Search this Site

  • Google


« Monday's (8/24) Savage Nation Appearance: All the President's Bigoted Men | Main | United Nations Plan: Teach Masturbation to 5-Year-Olds »

September 01, 2009


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.



Thanks for all you do and another great essay. The hypocrisy and lunacy of the left has until quite recently left me completely baffled. However, your book Sinisterisim shed light on many issues I had with the lefts apparent conflicts of principal. Before reading your book and another very good book by Jamie Glazov "United in Hate" I had a really hard time understanding actions like for instance Maxine Waters recent comments on her love for the murderous tyrant Fidel Castro. Now that I understand the tormented mind of the leftist these things make sense. The one thing I really hope is that ACORN and its spawn have cheated the democratic process. The reason I hope such odd things is it is unfathomable for me to believe actual living breathing "Americans" would vote for people who openly hold these genocidal maniacs in high regard, much like Joe Kennedy did with Adolph Hitler (before history exposed him). I would be truly sad for America if in fact a majority of the people freely voted for apologists of Stalin, Mao, Castro, and Ortega to name a few; those who find it acceptable to sanitize the populous in order to achieve their utopia.


How about when we are looking at American support of otherwise for dictators we take a little peak at Operation Condor in which the USA supported Pinochet in the murder, torture and supression of 10s of thousands of his countrymen and women and children in cahoots with the US? Just one of the unsavory maniacs supported for cold war reasons.

I also seem to remember that the US was rather ambivalent about entering the second world war at all and I have a vague recollection that the Soviets for all their hideous faults played a significant role in getting rid of Hitler.

But hell go ahead and re-write history. It's all the fault of jane fonda and acorn after all!


Yoyo said,

"I also seem to remember that the US was rather ambivalent about entering the Second World War at all and I have a vague recollection that the Soviets for all their hideous faults played a significant role in getting rid of Hitler."

Yes we did stall way too long on getting into WW2 and you can thank the "American" left for that. As far as the USSR playing a significant role in removing Hitler...yes they did. However, Hitler and Stalin were one in the same ideologically. Both were ruthless murderers of their own people, both were social statists, and both wanted regional and eventual global control. Unfortunatly we had to employ the old "enemy of our enemy is our friend," addage (that sucks). Only a few short years before WW2 the USSR and Germany were allies, and Italy was on the outs. Things could have been much different had the personalities been a bit different. In WW2 the only nation that had their head on straight was the UK, and it took Churchill a while to get the message out. The UK was the real hero of WW2. But the truth is whether we allied with Stalin or Hitler in WW2 a bad guy was going to make it out alive and millions upon millions would suffer as a result. The only guy who seemed to get that was Patton, who wanted to move on into Russia afterwards. I can’t say that I would endorse that policy but had we been successful at such an endeavor the Cold War and the trillions upon trillions spent on nuclear warheads that hopefully will never be used, could have been prevented.

As far as Op Condor and our implied sins in that regard. Anytime we look the other way on genocide weather in Uganda, Cuba, Russia, China, Cambodia, Sudan, Iraq, Armenians or Bosnia it is the wrong thing to do. I have a hunch we will have to make another choice here soon (within 10 years) with the Kurds, and I hope we do not stand on the sidelines because of George Soros generated public opinion poles.



I read the article by Bruce and the comments after and I think this is one issue where I split from the great deal of american conservatives.
Are you implying that America should be an interventionist state(Yes we did stall way too long on getting into WW2 ) and squash all the bad guys the world over...Im not trying to mock you but I hear this all the time from the neo-con channels(Fox, Limbaugh, etc)and I really have to question the wisdom of that vision. Why is it our purpose to police the world and get involved with every other crack pot dictator.

Lets take a look at Europe today. Some 70 years after world war two is over and Europe was saved from the great evil of Hitler.What has Europe become? A grey haired continent filled with people who are so ashamed of their past and so sucked into their own personal existence they lack the effort to reproduce themselves and they lack the spine to defend their entire way of life from Islamic invasion. In 50 years we might agree the European people would have been better off if Hitler had won.

Winston Churchill and the UK the real hero of WW2! I guess that
depends on your point of view. Although Churchill represented English bravery and valour all throughout his career, was he really a hero of 1940's England? Yes he refused to back down to Hitler. But what did Hitler want from Churchill? Hitler did not want to conquer England, in fact he almost came to begging Churchill for peace several times after the fall of Poland and France. Instead Churchill fought on and what was his legacy? Yes he was the hero of 1940, but after risking the british empire for the sake of Poland, he readily handed Poland right over to the soviets to be subjegated and terrorized. He left the British empire exhausted, broken, and hopelessly in debt to international finance. His political career ended rather dismally.

Walt, I think your main idea(and Bruce's) was that we shouldn't retreat from and rationalize evil when we see it. I completely agree. I think where I have trouble with so many who follow this train of thought is when you apply this to state politics. There are several reasons for this. First and foremost, no matter how noble states intentions appear to be there is always the core reason behind every conflict, mainly money and power.

I am going to wrap this up for the moment as one post is nowhere near long enough to tackle this issue but I would appreciate any feedback. As I mentioned earlier I always enjoy your commentary and hope to understand your point of view a little better.




I understand your perspective and I can't say I totally disagree with you. One thing I whole heartedly agree with you on is, "... one post is nowhere near long enough to tackle this issue ..."

First topic you said, "Are you implying that America should be an interventionist state(Yes we did stall way too long on getting into WW2 ) and squash all the bad guys the world over?"

My answer. The world must have some semblance of order. Order can be established two ways. The first way is if the people find a common set of ethics and morality they are willing to conform to. This establishment of order is typically achieved through a common belief in a Creator that will judge each man on their actions and punish or reward them eternally based upon their earthly performance and compliance to the preordained ethics. The utopian view of this dynamic if in fact it came to pass would be people with a strong sense of self responsibility, willing to be charitable of their own free will toward others in need; upon this, America was founded.

The second way to accomplish order is through tyranny. All of the people's free will is subject to the government OR whoever has the physical ability to execute. Failure to comply to the wishes of the tyrant typically results in harsh punishment or death. Genocide is a pre-emptive solution of the non-compliant. This is the model for most atheistic societies although they may not appear to be so they are only ambitious person or distressful situation from morphing to the worse case.

That is the story of order and chaos and if you think about it the only nations with true order are tyrannical regimes and even those nations experience chaos when a person or group desire freedom.

So to you quandary, "...should be an interventionist state..?" My answer is yes and no. Not in every case is it prudent for us to act with force to prevent genocide, even though it may be moral. However in every case we must declare our position firmly. Even in lost causes like Vietnam/Cambodia and Nicaragua our foes and would be Hitler’s took note. When Regan sent Kadoffi a nice little F-15 present back in the '80s would be despots got the message and when Carter didn't during the Iranian hostage crisis so to, did they get the message. Saddam and other mid east despots got the message when we booted his butt out of Kuwait, they also got the message when the UN failed to enforce the terms of surrender. If we act or fail to act in the face of a tyrant a message is delivered. If we pull back and employ the Monroe doctrine we can count on the world falling into chaos for a time followed by order at the hands of a tyrant or a few. Our only option for protection at that point is nuclear, which is a bad option. By saying that you must think my answer is Yes we need to be the worlds policeman; my answer is mostly no. However, when we do become involved in a situation we must enter with a detailed picture of what victory looks like and we must at all cost see it through. By doing this we transform our perception by a would be despot from Dudley Doright riding backwards on his horse to save the day to Samurai Jack a reluctant but invincible warrior. Once a battle is joined and the terms of victory are described the terms are no longer political; fully military. Once the battle is joined all of the Jane Fonda's and John Kerry's in the world can make no effect on the out come. If we executed with that do or die mentality the tyrants could not rule the world.

Next you said,” Hitler did not want to conquer England; in fact he almost came to begging Churchill for peace several times after the fall of Poland and France."

I would have to say I believe Churchill's judgment of Hitler to be correct. If an imperialist tyrant tells you not to'd better worry. Hitler had broken treaties before. He was not a man of honor and Churchill new it. Hitler was just hoping to stall for a while because a two or three front war is a booger. He was hoping Churchill was another gullible Chamberlain.

Shaun, these topics are complex and sometimes hard to bring closure to. But, make no mistake there is a right and wrong to every conflict. Discovering which is which might be tough but the Truth always remains. To top it off even once the Truth is discovered, actions are always accompanied by unintended consequences.



Before we get to far into a hagiography for churchill it may be useful to be aware that as americans you are paying for his mistakes now in pakistan, iraq and israel, and my country lost scores of young men on several fields of battle particularly turkey because he f*kd up. Churchill is a very complex character, yes he is someone tyou would want as a war minister perhaps but he never should have been allowed to redraw boundaries, to the supposed british interest all over the world.

Walt, in relation to Pinochet and other monsters, I agree with saun to some extent it hasn't helped the US to get into these fights altho perhaps they may have had a moral reason for doing so (in some cases they had caused the problems) but my point is the US supported these freaks because they were so caught up in cold war hysteria. The policy I mentioned used US people to chase Pinochets opponets all over the world and execute them where they were. Again, any black vs white policy that is solely driven by ideology is going to spawn cruelty, and barbarism because ideology trumps reality. EG who cares if our allie feeds his opponents to crocodiles so long as he hates X as much as we do".


PS I promise I'll find a way to do spell check in a typepad account soon, my misspelling is even giving me the ****.


Copy and paste to a word or notepad document before you post.


Thank you, at times I can be a bit of a luddite (mostly i get lazy) x

Philip France

I posted this days ago in response to Bruce Walker's article but Internet troubles circumvented the posting. Here are my thoughts on the article, but not the commentary that has ensued since then:

I second Walt’s applause for Bruce Walker’s guest piece. I also wish to warn my fellow-American’s that Comrade Obama’s “appeasement” is a diversionary tactic intended to (here’s that word again) appease his “liberal” supporters. By this I mean the benign, go-along-to-get-along “liberals” that put him in office. In truth, those who I have just described are overgrown children who have no idea of the evil that they have voted into our highest office.

Make no mistake about it, Barack Hussein Obama II is a radical Marxist. He has been a Marxist for nearly all, if not all of his life. His closest associations have been radical Marxists, beginning with his mother and extending through his father: his mentor, radical Marxist, poet, pervert and pornographer Frank Marshall Davis; to Jeremiah Wright; to William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. His allegiances are to radical Marxism and that is now our system of government.

I hope that I am wrong, but I foresee an attempt to usurp our Constitution through a Constitutional Convention in which our founding document is rewritten to suit the Marxist agenda desired by Academia and the radical Left. Evidence already exists in the naming of radical Marxists Van Jones, Mark Lloyd and Robert Holdren to key and unconstitutional positions close to the US Presidency.


I do not believe that Barack Hussein Obama II is the leader of this revolution. I believe that he is the finely-dressed puppet that is dancing on the strings of his nefarious masters. Remember that Marxism and evil come to us disguised. It cannot overtake our great Republic in plain view. But it is here. It is now upon us and this handsome man from the corrupt wards of Chicago is its smiling face with an award-winning smile (and adorable children, I might add).

I state this for a few reasons. One of which is the fact that all of his records and school grades are sealed. How can one individual pull this off? Can any one individual pressure enough High School, college, university, glee club, chess club, whatever to seal EVERYTHING about this man from public scrutiny?

Another reason is that I do not think that he is very intelligent. Yes, we are told so by the MSM, but the MSM has been infiltrated by radical homosexuals who expect their quid pro quo from their Dear Leader. If he is so intelligent, why are his grades concealed? Would not this be a rallying point for him to demonstrate his “intelligence”?

In front of a TelePrompTer, I’ll admit that he is as slick, if not MORE slick than anyone before him. But away from it, he makes George W. Bush sound like Alistair Cooke. This should cause us to question who the puppeteer is. Is it George Soros? Is it the Bilderberg Group? The Council on Foreign Relations? The Trilateral Commission? Or is it Bill Ayers (my guess)?

The fact remains that we have an amateur in the White House who has dangerous affiliations. A man who has little regard for the rule of law (he appointed six tax-cheats to high positions) and a man all-too friendly with Marxism and, in particular, black liberation Marxists.

We must send an All-Points Bulletin to the millions of slumbering Americans and we must do it now. I hate to say this, and I hope that I am wrong, but I truly believe that we have already seen our last Democratic election (read that again). There will be an end to our rights to freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly. There will be an end to our right to bear arms. The will be an end to our right to own property. There will be an end to our right to habeus corpus. There will be an end to conservative talk-radio. There will be an end to all of our God-given rights that have been heretofore guaranteed by our Constitution’s Bill of Rights.

I hope that I am wrong. I hope that I am VERY wrong. But the evidence thus far is that I am not.

America, America, God shed His grace on thee.


"I truly believe that we have already seen our last Democratic election (read that again). There will be an end to our rights to freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly. There will be an end to our right to bear arms. The will be an end to our right to own property. There will be an end to our right to habeus corpus. There will be an end to conservative talk-radio. There will be an end to all of our God-given rights that have been heretofore guaranteed by our Constitution’s Bill of Rights.

I hope that I am wrong. I hope that I am VERY wrong. But the evidence thus far is that I am not."

Phil,phil,phil this has more than whiff of World Nut Daily or even the freepers. Gee whizz from the other side of the spectrum, the man and his government is a middle right government. Like most successful politicians he has backed a mile away from ANY gun control no matter what Glen Beck might tell you.
Can you point to one serious legislative initiative currently in discussion from this governement that would reduce your "right" to carry penis substitutes (I mean manly guns of course)?
Do you honestly think that Murdoch and the other major media owners are all running a scary gay agenda because they are all gay?
Do you seriously think that this administration is going to strip your mortgage from your trembling fingers?

I understand that you lost the election and it is upsetting, one would think that the rights to privacy that were really lost under the last administration and some of the security "initiatives" implimented as policy would have raised a red flag for you. You know concrete tangible effects? Like having your phone tapped without a warrant, being placed on a no-fly list with no evidence or appeal etc. You know, real touchable impacts on your much vaunted freedoms but instead you are worried that the gays are comming to get you. Presumably they want to redecorate your house without your consent.



You do not understand what America means. You have admitted you are from elsewhere and that is fine, so is my family (4 generations ago, German, Russian, Swedish). My great grandparents came here to escape oppression in Communist Russia. I still have letters from my great-great G-pa (in Russia) to my great g-pa (which he sacrificially smuggled his family out of the USSR). My G-G-Gpa was eventually killed for his Christian faith because it got in the way of the communist government’s plans for their country. While the executions of millions were taking place many American "Socialists" were traveling over to Russia to ogle over this perfect people’s utopia. They were shown cozy Tonkin villages and efficient communal farms, and entertained by Lenin and Stalin personally, extolling the virtues of the Marxist plan of harmony. There were rumors of the wholesale slaughters of non-conforming people groups but they were ignored by the travelers. These traveling social studiers continued their journeys for many years and made multiple pleas to American Presidents to move our nation in that direction. Perhaps the FDR administration had the most "fellow travelers" in his self described "brain trust." This group of people and the alliances they formed are still in tact today even though they were forced underground from time to time. These are the same socialist Marxists that BHO has as his advisors and the ideals are the same ones he carries.

I started this by saying you don’t know what American means. I don't know if you are a citizen, a guest worker or an illegal but in the past becoming a citizen meant many many hours of study of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers and the functionality of a Representative Republic. Our American founding documents extol the virtues of Freedom, responsibility, industry, Unity (not diversity), morality and reverence to our Creator. If any of these are infringed upon the general felicity will be in jeopardy.

Lets just tackle one of your pet peeves; guns. You called them a "penis substitute." This statement shows your infantile understanding of those who hold the right to bear arms dear. We do not hold it dear because we like to hear the noise or because we like to intimidate others or to compensate for physical deficiencies (although guns are the great equalizer). We hold our rights dear because it is our hole card against tyrants. This is the sole purpose of the Second Amendment. I also enjoy my right to bear because it is a way I can protect the ones I love from harm and provide for them in times of trial.

You also said, "Like most successful politicians he has backed a mile away from ANY gun control no matter what Glen Beck might tell you."

Do you honestly think BHO would not prefer guns out of the hands of Americans? He is a central planner type, he is after societal control and holders of guns stand in the way of that plans execution. Additionally, BHO does not have to preach gun control from the Oval office. There have been multiple bills killed in committee this year that were proposed by not the Pres but by certain leftist congressmen. Additionally, this year there was a subversive administrative attempt to dramatically affect the supply of ammo, by means of required destruction of shell casings (rather than selling to reload). Many states have on the docket bullet fingerprint legislation. Some have "assault weapon" legislation (LOL). The front on the war against the Second Amendment has not been silent. Of course BHO has not said he wants to bring the UN blue helmets in to go door to door seizing guns; that is not their M.O. Gradual infringement is the name of the game.

Another statement you made regarding BHO, "the man and his government is a middle right government."

Wow I wonder why I respond to any of it. This is probably the dumbest thing I have ever read. Even Hugo Chavez made a comment (loose quote) "BHO better watch out or he will be left of me."

Philip France

Dear Yoyo,

It is evident that you see the world around you in the inverse of the way I do. We cannot both be correct but we could both be wrong. I at least admitted to hoping so. What is missing from your analysis is this: What if I am correct?


Here we go for Phil but particularly for Walt (because he has tried to be fair) a little self disclosure, I am not a guest worker or visitor or any sort of supplicant at your gates. I come from a small western country founded by the Brits. I’ll give you another clue, we had the highest growth of any western country since the global economic downturn. However a) about half my relatives are yanks and b) more importantly I work in an industry totally transmogrified by 9/11 and spend approximately 50% of my time travelling- just back from Beijing last month last week in Dubai and Sydney, New Caledonia in 10 days. So I travel and I get to see a lot of systems and I get to hear what people's feelings about their own regimes and that of the US too are. Believe me to some extent American exceptionalism is a real thing 'tho not in the way that most Americans think it is. You are a country that people have looked at for trends but not so much for leadership.

Probably that it part of the reason that so many people were dismayed that you descended into state sanctioned torture under the previous administration. Leaving that aside, our country has never had the fascination with guns that yours has. Generally rural people keep them and sporting shooters but not too many others and surprise, surprise we do not seem to fear that without them our government will turn into overnight fascists and need to be overthrown. Yes your gun love is a little hard to understand from my perspective but I take it as just a regional quirk like the Belgium’s eat mayonnaise on chips (yuk).

However, what I find very difficult to understand and my American friends and relatives too is why this small but vocal group of white right wing Americans is soooo terrified by this administration. My g*d you are a conservative country on so many levels, more that any western country, hell a good 40% of your population doesn’t believe in evolution! Do you really believe that a cany politician from the hyper political Chicago system is going to piss off the majority of the population by passing laws that none of you want? Why would he commit political suicide?

My concerns are these: when you get a cold the whole world sneezes so it would be kind of nice if kept your unfettered economic disasters to a minimum. The current admin inherited a huge mess, give the guy a little respect while he tries to find a solution, you always seemed to be the country with the strongest respect for you POTUS but within days you have let your radio demagogues scream the most disrespectful racist stuff I’ve ever heard and you must know that some nut job will take it as a call to violence, finally although most Americans are not so educated about the outside world have a look at what has worked elsewhere and if it fits in with your goals and aspirations adopt it. You know most of the world has health systems were reasonably happy with.

Regarding the comment a bout a middle right government, yes by the standards of all european and most western governments nothing has yet been accomplished or even promoted that is radically left wing. However i assume you guys are argueing in good faith and you believe your stuff as much as the rest of the population and I believe mine. Thank you for your time with me. (PS I apologise if this comes twice i have trouble with typekey)


yoyo, look, you're just a liberal. You drank the Kool-Aid a long time ago and you have no reasoning ability.

Oh and I bet you're from Australia. If you are you should be afraid of your government. It has given you hate speech laws that prevent people from speaking truth. Yeah, we should copy you.

Go box a kangaroo.


John sweet fool, the kool aid comment is one both sides of ameican politics use agiant each other, given my background and what i'm currently doing for a living I dont think lack of reasoning ability fits. Re Australian hate speech laws (YES you win the balloon!)nup no teeth, even terrorists cant get done under the same, the most toothless tiger known to legislature, the rabid Salt Shaker christians could come out after a national disaster where 180 people died in bushfires and blame it on abortion laws and nobody threatened them with more than dsgust. Yep john the australian government is soooo scary that we are able to go from 10+ years of conservative government to a liberal government without screams of communism and tea parties in the streets. and guess what? when the conservatives win again we will all cope with it without hysteria.


Yoyo, conservative to liberal is like Bush to Clinton. BO is way way past liberal and his fascist agendas are only an intermediary to the communism he wishes for. Do you think Van Jones was a fluke? I think not, that is the NO of these folks. The things he is trying will destroy the foundations of America.

PS is you have some more room in that open mind of yours check our

I would love to hear your response to this Mr-"40% of the people still don't believe in evolution."

Sel Nguyen Duc

Philip France - "I hope that I am wrong. I hope that I am VERY wrong."

Good bet there Sherlock, you generally are!

On a side note: Are you in love with Duke?

......."I'm Proud to be an American Where at Least I Know I'm Freeeeeeeee"

Sel Nguyen Duc

"40% of the people still don't believe in evolution." - This is clearly wrong!

40% of the people still haven't evolved. You'll find them in church.


Your just another run of the mill critic who does drive by jibes with small word bytes. How about you put some of your ideas on the table and try to defend them....or are you capable?

Sel Nguyen Duc

Shaun - You kidding?...Don't be such a child.


You know, I'd almost bet your one of the same posters who regularly comes here and you registered under a different name. I'll never know but that's the way it seems.

On another note I actually enjoy when people who disagree come to this site and express their ideas. It is healthy to have your positions challenged and Ive leanred a lot while discussing online. I just don't like it when people leave comments like yours without the desire or capability to back them up with thought. Try it out sometime Sel...

Me, a child? Lol, there's definitely a part of me thats a child. Hope it stays that way.



Don't bother with him Shaun he is just a housefly. Just a harmless brainless pest, with a twofold life purpose; annoy and create maggots.

Philip France

I will take on the "evolution" argument here.

There are two aspects to Darwinian evolutionary theory.

1. Microevolution: The development and evolving of characteristics WITHIN species based on fitness cause (survival instincts). This is abundantly obvious and undeniable.
2. Macroevolution: The projection of microevolution to the point where a species morphs into an altogether new species. Within this assumption is the suggestion that all life evolves from a single, common ancestor, There is no proven evidence of this aspect of Darwinian evolutionary theory. NONE. ZILCH. NADA. ZIP. ZERO.

In fact, there is a gigantic “elephant in the room” that suggests exactly the opposite (of the macroevolution theory). I’ll get to that shortly.

I have read a great deal about the various sub-theories in support of macroevolution such as co-option, homology, Haeckel’s embryos, the Miller-Urey experiment, Piltdown man, Java man, ad infinitum. Each of these is an evolutionary dead end and the scientific community knows this.

Look at anything in nature and one can easily see that it is designed. Even a living cell is a magnificent feat of nano-technology that is irreducibly complex (meaning that all of its component parts must be simultaneously present in order for the design to function). Secular critics best argument against this is the preposterous notion that this design is an illusion. Notice that they do not dispute the design, which in and of itself implies an Intelligence that is responsible for the design. No, the critics scoff by saying, “What are you to believe, me or your own eyes?”

Biology and Science educators have been derelict in concealing from you the phenomena known as the Cambrian explosion of life and the Cretaceous flower explosion. This occurrence shows that virtually all major phyla and fauna emerged simultaneously in the fossil record. This is strong evidence in support of the Biblical account of creation. Chinese anthropologist Jy Chen, arguably the leading authority on this subject, has said the following, “In America, you can criticize your government, but not Darwin; In China, we can criticize Darwin, but not our government,”

I suggest the following materials that are brilliant insights into this controversial subject:

1. The Design of Life by William Dembski and Jonathan Wells.
2. The Devil’s Delusion by David Berlinsky (Sidebar: Contrary to the title’s suggestion, Berlinksy is a secular Jew who has “no dog in this race”. He is a brilliant scientist and philosopher and his writings are refreshingly witty.
3. DVD “Icons of Evolution” (Illustra Media) available at Amazon. Com.
4. DVD “Unlocking the Mysteries of Life” (Illustra Media) also available at

Sel Nguyen Duc

I am offended. I am not trying to create maggots. Your daddy already did that.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

February 2024

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29