Head Scratcher: China Joe Admin Looking To Create Legal Migration Ways For Central America

By William Teach April 7, 2021 – 7:37 am

This is one of those headlines that just make you curl up your face and recoil from the computer screen a bit, wondering if you read this correctly and if the Biden admin is that stupid

White House aims to create legal ways for Central Americans to migrate, U.S. envoy says

The White House is looking to create legal ways for Central American migrants to reach the United States, U.S. President Joe Biden’s special envoy Ricardo Zuñiga said on Tuesday, amid a sharp rise in illegal crossings over the past few months.

Zuñiga, Biden’s envoy to the so-called Northern Triangle countries in Central America, said on a visit to Guatemala that the White House was looking to offer protections to migrants amid a push by Biden to reshape the U.S. border policy.

A jump in immigration from the three Northern Triangle countries of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador has posed one of the biggest political challenges to the new Biden administration.

A day after meeting with Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei, Zuñiga met most of his government’s senior cabinet ministers to discuss how to improve security as well as economic and societal conditions that drive Guatemalans to migrate.

“We are here to also talk about the need and the efforts of the White House to create legal means for migration so that people do not have to use irregular and dangerous routes,” Zuñiga said in a press conference.

“We also want to make sure that there are ways and means of accessing protection for people who require that protection,” he added.

Oh, good, so, this will incentivize even more people to make the long trek to the U.S. border where they will either demand entry or sneak in illegally. Though, the way this admin is working there’s often no need to enter illegally, or at least beyond walking across a point and getting caught, because they’ll be detained for a short period, fed and housed, then released to disappear into the nation.

There is a legal way: they can apply for citizenship via the normal channels, as so many other people do from around the world. They can apply for asylum at a U.S. embassy. They’ll go through the process to make sure they are good people, that they can take care of themselves, that they aren’t criminals, and so forth. But, that’s not what Democrats and China Joe want: they’d prefer the nation be overloaded with people who have few skills, little ability to pay for themselves. They want people who will be wards of the state and vote Democrat. They don’t care if these migrants are bringing nothing to the table. That they don’t read or speak English, and cannot communicate with Americans. That they often bring crime, drugs, and disease. And then they demand healthcare, money, housing, food, clothes, smartphones, and citizenship they haven’t earned. And Democrats are happy to give it to them

Read: Head Scratcher: China Joe Admin Looking To Create Legal Migration Ways For Central America »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration, Joe Biden | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Australian Group Calls Paris Targets “Virtually Impossible”

By William Teach April 6, 2021 – 3:03 pm

By virtually impossible, do they mean the measures needed per their cult beliefs which would destroy economies and turn citizens into serfs of Government?

“Virtually impossible”: Australian scientists sound alarm over Paris climate goals

The Australian Academy of Science quietly released a report on March 31 that underlines the stakes of President Biden’s April 22 climate summit and the next U.N. climate confab in Glasgow.

The big picture: The report, produced by Australia’s equivalent to the Royal Society of London, heaps doubt upon the feasibility of the Paris Agreement’s target of limiting global warming to “well below” 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) compared to preindustrial levels by 2100.

It calls the goal “virtually impossible” based on how significantly temperatures have already shifted, and the lack of emissions reduction commitments that would meet the challenge.

The details: Consistent with other recent studies, the report warns the world is on course for at least about 3 degrees Celsius (5.4 Fahrenheit) of warming if current emissions reduction pledges are not dramatically altered.

Funny how the “historic” Paris Climate Agreement is constantly said to not be enough, and climate cultists want more and more. Heck, Warmists were saying this as the ink was drying in the agreement (which is purely voluntary, mind you).

The bottom line: Unless far more ambitious near-term emissions targets are established, which is the main goal of both the White House and UN climate meetings, the report finds that even the less stringent Paris 2-degree target won’t be achievable. This is because emissions trajectories would begin arcing downward too late to get there.

They always want more more more. And more. And for good measure, some more. Yet, strangely, the people who are fearmongering over the climate crisis (scam) never seem to act like it’s a crisis in their own lives and change their behavior.

Meanwhile in other climate apocalypse news

Andrew Yang Wants To Turn NYC Into A Bitcoin Megahub. That Would Be Terrible For Climate Change

Doomsday cultists have never met something that they don’t think is Doom.

Insurers have no choice: Stop backing projects climate-risky projects or drown

Oh, good, threats. Nice business you have there: be a shame if something happened to it.

And, I wanted to do a full post on this, but, it is a true firewall, so can only get

Most alien civilisations risk fuelling global warming on their planets

Most planets inhabited by advanced civilisations would be likely to face catastrophic climate change as a result of burning fuel, researchers have found.

Human activity has had a geological impact on Earth, putting it into a new epoch known as the Anthropocene. Adam Frank at the University of Rochester, New York, and his colleagues wanted to know if the same thing might happen on other Earth-like planets.

The researchers began with the assumption that “exocivilisations” would arise on planets with initial carbon dioxide levels …

Assuming, eh? This is less a science and more a cult when they trot this stuff out. The aliens probably find the Earth a very silly place.

Read: Australian Group Calls Paris Targets “Virtually Impossible” »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 6, 2021 – 1:00 pm

…is a planet killing beer on an evil fossil fueled ship, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is A View From The Beach, with a post on maskless by Memorial Day.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

China Joe Looks To Redefine “Infrastructure”

By William Teach April 6, 2021 – 10:30 am

CNN is rather admitting that Joe and the Dems are not really attempting to pass a bill focused on infrastructure

The fight to define infrastructure could change America

Biden Brain SlugThe meaning of the word “infrastructure” suddenly depends on your politics.

President Joe Biden is using a sleight of hand by crafting a bill that might be traditionally associated with repairs to potholed highways to instead be his latest effort to reshape the US economy and social safety net. His move encapsulates the White House’s own sense of momentum and explains why Republicans are lining up to block his ambitions before they change the character of the country.

In one example, the President has stretched the definition of infrastructure to insert $400 billion in the bill to revolutionize home health care for the elderly and disabled. In another he’s also seeking billions to supercharge America’s development of electric vehicles to fulfill another political priority — the elimination of fossil fuels in the fight against climate change. And, after a year in which millions of workers relied on home internet connections to work remotely, the plan also includes $100 billion to build a high-speed broadband infrastructure that would reach the whole country.

Biden and his Cabinet members argue that infrastructure undergirds every pillar of American life, from education to energy, and health care to manufacturing and that the need for investment is gargantuan. But the President’s audacity and his generous interpretation of a policy area that Washington has traditionally seen as confined mostly to transportation projects is already sparking a huge clash with his foes on Capitol Hill. After all, one person’s infrastructure plan is another’s left-wing power grab. (snip)

The disconnect over infrastructure exposes the huge gulf in perceptions between Republicans and Democrats over the state of the country as the post-pandemic era approaches. It highlights a seminal moment in American politics with a new Democratic President eying a window in history to carve a record that will stand comparison with the great reforming Democrats of the 20th Century. And most fundamentally, the battle over the shape and size of Biden’s $2 trillion infrastructure bill announced last week fleshes out the perennial fault line between conservatives and liberals on the role of American government.

We all know what infrastructure is, and we all know that this bill being proposed is mostly about non-infrastructure things. It’s about pushing progressive (nice Fascism) ideas and increasing the power of the federal government. And, because it focuses so little on real infrastructure, we’ll be having this debate again in 3-4 years.

The unfolding standoff over the infrastructure bill escalated on Monday even as another threat to its passage came into view. West Virginia’s Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin warned he and several other moderates wouldn’t back Biden’s proposed corporate tax hike from 21% to 28% to help pay for the mega-bill.

They know it is bad optics, and that raising the corporate tax rate will not work out the way China Joe thinks. Corporations will just change up operations, which could mean less hiring, more part timers, slower coming pay raises, and passing the costs on to consumers, who will then purchase less. Tax increases never work out. Remember, though, Biden is all about bipartisanship and Unity! Despite essentially going it alone.

Read: China Joe Looks To Redefine “Infrastructure” »

Posted in Democrats, Dems in Charge: Now What?, Joe Biden | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Cult Lays Out The Rules For Eating Food Or Something

By William Teach April 6, 2021 – 7:13 am

Oh, wait, you where thinking these were rules for the people who believe in the climate crisis scam? Silly you. It’s rarely ever about themselves, it’s always about Other People. And government force on people and private entities

The 2 Rules for Eating to Fight Climate Change
Quit wasting food and eat less meat.

What’s for dinner?

On a planet wracked by rising seas, expanding deserts, withering biodiversity, and hotter temperatures, that’s a fraught question to answer. Food production accounts for roughly a quarter of the world’s greenhouse-gas emissions, and scientists have found that limiting global warming will be impossible without significant changes to how the world eats. At the same time, climate change is threatening the world’s food supply, with land and water being exploited at an “unprecedented” pace.

Reforming the food system to save the planet is going to require new corporate practices, and new laws and regulations at the national and international levels. But individual consumer behaviors matter, as well—more than you might think. Your diet is likely one of your biggest sources of climate emissions. But what should you do? Eat locally? Get your food from small-scale farmers? Choose organics and fair trade? Avoid processed foods? Eat seasonally?

The choices are many; the stakes are high. But experts on land use, climate change, and sustainable agriculture told me that two habits tower above all others in terms of environmental impact. To help save the planet, quit wasting food and eat less meat.

Look, reducing food waste is a good idea. That shouldn’t have to be controversial, but, the climate cult nuts have made yet another wise idea into part of their cult, and, let’s face it, the disciples of the Cult of Climastrology are pretty much just as culpable for this as Skeptics. I bought too much uncooked chicken the other day, didn’t need that much, but, it was the smallest amount I could buy. So, I’m throwing about half a pound out, because you can only refrigerate it for a few days. I know I’ll never get too it if I freeze it. But, it’s not up to Government to dictate my food habits.

And certainly not require me and you and everyone else (Warmists think this won’t affect themselves, of course, because they’re idiot cultists) to eat less meat. Because that’s really want the CoC want Government force. Because most people are not going to give up their own eating of meat. It’s always about governmental force.

Read: Climate Cult Lays Out The Rules For Eating Food Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 26 Comments | Trackback URL

Whoops: MLB Moving All Star Game To 9% Black Denver From 51% Black Atlanta

By William Teach April 6, 2021 – 6:57 am

Good job, Wokesters! You freaked out over a voting law you didn’t read and listened to idiots fearmongering and telling you lies about the new law. Now all the black business owners and workers are out somewhere between $38 million and $190 million in revenue from the game

‘Woke’ MLB moving All-Star Game from 51% Black Atlanta to 76% White Denver, critics note

Opponents of MLB’s decision Monday to move the 2021 All-Star Game to Denver because of Georgia’s new voting law suggest the move could end up hurting Atlanta’s Black residents rather than helping them.

They note the move will deal an economic blow to Atlanta, which is 51% Black, and provide a boost to Colorado’s capital, which is only 9% Black, according to U.S. Census figures.

The “Midsummer Classic” was set for July 13 at Truist Park, home of the Atlanta Braves, until the Major League Baseball decided Friday to change its location — a decision that was cheered by several large corporations. On Monday, MLB announced the game will now be played at Coors Field, home of the Colorado Rockies.

According to 2019 U.S. Census data, Atlanta is 51% Black and 40.9% White, while Denver is 9.2% Black and 76% White. (snip)

Nearly 30% of businesses in Atlanta are Black-owned, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported.

Great job there, moonbats, great job. Your unhinged Wokeism Outrage based on lies hurt blacks. Why aren’t they calling for moving the Atlanta Braves out of Georgia if they’re so worried? And the Falcons?

Oh, and there’s something else interesting about this

(Breitbart) MLB removed the All-Star Game from Atlanta after Georgia passed a series of voter reforms aimed at safeguarding the integrity of their elections. MLB and other corporations claimed that the new law acted as a “voter suppression” measure by shortening early voting periods and requiring ID.

Putting the falseness of those claims aside, for a moment, one would think that if MLB were so appalled by those measures, they would move their All-Star game to a place that fewer voting restrictions, not more.

However, that is not the case.

Not only does the state of Colorado require proof of identification when casting a ballot to vote, but it also has fewer early voting days than Georgia.

Oops? An ID card in Georgia costs $32, good for 8 years. It’s $12.67 in Colorado, good for 5 years (free if over 60). You can get a free ID strictly for voting in Georgia, though. Private entities really need to read the freaking laws and such before going Woke and driving away their patrons.

Read: Whoops: MLB Moving All Star Game To 9% Black Denver From 51% Black Atlanta »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Sports | 19 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmists Are Super Excited To Tell Rich People To Reduce Their Carbon Footprint

By William Teach April 5, 2021 – 3:00 pm

This is actually a good idea, since so many of the Rich Folks like to tell Everyone Else they need to comply to avoid climate apocalypse. Ones like Obama, John Kerry, China Joe, Kamala, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi. Ones like Leo DiCaprio, Harrison Ford, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jeff Bezos, Harry and Meghan Markle, Prince Charles, Thom Yorke (Radiohead), Mark Ruffalo, Billie Eilish, Emma Thompson, and, goodness, the list could go on and on and on, couldn’t it? They always have Excuses, though, eh?

If you’re wealthy, reducing your carbon footprint is important

It was the summer of 2012 when sustainability scientist Kimberly Nicholas decided she couldn’t live like this anymore. She was attending a climate change conference in Austria, listening to talk after talk about how bad global warming was and how much worse it was going to get. All the while, Nicholas was thinking about all of the planet-heating carbon that she, like most other attendees, had dumped into the atmosphere by flying there.

“It really felt like a conference of doctors smoking cigarettes and telling our patients to quit,” Nicholas said.

But after a beer with a U.K.-based friend who took a train to the conference, Nicholas, who is American but lives and conducts research in Sweden, realized something: She could have done that, too. Since then, Nicholas has stopped flying within Europe, cutting her air travel emissions by 90 per cent in the process. She has also stopped eating meat and has gone car-free. To ensure she’s making lifestyle changes that will have the biggest carbon bang for their buck, Nicholas conducted peer-reviewed research on the subject. In 2017, she and her colleague Seth Wyens published a paper on the individual behavioural changes that have the greatest benefits for the climate. Topping the list? Flying less, followed by driving less and eating a plant-based diet.

Yet, most Warmists will refuse to do this, because that would be inconvenient. Plus, Other People should be forced to comply.

Nicholas has now expanded that paper into a book, Under the Sky We Make. A crash-course on why climate change is happening and how to fix it interwoven with beautifully written, witty anecdotes about a scientist’s personal journey toward sustainability, Under the Sky We Make pushes back — politely, but with science — against the narrative that individual actions make little difference to the climate. Rather, if you’re a wealthy person living in a wealthy country, the book makes a compelling case that your individual choices matter a lot. For the “carbon elite,” as Nicholas describes her intended audience, the decision to take fewer flights or install solar panels on your roof materially reduces the amount of carbon in the sky forever, not least because it can inspire similar behavioural changes amongst your peers. (snip)

That’s not what Nicholas is doing. Her message isn’t aimed at folks struggling to make ends meet, but at people making a middle-class income or higher who live in a wealthy country like the United States, Germany, or France. Far from a distraction, Nicholas argues that the climate impact of the carbon elite is something we need to focus on — individually and systematically. She points out that globally, more than two-thirds of climate pollution can be attributed to household consumption, and that the richest 10 per cent of the world population — those making more than $38,000 a year — is responsible for about half of those emissions.

Wait, back up

…that the richest 10 per cent of the world population — those making more than $38,000 a year — is responsible for about half of those emissions.

So, basically, a high percentage of those living in the 1st World.

Read: Warmists Are Super Excited To Tell Rich People To Reduce Their Carbon Footprint »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 5, 2021 – 1:00 pm

…is an area flooded by carbon pollution created Bad Weather, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Dissecting Leftism, with a post on China Joe wanting to spend $20 billion to destroy “racist” highways.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Good News: The Pandemic Surge In Crime Is The Fault Of Police Or Something

By William Teach April 5, 2021 – 10:30 am

See, it’s not the fault of criminals, and certainly not the fault of Democrats who run the cities where crime is surging and have historically been soft on crime. Nope, it’s the police, according to Ryan Cooper at The Week

The pandemic crime surge is a policing problem

The last several years have seen a building movement for criminal justice reform in America, culminating in the massive George Floyd protests around the country last summer. Progressive district attorneys like Larry Krasner in Philadelphia and Chesa Boudin in San Francisco have been elected promising to cut back on cash bail, reduce the severity of sentences, prosecute crooked or violent cops, and so forth.

But reformers are running into a backlash. Krasner is up for reelection this year, and police unions are blaming him for the surge in violent crime that has happened in his city over the last year. They are backing a conservative challenger, Carlos Vega. A similar thing is happening in San Francisco, where a group of right-wing tech elites (with the typically tone-deaf slogan of “V.C. Lives Matter”) are trying to recall Boudin.

These arguments are a crock. A return to brutal war-on-crime tactics will not reduce crime — that will require staying the course on reform.

This is Liberal Thought, where cracking down on people who commit crimes will not reduce crime. Tell it to NY City, where the city was crime infested under Mayor Dinkens, then Rudy Guiliani came in, cracked down, and significantly reduced the crime rate.

The argument from police unions and Big Tech barons is the classic reactionary position on crime from the 1980s and ’90s. These reformers are supposedly being soft on crime, so the argument goes, and so the criminal class is emboldened. Therefore we need to “get tough” and start brutally punishing offenders to set an example.

So, being soft on criminals reduces crime? Now, that is a crock. And Cooper attempts to argue this for several more paragraphs

Unfortunately, there are several giant holes in the argument. Take Krasner: As Joshua Vaughn writes at The Appeal, while Krasner has put through many worthy reforms (he has cut future sentences by 20,000 years compared to the prior DA) he is not even close to the radicals who think the police should be abolished altogether. Indeed, many activists have criticized him for continuing to use steep cash bail amounts for certain crimes. Krasner has not at all halted prosecution of serious crime — on the contrary, he has prosecuted over 99 percent of homicides, and over 98 percent of non-lethal shootings, in which Philadelphia police made an arrest. Unfortunately, the cops made arrests in only about 40 percent of homicides and less than 20 percent of non-lethal shootings.

Uh, that’s because there are so many shootings, and, contrary to TV shows, most get away with it, especially since so many in these Democrat run cities refuse to snitch. Gang members won’t even snitch on members of other gangs. They’ll just retaliate.

The logic of the police unions is that if you punish murderers, there will be fewer murders. And it turns out that a great many criminals are escaping with impunity — it’s just the fault of the police. On the raw numbers, any Philly murderer has a better-than-even chance of evading the cops. In fact, it’s worse than that. Typically something like a third of murders basically solve themselves because the culprit is found at the scene, or there is very obvious evidence. Philly cops are doing barely better than that — meaning that if you kill someone and take any steps at all to cover your tracks, you’re all but guaranteed to get away with it. Krasner is more than willing to prosecute violent offenders, but Philly cops are too lazy or incompetent to catch most of them.

See? It’s the fault of the police. No mention that the crimes are being committed, and that they are rising, and were rising even before the pandemic. More often, police are there to clean up the crime, not to stop it.

Investigations into policing demonstrate that the most important part of detective work is community relations. Forensic evidence is rarely decisive; what matters are detectives who are trusted by the citizenry and witnesses who are willing to cooperate. It follows that, by the logic of the police unions, the biggest obstacle to reducing crime is the terrible reputation police departments have earned for themselves by constantly hassling, abusing, and killing people. People are much less willing to talk to police when departments are constantly in the news for mercilessly gassing and beating unarmed protesters, or choking somebody to death for trying to pass a fake $20 bill.

Again, it’s all the fault of the police, who are supposed to build relationships and squishy stuff. All Floyd had to do was comply. Put hands on steering wheel. Say “I had no idea it was a fake bill.” Cops would have written a statement, then moved on, because they don’t have time for something like that. The Treasury Department would have gotten an email, and could have followed up with Floyd if they chose. Local cops don’t care, it’s too hard to backtrace a fake bill, there is more important crime going on, and it’s not their job. Don’t want to have a run in with the cops? Don’t commit crime. It really is simple. If you get pulled over for speeding, don’t give the cops crap: you broke the law. Take the ticket and move on.

These are all promising strategies. But they will require more reform, not less — frankly, Krasner, Boudin, and other reformers have barely gotten started. In particular, it will require a total overhaul of recalcitrant police departments across the country, who seem to view crime sprees as useful political leverage they can use to escape accountability. Voters in Philly, San Francisco, and elsewhere: don’t fall for it.

How’s that defunding working out? Not well. Have fun in your unhinged Dem run cities.

Read: Good News: The Pandemic Surge In Crime Is The Fault Of Police Or Something »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Liberal World | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

ClimaBummer: Japan Just Saw Earliest Blossoming Of Cherry Blossom Trees In….1,200 Years

By William Teach April 5, 2021 – 7:43 am

You know what this means? Climate doom. All because you refuse to give up your fossil fueled travel and take the train or bus, refuse to stop eating juicy burgers, and won’t give up your money, freedom, and choice to Government

Japan just recorded its earliest cherry blossom bloom in 1,200 years. Scientists warn it’s a symptom of the larger climate crisis

Think of Japan in the spring, and the image that comes to mind is likely the country’s famous cherry blossoms, also known as “sakura” — white and pink flowers, bursting across cities and mountains, petals covering the ground.

The flowers, which experience a “peak bloom” that only lasts a few days, have been revered in Japan for more than a thousand years. Crowds celebrate with viewing parties, flocking to the most popular locations to take photos and have picnics underneath the branches.

But this year, cherry blossom season has come and gone in the blink of an eye, in one of the earliest blooms on record — and scientists warn it’s a symptom of the larger climate crisis threatening ecosystems everywhere.

Yasuyuki Aono, a researcher at Osaka Prefecture University, has gathered records from Kyoto back to 812 AD from historical documents and diaries. In the central city of Kyoto, cherry blossoms peaked on March 26, the earliest in more than 1,200 years, Aono said.

And in the capital Tokyo, cherry blossoms reached full bloom on March 22, the second-earliest date on record.

“As global temperatures warm, the last spring frosts are occurring earlier and flowering is occurring sooner,” said Dr. Lewis Ziska from Columbia Universities Environmental Health Sciences.

The peak bloom dates shift every year, depending on numerous factors including weather and rainfall, but have shown a general trend of moving earlier and earlier. In Kyoto, the peak date hovered around mid-April for centuries, according to Aono’s data, but began moving into early April during the 1800s. The date has only dipped into late March a handful of times in recorded history.

So, they bloomed super early 1,200 years ago? What caused that? Sure weren’t factories, fossil fuels, or megacities back then. Why can’t they be blooming earlier the same as back then? Which, interestingly, was during the Dark Ages, a time of mild cooling after the Roman Climate Optimum. And when the earlier times started shifting in the 1800’s, well, that was because the Earth was coming out of the Little Ice Age. The climate shifts.

Their early bloom, however, is just the tip of the iceberg of a worldwide phenomenon that could destabilize natural systems and countries’ economies, said Amos Tai, assistant professor of earth science at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.

There are two sources of increased heat, which is the main factor making the flowers bloom earlier: urbanization and climate change. With increased urbanization, cities tend to get warmer than the surrounding rural area, in what is called the heat island effect. But a bigger reason is climate change, which has caused rising temperatures across the region and the world.

I’m rather shocked they mentioned the urban heat island effect, which, while man-caused, is not global. But, they fail to mention the #1 reason for climatic systems, natural systems, starting with the Sun. But, that’s what climate cultists do. And the long screed goes on to describe more Doom which is all your fault. Just surrender, peons!

Read: ClimaBummer: Japan Just Saw Earliest Blossoming Of Cherry Blossom Trees In….1,200 Years »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | Comments Off on ClimaBummer: Japan Just Saw Earliest Blossoming Of Cherry Blossom Trees In….1,200 Years | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove