Monsanto? - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-25-2015, 11:41 PM   #46
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2 View Post
What's your angle with this question?

If we're going to criticize economists for being, dear god, *American*, might we also want to investigate this particular source of information?
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2015, 11:52 PM   #47
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 17,415
Local Time: 04:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wideawake2015 View Post
Hi everyone,

Much of the following is in direct reply to DaveC, but I am also replying to other comments in the context of this reply where relevant.

(1) DaveC asked, “Care to elaborate on why Bank of America is literally evil?”
I used to live in America and I had three Bank of America accounts. I simply did not like their practices with regards to my bank accounts, which I found to be unethical. The post-2008 era reinforces my cynicism. Whether it’s Bank of America or Barclays – what is the difference. Barclays in Africa, for example. I studied with African students who did not have high opinions of Barclays. I’ll get back to these issues when discussing corporations etc.

(2) Regarding the two economists. I tried to remember the exact source I was referring to and found it. I confess that I did not remember totally correctly. Here’s the link RTÉ Television - The Meaning of Life with Gay Byrne - then go to Page 4 and selected the interview with Bono. My mistake was that I was confusing this, which I watched over a year ago and did not remember 100% correctly, with the economists that Bono sought advice from when he first started learning about economics in the late 90s. He is actually talking about discussing policy / lobbying with the economists. HOWEVER, I had partly remembered correctly. See at 20 minutes, for the subsequent minute or so. What troubles me is he refers to “political spectrum” in terms of “left” and “right” which he then narrows down to “conservative” and “liberal”. That is NOT the complete political spectrum – apart from with regards to the very narrow USA political spectrum in terms of voting options. He also talks about a “radical centre”, but there is nothing radical about Bono’s free market “activism”.

DaveC, you asked: “Why exactly is two economists Bono spoke to being American an intrinsically bad thing?” I did not say that exactly and I did not mean to imply that. Bono’s economics guru is Jeffrey Sachs. He is American. That is fine. But there are economists all over the world of all political persuasions. Studying international development academically, you get to read a diversity of views and arguments. But Bono’s “activism” doesn’t stray beyond Jeffrey Sach’s “The End of Poverty”. And this book is troubling as I will try to argue.

Firstly, I would like to say that getting educated on international development by economists is only part of the problem. A macro-economics perspective hides all kinds of problems that Bono, Sachs, and the UN MDGs sweep under the carpet. Bono often talks about social justice, but he doesn’t seem to be aware at all about social injustices caused by macro-economic development policy. He should also be talking to anthropologists and sociologists, seeing how macro-economic development policy affects local communities, local cultures, indigenous (endangered) languages, and further strains imbalanced power relations and social inequalities. Bono’s references to social justice without considering these things is simply naivety. And yet he was so much hegemonic power, influencing thousands of U2 fans that think he has all the answers.

DIEMEN, you sound just like Bono. Too simplistic and not confronting enough of the issues. You say, “Compromise gets shit done” but where are the bigger compromises being made and by whom?

Regarding Jeffrey Sachs’s “The End of Poverty” – I was impressed when I first read it at time of publication. Wow, his water privatisation policies in Bolivia seemed to work so well! Then I read Naomi Klein’s responses – about what REALLY happened in Bolivia. The riots against water privatisation. Then I found myself in a classroom with some Bolivian students who totally opposed Jeffrey Sachs. This is one example. I won’t go into too much detail, but William Easterly, for example, has written a lot in argument against Sachs. There are videos online. See his book “White Man’s Burden” as a starting point. Read Dambisa Moyo – a Zambian economist educated in the UK and USA. She has been described as the “anti Bono”. Why is Bono not learning from her – an African, a woman? Why only white male American economists? Ashwani Saith refers to Sach’s book not as “The End of Poverty” but “The Idiot’s Guide to Poverty”. There is so much debate, yet Bono suggests there is consensus – that a “radical centre” is possible. This is PARTLY what I meant by being entrenched in a particular viewpoint. I will elaborate on that later.

(3) Regarding Monsanto, DaveC, you wrote: “Let me guess - GMOs are ‘pure evil’? News flash for you – unless you're out in the woods foraging for wild nuts and berries, nearly everything you eat has been genetically modified by humans.”

Thank you for the news flash. However, you guessed totally wrong in this case. Please try to guess accurately next time before jumping into such a patronising and antagonistic tone. GALEONGIRL also made the same assumption about my disapproval of Monsanto – and seemed to be equally patronising while at the same time displaying total ignorance. May I suggest that YOU do some more research?

My view is encapsulated by the comments of VLAD N U 2: “I believe Monsanto is evil not because of GMO (which is probably safe, scientifically) but because they just try to dominate the business”. Similarly, ELEVATED_U2_FAN knows what is going on! “Monsanto's practice of monopolization on our food supply is what really terrifies me”.

Hi OREGOROPA, you said you did not understand the Monsanto debate. May I recommend that you watch the documentary film “Food Inc”. Here is a trailer:

This is a ridiculous comment. Absolutely childish. A PR campaign is fine as long as it does not contradict the practices of the company. Then it is hypocritical whitewash. It is simple propaganda and lies. Telling lies is not ethical just as Monsanto’s practices are arguably unethical.

(5) BVS asked, “do you have a legitimate link that shows a connection between Bono and Monsanto?”

Firstly, I am surprised that Bono has not spoken out against such rumours if assuming he is “innocent”. To answer your question, I don’t know. This seems to be a more recent example of this Bono–Monsanto accusation:
U2's Bono partners with Monsanto to destroy African agriculture with GMOs - NaturalNews.com What do you think?

I just found this book on Google Books: “Jeffrey Sachs: The Strange Case of Dr. Shock and Mr. Aid” by Japhy Wilson. I don’t know the author and I don’t know if the book is reliable or not. However, the author makes a strong connection between Jeffrey Sachs’s work at Columbia and “partnerships” with Monsanto. Since Bono has yet to disagree with anything that Sachs has argued for, and Bono has not attempted to distance himself from the Monsanto rumours, I am not very confident that these are just “rumours”. Can someone please just ask Bono what he thinks about Monsanto?

Regarding the Sachs–Monsanto accusations, what is potentially extremely hypocritical here – or, at least, something Sachs should be arguing against – is Monsanto’s strict patents / intellectual property rights etc. Sachs argued AGAINST these practices in order to reduce poverty in the so-called developing world. Is he now endorsing or “partnering” with Monsanto in total contradiction of his own arguments?

(6) DaveC, I will try to elaborate on what I mean by “entrenched in a particular viewpoint”. Bono used to appear to be concerned with the social injustice of people who were not like him – in other parts of the world, of different political persuasions, who were oppressed, and so on. But his “activism” has come to represent the interests of elites – rich people like himself – although “in the name of” helping the poor. However, as I have argued above, his macro economic perspectives do not deal with all the issues of social injustice – in fact, they can create further social injustice and inequality. It troubles me that he doesn’t see this. Of course WE ARE ALL entrenched in particular viewpoints to some extent. This is called positionality in social sciences. But the extent to which we resist this entrenchment is the key point.

See:

I agree that this is business as usual, but I simply believe that it is unethical. Ireland collapsed and U2 decide to pay less tax by moving their money elsewhere. Again, compare with Russell Brand supporting the options that would make millionaires like him pay more taxes. Charlotte Church, too. It comes down not to what the rules are, or what is business as usual – but what kind of society and what kind of world we want to live in.

This brings me to:

(8) Questions of ideology. DaveC, if a corporation has the primary responsibility is “to increase value for its shareholders” do you really think that a company like Monsanto playing a part in development in Africa is REALLY acting in the interests of Africans? Who are the shareholders? Not Africans, but predominantly Americans, I suspect. DaveC, you have really, although unwittingly, hit the nail on the head here! Is the market really the best means of development in Africa? I’m sure it can play a role. But not via dominating the seed market and screwing African farmers. The market may have a role, but “activists”, as Bono describes himself, should be challenging Monsanto ALL the way to the bank. There should be no simple endorsement.

Anyway, the jury is out on the Bono–Monsanto connection. Let’s see what develops.

(9) Lennon, Strummer and Marley. Well, we just don’t know, do we DaveC. But my point is that Bono tries to ally himself with the public perceptions of certain individuals. Maybe it is just my projection, according to common perceptions of Lennon, Strummer and Marley, but I suspect they would be standing closer to Neil Young right now than Bono.
Raging in the free world: the many furies of Neil Young | Music | The Guardian You seemed to miss the point. They may be turning in their graves not because of what Bono supports (why should they care), but because of the way he allies himself with them (when they may have different viewpoints). But I guess, DaveC, you probably also think Neil Young is also “out to lunch”.

Sorry to write so much. Thanks for your patience.
Oof, I'm way too drunk right now to go through this point by point.

I don't want to argue with you. I think your original post was hyperbolic as hell and way too extreme. Hence the sarcasm in my reply.

I may think you're off base in general, but you've toned it way down since your OP and actually elicited a decent discussion, so I have no beef here. Welcome to Interference, I was sincere when I said that.
__________________

__________________
DaveC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 12:18 AM   #48
Blue Crack Addict
 
Vlad n U 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 28,014
Local Time: 08:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
If we're going to criticize economists for being, dear god, *American*, might we also want to investigate this particular source of information?
Pilger's Australian, if that's what you were asking.
__________________
Vlad n U 2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 01:08 AM   #49
War Child
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: ann arbor mi
Posts: 935
Local Time: 05:46 AM
Hi everyone,
glad to see this thread!

I actually don't have a problem with the whole U2 tax shelter thing, for what that's worth, and didn't have a problem (though now I feel compelled to understand that a little better, since apparently it's not an 'accident' that Bono hangs with Sachs and gets it so wrong about Monsanto!) with the American economists Bono likes to listen to.
I only started having a problem when he started supporting Monsanto, as outlined here:
Activist Post: U2, Bono? Celeb partners with Monsanto, G8, to biowreck African farms with GMOs

Sorry I don't have time now to read this whole thread, but perhaps this can add to any answer provided already to the questions about the reality of Bono's willingness to argue for letting Monsanto and other big-AG loose in Africa.
And as that link shows, this is a very problematic thing to do.

And just to add a little, since I've been researching lately the whole controversy over Monsanto's herbicide "Roundup". The substance--brand name for the generic 'glyphosate'--has been banned just last week by France,from sale at garden centers. It recently was put on the list of 'probable human carcinogens' by the World Health Organization's research body, despite huge efforts from Monsanto to stop that, including the sponsorship of very faulty 'science'. But the 'benefit' we were supposed to accept as a trade-off for this toxic herbicide was the alleged resistance and ease of growing Monsanto's product-line (proprietary, now, so, don't save those seeds or they will sue! And they're expensive. Sounds like a great model for reducing poverty in Africa, doesn't it?! um, maybe not?!!) of "Roundup Ready" crops, engineering to work with this herbicide and reduce 'inputs' for farming.
This piece from the Union for Concerned Scientists shows how that's not quite how it's working...how there has been huge net *increase* in the need for herbicide.
http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agric...l#.VYze24dVOsE

There are many many arguments against Monsanto that don't rely on opposition to GMOs per se. For one, the GMOs should actually make the farming easier, no? And not just require buying more tons of toxic chemicals from the people who now own the patents on our non-biodiverse crops?
__________________
ShellBeThere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 07:04 AM   #50
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 49
Local Time: 05:46 AM
Hello!

Sorry, I missed the question from IRVINE511, “how much do you know about John Pilger?” until seeing the response from VLAD N U 2: “What's your angle with this question?”

I’ll try to answer the question (although I am also very curious about the angle!) John Pilger, an Australian journalist. I’ve seen one or two documentaries he made, read some of his articles, and listened to some radio programmes he made / extended radio interviews with him. I recall in one that he was quite critical of the elite clique that surrounded Nelson Mandela in the 2000s.

IRVINE511 elaborated on the “angle”: “If we're going to criticize economists for being, dear god, *American*, might we also want to investigate this particular source of information?”

As VLAD N U 2 pointed out, John Pilger is Australian.

I would like to add (actually, it is a reiteration) that I was NOT criticising any economist for being AMERICAN. That would be pointless. Unless, IRVINE511, you are assuming I am anti-American? I was criticising the fact that Bono has seemed over-reliant on seeking economic advice on Africa from white male American economists of a particular political persuasion (whether liberal or conservative, either way they are neoliberal).
__________________
wideawake2015 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 07:17 AM   #51
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 49
Local Time: 05:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
Oof, I'm way too drunk right now to go through this point by point.
So rock ‘n’ roll. Well done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
I don't want to argue with you. I think your original post was hyperbolic as hell and way too extreme. Hence the sarcasm in my reply.
But you DID want to argue with me. You found my original post “hyperbolic as hell” and, well, throwing back a load of sarcasm was in a sense argumentative. So please tell me what exactly you found to be hyperbolic in my original post? I’m not denying that you might be correct, but I am curious to know what exactly bugged you about it, but without making the same arguments, which I have responded to but you have declined to comment on even though, as you say:

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
I may think you're off base in general,
Please explain. You responded to alleged hyperbole with sarcasm, but you respond to a "way off base" argument with "I don't want to argue with you". It doesn't have to be a bitchy sarcastic childish drunken argument. Please explain what you mean by way off base?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
but you've toned it way down since your OP
Please excuse my initial emotional outburst and thanks for policing this forum with sarcasm.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
and actually elicited a decent discussion, so I have no beef here.
But you said I am way off base?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
Welcome to Interference, I was sincere when I said that.
Thank you. Please excuse my sarcasm here. I just find your comments contradictory and your methods for argumentation inconsistent.
__________________
wideawake2015 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 07:47 AM   #52
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 49
Local Time: 05:46 AM
Hi SHELLBETHERE,

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShellBeThere View Post
I actually don't have a problem with the whole U2 tax shelter thing, for what that's worth, and didn't have a problem (though now I feel compelled to understand that a little better, since apparently it's not an 'accident' that Bono hangs with Sachs and gets it so wrong about Monsanto!) with the American economists Bono likes to listen to.
I originally dismissed the tax issue as business as usual, but when I came to try to “justify" it to others who were less favourable of U2, I found that I couldn’t justify it. Not because I lacked understanding of the situation etc. (although my knowledge is limited) but because my heart wasn’t in it! My heart wasn’t in making such an argument because I just find it to be wrong. As HOLLOW ISLAND said yesterday, “The argument that it's OK for U2 to avoid taxes because all corporations do it is insane and negates the idea that humans have moral obligations. Corporations are expected to do whatever the can to increase their profits because that's what they do - they are at odds with responsible governments, society, the planet itself. But U2 aren't an entity built to exploit. They are an artistic entity of people ‘with a social conscience’”.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShellBeThere View Post
I only started having a problem when he started supporting Monsanto, as outlined here:
Activist Post: U2, Bono? Celeb partners with Monsanto, G8, to biowreck African farms with GMOs

Sorry I don't have time now to read this whole thread, but perhaps this can add to any answer provided already to the questions about the reality of Bono's willingness to argue for letting Monsanto and other big-AG loose in Africa.
And as that link shows, this is a very problematic thing to do.
I'll take a look at the link. Thank you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShellBeThere View Post
And just to add a little, since I've been researching lately the whole controversy over Monsanto's herbicide "Roundup". The substance--brand name for the generic 'glyphosate'--has been banned just last week by France,from sale at garden centers. It recently was put on the list of 'probable human carcinogens' by the World Health Organization's research body, despite huge efforts from Monsanto to stop that, including the sponsorship of very faulty 'science'. But the 'benefit' we were supposed to accept as a trade-off for this toxic herbicide was the alleged resistance and ease of growing Monsanto's product-line (proprietary, now, so, don't save those seeds or they will sue! And they're expensive.
Very interesting, and depressing. This is why I object to assumptions and knee-jerk reactions when Monsanto is criticised and people assume it's a GM debate. There are so many dimensions to the problem of Monsanto.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShellBeThere View Post
Sounds like a great model for reducing poverty in Africa, doesn't it?! um, maybe not?!!) of "Roundup Ready" crops, engineering to work with this herbicide and reduce 'inputs' for farming.
A great model, if only! It is really shocking, isn't it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShellBeThere View Post
This piece from the Union for Concerned Scientists shows how that's not quite how it's working...how there has been huge net *increase* in the need for herbicide.
Increasing Herbicide Use | Union of Concerned Scientists
Thanks. I've bookmarked that and will take a look.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShellBeThere View Post
There are many many arguments against Monsanto that don't rely on opposition to GMOs per se. For one, the GMOs should actually make the farming easier, no? And not just require buying more tons of toxic chemicals from the people who now own the patents on our non-biodiverse crops?
This is not social justice, is it! I know very little about agricultural methods, GM, and so on. But Monsanto and GM will always be business as usual. Even if they have the potential to solve the world's food problems, other priorities will dominate.

I remember in the mid 80s, the time of Band Aid and Live Aid etc. An old school friend of my father was busy making a lot of money (he became a millionaire) storing "surplus" grain for the British government. He had aircraft hangars full of it. He had his own rail link. Most of it was burnt. To keep the price high. The business continued through the 90s. On the one hand there was the GM food debate "because there isn't enough food", and on the other hand vast amounts of grain being destroyed. Ok, the "surplus" might not have been enough to meet the demand, but it would have fed some hungry people somewhere. The point is that the market is not some benign "invisible hand" etc etc. as Adam Smith claimed. The market can be incredibly destructive, violent, oppressive. Etc. The potential of science, and human compassion and determination, are too often undermined by the market.
__________________
wideawake2015 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 08:42 AM   #53
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 17,415
Local Time: 04:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wideawake2015 View Post
So rock ‘n’ roll. Well done.



But you DID want to argue with me. You found my original post “hyperbolic as hell” and, well, throwing back a load of sarcasm was in a sense argumentative. So please tell me what exactly you found to be hyperbolic in my original post? I’m not denying that you might be correct, but I am curious to know what exactly bugged you about it, but without making the same arguments, which I have responded to but you have declined to comment on even though, as you say:



Please explain. You responded to alleged hyperbole with sarcasm, but you respond to a "way off base" argument with "I don't want to argue with you". It doesn't have to be a bitchy sarcastic childish drunken argument. Please explain what you mean by way off base?



Please excuse my initial emotional outburst and thanks for policing this forum with sarcasm.



But you said I am way off base?



Thank you. Please excuse my sarcasm here. I just find your comments contradictory and your methods for argumentation inconsistent.

I already explained rather thoroughly how I thought your first post was full of hysterics and hyperbole.

Me saying "I don't want to argue with you" meant exactly that. I don't particularly care if you think my comments are contradictory or don't like my methods. We don't need to debate it.
__________________
DaveC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 08:55 AM   #54
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 49
Local Time: 05:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
I already explained rather thoroughly how I thought your first post was full of hysterics and hyperbole.

Me saying "I don't want to argue with you" meant exactly that. I don't particularly care if you think my comments are contradictory or don't like my methods. We don't need to debate it.
Ok, I respect your wishes. I don't particularly care if you think I am "way off base", but since you made that point, I was interested to listen to you. Since you don't have anything to say, I'll leave it there. All the best.
__________________
wideawake2015 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 09:12 AM   #55
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2 View Post
Pilger's Australian, if that's what you were asking.

I am familiar with Pilger. Which is why I regard his opinions with skepticism.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 09:16 AM   #56
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 17,415
Local Time: 04:46 AM
Do you not realize that coming in here and ranting in a long post about "pure evil" and telling us all that we need to "wake up people" and swearing you'll never listen to U2 again as your very first post might be seen as a little off-putting?
__________________
DaveC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 09:25 AM   #57
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 03:46 AM
Yeah, and then not even knowing if and how much is true...


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 09:50 AM   #58
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 03:46 AM
Another perspective:

http://www.quora.com/Is-Monsanto-evi...id=y5k&share=1


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 09:56 AM   #59
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Polish-American Stronghold PA
Posts: 4,144
Local Time: 04:46 AM
Hyperbolic is the new buzzword in this forum. Might be a good song title.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________
Oregoropa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2015, 10:01 AM   #60
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 49
Local Time: 05:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
Do you not realize that coming in here and ranting in a long post about "pure evil" and telling us all that we need to "wake up people" and swearing you'll never listen to U2 again as your very first post might be seen as a little off-putting?
Point taken. It's a shame you didn't articulate your point so clearly in the first instance. Instead, you seemed to respond from my low level (or lower).

I have apologised for my hastily written outburst. I referred to "many comments on youtube and elsewhere from U2 fans praising Bono for caring about the world, caring about Africa, and so on. People don't seem to notice..." etc. I was referring to THOSE opinions from a certain proportion of U2 fans referring to Bono as if a saint who can do know wrong and who is an expert in economics and development issues. However, yes, in my "Wake up u2 fans" comment, while I was referring to that specific group, it appears I inadvertently homogenised all U2 fans and it seemed offensive. Suffice to say that as I stated in my opening line, I have been a U2 fan for over 30 years. Hence, it wasn't the rant of someone who hates U2 slagging off all U2 fans.

My "pure evil" comment was about Bank of America and banks in general, and I stand by my bewilderment regarding U2 publicising them as a good thing for Africa.
__________________

__________________
wideawake2015 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com