Please! Achtung! achtung!
as we german say
so no I come to the solution before I explain the problems
a no hope to explain at least
opalines of the solution to the problem and I call the solution
the idea of a private law society
so if the state
and especially the democratic state
is the months for billion capable
of creating and maintaining social order
if instead of helping to avoid conflict
the status a source of prominent conflict arm
and if rather than assuring legals
security and predictability the state itself continuously
generates in security
and unpredictability through its
legislation and if the state replaces
constant law was flexible
and arbitrary whim then
is capably of course the question a
arises as to who the correct and that must be
necessarily nuns status
solution to the problem of social order whole do we enforce these rules that I
explained
at the beginning as efficiently
as humanly possible and a solution to this is what I call
a private law society and a private law societies a society in which
every individual and every institution is subject
21 and the same set of Los
days no public laws that grants
privileges to specific person sought to specific functions
and there's also no public property
in such a society this is such a site
society only private law and private property
equality applicable to each and everyone
no one is permitted to acquire property
by any means other than through
origin appropriation through production
or through voluntary exchange
and no one possesses a privilege to Tex
wat to expropriate and moreover
in a private Law Society no one is permitted to
prohibit anyone else from using his
own property import up to enter any line of production
that he wishes to enter and compete against whom
ever he wants to compete no specific me
regarding the problem that we want to
discuss here that is arm in a private
Law Society the production of securities a production of law and
order will also be undertaken by freely finance
individuals and agencies that compete for voluntarily paying
we're not paying clientele justice a production of
all other goods and services now it would be
presumptuous one thing to predict
the pre size shape and form
of the security industry that would be march
was in the framework of a private law society but
it is not at all difficult to predict if your central changes
some that would fundamentally in
very favorably distinguish
competitive security industry from the president
and all too well known
status production of injustice
in disorder first of
ballin
any complex aside the
that is based on the division of labor
self defense will play only
a secondary role for reasons that I will come
pick to win a few minutes arm
it should be emphasized from the outset
that in the private Law Society everyone's
right to defriend oneself from aggression
against once person and against one's property
is entirely undisputed
in distinct contrast to the present statist
practice which brenda's people increasingly
on arm and defense seles against aggressors
in the private Law Society no restrictions
on the private ownership of firearms and
assault weapons exists everyone's
elementary right to engage in self-defence
to protect his life and property against
invaders will be sacrosanct
and S one knows from the experience
of the not so wild wild west
as well as numerous recent empirical investigations into the relationship
between
the frequency of gun ownership and crime rates
more guns imply less crime
let me just say a few words about this because
people are very confused about this
first in the wild west that is
the state time the United States when the federal state did not really exist
and practically every person most
owning guns contrary to what you see in many wild west
films some they existed
very small amounts of crime
Escom per copy da crime as compared to what exists in the current United States
imagine that you try to rob a bank
in every bank employee has gone
Tom the likelihood that you will get out of this gun
is practically zero these sorts of things
did simply not happen these
hear us were relatively wild but
wild only in the sense that people were willing participants
in in brawls so if you did go to a bar
arm and got into a fight and then people went outside
inch were shooting it out
that is obviously not crime up we would not interfere
if mike tyson is boxing against willamette Ali
that they are beating each other up these are willing participants
in something like this is all sorts of things exists that in the wild west
no question about it but
if you abstain from these types of things
the Wild West wasn't extremely safe place
as compared with the president United States
which is a dangerous place especially in major
cities due to the fact that
increasingly more limitations were put on gun
ownership are worse of course criminals
do not care about up breaking the law after all that's what they are criminals
arm imagine what would have happened
if they would not have this arm the entire British population
in recent decades during the riots that you saw recently
taking place in London do you think that the riots would have been as successful
in terms of the damage that they would have cost
if the British population would have been armed
I doubt it very much if you look at countries
Tom that are heavily armed such as Switzerland
were every meal adult yes and assault rifle
in his cap in his private cabinet with
munition Switzerland is one of the lowest crime rate countries in the world
and is one of the most heavily arm countries in the world
the same applies also to a use ray as far as I know
I'm not as familiar with the israeli casesa embassy
with the Swiss case um and the
there's a the famous study with a title
more guns a described by
guy John lot that use ample
illustration of the fact that the easy year
is in various states to have concealed weapons
the law was a crime rate tends to be your
um feed I'm just sick of something like this
a bill there was a rivalry between with different towns in the United States in
one
in one poll on the old law any
any ownership of guns at entirely and the rifle town
a a prescribe that people have to all
got um no
criminals are not nice guys but they are not Dom
arm as so in what in what town would you just
the build up your operation that seems to be rather obvious
um the this experiment Wilson
basically all law by the federal government saying
it's alright what that one called it outlawing
guns but it is not alright what the other told did
prescribing everybody to to own guns
in any case um but just as in two days
complex economy of course we do not produce our own shoes and our own suits
and our own telephones
arm but we take advantage of
the advantages that division of labor 0 of first
so we can expect that we will also do so
when it comes to the production of security especially
the more property a person owns
and the richer a society as a whole
is Tom heads most security
services will without doubt be provided
by specialized agencies that compete with each other for voluntarily
paying clients by various
private police insurance and
arbitration agencies
know if I wanted to summarize in one word to decide a sieve
difference and the decisive advantage
of a competitive security industry as compared
to the current status practice
this word would be contract
the state St ultimate decision-maker and judge
operates in the contract less
legal vacuo that exists
no contract between the state and its citizens
we do not have a contract that says I will do such-and-such
under such-and-such circumstance
it is not contractually fix
what this actually owned by who
and what accordingly is to be
protected the state does not say you own you¿re income
know it says you make it incumbent I tell you how much you can keep
been on much I will take arm
it is not fixed what service this the
is to provide it is not fix what this to happen to sustain
feels in its you d nor
what the prices that the custom the customer
so to speak of the service at the Stade
are offer us must pay for sis
service tax rates of flexible
they don't say Texas this and never will be changed
they never ask us if the changes if that is OK
no none of these things of fixed
rather state unilaterally fix us the rules of the game
the loss and can change them by legislation
during the game arm obviously
such a behavior is inconceivable for free be financed security providers
imagines this just imagine
a private security provider
guards with the police and ensure word
arbitrator whose offer consistent in something like this
he would say I will not contractually guarantee you anything
I will not tell you what specific sings I will regard s
your to be protective properties
nor will I tell you what I oblige myself to do
if according to your opinion I do not fulfill my service to you
but in any case eyes reserves the right
to unilaterally determine the price that you must pay me for such
on defiance or us
no no any any such security provider would be
would immediately disappear from the market you call
to due to a complete look of demand from the site of customers
each private treaty finance security producer in state must before its
protective clients contract
first of all and these contracts must
in order to be acceptable want to appear acceptable
by voluntarily paying clients
contain clear property descriptions
as well as clearly be fine mutual
services and obligations moreover
each party to a contract
for the duration until the fulfillment of the contract
would be bound by its terms and conditions
and every change of the terms and conditions
would require the unanimous consent of all parties concerned
thing the state again the medicine for that the state can of course just
past different losses if you are Justin in the enough
in a football game in the middle of the football game
a the the penalty rules will be changed
arm instead of just agreeing on not
from that from the outset were insisting before us we can shame that the middle
of the game but
only if we both agree on in which way they should be change
now more specifically in for up to appear acceptable to security buyers
these contracts must contain provisions about
what will be done in the case of conflict would dispute
between the allege protector or insurer
and his own protected or ensure clients
that is if serious a client between the insurance company
and it'd be the insurance company and
the client of this company nobody would sign the contract unless there would be
some ruling what will happen in such a case
um and these contracts must also contain provisions
0 what will happen in the case of a conflict between
different protecting agencies what different insures
and their respective clients everybody knows
that can be also conflicts between different insures
what will we do if there is a conflict between
this insurer and DEP insurer and
each insurable have to have provision in its contract
what procedure will be put in motion if that case
arises because everyone knows that case of course can arise also
and in this regard only one mutually agreeable solution exists
in these cases that is where we have conflicts between
the clients of the company and the company itself
or we have conflicts between different companies
arm the only solution that exists is
that one then resorts to arbitration by
in the planned sore pardons
emphasis on independents or parties
arm and these independence or parties
that are then used as arbitrators
in cases of conflict between someone is insured and the insurance company
were different insurance companies these independent
arm sort parties must be parties
are trusted by bowls parties to the conflict
com in addition um the sort parties
also freely financed
arbitration agencies that again
stand in competition with each other
was also arbitration agencies
the client's that is the insurer us
