What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. 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!

This is not true, is it? Removing confederates from Arlington?

Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
11,163
Reaction score
2,420
Points
160
Location
North Carolina

If passed as-is, this amendment would require that the federal government desecrate the graves of 482 Confederate soldiers buried in Arlington National Cemetery. The soldiers are buried in a circle around a massive, 106-year-old monument commemorating the Confederate soldiers who died in the Civil War. Every President since Teddy Roosevelt has laid a wreath at this monument. Yes, that includes Barack H. Obama. He paid his respects to the Confederate dead buried in Arlington back in 2009.

Warren's amendment would require that the memorial be removed from the grounds of Arlington. It is impossible to do this without disturbing the grave sites around the monument…

But it actually gets worse. Elizabeth Warren's amendment is so poorly written that while it gives an exception for gravestones, it does not exempt the graves themselves. Since being buried in Arlington is considered an honor, a literal reading of Warren's bill would require these Civil War soldiers to be exhumed and moved off the premises. Just think about how small of a person someone would have to be to write an amendment in 2020 that could force the exhumation of 482 Civil War soldiers because they disagree with the cause they fought for…

Even in a best case scenario, the graves would get to stay, but Arlington wouldn't be able to advertise where they're located. No signage… no mention in the maps… no helpful directions from staff… Anyone who has ever been to Arlington looking for a specific grave knows it is next to impossible to do without help and directions. So best case, the Confederates get to stay buried, but no one would be allowed to know where they are…
Well, if you actually READ the bill, it doesn't mandate that everything simply be removed. Each monument and everything else will be looked at and debated before anything is done. But why let the facts get in the way of your white supremacist outrage?

—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a commission relating to assigning, modifying, or removing of names, symbols, displays, monuments, and paraphernalia to assets of the Department of Defense that commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America. (c) DUTIES.—The Commission shall— (1) assess the cost of renaming or removing names, symbols, displays, monuments, or paraphernalia that commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America; (2) develop procedures and criteria to assess whether an existing name, symbol, monument, display, or paraphernalia commemorates the Confederate States of America or person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America; (3) recommend procedures for renaming assets of the Department of Defense to prevent commemoration of the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America; (4) develop a plan to remove names, symbols, displays, monuments, or paraphernalia that commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America from assets of the Department of Defense, within the timeline established by this Act; (5) include in the plan procedures and criteria for collecting and incorporating local sensitivities associated with naming or renaming of assets of the Department of Defense.
You’re an idiot. An indoctrinated moron.
The CSA were not traitors or seditionists. They attempted independence.
They failed, their states were reacquired by the USA and maintained statehood and historical significance in the context of the union.
You’re a brainwashed moron. You are more of a traitor than any of these CSA soldiers who fought for their states.

That is exactly what they were traitors and seditionists. Get a new excuse, that one is nothing but Grade A horseshit.
They were Pardoned; all Americans now!!

Greg

They still don't deserve to be honored.

Negroes still have no appreciation of the charity White Americans have given blacks....both yankees and southerners.

The best think that ever happened to the Africans but the worst thing for America was them being brought over here.

They are now being used as useful idiots by the democrats to further divide America and to fundamentally change it to the point where we will be so weakened we will not be able to defend ourselves from adversaries who are tooling up to take us down as we speak.

Racist propaganda at it's best. Now watch not one right winger will attack this hate speech, why is that?
I have a question of my own for ya. Not one black person has attacked hate speech from blm towards left wingers. Why is that?

Give me a few examples.
The vid isn't enough?

I don't hear him say the Nword in the vid.
 
OP
Gracie

Gracie

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
64,432
Reaction score
23,465
Points
2,290
Location
Wandering Nomad

If passed as-is, this amendment would require that the federal government desecrate the graves of 482 Confederate soldiers buried in Arlington National Cemetery. The soldiers are buried in a circle around a massive, 106-year-old monument commemorating the Confederate soldiers who died in the Civil War. Every President since Teddy Roosevelt has laid a wreath at this monument. Yes, that includes Barack H. Obama. He paid his respects to the Confederate dead buried in Arlington back in 2009.

