American Politics

Long_Before_Sunrise · December 7, 2023

2 hours ago, Lagie said:

I am very worried about your 2024 election, America.

So am I.

There's people trying to say Trump refusing to rule out dictatorship is 'out of context', a joke, tongue in cheek... then there's some who are straight up willing to welcome an American dictator.

Aldarion · December 7, 2023

17 hours ago, Rosedamai said:

Yeah, don't agree with this. At all. Can think of many examples where large-scale attempts to make society better generally didn't result in genocide or tyranny lol, in fact I would argue that it's the other way around haha. You calling "language of 'human rights'" being called BS is very funny to me because without that we'd still have very cruel and unusual punishments such as burning people at the stake, etc, no voting rights not just for women or people of color etc but for everyone; adoption of certain medical procedures also count as large-scale attempts, as well as banning child labor, offering public education, adoption of certain hygienic practices such as washing hands, and so on, so forth. Whether certain technological advancements are adopted and used publicly also count as large-scale attempts to make society better, as well as avoidance of environmental disasters. I could go on all day. Conversely there are genocides/tyrannies that were not caused by large-scale attempts to "make society better", for example the Rwandan genocides. Actually come to think of it please clarify what "make society better" means? Do you mean actual, honest, factually accurate advances in human well-being overall, or do you mean that a certain group of people believed that they were "making society better"?

And today thanks to language of human rights we have murder of babies, governmental tyranny, attacks on freedom of speech and so on.

So yeah. "Human rights" are bull****. "Basic decency" is not.

And what "make society better" means is irrelevant for my point. Revolutionaries always believe that they are "making society better".

17 hours ago, Rosedamai said:

But anyways, I really do not see the point people are trying to make here with the "oh but everyone wants to gain absolute power" rhetoric, yeah that is evident, but the point that others are trying to say is that the Trumpist Republicans are unraveling the very foundation of democracy that the U.S is built on in the process of and/or in order to gain absolute power. In order to refute that you should construct your argument I suppose you can argue that the Democrats are also destroying core tenets of democracy to the same degree that Trump is. Not cry about "human nature" and "selfishness" and your arguments boiling down to "well the Democrats do it too but in a more sneaky way" and what have you. Please cite your sources.

I don't need to "cite sources", Democrats are quite open about wanting to implement tyranny:

https://theconversation.com/democrats-need-to-make-the-u-s-constitution-work-for-them-as-the-2024-election-looms-205256

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/07/opinion/constitution-democracy-biden-trump.html

17 hours ago, Rosedamai said:

I would also gladly argue that humans are actually not as selfish as people seem to think as that would be disadvantageous to their survival, but that's a topic for another thread, it seems.

Yeah, humans don't give a **** about long-term survival.

Just an example: Democratic governors blocked bills for new nuclear power plants:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/democrats-nuclear-energy_n_6532accce4b00f9a71cc5381

If they were really that concerned about the environment, you'd think they would be happy about nuclear power plants, considering they are currently THE most environmentally-friendly power source out there.

But noooo. Posturing is more important than reality.

dracornithologist · December 7, 2023

Just to add to the discussion. I don't think pointing at powerful people (people with lots of wealth, political positions - people with Power to Make Change in the world) who are selling the health of the planet for their own gain is an example of humans not caring about long term survival. In the cases of the wealthy, who profit off the destruction of the planet, they are the same people looking into how to survive climate disaster *individually*, via their own amassed wealth. They are thinking about survival - their own. I think if decisions about global health were made by the global majority, we'd be able to see a lot more evidence of humans being interested in long term survival, not just their own, but of humanity.

I agree that many Democrats are not interested in what I personally feel is good change (I'm on the radical left of many of their positions), but I think better examples would be along the lines of assassination of character and career of anyone who opposes the party line, investment in the success of the conservative right in order to hold a threat over their voters' heads to keep them voting for them, the abandonment of real values like standing up for trans people and standing against genocide (again, I'm not talking about all, but many) - those are all good examples of why the two-party system is useless and keeps us entrenched in our oppressions. But I just disagree that the failure of a system set up by slaveowners has any bearing on the fundamental goodness of humans.

As regards human rights. That's just a term for whatever fundamental rights someone has by virtue of being human, in the eyes of the person using the term. Lots of bad things happen in the name of things like human rights. I'm not sure if you're looking for a discussion of those bad things or are just expressing anger at the way of the world, but sure! Yeah, it's really awful the way that people with power (and, key point, without the experience or empathy to restrain their violence) have historically hoarded power and used whatever tool society hands them (i.e. any of that society's infrastructure - like law, healthcare systems, armies, schools, etc) to keep control of that power and harm others with it. I don't think that acknowledging that means also dismissing the 'language of human rights' - unless you're proposing a different language to be able to discuss said crimes against humanity and what to do about it? I don't think 'common decency' covers it.

Jamari · December 7, 2023

Stunning images show Arizona border overrun by massive surge of adult male migrants

Edited December 7, 2023 by Jamari

purpledragonclaw · December 7, 2023

6 hours ago, Aldarion said:

I don't need to "cite sources", Democrats are quite open about wanting to implement tyranny:

https://theconversation.com/democrats-need-to-make-the-u-s-constitution-work-for-them-as-the-2024-election-looms-205256

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/07/opinion/constitution-democracy-biden-trump.html

Yeah, humans don't give a about long-term survival.

Just an example: Democratic governors blocked bills for new nuclear power plants:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/democrats-nuclear-energy_n_6532accce4b00f9a71cc5381

If they were really that concerned about the environment, you'd think they would be happy about nuclear power plants, considering they are currently THE most environmentally-friendly power source out there.

But noooo. Posturing is more important than reality.

I don't think that first link says anything to support your point. That's an opinion piece on what Democrats could do, not things Democrats are actually doing. It's conjecture. I can't read the second because it's paywalled.

There is a prevalent strain in the Republican party that supports fascism, however. This should scare anyone who cares about democracy in America.

We just had a nuclear plant melt down in 2011, on a scale similar to Chernobyl. I know of the benefits of nuclear energy, but in my opinion we don't have enough safeguards in-place for when power plants fail.

Rosedamai · December 8, 2023

14 hours ago, Aldarion said:

And today thanks to language of human rights we have murder of babies, governmental tyranny, attacks on freedom of speech and so on.

So yeah. "Human rights" are bull****. "Basic decency" is not.

This is infinitely amusing to me because you don't seem to know what human rights are. Without the concept of "human rights" you wouldn't have freedom of speech, you wouldn't regard "murder of babies" as something that is wrong, you wouldn't have any idea why tyranny is bad. Human rights are (quoted from the UN declaration of human rights) "rights inherent to all human beings, regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status. Human rights include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture, freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education, and many more. Everyone is entitled to these rights, without discrimination."

So no, your "freedom of speech" for example doesn't exist in a vacuum away from the concept of "human rights", as it is a concept directly derived from human rights.

14 hours ago, Aldarion said:

And what "make society better" means is irrelevant for my point. Revolutionaries always believe that they are "making society better".

No, what "makes society better" is relevant for your point. You stated that large-scale societal changes result in government tyranny and genocide most of the time. I cited specific instances where scientific discoveries, educational reforms, advances in medicine, etc., without such things. They may not seem like political/economic revolutions to you, but considering that certain medical procedures or reforms are points of political contention, yes they are large-scale societal changes. And yes, revolutionaries always believe that they are "making society better", which is why I asked if your standard for "making society better" is about actual, factual changes that led to societal changes or "people who believed that they were making society better." Because, for example, the age of consent used to be 12 in England, then raised to 13 in 1875, then raised to 16 in 1885. People who pushed for a higher age of consent believed that they were making society better, and I would agree with them. However, on the other hand, there are people who committed genocides because they believed that getting rid of a specific minority group in their country would make society better. You cannot put those two groups on the same page, imo, with sweeping generalizations like that.

14 hours ago, Aldarion said:

I don't need to "cite sources", Democrats are quite open about wanting to implement tyranny:

https://theconversation.com/democrats-need-to-make-the-u-s-constitution-work-for-them-as-the-2024-election-looms-205256

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/07/opinion/constitution-democracy-biden-trump.html

Yes, you do need to cite sources, that's how a debate works. And the first one, as stated by @purpledragonclaw above is conjecture. The second one is not about the democratic party lol it's about how the American constitution is actually hindering American democracy, as it reveals flaws in your political system. None of it is about the Democratic party. Sorry.

14 hours ago, Aldarion said:

Yeah, humans don't give a about long-term survival.

Just an example: Democratic governors blocked bills for new nuclear power plants:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/democrats-nuclear-energy_n_6532accce4b00f9a71cc5381

If they were really that concerned about the environment, you'd think they would be happy about nuclear power plants, considering they are currently THE most environmentally-friendly power source out there.

But noooo. Posturing is more important than reality.

That is not because "posturing is more important than reality", it's because nuclear power plants emit nuclear waste which is expensive and hard to get rid of and cause health risks to the public, and also have the risk of meltdowns.

I can think of multiple cases where humans were concerned about long-term survival enough to prevent ecological and environmental disasters-for example, outlawing freon gas in order to protect the ozone layer, banning certain pesticides such as DDT as they have negative results for wildlife, and so on.

I don't think humanity is doing enough for environmental conservation, sure, but that doesn't mean that humans suck lol

11 hours ago, dracornithologist said:

don't think pointing at powerful people (people with lots of wealth, political positions - people with Power to Make Change in the world) who are selling the health of the planet for their own gain is an example of humans not caring about long term survival.

Agreed, I don't really like how people keep conflating the actions of a few people in power as proof that humanity as a whole don't care about long-term survival.

11 hours ago, dracornithologist said:

As regards human rights. That's just a term for whatever fundamental rights someone has by virtue of being human, in the eyes of the person using the term. Lots of bad things happen in the name of things like human rights. I'm not sure if you're looking for a discussion of those bad things or are just expressing anger at the way of the world, but sure! Yeah, it's really awful the way that people with power (and, key point, without the experience or empathy to restrain their violence) have historically hoarded power and used whatever tool society hands them (i.e. any of that society's infrastructure - like law, healthcare systems, armies, schools, etc) to keep control of that power and harm others with it. I don't think that acknowledging that means also dismissing the 'language of human rights' - unless you're proposing a different language to be able to discuss said crimes against humanity and what to do about it? I don't think 'common decency' covers it.

Basically this haha.

Edited December 8, 2023 by Rosedamai

AsymDoll13 · December 8, 2023

Ya'll. This is some of the best news I've read/heard of in awhile.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/07/us/texas-abortion-ruling-exception.html

Long_Before_Sunrise · December 8, 2023

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton promptly sent the hospital a letter threatening to press charges.

AsymDoll13 · December 8, 2023

I'm glad she's going to get what she needs for her health, the poor woman. I can't even imagine.

Long_Before_Sunrise · December 9, 2023

The Texas Supreme Court has temporarily blocked her abortion.

😔

AsymDoll13 · December 9, 2023

29 minutes ago, Long_Before_Sunrise said:

The Texas Supreme Court has temporarily blocked her abortion.

😔

Ugh. I know. I hate the USA sometimes... Most of the time...

Aldarion · December 9, 2023

On 12/8/2023 at 2:24 AM, Rosedamai said:

This is infinitely amusing to me because you don't seem to know what human rights are. Without the concept of "human rights" you wouldn't have freedom of speech, you wouldn't regard "murder of babies" as something that is wrong, you wouldn't have any idea why tyranny is bad. Human rights are (quoted from the UN declaration of human rights) "rights inherent to all human beings, regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status. Human rights include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture, freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education, and many more. Everyone is entitled to these rights, without discrimination."

So no, your "freedom of speech" for example doesn't exist in a vacuum away from the concept of "human rights", as it is a concept directly derived from human rights.

My point was that if you talk about "human rights" as opposed to morality, it is all to easy to use the language of human rights to take away actual rights.

Capisci?

