| Pages:
1
2 |
Bajabus
Senior Nomad
Posts: 892
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: Elias Calles B.C.S. or NC USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: My friends..it's good.
|
|
the crime wave that baja is experiencing.......
especially in the north, is a direct result of the failed drug policies that have been implemented in the last 40 years. Witness the post about the
missing seaman in the news section. It is appaling that the drug lords get so rich off this misguided politic and that entire generations are
sacrificed to maintain an ozzie and harriet, head in the sand, just say no approach to drug abuse. The lure of get rich quick and screw em before
they screw me idealism is laying waste to thousands with bullets and violence instead of needles. There has to be a better way, we must be willing
to change and try something else.....it is obvious that almost half a century of current policy has failed. Anyone can see for them selves in Cabo,
TJ or just about any town in Baja.
"Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked of such a thing."
Dwight David Eisenhower
|
|
|
JESSE
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3370
Registered: 11-5-2002
Member Is Offline
|
|
I totally agree with you, illegal drugs are causing an incredible amount of problems, corruption, impunity,crime, and on and on, i think is very
obvious that only legalization can end this mess, but the problem is that people in the upper echelons of goverment on both sides of the border are
somehow profiting from this, here in Mexico it is so obvious that the Arellano felix, the Carrillos, and the Zambadas, are Drug lords that work for a
higher power, and in the US it seems very strange that considering the huge movements of money and drugs, theres never any drug lords aprehended.
This whole thing stinks, and it stinks all the way up to both our federal goverments.
|
|
|
JESSE
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3370
Registered: 11-5-2002
Member Is Offline
|
|
I know, drug dealers just love the policies of our countries, the Drug war keeps the prices high and the business going, these days you can find drugs
anywhere at anytime, and its pretty clear this is a total failure, i just cant understand why goverments are willing to sacrifice thousands and
thousands of its citizens just to keep an image alive. Legalization is the most dangerous and scary word for the Drug dealers, and like you said,
unfortunatelly in the near future this issues is not being considered by our politicians.
How many thousands of kids have to die in order for the politicos to realize that this policy is ridiculous?
|
|
|
Bajabus
Senior Nomad
Posts: 892
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: Elias Calles B.C.S. or NC USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: My friends..it's good.
|
|
We are talking about a lot of money per year here. Money that could be better put by both sides of the border into education and job training for a
start
Here are some stats on what we will spend. I don't know what Mexico will spend. or Baja specifically that would be interesting.
The U.S. federal government will spend over 19.2 billion dollars at a rate of about $609 per second on the War on Drugs this year.
Source: Office of National Drug Control Policy
State and local governments will spend at least another 20 billion.
Source: Drucker, Dr. Ernest, (1998, Jan./Feb.). Public Health Reports,, "Drug Prohibition and Public Health." U.S. Public Health Service. Vol. 114.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
People Arrested for Drug Law Offenses this Year
Arrests for drug law violations in 2002 are expected to exceed the 1,579,566 arrests of 2000.
Someone is arrested every 20 seconds.
Source: Uniform Crime Reports, Federal Bureau of Investigation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
People Arrested for Cannabis Law Offenses this Year
In 2000, 46.5 percent of the 1,579,566 total arrests for drug abuse violations were for cannabis -- a total of 734,497. Of those, 646,042 people were
arrested for possession alone. This is an increase over 1999, when a total of 704,812 Americans were arrested for cannabis offenses, of which 620,541
were for possession alone.
Source: Uniform Crime Reports, Federal Bureau of Investigation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
People Incarcerated for Drug Law Offenses this Year
Approximately 236800 people are expected to be incarcerated for drug law violations in 2002.
About 648 are locked up every day.
Source: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preventable HIV Infections this Year
Nearly 4,000 new HIV infections can be prevented before the year 2003 if the federal ban on needle exchange funding is lifted this year.
About 10 new cases could be prevented every day.
Source: Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, University of California, San Francisco
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked of such a thing."
Dwight David Eisenhower
|
|
|
Dave
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6005
Registered: 11-5-2002
Member Is Offline
|
|
My Rant!
