In the three excerpted texts we read for today, three men work out what it means (to them) to be citizens of a nation founded on an ideal.
J. Hector St.John de Crevecoeur meditates on the famous question: "What is an American?" His meditations demonstrate two things. First, the importance of America as an idea rather than a concrete entity. Second, the tensions between the idea of America as a free utopia and the reality.
Group Work:
What societies serve as (implicit and explicit) contrasts for Crevecoeur's examination of America?
Who does he consider and address as Americans?
Do you notice any internal contradiction in his work?
How does Crevecoeur model the Enlightenment ideals discussed in Pattel's lecture?
Declaration of Independence: Idea that Started a Nation
Thomas Jefferson wrote the "Declaration of Independence" in 1776 (although - as we have seen - it was edited by the Continental Congress). It was the document that started a nation.
How does this document function as a work of literature? How does it resemble the other texts we've studied?
Although we will not do this in class, comparing and contrasting these two dramatic presentations of the Declaration of Independence would be a very interesting way to look at the final paper. What do we hide or expose in our presentation of American history? Why?
Group Work:
Break into groups and identify the ways that the Declaration of Independence functions as an Enlightenment document. Post your comments in the comment box below.
In the rough draft of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson criticizes King George for participating in the slave trade.
A Declaration by the Representatives of United States of America, in General Congress Assembled
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for a people to advance from that subordination in which they have hitherto remained, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the equal and independent station to which the laws of nature and of nature's god entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the change.
We hold these truths to be [sacred and undeniable] selfevident, that all men are created equal and independent; that from that equal creation they derive in rights inherent and inalienables, among which are the preservation of life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these ends, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government shall become destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing it's powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes: and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. but when a long train of abuses and usurpations, begun at a distinguished period, and pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to [subject] reduce them to arbitrary power, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --
Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to expunge their former systems of government. the history of his present majesty is a history of unremitting injuries and usurpations, among which no fact stands single or solitary to contradict the uniform tenor of the rest, all of which have in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. to prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world, for the truth of which we pledge a faith yet unsullied by falsehood.
He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good:
He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has neglected utterly to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people unless those people would relinquish the right of representation [in the legislature], a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only:
He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
[he has dissolved]he has refused for a long space of time, to cause others to be elected, whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise, the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within:
he has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands:
he has suffered the administration of justice totally to cease in some of these colonies, refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers:
he has made our judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount of their salaries.
he has erected a multitude of new offices by a self-assumed power, and sent hither swarms of officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
he has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies and ships of war:
he has affected to render the military, independent of and superior to civil power:
he has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitutions, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their pretended acts of legislation, for quartering large bodies of armed troops among us;
for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders [which] they should commit on the inhabitants of these states; for cutting off our trade with all parts of the world;
for imposing taxes on us without our consent;
for depriving us of the benefits of trial by jury;
for transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses;
for taking away our charters, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments;
for suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever;
he has abdicated government here, withdrawing his governors, and declaring us out of his alegiance and protection;
he has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people:
he is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy unworthy the head of a civilized nation:
he has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions of existence:
he has incited treasonable insurrections of our fellow citizens with the allurements of forfeiture and confiscation of our property:
he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it's most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemispere, or to incure miserable death in their transportation hither. this piratical warfare, the opprobium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the Christian king of Great Britain. [determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought and sold,] he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce [determining to keep open a market where MEN should be bought and sold]: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he had deprived them, by murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them: thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.
in every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. a prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a people who mean to be free. future ages will scarce believe that the hardiness of one man, adventured within the short compass of twelve years only, on so many acts of tyranny without a mask, over a people fostered and fixed in principles of liberty.
Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. we have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over these our states. we have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here, no one of which could warrant so strange a pretension: that these were effected at the expence of our own blood and treasure, unassisted by the wealth or the strength of Great Britain: that in constituing indeed our several forms of government, we had adopted one common king, thereby laying a foundation for perpetual league and amity with them: but that submission to their parliament was no part of our constitution, nor ever in idea, if history may be credited: and we appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, as well as to the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which were likely to interrupt our correspondence and connections. they too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity, and when occasions have been given them, by the regular course of their laws, of removing from their councils the disturbers of our harmony, they have by their free election re-established them in power. at this very time too they are permitting their chief magistrate to send over not only soldiers of our common blood, but Scotch and foreign mercenaries to invade and deluge us in blood. these facts have given the last stab to agonizing affection, and manly spirit bids us to renounce forever these unfeeling brethren. We must endeavor to forget our former love for them, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends. we might have been a free and a great people together; but a communication of grandeur and of freedom it seems is below their dignity. be it so, since they will have it: the road to [glory and] happiness [and to glory] is open to us too; we will climb it apart from them [in a seperate state] and acquiesce in the necessity which denounces [pronounces][ our [everlasting Adieu!] eternal separation!
We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled do , in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these states, reject and renounce the allegiance and subjection to the kinds of Great Britain and all others whe may herafter claim by, through, or under them; we utterly dissolve and break off all political connection which may have heretofore subsisted between us and the people or parliament of Great Britain; and finally we do assert and declare these colonies to be free and independent states, and that as free and independent states they shall herafter have [full] power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.
Group Work: Collision of Slavery and Birth of Freedom
Read the deleted passage from this draft of the Declaration and talk about the collision of slavery and freedom. How is WRITING a part of this legacy?
Apess and Conversations about Freedom
As Morgan Freeman states in the dramatic presentation of the Declaration of Independence, the American government of ideals did not create an ideal world. However, it did generate conversations about these ideals. William Apess exposes American hypocrisy and demands justice.
Jordan Dylon Tony Patrick: It is an Enlightenment document to show the normal people how they are treated by Great Britain. It is a Puritan document because it talks about how God created everyone equal and they are not giving them the rights that God intended them to have. The Idea of Being American comes from how they are saying that everyone is created equal but they have no control over their decisions.
Enlightenment: The desire to "dissolve from political bands which have connected them with another," is their desire to be individuals rather than remaining true to old traditions. Another example is that "whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it." They want people to have more power than they have before.
Puritan: They appeal to traditional Christianity by saying that they are "endowed by their Creator." The phrase "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed," appeals to the Puritan beliefs of keeping their traditions.
Carah And Katelyn
> functioned as a Puritan document by mentioning God and lacking emotion.
> functioned as an enlightenment document by proclaiming their plan to break ties with Great Britain.
> functioned as the idea of being an American by stating their problems with Britain and then becoming their own country.
Boone and Shekinah
The declaration of independence can be seen from the puritan aspect from its justification that man follows God and that we are all created equally. From the enlightment side it takes the physical part of the world that are tangible given the ideas of what it means to be an American.
Enlightenment: The declaration states a lot of facts about the crimes King George has committed against the Americans. Every man has rights and they were not being recognized and infringed upon by the Crown.
Puritan: They state that all men are created equal by the same creator. We all have the same ability and chance because God has given it to us, but King George is trying to take it away.
Idea of being an American: We are able to function as an independent group of people. We know what the people want and want it to happen that way. We disliked a single ruler doing what he thought was best for him to stay in power rather than giving power to the people.
Alan Bowen, Areion leary
It starts off as a puritan document because it says God has given us the power to defend our rights. Then it goes to an enlightenment document as it starts giving actual facts about how they are oppressing our freedoms and people. It states that the idea of being an american is defending your rights and ideas.
Puritan because of the way they talk about God and how he is the leader of the world, then it goes to enlightenment because of the way they talk about freedom. Function the idea of being an American by stating their problems with the Britain then becoming their own country.
Cameron Whetzler, Anthony Tufaro, Glenn Scott
It is a Puritan Document because it appeals to religion. Enlightenment means rights that are given to you because you are human and not given to you by the government, therefore the original document by Thomas Jefferson said [in the Original document] that the slave trade was a war on humanity in itself.
Apess argues that the whites and the Indians are created equal. He appeals to pathos by reminding readers that they are created by one God who shows no favor toward outward appearance.
He uses pathos again in the third paragraph when he says that children are half-starved as a result of conflict.
He also brings up the point that many of the people who exploited Indians were people who spoke highly of them. This could fit under both ethos and pathos, because he appeals to ethics and emotions at the same time by making the audience question their own motives.
When he asks white men if they are the only ones deserving of God's love, he is essentially using their beliefs to manipulate their opinions by making them feel guilty.
He appeals to logos in paragraphs 15 and 16 by telling readers that their religion will remain the same, regardless of the skin color of the people who practice it. He reminds them that Jesus never considered outward appearance, urging readers to realize that their prejudice cannot be justified with their religion.
His strategies are appealing to their emotions by telling stories of the damage tension has caused, appealing to ethos by making them question their motives, appealing to religion and logic by telling them that their religion can accept people regardless of skin color, and he cleverly uses logos and pathos at the same time by using their religious beliefs to condemn their racial prejudice.
His lower-case writing of "christians" as opposed to "Christian" could mean that he is implying that they aren't true Christians because their actions have gone against what they are supposed to believe in. He uses their religion as a tool, turning it against them as a method of making them recognize their wrongdoing.
Tony, Patrick, Jordan: In the first paragraph he uses Pathos when he says " Judged by one God, who will show no favor to outward appearances" meaning that we are all the same. In the 6th paragraph he uses ethos by saying " can there not be the same principles under a redskin then there can be under a white" meaning that Indians should be able to be educated like the whites because they have the same abilities. In the 10th paragraph "The white man, being one in fifteen or sixteen are the only beloved images of God?" that is Logos because he uses logic to explain that just because they are white doesn't mean that they are more important than the other colors of skin. Paragraph 11 "Can you charge the Indians with robbing a nation almost of their whole continent, and murdering their woman and children, and then depriving the remainder of their lawful rights". Pathos. Because he is bringing up what the white people did to the Indians. Paragraph 14 "Did you ever hear or read of Christ teaching his disciples that they ought to despise one because his skin was different from theirs"? Pathos. Because he wants the British audience to realize that their is not one race that got promoted to be better than the other.
Alan Bowen, Johnteasha, Tracy, Darius, Arieon and Daniel
1. " that God who is the maker and preserver both of the white man and the Indian, whose abilities are the same, and who are to be judged by one God, who will show no favor to outward appearances, but will judge righteousness."
2. "How that would be I am not able to say—and if it should be, it would be nothing strange or new to me; for I can assure you that I know a great many that have intermarried, both of the whites and the Indians—and many are their sons and daughters"
3. " to give common education, and those of the brightest and first-rate talents put forward and held up to office."
4. "the saying of Jesus, "Thou shalt love,"
5. "Did you ever hear or read of Christ teaching his disciples that they ought to despise one because his skin was different from theirs?"
[3] - He appeals to emotion by telling how women were left as prostitutes and the children were starving. Anyone person should have emotions about this.
[4] - He claims the agents had no feeling toward the Natives. Did not care whether they died or lived. Its is equal to a lack of morals.
[6] - The white people do not care that they are there, but they do not care to educate them or help them. This is also a lack of morals.
[10] - Using the dominate culture's words against them is logical because it makes the white people look like hypocrites. Why should only the white man be created in the image of God, why can't the natives be considered created in the image of God.
[11] - There is a lack of ethics because the crimes of the white man is greater than the natives because the natives have never stolen an entire continent of land from a group of people and then slaughtered the women and children. Also depriving them of their lawful rights. :)
-He used ethos in paragraph 11 by using such straight-forward adjectives to try to make you actually feel what they were feeling.
-He used allusion when he referenced the Bible in paragraphs 10, 12,and 13.
-He uses figurative language when he uses the metaphor in "which is ten times blacker than any skin" (paragraph 9) so he can describe how society only sees their differences in skin color.
-He uses rhetorical questions at the beginning of paragraph 16 to really make you think about what hes trying to convey.
-He uses ethos on paragraph 14 by referring to the Bible by basically saying that "Jesus and his disciples didn't discriminate when it came to skin color, so why should they.
Cameron Whetzler, Anthony Tufaro, Keion Robinson, Glenn Scott, Dagoberto Acevedo:
1. Appeal to Religion- "God who is the maker... judged by God, who will show no favor to outward appearances, but will judge righteousness." Paragraph 1
2. Appeal to Religion- "Did you ever hear or read of Christ teaching his disciples that they ought despite one because his skin was different from theirs? Jesus Christ being a Jew, and those of his Apostles certainly were not whites." Paragraph 14
3. Appeal to Religion- "But you may ask who are the children of God? Perhaps you may say more but white. If so, the world of the Lord is not true. Paragraph 16
4. Appeal to Ethnicity- "... is not religion the same now under a colored skin as it ever was?" Paragraph 15
5. Appeal to Ethnicity- "Jesus Christ and his Apostles never looked at the outward appearances." Paragraph 15
You don't have permission to comment on this page.
Comments (15)
Jordan Ackerman said
at 11:43 am on Sep 14, 2016
Jordan Dylon Tony Patrick: It is an Enlightenment document to show the normal people how they are treated by Great Britain. It is a Puritan document because it talks about how God created everyone equal and they are not giving them the rights that God intended them to have. The Idea of Being American comes from how they are saying that everyone is created equal but they have no control over their decisions.
Jara Armstrong said
at 11:43 am on Sep 14, 2016
Tracy, Jara, Adriana:
Enlightenment: The desire to "dissolve from political bands which have connected them with another," is their desire to be individuals rather than remaining true to old traditions. Another example is that "whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it." They want people to have more power than they have before.
Puritan: They appeal to traditional Christianity by saying that they are "endowed by their Creator." The phrase "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed," appeals to the Puritan beliefs of keeping their traditions.
Katelyn Dunford said
at 11:43 am on Sep 14, 2016
Carah And Katelyn
> functioned as a Puritan document by mentioning God and lacking emotion.
> functioned as an enlightenment document by proclaiming their plan to break ties with Great Britain.
> functioned as the idea of being an American by stating their problems with Britain and then becoming their own country.
s_huggins@... said
at 11:43 am on Sep 14, 2016
Boone and Shekinah
The declaration of independence can be seen from the puritan aspect from its justification that man follows God and that we are all created equally. From the enlightment side it takes the physical part of the world that are tangible given the ideas of what it means to be an American.
Joshua Beckett said
at 11:44 am on Sep 14, 2016
Comment for Josh and Kyle:
Enlightenment: The declaration states a lot of facts about the crimes King George has committed against the Americans. Every man has rights and they were not being recognized and infringed upon by the Crown.
Puritan: They state that all men are created equal by the same creator. We all have the same ability and chance because God has given it to us, but King George is trying to take it away.
Idea of being an American: We are able to function as an independent group of people. We know what the people want and want it to happen that way. We disliked a single ruler doing what he thought was best for him to stay in power rather than giving power to the people.
Alan Bowen said
at 11:45 am on Sep 14, 2016
Alan Bowen, Areion leary
It starts off as a puritan document because it says God has given us the power to defend our rights. Then it goes to an enlightenment document as it starts giving actual facts about how they are oppressing our freedoms and people. It states that the idea of being an american is defending your rights and ideas.
Johnteasha said
at 11:45 am on Sep 14, 2016
Johnteasha Haines
Yaira Mota
Puritan because of the way they talk about God and how he is the leader of the world, then it goes to enlightenment because of the way they talk about freedom. Function the idea of being an American by stating their problems with the Britain then becoming their own country.
Cameron Whetzler said
at 11:48 am on Sep 14, 2016
Cameron Whetzler, Anthony Tufaro, Glenn Scott
It is a Puritan Document because it appeals to religion. Enlightenment means rights that are given to you because you are human and not given to you by the government, therefore the original document by Thomas Jefferson said [in the Original document] that the slave trade was a war on humanity in itself.
Jara Armstrong said
at 11:35 am on Sep 16, 2016
Jara and Shekinah:
Apess argues that the whites and the Indians are created equal. He appeals to pathos by reminding readers that they are created by one God who shows no favor toward outward appearance.
He uses pathos again in the third paragraph when he says that children are half-starved as a result of conflict.
He also brings up the point that many of the people who exploited Indians were people who spoke highly of them. This could fit under both ethos and pathos, because he appeals to ethics and emotions at the same time by making the audience question their own motives.
When he asks white men if they are the only ones deserving of God's love, he is essentially using their beliefs to manipulate their opinions by making them feel guilty.
He appeals to logos in paragraphs 15 and 16 by telling readers that their religion will remain the same, regardless of the skin color of the people who practice it. He reminds them that Jesus never considered outward appearance, urging readers to realize that their prejudice cannot be justified with their religion.
His strategies are appealing to their emotions by telling stories of the damage tension has caused, appealing to ethos by making them question their motives, appealing to religion and logic by telling them that their religion can accept people regardless of skin color, and he cleverly uses logos and pathos at the same time by using their religious beliefs to condemn their racial prejudice.
Jara Armstrong said
at 11:37 am on Sep 16, 2016
His lower-case writing of "christians" as opposed to "Christian" could mean that he is implying that they aren't true Christians because their actions have gone against what they are supposed to believe in. He uses their religion as a tool, turning it against them as a method of making them recognize their wrongdoing.
Jordan Ackerman said
at 11:36 am on Sep 16, 2016
Tony, Patrick, Jordan: In the first paragraph he uses Pathos when he says " Judged by one God, who will show no favor to outward appearances" meaning that we are all the same. In the 6th paragraph he uses ethos by saying " can there not be the same principles under a redskin then there can be under a white" meaning that Indians should be able to be educated like the whites because they have the same abilities. In the 10th paragraph "The white man, being one in fifteen or sixteen are the only beloved images of God?" that is Logos because he uses logic to explain that just because they are white doesn't mean that they are more important than the other colors of skin. Paragraph 11 "Can you charge the Indians with robbing a nation almost of their whole continent, and murdering their woman and children, and then depriving the remainder of their lawful rights". Pathos. Because he is bringing up what the white people did to the Indians. Paragraph 14 "Did you ever hear or read of Christ teaching his disciples that they ought to despise one because his skin was different from theirs"? Pathos. Because he wants the British audience to realize that their is not one race that got promoted to be better than the other.
Alan Bowen said
at 11:36 am on Sep 16, 2016
Alan Bowen, Johnteasha, Tracy, Darius, Arieon and Daniel
1. " that God who is the maker and preserver both of the white man and the Indian, whose abilities are the same, and who are to be judged by one God, who will show no favor to outward appearances, but will judge righteousness."
2. "How that would be I am not able to say—and if it should be, it would be nothing strange or new to me; for I can assure you that I know a great many that have intermarried, both of the whites and the Indians—and many are their sons and daughters"
3. " to give common education, and those of the brightest and first-rate talents put forward and held up to office."
4. "the saying of Jesus, "Thou shalt love,"
5. "Did you ever hear or read of Christ teaching his disciples that they ought to despise one because his skin was different from theirs?"
Joshua Beckett said
at 11:37 am on Sep 16, 2016
Josh Beckett - Kyle Hanna
[3] - He appeals to emotion by telling how women were left as prostitutes and the children were starving. Anyone person should have emotions about this.
[4] - He claims the agents had no feeling toward the Natives. Did not care whether they died or lived. Its is equal to a lack of morals.
[6] - The white people do not care that they are there, but they do not care to educate them or help them. This is also a lack of morals.
[10] - Using the dominate culture's words against them is logical because it makes the white people look like hypocrites. Why should only the white man be created in the image of God, why can't the natives be considered created in the image of God.
[11] - There is a lack of ethics because the crimes of the white man is greater than the natives because the natives have never stolen an entire continent of land from a group of people and then slaughtered the women and children. Also depriving them of their lawful rights. :)
Katelyn Dunford said
at 11:38 am on Sep 16, 2016
Katelyn Dunford and Carah Dalton
-He used ethos in paragraph 11 by using such straight-forward adjectives to try to make you actually feel what they were feeling.
-He used allusion when he referenced the Bible in paragraphs 10, 12,and 13.
-He uses figurative language when he uses the metaphor in "which is ten times blacker than any skin" (paragraph 9) so he can describe how society only sees their differences in skin color.
-He uses rhetorical questions at the beginning of paragraph 16 to really make you think about what hes trying to convey.
-He uses ethos on paragraph 14 by referring to the Bible by basically saying that "Jesus and his disciples didn't discriminate when it came to skin color, so why should they.
Dagoberto Acevedo said
at 11:40 am on Sep 16, 2016
Cameron Whetzler, Anthony Tufaro, Keion Robinson, Glenn Scott, Dagoberto Acevedo:
1. Appeal to Religion- "God who is the maker... judged by God, who will show no favor to outward appearances, but will judge righteousness." Paragraph 1
2. Appeal to Religion- "Did you ever hear or read of Christ teaching his disciples that they ought despite one because his skin was different from theirs? Jesus Christ being a Jew, and those of his Apostles certainly were not whites." Paragraph 14
3. Appeal to Religion- "But you may ask who are the children of God? Perhaps you may say more but white. If so, the world of the Lord is not true. Paragraph 16
4. Appeal to Ethnicity- "... is not religion the same now under a colored skin as it ever was?" Paragraph 15
5. Appeal to Ethnicity- "Jesus Christ and his Apostles never looked at the outward appearances." Paragraph 15
You don't have permission to comment on this page.