On 12/8/2023 at 2:24 AM, Rosedamai said:

No, what "makes society better" is relevant for your point. You stated that large-scale societal changes result in government tyranny and genocide most of the time. I cited specific instances where scientific discoveries, educational reforms, advances in medicine, etc., without such things. They may not seem like political/economic revolutions to you, but considering that certain medical procedures or reforms are points of political contention, yes they are large-scale societal changes. And yes, revolutionaries always believe that they are "making society better", which is why I asked if your standard for "making society better" is about actual, factual changes that led to societal changes or "people who believed that they were making society better." Because, for example, the age of consent used to be 12 in England, then raised to 13 in 1875, then raised to 16 in 1885. People who pushed for a higher age of consent believed that they were making society better, and I would agree with them. However, on the other hand, there are people who committed genocides because they believed that getting rid of a specific minority group in their country would make society better. You cannot put those two groups on the same page, imo, with sweeping generalizations like that.

And those "specific discoveries, educational reforms, advances in medicine" are NOT "large-scale societal change".

They are very specific changes with very specific applications, and are by no means direct attempts at societal reform.

I am not making "sweeping generalizations", merely pointing out that "change" and "progress" are not always a good thing. Most new ideas will be bad, that is simply a statistical fact, so caution is needed whenever trying to introduce something new.

On 12/8/2023 at 2:24 AM, Rosedamai said:

Yes, you do need to cite sources, that's how a debate works. And the first one, as stated by @purpledragonclaw above is conjecture. The second one is not about the democratic party lol it's about how the American constitution is actually hindering American democracy, as it reveals flaws in your political system. None of it is about the Democratic party. Sorry.

I don't see you citing sources.

The second one is precisely what I am talking about.

United States are a huge place, and solutions for e.g. cities on Western Coast cannot be the same as for the Midlands. So unless you introduce the extreme localization and decentralization in the vein of Roman Republic and the Holy Roman Empire and make the Federal government basically a figurehead, then introducing democracy also means introducing tyranny.

And Democratic Party, as far as I am aware, does make a lot of noise about democracy.

On 12/8/2023 at 2:24 AM, Rosedamai said:

That is not because "posturing is more important than reality", it's because nuclear power plants emit nuclear waste which is expensive and hard to get rid of and cause health risks to the public, and also have the risk of meltdowns.

That is false concern, you know.

Yes, nuclear power plants emit nuclear waste. Do you know what else emits nuclear waste? Thermoelectric power plants which replace them.

A coal-burning thermal power plant will emit more nuclear waste into the environment than your average nuclear power station.

And not an insignificant amount. In fact, a coal power plant will generate ten times the radioactive waste than nuclear power plant:

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2022-003567_EN.html#:~:text=To generate the same amount,than a nuclear power plant.

Radioactive waste from nuclear power plant is also relatively easily managed. Most of it comes in form of spent fuel rods, protective items and other solid waste which can be contained safely and relatively easily. Radioactive waste from a thermal power plant is mostly coal ash, which is spread all over the globe.

This is not even including all the other toxic byproducts it will release, which alone would make it more dangerous for human health and the environment than a nuclear power plant.

Matter of the fact is that nuclear power is one of the safest ways of producing power:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldwide-by-energy-source/

Is nuclear power the perfect solution? No. But it is the only solution - what wind and water resources there are, we have largely already exploited. Anything not wind or water is far worse than nuclear energy - solar panels specifically produce toxic waste at 300 times the rate that nuclear power plants do. Not to mention that while pollution may be less than it is with nuclear power plant, overall environmental impact of both wind turbines and dams is far worse than that of nuclear plants (dams, for one, also destroy the prime food growing real estate). You have to look not just at the plant itself, but also what it takes to construct and decommission it, what waste it generates, what does it take to transport electricity, what impact its mere presence has on the environment, and so on.

As for risk of meltdowns... we had a total of one environmentally significant meltdown in history - Chernobyl. Built by a socialist country that appointed politically appropriate managers instead of actual experts, and built to a fundamentally unsafe design. It is basically impossible for a modern power plant to suffer the catastrophe that Chernobyl did.

Fukushima was struck by a tsunami, and did suffer a meltdown, but the impact was localized.

https://www.cnet.com/science/how-nuclear-power-plants-could-help-solve-climate-crisis/

https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2011/apr/04/fear-nuclear-power-fukushima-risks

Ironically, the main reason why Fukushima turned into such an issue is the fact that properly-managed nuclear plants are so safe that people forgot the importance of proper power plant management:

https://www.newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/2012/07/23/330-Japan-TEPCO-ignored-atomic-accident-risks-due-to-myth-of-nuclear-safety-Report.html

On 12/7/2023 at 7:38 PM, purpledragonclaw said:

There is a prevalent strain in the Republican party that supports fascism, however. This should scare anyone who cares about democracy in America.

From what I can see, that book literally proposes same things which the Left had already done in the preceding decades.

On 12/7/2023 at 7:38 PM, purpledragonclaw said:

We just had a nuclear plant melt down in 2011, on a scale similar to Chernobyl. I know of the benefits of nuclear energy, but in my opinion we don't have enough safeguards in-place for when power plants fail.

We actually do. Both Chernobyl and Fukushima turned into issues precisely because these safeguards were ignored by people in charge.

purpledragonclaw · December 9, 2023

10 hours ago, Aldarion said:

From what I can see, that book literally proposes same things which the Left had already done in the preceding decades.

The United States does not have a true left-leaning party. In most other countries, Democrats would be considered center-right given their policies.

Source for this quoted sentence, please, of this happening historically in America?

And honestly, this kind of fascist power-grab is alarming no matter which party is doing it.

10 hours ago, Aldarion said:

We actually do. Both Chernobyl and Fukushima turned into issues precisely because these safeguards were ignored by people in charge.

And when they are, the results are catastrophic. The fact this has happened twice shows it doesn't matter the ideology of those in charge if they don't follow protocols. Should we assume protocols will be followed with new plants? I'm not optimistic.

Edited December 10, 2023 by purpledragonclaw

Fuzzbucket · December 9, 2023

2 hours ago, purpledragonclaw said:

The United States does not have a true left-leaning party. In most other countries, Democrats would be considered center-right given their policies.

Amen to that.

Aldarion · December 12, 2023

On 12/9/2023 at 7:18 PM, purpledragonclaw said:

The United States does not have a true left-leaning party. In most other countries, Democrats would be considered center-right given their policies.

Source for this quoted sentence, please, of this happening historically in America?

And honestly, this kind of fascist power-grab is alarming no matter which party is doing it.

It is not just in America. Left has used the exact same strategy everywhere:

https://theparrhesiadiaries.medium.com/the-marxist-long-march-through-the-institutions-and-into-the-age-of-identity-politics-6a7042b235dc

And I'd say that "other countries" don't have a true right-leaning party. Though that depends on how you define "left" and "right".

For me, neocons are at best dead center. Actual American right hasn't been in power in a while.

On 12/9/2023 at 7:18 PM, purpledragonclaw said:

And when they are, the results are catastrophic. The fact this has happened twice shows it doesn't matter the ideology of those in charge if they don't follow protocols. Should we assume protocols will be followed with new plants? I'm not optimistic.

So what is the solution, then?

Because hydro power simply isn't enough, and all other potential solutions are as devastating to the environment as nuclear power catastrophes are, if not more so.

Fuzzbucket · December 12, 2023

1 hour ago, Aldarion said:

And I'd say that "other countries" don't have a true right-leaning party. Though that depends on how you define "left" and "right".

It certainly does. The UK has a thoroughly right leaning one right now. The Netherlands is at risk of one taking power. There are others. But clearly they aren't right-wing enough for you.

1 hour ago, Aldarion said:

So what is the solution, then?

Because hydro power simply isn't enough, and all other potential solutions are as devastating to the environment as nuclear power catastrophes are, if not more so.

Wind and wave power, for a start. Also geothermal.

Jamari · December 12, 2023

Here's a thought.... Will Biden pardon his son from 17 years in prison? Will Hunter sing like a bird and turn on his father who could also be indited on tax evasion for a get out of jail free card? For the first time in our history this has happened. I pray for this crook to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I know you and I would be. What happened to "all men are created equal"? Your thoughts on this fact are welcome.

trystan · December 12, 2023

for those of us still wanting to pay attention:

10 alarming things Trump has promised to do in a second term

keep in mind, these are alarming things for America. There have been many things since inauguration day of 2017 that have been alarming for America.

whether your politics are right or left by whoever's definition, these things that trump says he will do are not normal for America.

also to note, there are many citations in the post.

