George Orwell was an Amateur
Analysis of the international database construction authorized by S 1348, known as the "Immigration Compromise" bill of 2007, which was pronounced dead after a "cloture" vote (to limit debate) in June 2007 and pronounced "resurrected" a week later,and a week after that was pronounced irrevocably dead. That is, until next year.
S1348, the Immigration Compromise bill of 2007, expected to come before Congress again within two years, will begin reshaping the drivers' license databases of all 50 states (which will already be combined by April 2008, as decreed by the Real ID Act enacted in 2005) into an international database of every man, woman, and child in the world. This will be used, at first, for an international passport, and to track criminals and terrorists. This is documented in the first set of tables. The second set of tables shows how S 1348 would create a separate database in the United States, for an Electronic Employment Verification System, to check on every person who works; no one will be able to work without it, and even with it, everyone will be caught who tries to work but is wanted by police, or is evading taxes, or is not a citizen or authorized immigrant.
Here are a few tables showing what parts of S1348 begin construction of a worldwide database. The table on the right is the actual language from the bill; the table on the left explains it.
|
Remember the Real ID act, already enacted, in 2005, and scheduled to be
implemented by April of 2008? It already requires the
drivers' license databases of all 50 states to combine and to add either a thumbprint or a retina scan record for every citizen.
Eerily similar to the "mark in the right hand or the forehead", since the word "forehead" in Greek can also mean "face". Without the new "Real ID", no one will be able to open a bank account, fly, drive, or enter a federal building
(meaning if you are sued in federal court you would not be allowed to defend yourself). Most employers require you to show your drivers' license before they will hire you. Several state legislatures have officially balked at this project, but in anticipation of its implementation on schedule, Section 135(d) - in the box to the right - of S1348 lets its huge database collect citizenship information IF an individual chooses to upgrade his drivers' license for use as a passport. In that situation, the state would check with the Secretary of State's database to verify the applicant is a citizen, before adding that fact to the drivers' license. S1348 does not make this happen everywhere immediately, since participation by both states and individuals is voluntary, but encourages interested states and individuals to participate in "pilot projects". The result, however, is literally an international ID card. |
Section 135(d)(1)(A) A State may include an individual's United States citizenship status on a driver's license which meets the requirements of section 202 of the REAL ID Act of 2005 (division B of Public Law 109-13; 49 U.S.C. 30301 note). (B) The Secretary of State shall develop a mechanism to communicate with a participating State to verify the United States citizenship status of an applicant who voluntarily seeks to have the applicant's United States citizenship status included on a driver's license. (C) All information collected about the individual shall be managed exclusively in the same manner as information collected through a passport application and no further distribution of such information shall be permitted. (D) A State may not require an individual to include the individual's citizenship status on a driver's license. (E) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a driver's license which meets the requirements of this paragraph shall be deemed to be sufficient documentation to permit the bearer to enter the United States from Canada or Mexico through not less than at least 1 designated international border crossing in each State participating in the demonstration program. Sec. 274A(c)(1)(B) (i)`(II) a driver's license or identity card issued by a State, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, or an outlying possession of the United States that satisfies the requirements of division B of Public Law 109-13 (119 Stat. 302); [must be shown to your employer before he can hire you] |
|
Section 135d(3) is where the database begins growing into a worldwide passport. It starts with a "pilot program", but it allows the Dept of Homeland Security to expand this “pilot program” without limitation, theoretically to the whole United States and to as many "additional foreign countries" as he can. All this withough further authorization from Congress. And not only with the Smart Card that already has the retina scan or thumbprint on it, but with "additional types of identification documents", such as, for example, the implantable chip! All this without further authorization from Congress! So far, however, participation by individuals and states remains voluntary, according to Section 135(d)(1)(D) above. |
Sec. 135d(3) AUTHORITY TO EXPAND- The Secretary of State and the Secretary may expand the demonstration program under this subsection so that such program is carried out in additional States, through additional ports of entry, for additional foreign countries, and in a manner that permits the use of additional types of identification documents to prove identity under the program. |
|
Section 135d(5) even pours pressure on Canada to create the same Real ID Card that we will have, turning the Real ID card into an international ID card and worldwide passport. Although the bill does not specify this much expansion from the original pilot program, it places no limits on expansion; in other words, the Director of the Department of Homeland Security has full authority to expand it all the way to an international card without which no man may bank, work, drive, fly, or cross a border, anywhere in the world, without it! It even permits graduation to a new "type of identification", which could cover the new Implantable Chip! All this authority is given the director of the Department of Homeland Security, to do all these things without further authorization from Congress! Although this section only names Canada as a partner in an international passport, paragraph (3)'s "authority to expand" appears to authorize the same kind of cooperation with all nations. |
Section 135d(5) RECIPROCITY WITH CANADA- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if the Secretary of State and the Secretary certify that certain identity documents issued by Canada (or any of its provinces) meet security and citizenship standards comparable to the requirements described in paragraph (1), the Secretary may determine that such documents are sufficient to permit entry into the United States. The Secretary shall work, to the maximum extent possible, to ensure that identification documents issued by Canada that are used as described in this paragraph contain the same technology as identification documents issued by the United States (or any State). |
|
I don't feel good about "sharing information" about passports with Mexico. We aren't
doing Mexicans or ourselves any favors by giving Mexico "technical assistance for the
development and maintenance of a national database". We can argue that national
tracking, here, though full of potential for tyranny, will not actually lead to
tyranny here as long as “our guys”, who won’t misuse the opportunity for power, are in
the White House. But we can’t argue that for already tyrannical regimes. It should be
clear that by not only sharing this technology but “pressuring” less free governments
to use it, we will enable them to be more tyrannical, hence driving MORE of their
citizens here, “illegally”, over our borders. We don't need to encourage other nations
to include biometric data on their national ID's. We don't need to start sharing
fingerprint databases between our three countries. We shouldn't even be doing it
ourselves. |
Sec. 113(b)(3)(D) [Regarding "improving the exchange of information related to the
security of North America", progress will be reported] in providing technical assistance
for the development and maintenance of a national database built upon identified best
practices for biometrics associated with immigration violators;
(E) in developing and implementing an immigration security strategy for North America that works toward the
development of a common security perimeter by enhancing technical assistance for programs and systems to support
advance automated reporting and risk targeting of international passengers;
(F) in sharing information on lost and stolen passports on a real-time basis among immigration or law enforcement
officials of Canada, Mexico, and the United States; and
(G) in collecting 10 fingerprints from each individual who applies for a visa. |
|
But don't worry. 135d(2) promises “Nothing in this subsection shall have
the effect of creating a national identity card.” What kind of word game is this? Is someone saying
the Real ID license is not already a “national identity card”? If so, I would like to know what the Real ID
card does not accomplish for Hell, that a “national identity card” would. |
(2) RULE of Construction: Nothing in this subsection shall have the effect of creating a
national identity card. |
Here is how the system would have worked had the bill passed:
|
It would start with the Social Security Administration database. Our current national databases are in no shape to serve Antichrist. They are riddled with errors, to the extent that even the Social Security database knows of 800,000 workers who all use the same phony social security number 123-45-6789. In other words, 800,000 unauthorized workers, told by their employers to fill out a W-9 form so their taxes could be withheld from their paychecks, needed a social security number to write in the blank. So they wrote in the number they saw on a set of social security card directions they got from the social security administration! That’s right, 800,000 U.S. workers who needed a phony Social Security card saw one of those examples, photocopied it, and went out and got a job with it! So now the U.S. Senate wants me to believe we can create an Electronic Employment Verification System accurate enough to entrust our careers to? My advice to every U.S. Senator: if you are defeated at the polls, live off your incredible pension! Don’t risk a job application! |
Sec. 274A(d)(1) REQUIREMENT FOR SYSTEM- The Secretary [of Homeland Security],
in cooperation with the Commissioner of Social Security, shall implement an Electronic Employment Verification System (referred to
in this subsection as the `System') to determine whether--
`(A) the identifying information submitted by an individual is consistent with the information maintained by
the Secretary or the Commissioner of Social Security; and
`(B) such individual is eligible for employment in the United States.
(2) REQUIREMENT for participation : The Secretary shall require all employers in the
United States to participate in the System, ... |
|
The Social Security database would be supplemented with IRS data. The two databases would not be combined directly. But the IRS would have much better information on who is a citizen. The taxpayer identification numbers which employers already have, and the social security numbers of employees reported by each employer, do not presently prove to the IRS who is a citizen. But they would, after the Electronic Employment Verification System begins checking everybody. Another way this bill would improve IRS databases is that when workers need to prove they have paid their taxes, they could get a certificate from the IRS saying they have. Presumably this means if a worker has been using phony ID, he would have to bring proof that the formerly fictitious taxpayer is really him. The IRS is neither known for accuracy, nor for responsibly using the information it has. A little more about how innacurate Social Security records are: as of 1997, they did not include whether the person is a citizen, on something like a fourth of its records. This came out during a 6/25/97 hearing of the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims, Judiciary Committee, House of Representatives. The Voter Eligibility Verification Act was considered, which would have required voting officials to check with the Social Security administration to make sure a voter was a citizen. The Social Security Administration's representive explained that the Social Security Administration doesn't know. Congressman Zoe Lofgren, California, said there is tremendous innacuracy in both Social Security and INS (now USCIS) records: "The INS databases are incontrovertibly incomplete, as well as being notoriously inaccurate; recent studies indicate an inaccuracy rate of at least 25 percent. The Social Security Administration's database is little better. Moreover, the inaccuracies tend to accumulate around the Asian and Latino names that are likely to be the targets of this legislation. |
Sec. 274A(a)(3)(B) INFORMATION sharing- The person hiring the alien shall provide to the employer, who obtains the labor of the alien, the employer identification number assigned to such person by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Failure to provide such number shall be considered a recordkeeping violation under subsection (e)(4)(B). Sec. 274A (d)(12)(C) EXCEPTIONS- Nothing in subparagraph (A) or (B) may be construed to limit the collection, maintenance, or use of data by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue or the Commissioner of Social Security as provided by law. (c)(1)(D)(iii) IRS Cooperation- The Secretary of the Treasury shall establish rules and procedures under which the Commissioner of Internal Revenue shall provide documentation to an alien upon request to establish the payment of all taxes required by this subparagraph. [Left to the imagination is how the IRS will deal with people who have been using phony ID's, and who will need to bring in records to prove the fictitious workers on their books are really them.] |
|
Sec. 121(1) combines these databases with the FBI's fingerprint database. |
SEC. 121. BIOMETRIC d ata enhancements.
Not later than October 1, 2008, the Secretary shall--
(1) in consultation with the Attorney General, enhance connectivity between the Automated Biometric Fingerprint Identification System (IDENT) of the Department and the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS) of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to ensure more expeditious data searches; and
(2) in consultation with the Secretary of State, collect all fingerprints from each alien required to provide fingerprints during the alien's initial enrollment in the integrated entry and exit data system described in section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1365a). |
|
Section 274A, "Unlawful Employment of Aliens", creates $5,000 fines and 3 years in jail for employers who don't keep the new records correctly. These are the kind of laws that make me hope my small business never grows to the point I will have to hire someone. Even 30 years ago it became an axiom that a small business with 3 employees had to hire a secretary just to handle government "feel good" reports. And now here is a whole new load of forms to fill out, which if not filled out right, will not only close down your business but put you in jail. The problem with paragraph iii, which says when they drag you before federal court for filling out your forms wrong, you will be found innocent if "a reasonable person" thought the phony ID looked OK, is that the view of what "a reasonable person" would think is made by lawyers, in court. If you have ever been in court, you know that the concept of "reasonable" , to a judge, is often outside the experience of ordinary people whose brains have not been processed by law schools. Besides, even if you win in Federal court, you may lose your business -- it is not cheap to prove your innocence in Federal Court! You may find it cheaper just to move your business to Mexico, where you can hire noncitizens without penalty, retire rich, and even become a local hero. |
Sec. 274A(a)(3)`(C) REPORTING requirement - The employer shall submit to the Electronic Verification System established under subsection (d), in a manner prescribed by the Secretary, the employer identification number provided by the person hiring the alien. Failure to submit such number shall be considered a recordkeeping violation under subsection (e)(4)(B). Sec. 274A(c)(2)`(B) PENALTIES- An individual who falsely represents that the individual is eligible for employment in the United States in an attestation required by subparagraph (A) shall, for each such violation, be subject to a fine of not more than $5,000, a term of imprisonment not to exceed 3 years, or both. Sec. 274A(c)(1) (A)`(iii) Standards for Examination - The employer has complied with the requirement of this paragraph with respect to examination of documentation if a reasonable person would conclude that the document examined is genuine and relates to the individual whose identity and eligibility for employment in the United States is being verified. If the individual provides a document sufficient to meet the requirements of this paragraph, nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as requiring an employer to solicit any other document or as requiring the individual to produce any other document. |
|
Mistakes expected in the database that will cause workers to lose their jobs for months are "solved" by the right to go to court, according to 274A(d)(10) and (11). Here is the whole section in the bill. You might as well go ahead and read it now, to help you get ready for when it passes. If you think this is too much reading, you may want to tell that to your lawmaker, because this is nothing compared to what you will have to read if you actually appeal! You will have to read the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (FRAP), besides a couple of dozen court cases. That is, unless you want to sell your business in order to afford an attorney. The whole thing boils down to Civil Rules of Appellate Procedure (CRAP) . According to Congressman Lofgren (quoted above) about 1/4 of the Social Security database is wrong, so it won't be just two or three people that will have to go through this process. Federal courts will be so busy they won't even have time to complain about being too swamped for their criminal caseload. They will just stop taking criminal cases. There won't be room in our jails for criminals anyway. Wait a minute - I can just see some internet conspiracist taking those last two sentences as fact and quoting me, so maybe I should spell out that was s-a-r-c-a-s-m. Sarcasm. However, now that I have brought up the subject, this bill also promises to put millions more in jail
than it creates new jail cells for - I'll get into that later. |
`(10) Administrative Review-
`(A) IN GENERAL- An individual who is terminated from employment as a result of a final nonconfirmation notice may, not later than 60 days after the date of such termination, file an appeal of such notice.
`(B) Procedures - The Secretary and Commissioner of Social Security shall develop procedures to review appeals filed under subparagraph (A) and to make final determinations on such appeals.
`(C) Review for Errors - If a final determination on an appeal filed under subparagraph (A) results in a confirmation of an individual's eligibility to work in the United States, the administrative review process shall require the Secretary to determine if the final nonconfirmation notice issued for the individual was the result of--
`(i) an error or negligence on the part of an employee or official operating or responsible for the System;
`(ii) the decision rules, processes, or procedures utilized by the System; or
`(iii) erroneous system information that was not the result of acts or omissions of the individual.
`(D) Compensation for Error-
`(i) In General - If the Secretary makes a determination under subparagraph (C) that the final nonconfirmation notice issued for an individual was not caused by an act or omission of the individual, the Secretary shall compensate the individual for lost wages.
`(ii) Calculation of Lost Wages - Lost wages shall be calculated based on the wage rate and work schedule that prevailed prior to termination. The individual shall be compensated for wages lost beginning on the first scheduled work day after employment was terminated and ending 180 days after completion of the administrative review process described in this paragraph or the day after the individual is reinstated or obtains employment elsewhere, whichever occurs first.
`(E) Limitation on Compensation - For purposes of determining an individual's compensation for the loss of employment, such compensation shall not include any period in which the individual was ineligible for employment in the United States.
`(F) Source of Funds - Compensation or reimbursement provided under this paragraph shall not be provided from funds appropriated in annual appropriations Acts to the Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security.
`(11) Judicial Review-
`(A) In General - After the Secretary makes a final determination on an appeal filed by an individual under the administrative review process described in paragraph (10), the individual may obtain judicial review of such determination by a civil action commenced not later than 60 days after the date of such decision, or such further time as the Secretary may allow.
`(B) Jurisdiction - A civil action for such judicial review shall be brought in the district court of the United States for the judicial district in which the plaintiff resides, or has a principal place of business, or, if the plaintiff does not reside or have a principal place of business within any such judicial district, in the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia.
`(C) ANSWER- As part of the Secretary's answer to a complaint for such judicial review, the Secretary shall file a certified copy of the administrative record compiled during the administrative review under paragraph (10), including the evidence upon which the findings and decision complained of are based. The court shall have power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming or reversing the result of that administrative review, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.
`(D) Compensation for Error-
`(i) In General- In cases in which such judicial review reverses the final determination of the Secretary made under paragraph (10), the court shall compensate the individual for lost wages.
`(ii) CALCULATION OF LOST WAGES- Lost wages shall be calculated based on the wage rate and work scheduled that prevailed prior to termination. The individual shall be compensated for wages lost beginning on the first scheduled work day after employment was terminated and ending 180 days after completion of the judicial review described in this paragraph or the day after the individual is reinstated or obtains employment elsewhere, whichever occurs first. |
|
The identity theft expected as a result of this database is "solved" by stiff penalties, in 274A(d)(12)(B). The provision of these stiff penalties tells us Congress expects its Electronic Employment Verification System to be vulnerable to a lot of identity theft, and for a lot of people to be tempted to steal. Sec. 274A(e) spells out the legal witch hunt for offending employers. Please don't take too much comfort in the promise that if the case against you doesn't hold water, that it will be dismissed. The decision whether to dismiss is made by a lawyer whose promotions and pay depend on his or her conviction rate. Dismissals are the kiss of death for a good conviction rate. Sec. 274A(e)(4) sets penalties between $200 and $6,000
for each mistake. (Not counting restraining orders and criminal convictions.) |
274A(d)(12)`(B) Limitation on Use of Data - Whoever willfully and knowingly accesses, discloses, or uses any information obtained or maintained by the System-- `(i) for the purpose of committing identity fraud, or assisting another person in committing identity fraud, as defined in section 1028 of title 18, United States Code; `(ii) for the purpose of unlawfully obtaining employment in the United States or unlawfully obtaining employment in the United States for any other person; or `(iii) for any purpose other than as provided for under any provision of law; shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both. 274A(e) (1) The Secretary shall establish procedures (A) for [complaints]... (B) for the investigation of such complaints...and (C) ...other violations...that the Secretary determines is appropriate... (2)(A)...officers... (i) shall have reasonable access to examine evidence regarding any employer...(ii)... may compel...the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence....(3) (B)(i) ...If the Secretary determines that such fine or other penalty was incurred erroneously, or determines the existence of such mitigating circumstances as to justify the remission or mitigation of such fine or penalty, the Secretary may remit or mitigate such fine or other penalty on the terms and conditions as the Secretary determines are reasonable and just, or order termination of any proceedings related to the notice.... `(4) Civil Penalties...(A) Hiring or Continuing to Employ Unauthorized Aliens- `(i) ... not less than $500 and not more than $4,000 for each unauthorized alien with respect to each such violation.`(ii) [2nd offense in a year:] not less than $4,000 and not more than $10,000 for each unauthorized alien with respect to each such violation. `(iii) [3rd offense in a year0 not less than $6,000 and not more than $20,000 for each unauthorized alien with respect to each such violation.`(B) ... Any employer that violates or fails to comply with the recordkeeping requirements ...shall pay a civil penalty as follows: `(i) Pay a civil penalty of not less than $200 and not more than $2,000 for each such violation. `(ii) [2nd offense in a year] not less than $400 and not more than $4,000 for each such violation. `(iii) [3rd time in a year] not less than $600 and not more than $6,000 for each such violation. `(C) OTHER PENALTIES- Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and (B), the Secretary may impose additional penalties for violations, including violations of cease and desist orders, specially designed compliance plans to prevent further violations, suspended fines to take effect in the event of a further violation, and in appropriate cases, the criminal penalty described in subsection (f). |
|
Sec. 274A(e)(5) if the employer appeals to U.S. District Court, “the burden shall be on the employer to show”, not that he is innocent – who cares about that - but “that the final determination was not supported by substantial evidence.” I've never heard of a standard of evidence like this! This means that if the Homeland Security prosecutor has
"substantial" evidence that you hired an illegal deliberately, it doesn't matter whether the evidence that you are
innocent is twice as substantial! Until now, the lowest standard of evidence was "preponderance of evidence".
It is used in divorce cases to decide who gets the kids. If in the mind of the judge 49.5% of the evidence favors
one parent and 50.5% favors the other, that's enough. The highest standard of evidence is "beyond a reasonable
doubt".
That is used in criminal trials. It is some comfort that they will not hang you until the jury is convinced
"beyond a reasonable doubt" that you did it. "Clear and convincing evidence" is a weaker standard, used in
child abuse cases. You can have "reasonable doubts" whether the parent did anything abusive, but if the evidence
is "clear and convincing" you can remove the child. |
Sec. 274A(e)`(5) JUDICIAL REVIEW- An employer adversely affected by a final determination
may, within 45 days after the date the final determination is issued, file a petition in
any appropriate district court of the United States. The filing of a petition as provided
in this paragraph shall stay the Secretary's determination until entry of judgment by the
court. The burden shall be on the employer to show that the final determination was not
supported by substantial evidence. The Secretary is authorized to require that the
petitioner provide, prior to filing for review, security for payment of fines and
penalties through bond or other guarantee of payment acceptable to the Secretary. |
|
The U.S. Senate expects less than one three-hundredth of its ambitious incarceration goals to be reached! Or, to put it another way, if we jail as many "illegals" as this bill says, they will have to wait in line for 300 years before all of them will have the opportunity to serve their time! Or to put it another way, if we jail half as many as this bill says, in order to find that much jail space we will have to turn every real criminal loose for the next 50 years! Sec. 275 Illegal Entry. (a)(2) Criminal Penalties. promises up to 6 months and a fine for the first time an "illegal" is caught. For the second time, up to 2 years and a fine. More if a real crime was committed. This applies to anyone caught here who may have lived here for decades. The great big glaring problem: we don’t have the jails to house 12 million illegals! We don’t even have the facilities for one million, without turning out real criminals. The specter of actual enforcement really raises the stakes on how much we want to invest our national self esteem in a stupid law. Sure, if we found a million Iowans were lawbreakers for exceeding our new 5 mph speed limit on Interstate 80, we could either jump up and down and whine that they broke the law, and make impractical resolutions to catch them all and put them all in jail – or we could raise the speed limit to a level no Christian should be ashamed of. Sec. 233(a) provides for closed military bases to be converted to 20 “detention centers” housing 1,000 each! At that rate, even if each of our 12 million illegals were jailed for only 6 months, it would take 300 years for those 12 million to have their turn in one of those 20,000 cells! Obviously, even though this bill authorizes the arrest and detention of every single illegal already here, besides those still coming, there is no expectation in the Senate that more than one three hundredth of these ambitious goals will ever be reached! |
Sec. 275(a)`(2) CRIMINAL PENALTIES- Any alien who violates any provision under paragraph (1)-- `(A) shall, for the first violation, be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both; `(B) shall, for a second or subsequent violation, or following an order of voluntary departure, be fined under such title, imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both; `(C) if the violation occurred after the alien had been convicted of 3 or more misdemeanors or for a felony, shall be fined under such title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both; `(D) if the violation occurred after the alien had been convicted of a felony for which the alien received a term of imprisonment of not less than 30 months, shall be fined under such title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both; and `(E) if the violation occurred after the alien had been convicted of a felony for which the alien received a term of imprisonment of not less than 60 months, such alien shall be fined under such title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. Sec. 233(a) Construction or Acquisition of Detention Facilities-
(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary shall construct or acquire, in addition to existing facilities for the detention of aliens, at least 20 detention facilities in the United States that have the capacity to detain a combined total of not less than 20,000 individuals at any time for aliens detained pending removal or a decision on removal of such aliens from the United States subject to available appropriations. |
The fact that such draconion business-busting penalties and court battles are addressed in this bill shows that we are not paranoid to expect that this Electronic Employment Verification System will put many businesses out of business. Or send them to Mexico.
If the Bible is right in warning us to expect Hell if we take the Mark of the Beast, we should naturally expect at least this taste of Hell when we implement 90% of the Mark of the Beast.
.
Other Fantastic Articles, Books, Movies, Music:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||