I'm sorry but this liberal just can't get excited about illegal drug usage and its consequences. While intellectually I understand that some people
with addictive personalities are at great risk, it comes down to this:
No one that I know of has started down the road to addiction involuntarily. People CHOOSE to do drugs. While I am no angel, (child of the sixties and
experimented with all illegal drugs) I also realized that If caught there would be penalties and I was prepared to accept them. As far as I'm
concerned, folks who abuse are candidates for "Darwin awards" and are not worthy of my concern.
Now, what should be done?
Legalization:
Are we really ready to include pot, cocaine, opiates and all the rest with legal drugs like alcohol and tobacco? Legal drug abuse costs our society
MUCH more that illegal drugs do. And rational thought will tell you that if legalized, drug usage will increase. Don't we have enough problems with
drunk drivers that we need to be concerned about "high drivers" or both? Sure legalization would destroy the smuggling business but would it decrease
drug usage? Besides, I personally don't give a S**t about drug smugglers. They wouldn't be in business if people didn't break the law by using their
product.
Education and prevention:
Show me an effective program and I'll buy it. So far, the best minds have failed to come up with any way to circumvent human nature. Free will is a
tough thing to crack. That's why people break laws.
Treatment:
The Chinese communists had a novel solution. Opium use was epidemic. They lined users up against a wall and shot them. Use declined dramatically and
rapidly. A bit extreme for us but some way to isolate abusers from drugs is needed. The thought of jailing everyone who abuses is uncomfortable for
this liberal but I know this to be true:
NO ONE while in jail has ever robbed or in any way harmed the innocent public to support their habit.
If we were to explore tougher measures against drug abusers I would suggest this:
Uniform penalties for illegal drug use. Jail not just the ghetto crack user but the Wall Street banker and teenage experimenter. Anyone who remained
drug free for a specific period would have their record expunged and would receive full pardon. For those who simply could not resist, send them back
to jail. Give them ALL the drugs they want. With luck they wouldn't serve out their sentence.
If people considering illegal drug use knew that if caught they WOULD go to jail, drug use would dramatically drop. The drug lords in Mexico would be
out of business and drug use down here would fade away.
|
|
|
BajaNomad
Super Administrator
Posts: 4969
Registered: 8-1-2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: INTP-A
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Dave
Jail not just the ghetto crack user but the Wall Street banker and teenage experimenter. |
Reality though is
that those with better resources for better representation will get better judgements through the legal system as it stands today.
--
Doug
[Edited on 11-24-2002 by BajaNomad]
When I was young, I admired clever people. Now that I am old, I admire kind people.
– Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel
We know we must go back if we live, and we don`t know why.
– John Steinbeck, Log from the Sea of Cortez
Affordable Domain Name Registration/Management & cPanel Web Hosting:
https://www.regionalinternet.com |
|
|
Dave
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6005
Registered: 11-5-2002
Member Is Offline
|
|
Today?s reality can be replaced. If strict possession and sentencing laws were enacted taking discretion away from judges, crack heads and Jebb Bush's
daughter might share jail cells. One or two examples like this would scare the crap out of middle class parents. We would see a dramatic decline in
recreational drug use.
|
|
|
JESSE
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3370
Registered: 11-5-2002
Member Is Offline
|
|
I say legalize it, and then tax the hell out of it, i know this is an issue that is very complex, but the drug industry fuels so much crime,
terrorism,and corruption.
Lets look at whats happening in countries where drugs where decriminalized and go from there, i am sure theres plenty of good and bad things to
discuss.
|
|
|
Dave
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6005
Registered: 11-5-2002
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by JESSE
I say legalize it, and then tax the hell out of it. |
Has that stopped legal (alcohol,prescription drugs etc.) drug abuse? Nope. And if you taxed the hell out of it the hard core abuser would resort to
theft to buy it.
|
|
|
reefrocket
Nomad
Posts: 224
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: Idaho
Member Is Offline
|
|
My belief is that taxing the hell out of drugs simply wouldn't work. You would be just trading one gangster for a political gangster. An example of
this is the TAX on tobacco and alcohol criminal are still very active in the fields of endeavor. The only way the dangerous criminal would get out of
the bussiness is if it wasn't profitable. So make the drugs avalible at 'like resorts' (that you can't leave till legally not under the influnce to
the point of being a hazard to the populace) very cheap. Therein NO profit except to the ones that would reduce their prices as competion for the ones
that wouldn't go to these places. Make the use of drugs out side of these places the crime and not call it illegal drug use but "willful reckless
endangerment of the public" with a FIX term of service in a public work facility where they would be a benefit to society not, a prison where
non-social vocations and mental/emotional damage is the only result.
Just my thoughts on the subject.
I know some wher in there booz is going to ventured as to be included but it might be a starting point?
|
|
|
Stephanie Jackter
Senior Nomad
Posts: 566
Registered: 11-3-2002
Location: Arizona
Member Is Offline
|
|
I know you all are putting out your best efforts to offer up a solution to the drug problem, and you may call me a defeatist, but the bottom line is
that there is no solution. Every one of your proposals has loopholes in them a mile wide to which anyone seriously intent on staying wacked on drugs
will always be able to get through. Unless we take the draconian steps of lining people up against the wall for one last shot to the head, we don't
get rid of drug addicts. And then we'd be stuck having to overthrow the crappy government that did it. That's the bottom line here.
I grew up under the negligent eye of an alcoholic mother and became a pot addict as soon I was able to get away from her at the age of 16. I've seen
addiction from both sides and can tell you that its a personality flaw. Even if we conquer one certain addiction (and I have done that with a few, the
most difficult and deadly one being cigarettes, by the way), there is always another to take its place. Until you figure out a way to cure this
particular brain glitch nothing in the world will change.
Add to that the hypocrisy that our government takes toward different drugs (alcohol-OK?, marijuana BAD???), we will never have a solid ground from
which to stand and tell our children not to do drugs. Even saying the phrase "alcohol and drugs" makes me grit my teeth at the big lie our society
seems to believe about the acceptability of one and not the others. If I'm ambivalent, imagine what your average 17 year old must feel about how two
faced our drug policy is.
If it weren't for knowing damn well how much impact the most legal drug in the world had on my childhood and my mother's whole lifetime, I might say
to legalize marijuana at least. But I also know that my memory is half shot from many years of pot use and I still have a hacking cough in the
mornings between what that and my two pack a day cigarette habit did to me. And I'm sure you didn't want to be on the road with me after a couple of
joints. I've been off it all for many years now, but the impact on my life still lingers. How would cops test for pot influence on someone's
driving, by the way? I don't think there is a way short of violating a suspect's rights by drawing blood. Correct?
And last, but not least, what would I possibly tell my children if they come to me and have gotten addicted to meth, crack, heroin, or extacy because
they were legal. I still am a functional addict and note daily that I have passed those tendencies to my kids. But my whole life at this point is
dedicated to insulating them from the drug world and making sure their other influences don't have those tendencies. Legalization would just compound
the difficulty of my mission.
Having said all that, I do agree that there are many people rotting in prison on my tax dollars who do not pose a violent threat to me and mine, while
rapists and child molesters are let off on good time because of overcrowding. The penalties for pot sales need to definitely be lessened and growing
one's own should probably be decriminalized. I remember feeling very degraded when I did smoke pot, at the fact that I had to deal with mafia idiots
(people I would never give the time of day to in any other social setting), in order to get my fix, while friends of mine got busted in on as if they
were mafia, thrown up against the wall with guns to their heads by the policem for just growing a few plants to meet their own needs. Government
policy does turn logic on its head sometimes.
Rant over.....for now...-Stephanie
|
|
|
JESSE
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3370
Registered: 11-5-2002
Member Is Offline
|
|
steph
Steph,
How would you deal with teacjing your kids about drugs and alcohol? i have a 17 yr old brother and i dont know if i should be hard and tell him that i
will kick his fanny if i find out hes doing something, or if i should drink a few beers with him and explain to him that it is fine to do it
ocasionally.
I am thinking 
|
|
|
Stephanie Jackter
Senior Nomad
Posts: 566
Registered: 11-3-2002
Location: Arizona
Member Is Offline
|
|
It's a tough one, Jesse. I like the way the french do it - letting the child take a little wine with the meal just as the parents do and showing them
moderate consumption by example. But would it work in my house? That's probably a whole nother story. Oddly enough, although my mom's an alcoholic,
I inherited my father's aversion to alcohol. It makes me sleepy and gives me hot flahes. I've always been grateful for that metabolic flaw as I've
seen the lives of close friends from high school destroyed completely by alcohol.
Having said that, I have a lot of problems with what to say to my children in general about addiction and moderation. And my life patterns tend to
not show them moderation by example. So what can I say without being a hypocrit? I have told my kids how good pot made me feel and at what cost to
the rest of my life those transient good feelings were. But I think the parent can only really reinforce what he or she wants by example, and I have
a hard time doing that. Set an Entenmans golden cake with chocolate frosting in front of me and self control still goes out the window!
I wish I had the answers. The only thing I know is that the problem with drug addiction in this country is so huge that answers are very hard to come
by. -Stephanie
|
|
|
reefrocket
Nomad
Posts: 224
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: Idaho
Member Is Offline
|
|
Steph, You got this so profoundly right like it was right out of my head.
| Quote: |
I wish I had the answers. The only thing I know is that the problem with drug addiction in this country is so huge that answers are very hard to come
by. -Stephanie
|
|
|
|
Stephanie Jackter
Senior Nomad
Posts: 566
Registered: 11-3-2002
Location: Arizona
Member Is Offline
|
|
Reefrocket - It was a little scary running around in your brain like that, but I'm glad I managed to pull out some of the good stuff.
Grover - Your comments are probably on the money. Who knows if your or my plan of general honesty about the effects of drugs will work, but one thing
we know is that smokescreen programs like DARE, which avoid completely talking about the "pleasurable" side of drugs, have been abominable failures.
Eventually the kids will try a drug and go "boy did they lie to me about that!" and then the whole message becomes a lie to the kid.
Do you happen to have any links on that Paxil story? I seem to have missed it.- Stephanie
|
|
|
Bajabus
Senior Nomad
Posts: 892
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: Elias Calles B.C.S. or NC USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: My friends..it's good.
|
|
Dutch VS USA figures
David, I belive it is a common misconception that if soft drugs were de criminalized that use would increase. Every country that has been willing to
honestly approach the problem and not interject factless baseless personal opinions has seen improvments.
Here is just one countries statistics
Use of marijuana by older teens (1994) USA 38% Dutch 30%
Use of marijuana by 15-year-old (in 1995) USA 34% Dutch 29%
Heroin addicts (in 1995) USA 430
per 100,000 Dutch 160 per 100,000
Here are the really sobering and telling figures
Murder rate
(in 1996) USA 8.22 per 100,000 Dutch 1.8
per 100,000
Crime-related deaths USA 8.2 per 100,000 (1995) Dutch 1.2 per 100,000 1994)
Incarceration rate (1997) USA 645 per 100,000 Dutch 73 per 100,000
Per capita spending on drug-related law enforcement USA $81 Dutch $27
The following is an excerpt from a letter to Bill Clinton in 2001 by Fredrick Polak, M.D. a psychiatrist at the Drugs Department of the Amsterdam
Municipal Health Service and Member of the Board of the Netherlands Drug Policy Foundation.
"In my country, and in many others, complaints increase that necessary and rational developments in drug policy -- such as the establishment of safer
injection rooms, and regulated drug supply to Dutch cannabis "coffee shops" -- can not be implemented because of the UN drug conventions. Yet the
experience gained in Holland, with our liberal policies, shows clearly that the basic suppositions underlying drug prohibition are wrong. We do not
have more, but fewer addicts. Yet you ignore the lower levels of drug use and incarceration in the Netherlands, and attack us ever more fiercely about
producing Ecstasy -- as if the drug trade can be blamed exclusively on the country where production takes place. The truth is really very simple. As
long as there is a strong demand for drugs, there will be production, and criminalization will only make the trade more lucrative. The important
question is not where the drugs come from. The point is that they should never have been made illegal.
I hope you don?t mind my, at this point, getting more personal. It is rumoured that you believe your brother would have died of his drug use if drugs
had been legalized. I think this is an unfair supposition. The chances for drug-dependent people to lead a normal life are definitely better in a more
liberal system. Tragic experiences with drug dependence among your family or friends do not provide evidence for continuing drug prohibition because
they are largely a consequence of drug prohibition itself.
There is not just one way of regulating the drug market. My advisors tell me it is not difficult to conceive various systems, all of them better than
the present situation of leaving the drug market to criminal forces. In your country, the term "legalization" is sometimes used as an invective but,
in reality, legalization means regulation of the drug market by responsible government. Use and abuse of drugs will increase only marginally, or even
decrease. Just as it is now, levels of drug use and preferences for specific substances will be determined mainly by cultural trends and social
developments. Governmental policies can only marginally influence these trends and preferences, and should concentrate on promoting responsible,
controlled use and limiting the risks involved.
The first thing we need to do is to abolish the worldwide, uniform regime of prohibition so as to enable individual countries to find their own
solutions. It was the wrong decision not to keep the evaluation of UN drug policies on the agenda of the summit, as Mexico proposed. How can I explain
to my compatriots back home that a policy so controversial, so costly, and so ineffective, never comes up for serious evaluation? Why is it that,
disregarding all criticism, the United Nations continues and even intensifies drug prohibition?
Bill, how can you expect us to continue supporting policies that have proved so damaging and counterproductive?"
"Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked of such a thing."
Dwight David Eisenhower
|
|
|
Bajabus
Senior Nomad
Posts: 892
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: Elias Calles B.C.S. or NC USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: My friends..it's good.
|
|
Dutch VS USA figures
David, I belive it is a common misconception that if soft drugs were de criminalized that use would increase. Every country that has been willing to
honestly approach the problem and not interject factless baseless personal opinions has seen improvments.
Here is just one countries statistics
Use of marijuana by older teens (1994) USA 38% Dutch 30%
Use of marijuana by 15-year-old (in 1995) USA 34% Dutch 29%
Heroin addicts (in 1995) USA 430
per 100,000 Dutch 160 per 100,000
Here are the really sobering and telling figures
Murder rate
(in 1996) USA 8.22 per 100,000 Dutch 1.8
per 100,000
Crime-related deaths USA 8.2 per 100,000 (1995) Dutch 1.2 per 100,000 1994)
Incarceration rate (1997) USA 645 per 100,000 Dutch 73 per 100,000
Per capita spending on drug-related law enforcement USA $81 Dutch $27
The following is an excerpt from a letter to Bill Clinton in 2001 by Fredrick Polak, M.D. a psychiatrist at the Drugs Department of the Amsterdam
Municipal Health Service and Member of the Board of the Netherlands Drug Policy Foundation.
"In my country, and in many others, complaints increase that necessary and rational developments in drug policy -- such as the establishment of safer
injection rooms, and regulated drug supply to Dutch cannabis "coffee shops" -- can not be implemented because of the UN drug conventions. Yet the
experience gained in Holland, with our liberal policies, shows clearly that the basic suppositions underlying drug prohibition are wrong. We do not
have more, but fewer addicts. Yet you ignore the lower levels of drug use and incarceration in the Netherlands, and attack us ever more fiercely about
producing Ecstasy -- as if the drug trade can be blamed exclusively on the country where production takes place. The truth is really very simple. As
long as there is a strong demand for drugs, there will be production, and criminalization will only make the trade more lucrative. The important
question is not where the drugs come from. The point is that they should never have been made illegal.
I hope you don?t mind my, at this point, getting more personal. It is rumoured that you believe your brother would have died of his drug use if drugs
had been legalized. I think this is an unfair supposition. The chances for drug-dependent people to lead a normal life are definitely better in a more
liberal system. Tragic experiences with drug dependence among your family or friends do not provide evidence for continuing drug prohibition because
they are largely a consequence of drug prohibition itself.
There is not just one way of regulating the drug market. My advisors tell me it is not difficult to conceive various systems, all of them better than
the present situation of leaving the drug market to criminal forces. In your country, the term "legalization" is sometimes used as an invective but,
in reality, legalization means regulation of the drug market by responsible government. Use and abuse of drugs will increase only marginally, or even
decrease. Just as it is now, levels of drug use and preferences for specific substances will be determined mainly by cultural trends and social
developments. Governmental policies can only marginally influence these trends and preferences, and should concentrate on promoting responsible,
controlled use and limiting the risks involved.
The first thing we need to do is to abolish the worldwide, uniform regime of prohibition so as to enable individual countries to find their own
solutions. It was the wrong decision not to keep the evaluation of UN drug policies on the agenda of the summit, as Mexico proposed. How can I explain
to my compatriots back home that a policy so controversial, so costly, and so ineffective, never comes up for serious evaluation? Why is it that,
disregarding all criticism, the United Nations continues and even intensifies drug prohibition?
Bill, how can you expect us to continue supporting policies that have proved so damaging and counterproductive?"
"Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked of such a thing."
Dwight David Eisenhower
|
|
|
Dave
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6005
Registered: 11-5-2002
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Bajabus
David, I believe it is a common misconception that if soft drugs were de criminalized that use would increase.
|
Maybe not use as a whole but among those who currently use and abuse it would. I know the threat of penalties made a difference when I used and had
there been none I would have used more frequently.
Unless one is sociopathic by nature law DOES make a difference when it comes to antisocial behavior. It is the unequal/lax enforcement of the law that
leads to more abuse. A criminologist proposed this experiment. Eliminate the penalties for murder committed on Tuesday and Thursday. I'd bet Monday
and Wednesday would be much less violent. Wouldn't you?
|
|
|
Bajabus
Senior Nomad
Posts: 892
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: Elias Calles B.C.S. or NC USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: My friends..it's good.
|
|
like I said
Abuse is the problem.......not use.
Here is a little ditty that maybe aint so witty.
Once upon a not so long ago some dudes thought they were a sittin pretty, way down yonder in a smallish baja city.
But then much to their chagrin a local capitano found them with their kilo and locked them up while grinnin.
Well no problemo mi amigos because now the capitano is drivin a brand new Chevy, while our little gringos are back in the land o' plenty.
So if you wonder why some paths to gettin high are blocked by moral values, it's cause guys like the capitano like countin their dinero.
"Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked of such a thing."
Dwight David Eisenhower
|
|
|
Bajabus
Senior Nomad
Posts: 892
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: Elias Calles B.C.S. or NC USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: My friends..it's good.
|
|
Dave while I respect your personal opinion, that's all it is, a personal opinion. The facts speak differently.
Also;
When speaking of anti social behavior, how can you compare pot smoking with murder? Are you saying that an individual that choses to to use pot in
the privacy of their own home or out camping is engaged in anti social behavior? Are you also saying that that individual, engaged in a private act
deserves to be arrested and jailed at my expense to the tune of thousands;
From the NY times;
"In 1995, city and state officials estimated that it costs $20,000 a
year to house a persons in a municpal shelter, $60,000 in Jail, $113,000
in the state psychiatric hospotical and $12,500 in a supportive
apartment, a kind of SRO model in which residents genrally have their
own kitchens and bathrooms and limited support services on line." (Randy
kennedy "Doors that Offered Hope to Homeless May Shut" New York Times
Oct 4, 1997 p. A 15)"
In other words, it cost more to keep one person in jail than to send
them to Harvard. (current tuitition, room board and books at the
Kennedy School of Government at Havard---is
$40,000. And that is a subdidized price. )
"Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked of such a thing."
Dwight David Eisenhower
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
|
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
