Occupy Wall Street

Pages: 1 … 10 11 12 13 14 … 36

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Occupy Wall Street

2011-10-18 21:08:06

#276

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6888|Canberra, AUS

Macbeth wrote:
Good job at missing the point john. It only mentioned the tax rates and the income gap in order to draw a comparison between how the in the U.S. and how it is in a AU. It's not judging or attempting to make any points about the U.S., it's judging OWS-AUS.

this.

only in "The GFC gave the US economy and political system a big bloody examination. It was found wanting. The banking regulatory system, the economic basis and the political system were found to be pretty well stuffed." does it really make a judgement on the us economic system and to be frank that is the prevailing view on both sides of politics in this country. i can point you to some rather loud speeches by tony abbott if you want evidence.

you might also have objected to "Protestors in Wall Street would kill for America to be Australia – real universal health care (if any Australian party leader proposed the meagre type of health care Obama had to beg to get through Congress he or she would be saying goodbye to the next election and the one after that), excellent education system, unemployment benefits, pensions, low inflation, low unemployment, a university education that doesn't leave you destitute. We have compulsory voting that doesn't leave the lower socio-economic groups disenfranchised."

but again, these are all either statements of fact (the comment about an obamacare equivalent being political death in this country is hard, stone cold fact) or restatements of standard mainstream opinion here.

Last edited by Spark (2011-10-18 21:10:11)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-10-18 21:09:48

#277

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5571|London, England

Spark wrote:
Jay wrote:
Spark wrote:
why are you expecting an australian to know the ins and outs of the american taxation system? his main point is that the occupy folks here are basing their concerns on argument that has very little applicability in this country.
Then why comment on America at all? He/she is saying that Occupy Wall Streeters have legitimate gripes and that the Occupy Kangarooland protestors don't. 20% of Americans control 85% of the wealth blah blah blah.
because this is a copycat protest. that's the whole point. it's not a genuine movement against appalling apparent injustices because they simply don't exist on that scale here by the same measures..

it's just bandwagon-hopping, and implicit in the article is him calling them out on that.

They're all bandwagon-hoppers. Most of the people that show up in Manhattan every day are just people who want to be a part of something. It's a story they can tell others. I don't even know why it was allowed to continue past the first day. The cops chase bums out of the parks constantly, they should've done the same to the hipster squatters.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2011-10-18 21:14:24

#278

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5571|London, England

Spark wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Good job at missing the point john. It only mentioned the tax rates and the income gap in order to draw a comparison between how the in the U.S. and how it is in a AU. It's not judging or attempting to make any points about the U.S., it's judging OWS-AUS.
this.

only in "The GFC gave the US economy and political system a big bloody examination. It was found wanting. The banking regulatory system, the economic basis and the political system were found to be pretty well stuffed." does it really make a judgement on the us economic system and to be frank that is the prevailing view on both sides of politics in this country. i can point you to some rather loud speeches by tony abbott if you want evidence.

you might also have objected to "Protestors in Wall Street would kill for America to be Australia – real universal health care (if any Australian party leader proposed the meagre type of health care Obama had to beg to get through Congress he or she would be saying goodbye to the next election and the one after that), excellent education system, unemployment benefits, pensions, low inflation, low unemployment, a university education that doesn't leave you destitute. We have compulsory voting that doesn't leave the lower socio-economic groups disenfranchised."

but again, these are all either statements of fact (the comment about an obamacare equivalent being political death in this country is hard, stone cold fact) or restatements of standard mainstream opinion here.

Well, then your nations mainstream opinion is shit.

2011-10-18 21:14:50

#279

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5799

Spark wrote:
We have compulsory voting that doesn't leave the lower socio-economic groups disenfranchised."

How does non-compulsory voting disenfranchise the lower socio-ecoomics groups? If anything it helps them.

2011-10-18 21:18:12

#280

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6888|Canberra, AUS

Macbeth wrote:
Spark wrote:
We have compulsory voting that doesn't leave the lower socio-economic groups disenfranchised."
How does non-compulsory voting disenfranchise the lower socio-ecoomics groups? If anything it helps them.

argument for another thread, but the standard argument in this country is that it guarantees proper and complete representation in the political sphere.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-10-18 21:18:33

#281

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5571|London, England

Because compulsory voting helps the socialists maintain power by offering stuff to the stupid and lazy. How else can you buy elections with gifts if the people you're trying to give the gifts to aren't showing up to the polls?

2011-10-18 21:19:49

#282

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5799

Jay wrote:
Spark wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Good job at missing the point john. It only mentioned the tax rates and the income gap in order to draw a comparison between how the in the U.S. and how it is in a AU. It's not judging or attempting to make any points about the U.S., it's judging OWS-AUS.
this.

only in "The GFC gave the US economy and political system a big bloody examination. It was found wanting. The banking regulatory system, the economic basis and the political system were found to be pretty well stuffed." does it really make a judgement on the us economic system and to be frank that is the prevailing view on both sides of politics in this country. i can point you to some rather loud speeches by tony abbott if you want evidence.

you might also have objected to "Protestors in Wall Street would kill for America to be Australia – real universal health care (if any Australian party leader proposed the meagre type of health care Obama had to beg to get through Congress he or she would be saying goodbye to the next election and the one after that), excellent education system, unemployment benefits, pensions, low inflation, low unemployment, a university education that doesn't leave you destitute. We have compulsory voting that doesn't leave the lower socio-economic groups disenfranchised."

but again, these are all either statements of fact (the comment about an obamacare equivalent being political death in this country is hard, stone cold fact) or restatements of standard mainstream opinion here.
Well, then your nations mainstream opinion is shit.

It doesn't agree with his world view. Thus it is shit.

I don't see what's so disagreeable with what Spark wrote. A lot of people would be happy if we had the AU's economics conditions right now and the article did make point out that in the U.S. both the left and right are very displeased with our political system. Me think that you are just knee jerking because someone from the AUS is commenting on our country.

Last edited by Macbeth (2011-10-18 21:20:35)

2011-10-18 21:22:07

#283

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6888|Canberra, AUS

tbf i didn't write most of that stuff... i just happen to agree with most of it.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-10-18 21:23:38

#284

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5571|London, England

Macbeth wrote:
Jay wrote:
Spark wrote:

this.

only in "The GFC gave the US economy and political system a big bloody examination. It was found wanting. The banking regulatory system, the economic basis and the political system were found to be pretty well stuffed." does it really make a judgement on the us economic system and to be frank that is the prevailing view on both sides of politics in this country. i can point you to some rather loud speeches by tony abbott if you want evidence.

you might also have objected to "Protestors in Wall Street would kill for America to be Australia – real universal health care (if any Australian party leader proposed the meagre type of health care Obama had to beg to get through Congress he or she would be saying goodbye to the next election and the one after that), excellent education system, unemployment benefits, pensions, low inflation, low unemployment, a university education that doesn't leave you destitute. We have compulsory voting that doesn't leave the lower socio-economic groups disenfranchised."

but again, these are all either statements of fact (the comment about an obamacare equivalent being political death in this country is hard, stone cold fact) or restatements of standard mainstream opinion here.
Well, then your nations mainstream opinion is shit.
It doesn't agree with his world view. Thus it is shit.

I don't see what's so disagreeable with what Spark wrote. A lot of people would be happy if we had the AU's economics conditions right now and the article did make point out that in the U.S. both the left and right are very displeased with our political system. Me think that you are just knee jerking because someone from the AUS is commenting on our country.

I'm not knee jerking at all. The author made a bunch of assumptions and had no idea what they were talking about. You can't compare the US and AU economies. Australia's economy has been propped up the last 3 years by it's minerals industry, which in turn is propped up by China sinking a trillion dollars into its economy as stimulus. We're a service based nation, they're a resource extraction based nation with a strong buyer. You can't compare the two and say that one came out of the recession in a better manner simply because their politics are better. That's insanity.

2011-10-18 21:23:53

#285

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5799

Spark wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Spark wrote:
We have compulsory voting that doesn't leave the lower socio-economic groups disenfranchised."
How does non-compulsory voting disenfranchise the lower socio-ecoomics groups? If anything it helps them.
argument for another thread, but the standard argument in this country is that it guarantees proper and complete representation in the political sphere.

I'm very much against any sort of measures that make voting more difficult here in the U.S. (like id cards) but I think that if you want to make elections fairer, campaign fiance reform would be the way to go. I don't trust the whole population to know what is going on in the world/their country nearly as much as the people who want to vote.

Then again I don't know much about campaign finance law in the AU.

2011-10-18 21:27:09

#286

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6888|Canberra, AUS

but that aus came out of the recession better (in fact, never went into recession at all) is beyond doubt - and hence the economic conditions here are such that the occupy movement's arguments in america translated to australia just look outright daft.

essentially, he's providing a big stone in the increasingly strong school of opinion that people in this country should stop fucking whingeing and realise just how much better conditions are here than in other first-world nations, economically. that may be a big reason why i'm so quick so sing its praises because i am sooooooooooooo sick and tired of people here moaning.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-10-18 21:28:26

#287

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5799

Jay wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Jay wrote:
Well, then your nations mainstream opinion is shit.
It doesn't agree with his world view. Thus it is shit.

I don't see what's so disagreeable with what Spark wrote. A lot of people would be happy if we had the AU's economics conditions right now and the article did make point out that in the U.S. both the left and right are very displeased with our political system. Me think that you are just knee jerking because someone from the AUS is commenting on our country.
I'm not knee jerking at all. The author made a bunch of assumptions and had no idea what they were talking about. You can't compare the US and AU economies. Australia's economy has been propped up the last 3 years by it's minerals industry, which in turn is propped up by China sinking a trillion dollars into its economy as stimulus. We're a service based nation, they're a resource extraction based nation with a strong buyer. You can't compare the two and say that one came out of the recession in a better manner simply because their politics are better. That's insanity.

/sigh

But again the point of the article wasn't to dick wave about how awsm the AU is. The point was to show people how awesome they have it in the AU compared to the place the protest started and that if anything they should be pretty content with things and not trying to tear down a system that is doing so well at the moment.

Thsnks for proving my point about the knee jerking.

2011-10-18 21:30:46

#288

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6888|Canberra, AUS

Macbeth wrote:
Spark wrote:
Macbeth wrote:

How does non-compulsory voting disenfranchise the lower socio-ecoomics groups? If anything it helps them.
argument for another thread, but the standard argument in this country is that it guarantees proper and complete representation in the political sphere.
I'm very much against any sort of measures that make voting more difficult here in the U.S. (like id cards) but I think that if you want to make elections fairer, campaign fiance reform would be the way to go. I don't trust the whole population to know what is going on in the world/their country nearly as much as the people who want to vote.

Then again I don't know much about campaign finance law in the AU.

i would point out that compulsary voting has been in place for the entire history of this country.

the campaign finance thing... very, very grey here, and rather discomfiting. i honestly am not entirely sure what's going on there. the trade union links to the alp muddies the water even further - i'm very much in favour of the m.turnbull reform proposed a few years back where donors have to be members of the electoral roll and declare the money from their own funds.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-10-18 22:34:12

#289

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6814|132 and Bush

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 … 45362.html

President Obama and the Democratic leadership are making a critical error in embracing the Occupy Wall Street movement—and it may cost them the 2012 election.

Last week, senior White House adviser David Plouffe said that "the protests you're seeing are the same conversations people are having in living rooms and kitchens all across America. . . . People are frustrated by an economy that does not reward hard work and responsibility, where Wall Street and Main Street don't seem to play by the same set of rules." Nancy Pelosi and others have echoed the message

Yet the Occupy Wall Street movement reflects values that are dangerously out of touch with the broad mass of the American people—and particularly with swing voters who are largely independent and have been trending away from the president since the debate over health-care reform.

The protesters have a distinct ideology and are bound by a deep commitment to radical left-wing policies. On Oct. 10 and 11, Arielle Alter Confino, a senior researcher at my polling firm, interviewed nearly 200 protesters in New York's Zuccotti Park. Our findings probably represent the first systematic random sample of Occupy Wall Street opinion.

Our research shows clearly that the movement doesn't represent unemployed America and is not ideologically diverse. Rather, it comprises an unrepresentative segment of the electorate that believes in radical redistribution of wealth, civil disobedience and, in some instances, violence. Half (52%) have participated in a political movement before, virtually all (98%) say they would support civil disobedience to achieve their goals, and nearly one-third (31%) would support violence to advance their agenda.

The vast majority of demonstrators are actually employed, and the proportion of protesters unemployed (15%) is within single digits of the national unemployment rate (9.1%).

An overwhelming majority of demonstrators supported Barack Obama in 2008. Now 51% disapprove of the president while 44% approve, and only 48% say they will vote to re-elect him in 2012, while at least a quarter won't vote.

Fewer than one in three (32%) call themselves Democrats, while roughly the same proportion (33%) say they aren't represented by any political party.

James Taranto on President Obama's Wall Street ties and protesters' disenchantment with the Democratic party.

What binds a large majority of the protesters together—regardless of age, socioeconomic status or education—is a deep commitment to left-wing policies: opposition to free-market capitalism and support for radical redistribution of wealth, intense regulation of the private sector, and protectionist policies to keep American jobs from going overseas.

Sixty-five percent say that government has a moral responsibility to guarantee all citizens access to affordable health care, a college education, and a secure retirement—no matter the cost. By a large margin (77%-22%), they support raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans, but 58% oppose raising taxes for everybody, with only 36% in favor. And by a close margin, protesters are divided on whether the bank bailouts were necessary (49%) or unnecessary (51%).

Thus Occupy Wall Street is a group of engaged progressives who are disillusioned with the capitalist system and have a distinct activist orientation. Among the general public, by contrast, 41% of Americans self-identify as conservative, 36% as moderate, and only 21% as liberal. That's why the Obama-Pelosi embrace of the movement could prove catastrophic for their party.

In 1970, aligning too closely with the antiwar movement hurt Democrats in the midterm election, when many middle-class and working-class Americans ended up supporting hawkish candidates who condemned student disruptions. While that 1970 election should have been a sweep against the first-term Nixon administration, it was instead one of only four midterm elections since 1938 when the president's party didn't lose seats.

With the Democratic Party on the defensive throughout the 1970 campaign, liberal Democrats were only able to win on Election Day by distancing themselves from the student protest movement. So Adlai Stevenson III pinned an American flag to his lapel, appointed Chicago Seven prosecutor Thomas Foran chairman of his Citizen's Committee, and emphasized "law and order"—a tactic then employed by Ted Kennedy, who denounced the student protesters as "campus commandos" who must be repudiated, "especially by those who may share their goals."

Today, having abandoned any effort to work with the congressional super committee to craft a bipartisan agreement on deficit reduction, President Obama has thrown in with those who support his desire to tax oil companies and the rich, rather than appeal to independent and self-described moderate swing voters who want smaller government and lower taxes, not additional stimulus or interference in the private sector.

Rather than embracing huge new spending programs and tax increases, plus increasingly radical and potentially violent activists, the Democrats should instead build a bridge to the much more numerous independents and moderates in the center by opposing bailouts and broad-based tax increases.

Put simply, Democrats need to say they are with voters in the middle who want cooperation, conciliation and lower taxes. And they should work particularly hard to contrast their rhetoric with the extremes advocated by the Occupy Wall Street crowd.

Certainly a right wing oped.. but interesting none-the-less

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2011-10-18 23:05:59

#290

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6929

Jay wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Jay wrote:

Well, then your nations mainstream opinion is shit.
It doesn't agree with his world view. Thus it is shit.

I don't see what's so disagreeable with what Spark wrote. A lot of people would be happy if we had the AU's economics conditions right now and the article did make point out that in the U.S. both the left and right are very displeased with our political system. Me think that you are just knee jerking because someone from the AUS is commenting on our country.
I'm not knee jerking at all. The author made a bunch of assumptions and had no idea what they were talking about. You can't compare the US and AU economies. Australia's economy has been propped up the last 3 years by it's minerals industry, which in turn is propped up by China sinking a trillion dollars into its economy as stimulus. We're a service based nation, they're a resource extraction based nation with a strong buyer. You can't compare the two and say that one came out of the recession in a better manner simply because their politics are better. That's insanity.

Essentially this. Australia wouldn't maintain it's growth rates without mining. However John I must say Australia won't be hit as hard, look at NZ they're doing relatively fine and it's mostly due to our interest rates being high and banks aren't forced to give out loans to under-qualified people.

The author did draw huge fucking assumptions about wealth disparity in America. But his main point about occupy sydney protestors is correct, bunch of fucking retards, we're in a great economic state compared to the rest of the world as well. Also they held it on a saturday, went on till sunday and most people went back to work on monday

The Aus health system isn't that great at all, my aunt works for the Dept of Health and the budgeting issues are fucked up. So lets say NSW wants to build a 200 million dollar hospital, the feds will give 100 million, but the feds won't give that 100 mil till the last stages of construction so Gillard can go "hey guise i has surplus this year!"

But compulsory voting is fucking shit, why should I get a fine if I don't go and vote? What if the nearest voting place is 300 km away?

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2011-10-18 23:06:49

#291

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6929

Spark wrote:
but that aus came out of the recession better (in fact, never went into recession at all) is beyond doubt - and hence the economic conditions here are such that the occupy movement's arguments in america translated to australia just look outright daft.

essentially, he's providing a big stone in the increasingly strong school of opinion that people in this country should stop fucking whingeing and realise just how much better conditions are here than in other first-world nations, economically. that may be a big reason why i'm so quick so sing its praises because i am sooooooooooooo sick and tired of people here moaning.

Australian work ethic.

2011-10-18 23:10:04

#292

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6888|Canberra, AUS

Cybargs wrote:
Jay wrote:
Macbeth wrote:

It doesn't agree with his world view. Thus it is shit.

I don't see what's so disagreeable with what Spark wrote. A lot of people would be happy if we had the AU's economics conditions right now and the article did make point out that in the U.S. both the left and right are very displeased with our political system. Me think that you are just knee jerking because someone from the AUS is commenting on our country.
I'm not knee jerking at all. The author made a bunch of assumptions and had no idea what they were talking about. You can't compare the US and AU economies. Australia's economy has been propped up the last 3 years by it's minerals industry, which in turn is propped up by China sinking a trillion dollars into its economy as stimulus. We're a service based nation, they're a resource extraction based nation with a strong buyer. You can't compare the two and say that one came out of the recession in a better manner simply because their politics are better. That's insanity.
Essentially this. Australia wouldn't maintain it's growth rates without mining. However John I must say Australia won't be hit as hard, look at NZ they're doing relatively fine and it's mostly due to our interest rates being high and banks aren't forced to give out loans to under-qualified people.

The author did draw huge fucking assumptions about wealth disparity in America. But his main point about occupy sydney protestors is correct, bunch of fucking retards, we're in a great economic state compared to the rest of the world as well. Also they held it on a saturday, went on till sunday and most people went back to work on monday

The Aus health system isn't that great at all, my aunt works for the Dept of Health and the budgeting issues are fucked up. So lets say NSW wants to build a 200 million dollar hospital, the feds will give 100 million, but the feds won't give that 100 mil till the last stages of construction so Gillard can go "hey guise i has surplus this year!"

But compulsory voting is fucking shit, why should I get a fine if I don't go and vote? What if the nearest voting place is 300 km away?

this country needs to have a serious second look at how federalism is implemented here. the state govts are abject piles of misery for the most part.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-10-18 23:24:06

#293

Little BaBy JESUS: m8; +394|6362|'straya

Cybargs wrote:
But compulsory voting is fucking shit, why should I get a fine if I don't go and vote? What if the nearest voting place is 300 km away?

Vote by post or take an early ballot if you happen to be in a town or city for another reason?

2011-10-18 23:28:36

#294

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6888|Canberra, AUS

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
Cybargs wrote:
But compulsory voting is fucking shit, why should I get a fine if I don't go and vote? What if the nearest voting place is 300 km away?
Vote by post or take an early ballot if you happen to be in a town or city for another reason?

annoying, though.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-10-18 23:29:44

#295

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6929

Spark wrote:
Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
Cybargs wrote:
But compulsory voting is fucking shit, why should I get a fine if I don't go and vote? What if the nearest voting place is 300 km away?
Vote by post or take an early ballot if you happen to be in a town or city for another reason?
annoying, though.

I just don't like voting.

2011-10-18 23:31:52

#296

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6888|Canberra, AUS

Cybargs wrote:
Spark wrote:
Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

Vote by post or take an early ballot if you happen to be in a town or city for another reason?
annoying, though.
I just don't like voting.

then don't.

i didn't last time.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-10-18 23:35:11

#297

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6929

Spark wrote:
Cybargs wrote:
Spark wrote:

annoying, though.
I just don't like voting.
then don't.

i didn't last time.

I'm not an electoral roll

2011-10-18 23:37:26

#298

-Sh1fty-: plundering yee booty; +510|5687|Ventura, California

Can somebody briefly explain to me the whole purpose of occupy wall street? What are they protesting about particularly. What do they want changed?

And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.

2011-10-18 23:37:37

#299

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6888|Canberra, AUS

Cybargs wrote:
Spark wrote:
Cybargs wrote:

I just don't like voting.
then don't.

i didn't last time.
I'm not an electoral roll

i literally just walked into the polling place, took my ballots and dropped them in the boxes. done.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-10-18 23:38:06

#300

Little BaBy JESUS: m8; +394|6362|'straya

In my opinion it's preferable to some countries where they get maybe 50% of the population voting, then the votes are divided between 2-3 major parties and a handful of minor parties and the winning party ends up having only been voted for by say 20% of the population. Hardly an effective mandate for the new government in my opinion.

Then again, Australia proved last year that even with compulsory voting it's hard enough to get the public to make a decision .

Anyway, i'll stop posting off topic now.

Last edited by Little BaBy JESUS (2011-10-18 23:40:09)

Pages: 1 … 10 11 12 13 14 … 36

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Occupy Wall Street

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums Occupy Wall Street

Macbeth wrote:

Spark wrote:

Jay wrote:

Spark wrote:

Spark wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Spark wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Spark wrote:

Jay wrote:

Spark wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Jay wrote:

Spark wrote:

Spark wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Spark wrote:

Jay wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Jay wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Spark wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Jay wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Jay wrote:

Spark wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Jay wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Spark wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Spark wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

Spark wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Spark wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Spark wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Board footer