Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Asset Confiscation Thread (merged)

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby magician » Thu 14 Sep 2006, 19:15:06

and this whole arguement, seen here and elseware on this site, relating to how a citizenry cannot possibly take up arms against the state, or governments in general as citizens with small arms, is utter bullshit. as if the size, proliferation, ect of your toys guarantees victory in battle. nation states cannot do asymetrical warfare. period end of story. iraq, vietnam, afghanistan (soviet and american mukery both) are shining examples of how people who make such arguements about why resistance is futile or "your guns wont stop tyranny in 4th gen warfare" ect are ignorant of history, military tactics, the limits of modern weaponry, and general state of world affairs. to those people i suggest (assuming they can read above a newspaper level) to read "the art of war" by sun tsu. it might shed some light on why we are getting our asses handed to us in iraq, and had them handed to us in Nam. oh but some asshole who only gets his news from cable and only understands his trained specialty in life will get on his high horse and talk about why we are winning in iraq and other bullshit. we are losing for the same reason the arguement they make about a weak citizenry being an ineffective fighting force is bullshit. they live there and have enough left over rusty soviet weaponry and homeade bombs that they can keep things interesting and ECONOMICALLY AND MILITARILY BLEED US DRY BY SAPPING OUR RESOURCES.

--fr coyote
magician
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun 26 Feb 2006, 04:00:00
Location: outside of consensus reality

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby ClassicSpiderman » Thu 14 Sep 2006, 22:42:29

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RonMN', 'A')nybody ever hear of a "scortched earth policy"?
If they wanna use you land for a big box store (wallmart/home depot)...then there's not much you can do.
If your farmland is intended to be used as farmland...you could drizzle waste oil all over the property.
If they intend to use your shelter as "their" shelter...you could set it on fire.
If they intend to steal your water, you could poisen it.
If they intend to confiscate your gold/silver...you could throw it into the river.
None of these thing will help you...but they will help others as the ugliness progresses.

That's what I thought that the white farmers in Zimbabwe should have done -- set fire to, poison and utterly destroy their properties when the handwriting was on the wall. Instead, they meekly gave them up except for a few holdouts.
I remember someone telling me a story where a small town (of about 1000 homeowners) was about to be incorporated to the larger city of Winnipeg. Basically, this meant that the homeowners of this small town would have seen their property taxes double. What did they do? Every single one of those residents _collectively_ stopped paying their taxes. The government could have legally thrown 1000+ people in jail and foreclosed on everyone's homes. Instead, they quietly chose to return to the status quo. Lesson here: if the government or banks are about to screw you, you should screw them in turn.
User avatar
ClassicSpiderman
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu 16 Mar 2006, 04:00:00
Location: Calgary

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby seldom_seen » Thu 14 Sep 2006, 23:37:44

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('magician', 't')hey live there and have enough left over rusty soviet weaponry and homeade bombs that they can keep things interesting and ECONOMICALLY AND MILITARILY BLEED US DRY BY SAPPING OUR RESOURCES.

When it comes to guerrilla warfare it's important to make a distinction between urban and rural conflict. In vietnam and afganistan, the guerrillas have/had a distinct advantage of being able to fade in to the mountains or jungles. No amount of agent orange or cluster bombs can cover the vast jungles of s.e. asia or the mountains of afghanistan. The US never really won anything in vietnam, and they will never control the mountains of afghan.

Thoreau said, "In wilderness is the preservation of the world." The last wild places on earth will possibly become the last strongholds for free humans.

Cities, on the other hand, can quickly be converted to concentration camps. The Iraq situation is not advantageous to the natives. Not because they live there or have lots of soviet weapons, but because the population is concentrated in cities. Although unlikely, at a moments notice the US could change policy and start turning baghdad in to another dresden or nagasaki.

The destruction of wilderness not only leads to pollution, loss of wildlife habitat and depletion of natural resources, but to a tightening of the chains around the human spirit. The destruction of wildnerness leads directly to slavery.

The government can't take your stuff if they can't find you.
seldom_seen
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue 12 Apr 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby elocs » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 00:32:28

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RonMN', 'A')nybody ever hear of a "scortched earth policy"?
If they wanna use you land for a big box store (wallmart/home depot)...then there's not much you can do. --snip-- None of these thing will help you...but they will help others as the ugliness progresses.

But, WWJD?
elocs
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Sat 04 Mar 2006, 04:00:00
Location: La Crosse, Wisconsin

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby zoidberg » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 00:34:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('magician', 'a')nd this whole arguement, seen here and elseware on this site, relating to how a citizenry cannot possibly take up arms against the state, or governments in general as citizens with small arms, is utter bullshit. as if the size, proliferation, ect of your toys guarantees victory in battle. nation states cannot do asymetrical warfare. period end of story. iraq, vietnam, afghanistan (soviet and american mukery both) are shining examples of how people who make such arguements about why resistance is futile or "your guns wont stop tyranny in 4th gen warfare" ect are ignorant of history, military tactics, the limits of modern weaponry, and general state of world affairs. to those people i suggest (assuming they can read above a newspaper level) to read "the art of war" by sun tsu. it might shed some light on why we are getting our asses handed to us in iraq, and had them handed to us in Nam. oh but some asshole who only gets his news from cable and only understands his trained specialty in life will get on his high horse and talk about why we are winning in iraq and other bullshit. we are losing for the same reason the arguement they make about a weak citizenry being an ineffective fighting force is bullshit. they live there and have enough left over rusty soviet weaponry and homeade bombs that they can keep things interesting and ECONOMICALLY AND MILITARILY BLEED US DRY BY SAPPING OUR RESOURCES.

--fr coyote


Excellent reply. Exactly true. Plus in a civil situation those storm troopers depends on citizens to supply them with food, energy, everything(never-mind recruiting citizens to be stormtroopers). It doesn't take much fighting against the citizenry before you lose your ability to fight.

If the US government went around seizing property like the Soviets, it wouldn't be too long before the US was officially dead. Its too large, too diverse, too urban to be pacified with force by even a million storm troopers. Remember the US generals figured several hundred thousands troops would be necessary for Iraq. (the got about 130,000 with predictable results). Iran is a non-starter.

Heres a good web site.

http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/glo ... teres.html

Read his other posts. He's got a good bead on asymmetric warfare.

Edit: Urban centers a notoriously hard to hold if even only a few diehards holdout. Stalingrad anyone? I highly doubt the Nazis held anything back.

Even in Berlin at the end, with the Germans beat into a bloody pulp the Soviets lost thousands of troops going through there
"Altogether, the Berlin operation (16 April - 8 May) cost the Red Army 361,367 casualties (dead, missing, wounded and sick) and 1,997 tanks and assault guns."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Fr ... rld_War_II)#End_of_War:_April.E2.80.93May_1945

Think about it. Of course if the US nuked everything thats different, but its also virtually impossible and defeats the purpose of trying to take and hold Iraq.
User avatar
zoidberg
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 635
Joined: Wed 23 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Center of north america

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 02:22:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('zoidberg', 'E')xcellent reply. Exactly true. Plus in a civil situation those storm troopers depends on citizens to supply them with food, energy, everything(never-mind recruiting citizens to be stormtroopers). It doesn't take much fighting against the citizenry before you lose your ability to fight. --snip-- Think about it. Of course if the US nuked everything thats different, but its also virtually impossible and defeats the purpose of trying to take and hold Iraq.

I think, guys you are joking here. Urban centres are easiest targets to conquer by military means, provided that authorities would not care about collateral damage.
1. Supplies (water, electricity, food) can be cut off, while city is surrounded.
2. Cluster/carpet bombing, phosphorus bombing, napalm etc would work very nicely in urban areas.
3. You can always nuke a city, if you got impatient.

All the trouble, which US is facing in Iraq are due to soft hand approach. You would have no chance to resist in a city, should US government supported by military decided to work in a stalinistic fashion. Countryside would be controlled with a system of forts, but tiny bits of freedom would survive there with some luck.

PS. Concerning nuking: You do not have to nuke ALL rebelious cities, if you want to crush insurgence. It is sufficient, that you nuke ONE of them in spectacular way and show on TV how it looks. You will find, that majority of citizens of other cities will start shooting insurgents themself without much need to involve stormtroopers.

Your only hope to save freedom (if US government had turned fascist or stalinistic) would be in military refusing to carry out orders itself. Failing so, you are done. And small arms? - you may stuff them down your ass.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby zoidberg » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 21:01:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', '
')I think, guys you are joking here.

Its no joke. I've never been in a war, but I'm a bit of a military history nerd. As Napoleon said morale is to physical as 3 is to 1. And thats in the age of muskets! Imagine what low morale means when the enemy has machine guns and RPGs.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', '
')Urban centres are easiest targets to conquer by military means, provided that authorities would not care about collateral damage.

Cities are easy to get into(being transportation hubs). Buildings are easy to blow up(being big and motionless). Its really easy to kills mass graves worth of civilians(what with everyone bunched up in the city).

However these characteristics do not mean its easy to conquer a city. Blowing up buildings creates rubble. Rubble is easy for individual soldiers to hide. It stops most vehicles. And blowing up rubbles generally just shifts it around, as opposed to clearing it. These characteristics give a massive advantage to the defender. These characteristics resist the overwhelming mechanized advantage of the US, and the US has not been overly concerned about collateral damage. Sure they're not the Nazis, but those "smart" weapons miss a lot. Not all bombs dropped are smart. Some are just dumb bombs with fins and satellite receivers on 'em.

But don't believe me. Believe the US generals asking for troops. The hints that Iraq is collapsing into a civil war. How about the fact that the US let Sadr walk away after attacking US forces and join the political ranks? Remember Mogtada Al Sadr and his mini revolt. Took 4 towns, threaten to tear apart Baghdad. Sure you may think he was accommodated because the US is too nice to do what was necessary to defeat him. Not true. He was accommodated because the US simply did not have the wherewithal to defeat him(ie scatter his army and capture him). Why? Because bombing the crap outta everything wouldn't have destroyed his fighting capability. And there aren't enough Marines to take and hold everything at all times. Even if there were, that would've failed too because eventually enough Marines would get killed and their morale would sag, and then they'd get Dienbienphu (when the French got surrounded and surrendered in Vietnam).

History will teach lessons repeatedly to those who ignore it.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', '
')1. Supplies (water, electricity, food) can be cut off, while city is surrounded.
2. Cluster/carpet bombing, phosphorus bombing, napalm etc would work very nicely in urban areas.
3. You can always nuke a city, if you got impatient.

Those 3 options do much to kills civilians and destroy infrastructure. They are far less effective at dislodging motivated, dug in troops.

You may use Falluja as a case where unrestrained attacks by the US as a template for success. The US did raze over half of Falluja. Many citizens were killed and many have left, and the amount of attacks in Falluja is much lower.

However: Those insurgents are now elsewhere targeting Shias along with the Americans. Total violence is increasing and there is no signs of abating. Shifting the problem is not solving it. In order to pacify Iraq the US will simply have to kills almost everyone, in order to follow the Falluja model. Sitting safely in the west(as I am) that may seem fine to you. If so, then theres really no point in arguing with you. However I would love for Karma to get you in Iraq to appreciate US military magnificence.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', '
')PS. Concerning nuking:
You do not have to nuke ALL rebelious cities, if you want to crush insurgence.
It is sufficient, that you nuke ONE of them in spectacular way and show on TV how it looks.
You will find, that majority of citizens of other cities will start shooting insurgents themself without much need to involve stormtroopers.

Name me one example where death from above provoked a regime change or surrender.

PS. Japan in WWII doesn't count because the US refused to accept Japanese surrender that wasn't unconditional. The Japanese had one condition:keep the emperor. The US refused till the nukes were ready then nuked them, then accepted the surrender(the emperor was kept).

Oh and sure show a nuked city full of dead and horribly dying defenceless civilians. Show that all over the TV. There'd be riots in Washington DC before Baghdad.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', '
')Your only hope to save freedom (if US government had turned fascist or stalinistic) would be in military refusing to carry out orders itself.
Failing so, you are done.
And small arms? - you may stuff them down your ass.
Dont feel bad. Rumsfeld, wolfowitz and associated cronies believed the same as you. Wolfowitz skipped the boat already and Rumsfeld's career is quite done after the current adminstration. I cant say for associated cronies, but I'd assume their bureaucratic promotions went on hold when the neo-cons lost their support. (not all yet, but soon hopefully)

down my ass? Was that necessary?

PPS: Stalinism is a political ideology, a variant of Marxist-Leninist thought. Its not a military methodology.
User avatar
zoidberg
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 635
Joined: Wed 23 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Center of north america
Top

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby Bug » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 22:29:54

The thread even though it got off topic, but that's OK the topics discussed were interesting.

The bottom line is this. What is a middle class person to do faced with future scenarios.

My concern is not so much asset seizure to support grabbing scarce resources to keep the rabble at bay, but seizure, euphemistically called 'foreclosure' by tax authorities because people are unable to pay taxes that skyrocket as interest rates soar.

If it is true the US government is 49 trillion dollars in the hole to the bankers and bondholders for monies borrowed, not including interest, then they will turn to taxpayer to pay their keepers. Taxpayers are their assets, and if the taxpayer can't pay, they will go after the property that taxpayer owns. Ultimately, everything you own in collateral to that 49 trillion debt. And that doesn't even include the fact your local property and state taxes will go up because those governments borrowed money as well and are also in the hole.

So think about it what would be the best course of action for someone who wants to prepare, with the above scenario in mind?

Do you lay low, sell off all you have, and hide the proceeds and lay low assetless as possible until this whole thing blows over or what?
User avatar
Bug
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed 13 Sep 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby mmasters » Sat 16 Sep 2006, 14:45:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bug', '
')If it is true the US government is 49 trillion dollars in the hole to the bankers and bondholders for monies borrowed, not including interest, then they will turn to taxpayer to pay their keepers. Taxpayers are their assets, and if the taxpayer can't pay, they will go after the property that taxpayer owns. Ultimately, everything you own in collateral to that 49 trillion debt. And that doesn't even include the fact your local property and state taxes will go up because those governments borrowed money as well and are also in the hole.

So think about it what would be the best course of action for someone who wants to prepare, with the above scenario in mind?


I think what's most likely to happen is the savings of the country will get wiped out. The US economy runs on bubbles, and I think one of the next ones coming is a gold bubble. The markets will go nuts at some point and people will scramble for security with their financial nest eggs. Once they've got it in gold, the central banks will crash it into oblivion and use the money to salvage the beast.

That's a walk in the park compared to a large scale physical/real estate asset seizure which is a nightmare can of worms for everyone.
User avatar
mmasters
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sun 16 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Top

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby kokoda » Fri 03 Nov 2006, 19:06:43

A few years after peakoil assets will be useless.

There will be empty houses, deserted cars, and useless electronic goods for all.
User avatar
kokoda
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 440
Joined: Thu 24 Aug 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby Mesuge » Sat 04 Nov 2006, 07:07:48

Very interesting thread.
Look at the history. If your production capacity is being constrained and shrinking, i.e. in post PO world by expensive energy and no commercial credit you can expect a similar situation in some aspects as in the Stalinist Russia and/or after the US stock crash in the 30s..

Cities> more people living on fewer m2 space. The most efficient buildings for the elite, the somewhat efficient dwellings for the rest, and the deserted factories, walmarts and old "projects" for the squatting punks and other outlaws

Country> collectivization of small farm equipment and land. What Stalin did by force - in fact US bankers did accomplish by smart financial schemes. This would intesify.

The 1mil question is whether the general public in the west will fight the system or run for protection by the system. I'd would say that given the low intensity protest up to this date definately the first phase would be a fascist regime and as it later fails to deliver due to the mighty powers of depletion curve it will further desintegrate into smaller authoritarian units based on the local conditions. For instance, more agrarian chunks or more left over industrial areas.

Think about the Duncan's points on the right side of the curve where the civilization fall is stoped for a while before further downfall.

That's how it went in the history, be it the late Roman empire or the central american civilizations etc..

So, any generalization how to proceed on individual basis are quite futile. You can thrive as some ruthless apartchik or on the other hand as some regional insurgency warlord or get caught in the middle as John Doe, the bystander.

Therefore my personal advice would be, as the system goes down enjoy it, the sparks will be all over..
DOOMerotron: at all-time high [8.3] out of 10..
User avatar
Mesuge
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1500
Joined: Tue 01 Nov 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Euro high horse bastard on the run

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby MD » Sat 04 Nov 2006, 08:10:27

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mesuge', '.')..So, any generalization how to proceed on individual basis are quite futile...


Exception: "When in Rome, do as the Romans do."
Stop filling dumpsters, as much as you possibly can, and everything will get better.

Just think it through.
It's not hard to do.
User avatar
MD
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4953
Joined: Mon 02 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: On the ball
Top

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby Cloud9 » Sat 04 Nov 2006, 09:08:23

To attempt to disarm us would be a mistake. To attempt to do it by force would be a real big mistake. A lot of us don’t live in big cities. Waco, while a tragedy for those involved, was in fact a victory for gun owners. Had it gone the way the feds had hoped, it would have been but one of a long train of raids and arms seizures. As it turned out, it stopped the seizure agenda in its tracks. Lesson learned: Shooting up churches and killing kids does not play well in Middle America.
User avatar
Cloud9
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2961
Joined: Wed 26 Jul 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby Falconoffury » Tue 07 Nov 2006, 15:34:52

By the time the government starts seizing property for food or ethanol production, it will be the beginning of the end. Get your survival gear together and head for the hills, lest you yourself be seized for slave labor.

