Breaking News: Federal judge blocks controversial sections of Arizona immigration law - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

Sly · 07-28-2010, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikki_Licks

And what do you know about American rights? Please enlighten us all!

Remember this is not Canada

Does that mean Canadians have more rights than Americans?

Maybe I should migrate to Canada.

Caligari · 07-28-2010, 12:35 PM

Fiddy illegals (had to do it)

_Richard_ · 07-28-2010, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikki_Licks

And what do you know about American rights? Please enlighten us all!

Remember this is not Canada

that's a good point, what do i know about american rights

i guess i could quote your founding fathers, but why laugh

i guess i could quote the WW2 propaganda, but why cry

so no, you're right, i have no idea what rights you guys do or don't have

i'll just say i am pointing out the blatant racism that is going on

GrouchyAdmin · 07-28-2010, 12:39 PM

The biggest issue I have with amnesty is giving a privilege to someone whose first order was to break a law of my country. You do that anywhere else, you get in trouble for it.

So someone pesters you cuz you have a different skin color? Welcome to the fucking world. Deal with it, it's what we've got to live with these days. I dealt with it all of the time with the harassment in Latin America and elsewhere - and ya know what? I didn't fucking bitch and whine that they were infringing on my rights - because in their country, I had none.

Grapesoda · 07-28-2010, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Just shows you we have lost our right to vote

looks that way.... been that way in LA county for years

Grapesoda · 07-28-2010, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

i'll just say i am pointing out the blatant racism that is going on

racism as in anything whites disagree with is racism or racism as in anything non whites want to do and are called on, is racism?

Nikki_Licks · 07-28-2010, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

To the best of my knowledge he does not have the legal power to deport anyone...only the Federal Government has that power.

He does it all the time, and I would assume he is doing it right. Joe always covers his bases and I don't know the full process he goes through, all I know is he sends them home, via plane or bus.

2012 · 07-28-2010, 12:45 PM

The Demon · 07-28-2010, 12:45 PM

This isn't a problem. They needed to make the feds look good. It'll be overturned on appeals. The rest of the law goes into effect just fine, so it's still a victory.

Nikki_Licks · 07-28-2010, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

that's a good point, what do i know about american rights

i guess i could quote your founding fathers, but why laugh

i guess i could quote the WW2 propaganda, but why cry

so no, you're right, i have no idea what rights you guys do or don't have

i'll just say i am pointing out the blatant racism that is going on

Just what I thought....................................

_Richard_ · 07-28-2010, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bm bradley

racism as in anything whites disagree with is racism or racism as in anything non whites want to do and are called on, is racism?

racism as in, second class citizens.

have you ever experienced racism? been told you can't marry cause the colour of your skin? fought your way out at the knees cause that was the only way you were going to survive?

you experienced racism?

_Richard_ · 07-28-2010, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikki_Licks

Just what I thought....................................

i was being facetious...............................

The Demon · 07-28-2010, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

racism as in, second class citizens.

have you ever experienced racism? been told you can't marry cause the colour of your skin? fought your way out at the knees cause that was the only way you were going to survive?

you experienced racism?

The problem is, morons and liberals abuse the term "racism" to the point where it becomes a meaningless justification.

Caligari · 07-28-2010, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2012

so sad, but he still has those scam-tastic Gold Freedom Roosters to sell!

theking · 07-28-2010, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikki_Licks

He does it all the time, and I would assume he is doing it right. Joe always covers his bases and I don't know the full process he goes through, all I know is he sends them home, via plane or bus.

It is my understanding that he...just as any...law enforcement agency can...works through a 287(g) program which is a federal program that allows law enforcement to turn over illegal immigrants who have been arrested/convicted of a crime (other than simply being an illegal immigrant) to the feds for deportation.

Complaints about Arpaio's immigration enforcement tactics led the federal government last October to yank his authority to enforce immigration laws during patrols...and he is currently under federal investigation.

HighEnergy · 07-28-2010, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReGGs

Gee I wonder why Jan Brewer would want this law? I bet it has nothing to do with the fact that the people who run her campaign lobby for private prisons that stand to fill up once this law goes through. But nahhh she was doing it because she is patriotic. Not because she knows that she can race bait a bunch of xenophobes into legalizing ethnic profiling ....

SB1070 violations are/were all misdemeanors, not prison offenses by any means. I'm guessing Shurf Joe will pick up the pace now.

baddog · 07-28-2010, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

i'll just say i am pointing out the blatant racism that is going on

And you wonder why people suggest you are an idiot.

Nikki_Licks · 07-28-2010, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

It is my understanding that he...just as any...law enforcement agency can...works through a 287(g) program which is a federal program that allows law enforcement to turn over illegal immigrants who have been arrested/convicted of a crime (other than simply being an illegal immigrant) to the feds for deportation.

Complaints about Arpaio's immigration enforcement tactics led the federal government last October to yank his authority to enforce immigration laws during patrols...and he is currently under federal investigation.

I don't know the fine lines of his operation. As I recall he always turned them over to the border patrol at the border and they send them home. If anything, it gets the job done.
I heard on the news he is under investigation, but this won't be the first time, nor the last and he always seems to win in the end, so I will place my faith in him instead of the corrupt federal government to get the job done ;)

Nikki_Licks · 07-28-2010, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HighEnergy

SB1070 violations are/were all misdemeanors, not prison offenses by any means. I'm guessing Shurf Joe will pick up the pace now.

He has plenty of raids scheduled for tomorrow and I am sure he will be successful in rounding up more to send home.

_Richard_ · 07-28-2010, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

And you wonder why people suggest you are an idiot.

a law that only targets a segment of the population that pays taxes isn't racist?

HighEnergy · 07-28-2010, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Demon

This isn't a problem. They needed to make the feds look good. It'll be overturned on appeals. The rest of the law goes into effect just fine, so it's still a victory.

Not what we wanted but certainly not a loss either. It sounded like the wording and phrases of the stricken parts had an impact on the decision.

This is gonna be a long haul, there is an upside though. As long as it's being debated, discussed, appealed, etc the illegals will be running scared. That's a plus for Arizona, not so much for the States they're fleeing to.

brassmonkey · 07-28-2010, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

a law that only targets a segment of the population that pays taxes isn't racist?

what is your plan

it targets south americans in Az because they are in violation id say 99.9% of illegals are south american in Az. im not going throught this explanation again

theking · 07-28-2010, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikki_Licks

He has plenty of raids scheduled for tomorrow and I am sure he will be successful in rounding up more to send home.

I repeat...he cannot deport anyone. He can (or could...before the feds suspended his authority to do so...so I don't know if he still can) through the 287(g) program turn over to the feds those illegal immigrants that have been arrested/convicted of a crime (other than simply being an illegal immigrant) to the feds for deportation.

The new Arizona law would not have allowed Arizona to deport anyone for simply being an illegal immigrant...the law simply made it a state law...vs a federal law...to be an illegal immigrant and would have given the state the power to arrest/convict and hold the illegal in jail...but not to deport...as only the feds have the power to deport.

The Demon · 07-28-2010, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

a law that only targets a segment of the population that pays taxes isn't racist?

Weird, considering the majority of that "population" DOESNT pay taxes..

baddog · 07-28-2010, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

a law that only targets a segment of the population that pays taxes isn't racist?

Where do you come up with this crap?

Vendzilla · 07-28-2010, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSenator

Susan Bolton was appointed by Clinton....I bet she is a super duper liberal

So you're saying Liberals are against the power of the Vote?

brassmonkey · 07-28-2010, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

I repeat...he cannot deport anyone. He can (or could...before the feds suspended his authority to do so...so I don't know if he still can) through the 287(g) program turn over to the feds those illegal immigrants that have been arrested/convicted of a crime (other than simply being an illegal immigrant) to the feds for deportation.

The new Arizona law would not have allowed Arizona to deport anyone for simply being an illegal immigrant...the law simply made it a state law...vs a federal law...to be an illegal immigrant and would have given the state the power to arrest/convict and hold the illegal in jail...but not to deport...as only the feds have the power to deport.

sheriff is clever!

"The first thing you need to address if you?re an immigrant with a criminal record is whether or not you?re an illegal or legal immigrant. Generally, if a person has come into the US illegally, they are typically prohibited from applying for US citizenship on this ground alone and may also be subject to deportation. The reason is because illegal immigrants have not only violated US law by coming into the country without authorization, but they?ve also cut in line in front of all those immigrants who have applied for residency through the normal legal immigration process. This process is important to the US because it gives the government a chance to vet all potential immigrants prior to being allowed entry. Though its possible for ICE to choose not to deport an illegal immigrant, such decisions happen very rarely and usually only in extraordinary cases."
read here their just hurting themselves.

theking · 07-28-2010, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brassmonkey

sheriff is clever!

"The first thing you need to address if you’re an immigrant with a criminal record is whether or not you’re an illegal or legal immigrant. Generally, if a person has come into the US illegally, they are typically prohibited from applying for US citizenship on this ground alone and may also be subject to deportation. The reason is because illegal immigrants have not only violated US law by coming into the country without authorization, but they’ve also cut in line in front of all those immigrants who have applied for residency through the normal legal immigration process. This process is important to the US because it gives the government a chance to vet all potential immigrants prior to being allowed entry. Though its possible for ICE to choose not to deport an illegal immigrant, such decisions happen very rarely and usually only in extraordinary cases."
read here their just hurting themselves.

I fail to see how what you posted makes the Sheriff clever...or what it has to do with my post. Care to educate me on both points?

The Demon · 07-28-2010, 02:20 PM

Ah liberals. The cornerstone of stupidity in this country.

brassmonkey · 07-28-2010, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

I fail to see how what you posted makes the Sheriff clever...or what it has to do with my post. Care to educate me on both points?

when they are captured they are marked. they will never become citizens. sweeping them up puts them in the system so if they try to apply after being deported they can not become a citizen. the ones convicted of felony identity theft are for sure not getting citizenship.

HighEnergy · 07-28-2010, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

I repeat...he cannot deport anyone....

He can check the status (via ICE) of anyone booked. He can't arrest an illegal for being an illegal, but if they have been booked for some other reason he can check their status. Then once they do their time, pay their fine, they belong to ICE.

Vendzilla · 07-28-2010, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bm bradley

looks that way.... been that way in LA county for years

I remember prop 187

LA is a sactuary city, I grew up there. I'm moving back soon, get some real mexican food, not the taco bell wanna be shit

theking · 07-28-2010, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HighEnergy

He can check the status (via ICE) of anyone booked. He can't arrest an illegal for being an illegal, but if they have been booked for some other reason he can check their status. Then once they do their time, pay their fine, they belong to ICE.

That is my understanding...under the 287(g) program...which apparently any law enforcement agency...can work through...but in his case his agency was suspended from the 287(g) program...and he is under investigation...so I am not certain what he can or cannot do now.

Nikki_Licks · 07-28-2010, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

I repeat...he cannot deport anyone. He can (or could...before the feds suspended his authority to do so...so I don't know if he still can) through the 287(g) program turn over to the feds those illegal immigrants that have been arrested/convicted of a crime (other than simply being an illegal immigrant) to the feds for deportation.

The new Arizona law would not have allowed Arizona to deport anyone for simply being an illegal immigrant...the law simply made it a state law...vs a federal law...to be an illegal immigrant and would have given the state the power to arrest/convict and hold the illegal in jail...but not to deport...as only the feds have the power to deport.

Ok, I get what you are saying, but as of yet, I do not know the fine line he has to work within and as I mentioned in my other post, he turns them over to the border patrol as he has in the past and they deal with sending them home. I will see what I can find out about this.
What ever Joe is doing today is working because the feds have not jumped in to stop any of his usual raids. Sending them to tent city or the SB1070 section that was just set up may be the new plan to get around the feds...putting them in jail.

On another note, the AZ law mirrors California and Federal law which the feds have refused to enforce, but I have a feeling when other states jump on board a file suits against the federal government, things will change.

Quentin · 07-28-2010, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

So you're saying Liberals are against the power of the Vote?

You certainly don't have to be a liberal to believe that it is a good thing that we have in this country a process for subjecting statutes to judicial scrutiny. (And if you work in the porn industry, you sure as shit depend on that process for your continued professional survival.)

Let's suppose that someday in the not too distant future, an anti-gun political action group in some state/municipality or another manages to muster enough signatures to get a measure on the ballot to simply outlaw guns in that state/municipality, and let's say that measure then passes by a popular vote.

Let's further suppose that a federal court then rules that state/municipality's new gun law unconstitutional (which it would be, IMO).

Would you complain that the court in the above hypothetical had violated the will of the people, or would you applaud the court for upholding the Constitution? I suspect you would be glad the court had the authority to review the law, and glad that it overturned it, as I would be.

Judicial review of legislative and/or voter action is a good thing, whether or not you or I like any given decision the courts make.

Do judges sometimes (or even often) rule in ways that are contrary to the intent of the Constitution and/or case law/precedent? Of course! Judges are human, and as such they are subject to biases that can cloud their judgment. This is a big part of the reason why our system has multiple checks and multiple layers of overriding authority built in.

At the end of the day, all we can do is set the system up to strongly discourage judicial bias, and have review of lower courts by higher courts in order to increase the likelihood that we catch and correct instances in which political subjectivity has tainted a given court's/judge's decision.

It ain't perfect.... but if you stack our court system up against that of other countries, I think you'll agree our system comes out of that comparison looking relatively good, really.

TheDoc · 07-28-2010, 02:38 PM

It will get going either way... even if they have to clean up a few parts, it will get through.

For the few nut wingers that think left/democrats/liberals, etc don't also support this law, your brain is in backwards again.

The Demon · 07-28-2010, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedoc

it will get going either way... Even if they have to clean up a few parts, it will get through.

For the few nut wingers that think left/democrats/liberals, etc don't also support this law, your brain is in backwards again.

irony...

theking · 07-28-2010, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quentin

You certainly don't have to be a liberal to believe that it is a good thing that we have in this country a process for subjecting statutes to judicial scrutiny. (And if you work in the porn industry, you sure as shit depend on that process for your continued professional survival.)

Let's suppose that someday in the not too distant future, an anti-gun political action group in some state/municipality or another manages to muster enough signatures to get a measure on the ballot to simply outlaw guns in that state/municipality, and let's say that measure then passes by a popular vote.

Let's further suppose that a federal court then rules that state/municipality's new gun law unconstitutional (which it would be, IMO).

Would you complain that the court in the above hypothetical had violated the will of the people, or would you applaud the court for upholding the Constitution? I suspect you would be glad the court had the authority to review the law, and glad that it overturned it, as I would be.

Judicial review of legislative and/or voter action is a good thing, whether or not you or I like any given decision the courts make.

Do judges sometimes (or even often) rule in ways that are contrary to the intent of the Constitution and/or case law/precedent? Of course! Judges are human, and as such they are subject to biases that can cloud their judgment. This is a big part of the reason why our system has multiple checks and multiple layers of overriding authority built in.

At the end of the day, all we can do is set the system up to strongly discourage judicial bias, and have review of lower courts by higher courts in order to increase the likelihood that we catch and correct instances in which political subjectivity has tainted a given court's/judge's decision.

It ain't perfect.... but if you stack our court system up against that of other countries, I think you'll agree our system comes out of that comparison looking relatively good, really.

Excellent analogy and excellent critique oi our system.

TheDoc · 07-28-2010, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Demon

irony...

You nut wringers still haven't figured out what reality is.

The Demon · 07-28-2010, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quentin

You certainly don't have to be a liberal to believe that it is a good thing that we have in this country a process for subjecting statutes to judicial scrutiny. (And if you work in the porn industry, you sure as shit depend on that process for your continued professional survival.)

Let's suppose that someday in the not too distant future, an anti-gun political action group in some state/municipality or another manages to muster enough signatures to get a measure on the ballot to simply outlaw guns in that state/municipality, and let's say that measure then passes by a popular vote.

Let's further suppose that a federal court then rules that state/municipality's new gun law unconstitutional (which it would be, IMO).

Would you complain that the court in the above hypothetical had violated the will of the people, or would you applaud the court for upholding the Constitution? I suspect you would be glad the court had the authority to review the law, and glad that it overturned it, as I would be.

Judicial review of legislative and/or voter action is a good thing, whether or not you or I like any given decision the courts make.

Do judges sometimes (or even often) rule in ways that are contrary to the intent of the Constitution and/or case law/precedent? Of course! Judges are human, and as such they are subject to biases that can cloud their judgment. This is a big part of the reason why our system has multiple checks and multiple layers of overriding authority built in.

At the end of the day, all we can do is set the system up to strongly discourage judicial bias, and have review of lower courts by higher courts in order to increase the likelihood that we catch and correct instances in which political subjectivity has tainted a given court's/judge's decision.

It ain't perfect.... but if you stack our court system up against that of other countries, I think you'll agree our system comes out of that comparison looking relatively good, really.

Damn good read sir. One of the most articulate posts I've ever read here.

The Demon · 07-28-2010, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedoc

you nut wringers still haven't figured out what reality is.

Quote:

irony

Quote:

ah liberals. The cornerstone of stupidity in this country.

_Richard_ · 07-28-2010, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Where do you come up with this crap?

the idea that i like to be treated the way i treat other people.

you wouldn't have a problem having to prove your citizenship after being pulled over for 'reckless driving'? Ignore the fact that you would never have this problem for a second, and try to think about the ride home in the cop cruiser to prove you are an American.

Driver license is probably fake anyway, dirty biker

_Richard_ · 07-28-2010, 02:52 PM

i say dirty in a very proverbial sense
i found you clean and well kept

Brujah · 07-28-2010, 02:53 PM

I'm glad to see the bigots and racists are put in their place.

_Richard_ · 07-28-2010, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Demon

Weird, considering the majority of that "population" DOESNT pay taxes..

Businesses

1.6 million
The number of Hispanic-owned businesses in 2002.

* Nearly 43% of Hispanic-owned firms operated in construction; administrative and support, and waste management and remediation services; and other services, such as personal services, and repair and maintenance. Retail and wholesale trade accounted for nearly 36% of Hispanic-owned business revenue.
*
Counties with the highest number of Hispanic-owned firms were Los Angeles County (188,422); Miami-Dade County (163,187); and Harris County, Texas (61,934).

Triple
The rate of growth of Hispanic-owned businesses between 1997 and 2002 (31%) compared with the national average (10%) for all businesses.

$222 billion
Revenue generated by Hispanic-owned businesses in 2002, up 19% from 1997.

44.6%
. . of all Hispanic-owned firms were owned by Mexicans, Mexican-Americans and Chicanos.

29,168
Number of Hispanic-owned firms with receipts of $1 million or more.

TheDoc · 07-28-2010, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Demon

Dang, you do can do quotes and smilies.... you're such a good boy!

I would really love more of your brilliant incite, please share away.

2012 · 07-28-2010, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brujah

I'm glad to see the bigots and racists are put in their place.

Coup · 07-28-2010, 03:04 PM

Cry proto-rascists, cry. Let the tears stream down your faces.

to justice.

brassmonkey · 07-28-2010, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brujah

I'm glad to see the bigots and racists are put in their place.

yeah stopping the continued abuse of the system is racist.

Nikki_Licks · 07-28-2010, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

Businesses

1.6 million
The number of Hispanic-owned businesses in 2002.

* Nearly 43% of Hispanic-owned firms operated in construction; administrative and support, and waste management and remediation services; and other services, such as personal services, and repair and maintenance. Retail and wholesale trade accounted for nearly 36% of Hispanic-owned business revenue.
*
Counties with the highest number of Hispanic-owned firms were Los Angeles County (188,422); Miami-Dade County (163,187); and Harris County, Texas (61,934).

Triple
The rate of growth of Hispanic-owned businesses between 1997 and 2002 (31%) compared with the national average (10%) for all businesses.

$222 billion
Revenue generated by Hispanic-owned businesses in 2002, up 19% from 1997.

44.6%
. . of all Hispanic-owned firms were owned by Mexicans, Mexican-Americans and Chicanos.

29,168
Number of Hispanic-owned firms with receipts of $1 million or more.

I am sure what you have posted here are stats from "LEGAL" Mexican American?s or Chicanos who own businesses that pay taxes and not "ILLEGAL" Mexican's/Chicanos who mooch and drain the system in each and every state they squat in, along with not paying taxes.

I believe he is referring to ILLEGAL'S that do not pay into the system.

07-28-2010, 12:35 PM	#52
Caligari Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: At The Mountains Of Madness Posts: 5,414	Fiddy illegals (had to do it) __________________ ATTN Webmasters Cruel Bucks - LIVE Gonzo Does Not Pay ------------------------------------------------ Animal Rescue Click Here to Feed An Animal for Free

07-28-2010, 12:39 PM	#54
GrouchyAdmin Now choke yourself! Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 12,085	The biggest issue I have with amnesty is giving a privilege to someone whose first order was to break a law of my country. You do that anywhere else, you get in trouble for it. So someone pesters you cuz you have a different skin color? Welcome to the fucking world. Deal with it, it's what we've got to live with these days. I dealt with it all of the time with the harassment in Latin America and elsewhere - and ya know what? I didn't fucking bitch and whine that they were infringing on my rights - because in their country, I had none. __________________ AIM: GrouchyGfy

07-28-2010, 12:45 PM	#59
The Demon Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 7,336	This isn't a problem. They needed to make the feds look good. It'll be overturned on appeals. The rest of the law goes into effect just fine, so it's still a victory. __________________ Greed is Good

07-28-2010, 02:20 PM	#79
The Demon Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 7,336	Ah liberals. The cornerstone of stupidity in this country. __________________ Greed is Good

07-28-2010, 02:38 PM	#86
TheDoc Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Currently Incognito Posts: 13,827	It will get going either way... even if they have to clean up a few parts, it will get through. For the few nut wingers that think left/democrats/liberals, etc don't also support this law, your brain is in backwards again. __________________ ~TheDoc - ICQ7765825 It's all disambiguation

07-28-2010, 12:45 PM	#58
2012 So Fucking What Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 17,189

07-28-2010, 02:52 PM	#93
_Richard_ Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Vancouver Posts: 30,985	i say dirty in a very proverbial sense i found you clean and well kept

07-28-2010, 02:53 PM	#94
Brujah Beer Money Baron Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: brujah / gmail Posts: 22,157	I'm glad to see the bigots and racists are put in their place. __________________ Free Premium Domain Lists and Tools at Clickmojo.com For Sale: Obscenity.com

07-28-2010, 03:04 PM	#98
Coup 🚨 PBBC International 🚨 Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: /👁\ Posts: 9,931	Cry proto-rascists, cry. Let the tears stream down your faces. to justice.