and the insured expect of sees
arbitrator still sees independence or parties
that they will come up was the verdict that is
recognized is fear and just by
all sides and only
arbitrators that are capable of forming
such judgments will succeed in the arbitration market
because no opportunity Shin agency can rely
on the fact that it will be chosen the next arbitration case
again you can't turn two different companies
if easel of the conflicting parties is dissatisfied
was a service performed by Z's arbitration agencies
arbitrators that are incapable of
forming judgments that are considered to be fear by all
conflicting clients
I'll and the out which are viewed as biased or partial
will simply disappear from the market I'll come pick to
to lose topic it little bit late again
now from from this fundamental advantage that is
that the IOC that they exist the contractual relationship between
agency said allegedly protect you
and you wants to be protected
a number of additional advantages fall
priced of competition
among police and among insurers and are between us for paying clients
would bring about the tendency toward continuous
call in the price of protection
per insured value arm
which makes protection increasingly more affordable also for poor people so to
speak
West a number to police the conditions the price of protection will steadily
rise
and become increasingly unaffordable a new
what we pay for protection currently goes up every year
on the other end the protection that we are actually receiving
gets worse and worse by he from year to year
arm for some more this I have already indicated
protection and security goods and services
that complete was all also ugg boots and socks
arm if your resources are a located to
protection fewer resources can be expended on
cars on vacation on food and drink
for for example arm and also
resources at up to locate it to the protection
of person a workgroup a arm
that same people living on on the west coast of Australia
are compete was resources
expended on the protection of people be
living on the east coast of of Australia
arm and as a text from the protection monopolist
the state's a location of resources will be necessarilly
up of it or are you why do they spent more on this
group then on that group home much should be spent
in total on protection are
conceivably you can I'll protect people buying
equipping everyone was the was a personal bodyguard and
a tank and the flames throw out put on on on top of it
arm do we need that much protection what would be
one policeman per cells in people was a stick
be sufficient all the whities I would do we decide
the sorts of things the market the Site C sorts of things
how much milk we we put used wants to have how much milk will will
the milk be delivered arm when it comes to states deciding
home watch to provide of what to
who they have they have no rational way to the site because
consumers do not buy GC they make the decision for consumers
of course desires and needs see have not the faintest idea
arm as a text funded protection one of us
the state's a location of resources is office opportunity
I'm there will be overproduction was there will be under production of
security
as compared to other competing goods and services
and there will be over protection of some individuals groups or regions and
under protection of others
of course most awful the protection will be forces state officials themselves
of they always make sure that they have plenty of bodyguards surrounding them
even though they should be the ones that these are
to be on perfect etc
so in be in sharp contrast to that in the
in a system of really competing protection agencies
all arbitrariness of a location all
over and under production would disappear protection would be a quarter
the relative importance that it has in the ice of voluntary paying consumers
and it should be perfectly clear that people have very different demands
insist I mean if you arnold schwarzenegger
Utah need as many personal bodyguards
as I need is a relatively weak person so to speak
arm some old ladies might want to have more protection
then the then some strong young man
if you live in a high crime rates at these
use expand more money on that then if you live
in the in the up pics the the somewhere and
I'll arm and like Rockwood crocodile dundee have my know all to handle them
a nice and weapons in the perfect up perfect way
so protection would be a quarter important said it had asked for
different people at different places
and no person or group or region would recruit new
receive protection at the expense of any other one
each everyone would receive put check protection
it accordance with his own payments the payments
records with his own desires
but the most important eventual for private contract based production of law
and order however
is of a qualitative nature
first days fight against crime
the state is not korea sleepy inefficient in this regard
because the state agents and trusted was just ask up paid out of Texas
that is yeah independent of the a up
payment is independent of their productivity
why shouldn't you work if you are paid
for doing nothing at all arm
infected can be expected that state agents take it
interest in maintaining a moderately high a crime rate
because this way you can justify fr increased funding
com as when a pic we know of course said
that the police employs all sorts of
agents that XPS actual
oval cut to arm that is that calls
sore problems and then afterwards just say
pay we need more funding and work to put the ourselves
against these types of activities you get to give you an example from
from Germany they are you thinking about to get
old outlawing some right-wing so-called
Nazi Party the problem with that is
Isis it right that the few years ago and then they found out
that most girls approve of it defections based on which they want to 20
all that party were done by agents of the state
that had been infiltrating just party on
and and them it
that even the courts worked what a shame just opal the party because
the the people the people have been state
employees who had been responsible for these types of activities
in fact what we can expect is that state
agents take as I said them and
even worse is for state agents the victims of crime
and the indemnification the compensation
of such victims place at best
a very negligible role the state does not
indemnify the victims of crime the state claims
that it protects from crime well
for more to us robbers and and so forth
but if it fails in that task they don't do anything
to just make good um
to the contrary
the harm victims are still for rosa
insulted in making them as taxpayers
pay for the incarceration
and the rehabilitation of the criminal
should he be capture arm
the victims do not get anything from the aggressors
knows the aggressors are incarcerated incarceration of an American
a prisoner in america's roughly 70 songs
dollars for EVE arm so these people can just
play table tennis complain if they don't get the right moostly for breakfast
are they can worked out so that once I get back
out a their next time a little bit stronger
arm they can even stay take it even study law
are in order to bring lawsuits against people
against people with in incarcerate it's a
incarcerated them arm
there's no incentive for instance
for State Police
to fly in stolen goods ask yourself
is here and sit there for an insurance company to find stolen goods the answers
of course
if I find the good so I don't have to compensate them why should the policeman
ever try to find stolen goods
it makes no difference no difference whatsoever
um private companies would have an incentive to prevent crimes because if
they prevent crimes
they don't have to pay up arm why would a state-funded
policemen have an interest in preventing
crimes if they have no obligation
to do any compensation afterwards in that case there are other hand old
parking tickets doing coffee at
711 are and the instead of
engaging in dangerous things like hunting down on dangerous criminals
I'll you the in the enjoy life
by doing things that are pleasurable because everybody pre prefer us of
course to do
pleasurable sings are overdoing dangerous
dangerous things um
private security providers in particular ensure us
said because they have to indemnify 0 clients in the case of an actual damage
otherwise it would of course fight no claimed whatsoever
arm they must operate fuel efficient manner
they must be efficient in the prevention of crime
because otherwise they would have to pay up
arm if a criminal check
cannot be pro prevent that they must be efficient
in detecting and recovering the stolen loot
otherwise again they would have to pay up
and particular they must be efficient in the detection in the f3 henchman of the
criminal
for only if the criminalist a pre handed is it possible for them
to make him pay for the compensation
old to that big them and thereby reduce their own cost
to all very very different sipes did
incentive structure is an entirely different one
then the incentive structure this Facebook Tex
funded protection agencies in addition
a private competitive
and contract-based security industry past the general
peace promoting effect
no States are as I have
indirectly already explain by nature aggressive institutions
they can call Austin provoke conflict importance in
solve it 20 own advantage
what to put it differently arm
s pics funded monopolist of ultimate decision-making
states can externalize the cost
associated with aggressive behavior on
to other people is on to the hapless
taxpayers and accordingly will tend to be more aggressive
vis-a-vis 0 own population as well yes vis-a-vis
for nice in
symbols but the simple riddle
what the united states have gone to war
against iraq if bush and his cronies have to pay all the costs associated
with that
out of their own pockets com
be accessed 15 hairspray like
if you can make also people pay for you on ridiculous
aggressive policies pay you tend to be more aggressive than you normally would
be
com so good
competing private insurers off by nature however
defensive and peaceful on the one hand
this is because every pic of aggression is cost
an insurance company that would be engaged in aggressive conduct
would require comparatively higher insurance premiums
are and that involves lost of clients to cheaper number aggressive
insures and on the other hand
it is not possible to ensure oneself begins
every conceivable risk
rather it is only possible to ensure oneself against
accidents that is risks over
whose outcome you have no personal control
arm and to which you do not contribute anything
to give foot for example it is possible to insure yourself
against the risk of this and the risk of fire
arm but is impossible to ensure oneself against the risk of
committing suicide 2morrow arm
want to burn down your own house
arm similar is impossible to insure oneself against the risk of business
failure
arm if you could do this I would insure myself and
it then the next day I just been mess up my business and then I could collect the
insurance premium you cannot control yourself against such things like this
you can also insure yourself against unemployment
when there is something of course is called unemployment insurance batik
but again you States invented off-course
I'm America defense America by
attacking iraq even though no iraqi ever attacked the United
is a completely defensive activity
%uh so we of course also have unemployment insurance
arm but unemployment is and on
insurable risk all I have to do to get unemployed is go to my boss
and tell 'em what Sobe is and
than I miss my job and I've and the insurance company would be held
responsible to help me out
Kansas problem come
for is also possible to ensure myself against disliking my neighbor
arm forth each case
one have some control of full control over the even
in question the risk in question most significantly
the on insurability of individual actions and sentiments
in distinction to the insurability against acceptance
implies that it is also impossible to ensure oneself against the risk of
damage just
that result from once own priorities aggression low provocation
it is I cannot insure myself against
me going all out the provoking somebody else or
hitting him in the head and then saying hey we know you
this guy is we tell you anything against me come to my rescue
no insurance company would never take on cases like
like sis arm instead every insurer must restrict the
actions of his clients so as to it could exclude all
aggressions and provocation on their part also kweisi will simply not insure
you
are that is any insurance against social disaster such as crime
must be contingent on the in Swartz up meetings himself
to specified norms of civilized
non aggressive conduct and
for rosa due to the same reasons and financial concerns
insurance will tend to require that their clients
abstain from all forms of the G luck to you
justice except in quite extraordinary
circumstances because vigilante justice
even if it is justified invariably
causes uncertainty and provokes
possible sort party intervention
and by obliging their clients instead to submit to regular
and publicized and open procedures when ever as a sink that the have been
victimized
these disturbances are that Associated and the associated cost with these
disturbances
can be largely avoided so
vigilante justice will not take place insurance companies will say
except in and a very circle unusual circumstances
there has to be an open investigation everything must be public
so that up conflicts
sudden involvements office sort parties
can be we'd use so that the cost of the operation of the shoe
insurance business can be can be lowered
arm and buy up large Inc their clients instead to submit to regular and
publicize pussy just want it was a sink that they have been victimized
these disturbances and associated costs can be largely avoided and lastly
it is worthwhile pointing out that while states
test text funded agencies can and do engaged in large-scale a prosecution
of victimless crime such as illegal drug use prostitution and gambling
the so-called crimes would tend to be of little
10 console Ron within a system of relief under protection
agencies arm protection against such
crimes would require obviously higher insurance premiums
but since these crimes on like genuine crimes where you have
really victims are crimes
well you don't have any victims I'll
would simply not find any clients why should I just
pay higher insurance premiums to protect myself
against something that that never victimizers me
in in any in any way
and even more Ball State's as I have already noticed always and everywhere
eager to disarm its population
and us are all bit of it essential means
of self defense private law societies
are characterized by an on restrict that the right to self-defence
and hence by widespread private gun and weapon
ownership just again just imagine
a security producer who demanded
of its prospective clients
that they would first have to completely dis
arms themselves and overall
weapons all nice all hammers also also
whatever it is before this company would be willing
to defriend the client's life and property
no core CPI everyone :d would think of this as a bad joke
and refuse suction offer a sec
so company comes to you and says I will protect you
but first you hand over everything that you can use to protect yourself
first and then my protection will begin
now UK every normal person will say that there is something really fishy going on
at
arm nonetheless is this is precisely what the states do
obviously toll-free be financed insurance companies that the man that
potential clients first
to hand over all of their means of self defense as a prerequisite of protection
with immediately a row so most
utmost this suspicion as to their true motives
and they would quickly go bankrupt in their own best interest insurance
companies on the other hand
would reward arm clients in particular those
that are able to certify some level of training in the handling of
arms and charging them low up premiums
that reflect the lower risk that there we present
in the same way as insurance charge less if homeowners have an alarm system
was safe install the soul with the train
gun or not we present lower insurance risk
now last and most importantly a system of competing protection agencies would
have
2004 impact on the development of law
on the one hand it would allow for a greater variability
of law
let me explain this for us instead of imposing a uniform set
uniform set of standards onto
everyone as set this a case under
status condition protection agencies could compete against each
also I'm not just by price
but also throughput tech product differentiation
that could exist for instance side by side
Catholic protection agencies were ensures
applying canon law jewish
agencies applying Mosaic Law Muslim agencies applying Islamic law
and agency supplying secular law of one variety
or another all of them sustained by a voluntarily paying
lie clientele consumers could choose so to speak the law apply to them
and their property and no one would have to live under
foreign law now on the also on hand
the very same system of private law order up
and private production of law and order would promote the tendency
toward as a unification and the harmonization
of law because the domestic so to speak domestic catholic-jewish Rollman
muzzaik law whatever arm would apply
obviously only it was a person and property
of those who have chosen this law
arm canon law for instance would apply only to profit catholics
and deal solely was in truck asslick conflict and conflict resolution
that is was conflict resolution between to
to catholics that are are
voluntarily have voluntarily subject themselves to lose this
canon law arm get
is obviously also possible of course that the Catholic might
come into conflict was a subscriber of some as a law called
such a Muslim law court for instance no
if Boleslaw colds reached the same or similar conclusion
then of course no difficulties with the rise
however if competing law colds arrive
it distinctly different conclusions
and they would definitely do so in some cases
then obviously a problem arises that is the domestic
the in truck group law would be obviously
useless but naturally every inch work personal want protection also
against this contingency namely the contingency
of intergroup conflict everyone knows that can of course happen also
might be nice if they've of if you all catholics and the problem would be very
is off but if we are not of gas leaks everybody knows then the conflict in the
simple
rise to be in that group with that group
and they can sometimes come to different up
different conclusions arm
so in this situation he cannot be expected that one
intro was a subscriber and the subscribers of its law court simply
support made
their judgment who's that of another insurer and its law
brother as I have already explained before
arm into situations exist only one credible
acceptable way out of this predicament
and that is from the outset every insurer would have to be contractually
obliged
to submit itself it's Klein to of it racin
by an independence or party
and just party would not only be independent
but at the same time it would be easy unanimous choice
of bowls conflicting parties so
the Catholic agency and the Muslim agency would
goal to us sort independent
unanimously agreed upon are agency that the performance now
the conflict that they have regarding
was right and who is wrong in the case at hand
and it would be agreed upon the sort party because of its
commonly perceived ability to find mutually agreeable
fear solution in cases of into a group
disagreements and different arbitrator feel
inzest task and arrive conclusions that were perceived as
on feel all biased by ease 01 of C insurance for their clients
this person was agency would not likely be trolls
S& arbitrator in the future again
and as a result then of this constant cooperation of various insurance and
arbitrators a tendency port
the unification of property and contract law
and the harmonization of the rules of procedure
evidence and conflict resolution would be set in most
to give is important to realize that the variety a variety of law Colts does not
at all
exclude a development course
toward harmonize a shin of Los
as soon as it comes to conflicts between zzzz
rival law courts quite to the contrary
the is a pressured to lose them develop universal law courts
that apply so to speak to all these
different law Colts that applied
to in 20 internal groups
no so a tendency towards the unification of property and contract law
and the harmonization of the rules of procedure evidence
conflict resolution would be set in motion so in
in buying protection insurance every insurer
and every insured becomes the participant
in an integrated system for conflict avoidance
I'll and of peacekeeping every single conflict
and every single damage claim regardless of where
and by war against who
would fall exactly in the US diction of one
or more specific insurance agency
and would be handled he's a boy in individual
insure us domestic law were Boise
international universal law provisions
and procedures agree upon by everyone
in advance by agree on sort party arbitration
and so as a result instead of per minute conflict and
injustice and legal in security yes we have it and as a present status
conditions
in a private law society we would get
the highest degree of peace justice legal security
arm and and safe and
and safety thank you very much
and
can I ask a a question which I guess is appropriate for the time
I'm in in europe we're seeing with the
nations having problems with the delivers a bit
and issue with phones and what we're seeing this
occurring in the United States and probably much possible world
I'm as we move on to the next AG
in in society we more like to go your way
or more likely to go to totalitarian say
it if you your if you ask me I'm
a a rather than to be pessimistic as a wheel
a situation has become
worse from from year to year this as far as i'm concerned. a
I'm pretty sure that there will be a catastrophe brewing somewhere in the
future but catastrophes do not always
in up improving sings they might sings
might make things even even worse the
the European crisis for instance has not let to a situation where
the European Union is is broken up as it should be
um but the has led to a situation
were increased attempts are being made to to go for as a
in in terms of centralization is create European central government and so forth
a.m. to in the short run I tend to be rather pessimistic
om if I would be at the fundraising dinner I would have to say there must be
something good in the future coming
it that you get that you get some return on your money
up I'm I'm not too hopeful for mankind
a only few
on the on the other hand as as long as they don't incarcerate us
and leave us alone let's try to have as much fun as possible
and that a and and enjoy simply that we have insights that other people do not
have
Minnesota see you see the nonsense going on and just sit there they didn't I say
that that would happen if exactly should have a rapid
sky
For more infomation >> PIMIENTOS RELLENOS DE ATÚN - Duration: 2:01. 
For more infomation >> Folge 14: Boxspring-Bett oder besser nicht? - Duration: 3:08. 
For more infomation >> GAME Talking Tom Running for Gold Cat Angela - Duration: 11:53. 
For more infomation >> "Con đường xưa em đi" và 4 bài hát trước 1975 bị tạm dừng lưu hành để thẩm định lại ca từ - Duration: 2:43. 
For more infomation >> Флиппинг или полет бабочки. - Duration: 1:34. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét