 Adam Weishaupt, founder of the Illuminati THE ILLUMINATI AIMED TO CREATE “A STATE OF LIBERTY AND MORAL EQUALITY.” How did a Bavarian professor end up creating a group that would be at the center of two centuries of conspiracy theories? The 18th-century German thinker Adam Weishaupt would have been stunned if he had known his ideas would one day fuel global conspiracy theories, and inspire best- selling novels and blockbuster films. Until he was 36, the vast majority of his compatriots would have been equally stunned to discover that this outwardly respectable professor was a dangerous enemy of the state, whose secret society, the Illuminati, was seen to threaten the very fabric of society. Born in 1748 in Ingolstadt, a city in the Electorate of Bavaria (now part of modern- day Germany), Weishaupt was a descendant of Jewish converts to Christianity. Orphaned at a young age, his scholarly uncle took care of his education, and enrolled him in a Jesuit school. After completing his studies, Weishaupt became a professor of natural and canon law at the University of Ingolstadt, married, and started a family. On the surface, it was a conventional enough career—until 1784 when the Bavarian state learned of his incendiary ideas. A closer look at his upbringing, however, reveals that Weishaupt always had a restless mind. As a boy he was an avid reader, consuming books by the latest French Enlightenment philosophers in his uncle’s library. Bavaria at that time was deeply conservative and Catholic. Weishaupt was not the only one who believed that the monarchy and the church were repressing freedom of thought. Convinced that religious ideas were no longer an adequate belief system to govern modern societies, he decided to find another form of “illumination,” a set of ideas and practices that could be applied to radically change the way European states were run. Freemasonry was steadily expanding throughout Europe in this period, offering attractive alternatives to freethinkers. Weishaupt initially thought of joining a lodge. Disillusioned with many of the Freemasons’ ideas, however, he became absorbed in books dealing with such esoteric themes as the Mysteries of the Seven Sages of Memphis and the Kabbala, and decided to found a new secret society of his own. Weishaupt was not, he said, against religion itself, but rather the way in which it was practiced and imposed. His thinking, he wrote, offered freedom “from all religious prejudices; cultivates the social virtues; and animates them by a great, a feasible, and speedy prospect of universal happiness.” To achieve this, it was necessary to create “a state of liberty and moral equality, freed from the obstacles which subordination, rank, and riches, continually throw in our way.” On the night of May 1, 1776, the first Illuminati met to found the order in a forest near Ingolstadt. Bathed in torchlight, there were five men. There they established the rules that were to govern the order. All future candidates for admission required the members’ consent, a strong reputation with well-established familial and social connections, and wealth. In the beginning, the order’s membership had three levels: novices, minervals, and illuminated minervals. “Minerval” referred to the Roman goddess of wisdom, Minerva, reflecting the order’s aim to spread true knowledge, or illumination, about how society, and the state, might be reshaped. “The Illuminati aimed to create “a state of liberty and moral equality.” Over the following years, Weishaupt’s secret order grew considerably in size and diversity, possibly numbering 600 members by 1782. They included important people in Bavarian public life, such as Baron Adolph von Knigge and the banker Mayer Amschel Rothschild, who provided funding. Although, at first, the Illuminati were limited to Weishaupt’s students, the membership expanded to included noblemen, politicians, doctors, lawyers, and jurists, as well as intellectuals and some leading writers, including Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. By the end of 1784, the Illuminati had 2,000 to 3,000 members. Baron von Knigge played a very considerable role in the society’s organization and expansion. As a former Freemason, he was in favor of adopting rites similar to theirs. Members of the Illuminati were given a symbolic “secret” name taken from classical antiquity: Weishaupt was Spartacus, for example, and Knigge was Philo. The membership levels also became a more complex hierarchy. There were a total of 13 degrees of initiation, divided into three classes. The first culminated in the degree of illuminatus minor, the second illuminatus dirigens, and the third, that of king. An Inside JobPressures both internal and external, however, would soon put an end to the order’s expansion into the upper echelons of Bavarian power. Weishaupt and Knigge increasingly fought over the aims and procedures of the order, a conflict that, in the end, forced Knigge to leave the society. At the same time, another ex-member, Joseph Utzschneider, wrote a letter to the Grand Duchess of Bavaria, supposedly lifting the lid on this most secret of societies. The revelations were a mix of truth and lies. According to Utzschneider, the Illuminati believed that suicide was legitimate, that its enemies should be poisoned, and that religion was an absurdity. He also suggested that the Illuminati were conspiring against Bavaria on behalf of Austria. Having been warned by his wife, the Duke-Elector of Bavaria issued an edict in June 1784 banning the creation of any kind of society not previously authorized by law. The Illuminati initially thought that this general prohibition would not directly affect them. But just under a year later, in March 1785, the Bavarian sovereign passed a second edict, which expressly banned the order. In the course of carrying out arrests of members, Bavarian police found highly compromising documents, including a defense of suicide and atheism, a plan to create a female branch of the order, invisible ink recipes, and medical instructions for carrying out abortions. The evidence was used as the basis for accusing the order of conspiring against religion and the state. In August 1787, the duke-elector issued a third edict in which he confirmed that the order was prohibited, and imposed the death penalty for membership. Weishaupt lost his post at the University of Ingolstadt and was banished. He lived the rest of his life in Gotha in Saxony where he taught philosophy at the University of Göttingen. The Bavarian state considered the Illuminati dismantled. Their legacy, however, has endured and fuels many conspiracy theories. Weishaupt was accused—falsely—of helping to plot the French Revolution. The Illuminati have been fingered in recent events, such as the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Weishaupt’s ideas have also influenced the realms of popular fiction, such as Dan Brown’s Angels & Demons and Foucault’s Pendulum by Italian novelist Umberto Eco. Although his group was disbanded, Weishaupt’s lasting contribution may be the idea that secret societies linger behind the scenes, pulling the levers of power. |
Meet the Man Who Started the Illuminati
| Source: | nationalgeographic.com |
| Published: | Feb 2, 2018 |
| Author: | Isabel Hern�ndez |
| Post Date: | 2018-02-02 08:41:19 by Gatlin |
| Views: | 5466 |
#1: Deckard To: Gatlin (#0)
Deckard posted on 2018-02-02 08:46:08 Reply Private Reply
#2: Gatlin To: Deckard (#1)
Gatlin posted on 2018-02-02 08:52:19 Reply Private Reply
#3: VxH To: Gatlin (#2)
Was Solzhenitsyn an idiot?
www.google.com/search? q=2...ars+together+solzhenitsyn
Russia! Russia! Russia?
2+2=4
VxH posted on 2018-02-02 12:07:55 Reply Private Reply
#4: Deckard To: Gatlin, VxH (#2)
Rinse and repeat.
Deckard posted on 2018-02-02 13:03:46 Reply Private Reply
#5: Gatlin To: VxH (#3)
I have seen it said that Alexander Solzhenitsyn was: A Useful Idiot for the West and that “he was a bad novelist and a fool. The combination usually makes for great popularity in the US.”
Here, I’ll let you see that too:
Gatlin posted on 2018-02-02 13:08:10 Reply Private Reply
#6: Gatlin To: Deckard (#4)
Gatlin posted on 2018-02-02 13:27:21 Reply Private Reply
#7: VxH To: Gatlin (#5)
Comrade President Andropov, is that you or is Gatlin just one of your misfiring KGB propaganda puppets?
VxH posted on 2018-02-02 13:37:38 Reply Private Reply
#8: Deckard To: Gatlin (#6)
Yeah - you said that already Parsons.
Deckard posted on 2018-02-02 13:45:48 Reply Private Reply
#9: Gatlin To: Deckard (#8)
They still proves absolutely NOTING...it’s still only a figment of your imagination, CT freak.
Get al life ...
Gatlin posted on 2018-02-02 13:50:32 Reply Private Reply
#10: Liberator To: VxH (#3)
Don't expect Gilligan to figure out even the most obvious and simple equation.
Liberator posted on 2018-02-02 13:52:32 Reply Private Reply
#11: Liberator To: Deckard (#8)
"I can't hear you, see the photos, OR add 2+2!!" ~ Gilligan
He's incapable of comprehending reality. Even as evidence is presented on a silver platter.
Liberator posted on 2018-02-02 13:56:23 Reply Private Reply
#12: Gatlin To: Liberator (#10)
Coming for some ill-informed person who still believes that Mexico sent their Special Forces into the U.S. to create havoc by rioting....but cannot provide one iota of proof.
LOL ...
Gatlin posted on 2018-02-02 13:59:22 Reply Private Reply
#13: Gatlin To: Liberator (#11)
Speaking of evidence, as you have....show your evidence on a silver platter that Mexico sent Special Forces into the U.S. to create havoc.
Or did you just flat out make up shit and LIE?
Gatlin posted on 2018-02-02 14:02:18 Reply Private Reply
#14: Deckard To: Gatlin (#9)
Nice to see that you are still relying on CIA propaganda talking points.
Conspiracy theory’s acutely negative connotations may be traced to liberal historian Richard Hofstadter’s well-known fusillades against the “New Right.” Yet it was the Central Intelligence Agency that likely played the greatest role in effectively “weaponizing” the term.
In the groundswell of public skepticism toward the Warren Commission’s findings on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the CIA sent a detailed directive to all of its bureaus. Titled “Countering Criticism of the Warren Commission Report,” the dispatch played a definitive role in making the “conspiracy theory” term a weapon to be wielded against almost any individual or group calling the government’s increasingly clandestine programs and activities into question.
"Conspiracy theory" is usually used as a pejorative label, meaning paranoid, nutty, marginal, and certainly untrue.
The power of this pejorative is that it discounts a theory by attacking the motivations and mental competence of those who advocate the theory. By labeling an explanation of events "conspiracy theory," evidence and argument are dismissed because they come from a mentally or morally deficient personality, not because they have been shown to be incorrect.
Calling an explanation of events "conspiracy theory" means, in effect, "We don't like you, and no one should listen to your explanation."
In earlier eras other pejorative labels, such as "heresy," "witchery," and "communism" also worked like this. The charge of "conspiracy theory" is not so severe as these other labels, but in its way is many times worse. Heresy, witchcraft, and communism at least retain some sense of potency. They designate ideas to be feared. "Conspiracy theory" implies that the ideas and their advocates are simple-minded or insane.
All such labels implicitly define a community of orthodox believers and try to banish or shun people who challenge orthodox beliefs. Members of the community who are sympathetic to new thoughts might shy away from the new thoughts and join in the shunning due to fear of being tainted by the pejorative label. CONSPIRACY THEORY AS NAIVE DECONSTRUCTIVE HISTORY by Floyd Rudmin
We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false. — William Casey, Ronald Reagan’s first CIA Director (from Casey’s first staff meeting, 1981)
Deckard posted on 2018-02-02 14:06:04 Reply Private Reply
#15: Gatlin To: Deckard (#14)
he results are in: we’re a nation of idiots.
Well, that might overstate the case a bit. But some of the latest polling data does seem to show that at least 30 percent of American citizens—and maybe lots more— are as dumb as a bag of inbred hammers.
The poll in question is a delightful one put out this week by Public Policy Polling, a concern ranked by Fordham University as the best out of 28 organizations for the accuracy of its national pre-election estimates in 2012. This time, the folks at P.P.P. decided to have a bit of fun, and rather than polling about which political party is up or down, opted to ask Americans about their beliefs in conspiracy theories. I can just imagine the laughter at the P.P.P. offices when they started putting together the questions.
The results, though, were no comedy. More like a horror movie—and one with a plotline that goes beyond any level of belief.
How many of you think Barack Obama is the Antichrist? You know, the fella (or fellas, depending on which part of the Bible you’re reading) confronted by Jesus in the Second Coming? Twenty-six percent of Americans either believe that the president is preparing for war with the Messiah or aren’t sure that he isn’t. (Of course, since Obama has been in office for five years, these yahoos should really start to wonder what’s taking Jesus so long to get back to Earth to confront the demon president.)
Hopefully, these are the same 26 percent of wackos who believe that the government puts fluoride into drinking water notfor dental health but for “other, more sinister reasons,” as the P.P.P. question read. It was all a communist plot, you see, to do . . . something.
Stanley Kubrick did a delightful send-up of this conspiracy theory in the film *Dr. Strangelove,*with a main character who declared that fluoridation was designed to contaminate the “precious bodily fluids” of Americans. He started World War III because of his beliefs; fortunately, most of the 26 percent probably couldn’t even start a math test.
That doesn’t mean that these uninformed folk are harmless. Fifty-four percent of Americans—more than half the country!—either believes that childhood vaccinations cause autism or aren’t sure whether they do. Never mind that study after study, including one just released by the Centers for Disease Control, say this belief is uneducated malarkey. Why should anyone consider that when we have former Playboy model and B-movie actress Jenny McCarthy disagreeing? Yes, that is where we are: Americans are more likely to believe a nursing-school dropout than PhDs from America’s most prestigious institutions of higher learning.
Which brings us to the next absurdity: climate change. Forty-nine percent either believe the college dropouts and billionaires or aren’t sure if they should—that global warming is a hoax. Notsimply that scientists are in error (which they aren’t) but that they have orchestrated the most expensive, wide-ranging, and mind- numbing fraud in the history of the world, just ’cause.
Once again, it’s the PhDs versus college dropouts like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. Sure, there are a few scientists—almost never climatologists—who cast aspersions on the idea that all the melting ice and record temperatures in the world might have something to do with the planet getting warmer. But when the vast, vast, vast majority of scientists—including one hired by the Koch brothers, the multi- billionaires with a financial interest in poo-poohing climate change—have concluded not only that the phenomenon is real but that it is being triggered by man-made pollutants, perhaps doubters should set aside their doubts.
But the Limbaughs and Hannitys of the world have done a great job convincing Americans that climatologists have entered into this massive, incomprehensible conspiracy to fool the world that there’s a problem. The reason, they say, is that climatologists are doing it for the money, so they can continue to live in their climatologist mansions and drive their climatologist Ferraris. (For the 26 percent who might not get it, that was sarcasm.) Meanwhile, the people who selflessly fight for Americans—the billionaire industrialists and oil-industry magnates—speak only truth because, you know, they have no financial reason to suggest climate change is a fraud. After all, they have dedicated themselves to a modest life so they can advance the truth, residing in their tumble-down, billionaire shacks and driving their billionaire 1994 Chevys. (Once again—sarcasm.)
I’m not belittling the McCarthys, Limbaughs and Hannitys simply to be snide. The reality here is that science is hard. It requires deep and long-term training to understand the ractions in ecosystems or microchips or intestines. If a doctor said you had stomach cancer, would you consult Rush Limbaugh for a second opinion? Of course, that sounds like nonsense, but many Americans have no qualms about listening to political commentators and untrained activists when it comes to even more complex scientific questions. In essence, the greater amount of training it takes to understand something, the more likely, it seems, that Americans will turn to people with shallow knowledge for guidance.
Take vaccines and autism. The entire idea started with a horrific, fraudulent study in a 1998 issue of the Lancet. Click on the link to the abstract, and you’ll notice the large, red word “RETRACTED” across it. The reason is that the study has been deemed a fraud. Not a single legitimate study backs the idea. But the McCarthys of the world march on, true believers who are simply unqualified, frightening Americans into believing their children are safer if they have no protections against deadly disease.
The untrained assault on climate change is the same thing. Consistently, political commentators will say such things as “there’s a blizzard! Global warming is fake!” without any understanding that there is a huge difference between weather and climate.) The greater problem was the phrase “global warming,” because the uninformed didn’t understand that rising climactic temperatures can cause changes in an ecosystem that result in wild swings in weather from both cold and hot. That’s why the phrase is now “climate change.” But folks like Limbaugh don’t get it. He just issued a new proclamation that climate change is fake because there has been stratospheric cooling. This is why you don’t get your science from a radio personality —Limbaugh just offered up the very scenario that the climatologists said would occur: climate change causes stratospheric cooling.
So, should you listen to me? Of course not. I’m not a scientist either. But there is plenty of valid research, easily accessible through google, that lays out the trends and issues surrounding the safety of vaccines and the changes in climate we experience. But Americans, based on the PPP poll, would rather listen to celebrities. Bottom line here is that American ignorance isn’t always just funny—it can be downright dangerous.
The poll just gets more and more depressing. Almost half of Americans believe Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11 or aren’t sure whether he was. Twenty-two percent: the Bush administration knowingly allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen. Nineteen percent: the Paul McCartney we see perform these days is a lookalike who took the real singer’s place after he died in 1966.
Here’s a great one. Thirty percent either believe that the media or the government adds secret mind-control technology to television-broadcast signals or aren’t sure whether it’s true. Seriously! Almost one-third of Americans think they are being or might be subjected to secret mind control. (Bet that doesn’t stop them from watching American Idol, though.)
Still, my favorite takes us into the beehive of lunacy inside too many American brains. The question asked by P.P.P., in total, was this:
“Do you believe that a secretive power elite with a globalist agenda is conspiring to eventually rule the world through an authoritarian world government, or New World Order, or not?”
In a nation that spawned the Tea Party, small wonder that the results here are horrifying: 53 percent of Americans either believe in this vast conspiracy or aren’t sure if it’s false.
Look, folks, the reality is that conspiracies are hard to pull off. Large groups of media executives, reporters, politicians, and scientists couldn’t manage to conspire to have lunch, must less take over the world. But these nutty beliefs have real consequences, on real people. Or, as Scientific American put it in an article last year, “[t]he new science denialism is creating an existential crisis like few the country has faced before.”
Yes, we have become scientific and political illiterates, and no nation can survive on a bedrock of such delusional stupidity. Of course, the 26 percent (or more) won’t believe me, if they manage to read this. I’ll just be deemed an “elitist” for daring to suggest that demon science and data, rather than ridiculous conspiracy theories, should be used to judge reality. So, it may be a losing battle, but we should all try. I don’t want to be forced, someday, to stand by as the rest of the world renames our nation “America the Ignorant.”
Gatlin posted on 2018-02-02 14:15:18 Reply Private Reply
#16: Deckard To: Gatlin, Liberator (#2)
Some "idiots" who believe in conspiracy theories:
“The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining supercapitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control. Do I mean a conspiracy? Yes, I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, incredibly evil in intent.”
–Rep. Larry P. MacDonald, killed in Korean Air Lines 007, 1983
“We are moving toward a new world order, the world of communism. We shall never turn off that road.”
—Mikhail Gorbachev, 1987
“I think that his [Obama’s] task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period, when really a New World Order can be created.”
—Henry Kissinger, CNBC 2008
“In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.”
—Strobe Talbot, Deputy Secretary of State, TIME, July l992
“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”
—David Rockefeller, NWO Banker
Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government.”
–Dr. Henry Kissinger, Evians, France, 1991
“Today the path of total dictatorship in the United States can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the Congress, the President, or the people. Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government – a bureaucratic elite.”
–Senator William Jenner, 1954
“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.”
—Franklin D. Roosevelt, letter to Col. House, November 21, l933
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years.
It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government.
The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”
—David Rockefeller, Baden-Baden, Germany 1991
“Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.”
—Woodrow Wilson
“Some even believe we are a part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty and I am proud of it.”
—David Rockefeller, Memoirs.
“Big Brother in the form of an increasingly powerful government and in an increasingly powerful private sector will pile the records high with reasons why privacy should give way to national security, to law and order, to efficiency of operation, to scientific advancement and the like.”
—William O. Douglas U. S. Supreme Court Justice
Deckard posted on 2018-02-03 12:11:28 Reply Private Reply
#17: Liberator To: Deckard (#16)
This clown can only lamely attack the messenger, aka "CTs" in little cutesy formatted frames.
And he wonders why he has no cred.
Liberator posted on 2018-02-03 12:19:32 Reply Private Reply
#18: Deckard To: Gatlin (#15)
Seems to me that the Manhattan Project was kept secret from the public for many years - that's just one example of where you are wrong.
When the entire MSM is controlled by the government - they will print or air what they are told.
Any reporter who values his job will not rock the boat by questioning the official narrative.
Also - Stephen Jones and other respectable engineers and architects were fired form their jobs for questioning the 9/11 Fairy Tale.
Too Grand a Conspiracy?
Was the involvement of just too many people required to pull off the so-called 'conspiracy theory' posited by the 9/11 Truth momvement? Defenders of the 'official story' say yes. They claim the theory is too far-fetched because it is a plan that would have had to involve far too many people, far too many 'conspirators' to so smoothly have been pulled off.
The idea being that at some point one of the 'conspirators' would have talked and/or come forward and/or refused to participate, etc. Some debunking websites and papers even claim the conspiracy would have needed the involvement of hundreds of people all coordinated not only operationally, but in their deviousness as well. And at first glance, this seems a reasonable point to make.
But there are ultimately two main problems with the argument. Firstly, it does not in any way answer any of the hard, relevant evidence relating to the case and narrative of 9/11 covered in this paper that does point to some kind of conspiracy. Instead, it is simply a stated notion of disbelief. And secondly, there did not, in actual fact, need to be that many people involved with the overall vision, of every detail and every implication of the plan.
There only needed to be a select few people at the top of the chain of command who knew exactly what was being carried out, where and how to create confusion, and why. The military and intelligence community is made up of people accustomed to following orders, without question. And many researchers who have spent time in the CIA and military intelligence have stepped forward into the 9/11 truth movement to explain the notion of 'compartmentalization'. A phenomenon and strategy that explains why not very many people need be in on the overall plan and execution of a covert operation for it to be successful.(more at the link)
Deckard posted on 2018-02-03 12:26:09 Reply Private Reply
#19: Deckard To: Liberator (#17)
He is a persistent little shill, isn't he?
And his formatting style is a lame attempt by him to add gravitas and respectability to the bilge he posts.
Notice that his last post dismissed those who believe that global warming is scam - typical leftist tripe.
Deckard posted on 2018-02-03 12:33:51 Reply Private Reply
#20: Liberator To: Deckard (#19)
The obsession is odd to say the least.
And his formatting style is a lame attempt by him to add gravitas and respectability to the bilge he posts.
Lol, true. That make it all that much more comical. Bless his heart.
Notice that his last post dismissed those who believe that global warming is scam - typical leftist tripe.
Thanks. I did miss it. And everything else. NOT surprised given his past fervent support of and defense of the ACLU. Our Little Buddy is a closet prog, and Statist-Globalist authoritarian.
Liberator posted on 2018-02-03 12:50:48 Reply Private Reply
#21: Gatlin To: Deckard (#18)
Bad example....in fact, no example at all.
The Manhattan Project was no “evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons.” Neither was the Manhattan Project was an “unexplained event, conspiracy theory belief that some that covert but influential organization was responsible for a circumstance or event.” Consequently, your invalid argument using the Manhattan Project does not follow formal logic and therefore is a non sequitur.
You may now continue to waste your time ...
Gatlin posted on 2018-02-03 17:33:20 Reply Private Reply
#22: Gatlin To: Deckard (#16)
Yep.....thanks.
Gatlin posted on 2018-02-03 17:51:14 Reply Private Reply
#23: Gatlin To: Deckard (#19)
... obviously extremely effective, otherwise you would not have mentioned it.
Thanks ...
Gatlin posted on 2018-02-03 18:09:01 Reply Private Reply