Jamari · December 12, 2023

fact check: Will Pierce, a dyed in the wool democrat, who wrote Biden's speech for presidency in 2019 has just announced he has left the democratic party in favor of the republican party. He said on fox news that the democratic party has no consideration for the American people. I'm sure it will be rerun on fox news if you need more proof. No one wants to answer my question? u[date" 92 American military basis have jbeen attacked by Iranian forces since the Israeli war and Biden has done nothing about it.

Edited December 12, 2023 by Jamari

trystan · December 12, 2023

a google search gave me these:
PIERCE: I Advised Bernie And Raised Funds For Biden. Now I’m Joining The Republican Party by Will Pierce, Contributor

Quote

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller.

this is his opinion.

How the US strikes a delicate balance in responding to attacks on its forces by Iran-backed militias - from the AP:

Quote

In response to the attacks, the U.S. has walked a delicate line. The U.S. military has struck back just three times as the Biden administration balances efforts to deter the militants without triggering a broader Middle East conflict.

yes, Biden has done something. the bolded words are mine. this really could escalate into a huge war if the US were to ....what? bomb the out of Iran? Will you serve if it comes to that?

Edited December 12, 2023 by trystan

purpledragonclaw · December 12, 2023

11 hours ago, Aldarion said:

It is not just in America. Left has used the exact same strategy everywhere:

https://theparrhesiadiaries.medium.com/the-marxist-long-march-through-the-institutions-and-into-the-age-of-identity-politics-6a7042b235dc

And I'd say that "other countries" don't have a true right-leaning party. Though that depends on how you define "left" and "right".

For me, neocons are at best dead center. Actual American right hasn't been in power in a while.

You avoided providing a source by saying the Left in other countries have done this. I'm asking you for a source for the Left in America doing this because the Right doing this in America at this point in history is unprecedented. Please show me where the left has done this in America.

You also ignored where I said it doesn't matter which party does this, this kind of blatant fascism is bad no matter which party does it.

That Medium article is not the same thing as Project 2025.

Other countries do indeed have right-leaning political parties. Fuzzbucket provided the UK as an example. France does as well.

The American Right you referenced I would argue has transformed into the MAGA movement, adapted as time has changed. Are you suggesting there is no Right party in America because they don't fit a definition that's been dead for 80 years? Who would you consider to be Right and Left in the U.S.?

To your comment on energy, I don't have a solution that would work for everyone.

Edited December 13, 2023 by purpledragonclaw

trystan · December 12, 2023

4 hours ago, Jamari said:

Here's a thought.... Will Biden pardon his son from 17 years in prison? Will Hunter sing like a bird and turn on his father who could also be indited on tax evasion for a get out of jail free card? For the first time in our history this has happened. I pray for this crook to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I know you and I would be. What happened to "all men are created equal"? Your thoughts on this fact are welcome.

hey, i can do this too:

Ivanka's Facade of Fortune

Hunter Biden Indicted, But...

both are from Mary Trump's substack column.

however: what's Hunter Biden's position/title in his father's government cabinet?

purplehaze · December 12, 2023

5 hours ago, Jamari said:

For the first time in our history this has happened.

I'm not at all clear what you are saying has happened for the first time. Bolding is mine, but what is the "this" you are speaking of? It does not seem to refer back to the earlier sentences in that post.

AsymDoll13 · December 12, 2023

1 hour ago, trystan said:

hey, i can do this too:

Ivanka's Facade of Fortune

Hunter Biden Indicted, But...

both are from Mary Trump's substack column.

however: what's Hunter Biden's position/title in his father's government cabinet?

Ooo~ Those articles are fun to read! I love that Mary is just calling him out. It's so satisfying to read.

trystan · December 13, 2023

3 hours ago, AsymDoll13 said:

Ooo~ Those articles are fun to read! I love that Mary is just calling him out. It's so satisfying to read.

they are fun to read! while she says she doesn't really enjoy calling out Donald and her family, it's necessary that she does it.

Sign In

American Politics

Recommended Posts

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Share this post

Link to post

Recently Browsing 0 members