Peta Kills animals? - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
 39Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 01-05-2015, 05:47 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
Posts: 52
Peta Kills animals?

Is this true??

Here is a link: Is this real?

http://www.petakillsanimals.com/proof-peta-kills/
wedigfood is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 Old 01-05-2015, 06:43 PM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by wedigfood View Post
Is this true??

Here is a link: Is this real?

http://www.petakillsanimals.com/proof-peta-kills/
Wtf? Can somebody verify or refute this please?
Go Vegan is offline  
#3 Old 01-06-2015, 03:21 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Naturebound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 4,609
No idea. But I can't take seriously a site that does not provide any information about who they are. No contact information, nothing. Most of their claims against PETA are pretty outrageous and laughable, especially the link above. For instance how do they determine when someone from PETA buys or brings in an animal at the shelter? Wouldn't take it seriously at all. If you look around their site, they bash celebrities for mundane stuff and look for anyway to discredit their veganism/vegetarianism. Their tactics are more obnoxious than PETAs...
beanspud likes this.

In the end, only kindness matters. - Jewel



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Naturebound is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#4 Old 01-06-2015, 05:02 AM
Beginner
 
RedPill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 196
Google "PETA kills animals" and you will find many links to news articles on the subject.
lucky7 likes this.
RedPill is offline  
#5 Old 01-06-2015, 06:50 AM
Impeach the gangster
 
Capstan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,052
PKA is a project of "The Center for Consumer Freedom," a nonprofit funded largely by the food industry. I would say they are hired guns for big business.
Tom likes this.

"There is more wisdom in the song of a bird, than in the speech of a philosopher...." -Oahspe
"The thing is, you cannot judge a race. Any man who judges by the group is a pea-wit. You take men one at a time." -Buster Kilrain, The Killer Angels -Michael Shaara
"Anyone who doesn't believe in miracles isn't a realist." -Billy Wilder
Capstan is offline  
#6 Old 01-06-2015, 07:39 AM
No flesh since 99'
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 959
This site gets their information from the Virginia Department of Agriculture. If you scroll down the page on this link, the PETA shelter provides (under state law) records of how many animals they took in, were claimed, adopted, transferred and euthanized. I suppose if one was interested, they could contact the VADA and get their own copies, as this is public information, available upon request.

https://www.petakillsanimals.com/dow...llsAnimals.pdf

What it does not say is the reasons the animals were killed. It is assumed some were sick or injured beyond being able to be saved, but not all animals dropped off at a PETA shelter were beyond hope upon arrival. In essence, PETA does run kill shelters, but their PR team glosses it over under the guise of "doing societies dirty work".
lucky7 likes this.
Kiwibird08 is offline  
#7 Old 01-06-2015, 07:43 AM
...
 
Blobbenstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 3,936
I think their message is 'Peta kills animals, so you can go back to eating your bacon sandwich with a clear concisions'
Tom and Naturebound like this.

Blobbenstein is offline  
#8 Old 01-06-2015, 09:05 AM
No flesh since 99'
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blobbenstein View Post
I think their message is 'Peta kills animals, so you can go back to eating your bacon sandwich with a clear concisions'
I see nothing on that site that is pro-meat/pro-cruelty. They just don't like PETA and aren't afraid to put it out there how outright obnoxious/extremist they are. Perhaps the message is that if you want to donate money/time to help animals, there may be better organizations than PETA... Like your local no-kill shelter for example. OR the fact many vegetarians and vegans do not support or want to be associated with PETA (in this case, many people find an animal rights organization that runs kill shelters to be offensive and wrong)

PETA has done a lot of good for animals, don't get me wrong, but they've also done a whole lot of damage to the publics perception of a vegetarian/vegan lifestyle (which equates to less people being willing to try). They lie too. They should stick to their undercover documentaries because that's their strong suit. They need to leave taking in homeless animals to local no-kill shelters.
Kona and lucky7 like this.

Last edited by Kiwibird08; 01-06-2015 at 09:09 AM.
Kiwibird08 is offline  
#9 Old 01-06-2015, 10:11 AM
Ankle Biter
 
Poppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Central Virginia, USA
Posts: 9,332
The Center for Consumer Freedoms is a right-wing lobbying group supporting meat, fast food, tobacco and alcohol. Peta actually doesn't have a "shelter". It does have a network of foster families who help with displaced and adoptable animals, and limited facilities to house animals. However, Peta offers free euthanasia services to the general public, and people bring them their very sick, old, and unadoptable pets.

Here is an interesting website: http://www.whypetaeuthanizes.com/und...s-shelter.html

I wish our area offered free euthanasia. I believe it would cut down in the number of animals given up to municipal shelters and pounds - especially seniors and animals with major health problems.
silva, Joan Kennedy and beanspud like this.

It is our choices that show what we truly are far more than our abilities. ~A. Dumbledore

Last edited by Poppy; 01-06-2015 at 10:26 AM.
Poppy is offline  
#10 Old 01-06-2015, 10:30 AM
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
Posts: 52
Did a little more research. Yes, the original information came from a biased source although I found some information from a site run by Nathan Winograd.

Nathan

On his site it said "Since 1998, PETA has killed over 30,000 animals, roughly 2,000 animals a year including kittens and puppies." In a debate between Nathan and a peta attorney, PETA argued that animals were better off dead.

Actual peta members, employees, kill the animals.
Kona likes this.
wedigfood is offline  
#11 Old 01-06-2015, 10:41 AM
Ankle Biter
 
Poppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Central Virginia, USA
Posts: 9,332
Ha! Nathan Winograd is also a biased source! Just try to get into debate with him on FB, he'll ban you so fast your head will spin!

It seems as though the leaders of any branch of the animal rights movement are quite the characters. Nathan has some wonderful ideas about creating a no-kill environment and many, many shelters are increasing adoption/save rates simply by implementing his ideas. But, like Gary Yourofsky or Ingrid Newkirk, he is very controversial and expresses opinions that make you scratch your head at times.

It is our choices that show what we truly are far more than our abilities. ~A. Dumbledore
Poppy is offline  
#12 Old 01-06-2015, 11:46 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Joan Kennedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lovettsville, VA and Portland, OR
Posts: 1,982
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_...nsumer_Freedom Like Poppy said, Petakillsanimals is a front for the Center for Consumer Freedom. I don't think it's possible to read the Wikipedia entry on Center for Consumer Freedom and impute ethical values to anything they say or do. This org was originally funded by $600,000 from Phillip Morris to fight efforts to ban smoking in restaurants. Because, you know, consumers should be free to do what they want where they want. They lobby the interests of puppy mills and factory farms, as well as tobacco and alcohol, and they are the mortal enemy of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. It's occured to me they are actually run by the Antichrist's evil twin. If I didn't like one other thing about PETA, I'd admire it for attracting this particular adversary.
Tom, beanspud and Naturebound like this.
Joan Kennedy is offline  
#13 Old 01-06-2015, 02:26 PM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
If PETA really do this then I am very disappointed in them...

However, the source of the information seems dubious to me...
Go Vegan is offline  
#14 Old 01-07-2015, 02:51 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
Posts: 52
Here is a link to a peta article, "The deadly consequences of no kill policy."

They never actually say, its better to kill than cage, although its hard not to interpret the article any other way.
Kona likes this.
wedigfood is offline  
#15 Old 01-07-2015, 03:16 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Joan Kennedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lovettsville, VA and Portland, OR
Posts: 1,982
The article seems to be mostly saying that a shelter can be admit-all or it can be no-kill, but it can't be both. In the absence of unlimited resources, unlimited staff and unlimited space, that would seem to be true. Spay/neuter is the custom in some parts of the country but not others. I don't see the folly in transporting from where the animals are to where the homes are. The article doesn't recognize differences between one region and another that way. I've experienced it as a North/South difference, for one thing. If I drove 200 miles south, there would be many more healthy, socialized, adoptable dogs in shelters than there are where I live. Where I live, the rescuers sweep in and take all the "easy" dogs out of the shelters. And when you go to adopt from one of the rescuers, there's a blizzard of roadblocks and barriers to navigate as they find one reason after another to say No Dog For You. And No Cat Either. Some of the homeless animals problem really is logistics, and the article writer isn't acknowledging that.
Joan Kennedy is offline  
#16 Old 01-07-2015, 04:54 PM
Tom
Veggie Regular
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 5,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capstan View Post
PKA is a project of "The Center for Consumer Freedom," a nonprofit funded largely by the food industry. I would say they are hired guns for big business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blobbenstein View Post
I think their message is 'Peta kills animals, so you can go back to eating your bacon sandwich with a clear concisions'
I've been under this impression as well. However, if PeTA does in fact euthanize animals, I'm not sure how this could be compatible with their usual "human-hands-strictly-off-animals" philosophy. (Okay, I might be oversimplifying or mis-stating their position... at least some PeTA members have adopted animals in need of homes, even if other members have stated that "pets" should ultimately be extinct.)

Peasant (1963-1972) and Fluffy (1970s?-1982- I think of you as 'Ambrose' now)- Your spirits outshone some humans I have known. Be happy forever.
Tom is offline  
#17 Old 01-09-2015, 10:20 AM
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
Posts: 52
Posted January 4th by Professor Gary L. Francione. Not entirely related to the current subject I originally posted but I think its very important.

VEGANISM, PETA, "PERSONAL PURITY," AND PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE
PETA says:
>>Being vegan is about helping animals, not maintaining personal purity. Boycotting products that may contain trace amounts of animal products can actually be harmful to animals in the long run. For example, by refusing to eat a veggie burger from a restaurant because the bun may contain traces of milk or eggs, you are discouraging that restaurant from offering vegan options because it is seems too difficult a task. So use our list as a guide, and do your best to avoid animal ingredients.<<
http://www.peta.org/living/beauty/an...redients-list/
This is speciesist. A social movement that seeks justice for nonhumans says that we should *never* choose to participate in animal exploitation. Period. We should not decide to eat the product with milk or eggs to make the owner think it's easier to serve vegans. That is like saying that we ought not to object to "small" instances of misogyny or racism because we don't want racists or misogynists to think that the equality of woman and people of color is "too difficult."
And what's a "trace"? How much is "okay"? And what if it's a "small" amount of meat? How is that different from a "small" amount of egg or dairy? Answer: it isn't. So if you buy this nonsense, go ahead and eat the pork sprinkled on your dish as well--as long as there's not a lot.
A number of “animal advocates” support this approach. For example, Bruce Friedrich, formerly of PETA and now with Farm Sanctuary, says:
>>We all know that the number one reason why people don’t go vegan is that they don’t think it’s convenient enough, and we all know people whose reason for not going vegan is that they “can’t” give up cheese or ice cream.
But instead of making it easier for them to help animals, we often make it more difficult. Instead of encouraging them to stop eating all other animal products besides cheese or ice cream, we preach to them about the oppression of dairy cows. Then we go on about how we don’t eat sugar or a veggie burger because of the bun, even though a tiny bit of butter flavor in a bun supports significantly less suffering than eating any non-organic fruit or vegetable, or using a plastic bottle, or about 100 other things that most of us do. Our fanatical obsession with ingredients not only obscures the animals’ suffering—which was virtually non-existent for that tiny modicum of ingredient—but nearly guarantees that those around us are not going to make any change at all. So, we’ve preserved our personal purity, but we’ve hurt animals—and that’s anti-vegan.<<
http://ccc.farmsanctuary.org/…/read-...ctiveadvocacy/
Peter Singer, considered by some to be the “Father of the Animal Rights Movement” says:
>>I think it’s more important to try and produce a change in the right direction than to be personally pure yourself. So when you’re eating with someone at a restaurant, and you ordered something vegan but when it comes there’s a bit of grated cheese or something on it, sometimes vegans will make a big fuss and send it back and that might mean the food is wasted. And if you’re in company with people who are not vegan or not even vegetarian, I think that’s probably the wrong thing to do. It’d be better off just to eat it because people are going to think, ‘Oh my god, these vegans…’<<
http://www.satyamag.com/oct06/singer.html
I agree that being vegan is not about "personal purity." But I *don't* see not exploiting vulnerable beings--human or nonhuman--as being about "personal purity." I see it as a matter of caring about fundamental justice and acting on it. To call that a matter of "personal purity" is simply to say that justice should not be a matter of clear moral principle. And I could not disagree with that more.
So if the restaurant won't give you a vegan meal, don't eat the non-vegan meal just because you think it will help animals. It won't. What it will do is to send a very clear message that you do not regard animal rights as a matter of moral principle.
And that is very harmful to animals.
People are more likely to embrace veganism if they agree that there’s something serious and important at stake. And as long as you choose to eat any amount of meat, dairy, and eggs, they will never see veganism as a matter of fundamental justice.
Gary L. Francione
Professor, Rutgers University
wedigfood is offline  
#18 Old 01-09-2015, 10:58 AM
...
 
Blobbenstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 3,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom View Post
I've been under this impression as well. However, if PeTA does in fact euthanize animals, I'm not sure how this could be compatible with their usual "human-hands-strictly-off-animals" philosophy. (Okay, I might be oversimplifying or mis-stating their position... at least some PeTA members have adopted animals in need of homes, even if other members have stated that "pets" should ultimately be extinct.)
I'm sure if Peta had a portal into which all unwanted animals could be pushed, into a world where they would all be looked after and fed vegan food, then they probably wouldn't euthanasia healthy animals.
Tom likes this.

Blobbenstein is offline  
#19 Old 01-09-2015, 12:16 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by wedigfood View Post
VEGANISM, PETA, "PERSONAL PURITY," AND PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE
PETA says:
>>Being vegan is about helping animals, not maintaining personal purity. Boycotting products that may contain trace amounts of animal products can actually be harmful to animals in the long run. For example, by refusing to eat a veggie burger from a restaurant because the bun may contain traces of milk or eggs, you are discouraging that restaurant from offering vegan options because it is seems too difficult a task. So use our list as a guide, and do your best to avoid animal ingredients.<<
http://www.peta.org/living/beauty/an...redients-list/
This is speciesist. A social movement that seeks justice for nonhumans says that we should *never* choose to participate in animal exploitation. Period. We should not decide to eat the product with milk or eggs to make the owner think it's easier to serve vegans. That is like saying that we ought not to object to "small" instances of misogyny or racism because we don't want racists or misogynists to think that the equality of woman and people of color is "too difficult."
And what's a "trace"? How much is "okay"? And what if it's a "small" amount of meat? How is that different from a "small" amount of egg or dairy? Answer: it isn't. So if you buy this nonsense, go ahead and eat the pork sprinkled on your dish as well--as long as there's not a lot.
Is there a bit of confusion here between possible cross-contamination, "may contain traces of milk or eggs" and intentional contamination, "the pork sprinkled on your dish"?
leedsveg is offline  
#20 Old 01-09-2015, 02:23 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
Posts: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by leedsveg View Post
Is there a bit of confusion here between possible cross-contamination, "may contain traces of milk or eggs" and intentional contamination, "the pork sprinkled on your dish"?
It is confusing, thanks for catching that. Cross contamination at a factory that produces a vegan and non-vegan product is usually mentioned so if someone has an allergy they will not become sick. I personally buy products all the time that have that have warnings even though I obviously don't consume dairy.

Careless preparation of food at a restaurant, calling it intentional contamination or something else, causing my plate of food to have dairy on it is completely different in my mind. Actually happens many times when I order salad without cheese and it shows up with cheese. I politely refuse it and ask for it to be redone. If it comes back with small amounts of cheese still on it, i.e. the cook picked off the cheese, I won't pay for it and will either leave if I am alone or stay if I am not alone, and won't eat anything else.
leedsveg likes this.
wedigfood is offline  
#21 Old 01-09-2015, 08:07 PM
Super Moderator
 
silva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 8,942
This reminds me of the first month I decided to be vegan and there was a luncheon at work that for years was the same food. I felt there would be salad and all would be good. The salad for the first time had shredded cheese mixed in, and there was absolutely nothing vegan. The cook in charge of the cafeteria came out to find me and a couple other vegetarians to let us know she reserved some black bean patties for us. I knew they were Morningstar and had egg, and my initial thought was to politely refuse, but I looked at her smile, and realized how very considerate she was to do that. I did have a pattie and never regretted that decision.
After that day the soups that should have always been veggie but used to contain animal stock then became regularly vegetarian (many vegan) and would have labels. We had a conversation about what vegan meant, and she would label foods that fell into that catagory. The salad bar improved immensely.
Now what if I were to have refused that pattie telling her it didn't meet my standards? She had no desire to care enough to go further-no one else was vegan, and the vegetarians didn't really care enough about the cafeteria choices. Sometimes we need to appreciate that others dont' share what seems so astoundingly obvious to us and acknowledge the efforts they make to change.
silva is offline  
#22 Old 01-09-2015, 09:58 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Wolfie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 6,850
PeTA hates pit bulls and used donations to go to court trying to stop Best Friends and the others from saving the Vick dogs. They don't want any pit bulls or their mixes adopted from shelters; they'd rather see them killed. They also have a vendetta against feral cats. They are sexist, into fat shaming, and make all vegans look like whackjobs since the general public seems to think all vegans are card-carrying PeTA members.

They started out as a decent organization back in the day. Then somehow bat**** crazy Ingrid Newkirk took over and it's been downhill from there.
Kona likes this.

Last edited by Wolfie; 01-09-2015 at 10:00 PM.
Wolfie is offline  
#23 Old 01-10-2015, 04:12 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by silva View Post
This reminds me of the first month I decided to be vegan and there was a luncheon at work that for years was the same food. I felt there would be salad and all would be good. The salad for the first time had shredded cheese mixed in, and there was absolutely nothing vegan. The cook in charge of the cafeteria came out to find me and a couple other vegetarians to let us know she reserved some black bean patties for us. I knew they were Morningstar and had egg, and my initial thought was to politely refuse, but I looked at her smile, and realized how very considerate she was to do that. I did have a pattie and never regretted that decision.
After that day the soups that should have always been veggie but used to contain animal stock then became regularly vegetarian (many vegan) and would have labels. We had a conversation about what vegan meant, and she would label foods that fell into that catagory. The salad bar improved immensely.
Now what if I were to have refused that pattie telling her it didn't meet my standards? She had no desire to care enough to go further-no one else was vegan, and the vegetarians didn't really care enough about the cafeteria choices. Sometimes we need to appreciate that others dont' share what seems so astoundingly obvious to us and acknowledge the efforts they make to change.
What a good post that illustrates the benefits of looking at the "whole picture".
leedsveg is offline  
#24 Old 01-10-2015, 04:16 AM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
I would not consume restaurant dishes containing egg/milk/cheese ingredients...If a "vegan" dish was brought out and had cheese on it I would definitely send it back...

The "produced in a factory that also makes x and so may contain traces of x" phrase is a different matter and is used for legal reasons in case someone has an anaphylactic shock due to a particle of accidental dairy contaminant...

Also...PETA hating pit bulls and feral cats is so wrong

Last edited by Go Vegan; 01-10-2015 at 04:19 AM.
Go Vegan is offline  
#25 Old 01-10-2015, 08:37 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Joan Kennedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lovettsville, VA and Portland, OR
Posts: 1,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Go Vegan View Post
Also...PETA hating pit bulls and feral cats is so wrong
Is the problem that PeTA euthanizes feral cats, or is the problem that people keep unneutered cats, give them the run of the outdoors, and then release their kittens into the wild? I recognize that one doesn't necessarily rule out the other. But I also recognize that the songbirds might disagree with me about that.

Whatever you think about this organization, it must be acknowledged that when people fail to manage the risks within their own control, it falls to others to manage the consequences of those failures.
leedsveg and beanspud like this.

Last edited by Joan Kennedy; 01-10-2015 at 08:42 AM.
Joan Kennedy is offline  
#26 Old 01-10-2015, 12:11 PM
Lovable misanthrope
 
MozIsMyShepherd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: London
Posts: 1,398
GoVegan please could you post a link to where PETA say they hate pitbulls and feral cats?
MozIsMyShepherd is offline  
#27 Old 01-10-2015, 03:15 PM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by MozIsMyShepherd View Post
GoVegan please could you post a link to where PETA say they hate pitbulls and feral cats?
I was actually commenting on what Wolfie said!

Maybe they can give a link?
Go Vegan is offline  
#28 Old 01-10-2015, 03:18 PM
Vegan as f**k
 
Go Vegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Worthing, England
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joan Kennedy View Post
Is the problem that PeTA euthanizes feral cats, or is the problem that people keep unneutered cats, give them the run of the outdoors, and then release their kittens into the wild.
I think both parties are responsible for different aspects of the same problem...But the actual killing process is worse IMO...
Go Vegan is offline  
#29 Old 01-31-2015, 11:14 PM
Veggie Regular
 
rasitha.wijesekera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 551
PETA does a hell of lot of good for animals. They care about animals a lot more than average people. They never denied the fact that they euthanize animals. Obviously a no-kill stance would be great PR for them. But they choose to do it and they give a pretty good rationale as to why if you go to their site.
They lobby and try to change laws, spread awareness so much. They are one of the most important entities for animal rights active in the world today. Like any organization though, it has things you can despise. Usually what happens is whatever good they do is overshadowed by few negative points and emphasized to serve an agenda.
wedigfood likes this.
rasitha.wijesekera is offline  
#30 Old 01-31-2015, 11:22 PM
Veggie Regular
 
rasitha.wijesekera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiwibird08 View Post
I see nothing on that site that is pro-meat/pro-cruelty.
uhh... they are obviously not going to say
PETA IS CRAZY = VEG*NS ARE CRAZY = YOU CAN EAT MEAT WITHOUT GUILT.

its only implied.
rasitha.wijesekera is offline  
Reply

Tags
animals , peta , shelter

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off