32 thoughts on “Why don’t these guys just leave a comment?”

1. Moderate Guy May 3, 2007 at 4:42 pm

   It’s a patriotism thing. You wouldn’t understand.

   Reply ↓
2. Brad Warthen May 3, 2007 at 5:00 pm

   No, it’s the opposite. And in his case, it’s inside-out and opposite, since he’s not even from around here.
   To an American born in the 20th century or later — and I’m going to go out on a limb and say that would describe Mr. Vallante — to have a greater sense of loyalty to A state than to the UNITED States is not patriotism. And he lives in New York…
   Maybe it’s “matriotism.” I don’t know.

   Reply ↓
3. Randy E May 3, 2007 at 5:04 pm

   Brad, please tell me you didn’t read the whole letter. I remember drinking sour milk once. After the first sip, I threw it away.
   Of course, when we guys find something that smells bad, we immediately turn to our pals, “hey, smell this, it stinks!”

   Reply ↓
4. Bobby May 3, 2007 at 5:07 pm

   ‘Irregardless’
   That is too funny… what I don’t understand is why any of these people think any of that stuff matters.. confederacy, naacp, civil war, black soldiers. Who cares? All of the history is irrelevant. All that should matter is whether one is ok having the state officially endorse something that offends a large portion of their state. It’s not illegal, but does that make it right?

   Reply ↓
5. Brad Warthen May 3, 2007 at 5:43 pm

   Bobby gets it. How come these other guys don’t get it?

   Reply ↓
6. Moderate Guy May 3, 2007 at 5:45 pm

   Who says it offends a large majority of the population of the state? What population? Natives or immigrants? Why did it not offend anyone from 1890 until 1990? Could it just be another phony issue ginned up to sell newspapers? Hmmmmm.

   Reply ↓
7. Randy E May 3, 2007 at 6:01 pm

   Nah, the African-Americans being chased by guys in sheets carrying this same flag from 1890 into the 1960s probably weren’t offended at all.
   I’m not necessarily offended as I am embarassed.
   I’m disappointed that we don’t have more of a focus on the SC flag and the history behind it. Brad, why not get Dr. Walter Edgar to write a piece for your blog? He promotes the old Carolina Day in which we celebrate our state history!!

   Reply ↓
8. Uncle Elmer May 3, 2007 at 7:15 pm

   Actually this is kind of weirdly illustrative. It really demonstrates how a few people can keep the kind of hate alive that fuels things like the Sunni/Shiite or Protestant/Catholic conflicts that are very active in some parts of the world. We don’t need it here.
   So now I’m curious. What did he accomplish by sending this? It wasn’t exactly persuasive rhetoric.
   Moderate guy, I don’t believe Bobby claimed a majority. He just said “a large portion.”
   And I hate to ask, but what do you mean by “immigrants?”

   Reply ↓
9. Moderate Guy May 3, 2007 at 8:11 pm

   Randy, perhaps you should be embarassed by your shallow concept of history. To see how the various Confederate flags and symbols were honored by the entire nation, just look at the accounts of the battle reunions which began in 1890. The flag was not associated with anything negative until the KKK and motorcycle outlaws of the 1960s.
   If the Sons of Confederate Veterans and United Daughters of the Confederacy had legal control of the banners of their ancestors, this misuse of the flag would go away, and so would any reactionary excuse for banning it from public display.
   But radical “liberal” judges have said that hate groups have a right to misappropriate almost any symbol, except the current trademarks of large corporations.

   Reply ↓
10. Moderate Guy May 3, 2007 at 8:14 pm

    “A large portion” describes a serving of grits. Since it is so vague, I just assumed Bobby meant a majority, which is of course not true. Maybe the flag haters need to tell us how small a portion of the allegedly offended is required for the rest of society to kowtow to their demands.

    Reply ↓
11. Bobby May 3, 2007 at 8:24 pm

    Don’t be dense, moderate guy. And I think it’s you who should define how many people you are ok offending before it’s too many, because you obviously don’t care about the citizens of this state. I have a suspicion that number would be the population of this state minus one.

    Reply ↓
12. Randy E May 3, 2007 at 11:36 pm

    I stand corrected, African-Americans were chased around by guys in sheets carrying this same flag for the past 40 years.
    I’m sure when they were being shot and lynched by these ghosts carrying “moderate” man’s beloved flag, African Americans were cursing the “radical ‘liberal'” judges for allowing their flag of heritage to be “misused”.
    Then in 1990, according to moderate man, African-Amercians had an epiphany about this association between the rebel flag and the abuse they suffered at the hands of rebel flag yielding klansmen.
    Let’s try this history, the SOUTH CAROLINA flag has a great deal more to do with our heritage. Why is that not celebrated and cherished as much as the rebel flag which originated during the civil WAR!?!? According to the rebel flag apologist, being associated with a CIVIL WAR (an attempt to permanently divide our country) is not “negative”.

    Reply ↓
13. Randy E May 3, 2007 at 11:37 pm

    wielding

    Reply ↓
14. Gary May 4, 2007 at 8:18 am

    I don’t count myself as a rabid flag detractor or defender. Butthe long rant from the New York SCV guy, well, I just don’t get it. Moving the flag off the dome, which I am sure he would have opposed, did nothing to “hide” history. It was a step to put history at a historical location.
    So here’s the question I always want to ask the SCV partisans: Looking back over history, is it good or bad that the South lost the Civil War?

    Reply ↓
15. Rickyrab May 4, 2007 at 10:56 pm

    To Gary: Why don’t you ask Harry Turtledove that question?
    To everyone: Why should it be surprising that there are Confederates in New York? There are Nazis in America! There are Muslims in France and England! So of course New York is going to have some Confederates! It’s a small world after all… Anyhow, while New York stayed in the Union, numerous of the people in New York City didn’t exactly like it. There were calls for secession; also, ethnic tensions arose due to the fact that the rules of the war draft favored the rich over the poor. Poor people objected and started an enormous riot, the Draft Riots of 1863. The army had to go in and quell that little insurrection.

    Reply ↓
16. Petersburg May 7, 2007 at 6:58 pm

    HERE IT IS! The OFFICIAL MILITARY DEFINITION OF A SOLDIER DURING THE “CIVIL WAR”, OR the more accurate definition, the “WAR OF NORTHERN AGRESSION.”
    Here it is folks, “beyond a shadow of doubt” factual contemporary documentation by a well noted and respected (by some “not from here”) Union General expert.
    Unlike all the historically deficient “experts” posting on the Internet sites and blogs with “this and that”, this Union General knew what he was talking about. Southern classmates / leaders followed the same rules.
    “According to General August Kautz’s, USA, “Customs of Service, for Non-Commissioned Officers and Soldiers” (1864), page. 11: “In the fullest sense, any man in the military service who receives pay, whether sworn in or not, IS A SOLDIER because he is subject to military law. Under this general head, laborers, teamsters, sutlers and chaplains, are soldiers.”
    Now all the so Now all the so called “Experts,”Yankees”.and “Scalawags” can whine, and they can “tell history wrong”, but there is another fact that will always bite the bad guys, and that is “You Can’t Change History.” Someone will always “dig up the truth, now or later. If your name is on the bad stuff watch out “legacy!”
    Some folks are not satisfied with facts, don’t read much, and just seem to enjoy the “name calling.” Some of the real sick people must be foaming at the mouth when they see Black and White Southerners enjoying their history and heritage together. Don’t see much of this in the news or in blogs these days. What do you call that? Liberal?:
    http://www.petersburgexpress.com/Pocahontas.html
    &
    http://www.petersburgexpress.com/Petersburg_Black-CSA.html
    Petersburg
    http://www.petersburgexpress.com
    “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” — George Orwell

    Reply ↓
17. Petersburg May 7, 2007 at 6:58 pm

    HERE IT IS! The OFFICIAL MILITARY DEFINITION OF A SOLDIER DURING THE “CIVIL WAR”, OR the more accurate definition, the “WAR OF NORTHERN AGRESSION.”
    Here it is folks, “beyond a shadow of doubt” factual contemporary documentation by a well noted and respected (by some “not from here”) Union General expert.
    Unlike all the historically deficient “experts” posting on the Internet sites and blogs with “this and that”, this Union General knew what he was talking about. Southern classmates / leaders followed the same rules.
    “According to General August Kautz’s, USA, “Customs of Service, for Non-Commissioned Officers and Soldiers” (1864), page. 11: “In the fullest sense, any man in the military service who receives pay, whether sworn in or not, IS A SOLDIER because he is subject to military law. Under this general head, laborers, teamsters, sutlers and chaplains, are soldiers.”
    Now all the so Now all the so called “Experts,”Yankees”.and “Scalawags” can whine, and they can “tell history wrong”, but there is another fact that will always bite the bad guys, and that is “You Can’t Change History.” Someone will always “dig up the truth, now or later. If your name is on the bad stuff watch out “legacy!”
    Some folks are not satisfied with facts, don’t read much, and just seem to enjoy the “name calling.” Some of the real sick people must be foaming at the mouth when they see Black and White Southerners enjoying their history and heritage together. Don’t see much of this in the news or in blogs these days. What do you call that? Liberal?:
    http://www.petersburgexpress.com/Pocahontas.html
    &
    http://www.petersburgexpress.com/Petersburg_Black-CSA.html
    Petersburg
    http://www.petersburgexpress.com
    “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” — George Orwell

    Reply ↓
18. Jimmy Shirley May 7, 2007 at 8:50 pm

    I stand corrected, African-Americans were chased around by guys in sheets carrying this same flag for the past 40 years.
    I’m sure when they were being shot and lynched by these ghosts carrying “moderate” man’s beloved flag, African Americans were cursing the “radical ‘liberal'” judges for allowing their flag of heritage to be “misused”.
    Posted by: Randy E | May 3, 2007 11:36:09 PM
    ==============================================
    year WoW BoW WoB BoB
    1995 6,069 1,109 455 6,039
    WoW=White on White
    BoW=Black on White
    WoB=White on Black
    BoB=Black on Black
    These numbers come from the United States Department of Justice. What they represent are homicide, i.e. murder. As can be seen, in one year alone – 1995- Blacks murdered more than 1,000 Whites, while Whites murdered not quite 500 Blacks. Point being is that, according to the Tuskeegee Institute, one of those famous segregated HBCU’s, for the 86 year period from 1882-1968, 4,743 people were victims of lynching, of which 3,446 were Black and 1,297 were White.
    And, when anyone does the checking, they will find out that in the nearly forty year period from the early 70’s til now, Blacks have murdered many thousands of us, much more than how many of them we have murdered.
    So, when anyone brings up lynching, as terrible as that sounds and as if that justifies anything, it is nothing compared to the butchery they have perpetrated against us. If you are curious, just go to the website I posted below.
    http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/ovracetab.htm

    Reply ↓
19. Ready to Hurl May 8, 2007 at 11:49 am

    According to General August Kautz’s, USA, “Customs of Service, for Non-Commissioned Officers and Soldiers” (1864), page. 11: “In the fullest sense, any man in the military service who receives pay, whether sworn in or not, is a soldier because he is subject to military law. Under this general head, laborers, teamsters, sutlers and chaplains, are soldiers.”
    Gimme a break! Laborers, teamsters (wagon drivers), and sutlers (independent vendors) are considered “soldiers?” What about the prostitutes who followed the armies around?
    What a joke.

    Reply ↓
20. Bill Vallante May 9, 2007 at 9:21 am

    First, I did attempt to post on your blog but when I tried it, this is what I got:
    http://www.typepad.com/.shared/html/spam-message.html
    Besides, we both know that you really didn’t read everything I wrote so stop moaning about its length – you always have the option, as one of your drones said, to toss “sour milk” away.
    As far as how much time I spent on the letter, don’t fret – it didn’t take long at all. Historical research is what I enjoy doing and I have thousands of pages that I can simply copy and paste from.
    And yes, I agree with you – South Carolinians should decide what to do where this particular flag issue is concerned. I and others will happily go away and leave the citizens of your state to make their own decision – as soon as the NAACP goes away. As soon as this national organization stops paying for transportation for out of state (and quite possibly PAID) demonstrators, we will all shut up and go away. As soon as out-of-state presidential candidates (including my own carpetbag Senator) stop rolling into town to give their unwelcome opinions on the flag, opinions, by the way, which a blind man can see are nothing more than transparent attempts at demagoguery, we’ll go away. Until that time, you have the option to hit your “delete” button or edit your blog. As I suggested once before – have a referendum on the matter and be done with it. This way, when you lose 2-1 the way the flag critics in Mississippi did, I can have a good laugh while watching y’all cry in your beer.
    Neither you, nor your blog minions have addressed anything I’ve said. Snide comments don’t qualify as an answer.
    “Patriotism” is the love of one’s home and the love of one’s people. No one said anything about the “love of one’s government”. For you and other pseudo-chest-thumping patriots out there I make you a prediction – within the next 50 years you will see a movement to replace the Stars and Stripes. I won’t go into a lengthy discussion of why I believe this is so – I’ll just make the statement. Remember I told you so when it begins to happen. At 57, I’m betting (and hoping) that I won’t be around to see it.
    And y’all can spare me the blather about the 3000+ lynchings in an 80 year period. I don’t have the figures at hand but I’m betting, as someone else intimated, that there have been more black on white murders in this country in the last 5 years.
    Further, open your eyes and see where is it that black people have historically chosen to make their homes. Which states have the largest percentages of black populations? Your own state’s is over 30%. Mississippi’s is over 40%! Why is that? Because they like it there – Confederate flags notwithstanding.
    And neither you nor any of your minions have adequately answered my question regarding where it is written that the feelings of “some” must take preference over the feelings of others? For hundreds of thousands of South Carolina’s citizens, the Confederate flag holds positive meaning. Who says that their history, their feelings, their sentiments, must take a backseat to the feelings of others? Is it perhaps because most of them are not members of an “AVG”, i.e., “Accredited Victims Group”? If you feel this is so, then state it as such and stop beating around the bush.
    Bill Vallante

    Reply ↓
21. Michael Rodgers May 12, 2007 at 5:38 am

    Bill,
    Your question regarding the feelings of some taking preference over the feelings of others is a divisive question. Unfortunately, the debate keeps returning to divisive questions like, when will it be enough to satisfy those people (whichever side those people are on)? Because “they” won’t be happy until the Confederate flag is (banned) or (displayed) everywhere. This approach does not lead to understanding and true debate.
    What democratic politics is all about is trying to respect everyone’s opinion in order to come up with official policies that are as appropriate and as effective as possible. When the SC state government makes an official declaration, by, for example, flying the Confederate flag from a flagpole on the Statehouse grounds, that declaration should be reviewed and debated by the citizens.
    I personally feel that flying the Confederate flag from a flagpole on the Statehouse grounds is neither an appropriate nor an effective way for our legislature
    1) to honor the sacrifice of the Confederate soldiers and their families,
    2) to promote business and civic efforts and responsibility,
    3) to embrace Southern hospitality as a core value, and
    4) to promote education and civic participation.
    What I am trying to say is that, in my opinion, the legislature’s flying of the Confederate flag from a flagpole on the Statehouse grounds actually serves to do the opposite of 1-4 above. By never debating, by always calling things compromises, and by pretending that the Confederate flag still flies to represent our state government despite the defeat (and sacrifice) in the Civil War, our legislature is not serving noble, uniting purposes when it decides to contune flying the Confederate flag from a flagpole on te Statehouse grounds.
    South Carolina citizens, let’s debate and form a commission to study the Confederate Memorial. How can we change it so that it artistically achieves appropriate goals, such as 1-4 above. I hope that the citizens of South Carolina can get our legislature to take down the Confederate flag from the flagpole on the Statehouse grounds and display it in a museum. Taking down the flag from where it flies from a flagpole on the Statehouse grounds will help us to respect history and to make progress for all of our citizens.
    Regards,
    Michael Rodgers
    Columbia, SC

    Reply ↓
22. Jimmy Shirley May 12, 2007 at 2:46 pm

    Mr. Rodgers,
    True, you addressed Bill, and not me. But, do you even understand your own position? You are advocating surrender and submission to the enemies of Southern history and heritage. The Black klan, (naacp), rage that the noble and honourable Confederate Battle Flag be hidden in a museum somewhere. And, how long do you suppose the encouragement they receive from that surrender results in their demand that it be removed from the museums? To compromise with “those people” is surrender. They will never, ever be satisfied. They have gone from requesting to demanding equal rights, to demanding special privileges, to demanding money, deceitfully called “”reparations”” because their ancestors were slaves, never mind that those ancestors were captured as prisoners by rival African tribes and sold to the European traders at the sea shore.
    You say, “What democratic politics is all about is trying to respect everyone’s opinion…” What you really mean is “everyone’s opinion” except true Southerners. You must know that all true Southerners do not embrace your position that the CBF must come down. Therefore, your statement is false.
    The CBF on the State grounds, atop the Capitol, is highly appropriate because of the political position their State took in 1860, the SCV (South Carolina Volunteers) gladly answered the call to defend their State from an invasion by a hostile government, and the gove’t. of South Carolina owes it to their descendents to never forget their sacrifice. And that CAN NOT be shown by hiding the banner that they marched, and died under. So, bless your heart, you are very, very wrong on this count, sir.

    Reply ↓
23. Michael Rodgers May 12, 2007 at 6:41 pm

    Dear Jimmy,
    Thank you, sir, for your post. I am glad to find agreement with you in our shared desire to always remember the sacrifice of the Confederate soldiers and their families. Personally, I feel that the SC legislature and special interests are hijacking the Confederate Memorial from SC citizens. By flying the Confederate flag from a flagpole on the Statehouse grounds, our legislature has chosen to send political statements to try to divide SC citizens against each other. I understand from your post that you, sir, have seen the divisiveness that arises from their tactic. I hope that you will join with me to improve the Confederate Memorial so that all of the citizens of South Carolina can celebrate and remember the sacrifice of the Confederate soldiers and their families. I want my fellow citizens (any, and all, and I really mean all) to help form, and contribute to, a commission of artists and historians, so that the commission can develop proposals to improve the Confederate Memorial. I really believe that we can make a difference, that we can improve the Confederate Memorial, that we can get the Confederate flag down from the flagpole, and that we can get the State Museum to dislay the Confederate flag. Thank you again.
    Regards,
    Michael Rodgers
    Columbia, SC

    Reply ↓
24. Bill Vallante May 15, 2007 at 8:39 am

    Mr. Rodgers
    Frankly, I don’t care if my question is “divisive” or not. It’s a logical question – one which needs to be answered. Are the “feelings” of those hundreds of thousands of South Carolinians who want the flag to fly as valid as those who do not? If not, why not? Is it because most of the pro flag people do not qualify as being members of an “AVG”? (Accredited Victims Group) You don’t solve problems by sweeping them under the rug. I’ve asked the question several times and still, so far, no answer. Surrendering ones values for the sake of so-called peace and harmony is not an answer.
    Ah, “divisive” – one of my favorite words from the “PC” lexicon! It seems these days that we must all be “unified”, (another one of my favorites in that same lexicon). How about simply realizing that we aren’t going to see eye to eye on everything, and that “live and let live” is a far better philosophy to live by if we want a free society, than trying to coerce those that don’t agree with you into sitting on the floor and singing “Kum-Baya”? I for one have never understood people who hate me for what I believe yet simultaneously moan about not being able to be “unified” with me or who moan about “divisiveness”! I should think that such people would be as happy to be apart from me as I am from them. Maybe since you choose to use this word so much you have some insights into this mystery and can therefore enlighten me?
    You want South Carolinians to debate and form commissions? To what end? Again I ask, what about the hundreds of thousands of South Carolinians who do not feel as you do? Are they to be included or will they be made to sit on the side lines? And what is supposed to be the end result of this “commission”? A group hug? What exactly will it solve? And what is a debate supposed to accomplish? The word “debate” implies that there are two or more different views on a given subject. Your “debate” sounds like one where there is only one view – a view toward taking the flag down. So then, what’s the point of having a debate if you’ve already decided the issue?
    I’ve got a better idea:
    First, hold a referendum. To date, only one state has had the guts to do it and that was Mississippi. The old state flag, the one with the Confederate battle emblem in it, won by a 2-1 margin. The NAACP whined, the media fumed, and then they swept the story under the rug – because from their perspective, the results of that referendum were an embarrassment! In a state whose black population is over 40%, it would appear that most of its black citizens stayed home. I guess the theory about “a lot” of black people being offended has to get thrown out the window!
    And second, let’s start realizing that the idea that “some” people find some things offensive works both ways. What about things that appeal to “some” black people if those things don’t appeal to “some” white people? I could cite a litany of examples, Martin Luther King Day for one. I’m old enough to remember him. I can remember his less than stellar qualities, and I see no redeeming value in the man. However, I am astute enough to realize that there are people who do. Should I lobby for canceling the holiday, or perhaps, should I simply realize that in a “diverse” society, people are not always going to see things the same way? Maybe “live and let live” is a better way to go? It isn’t necessary for everyone to share the same sentiments about everything. I’ve had black friends all my life – every year they go off to celebrate MLK Day and I don’t give them any grief about it. Of course, when I go off to my Confederate activities and they don’t give me any grief either. They are simply two areas where we don’t share commonalities. We share in those areas we have in common, and we respect each other and go our separate ways in those areas where we don’t. It’s easy to do actually, when you take the politicians and race baiters out of it, and it works quite well.
    Bill Vallante

    Reply ↓
25. Michael Rodgers May 15, 2007 at 7:48 pm

    Dear Mr. Vallante,
    Thank you for your post. I don’t like divisiveness, but I love debate. By debate I mean impassioned dialogue based on feelings and reason. Divisiveness is pitting people against each other, separating people into “us” and “them,” and encouraging hate. Encouraging this type of hatred sometimes leads to violence and can lead to war. I suggest reading Dr. Suess’ classic “The Butter Battle Book.” Sometimes, if people would take a step back from “us” vs. “them,” they can find common ground. I see from your post that you and your friends have done this, and I am happy for you. I completely agree with you that “live-and-let-live” is and should be the best default strategy. Sometimes, change is called for, and, while change can be disruptive and cause hurt feelings, change can make things better for all of us. Change will then lead to a new season of friendliness and “live-and-let-live” disagreement.
    Regarding the SC legislature’s flying of the Confederate flag from a flagpole on the Statehouse grounds, I encourage debate. I encourage all voices to participate in the free-speech marketplace of ideas. So, to answer your question, no one’s feelings are any more valid than any other person’s. We’re all in this together. No one should be made to sit on the sidelines. I don’t divide people into victims and non-victims or into any other binary division. I think your suggestion of a referedum is a good one, which means that eventually a political decision will be made by the people of South Carolina. Between now and when the referendum is held, there is a lot of debating to be done. First, we need to come up with several proposals for what the referendum should say. That’s why I want a commission to develop proposals for improving the Confederate Memorial. I hope that the commission will hear from any SC citizen who wishes to provide input, as well as from artists and historians. When SC citizens review the proposals of the commission, they will debate with each other and try to convince each other which proposal is best. At this point people will decide which camps they are in, with regard to the proposals, and they will vote.
    People will respect such a process because they will have had a chance to have their say. The SC legislature denied us a chance to engage with them and with each other when they voted for what they called a “compromise.” The politics of our SC legislature in that decision upsets me because they stifled debate, causing the disagreements people have about this issue to fester. Moreover, the SC legislature turned the Confederate Memorial into a political statement encouraging “us” vs. “them” divisiveness. I do expect a change from this debate. But what the change will be, I cannot say, because I don’t know, because this is an exciting issue and lots of people will have opinions about the proposals. I do hope and expect that the Confederate flag will be removed from where the SC legislature has chosen to display it, specifically flying from a flagpole on the Statehouse grounds. But I don’t know what the artists and historians and the SC citizens will come up with for proposals. I do know that honest debate will lead to some understanding and progress and growth.
    Regards,
    Michael Rodgers
    Columbia, SC

    Reply ↓
26. Sensmq July 3, 2007 at 7:20 am

    Hello dear webmaster. I found your site via google and i like it very much. cia!!

    Reply ↓
27. Sengiu July 3, 2007 at 7:54 am

    Hello dear webmaster. I found your site via google and i like it very much. cia!!

    Reply ↓
28. Denqpk July 3, 2007 at 12:54 pm

    Good day. I just wanted to say that you created realy great site. thanks!

    Reply ↓
29. Dendgs July 3, 2007 at 1:01 pm

    Good day. I just wanted to say that you created realy great site. thanks!

    Reply ↓
30. Lohness January 6, 2008 at 2:57 pm

    ку ку

    Reply ↓
31. othbdw February 19, 2008 at 1:42 pm

    icq 418-589-609 * 418589609 Урод и кидала
    кидает на деньги в WOW проверено name: sidd3
    owner of this icq and nickname is cheater and motherfucker
    P.S Чтоб это был твой самый большой заработок за всю жизнь

    Reply ↓
32. Tipaporavtop April 4, 2009 at 5:36 am

    Neploxoy Blog. Gelayu uda4i v razvitii.
    Xotelbi vam porekomendovat svoy porekt
    http://www.tipa-pora-v-top.ru/map.html

    Reply ↓