Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Scudbuster

Farewell to Faith

1,161 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Golden Duck
5 hours ago, psyche101 said:

That case studies seem more than sufficient. Like with any other investigation. 

Pell is not being charged because he is hiding in the Vatican, we all know this. 

What he was accused of was KNowledge that he turned a blind eye to, and he even admitted that much.

A: "It's a sad story and it wasn't of much interest to me."
Q: "What wasn't of much interest to you, Cardinal?"
A: The suffering of course was real and I very much regret that, but I had no reason to turn my mind to the extent of the evils that Ridsdale had perpetrated."

What constitutes it is nakedness in front of monor on multiple occasions and with multiple witnesses. 

Multiple concurring witnesses make the huge difference between the allegations and your tall tales. 

Pell admitted:

"...Too many of them [complaints] certainly were dismissed and sometimes they were dismissed in absolutely scandalous circumstances."

"They were very, very, very plausible allegations made by responsible people that were not followed up sufficiently."

"At that stage, the instinct was more to protect the institution, the community of the church, from shame."

So we have motive, means, admission, witnesses and victims. And as a bonus here, the claim does not defy physics. 

Child abuse is an emotive subject, that canot be avoided when discussing the abuser.  

Did you read the fat that his first responsibility was to protect the Church? Apparently not. There is no good reason for him to avoid trials and hinde in the Vatican. The Church is simply protecting that which protected the Church. He just said he did not want to think about that which he knew, and we know that is because he was guilty of the same.

Father Peter Searson should just be thrown in a hole, and then forget where the hole is. 

Why do you suppose Pell refused free offers of transport back to Australia in First Class with his own personal Physician? SHould he not trust God to see him safely back home?

#bringpellback

1455154835440.jpg

 

I don't recall the Case Studies coming to the same conclusion you have. 

#bringbackpell was a campaign implore Pell to return to Australia in front of the Commission; not a trial?

He has been questioned by the Commission and, IIRC, the questions and answers, you quoted, were obtained over video-link? [Sorry if I've got this wrong.  I have a memory of him saying these words over video link. I'm aware I've quoted Elizabeth Loftus in the UFO Forum - I'm prepared for a beating]

Some time later VicPol were keen to get over there and question him.  I didn't hear they asked Pell to return. I imagine VicPol must have a reasonable concern to justify a junket like that.

Now if the current investigation leads to a charge, I don't the provision for a trial in absentia would be fulfilled. Whether or not charges could be laid, I'm not sure.

But what about a warrant? I'd be surprised if there wasn't a UN Convention that wasn't applicable. I'm sure there are instruments that can be used to bring pressure on the Vatican if that's what is needed.

At this stage VicPol are still quiet and giving no reason to form a judgement.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

 

Hab's Morse Code from his dead Mum. I am ready to apologise to the both of them as soon as Walkers Alien God shows up for a chat in my backyard and Hab's Mum offers me some flowers with a bit of morse code.

Any day now I suspect ........... :unsure2: 

As much as I would expect from you, little fella. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
back to earth
13 hours ago, Habitat said:

 BTE's words........."Cardinal George Pell - the Aussie one that just escaped and is hiding in the Vatican  ( the one that the term 'Pellophile' * came from )      may well have      gone from Pellophile to pedophile "

:unsure:

do you understand what the  bolded means .... O Master of the English language that claims my skills are lacking ?  

Still trying ... and   failing   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
back to earth
13 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

So you are claiming he is a liar, faker. cheat, pedophile, rapist and murderer all in one paragraph.

For those concerned with the truth this is what happens when you only cruise the scandal internet sites for what you want to hear. Using the internet I can come up with  list of allegations on any famous person. So what? To know the truth you must investigate the full story hearing all sides, would you not agree?

As for the  videos, there has never been a video showing any fraud. Of all the photos and miles of video, the best the critics can do is show the same few videos that only show the possibility of a fraud. It's all contrived to one that really cares to investigate. The only western scientist to do a thorough investigation has ruled out the possibility of explaining away the thousands of materializations is Erlender Haraldsson. Things like producing fruit out of season, producing things on demand, causing materializations at a distance can not be just explained away as sleight of hand.

 

Materialisation out of thin air   !  

- delusional ! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
3 hours ago, back to earth said:

do you understand what the  bolded means .... O Master of the English language that claims my skills are lacking ?  

Still trying ... and   failing   

Well, it would still be defamatory. You don't hear police idly saying a suspect "may be guilty", they "say" that by laying charges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
back to earth

And I then suppose you would call this defamatory too ;     'materialization out of thin air '   ..... with out  any of the usual checks that a stage magician allows ... what a load of hogwash !

 

 

But you want to believe  ..... dont you  ? :)  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
back to earth

OOOOOOHHHHHH     Holy Ash !   Out of thin air !    Thank you Baba!         :rofl:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat

I don't want to believe anything about Baba or anyone else, whether he was genuine or otherwise does not alter my mind one way or the other. Neither does anything Pell did, or failed to do, make any difference, I don't "follow" any religion or cult. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
back to earth

Back peddle now is it ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
5 minutes ago, back to earth said:

Back peddle now is it ? 

You appear to want to peddle the idea that I am an anti-sceptic, woo promoter, I suggest you should back-pedal from that ! It is not the case. I am only interested in the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 30/12/2016 at 6:33 AM, back to earth said:

..... and to offer up an excuse to counter the point you made  about the speed of thought being faster than the speed of light , which got debunked. So you had to invent  ... no,  actually , you had to borrow the idea from some old SF story .  

Nope, I dont need to believe  either of those things .    You seem to come from a background of being used to telling people what they 'need to do and believe ' . 

Nope .  More walker waffle, You tried this before and went on with pages of BS . take it to the science forum buddy !   I know you won't, you won;t go near there with your 'science ideas' as you get eaten for breakfast ... they deal with facts and real research .... remember what happened that time you made these silly 'scientific claims' and the mod moved your post to science forum ...    trashed , trounced and then you legged it . 

Nope. Totally wrong guess.  My attitude is generated  from the ridiculousness of many of your posts .  Thats why I give you   ' attitude ' .

 

      ^    More imaginative fantasy  .  ... it will be like this ... it will be like that  ....   space prison ....       etc etc   :rolleyes:

 

Image result for cavemen from space

 

Its true that i know that thought can travel faster than light because my own consciousness  has travelled to the centre of our galaxy and spent some time there within a time frame of a few hours.  It is true that i know these technologies exist because i have used them travel to many places in the galaxy and to  to attach my consciousness to that of many alien beings.  it is true that these themes are common in science fiction and i often wonder if the writers have had similar experiences to my own.

 However i travelled through  "star gates"  as far back as the nineteen fifties, long before the y appeared on television, were seriously considered by science, or even appeared much in  science fiction

You are simply wrong about the current abilities of science and technology and the projected rates of development  of these.   I admit to being an optimist who has followed the development of both science and science fiction for  over 60 years but all the points i made have appeared in documentaries or scientific journals or magazines  where the scientists involved explained current progress, future extrapolations, and their own belief about the time frames involved

 I dont know why , but you have shown yourself to be terribly pessimistic about the rate of development in human science and technology.  I am not sure you understand how it is like an expanding sphere The sphere only has to expand a little to encompass a huge increase in space but also a huge increase in surface area Science builds on current knowledge and as this increases the actual rate of progress does, as well. 

Actually i don't remember EVER having a post of mine moved. I've never written a OP /thread  involving science only talked about it within these sections of the forum. A mod would not move someone elses post just because i sidetracked it a little, so i think you are mistaken.  Question is, was it an honest mistake or a dishonest one?  If you can find such a post i will apologise .

We have argued on such issues before and once i was a bit overoptimistic about what IS happening,  but not necessarily ever wrong about what WILL happen.   What hopes do YOU hold for the future of humanity? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 30/12/2016 at 6:19 AM, back to earth said:

Tries to  counter point about  stories are stories .... with more  stories   ......... by now telling another story     :)   

Got a story to counter this with ?   :D   

It is hard to counter ignorance, particularly quite wilful ignorance. I am sure you do actually get the point. i doubt anyone could be so dumb as to not

So what game are you playing now?

 Testicular squash? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat

Must be good stories, BTE keeps coming back for more,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 30/12/2016 at 0:28 PM, psyche101 said:

 

#bringpellback

1455154835440.jpg

 

Quote

 

Quote

That case studies seem more than sufficient. Like with any other investigation. 

Pell is not being charged because he is hiding in the Vatican, we all know this. 

No we do not that is a (rather biased) supposition . He isnt hiding. He hasnt refused to return and his being in the vatican would not prevent charges being laid. iI charges arent laid it is because the police prosecutors do not believ they have sufficwint evidences to charge him

Quote

What he was accused of was KNowledge that he turned a blind eye to, and he even admitted that much.

A: "It's a sad story and it wasn't of much interest to me."
Q: "What wasn't of much interest to you, Cardinal?"
A: The suffering of course was real and I very much regret that, but I had no reason to turn my mind to the extent of the evils that Ridsdale had perpetrated."

What constitutes it is nakedness in front of monor on multiple occasions and with multiple witnesses. 

Multiple concurring witnesses make the huge difference between the allegations and your tall tales. 

So pell was honest and you don't like the conclusions you  draw  from that honesty.  pell is saying that at the time he was not compelled or motivated to   investigate allegations.

I would have to check the context but i know form other testimonies tha t a lot of it was simple disbelief tha t  a fellow churchman would even think of abusing a child 

I am not sure that this is a charge which even exists let alone could be proven or demonstrated in a court of law  How do you prove he SHOULD have known, or should have believed the accusations, given the context of that time (not the present where we a reall wiser and less naive)  Was failure to believe and act a criminal offence a t his time>  it pre exists any mandatory notification legislation, for example. 

I thought we already agreed that  nakedness in front of a minor in itself  was not only not criminal but actually quite common in that era (all boys involved in sports would have found themselves naked in the pesence of other males of varied ages) it qwould require some greater extent of  inappropriate  behaviour for this to have been criminal or even anti social behaviour at that time Would you charge all men of tha t era who showered with non adult males or is it the fact pell is a churchman ad not a football player which upsets you? 

yes i am being deliberately difficult here because i want to point out that when you take away your prejudices this is NOT a simple matter. 

Quote

Pell admitted:

"...Too many of them [complaints] certainly were dismissed and sometimes they were dismissed in absolutely scandalous circumstances."

"They were very, very, very plausible allegations made by responsible people that were not followed up sufficiently."

"At that stage, the instinct was more to protect the institution, the community of the church, from shame."

So we have motive, means, admission, witnesses and victims. And as a bonus here, the claim does not defy physics 

And so because pell admits to being a person of his time, he is guilty of what ?

He is speaking here with the benefit of hindsight which we ALL have now  it doesn't mean that at the time, or in the context, he found the claims believable or plausible or that the culture of the time made it possible to believe that  priests would behave in such ways.   You are judging him by the standards of today and with hard won knowledge we possess which he did not then. Pell goes a little further and admits that the church covered up some allegations  Does he admit to doing this himself? 

One cannot charge the church.  In many countries it is not legally recognised a s a "person" or legal equivalent, meaning it cannot be charged Should we then make scapegoats of the most public figures, or only prosecute those who actually committed crimes. 

 

Quote

Child abuse is an emotive subject, that canot be avoided when discussing the abuser.  

Did you read the fat that his first responsibility was to protect the Church? Apparently not. There is no good reason for him to avoid trials and hinde in the Vatican. The Church is simply protecting that which protected the Church. He just said he did not want to think about that which he knew, and we know that is because he was guilty of the same.

Father Peter Searson should just be thrown in a hole, and then forget where the hole is. 

Why do you suppose Pell refused free offers of transport back to Australia in First Class with his own personal Physician? SHould he not trust God to see him safely back home?

#bringpellback

Emotion has no place in the legal system, and is dangerous and prejudicial if allowed a place. 

I agree that i think pell failed his moral duties. I doubt he failed any legal ones at the time, but time will tell.

Why should pell return to Australia anymore than any other employee doing a job UNTIL he is required by law to do so? Given modern communications there was no need for him to return to Australia to give evidence to the royal commission it seemed more a chance for people to confront him personally   I don't think i would come home just because sections of the public or media hounded me to do so

  His health complicates matters. If charged he should be forcibly brought back, if this can be done safely. However i don't think he should be compelled to return or to endanger his health unless, or until, he is charged.

I think you credit the Vatican with too much power and influence over the australian legal system . 

 

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 30/12/2016 at 0:40 PM, psyche101 said:

Observations form the largest communities on earth regarding space and space travel, the world of communications experts scanning the skies for such anomalies, and then of course physics. 

Validity is entirely out of my hands. I do not get a say in what is valid, things prove themselves and I observe validity. So, no, that makes no sense at all. If you could prove your imaginary alien god freind to be real, I would have to accept solid evidence regardless of my current understandings. What I know would have to be re-written, giving me a whole new aspect to investigate. As it stands, current understandings refute your extraordinary claims and as such, your claims are the ones in doubt here. If you had transferable proofs, we simply would not be having this discussion. You would be validated. But that is not the case there is it? 

How do any of these, provide evidences that my particular friend is imaginary. ? As far as i know no ones been scanning me or even recording my day to day life. 

Your current understandings refute my ordinary claims in your own mind . My own validate them inmine That is just the way it is  I am validated in my knowledge because of the proofs and evidences I have .

  You do not have them

That is true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 30/12/2016 at 0:52 PM, psyche101 said:

LOL, have you not picked up that the plural of "Anecdote" is NOT data? 

Nope, who has historically had backyard chats with an alien God? I see religious people in here indicating your story means you have a screw loose, that is not identifying with your claim whatsoever. In fact, I have little doubt that several would take offence at your words in their mouths. 

Woo is not research just like Science Fiction is not Science.

Huge hurdle for you to overcome there it seems. 

Not sure what you are referring to exactly, you change aspects of your tall tales on the fly all the time, as such, my money is on BTE there. He has proven himself to be knowledgeable, well grounded, intelligent and has a great sense of humour. I have seen your claims fall victim to physics and I have seen you misinterpret studies to support your personal ideals. I do not find you to be a reliable source of information at all. Very much the opposite. 

Actually the plural of anecdote IS data, in at least one sense  it is how scientists proceed. As individuals  the y experiment, observe, compare etc.

They record this observation and results as data. This data becomes anecdotal as soon as it is passed onto anyone who was not present .   When two anecdotal experiences coincide you are on your way yo a scientific discovery  It is the repeatable nature of anaecdotal observations under laboratory conditions which forms the basis of scientific knowledge and understandings but if one scientist  doesn't tell his experiences or his results to another, as an anecdote, no comparisons or evaluations can be made.

Even test results pased onto another become anecdotal evidence until confirmed . 

Historically many many peole including right up until today have had chats with gods or visitations form different entities. .  These can be read, compared, analysed contrasted just like data passed on anecdotally by a scientist. and much can be lkearned form doing so.

 I dont change anything  in any narrative of mine, although i will add details i have left out   where people want them or fail to have something clear. But it is true that many posters don't remember or tend to conflate difernt accounts and get confused  I lived through them and simply retell them so i remember them well.    i suspect some posters deliberately conflate or alter my narratives in order to make them see even more impossible.  May certainly completely misunderstand a lot of what I am explaining because they  just cannot get it into their heads that it is real. 

Everything remains on the record here (as far as i know) so anyone who is really interested could go back and verify this.

Many things in my life demonstrate that our current knowldge and understanding of physics is wrong or limited  But this is not surprising. As an historian I know our knowledge and understanding is constantly evolving   I dont get surprised or fussed anymore a t the materialisation and dematerialisation of energy and matter or the instantaneous transmission of thoughts and matter.  if present physics says this is impossible then present physics is wrong and i suspect will be shown to be wrong in the near future as our own knowldge evolves. 

Explian how the following ONE true example is possible if physics is fully known today.

 One student during my yard duty  tells me her mobile phone is missing. (lots of kids and teachers asked me to locate lost and stolen things) 

i get a mental message and tell her its in the green bag on top of the lockers in that room there (pointing) I have no knowledge of the situation the room etc  outside of this conversation  

The girl turns to her friend and says, "You b****, you DID take it "

Turns out SHE  new what I was talking about  even though i had no idea outside of that mental communication.  The green bag was her friend's. the class room was their own and her friend had taken the phone and put it in her own (green) bag   Now, how did  i know where the bag was, with total certainty? I knew it as clearly as i knew where my own bag was placed. 

It doesn't matter if you believe a word of this. It and many similar things happened to me.  I know them to be true, and have to think through possible logical answers.  What is a rational logical answer for such detailed knowledge of a classroom i had not been in and the location of a phone in a bag on top of lockers . Only a couple of logical answers present themselves

Then repeat this time and time again. How can i know such things, using physics to provide an answer? 

Some how i knew with total certainty where the phone was, and its surrounding location.  I've done the same for keys wallets purses  work related usbs  and other posseions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
back to earth
3 hours ago, Habitat said:

You appear to want to peddle the idea that I am an anti-sceptic, woo promoter, I suggest you should back-pedal from that ! It is not the case. I am only interested in the truth.

The why where you so impressed with Papageorge when he  started to try and peddle 'spiritual science '   

..... which was clearly woo from the beginning ,   ended up being woo   and remains woo   ?

Edited by back to earth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
back to earth
2 hours ago, Habitat said:

Must be good stories, BTE keeps coming back for more,

Its good fishin here   :)   

 

Related image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
12 minutes ago, back to earth said:

The why where you so impressed with Papageorge when he  started to try and peddle 'spiritual science '   

..... which was clearly woo from the beginning ,   ended up being woo   and remains woo   ?

No, I don't think he is promoting any woo, he just allows, and may have good personal reasons for it, that there are things that clearly do not comply with rationalist dogma.

Edited by Habitat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
back to earth
2 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

It is hard to counter ignorance, particularly quite wilful ignorance. I am sure you do actually get the point. i doubt anyone could be so dumb as to not

So what game are you playing now?

 Testicular squash? 

Its your game,  with the constant story telling, and when you tell a story to  explain the 'validity' of stories , as 4 posters now have pointed out to you , its silly , senseless and indicates some type of syndrome  ( which wont show up in  your  ' I am not crazy  or have epilepsy  tests .' )

But the, on top of that , when you tell yt another  story to explain all that that one wonders what is wrong with you ?  

BUT THEN   when you get your petticoats in a huff because I pointed that out and in response  you just do it all again , multiple stories and ' counter '  what I said  by merely affirming  'it is true I do  this .... '  ' it is true I do  that '  over and over agian , like some new age affirmation , that you are desperately trying to convince yourself about . . . . .

 

... well , time  to take a powder . . . .  and have a nice lie down .... and get Mrs walker to bring you a nice cup of tea. 

A new year starts tomorrow ..... maybe you could turn over a new leaf ?  

 

Edited by back to earth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
back to earth
9 minutes ago, Habitat said:

No, I don't think he is promoting any woo, he just allows, and may have good personal reasons for it, that there are things that clearly do not comply with rationalist dogma.

Okay , he 'allows' woo .......  and you were so glad he turned up to do that   :)   .      

Doesnt matter - it was all exposed and a silly embarrassing and obvious failure to those that observed it unfold  .... except you and Walker  of course :) .       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
1 minute ago, back to earth said:

Okay , he 'allows' woo .......  and you were so glad he turned up to do that   :)   .      

Doesnt matter - it was all exposed and a silly embarrassing and obvious failure to those that observed it unfold  .... except you and Walker  of course :) .       

Nothing much happened that I could see, I still think he is worth reading, but of course, I still read you, and you are one of those people who believes in The Magic Formula of Existence, which basically out-woos any woo I can think up. And did you see what "lurch" had to say about Crowley ? I thought he was a prospective proxy, too, but he's blotted his copybook there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
3 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Actually the plural of anecdote IS data, in at least one sense  it is how scientists proceed. As individuals  the y experiment, observe, compare etc.

They record this observation and results as data. This data becomes anecdotal as soon as it is passed onto anyone who was not present .   When two anecdotal experiences coincide you are on your way yo a scientific discovery  It is the repeatable nature of anaecdotal observations under laboratory conditions which forms the basis of scientific knowledge and understandings but if one scientist  doesn't tell his experiences or his results to another, as an anecdote, no comparisons or evaluations can be made.

Even test results pased onto another become anecdotal evidence until confirmed . 

Historically many many peole including right up until today have had chats with gods or visitations form different entities. .  These can be read, compared, analysed contrasted just like data passed on anecdotally by a scientist. and much can be lkearned form doing so.

 I dont change anything  in any narrative of mine, although i will add details i have left out   where people want them or fail to have something clear. But it is true that many posters don't remember or tend to conflate difernt accounts and get confused  I lived through them and simply retell them so i remember them well.    i suspect some posters deliberately conflate or alter my narratives in order to make them see even more impossible.  May certainly completely misunderstand a lot of what I am explaining because they  just cannot get it into their heads that it is real. 

Everything remains on the record here (as far as i know) so anyone who is really interested could go back and verify this.

Many things in my life demonstrate that our current knowldge and understanding of physics is wrong or limited  But this is not surprising. As an historian I know our knowledge and understanding is constantly evolving   I dont get surprised or fussed anymore a t the materialisation and dematerialisation of energy and matter or the instantaneous transmission of thoughts and matter.  if present physics says this is impossible then present physics is wrong and i suspect will be shown to be wrong in the near future as our own knowldge evolves. 

Explian how the following ONE true example is possible if physics is fully known today.

 One student during my yard duty  tells me her mobile phone is missing. (lots of kids and teachers asked me to locate lost and stolen things) 

i get a mental message and tell her its in the green bag on top of the lockers in that room there (pointing) I have no knowledge of the situation the room etc  outside of this conversation  

The girl turns to her friend and says, "You b****, you DID take it "

Turns out SHE  new what I was talking about  even though i had no idea outside of that mental communication.  The green bag was her friend's. the class room was their own and her friend had taken the phone and put it in her own (green) bag   Now, how did  i know where the bag was, with total certainty? I knew it as clearly as i knew where my own bag was placed. 

It doesn't matter if you believe a word of this. It and many similar things happened to me.  I know them to be true, and have to think through possible logical answers.  What is a rational logical answer for such detailed knowledge of a classroom i had not been in and the location of a phone in a bag on top of lockers . Only a couple of logical answers present themselves

Then repeat this time and time again. How can i know such things, using physics to provide an answer? 

Some how i knew with total certainty where the phone was, and its surrounding location.  I've done the same for keys wallets purses  work related usbs  and other posseions

I would think that you could publish a book about your unprovable facts, you have documented quite a few here. And by the way, do you type too fast to spell properly, I myself don't type that well but do try. :lol:

jmccr8

Edited by jmccr8
spelling
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
5 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

I would think that you could publish a book about your unprovable facts, you have documented quite a few here. And by the way, do you type to fast to spell properly, I myself don't type that well but do try. :lol:

jmccr8

You get the job as editor. :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
Just now, Habitat said:

You get the job as editor. :)

I don't know, I make a pretty good living reading a tape measure and signing cheques at jobs end.:D

jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.