Ghenghis

Poppycock, Propaganda and Politics

37 posts in this topic

PERSONAL POST

The Poppy Project http://www.eaves4women.co.uk/POPPY_Project/POPPY_Project.php

was set up in 2003. It is funded by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform (reporting to the Ministry of Justice) to provide accomodation and support to women who have been trafficked into prostitution. It has 54 bed spaces in houses nationally.

As has been said in other places, some on this site, as it's very raison d'etre is to fight trafficking (Which any right minded person would agree is the only correct course) then it needs to prove that there is in fact something to fight in order to continue to receive it's funding from the Government. The same Government who trot out all those extremely dubious statistics on the level of said trafficking.

Apparently in return for the outreach and also the bed spaces, they receive £3.6M pa for their work.

They claim to have had 700 referals since they were set up in 2007.

That works out at a cost of approx £100,000 per referal or £700,000 per bed even if all of those beds are occupied.

Indeed, using the same poor mathematics and extrapolation that they use themselves, it could be argued that, if you take their usage of "short term" accomodation as being 6 months each that for every 7 women referred to Poppy, only 1 meets the criteria to be helped. That is a 14% conversion rate from referals to clients.

So do we need to have a good look at how the Government are using taxpayers money to fund a propoganda organ for the Government that Harriet Harman is using dishonestly in order to prop up her quasi-feminist agenda.

Now clearly, as a man, I am already totally suspect to even comment on these matters however a short examination of my total posting record will show that I am totally against trafficking and always recommend alerting the Police or Crime Stoppers if you even suspect, let alone have proof of, trafficking. It is an evil crime that completely wrecks families and lives and I would advocate the death penalty for those who perpetuate slavery of this nature in today's world.

However, I also truly believe that all of the women I have met to date whilst punting have been free, independant women who have made a choice as to how they earn their living.

Another smokescreen is the statistic thrown up about how many prostitutes have been assaulted etc during or as a result of working. Clearly this statistic looked at sensibly strongly underlines the need for sensible legislation and regulation so that a woman choosing to be a prostitute can work in a safe and legally protected manner.

It is plain crazy to have a world where when prostitutes are assaulted by rivals or their pimps, the police are more interested in the prostitution angle than they are in the assault and future safety of the lady involved.

So, I think it is well past time that we all started to challenge wherever possible the Harriet Harmans, John Sentamus and Poppycock of this world with the truth and facts.

They are relying on us to want to keep out of sight on this one and so they are (As has been said elsewhere) winning the propaganda war.

We now have at least two journalists on this site wanting to know our side of the story. Let's give them it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another smokescreen is the statistic thrown up about how many prostitutes have been assaulted etc during or as a result of working. Clearly this statistic looked at sensibly strongly underlines the need for sensible legislation and regulation so that a woman choosing to be a prostitute can work in a safe and legally protected manner.

Without at all wanting to trivialise the physical danger that WGs occasionally face, I would bet that it is less than a Nurse or Doctor working the nightshift in A&E.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Without at all wanting to trivialise the physical danger that WGs occasionally face, I would bet that it is less than a Nurse or Doctor working the nightshift in A&E.

I don't want travilise it also, but there is a difference: Nurse or doctor working in A&E not going to be on theirs own, plus they have an additional security equipments installed. WGs are! (if its not parlour or working flat)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Without at all wanting to trivialise the physical danger that WGs occasionally face, I would bet that it is less than a Nurse or Doctor working the nightshift in A&E.

I have no comment on this as I have no evidence either way, however one set of people are protected by the law and society and the other is cast adrift and persecuted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another smokescreen is the statistic thrown up about how many prostitutes have been assaulted etc during or as a result of working. Clearly this statistic looked at sensibly strongly underlines the need for sensible legislation and regulation so that a woman choosing to be a prostitute can work in a safe and legally protected manner

Do you mean us to contribute ideas about this, or what? Remember that one person's sensible idea is another person's airy-fairy scheme and someone else's dangerous nonsense.

It is plain crazy to have a world where when prostitutes are assaulted by rivals or their pimps, the police are more interested in the prostitution angle than they are in the assault and future safety of the lady involved

I assume you did not mean to imply that this ludicrous state of affairs is the fault of the police.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you mean us to contribute ideas about this, or what? Remember that one person's sensible idea is another person's airy-fairy scheme and someone else's dangerous nonsense.

It is self evident by the fact that your post appeared whilst you are in pre-Mod.

I assume you did not mean to imply that this ludicrous state of affairs is the fault of the police.

Unless you accept the defence, which I understood was completely debunked at Neurenberg, of "I was only following orders" is valid, then the Chief Constables involved have to take some large measure of responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is self evident by the fact that your post appeared whilst you are in pre-Mod

What is self-evident? I made two points and you don't mention which you are agreeing with..

Unless you accept the defence, which I understood was completely debunked at Neurenberg, of "I was only following orders" is valid, then the Chief Constables involved have to take some large measure of responsibility

In our system, the police are not elected, the Government is. Elsewhere things may be different, but here the responsibility rests 100% with the Government unless orders to the police mean they would have to break laws to follow said orders. It's pretty simple really..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PERSONAL POST

The Poppy Project http://www.eaves4women.co.uk/POPPY_Project/POPPY_Project.php

was set up in 2003. It is funded by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform (reporting to the Ministry of Justice) to provide accomodation and support to women who have been trafficked into prostitution. It has 54 bed spaces in houses nationally.

As has been said in other places, some on this site, as it's very raison d'etre is to fight trafficking (Which any right minded person would agree is the only correct course) then it needs to prove that there is in fact something to fight in order to continue to receive it's funding from the Government. The same Government who trot out all those extremely dubious statistics on the level of said trafficking.

Apparently in return for the outreach and also the bed spaces, they receive £3.6M pa for their work.

They claim to have had 700 referals since they were set up in 2007.

That works out at a cost of approx £100,000 per referal or £700,000 per bed even if all of those beds are occupied.

Indeed, using the same poor mathematics and extrapolation that they use themselves, it could be argued that, if you take their usage of "short term" accomodation as being 6 months each that for every 7 women referred to Poppy, only 1 meets the criteria to be helped. That is a 14% conversion rate from referals to clients.

So do we need to have a good look at how the Government are using taxpayers money to fund a propoganda organ for the Government that Harriet Harman is using dishonestly in order to prop up her quasi-feminist agenda.

Now clearly, as a man, I am already totally suspect to even comment on these matters however a short examination of my total posting record will show that I am totally against trafficking and always recommend alerting the Police or Crime Stoppers if you even suspect, let alone have proof of, trafficking. It is an evil crime that completely wrecks families and lives and I would advocate the death penalty for those who perpetuate slavery of this nature in today's world.

However, I also truly believe that all of the women I have met to date whilst punting have been free, independant women who have made a choice as to how they earn their living.

Another smokescreen is the statistic thrown up about how many prostitutes have been assaulted etc during or as a result of working. Clearly this statistic looked at sensibly strongly underlines the need for sensible legislation and regulation so that a woman choosing to be a prostitute can work in a safe and legally protected manner.

It is plain crazy to have a world where when prostitutes are assaulted by rivals or their pimps, the police are more interested in the prostitution angle than they are in the assault and future safety of the lady involved.

So, I think it is well past time that we all started to challenge wherever possible the Harriet Harmans, John Sentamus and Poppycock of this world with the truth and facts.

They are relying on us to want to keep out of sight on this one and so they are (As has been said elsewhere) winning the propaganda war.

We now have at least two journalists on this site wanting to know our side of the story. Let's give them it.

Well said Ghenghis - Excellent summary

I fear they have an inherent advantage in the propaganda war that their version of things is a sexier one for the Media than the more prosaic reality. It doesn't help that chaps with influence like that bishop make pronouncements on the basis of rubbish they read in the press.

We have on the plus side serious academia trying to keep it real. On the down side it is hard for us to stick our heads above the parapet, either as clients or service providers, because of the stigma attached to prostitution and our personal circumstances.

There is a lot of money in this industry but I think it needs something like the USW to get some of it specifically for a fighting fund, hire a PR company and work out a strategy to combat Poppycock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent post, it's not enough for us to be right and the poppy project to be wrong they need to be challenged.Unless we all want to form our own group and give TV interviews visit parliament etc the best way to do this is support those that do and can.

Any journalists reading this have you been to the IUSW and ECP websites and seen what real working girls say?

As for the rest of us has everyone signed the on-line petitions on these websites and sent a donation?

Like Ghenghis says the poppy project are winning the propaganda war, to help reverse that everyone needs to do their bit.I'm only a man (which means my opinion does not count to redfems!) but I pay tax and I vote so I will influence what I can, as far as I can as a citizen.

Most posters will know these but here are the links.

www.prostitutescollective.net

www.iusw.org

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is self-evident? I made two points and you don't mention which you are agreeing with..

If you remember the fist thing you asked which was..........

Do you mean us to contribute ideas about this, or what?

then you will realise that my comment was that it was self evident by the fact your post came out of pre-Mod intact that I was inviting comments.

Your two points were there for all and they looked more like comment and I read them as such.

In our system, the police are not elected, the Government is. Elsewhere things may be different, but here the responsibility rests 100% with the Government unless orders to the police mean they would have to break laws to follow said orders. It's pretty simple really..

Thank you for stating the obvious, I shall try not to be as patronising in my response.

You are, of course wrong in as much as the Police should not be supporting a political agenda but should impartially uphold the laws and in the process make sensible judgements. Assault and attemted murder are in my book a lot more serious offences than living off immoral earnings etc., however your views may differ.

Just today we have seen Jacqui Smith censured for using the Police service in a political manner and indeed the Inspector of Police has apologised that they allowed themselves to be so used and has made recommendations that this is codified differently in future - is that difficult to understand?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't want travilise it also, but there is a difference: Nurse or doctor working in A&E not going to be on theirs own, plus they have an additional security equipments installed. WGs are! (if its not parlour or working flat)

I'm on your side, Xenia; if WGs work together, giving greater safety to each other, they become guilty of operating a Brothel. David Blunkett when Home Secretary wanted to change this, but his successors at the Home Office seem to favour the zero-tolerance approach.

All I meant by making the comparison is that just because someone faces danger in their work does not mean it should be outlawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for stating the obvious, I shall try not to be as patronising in my response

Uh, you failed, dude :D

You are, of course wrong in as much as the Police should not be supporting a political agenda but should impartially uphold the laws and in the process make sensible judgements. Assault and attemted murder are in my book a lot more serious offences than living off immoral earnings etc., however your views may differ.

Just today we have seen Jacqui Smith censured for using the Police service in a political manner and indeed the Inspector of Police has apologised that they allowed themselves to be so used and has made recommendations that this is codified differently in future - is that difficult to understand?

It has always in the past been the position that the Home Secretary maintains a kind of personal command over the Metropolitan Police [hence, for example, the noted failure of many Met Commissioners to tackle the ingrained corruption until the 70s]. Other forces, it is true, have less direct influence from Whitehall, but the trend is definitely one of centralisation and towards uniformity of approach and uniformity of powers exercised.

I assume (since I have not seen or heard a news bulletin today) your mention of Jacqui Smith is in re: the matter of Damian Green MP. I had understood from the weekend's press that the most substantial blame lay with senior civil servants, who had wildly overstated to the police the secrecy of the documents leaked to Mr Green. I will be most interested to find that this is incorrect.

Your statement above that I am 'wrong' is a value judgement which I respect but which I humbly submit, m'Lud, is not particularly sustained by the facts :)

Now, kindly take me out of pre-mod, my man - I'll give you a good reference :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes,its a shame that the industry is'nt more supportive financially & politically of the english collective of prostitutes, & the international union of sex workers.

thankfully there are some who do help but more should donate to those who are defending the industry

lets not forget that as taxpayers we are actually donating to the poppy project who want us all criminalised,so its important to speak out when we can to try counteracting govt propaganda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An unholy alliance of fundamentalists from opposite ends of the spectrum, religious and feminist. Both viciously anti-sex, well straight sex anyway in the case of the radfems.

Funny, never really saw the CofE standing for anything much. More Jam and Jerusalem than hellfire and damnation. Unusual for a CofE primate to take a stand, but worrying.

Up to now it's been just a few, mostly female, labour politicians and a bunch of radfems who currently have their ear. Harman thinks all prostitution is degrading and unacceptable. What she doesn't realise is that the radfems whispering in her ear think that all straight sex is exactly like that.

Everyone else has sensibly avoided the debate thus far, but Sentamu has broken ranks to support the legislation including strict liability, an abuse of civil rights he would not appreciate if Mugabe was behind it.

Clearly he has been got at, fed a load of junk which he has trusted to be accurate and as a result decided that the legislation including strict liability is the lesser of the two evils. His advisers can't be very sophisticated.

But the problem is that the debate is now being opened out beyond the politicos and on Poppycock terms i.e. vastly distorted figures on trafficking are being accepted as a given.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(another) debate on the guardian website.

this quote sums up the real way HH and her like think:

What will it be like for women to live in a world where men can buy sex from a woman without needing to care whether she is remotely attracted to him or is enjoying it physically at all?

Poster doesnt seem to realise this is already the world we are in!

But seriosuly, a lot of these people just dont like the idea that men can get sex easily without begging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PERSONAL POST

The Poppy Project http://www.eaves4women.co.uk/POPPY_Project/POPPY_Project.php

was set up in 2003. It is funded by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform (reporting to the Ministry of Justice) to provide accomodation and support to women who have been trafficked into prostitution. It has 54 bed spaces in houses nationally.

<snipped for brevity's sake>

We now have at least two journalists on this site wanting to know our side of the story. Let's give them it.

Excellent post Ghenghis (hopefully a lot more satisfying to write than scolding hapless touts and cheerleaders on another thread :P). Thank you for taking the time to write it.

Whilst many of just can't go public with our stories and povs, it is time we stood up and got counted where "facts" and "statistics" about prostitution are misused in the name of crusading and personal promotion. Hopefully, the journalists referred to above can sort the wheat from the chaff on these boards to get some sort of balanced view.

It is important (as you have done) to recognise, and be seen to recognise, that trafficking exists, albeit not on the ridiculous scales reported, and must be stamped out. An ex-trafficked WG (Lim ?) was interviewed on BBC London last week and her tale of begging punters to help her only to be continually reported to the management as a potential escapee was both chilling and harrowing. I would hope that the vast majority of punternet posters would do the right thing when put in that situation. I am staggered that according to young Lim, no-one did for her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is already well known from watching other countries that legalisation/decriminalisation is the only sensible way to go.

It's like the drugs trade, you just hand it to the black market on a plate by making it illegal.

With legalisation/decriminalisation comes regulation, safety and management.

No wonder that there is no mention on their site of the prostitute collective etc. They appear to know more of what is best than the prostitutes themselves, so why would they need their opinion?

The reality of trafficking is based on economics, not the lust of dirty old men. Just like drug mules who risk death and people who work to provide the west with cheap goods.

If there is a job that pays money, you can best someone will do it.

But I wonder, what would all these women do if they were not prostituting?

It reminds me of the people who want to boycott goods made from poor countries because of their working conditions. What happens to the people who are employed when the work starts to dry up?... Starve?

But, ofcourse, it would be suicide for the government to side with prostitutes and heaven forbid the punters. There is still way to much social stigma and too little government backbone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of thoughts and memory from a few years ago

We are currently experiencing the largest movement of humans in the history of our kind, maybe not in percentage terms but in total numbers, mainly from south to north globally, but also east to west in Europe. Without offering or opening a political row this is obviously economical driven.

One of the drivers for prostitution is economic, the other being men's lust. Some of this movement of people is being driven/facilitated by the sale of sex.

The scale of the numbers and the weight of the drivers is speculation at this point. I'm sure some do exaggerate the numbers as others might play them down.

Many of those moving continents (and some times countries) have no access to the protection of the host state, nor knowledge of the language, culture let alone the processes of welfare. Crucially neither do we have access to them, or even know about their world, these poor desperate people trafficked people (sexual or otherwise, think of the cockle pickers in Morecombe).

Those of us who buy sex, or sell sex, in the mainstream UK have very little knowledge of the underworld of this vast movement of people. We are not in position to comment.

However our freedom to exchange money for sex is being challenged by those who link this movement of people and their terrible exploitation with us. As G said we must always challenge trafficking.

But do we, I ask this because once I didn't.

I was once with a regular girl, I won't mention her name or the establishments she worked at when this encounter took place.

Her first initial was K. She was (now deleted) a well reviewed girl at two established houses in north east London and south east London. She must have had 50 odd reviews. I met her before she started at these places, at another well known east London parlour that still exists. She was said to come from Poland. One day we talked, she was not from Poland, she was*********, she had arrived here with a debt of £4000, she thought she was coming here to be dancer. I asked what would happen if didn't pay the remaining £ 2000 she laughed, the most harrowing, haunting laugh I'd ever heard she looked like she wanted to cry.

I asked what I could to help she said nothing, she had family in **********, that would be hurt.

This was a girl known for her affection, warm and willingness. She might have been an exception but what do we really know about the complexities of these vast movements of people? About the hidden people and the happy fronts of those we encounter, whether delivering our pizzas, fixing fencing, sucking our cocks of servicing their own communities.

I did nothing to report the trafficking here because of her wishes. There is another of the complexities of the issue.

I'd suggest if we want to protect the freedom we have we don't lay into projects that support those whose lives are, unimaginably, unbearably full of suffering.

These are projects we should support, financially (yes lets cough up against trafficking) and as supporters we should expect a role in their governance to ensure they are well run, accountable to funders and their research is based on sound academic principles.

Now I'm not about to offer myself as board member but I do think we should do more than have Crimestoppers number on the front page. We should engage at a strategic level with those who want to fight trafficking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post, Mickey.

We now have at least two journalists on this site wanting to know our side of the story. Let's give them it.

But as far as this forum is concerned, haven’t we been doing that, ad infinitum, especially on the L&L board?

And it's not just here, but on other sites and in the many corrective comments that always follow online articles or opinion pieces that uncritically trot out Poppy's discredited figures.

The anti lobby remains strong because it has many leading feminist journalists and similar allies in its pocket, all of whom keep hammering away with the same flawed figures and the same blinkered views. The puritans, be they from the conservative Judeo-Christian tradition or the radical feminist left, cannot allow their preconceived views to be overturned, cannot allow that any working girl has made an informed and voluntary choice to go into this line of work. Nor will they ever accept that it is work, providing services in exchange for payment, much like any other work. Equally they will do everything they can to prevent the public at large from seeing the truth of the matter.

Despite the propaganda, comments from unbiased members of the public indicate that they do largely recognise that most prostitution is a free exchange between consenting individuals, not the modern day scourge of slavery and drug abuse the anti lobby want it be.

Yes, one could be forgiven for thinking they really want it to be like that, that there be thousands of enslaved and drug-addled girls on the streets of Britain, because only then will their distortions be true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An ex-trafficked WG (Lim ?) was interviewed on BBC London last week and her tale of begging punters to help her only to be continually reported to the management as a potential escapee was both chilling and harrowing. I would hope that the vast majority of punternet posters would do the right thing when put in that situation. I am staggered that according to young Lim, no-one did for her.

That is truly sickening and makes our task an uphill one, especially those of us who are doubly damned because we favour "foreign" ladies. I suppose one should never be surprised by the vileness of humanity, but what sort of punters are these?

I can assure anyone reading that if a girl asked for my help in that situation she would be out of there pretty damn quick. If I couldn't get her out straight away, on my own, then it's straight to Crimestoppers or the police. There would be an alternative possibility too, if the girl didn't want to involve the police and stay under the radar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PERSONAL POST

The Poppy Project http://www.eaves4women.co.uk/POPPY_Project/POPPY_Project.php

was set up in 2003. It is funded by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform (reporting to the Ministry of Justice) to provide accomodation and support to women who have been trafficked into prostitution. It has 54 bed spaces in houses nationally.

As has been said in other places, some on this site, as it's very raison d'etre is to fight trafficking (Which any right minded person would agree is the only correct course) then it needs to prove that there is in fact something to fight in order to continue to receive it's funding from the Government. The same Government who trot out all those extremely dubious statistics on the level of said trafficking.

Apparently in return for the outreach and also the bed spaces, they receive £3.6M pa for their work.

They claim to have had 700 referals since they were set up in 2007.

That works out at a cost of approx £100,000 per referal or £700,000 per bed even if all of those beds are occupied.

Indeed, using the same poor mathematics and extrapolation that they use themselves, it could be argued that, if you take their usage of "short term" accomodation as being 6 months each that for every 7 women referred to Poppy, only 1 meets the criteria to be helped. That is a 14% conversion rate from referals to clients.

So do we need to have a good look at how the Government are using taxpayers money to fund a propoganda organ for the Government that Harriet Harman is using dishonestly in order to prop up her quasi-feminist agenda.

Now clearly, as a man, I am already totally suspect to even comment on these matters however a short examination of my total posting record will show that I am totally against trafficking and always recommend alerting the Police or Crime Stoppers if you even suspect, let alone have proof of, trafficking. It is an evil crime that completely wrecks families and lives and I would advocate the death penalty for those who perpetuate slavery of this nature in today's world.

However, I also truly believe that all of the women I have met to date whilst punting have been free, independant women who have made a choice as to how they earn their living.

Another smokescreen is the statistic thrown up about how many prostitutes have been assaulted etc during or as a result of working. Clearly this statistic looked at sensibly strongly underlines the need for sensible legislation and regulation so that a woman choosing to be a prostitute can work in a safe and legally protected manner.

It is plain crazy to have a world where when prostitutes are assaulted by rivals or their pimps, the police are more interested in the prostitution angle than they are in the assault and future safety of the lady involved.

So, I think it is well past time that we all started to challenge wherever possible the Harriet Harmans, John Sentamus and Poppycock of this world with the truth and facts.

They are relying on us to want to keep out of sight on this one and so they are (As has been said elsewhere) winning the propaganda war.

We now have at least two journalists on this site wanting to know our side of the story. Let's give them it.

Well said..... There is a very serious issue here in that Poppy gets the huge majority of its funding from the Government and then, in an incestuous circle, spends an undisclosed proportion of that money on lobbying the government. This same model is seen with other fake charities, e.g. Alcohol Concern and Action on Smoking & Health (see http://www.fakecharities.org though it seems to be down today).

Even at best this is bad practice, insofar as the Government receives lobby group propaganda, not objective research for its (sic; our) money. At worst, it is corrupt if it becomes a backdoor means of employing friends -guaranteed to give the opinion ministers want- on the public payroll with no duty of objectivity. In either case it is something we can ill afford in these difficult economic times and an issue that should be considered by the National Audit Office as well as the Charity Commissioners.

I believe I am right to say that in the US the law states that "no substantial part" of a public charity's activities may be devoted to [political] lobbying.... Perhaps it is something we need here, especially for any charity that derives more than half its income from public sources

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some posters here appear to be saying : "We cannot possibly change anything because the odds are stacked against us, nobody loves us, let's all just keep quiet, don't rock the boat, and a few of us may escape un-noticed".

Fine, if that works for you but some of us would prefer to take more positive actions in order to try and make a positive albeit incremental step forward in this issue.

So feel free to keep your heads down if that is your scene but don't nay-say us into oblivion because we don't want to go down without a fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are currently experiencing the largest movement of humans in the history of our kind, maybe not in percentage terms but in total numbers, mainly from south to north globally, but also east to west in Europe. Without offering or opening a political row this is obviously economical driven

How so? We are constantly being told on TV that the developing countries are weathering the recession better than countries like the UK.

Or perhaps it is that the developing countries are exporting their unemployed to us? And perhaps these new arrivals are exploiting the unwillingness of the police to take action which is not prioritised by our leading politicians?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now