What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Disproportionate Farce

Bonnie

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2004
Messages
9,476
Reaction score
670
Points
48
Location
Wherever
By Bob Parks (07/25/2006)
http://americandaily.com/article/14744
It’s been a long week. Let’s catch up....

Lockstep
The liberal media, and the officials they love, have repeatedly accused Israel of using “disproportionate force” with their response to the Hezbollah kidnapping and rocket attacks. Only a liberal believes a war must be fought, if they have to be fought at all, fairly.

Who knows what the Iraq situation would be like today if our military were allowed to fight war to win? Maybe if liberal media idealists, who are always looking to bust our troops while looking the other way at enemy suicide bombers and beheaders, would let them use all the force at their disposal, we might be mostly out of Iraq and Afghanistan today.
But no. Let's fight a nice, clean, fair war.

As Israel could give a flying you-know-what about what Helen Thomas or David Gregory thinks, let's hope they'll show our left how a war is won. But then again, that would be assuming a liberal would willingly admit they were wrong....

A Universe Between The Ears
A few nights ago, Puerto Rico’s own Zuleyka Rivera Mendoza's began her reign as the new Miss Universe. Sure, the media took notice when she fainted after winning the crown.

But it was what she said prior that caught my attention. According to the Associated Press, “In her pageant biography, Rivera explained what made her different from the other contestants.”

"Physically, I have been told by modeling agencies and friends that I represent the consummate Latino look. Everything in my face expresses our heritage, our music and the wonderful mixes of races that we are.”



“My biggest goal in life is to become a great actress of infinite range. I am a keen observer of the human behavior, which under my interpretation, is one of the best things an actress can do."

Whatever happened to wanting to end poverty, finding a cure for AIDS, seeking world peace, and all the stereotypical banter we’ve come to expect from this annual cheesecake ceremony? Instead, this babe thinks her tight 18-year-old ass is her stepping stone to fame, fortune, and The Oscars.

She may be right….

Quote Of The Year (So Far)
"If I was president, this wouldn't have happened."
· Massachusetts Senator John Kerry on the Israeli-Lebanon conflict

Understatement: Kerry is an opportunist. He added, "The president has been so absent on diplomacy when it comes to issues affecting the Middle East, we're going to have a lot of ground to make up (in 2008) because of it."

Diplomacy with terrorists, eh? We’re definitely lucky Kerry isn’t president. How many people have asked over the last week, how does one go about negotiating with terrorists? The answer is you can’t, won’t, shant, etc.


"The ‘calmness’ is not a complete halt of the fire; it's a temporary emergency base for rest, due to needs and national interests, in order to evaluate the situation. It is a means to manage the struggle, since when managing a struggle, at times you escalate and at (other) times you clam things down. This is natural, especially since you are not an army, you are a popular rebellion, you are popular resistance, so it is natural you will calm things down whenever you want to, and escalate whenever you want to.”
· Khaled Masha'al, Damascus-based leader of Hamas on Al-Arabbiya TV, January 25, 2006

So Kerry says the Bush Administration lacked diplomacy, yet he turned around and added, “We have to destroy Hezbollah." Is that what he’d say at the negotiating table, or would our enemy see the second of two faces we here in America have seen many times before…?
Quote Of The Year, So Far (runner-up)
"I have a very hard time with this word 'non-violence', because I don't believe that I am non-violent. Right now, I would love to kill George Bush."
· Nobel peace laureate Betty Williams during a speech to hundreds of schoolchildren at the Earth Dialogues forum, being held in Brisbane

Why do liberals talk the talk when it comes to peace and love and tolerance and inclusion, yet are the first to wish death upon those who have the nerve to disagree with them? Yes, I’ve asked this numerous times before, but if there was ever a better example of liberal hypocrisy, this takes the vegetarian cake.
Now, the million-dollar question should be whether the Nobel people will pull a Milli Vanilli and yank her peace prize for her eloquent public peace-speak in front of impressionable children. Then again, these are the same people who awarded terrorist leader Yasser Arafat a Nobel Peace Prize.Go figure.

A Simple “Thank You” Would Suffice
According to the Associated Press, “An Arab group said the federal government has failed to protect Americans from the fighting in Lebanon.”

“The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee is suing on behalf of about 30 people. The lawsuit filed in Detroit alleges that Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld didn't take all possible steps to secure the safety and well-being of U.S. citizens.”

Simple questions apply here.

Did Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice tell these people to go to Lebanon in the first place? Did Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, or the American taxpayer foot the bill for their transit there? Did Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice tell these people it was a good idea to disregard the many warnings issued by our state department and go to what some consider Terrorist Central?

The answer to all these questions is no.
Yet, the American taxpayer is again being forced to pay up and fund the evacuation. Some if this was agitated by a mainstream media who actively sought out grumblers and Bush-bashers. That is, until the angry emails and phonecalls came in; then we heard from those who were happy our Navy, Marines, and cruiseships were around to get everyone out.

Now that some are safe, it’s time to sue us all in return.
One piece of advice. Don’t go back there. Next time, it would be my recommendation to leave you there. We’ll see how much that lawsuit can save you then.

Max Factoid
As I am not a woman, I know not of such things, but should Hillary Clinton become president, it may cost us all in more ways than we can initially fathom. According to the New York Post, Miss Hillary is not the “love me as I am”, armpit hair, no makeup feminist we all grew to love and admire.

Apparently, the good senator is using hard-earned campaign donation money for rather pricey hair stylings and make-up sessions with some of Hollywood's finest. Then again, how typical is this of limousine liberals who demand we give them our hard-earned cash, yet spend it with no sense of conscience and/or good taste.

But as we're talking about the left's money, let's see how long it takes for them to catch on to the latest Clinton hustle.
Dancing Fools
They say a picture speaks a thousand words. How about four...?





Good thing I don't know what Cynthia and Cindy were “dancing” to. I'd be forever plagued by horrifying imagery every time I heard it thereafter.

Bush / Gore, Por Favor
Reminiscent of our 2000 election, liberal “populist” Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador refuses to concede defeat to conservative candidate Felipe Calderon, claiming fraud in a July 2 election that left them separated by barely a half percent of the 41 million votes.

One question that consistently comes up in my head: Why is it when liberals win, it's “the will of the people.” But whenever they lose nowadays, it's always election fraud, disenfranchisement, dirty tricks, or the public was too stupid to understand what they were voting for?
Just throwing it out there....

Spin The Anchor
A couple weeks ago, “Access Hollywood” included a July 19 web entry which quoted Katie Couric, who was still co-anchor of NBC's “Today" show, as saying "I think the situation there (Iraq) is so dangerous, and as a single parent with two children, that's something I won't be doing.”

Guilt us with the single mom thing and we'll forget she accepted the $60 million contract at CBS that assumed she'd do the same thing any man being paid less would do.

There are several issues here. First of all, despite feminist mandates, women have no place in combat zones. If you think that's sexist, try asking your mall-bound 18-year-old daughter (when she gets off the cellphone) to stop by the post office and sign up for selective service as law dictates all 18-year-old boys do. Imagine the look of horror, eye-rolling, and drama that would follow.

It would appear the high-priced publicists were quickly phone-whipped into a frenzy, thus this “correction” was later issued....

“The comments from Katie Couric that earlier ran on AccessHollywood.com were from a previous interview on May 30th in regards to whether or not she would go to Iraq in light of injured CBS News correspondent Kimberly Dozier. The Web site story has since been clarified and includes more recent comments that were given by Couric in regards to the current Middle East crises at the CBS TCAs (Television Critics Association). "Access Hollywood" NEVER aired this story and regrets that the previous Web site story was misleading.”

Obviously a correction was appropos based on what Couric said on July 16th but was not published in the initial AccessHollywood story....

“I think, yeah, of course I would want to be there. I think -- in terms of traveling, I think it will be done on a case-by-case basis. I think sometimes correspondents who have been covering beats for months and even years often have a great handle on what's going on in a certain global hot spot. But clearly if it's going to serve the story, advance the story, and be helpful to the story, I would like to be there. I think it really depends on the situation and what's happening.”
Whether this is spin or not, who knows? Whether the quote was really left out or later added to “correct” the impression given, who knows.

The real issue here is the importance given to anchors. Dispite common perception, anchors are not reporters. Most don't go out and dig up the news. Most sit in air-conditioned studios and read teleprompters. On the evening news level, it's not done live so the presentation comes off as flawless. Why these prompter-readers need to have a battlezone backdrop is purely for propping up their own sense of self-importance.

Katie should stay home, as should Sheppard Smith, and all those other anchors who feel their presence there make the story all the more real. They are in the way, giving the American people (and the enemy watching on the dish) information that doesn't enhance the story, and may endanger real people fighting on the ground.

Suggestion
To the Fox News Channel,
Please move your New York studio to the second floor. It's really distracting to see some of our nation's truly stupid, constantly peering in the window, and waving while being positioned correctly in the shot via cellphone.
They're embarrassing, annoying, and so trash. If you moved your studio upstairs, you'd still have the street backdrop, without the inane gestures of America's finest.
Sincerely,
Bob Parks




:)
 

Hagbard Celine

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
61
Points
48
Location
Atlanta, GA
Well, let's see. There was a kidnapping, then another. Then another. That makes three kidnappings. Israel's response to these three kidnappings was to launch a full-out war on Lebanon that is killing not only terrorists, but women and children as well. Everyday I'm seeing new pictures of children screaming with third-degree burns covering most of their bodies. Yesterday I saw an infant screaming in a hospital because half its body was burnt up. I think the word "disproportionate" is accurate here. Not saying the Arabs didn't deserve it for voting terrorists into public office, because God knows you reap what you sow, just saying your constant string of liberal-bashing posts quoting arch-religious conservative bloggers is getting pretty moronic. And it's especially moronic when the premise is false to begin with.
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
85,586
Reaction score
17,907
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
Hagbard Celine said:
Well, let's see. There was a kidnapping, then another. Then another. That makes three kidnappings. Israel's response to these three kidnappings was to launch a full-out war on Lebanon that is killing not only terrorists, but women and children as well. Everyday I'm seeing new pictures of children screaming with third-degree burns covering most of their bodies. Yesterday I saw an infant screaming in a hospital because half its body was burnt up. I think the word "disproportionate" is accurate here. Not saying the Arabs didn't deserve it for voting terrorists into public office, because God knows you reap what you sow, just saying your constant string of liberal-bashing posts quoting arch-religious conservative bloggers is getting pretty moronic.

You forgot the missiles aimed at Haifa by Hezbollah.
 

Hagbard Celine

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
61
Points
48
Location
Atlanta, GA
jillian said:
You forgot the missiles aimed at Haifa by Hezbollah.
True, but Israel's chief reason behind it's offensive was to urge the release of its soldiers. The Qassam rockets being fired over its borders sporadically were an ancilliary issue.
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
85,586
Reaction score
17,907
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
Hagbard Celine said:
True, but Israel's chief reason behind it's offensive was to urge the release of its soldiers. The Qassam rockets being fired over its borders sporadically were an ancilliary issue.

I disagree. I think Israel's primary objective was to get Lebanon to do what it was supposed to and put its own troops on the border so that Hezbollah would be displaced.

It was really interesting. I was watching Anderson Cooper last night and he did a piece on how Hezbollah is trying to use the international press corps to propagandize for it. Terrorist organizations like Hezbollah dig in among civilian populations for the very purpose of having large numbers of civilian casualties.
 

Hagbard Celine

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
61
Points
48
Location
Atlanta, GA
jillian said:
I disagree. I think Israel's primary objective was to get Lebanon to do what it was supposed to and put its own troops on the border so that Hezbollah would be displaced.

It was really interesting. I was watching Anderson Cooper last night and he did a piece on how Hezbollah is trying to use the international press corps to propagandize for it. Terrorist organizations like Hezbollah dig in among civilian populations for the very purpose of having large numbers of civilian casualties.
Israel's initial offensive on its northern border with Lebanon was sparked by the capture of two of its soldiers by Hezbollah militants. In the first few days of the offensive, news channels were reporting that they were fighting a two-front war with Lebanon and Palestine. Now the coverage has switched almost exclusively to the conflict with Lebanon. After Israel's initial attacks, Israel changed its reasoning from just trying to release its troops to trying to eradicate Hezbollah (a noble task IMO), but Israel's reasoning aside, the offensive launched against Lebanon has been disproportionate, especially as civilian casualties are concerned. I was pointing out that this thread's entire premise is false and is just an excuse for Bonnie and others to rag on the "libs."
 
OP
B

Bonnie

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2004
Messages
9,476
Reaction score
670
Points
48
Location
Wherever
Hagbard Celine said:
Well, let's see. There was a kidnapping, then another. Then another. That makes three kidnappings. Israel's response to these three kidnappings was to launch a full-out war on Lebanon that is killing not only terrorists, but women and children as well. Everyday I'm seeing new pictures of children screaming with third-degree burns covering most of their bodies. Yesterday I saw an infant screaming in a hospital because half its body was burnt up. I think the word "disproportionate" is accurate here. Not saying the Arabs didn't deserve it for voting terrorists into public office, because God knows you reap what you sow, just saying your constant string of liberal-bashing posts quoting arch-religious conservative bloggers is getting pretty moronic. And it's especially moronic when the premise is false to begin with.

Try this Hezbollah entered Israeli's border, then killed 8 of their soldiers took 2 more all for the purpose of starting this conflict.
 
OP
B

Bonnie

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2004
Messages
9,476
Reaction score
670
Points
48
Location
Wherever
jillian said:
I disagree. I think Israel's primary objective was to get Lebanon to do what it was supposed to and put its own troops on the border so that Hezbollah would be displaced.

It was really interesting. I was watching Anderson Cooper last night and he did a piece on how Hezbollah is trying to use the international press corps to propagandize for it. Terrorist organizations like Hezbollah dig in among civilian populations for the very purpose of having large numbers of civilian casualties.

Exactly. And they have had six years to dig in quite well.
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
85,586
Reaction score
17,907
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
Hagbard Celine said:
Israel's initial offensive on its northern border with Lebanon was sparked by the capture of two of its soldiers by Hezbollah militants. In the first few days of the offensive, news channels were reporting that they were fighting a two-front war with Lebanon and Palestine. Now the coverage has switched almost exclusively to the conflict with Lebanon. After Israel's initial attacks, Israel changed its reasoning from just trying to release its troops to trying to eradicate Hezbollah (a noble task IMO), but Israel's reasoning aside, the offensive launched against Lebanon has been disproportionate, especially as civilian casualties are concerned. I was pointing out that this thread's entire premise is false and is just an excuse for Bonnie and others to rag on the "libs."

Actually, I'm one of the "libs" that Bonnie sometimes rags on :happy2:

You might want to consider the fact that Hezbollah has been digging in for five years getting ready for this and WANTED Israel to have to fight on two fronts... something that even the Nazis couldn't do.

*Edit* By the by, there's historical precedent for that, isn't there?
 

Hagbard Celine

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
61
Points
48
Location
Atlanta, GA
Bonnie said:
Try this Hezbollah entered Israeli's border, then killed 8 of their soldiers took 2 more all for the purpose of starting this conflict.
Did Hezbollah kill the same number of Israeli civilians as Israelis have killed Lebanese? Did Hezbollah destroy Israel's infrastructure sending the entire country back in time twenty years? No. There's your disproportionality.
 
OP
B

Bonnie

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2004
Messages
9,476
Reaction score
670
Points
48
Location
Wherever
Hagbard Celine said:
Did Hezbollah kill the same number of Israeli civilians as Israelis have killed Lebanese? Did Hezbollah destroy Israel's infrastructure sending the entire country back in time twenty years? No. There's your disproportionality.

See Jillians post above...

Ps Jillian I only rag on you when you deserve it and for your own good... ;)
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
85,586
Reaction score
17,907
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
Hagbard Celine said:
Did Hezbollah kill the same number of Israeli civilians as Israelis have killed Lebanese? Did Hezbollah destroy Israel's infrastructure sending the entire country back in time twenty years? No. There's your disproportionality.

Does the Israeli military dig in among civilian populations so their own people are targeted?

That's what makes it appear disproportionate.

Or should Israel just allow its cities to be hit by bombs without responding?
 
OP
B

Bonnie

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2004
Messages
9,476
Reaction score
670
Points
48
Location
Wherever
Hagbard Celine said:
Did Hezbollah kill the same number of Israeli civilians as Israelis have killed Lebanese? Did Hezbollah destroy Israel's infrastructure sending the entire country back in time twenty years? No. There's your disproportionality.

Celine seriously do you really think Israel wants this or any other conflict they have been involved in? Hezbollah and all other terrorists in that region know full well that Israel takes the lives of every one of their soldiers very seriously, and they know that one sure way to provoke Israel into responding is to take or kill an Israeli soldier. Israel wants to live in peace, they have never been able to do that because they are surrounded with enemies save for the few moderate countries in that region like Jordan, that just want them destroyed.
 

theHawk

Registered Conservative
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
43,939
Reaction score
38,501
Points
3,605
Location
Arizona
Hagbard Celine said:
Did Hezbollah kill the same number of Israeli civilians as Israelis have killed Lebanese? Did Hezbollah destroy Israel's infrastructure sending the entire country back in time twenty years? No. There's your disproportionality.


So in war you can't kill more than your enemy? Once you go over the number, you should cease fire and wait for more casualties before resuming it, just to keep it "proportional". I guess Libs have their new catch-phrase....

A war is suppose to be won, with as few casualties on your side as possible. Its not supposed to be "fair", you want a war to be as "disproportional" as possible in your favor.

Your liberal logic is self-destructive.

:duh3:
 

Hagbard Celine

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
61
Points
48
Location
Atlanta, GA
jillian said:
Does the Israeli military dig in among civilian populations so their own people are targeted?

That's what makes it appear disproportionate.

Or should Israel just allow its cities to be hit by bombs without responding?
The comment I bolded is ridiculous. No one in their right mind would respond affirmatively to this question. Of course Israel shouldn't put up with any terroristic threats against its sovereignty. However, you must concede that Israel's response, though pleasing to the spirit of the blood-lusting savage harkening back from the time of the bloody spectacle in the coliseum of Rome that lies in all our hearts, is disproportionate. Not all Lebanese are Hezbollah militants, especially the young children who are being killed and maimed. Therefore, the attack by Isreal on Lebanon as a whole is disproportionate to the incident that catalysed the situation.
 

Hagbard Celine

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
61
Points
48
Location
Atlanta, GA
Bonnie said:
Celine seriously do you really think Israel wants this or any other conflict they have been involved in? Hezbollah and all other terrorists in that region know full well that Israel takes the lives of every one of their soldiers very seriously, and they know that one sure way to provoke Israel into responding is to take or kill an Israeli soldier. Israel wants to live in peace, they have never been able to do that because they are surrounded with enemies save for the few moderate countries in that region like Jordan, that just want them destroyed.
I think they hate their savage Arab neighbors as much as the Arabs hate them. I also think that they are making an example of Lebanon to their other enemies at the expense of the Lebanese civilian population.
 

dilloduck

Diamond Member
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
53,240
Reaction score
5,796
Points
1,850
Location
Austin, TX
Hagbard Celine said:
I think they hate their savage Arab neighbors as much as the Arabs hate them. I also think that they are making an example of Lebanon to their other enemies at the expense of the Lebanese civilian population.

Perhaps other muslim civilian populations will take notice and think twice when armed militias come and set up rocket launchers next door.
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
85,586
Reaction score
17,907
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
Hagbard Celine said:
The comment I bolded is ridiculous. No one in their right mind would respond affirmatively to this question. Of course Israel shouldn't put up with any terroristic threats against its sovereignty. However, you must concede that Israel's response, though pleasing to the spirit of the blood-lusting savage harkening back from the time of the bloody spectacle in the coliseum of Rome that lies in all our hearts, is disproportionate. Not all Lebanese are Hezbollah militants, especially the young children who are being killed and maimed. Therefore, the attack by Isreal on Lebanon as a whole is disproportionate to the incident that catalysed the situation.

I'm not sure what you think their response should have been then. They have to get the missiles off of their border. Hezballah puts those missiles and its bases where young children live. Israel isn't responsible for that.

Hezballah is, however, responsible for aiming those missiles at Israeli civilian populations. I think Israelis are tired of having their children killed, so I'm not certain what a proportionate response would be if it is ineffective in getting rid of the missiles and Hezballah.

Both the Lebanese and Israeli people I've met want to live peacefully. Hezballah is an impediment to that, and intentionally so, but the Lebanese government has had six years to do what it was supposed to and put its own troops there.

It's a quandry... not as simple as proportionate or not. Perhaps effectiveness is more appropriate.
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,854
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
Hagbard Celine said:
Well, let's see. There was a kidnapping, then another. Then another. That makes three kidnappings. Israel's response to these three kidnappings was to launch a full-out war on Lebanon that is killing not only terrorists, but women and children as well. Everyday I'm seeing new pictures of children screaming with third-degree burns covering most of their bodies. Yesterday I saw an infant screaming in a hospital because half its body was burnt up. I think the word "disproportionate" is accurate here. Not saying the Arabs didn't deserve it for voting terrorists into public office, because God knows you reap what you sow, just saying your constant string of liberal-bashing posts quoting arch-religious conservative bloggers is getting pretty moronic. And it's especially moronic when the premise is false to begin with.

Yeah, the media gets better results from showing Lebanese children in a nospital than it does from a pile of timber than used to be a family's house until a Hezbollah missile landed on it.

Israel didn't launch a war against Lebanon. Israel is seeking out and destroying Hezbollah terrorists wherever they find them.

Perhaps Lebanon shouldn't have allowed an armed terrorist organization to set up shop within its borders?
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,854
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
Hagbard Celine said:
Israel's initial offensive on its northern border with Lebanon was sparked by the capture of two of its soldiers by Hezbollah militants. In the first few days of the offensive, news channels were reporting that they were fighting a two-front war with Lebanon and Palestine. Now the coverage has switched almost exclusively to the conflict with Lebanon. After Israel's initial attacks, Israel changed its reasoning from just trying to release its troops to trying to eradicate Hezbollah (a noble task IMO), but Israel's reasoning aside, the offensive launched against Lebanon has been disproportionate, especially as civilian casualties are concerned. I was pointing out that this thread's entire premise is false and is just an excuse for Bonnie and others to rag on the "libs."

Problem with your theory is the premise is not false. if you were paying attention as well as you claim, you would know the operation to attack Hezbollah had been planned previous to any kidnappings, and the response is NOT disproprtionate.

The idea in armed conflict is to win destroy the enemy's ability wage war by whatever means are at one's disposal. We aren't talking about an enemy that marches onto the field of honor for a one-on-one showdown. We're talking about an enemy that targets noncombatants, purposefully hides among them to increase civilian casualties, and uses cold-blooded murder as the means to their end.

There's no "ragging on the libs." But I will rag on ANYONE who is so distracted by noncombatant casualties they can't bring themselves to win a righteous war.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$80.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top