If you're just worried about zombies, make sure you get land far from population centers. Stay near towns that are small enough to be supported by local food production.
"If humans don't control their numbers, nature will." -Pimentel
"There is not enough trash to go around for everyone," said Banrel, one of the participants in the cattle massacre.
"Bush, Bush, listen well: Two shoes on your head," the protesters chant
User avatar
Falconoffury
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1395
Joined: Tue 25 May 2004, 03:00:00

Re: Asset Seizures after peak oil

Unread postby AgentR » Tue 07 Nov 2006, 15:40:03

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cloud9', 'T')o attempt to disarm us would be a mistake. To attempt to do it by force would be a real big mistake. A lot of us don’t live in big cities..


They'll have much better things to do than confiscating the guns from the folks that they'll be planning to call up as militia further down the road.

Banditos would be much higher on their list of things in need of fixing.
Yes, we are. As we are.
And so shall we remain; Until the end.
User avatar
AgentR
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1946
Joined: Fri 06 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Location: East Texas
Top

Can the government legally confiscate your assets?

Unread postby Denny » Sun 23 Mar 2008, 13:06:49

If you are an American, I guess you'd say no. Many recommendations here deal with putting goods aside for a calamity.

But, back in 1933, President Roosevelt ordered all gold seized. This was done, not with a direct act of Congress, but by invoking a clause of the 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act. See here: The Confiscation Order. What is also vile is that he did not even have the guts to write the namne of the Act in question within the executive order, guessing logically, that the public would have seen it as outside the intended bounds.

Ultimately, the IRS was ordered to seal and then inspect bank safety deposit boxes.

This seems like the kind of thing one would expect in a dictatorship, like a Communist country, or Venezuela under Hugo Chavez. But, it happened in America!

What would be to stop a future U.S. government from seizing energy resources or food commodities in storage?
Last edited by Denny on Sun 23 Mar 2008, 14:40:17, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Denny
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1738
Joined: Sat 10 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Canada

Re: Can the government legally confiscate your assets?

Unread postby TommyJefferson » Sun 23 Mar 2008, 13:14:48

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Denny', 'W')hat would be to stop a future U.S. government from seizing energy resources or food commodities in storage?


Local militias combined with disloyal members of the military.
Conform . Consume . Obey .
User avatar
TommyJefferson
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1757
Joined: Thu 19 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Texas and Los Angeles
Top

Re: Can the government legally confiscate your assets?

Unread postby roccman » Sun 23 Mar 2008, 13:14:48

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Denny', '
')
What would be to stop a future U.S. government from seizing energy resources or food commodities in storage?


a well placed 223...
"There must be a bogeyman; there always is, and it cannot be something as esoteric as "resource depletion." You can't go to war with that." Emersonbiggins
User avatar
roccman
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4065
Joined: Fri 27 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: The Great Sonoran Desert
Top

Re: Can the government legally confiscate your assets?

Unread postby Ludi » Sun 23 Mar 2008, 13:24:19

I recommend appearing to have no assets to speak of. Don't flounce around. Fly under the radar.


That is my advice for all of this, for now and the future.

Don't flounce.
Ludi
 

Re: Can the government legally confiscate your assets?

Unread postby efarmer » Sun 23 Mar 2008, 13:52:23

You watched your government at the very height of the
American Empire and with the most reactionary and impulsive
government it has been able to conjure in modern times
botch Katrina. If you wish to think so doomer then let's play the
game with scale like it would be. The remnants of a central
government will be talking to each other in guarded compounds
while local chaos or local order exists in a dynamically shifting
polka dot pattern across the American landscape. You are
conjuring a central Hollywood bogeyman for a cameo that
will be filled by brutish gang and mob actions and opposed by
ad hoc community efforts. Besides Dennis Hopper will be to
old to run this government by then. Another factor to consider
is a bunch of blooded Iraq military vets getting orders to move against their own people by an elite leadership faction. I believe they would slay them before they issued the second page of the
orders.

I think a browning out to a miserable and relatively peaceful
shittiness like the Great Depression without oil in the ground
to drive away from itself is much more likely. And keep your
weapons small caliber, like 22 caliber. The bigger calibers
tear the rat up so bad that they don't stay on the barbecue
rack worth a damn.
User avatar
efarmer
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2003
Joined: Fri 17 Mar 2006, 04:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron