Conquer Club

When will the party let the people choose their own future?

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

When will the party let the people choose their own future?

Postby mrswdk on Mon Nov 02, 2015 3:14 pm

For years now, the republic has occupied this bordering land by force. Denying the rights of the indigenous people, it refuses to give them autonomy, refuses to grant them cultural recognition, and refuses to relinquish its claim over their lands which it took by force all those years ago.

The people do not wish to be subsumed into their colossal neighbor's territory. They wish to have their own identity, their own sovereignty, and their own freedom.

For now the regime refuses to listen, refuses to cede to pressure. It is happy to hold on to its prize, happy to take strategic gain at the expense of the people. The international community, eager to trade with the central government, refuses to support the indigenous people's cause, but their discontent is growing, their resistance increasing. For how much longer can the occupation last?

An upcoming election has highlighted the deep disagreement between native Hawaiians over what the future should look like. For some, it's formal recognition of their community and a changed relationship within the US. Others want to leave the US entirely - or more accurately, want the US to leave Hawai'i.

When US officials came onto the stage that June night, they must have known they would be hearing from a hostile audience.

Speaker after speaker came up to the microphone, decrying a rigged process and an occupying government with no legitimacy.

"We do not need you here. This is our country."

"Get out of our house! Go home."

The officials weren't hearing from foreign nationals, but a crowd of citizens in Honolulu, Hawai'i. Someone began singing the opening words to Hawaii Ponoʻī - a national anthem of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the state's official song.

"Hawaii ponoʻī (Hawaii's own), Nānā i kou moʻī (Be loyal to your king)."

Many in the room at the Hawaiian state capitol began singing along.

This was the first in a series of 2014 hearings by the US interior department about whether it should offer a path to federal recognition to the Native Hawaiian community. Such a path has been long open to Native American groups on the mainland, but not to the descendants of Hawaii's indigenous people.

A year later, the interior department has made it official - publishing a proposed "procedures for re-establishing a formal government-to-government relationship".

The first ballots to elect delegates to a convention, or 'aha, for this purpose have now gone out in Hawai'i. Forty delegates from across the islands will meet in February to discuss whether there should be a Native Hawaiian government and what it should look like in the 21st Century.

Williamson Chang, a professor of law at University of Hawai'i, is one of those Hawaiians. He argues under international law, one country can only annex another by treaty - a document which both parties sign. This is how the entire rest of the US was formed - the Louisiana Purchase, the treaties with Native American tribes, the addition of the Republic of Texas. Anything else - including what happened in Hawaii - is an occupation, Chang says.

Hawaii occupies a unique place in US history - a set of islands 2,500 miles (4,023km) away from the mainland where in 1893, white businessmen and sympathetic politicians, with help from the US military, overthrew a constitutional monarchy.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34680564
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby mrswdk on Mon Nov 02, 2015 3:17 pm

I, for one, think it is absolutely ridiculous that a superpower thinks that it can seize islands so far from its mainland with a straight face. The superpower tries to claim it is not a threat, but we can all clearly see the military bases they have built on the islands in order to project power around the region. To show this much disregard for international law, this much disdain for the people who feel bullied by the actions of the giant - this is the behavior of a empire, not of a peaceful nation which respects the rule of law. jimboston, rishaed, Bernie Sanders and many others on this forum will surely agree.
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby riskllama on Mon Nov 02, 2015 3:54 pm

Tibet, Spratlys...
weak trolling attempt, mrs...
don't forget, we have a replacement for you now... :lol:
Image
User avatar
Lieutenant riskllama
 
Posts: 8976
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2014 9:50 pm
Location: deep inside Queen Charlotte.

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby jgordon1111 on Mon Nov 02, 2015 4:08 pm

Lmao, I thought this was a topic about chairman mao's China or Kim's Korea, my mistake, of course you believe those regime's are the best thing since rice paper, how come you never knock them and the atrocities committed there?
Image
User avatar
Private jgordon1111
 
Posts: 1711
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby tzor on Mon Nov 02, 2015 4:45 pm

I'm rolling on the floor laughing out loud (well actually not, I was doing that, I obviously can't do that and type at the same time). The person from the country who routinely suppresses whole minorities even to the point of expelling that minority's religious leader and making a stink whenever another head of state acknowledges him decides to post about indigenous peoples.

Image
Image
User avatar
Cadet tzor
 
Posts: 4076
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:43 pm
Location: Long Island, NY, USA

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby jimboston on Mon Nov 02, 2015 5:12 pm

Regardless of whether or not the OP is a Troll...

I for one would be fine with allowing the State of Hawaii to vote for Secession.

I would expect the following...
1) Fair election, no tampering.
(Obviously)

2) All current US Citizens who are Residents of Hawaii being allowed to vote in said referendum.
(All people who live there NOW have a stake in the results... not just those whose ancestors lived there prior to 1898. In the US we give equal voting rights to all citizens... regardless of how or when they because citizens. This principal must still apply.)

3) Requirement of super-majority... maybe 2/3rds.
(I think it is incumbent on those who seek change from the CURRENT STATUS QUO to demonstrate the vast majority want change, not just a simple majority.)

4) Implementation to be phased over time; with US Federal Gov't retaining land use for at least another 25years, and as much as another 100years. Obviously the Federal Gov't would have to pay some lease.
(You can't expect the US Gov't to immediately lose all use of land, army bases, scientific stations, etc immediately. It's not realistic, nor should we [the US people] take loss on investments we made to build infrastructure. In addition to military bases, there are also some significant scientific installations that were expensive.)

If these criteria are met... go for it.

BTW... I won't further debate my criteria. I've stated my reasoning. The US is in the position of power; allowing a referendum and agreeing to honor the outcome is positive... and making these demands as part of this is reasonable.

These comments agree with all previous statements I've made.
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5379
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby mrswdk on Mon Nov 02, 2015 5:19 pm

jimboston wrote:2) All current US Citizens who are Residents of Hawaii being allowed to vote in said referendum.
(All people who live there NOW have a stake in the results... not just those whose ancestors lived there prior to 1898. In the US we give equal voting rights to all citizens... regardless of how or when they because citizens. This principal must still apply.)

3) Requirement of super-majority... maybe 2/3rds.
(I think it is incumbent on those who seek change from the CURRENT STATUS QUO to demonstrate the vast majority want change, not just a simple majority.)


i.e. you want to set voting criteria that will allow the implanted American population to completely block any move for independence on the part of the people who were there before America overthrew their government and started shipping Americans to the islands
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby patches70 on Mon Nov 02, 2015 5:26 pm

jimboston wrote:Regardless of whether or not the OP is a Troll...

I for one would be fine with allowing the State of Hawaii to vote for Secession.

I would expect the following...
1) Fair election, no tampering.
(Obviously)

2) All current US Citizens who are Residents of Hawaii being allowed to vote in said referendum.
(All people who live there NOW have a stake in the results... not just those whose ancestors lived there prior to 1898. In the US we give equal voting rights to all citizens... regardless of how or when they because citizens. This principal must still apply.)

3) Requirement of super-majority... maybe 2/3rds.
(I think it is incumbent on those who seek change from the CURRENT STATUS QUO to demonstrate the vast majority want change, not just a simple majority.)

4) Implementation to be phased over time; with US Federal Gov't retaining land use for at least another 25years, and as much as another 100years. Obviously the Federal Gov't would have to pay some lease.
(You can't expect the US Gov't to immediately lose all use of land, army bases, scientific stations, etc immediately. It's not realistic, nor should we [the US people] take loss on investments we made to build infrastructure. In addition to military bases, there are also some significant scientific installations that were expensive.)

If these criteria are met... go for it.

BTW... I won't further debate my criteria. I've stated my reasoning. The US is in the position of power; allowing a referendum and agreeing to honor the outcome is positive... and making these demands as part of this is reasonable.

These comments agree with all previous statements I've made.


If you really believe the above, then it should stand to reason that it applies to any state. If Texas wants to vote to secede then they should be allowed to and if the vote is the affirmative then the Federal government can't intervene, as in using force to keep said state from seceding.

Hahah!
That puts you firmly in the "Lincoln was wrong" camp when it comes to how the Federal government should react when a state attempts to secede.
Private patches70
 
Posts: 1664
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:44 pm

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby / on Mon Nov 02, 2015 6:15 pm

Wait, who's the king of Hawaii? Is it Obama?
Sergeant 1st Class /
 
Posts: 484
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:41 am

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby jimboston on Mon Nov 02, 2015 6:47 pm

mrswdk wrote:
jimboston wrote:2) All current US Citizens who are Residents of Hawaii being allowed to vote in said referendum.
(All people who live there NOW have a stake in the results... not just those whose ancestors lived there prior to 1898. In the US we give equal voting rights to all citizens... regardless of how or when they because citizens. This principal must still apply.)

3) Requirement of super-majority... maybe 2/3rds.
(I think it is incumbent on those who seek change from the CURRENT STATUS QUO to demonstrate the vast majority want change, not just a simple majority.)


i.e. you want to set voting criteria that will allow the implanted American population to completely block any move for independence on the part of the people who were there before America overthrew their government and started shipping Americans to the islands


All people that live there are humans.
Why should one group of humans have rights that supersede the rights of another group.

Some of the "implanted" people have been there for generations.

We've talked about this in other threads. You can't change history. You have to deal with the world AS IT EXISTS TODAY. Today Hawaii is part of the USA. The people who live there are Americans. They all have the same rights. The "native people" as you label them are not oppressed in any way. The US took over Hawaii OVER 100 YEARS AGO. This did not happen last week. We can not turn back the clock.

Would you also propose we restore the traditional Hawaiian monarchy? You'd have to if you think it's right that we should just leave... if we should JUST LEAVE, then we should leave it as we found it.

Many people with "native" ancestry want to secede. Many people with "native" ancestry want to stay part of the USA. I am sure that there are also people of "non-native" who would be for secession. You are separating people based solely on their ethnicity. Hence you are espousing racist views. You need to let all people vote equally.

Do you think the votes of Hawaiian people who want to remain part of the USA should not count?

You make these very grand assertions... but you never propose or suggest ideas for how we might actually go about "solving the problem" in the real world. That right there is the true definition of a Troll in this forum.
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5379
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby mrswdk on Mon Nov 02, 2015 6:57 pm

So you are, therefore, happy for Hawaii to remain part of the US despite the US's control of Hawaii continuing to amount to an illegal occupation?
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby jimboston on Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:00 pm

patches70 wrote:
If you really believe the above, then it should stand to reason that it applies to any state. If Texas wants to vote to secede then they should be allowed to and if the vote is the affirmative then the Federal government can't intervene, as in using force to keep said state from seceding.


Yes. Assuming that all criteria are met.


patches70 wrote:Hahah!
That puts you firmly in the "Lincoln was wrong" camp when it comes to how the Federal government should react when a state attempts to secede.


HOLD THE LAUGH!

I can argue that the criteria I set were NOT in play during Civil War times.

#2 is very questionable...
The only people voting for anything at the time were White Men. Women had no vote, and African Americans had no vote. You can argue that the criteria were not met for this reason.

I also don't recall any referendum of the people. Maybe it happened... but I think the vote to secede was made by the state legislative bodies, and not by open referendum. I could be wrong here; so forgive me if I am.

#3 I'd have to do research on this... but if there was no referendum, then there was certainly no super-majority.

#4 Definitely wasn't met. There was no plan to allow for peaceful separation. That was one of the causes of the initial fighting in the first place. There was no discussion or agreement on how to handle transfer or Federal property.

As an aside... Lincoln may or may not have been wrong, but sometimes the end does justify the means. In this case, the South seceding would've likely set up a bad continental dynamic, that could have had the North/South standing on opposite sides of the battlefield in WW1 and WW2. History proves that his ultimate goal was justified. This is just an aside, and not pertinent to discussion of orderly secession of a State today.
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5379
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby mrswdk on Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:04 pm

LOL. 'Sometimes the end does justify the means', i.e. sometimes it's okay to ignore all the conditions I just set if I think there's a good reason to.
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby mrswdk on Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:07 pm

So following your logic, if China can just retain control of the South China Sea for long enough, people should eventually stop questioning the legitimacy of this, accept the reality that China now controls the Sea, and move forward with China's sovereignty over the Sea taken as a given?
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby jimboston on Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:07 pm

mrswdk wrote:So you are, therefore, happy for Hawaii to remain part of the US despite the US's control of Hawaii continuing to amount to an illegal occupation?


EVERY COUNTRY THAT EXISTS TODAY HAS TAKEN LAND FROM SOME OTHER PEOPLE WHO OCCUPIED LAND BEFORE THEM.

THE PEOPLE THAT OCCUPIED THAT LAND PREVIOUSLY... THEY VERY LIKELY TOOK IT FROM SOMEONE ELSE.

You can't change history.

I don't agree with your classification of Hawaiian Statehood as an "illegal occupation". The people who were born there are full citizen's of the USA, with all the rights and privileges of any other citizen. An occupation implies that there is some sort of oppression. That's just not the case.

Furthermore, I have stated three times now that I am 100% fine with the Citizen's of Hawaii having a public referendum. The fact that this would be an option is proof in and of itself that this is not an occupation.

If you continue to ignore my points and put words in my mouth I will be forced to put you on IGNORE.

If you want to have a discussion with an open minded human being, let's talk...

Otherwise f**k off...
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5379
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby mrswdk on Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:11 pm

Just trying to clarify your stance. Regardless of whether the residents of the islands have been given American citizenship the occupation of Hawaii is very definitely illegal, as the BBC article points out. I just want to be clear that when you say we should move on and put the past behind us, that includes putting aside the legality of any prior act of expansionism.
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby jimboston on Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:12 pm

mrswdk wrote:So following your logic, if China can just retain control of the South China Sea for long enough, people should eventually stop questioning the legitimacy of this, accept the reality that China now controls the Sea, and move forward with China's sovereignty over the Sea taken as a given?


1) First they have to get control over it, before they can "retain" control.

2) If China has those Island's there in 50 years, and has military control of the area, and has Oil Platforms all over the place... then it really won't matter if I or anyone else questions their "legitimate" rights or not. Yes, by default they will have essentially annexed the area... and yes, after some period of time the other people will have to accept it.

The fact is that it is the intersection of... *the "non-acceptance" of conditions "on the ground and *the ability of some other group to dispute those conditions... that cause wars.

I have to run, so not going to explain that any better... I hope I am understood, but if not, oh well.
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5379
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby muy_thaiguy on Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:13 pm

Well, going to be hard to restore the Hawaiian Monarchy, as the last heir with any legit claim died about 100 years ago. Died at age 79 due to complications from a stroke. Her chosen heir died due to pneumonia and had not had a chance to name an heir herself.

Though that said, once again, mrswdk starts a very ironic thread.

A better question, is when is China going to restore Tibet to their own independence and allow the Dali Lama to return and bring forth the actual Panchen Lama, chosen by the Dali Lama and not some puppet chosen by the government of China?
"Eh, whatever."
-Anonymous


What, you expected something deep or flashy?
User avatar
Private 1st Class muy_thaiguy
 
Posts: 12746
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 11:20 am
Location: Back in Black

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby Dukasaur on Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:14 pm

patches70 wrote:
jimboston wrote:Regardless of whether or not the OP is a Troll...

I for one would be fine with allowing the State of Hawaii to vote for Secession.

I would expect the following...
1) Fair election, no tampering.
(Obviously)

2) All current US Citizens who are Residents of Hawaii being allowed to vote in said referendum.
(All people who live there NOW have a stake in the results... not just those whose ancestors lived there prior to 1898. In the US we give equal voting rights to all citizens... regardless of how or when they because citizens. This principal must still apply.)

3) Requirement of super-majority... maybe 2/3rds.
(I think it is incumbent on those who seek change from the CURRENT STATUS QUO to demonstrate the vast majority want change, not just a simple majority.)

4) Implementation to be phased over time; with US Federal Gov't retaining land use for at least another 25years, and as much as another 100years. Obviously the Federal Gov't would have to pay some lease.
(You can't expect the US Gov't to immediately lose all use of land, army bases, scientific stations, etc immediately. It's not realistic, nor should we [the US people] take loss on investments we made to build infrastructure. In addition to military bases, there are also some significant scientific installations that were expensive.)

If these criteria are met... go for it.

BTW... I won't further debate my criteria. I've stated my reasoning. The US is in the position of power; allowing a referendum and agreeing to honor the outcome is positive... and making these demands as part of this is reasonable.

These comments agree with all previous statements I've made.


If you really believe the above, then it should stand to reason that it applies to any state. If Texas wants to vote to secede then they should be allowed to and if the vote is the affirmative then the Federal government can't intervene, as in using force to keep said state from seceding.

Hahah!
That puts you firmly in the "Lincoln was wrong" camp when it comes to how the Federal government should react when a state attempts to secede.

This is a bit of a digression but.... I believe it wasn't Lincoln that was wrong, but the Confederates who decided to go to war. This is not my area of expertise, but I've seen people convincingly argue that if the southern states had decided to push through their secession through nonviolent means, fighting in court not on the battlefield, using the language of the Constitution that they were sovereign states freely joined to the Union, then they may very well have won their independence. It was by opening fire on Fort Sumter and other places that they hardened the resolve of the North and made a negotiation impossible.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.”
― Voltaire
User avatar
Sergeant Dukasaur
Community Team
Community Team
 
Posts: 28134
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
32

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby jimboston on Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:14 pm

mrswdk wrote:Just trying to clarify your stance. Regardless of whether the residents of the islands have been given American citizenship the occupation of Hawaii is very definitely illegal, as the BBC article points out. I just want to be clear that when you say we should move on and put the past behind us, that includes putting aside the legality of any prior act of expansionism.


No.

There are many factors involved.

Time is one?
The acceptance of the residents with current status is another?

I could probably think of 5-10 more.
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5379
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby jimboston on Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:15 pm

muy_thaiguy wrote:Well, going to be hard to restore the Hawaiian Monarchy, as the last heir with any legit claim died about 100 years ago. Died at age 79 due to complications from a stroke. Her chosen heir died due to pneumonia and had not had a chance to name an heir herself.

Though that said, once again, mrswdk starts a very ironic thread.

A better question, is when is China going to restore Tibet to their own independence and allow the Dali Lama to return and bring forth the actual Panchen Lama, chosen by the Dali Lama and not some puppet chosen by the government of China?


Her questions are good.
Too bad she doesn't add additional value to the conversation.

Good luck getting an answer.
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5379
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby mrswdk on Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:21 pm

jimboston wrote:
mrswdk wrote:So following your logic, if China can just retain control of the South China Sea for long enough, people should eventually stop questioning the legitimacy of this, accept the reality that China now controls the Sea, and move forward with China's sovereignty over the Sea taken as a given?


1) First they have to get control over it, before they can "retain" control.

2) If China has those Island's there in 50 years, and has military control of the area, and has Oil Platforms all over the place... then it really won't matter if I or anyone else questions their "legitimate" rights or not. Yes, by default they will have essentially annexed the area... and yes, after some period of time the other people will have to accept it.

The fact is that it is the intersection of... *the "non-acceptance" of conditions "on the ground and *the ability of some other group to dispute those conditions... that cause wars.

I have to run, so not going to explain that any better... I hope I am understood, but if not, oh well.


Why wait decades though? If China grabs the Sea now and can't be contested, then it is already the fact on the ground that the Sea belongs to China. The situation would still be the same whether we wait 4 weeks or 50 years.
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby jgordon1111 on Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:33 pm

Your last statement about China owning the sea, makes every argument you have put forward regarding Hawaii invalid, and proves you are nothing more than a hate monger troll, be silent fool spread your hate elsewhere.
Image
User avatar
Private jgordon1111
 
Posts: 1711
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby jimboston on Mon Nov 02, 2015 7:57 pm

mrswdk wrote:Why wait decades though? If China grabs the Sea now and can't be contested, then it is already the fact on the ground that the Sea belongs to China. The situation would still be the same whether we wait 4 weeks or 50 years.


It is being contested.

You can't change history.
Last week isn't history.

That said... the fact that these islands are already built (as I understand it) is a big "win" for China on this issue.
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5379
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: When will the party let the people choose their own futu

Postby riskllama on Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:45 pm

what about guam, mrs? do they seem happy enough with their current affiliation with the US for you? or were you saving this one for tomorrow?
Zhongshan/Dalai Llama... ;)
Image
User avatar
Lieutenant riskllama
 
Posts: 8976
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2014 9:50 pm
Location: deep inside Queen Charlotte.

Next

Return to Acceptable Content

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ConfederateSS