OPERATION YELLOW ELEPHANT Overview
This is the original Overview from July, 2005.
This remains on the blog as a historical document of Our Beginnings.
Operation Yellow Elephant has evolved since then based on further refinements of our mission balanced with our national interest. In many cases, comments and other feedback from Real Americans have prompted these clarifications.
We encourage all concerned to look at OYE 101 etc. on the upper right-hand corner of the blog for current, up-to-date information about Operation Yellow Elephant.
Thank you.
One of the General's readers pointed out that there isn't a good, one stop place to learn everything you need to know about OPERATION YELLOW ELEPHANT. Hopefully, this post will serve that purpose. Check back often for updates.
The objective of OPERATION YELLOW ELEPHANT is to recruit College Republicans and Young Republicans to serve as infantry. They demanded this war and now viciously support it. It's only right that they also experience it.
The 56th College Republican National Convention (June 24-26, 2005) and the Young Republican National Convention (July 6-10, 2005; directions) are the settings for most of the ops.
The General encourages his readers to take the initiative to create materials and to plan and conduct special operations. Please let him know what you've done and he'll try to post it.
Regular readers know that the General is a proud heterosexual, Christian conservative. He is not trying to embarrass the College Republicans. Rather, he believes that by encouraging them to enlist, he is pushing them to be more vocal about the good work their doing to make our homeland safe--things like holding affirmative action bakesales, holding immigrant hunts, almost single-handedly funding Ann Coulter, David Horowitz, and Michelle Malkin, relieving the elderly of the burden of having money, and punching out Joan Jett.
Posts introducing OPERATION YELLOW ELEPHANT
The first post - The General asks Rep. Mike Pence to ask the CR's to enlist when he speaks at their convention.
The rationale behind OPERATION YELLOW ELEPHANT
OPERATION YELLOW ELEPHANT Briefing
Materials
OPERATION YELLOW ELEPHANT stickers, buttons, tees, etc.
More materials -- A resolution to pass out at the CR convention, a poster that rates a 10 on the manly scale of absolute gender, and a web ad.
"Sign Up or Shut Up" stickers (free download), buttons, tees, etc.
OYE Bingo cards (free download), buttons, tees, etc.
Special Ops
Special Op "First Strike" - Ask the College Republican leadership to pass a resolution disbanding their organization and calling for its membership to enlist.
Special Op "Video Ninja" - Strike Teams will videotape encounters with CRs near their convention.
Mark's op - Mark sends a number of emails to the College Republican National Committee asking them to put links to recruiters on their site. They remain silent.
Special Op "Volunteer" - Taskforce Burnplant contacts CR organizations across the country and asks their members to enlist. This results in a lengthy Exchange with the Gonzaga College CRs.
Special Op "Adbusters" - Col. Crooks and Liars attempted to assist our nation's military recruiting efforts by placing a full page ad in the Official Program of the Young Republican National Convention. Unfortunately, the Young Republican leadership felt that such an appeal would, as the kids say, "put a harsh on their buzz.
Phase II - Karl Olson sprang for recruiting booths at the Young Republican National Convention, and the General proposes that people hold Bake Sales for Body Armor at their community festivals.
Blue Team Special Op "Fax-a-Fascist"
Red Team Special Op "Lucky Strike"
Red Team Special Op "Tikrit Taxi"
OPERATION YELLOW ELEPHANT Bingo -- Play America's favorite game using the excuses made by College Republicans for avoiding the war.
Special Op: "Army of Jeff" -- Armed with large jars of vasoline, an army of Gannons descend upon the Young Republican National Convention to ply their trade.
Other
Letter to Nathan Taylor, Chair, Young Republicans - I congratulate Mr. Taylor for his organizations tremendous sacrifice. They're sending Chapstick to our troops. I also comment on Taylor's charge that we are going to disrespect veterans by infiltrating the Young Republican convention.
I uncover a sinister plot to destroy our military effectiveness.
posted by Anonymous @ 7/09/2005 01:24:00 AM
24 comments
24 Comments:
Frist!
The assertion that all who approve of the war (in Iraq I assume) must be willing and able to join up to fight is absurd.
Following that faulty logic we would have never fought for independence from England, or joined WW2 to save Europe. Since only a small majority wanted to be liberated from Europe, and an even smaller number of people wanted to join in WW2.
It is the job of the supporters to convice the cowards, naysayers, and timid to join the cause-- therefore it is right and just that many will support but not pick up a gun and fight.
My only question to the author of this site is... since I have served in the Military (War on terror) does my opinion on being 'prowar' now become valid? Which by the way, if you survey those in the military (or survey most conservatives and moderatesin or out of the military) you will see that most support the "war". The only people who are anti-war are mega-liberals, pacifists, socialists, pro-totalitarians, anti-us-on-everything etc...basically your typical ex-drug using hippies on college campuses, mixed with a tinge of anti-war wolf in sheeps clothing pseudo-conservative half-liberal people such as the author of this site.. these people are the anti-war crowd... topped with a few liberal politico/hollywood superficials to get the point out on libTV such as CNN, Al-Reuters, and AP (all propaganda/associated press).
Then you have your brainwashed conspiracy theoried out websites such as this, who disregard all FACTS; whose only goal is to sarcasticly point out that most young republicans at college campuses don't want to put on a uniform and fight, but want to support the country doing "something" against an enemy that has called the US " the great satan " and has issued a "fatwah" against all US citizens, calling for our death and destruction.
So if it comes down to who I want to believe... do I choose to believe the sarcastic wit of a young disgruntled liberal who has an axe to gring with conservatives.. OR DO I WANT TO BELEIVE THAT THE TERRORISTS ARE SERIOUS when they say that they think we are the "great satan" and they want to destroy me?! Thus having figured out who I believe... I choose the side of the conservatives... in which I say.. even though I'm no longer in the military, I support the action of fighting overseas to head off fututre problems before they come to fruition... after all, as I mentioned.. you would be a FOOL if you DIDN'T belive the terrorists at their word, but you would be a FOOL if you believed a lame author of a website who downplays the seriousness of fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.
Whether or not young republicans join up to fight is pointless.. just because they don't join doesn't make the mission any less important. Every other country in the world has demonstrated for over 20 years that they ARE NOT willing to do anything about it besides give money to poor countries and TALK about the "issues" behind terrorism. It should be obvious to everyone involved, that the "issues" are always changing with terrorists... thus we cannot give them what they want, because they will always want more... if I remember correctly, they first hated us because we were "western crusaders".. then they hated us after Israel became a nation in the 60's.. then they hated us because of our "western decadence" in the 70's and 80's... then we became peaceful under Clinton in the 90's.... but they still hated us for some reason... now they attacked us in 2001 at the WTC... for some unknown conglomeration of reasons.
So where do we begin in the appeasment if we follow the liberals plan?
michael, shut the fuck up you fascist theocrat repthuglican, you and your baby killing fascist friends started this war along with the CHICKENHAWKS and now we have to pay for it
terrorists just want to be LEFT ALONE, so let's stop this evil war and stop recruiting and stop drafts and there will be no one to fight awful wars anymore
right on!
Michael,
I'm afraid you're guilty of some truly fallacious logic yourself. If you are going to draw a parallel between the argument of OYE (those in favor of this war should be willing to fight it) and WWII or the Revolutionary War, the fact that "only a small majority wanted to be liberated from Europe, and an even smaller number of people wanted to join in WW2" is utterly irrelevant -- in fact, a non sequitur. If there *were* a valid analogy here, you would have to claim that there were TONS of people sitting at home in favor of WWII who did not enlist, and we won anyway. I don't think that's the case, so there's no analogy to make. In fact, as people have pointed out elsewhere on this site, there were hardly widespread recruitment shortages during WWII, or other wars where people lied about their age to join up.
Now I suppose the fact that I teach college-level logic will be completely irrelevant to you, as you will automatically write me off as one of the "mega-liberals, pacifists, socialists, pro-totalitarians, anti-us-on-everything etc...basically your typical ex-drug using hippies on college campuses" despite the fact that I never take drugs and am far too young to be a hippie. :) [I'll cop to being a pacifist and a socialist, though -- positions borne of my childhood Christian indoctrination.]
It's just, if you're going to go on a rant about logic, get it right, for God's sake, or sign up for some college classes, to which you are now entitled, having served (I'm assuming) honorably.
they just want brown people to die in imperialist wars, it's a double whammy
Typical college teacher, and an even more frenzied typical response from those incapable of error.. (neo-libs).
First to the logic teacher.. what is my logical fallacy? What error did I make when I drew a correlation between those who supported WW2 and did not sign up and those who suppored Iraq and sign up? The only factual note I left out.. which I assumed a "highly intelligent" COLLEGE academia waste case like Dr.Spock would pick up.. was that there was a DRAFT. Otherwise, the naysayers, pacifics, and socialists would have prevailed, and we would either be dead or taken over.
The only false logic I can see is the OYE logic that THOSE WHO SUPPORT A WAR MUST ALSO FIGHT IT. Which brings me back to my original point about the 1776 revolution, and WW2, in which I note that only a small percentage ACTUALLY supported these wars.. Thus your point is negated when you analyze the faulty logic/straw man argument that is posed by OYE and its constituents.
Bogus assertions, half baked conspiracy theories, and anti-conservative loqucious diatribes are all I seem to be reading on this site... yeah, sure, you may top off your paragraph arguments with Authors like Pape, who by the way agree that Terrorism should be challenged militarily, and rogue regimes (cough cough, saddam) should be contained. And you may use sarcasitc blog-inspired conspiracy theoried cut and paste ideology from other 3rd party liberal blogs, but that still doesn't change the fact that even though COLLEGE REPUBLICAN CONSERVATIVES and COLLEGE DEMOCRAT LIBERALS are BOTH not signing up for duty... just like during WW2 and just like at the 1776 revolutionary war (even though there was not a bi-cam party system -the point is still the same).
So back to my original post, my main point, even though college repubicans are NOT doing the RIGHT THING... doesn't mean that invading Iraq and Afghanistan was wrong. Mr-logic-professor will be the first to explain the "false dilemma" that is created by OYE stating that -those conservatives who support the war on terror must sign up and fight.
Finally, lets get to the real point of OYE. This site is not about "yellowness" of the elephants. Rather it is about the belief that the entire operation in Iraq and elsewhere is a sham. One big giant conspiracy from Bush to get the USA to invade the middle east... what this fails to acknowledge is that the Liberal Democrats would ALSO have to be involved in the "big conspiracy" from the quote "American empire" and our "corporate owners". Since these liberal college professors have seletive memories, let me remind you that Clinton in 1998 said Iraq was builing WMDs... and Clinton bomded Iraq because of that fact. Oh yeah.. Clinton was a "coroporate slave" to McDonalds.. maybe he was bombing because he "knew" Bush would "steal the election" and then "invade Iraq for Oil".
Whew.. too many College professor/mega-lib conspiracies to deal with at once... there must be a million co-conspirators at work pushing this evil-anti-environment pro-war-anti-drug,pro-bigbusiness, anti-socialist agenda... whoops I forgot to work in religion and abortion.
After all... those reasons just mentions are why you really don't like the college young republicans... not just that they aren't signing up to fight in Iraq.
One more thing... that fact that you critique me on my statemtents, but leave this post unchecked shows your inability to stand back and view the fact objectively..
Quote:
"michael, shut the fuck up you fascist theocrat repthuglican, you and your baby killing fascist friends started this war along with the CHICKENHAWKS and now we have to pay for it
terrorists just want to be LEFT ALONE, so let's stop this evil war and stop recruiting and stop drafts and there will be no one to fight awful wars anymore."
THIS PERSON is your mega-lib disciple. Like most liberals .. ultra-simplistic reasoning, and the inability to rationally deduce that Terrorism (as I said in my first post on this site) was NOT caused by the USA and its MidEast Policies. The "reason" the terrorists hate is is ALWAYS changing... one year its one thing.. the next year its another... one year its Isreal.. then next it is because of the crusades from the middle ages.
We tried "just leaving them alone" .. from 1992 to 1999.. but then they blew up the Embassy, the USS Cole, Bali... I suppose those people in Bali are part of the "bush conspiracy to take oil from Iraq before bush became president in 2001". Haven't heard about that yet.. but then again the college professors haven't received their weekly talking points from the Nancy Pelosi/Michael Moore/MoveOn special interest groups.
Don't worry Sue, the liberals will give you more crap to spout on LibBlogs shortly, keep an eye out in the mail for your talking points, or just tune into CNN, Al-Reuteurs, or AP (all propaganda).
Michael, speaking as an Academy-gradute and a veteran, I say that you are off base in your basic presumptions regarding those with you you disagree.
Not every veteran feels compelled to believe the propaganda used to justify their misuse and abuse by the leaders. Many, many veterans who have kept their eyes open and their minds clear for possibly the frequently disconcerting contradictions between what our government says and what it actually does.
In fact, it has been said by many throughout the history of our nation (and by other wise souls throughout world history) that it is the obligation of a true patriot to use their own brains to think for the betterment of the community, and not to believe every line of bullshit they are handed.
Have you never read what Major General Smedley Butler, USMC, Commandant of the Corps, wrote in his famous essay, "War is a Racket"? He said that war is an enterprise perpetrated by the ultra-wealthy, and that the military is the "enforcers" of that racket. He claimed to have been the ultimate "Chief Enforcer" for the racketeers of American Industry.
Imagine, if you will, what it must have felt like to be a landser in Russia in 1942. Do you think that every German footsoldier was necessarily evil? Or were they used and abused by their leadership in an enterprise that ultimately led to the downfall of all that they cherished? It has often been thus, Michael, and it will continue to be so until EVERYONE - veterans or not - starts to use their own critical thinking functions to come up with conclusions based upon the facts.
The problem, unfortunately, is that too many people start with the conclusions and cherry-pick the facts to fit. It simply doesn't work that way, Michael.
Oh, yeah, another military maxim you might want to recall: "Know your enemy." Every time someone spouts the truism that terrorists "hate freedom" they are ignoring every bit of evidence available to them; and they are choosing - deliberately! - to NOT know their enemies. This is a guarantee for failure, buddy.
Oh, yeah, one more thing: We (the United States Military) have NEVER just "left them alone" (as you put it). No nation has fought more wars per annum, in all of history, than has the United States of America. This is especially so if you include wars by proxy, where we arm and train foreign armies, provide them with intelligence and directives, and (on the flip side) punish nations that do not prosecute wars that our govt feels are compelling.
Bali? Bali was just a convenient target, full of American and Austrialian civilians. Try the Philippines, where our army has been helping the Christian Philippino army crush the Muslim Moros for decades. Or how about East Timor, where President Bush 41 helped the govt of Indonesia annex and crush all resistance and run death camps and, basically, conduct what has come to be called "ethnic cleansing" (a euphemism akin to "collateral damage," if you ask me).
USS Cole? Again, a convenient target in the regaion. We had an army in Saudi Arabia, which is exactly what these terrorists were protesting. (By the way, this is not an opinion unique to terrorists. The govt of the supposedly-friendly Oman refuse to let American sailors even touch their soil on the wharf without absolute necessity.)
Know your enemy -- and know yourself, too, Michael. If our govt is going to go stomping around the world, making waves, we'd better be prepared for some backwash.
Actually, there is a conspiracy, one as old as humanity, itself. It is the conspiracy of those who have power to keep it at all costs. Their willing co-conspirators are those who allow themselves to be convinced that "all costs" is justified.
Sometimes this justification comes from fear (of reprisal, perhaps, or fear of the state-prescribed boogiemen, in this case "terrorists"). Often the justification is due to a delusion that they will get a piece of that illusive and exclusive pie.
Finally, justification often comes from more ephemeral reasons than that. (How about: a) A seat in heaven, or b) 40 virgins, or even c) [insert religious and/or ideological ideal of your choice here].)
"Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't conspiring against you." (Actually, crying "conspiracy theory" is a classic form of non-arguing. It's a way of distracting from the message by pidgeon-holing the message, instead.)
Ok, Michael, let me try this again.
You wrote:
"Following that faulty logic [that those approve the war must be willing to join up and fight] we would have never fought for independence from England, or joined WW2 to save Europe. Since only a small majority wanted to be liberated from Europe, and an even smaller number of people wanted to join in WW2."
You seem to be taking issue with the following logic (Aristotelian enthymeme follows):
General Premise (implied): When only a small majority of people want to fight a war, we don't fight it.
Specific Premise: Only a small majority of people wanted to fight in the war of independence and WWII.
Conclusion: We would never have fought for independence from England or joined WW2.
I agree that this is dumb logic, because the general premise has questionable truth value, and I have no idea if the specific premise is true either. In fact, you seem to be suggesting that a better general premise would be "We fight (and win) wars whether a majority of people support them or not."
However, the logic of the OYE campaign is this:
General premise: People who truly believe in something should be willing to have the courage of their convictions.
Specific premise: Lots of people of eligible-to-serve age really believe we should be sending troops to Iraq.
Conclusion: Eligible-for-military-service people who truly believe we should be sending troops to Iraq should have the courage of their convictions and go.
While we can also certainly critique this logic (and there are several corollaries implied by this set of premises that I won't go into now but would be happy to later if you insist), my point was that the two lines of logic are not compatible. General premises have to be similar or it's very difficult to make good analogies. OYE's logic has NOTHING to do with whether a majority of the population supports or does not support the war in Iraq. It simply says that those who support it should go fight it, especially since we are desperately short of troops.
You brought up the draft -- fair enough. Yes, if we institute a draft for this war, then lots of people are going to be forced to go fight whether they support the war or not, and maybe we'll win. Is this a better solution to our troop shortage? Try suggesting this to some of your YR or CR friends and see what they think.
Perhaps the twit who started this site should take a survey of the young people fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan. Ask THEM if they are republican or democrat. The majority are republicans. That is why scumbag Al Gore attempted to suppress their mail-in votes in Florida during the 2000 election. Ask THEM if they would have rather had Al Gore or John Kerry at the helm post 9-11. But we don't expect that from a transparent agitprop artist like you, and not a very good one at that. You are not a conservative Christian, and since you don't even have the guts to identify yourself, we can't really even ascertain who or what you are. Let me suggest that you are not even a person, but rather an organization which, like Moveon.org has as its sole purpose the proliferation of misinformation and smearing of republicans. These are standard Leftist tactics. Too bad you don't rely on facts. You wouldn't even exist if that were the case.
Jim... you and I should know by now that Liberal never acknowledge facts.. after all, these university professors have brainwashed all college students from 1969 forward that Facts are "relative"---and "truth" is subjective.
For instance, if you go back up and read the posts I made, you will see frenzied responses using demo-lib-rhetoric, and you will also see that none of the posts acknowledge any of the facts I stated, rather the proceed with personal attacks (even though they don't know me) and only take issue with my "logic" comment.
Notice they completely DISREGARD the TRUE statements about Terrorists always having different reasons for hating the USA, how we can't "just leave them alone", how the world has done nothing about the terrorism problem, and rogue regime problem for the past 30-40 years....
also these liberal swamp fever sufferers never back up their claims about the "corporate masters" who control the vast RIGHT wing conspiracy.. nor do they explain how Bush and the "Vast right wing conspirators" were able to dupe millions of people into doing their bidding. Also no-explanation on why Clinton bombed Iraq in 1998 (when the democrats said WMD's were in Iraq). Oh yeah.. thats right... Clinton is in on the BIG CONSPIRACY, just like George Bush.. maybe they're all on a treasure hunt with the declaration of independence map... a map that leads to Oil in Iraq for sure!!
Rest assured though, that these folks will say that the War on Terror is leading the CORPORATE SLAVES (people like you and I) into a preplanned IMPERIALISTIC WAR (even though we are not making any 51st state, and even though NOONE from the USA wants to move to Iraq to start a US colony)... despite these facts... liberal blow hards responding to my original comments range from Corporate Slave crap... to "imperialistic war", and "war for oil" comments... I guess they don't know that for an Empire to exist we must have US territories outside of the USA... and Iraq and Afghanistan are not territories.. rather they are under military occupation, which comes to an end eventually within years.
A state taken by an empire becomes a posession of that empire, as well as the resources and peoples. The last time I checked.. a majority of Iraq oil was going to EUROPE-not the US! and the rest of the resources are staying in Iraq.. such as copper, aluminum, grains, salt etc... Also no people are being used to make US products, nor are we TAXING any of the Iraqi people (things that empires do)... therfore I have deduced that the EMPIRE claim and the Corporate Slave claims are baseless, like 90% of all liberal arguments-- they heard it on CNN or from some dimwit college cronie professor who has been DICTATOR of their classroom too long.
Professor Illuminata,
you state my general premise completely wrong.. which is why YOU are wrong! And is scary that you are teaching young minds to argue.
What I actually said in my post:
If we only fight in wars that the "people" supported ---we would NOT have fought in 1776 against England, and we would NOT have fought in WW2, this is due to the FACT that a majority of people did not support taking action.
OYE claims that Republicans are "yellow" because they are not signing up in disproportionate numbers to fight, but then again neither are liberals... but according to OYE it DOESN'T matter that liberals are not signing up because it it a baseless war... however if you follow that claim, as I said in my posts- this is faulty logic at best, because if you believe that Liberals are vindicated for being cowards because THEY BELIEVE it is an unjust war, it would also mean that vice versa you must also accept the claims that the WAR IS JUST by conservatives who DO sign up to fight.
To claim that college republicans are yellow because they are not enlisted, is the same as saying those who supported WW2 or 1776 revolution, but were not in the military were yellow. Tell that to the founding fathers, soldiers families and the plethora of others that never fought in a war but supported the effort.
Therefore it is faulty logic on the part of OYE to deduce that all conservatives who support, but do not sign up are yellow.
Oh, but they are.
Like all those throughout history who lack the courage of their "convictions", they prefer others to do their dirty work for them. How sad.
Michael and Jim:
CHickenhawks are you?
Deniers are you?
Blathering are you?
Get off yer asses and go fight the "noble fight" that the rest of America is paying for.
Then maybe you have the right to speak about it.
Otherwise, STFU. I'm not terribly impressed with your blatherings...
Okay, slightly (or way) off topic, but what do think about the debacle with Dr. Hwang Woo Suk in South Korea? I just published a blog entry on it. I'd love it if you read it. My site's newish and no one seems to read it very much. I'd love your opinion... I swear this isn't a ad or spam or some bs like that. I'm just looking for some thinkin'/readin' folks to take a look and share their thoughts.
I tire of all of this. IF in FACT we did become a Fascist state I can tell you, with conviction, that I would be the first to volunteer to execute every last one of you so-called ,liberals'... Whining and pathetic subhumans!
Nazis? - Socialist- Liberals!
Stalinists?- Communist- Liberals!
Khmer Rouge?- Communist- Liberal!
Castro?- Communist- Liberal!
And there are countless others that have committed genocide in the name of so-called Liberalism! Look it up. Do not deny your sorted history.
The friend of my enemy is my enemy. You are all liars, theives, and soul-less murderers. You are worse than animals.
So much for the fighting dems.
Do you want to fight any war? This is the most successful occupation in war history. A ~120 to 1 kill ratio is pretty good, wait actually it's the BEST. We've just lost all willpower. Thanks to media and friends!
"I didn't leave the democratic party, the democratic party left me." - Democrat Senator Zell Miller
And now you're running out Joe Lieberman, and now you dare claim republicans don't serve? If you mean a bunch of 40 year olds didn't sign up immediately and put their kids in the cold yea sure. They're just aren't a whole lot of conservative teenagers. It's a contradiction, ignorant people tend to be democrat. It's a fact teenagers tend to be more democratic, when they get wiser and grow up, they become more republican.
Most people that signed up after 9/11 signed up because they realized that Islam is at war with the West, and that we must fight it. Read even a tidbit of the Qu'Ran or talk to some apostates, or the ONE Muslim I've heard who admitted the truth.
Read this article about Muslims killing fields at Darfur. All for religion.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15026
"It is my personal belief that the violent and unsavoury elements in Islam must be highlighted by Muslims, admitted and repudiated.
Yet, I am still Muslim, because I believe that Islam can be a secular and modern faith, consistent with democracy. But this will never occur until there is as Walid Shoebat mentioned recently, a 'confession'." Mr. Haidon, a MUSLIM.
I could cite a million qu'ran verses too, but nobody ever cares to actually check if the religion is good or evil.
Muslim arab states routinely stone gays, adulterers, and abortionists. Funny how those are their biggest supporters here!
I find it funny that the owner of this blog has never served in the military. Mr. OYE Blogman, when will you stand up and BE A MAN?!?!
Anonymous (11 June, 2001 14:08)-
The military didn't want me, and now I'm too old.
The Army told me I could best help them by encouraging eligible [younger] people to consider military service.
Hence, Operation Yellow Elephant.
How 'bout you fax yourself, fuckers?
Post a Comment
<< Home