Warren's amendment would require that the memorial be removed from the grounds of Arlington. It is impossible to do this without disturbing the grave sites around the monument…

But it actually gets worse. Elizabeth Warren's amendment is so poorly written that while it gives an exception for gravestones, it does not exempt the graves themselves. Since being buried in Arlington is considered an honor, a literal reading of Warren's bill would require these Civil War soldiers to be exhumed and moved off the premises. Just think about how small of a person someone would have to be to write an amendment in 2020 that could force the exhumation of 482 Civil War soldiers because they disagree with the cause they fought for…

Even in a best case scenario, the graves would get to stay, but Arlington wouldn't be able to advertise where they're located. No signage… no mention in the maps… no helpful directions from staff… Anyone who has ever been to Arlington looking for a specific grave knows it is next to impossible to do without help and directions. So best case, the Confederates get to stay buried, but no one would be allowed to know where they are…
Well, if you actually READ the bill, it doesn't mandate that everything simply be removed. Each monument and everything else will be looked at and debated before anything is done. But why let the facts get in the way of your white supremacist outrage?

—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a commission relating to assigning, modifying, or removing of names, symbols, displays, monuments, and paraphernalia to assets of the Department of Defense that commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America. (c) DUTIES.—The Commission shall— (1) assess the cost of renaming or removing names, symbols, displays, monuments, or paraphernalia that commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America; (2) develop procedures and criteria to assess whether an existing name, symbol, monument, display, or paraphernalia commemorates the Confederate States of America or person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America; (3) recommend procedures for renaming assets of the Department of Defense to prevent commemoration of the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America; (4) develop a plan to remove names, symbols, displays, monuments, or paraphernalia that commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America from assets of the Department of Defense, within the timeline established by this Act; (5) include in the plan procedures and criteria for collecting and incorporating local sensitivities associated with naming or renaming of assets of the Department of Defense.
You’re an idiot. An indoctrinated moron.
The CSA were not traitors or seditionists. They attempted independence.
They failed, their states were reacquired by the USA and maintained statehood and historical significance in the context of the union.
You’re a brainwashed moron. You are more of a traitor than any of these CSA soldiers who fought for their states.

That is exactly what they were traitors and seditionists. Get a new excuse, that one is nothing but Grade A horseshit.
They were Pardoned; all Americans now!!

Greg

They still don't deserve to be honored.

Negroes still have no appreciation of the charity White Americans have given blacks....both yankees and southerners.

The best think that ever happened to the Africans but the worst thing for America was them being brought over here.

They are now being used as useful idiots by the democrats to further divide America and to fundamentally change it to the point where we will be so weakened we will not be able to defend ourselves from adversaries who are tooling up to take us down as we speak.

Racist propaganda at it's best. Now watch not one right winger will attack this hate speech, why is that?
I have a question of my own for ya. Not one black person has attacked hate speech from blm towards left wingers. Why is that?

Give me a few examples.
The vid isn't enough?

I don't hear him say the Nword in the vid.
Of course you didn't. He could appear in a white sheeted pointy hat and you would still defend him.

Look, I will say this once. You are not stupid. Just bullheaded. THINK for a minute. Biden has used the N word many time in his career. Dementia or not, his racism towards black is still embedded in him. Just like a drunk shows his/her true self when embibing...so do dementia patients. It's who they are.

Believe what you want. I'm not going to argue with you further about it.
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
11,163
Reaction score
2,420
Points
160
Location
North Carolina

If passed as-is, this amendment would require that the federal government desecrate the graves of 482 Confederate soldiers buried in Arlington National Cemetery. The soldiers are buried in a circle around a massive, 106-year-old monument commemorating the Confederate soldiers who died in the Civil War. Every President since Teddy Roosevelt has laid a wreath at this monument. Yes, that includes Barack H. Obama. He paid his respects to the Confederate dead buried in Arlington back in 2009.

Warren's amendment would require that the memorial be removed from the grounds of Arlington. It is impossible to do this without disturbing the grave sites around the monument…

But it actually gets worse. Elizabeth Warren's amendment is so poorly written that while it gives an exception for gravestones, it does not exempt the graves themselves. Since being buried in Arlington is considered an honor, a literal reading of Warren's bill would require these Civil War soldiers to be exhumed and moved off the premises. Just think about how small of a person someone would have to be to write an amendment in 2020 that could force the exhumation of 482 Civil War soldiers because they disagree with the cause they fought for…

Even in a best case scenario, the graves would get to stay, but Arlington wouldn't be able to advertise where they're located. No signage… no mention in the maps… no helpful directions from staff… Anyone who has ever been to Arlington looking for a specific grave knows it is next to impossible to do without help and directions. So best case, the Confederates get to stay buried, but no one would be allowed to know where they are…
Well, if you actually READ the bill, it doesn't mandate that everything simply be removed. Each monument and everything else will be looked at and debated before anything is done. But why let the facts get in the way of your white supremacist outrage?

—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a commission relating to assigning, modifying, or removing of names, symbols, displays, monuments, and paraphernalia to assets of the Department of Defense that commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America. (c) DUTIES.—The Commission shall— (1) assess the cost of renaming or removing names, symbols, displays, monuments, or paraphernalia that commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America; (2) develop procedures and criteria to assess whether an existing name, symbol, monument, display, or paraphernalia commemorates the Confederate States of America or person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America; (3) recommend procedures for renaming assets of the Department of Defense to prevent commemoration of the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America; (4) develop a plan to remove names, symbols, displays, monuments, or paraphernalia that commemorate the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America from assets of the Department of Defense, within the timeline established by this Act; (5) include in the plan procedures and criteria for collecting and incorporating local sensitivities associated with naming or renaming of assets of the Department of Defense.
You’re an idiot. An indoctrinated moron.
The CSA were not traitors or seditionists. They attempted independence.
They failed, their states were reacquired by the USA and maintained statehood and historical significance in the context of the union.
You’re a brainwashed moron. You are more of a traitor than any of these CSA soldiers who fought for their states.

That is exactly what they were traitors and seditionists. Get a new excuse, that one is nothing but Grade A horseshit.
They were Pardoned; all Americans now!!

Greg

They still don't deserve to be honored.

Negroes still have no appreciation of the charity White Americans have given blacks....both yankees and southerners.

The best think that ever happened to the Africans but the worst thing for America was them being brought over here.

They are now being used as useful idiots by the democrats to further divide America and to fundamentally change it to the point where we will be so weakened we will not be able to defend ourselves from adversaries who are tooling up to take us down as we speak.

Racist propaganda at it's best. Now watch not one right winger will attack this hate speech, why is that?
I have a question of my own for ya. Not one black person has attacked hate speech from blm towards left wingers. Why is that?

Give me a few examples.
The vid isn't enough?

I don't hear him say the Nword in the vid.
Of course you didn't. He could appear in a white sheeted pointy hat and you would still defend him.

You aren't really that dumb, are you?

Look, I will say this once. You are not stupid. Just bullheaded. THINK for a minute. Biden has used the N word many time in his career. Dementia or not, his racism towards black is still embedded in him. Just like a drunk shows his/her true self when embibing...so do dementia patients. It's who they are.

Believe what you want. I'm not going to argue with you further about it.

Fair enough, now you do the same. Trump was sued in the past for his racist rental practices, his support for white nationalist, white supremacist, racist views, but folks like you try to tell us that he likes black folks. I mean really?
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
91,311
Reaction score
23,474
Points
2,180
Location
in between
If true, this is going WAY too far. WAY.

Why? They're dead, they don't care.

We need to tear down every last Confederate monument in the country, and make sure the history books make it clear that the Confederates were in the wrong.

There is an appropriate place for Confederate memorials: historic sites of battles and cemeteries (like commemorations for other war dead).
 
OP
Gracie

Gracie

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
64,432
Reaction score
23,465
Points
2,290
Location
Wandering Nomad
Dig up Teddy Kennedy and Jackie Onasis too then.They cheapen the real heros buried there.
Ted, I can understand. But why Jackie?
Jackie belongs buried in Greece with her husband.
I politely disagree. Her husband was POTUS. She loved him. She also had a life to lead after he was murdered. She belongs next to him. She earned it. She held his brains in her lap. The man she loved.
 

HenryBHough

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
31,001
Reaction score
6,991
Points
1,140
Location
Oak Grove, Massachusetts
I politely disagree. Her husband was POTUS. She loved him. She also had a life to lead after he was murdered. She belongs next to him. She earned it. She held his brains in her lap. The man she loved.

So you believe she married Onassis for his money?
 

Utilitarian

co-Cain Manager
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
1,343
Reaction score
668
Points
198
Location
NC
If true, this is going WAY too far. WAY.

Why? They're dead, they don't care.

We need to tear down every last Confederate monument in the country, and make sure the history books make it clear that the Confederates were in the wrong.
I'm not aware of any history books in public education that glorify the Confederacy.

As for the monuments, that's up to locals to decide. If the locals want to remove them from their respective areas, then so be it, but it shouldn't be a federal agenda.
 
OP
Gracie

Gracie

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
64,432
Reaction score
23,465
Points
2,290
Location
Wandering Nomad
I politely disagree. Her husband was POTUS. She loved him. She also had a life to lead after he was murdered. She belongs next to him. She earned it. She held his brains in her lap. The man she loved.

So you believe she married Onassis for his money?
No. I think she was suffering. He just happened to be rich. And she didn't want anything more to do with the USA politics. It killed her husband. She wanted away. He took her away. And was loaded with dough. Did she like him? Probably. But love? No. The love her life died right in front of her. I don't blame her one bit for getting out of it all. Was I upset when she married Onassis? yeah. But now that I am older, and can relate to things I couldn't at that time...I think she was lonely, sad, suffered PTSD due to a brain in her lap and did what she thought best at the time. It worked out for her. But she needs to be with her husband. POTUS of the USA.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
133,294
Reaction score
15,712
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
I'm not aware of any history books in public education that glorify the Confederacy.

As for the monuments, that's up to locals to decide. If the locals want to remove them from their respective areas, then so be it, but it shouldn't be a federal agenda.

No, the history books generally try to pussy foot around the evils of the Confederacy. But what we do have is a whole history of popular literature that glorifies it, and that's the problem. From "Birth of a Nation" to "Gone with the Wind" to more recent efforts like "Gods and Generals".
 

HenryBHough

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
31,001
Reaction score
6,991
Points
1,140
Location
Oak Grove, Massachusetts
No. I think she was suffering. He just happened to be rich. And she didn't want anything more to do with the USA politics. It killed her husband. She wanted away. He took her away. And was loaded with dough. Did she like him? Probably. But love? No. The love her life died right in front of her. I don't blame her one bit for getting out of it all. Was I upset when she married Onassis? yeah. But now that I am older, and can relate to things I couldn't at that time...I think she was lonely, sad, suffered PTSD due to a brain in her lap and did what she thought best at the time. It worked out for her. But she needs to be with her husband. POTUS of the USA.

There were elements to the relationship that were not generally known. Politics being what they are today it's dubious that the press would have been so kind and gentle as they are now. Remember, Kennedy could not be a Democrat today so he and his family would be fair game.

Neither party was the angel you might prefer to believe.
 

Utilitarian

co-Cain Manager
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
1,343
Reaction score
668
Points
198
Location
NC
I'm not aware of any history books in public education that glorify the Confederacy.

As for the monuments, that's up to locals to decide. If the locals want to remove them from their respective areas, then so be it, but it shouldn't be a federal agenda.

No, the history books generally try to pussy foot around the evils of the Confederacy. But what we do have is a whole history of popular literature that glorifies it, and that's the problem. From "Birth of a Nation" to "Gone with the Wind" to more recent efforts like "Gods and Generals".
Birth of a Nation isn't exactly looked favorably upon. Neither is Gone with the Wind (nowadays).

I haven't seen Gods and Generals, so I can't comment on it.

Just because some people want to write stories glorifying it is quite different from having schools teach it that way. Maybe you've had different history courses than I've had, but I remember the general presentation of the Confederacy in most of my history courses has been that the Civil War was a complicated conflict. It didn't glorify either side, but it did explain that slavery was only part of the cause for the war. The biggest factor that led up to the war was related to slavery but also had to do with the balance of political power among states.

When abolitionism started gaining momentum in the North, every time a new state was created, there was an attempt to keep both the North and South appeased. So, for every free state that was created, another slave state was created around the same time. Slavery was the primary political issue between the North and South, but it definitely wasn't the only thing dividing them. There were related economic issues as well. The South provided a lot of the raw materials for the finished goods that the North produced. There were conflicts involving this trade.

Lincoln himself was quoted as saying that if he could find a way to preserve the Union without ending slavery, he would implement it. When it became clear that the Confederacy was losing later on, he committed to ending slavery -- although at first, only slaves in Confederate controlled states were freed. It wasn't until later that all slaves were freed. Lincoln was much more of a pragmatist than an idealist, but a lot of depictions of him seem to ignore this.

Even in Germany, the approach toward dealing with the darker chapters of history is more nuanced than just tearing statues down. Germany still has museums and parks that have Nazi statues and paraphernalia that provide a full historical context for these things. America should take the same approach.

I understand the desire to remove Confederate statues from the public square, but removing them without destroying them is probably the best approach. These can be put in museums and parks that specifically address the history of the war.

The Polish didn't destroy Auschwitz -- they turned it into a memorial. It is much better to remember the past than to erase it, even if the memories are horrific.
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
68,662
Reaction score
18,785
Points
2,220

If passed as-is, this amendment would require that the federal government desecrate the graves of 482 Confederate soldiers buried in Arlington National Cemetery. The soldiers are buried in a circle around a massive, 106-year-old monument commemorating the Confederate soldiers who died in the Civil War. Every President since Teddy Roosevelt has laid a wreath at this monument. Yes, that includes Barack H. Obama. He paid his respects to the Confederate dead buried in Arlington back in 2009.

Warren's amendment would require that the memorial be removed from the grounds of Arlington. It is impossible to do this without disturbing the grave sites around the monument…

But it actually gets worse. Elizabeth Warren's amendment is so poorly written that while it gives an exception for gravestones, it does not exempt the graves themselves. Since being buried in Arlington is considered an honor, a literal reading of Warren's bill would require these Civil War soldiers to be exhumed and moved off the premises. Just think about how small of a person someone would have to be to write an amendment in 2020 that could force the exhumation of 482 Civil War soldiers because they disagree with the cause they fought for…

Even in a best case scenario, the graves would get to stay, but Arlington wouldn't be able to advertise where they're located. No signage… no mention in the maps… no helpful directions from staff… Anyone who has ever been to Arlington looking for a specific grave knows it is next to impossible to do without help and directions. So best case, the Confederates get to stay buried, but no one would be allowed to know where they are…
Gracie, you've kinda been had. I don't know if this bill passed--there's no google hits since July--but even if it did, The legislation introduced by Senator Elizabeth Warren to redesignate military bases named after Confederate generals includes a provision that ensures all graves remain undisturbed.

The article you put up did a lot of "What iffing" to scandalize people, but I highly doubt if anyone would consider removing the memorial to the Confederate soldiers there.

The Confederate Monuments We Shouldn’t Tear Down Opinion | The Confederate Monuments We Shouldn’t Tear Down
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
133,294
Reaction score
15,712
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Just because some people want to write stories glorifying it is quite different from having schools teach it that way. Maybe you've had different history courses than I've had, but I remember the general presentation of the Confederacy in most of my history courses has been that the Civil War was a complicated conflict. It didn't glorify either side, but it did explain that slavery was only part of the cause for the war. The biggest factor that led up to the war was related to slavery but also had to do with the balance of political power among states.

That's exactly my point. The history books in this country are written for "What's acceptable in Texas" because Texas is the biggest market for school texts in the country.

There should be nothing "complicated" about the Civil War. Some assholes kept wanting to own slaves when the majority of the country was against Slavery. They scared some dumb white trash into dying for them by telling them black men were going to fuck their women after the war if they lost. The revisionism started coming AFTER the war, when that didn't happen, and they had to come up with excuses why all that carnage happened, and that's when they started talking smack about "States Rights" and "Economic Oppression from the North".

Even in Germany, the approach toward dealing with the darker chapters of history is more nuanced than just tearing statues down. Germany still has museums and parks that have Nazi statues and paraphernalia that provide a full historical context for these things. America should take the same approach.

You won't find a statue of Adolf Hitler in the whole of Germany. As it should be. Same deal with Jefferson Davis.
 

Utilitarian

co-Cain Manager
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
1,343
Reaction score
668
Points
198
Location
NC
That's exactly my point. The history books in this country are written for "What's acceptable in Texas" because Texas is the biggest market for school texts in the country.

There should be nothing "complicated" about the Civil War. Some assholes kept wanting to own slaves when the majority of the country was against Slavery. They scared some dumb white trash into dying for them by telling them black men were going to fuck their women after the war if they lost. The revisionism started coming AFTER the war, when that didn't happen, and they had to come up with excuses why all that carnage happened, and that's when they started talking smack about "States Rights" and "Economic Oppression from the North".

Your understanding of history is rather lacking. Most Confederates didn't own slaves. They were too poor for that. Now, it is true that the elites of each side pitted their poor against each other to die for their own interests, but that's pretty much every war.

It's not revisionism to mention the economic factors that coincided with the slavery issue. It's also not revisionism to mention how this was part of what made the creation of new states rather tricky.

Even in Germany, the approach toward dealing with the darker chapters of history is more nuanced than just tearing statues down. Germany still has museums and parks that have Nazi statues and paraphernalia that provide a full historical context for these things. America should take the same approach.

You won't find a statue of Adolf Hitler in the whole of Germany. As it should be. Same deal with Jefferson Davis.

There may not be a statue of Hitler himself, but there are monuments that invoke his name. If we want to talk about revisionist history, several American columnists have given a false account of what happened when Germany fell at the end of WW2. De-Nazification was not absolute, as they often claim. A good example of this is a museum of sorts that is in Berlin that displays various Nazi-era statues and monuments, along with imperial German ones.


It is true that Allied forces pushed Germany to remove most of its Nazi-era statues and monuments, but not all of them were destroyed. They were sometimes moved into storage or museums like the one in the article above.

It's also worth noting that removal of all these statues and monuments made it easier for Germany to initially gloss over its dark history. It was not eager to face its atrocities after defeat, and it wasn't until the 60s that they really started to teach their children about the Nazi past.

In Poland, Auschwitz has become a memorial. Buchenwald is a memorial in Germany. Dachau is another memorial there. Herzogenbusch is a memorial in the Netherlands. There are many more camps that have become memorials in multiple countries.

So no, erasing history is not the answer. And when we talk about what removal occurred in Germany, that was done by pressure from external forces, not Germans acting of their own volition. There was much more push by Germans to remove Soviet monuments and statues when the Berlin Wall finally came down. Granted, Soviet monuments and statues should not be destroyed either.

We cannot afford to forget the history of the Nazis, Soviets, or Confederates.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$230.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top