Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study
What about H3N2? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_flu_pandemic Of course SARS-CoV was worse, and MERS-CoV a lot worse than CoV19, but comparatively very very few people got those. HA-MRSA killed 100k in USA in 2002, and didn't end there, but that's bacteria, not viral. On Sun, June 14, 2020 1:53 pm, Peter Frederick via Mercedes wrote: > The only one we've had that gets close to the same description of > CoVid-19 is the H1N1 flu a few years back. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study
On Sun, 14 Jun 2020 09:27:17 -0400 Dan Penoff via Mercedes wrote: > I work with and have been trained as a part of my job to interact and > respond with FEMA for such events, so I’m very familiar with what could > be done and how it would be managed. No one ever gave the order or > provided direction. This is the direct responsibility of the office of > the President to DHS, under which FEMA acts. Period. Every other FEMA action I have heard of required the locals (governor, etc.) to request help, as our federal system requires. Craig ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study
On Mon, June 15, 2020 5:12 pm, Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes wrote: > Timing is about right from loosening restrictions > 2-3 weeks ago. And how would that timing fit in with the beginning of the George Floyd protest gatherings around May 26th? ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study
My thanks too, Karl. You've taken the time to give us very valuable information. Gerry On Mon, 15 Jun 2020 15:39:22 -0500 OK Don via Mercedes wrote: > Thanks Karl, for taking the time to give us a simple, factual, explanation. > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:46 PM Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes < > mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote: > > > At their root level, public health crises driven by highly infectious > > diseases are a national problem. The response alwys needs to be carried out > > by state and local entities, but particularly when dealing with a novel > > pathogen, allowing the best scientific and public health experts to drive > > the response is critical. That is what Iceland did. The public health > > department drove the entire thing. Politicians were not involved at all in > > telling them what to do or how to do it. There will always be political > > ramifications from any action, but those cut both ways and if the > > politicians drive it and get things wrong, they pay the price. So I would > > argue it is best to just rely on the public health experts and let them > > take any heat. Best for the politicians and best for the country in terms > > of disease control. > > > > Anyway State departments of health are highly variable in their resources > > and levels of expertise and will therefore depend to varying levels on > > national resources and guidance for their reponse plans and policies. New > > York City is a world class health department on its own, for instance. > > Their politicians chose not to listen to their public health officials > > initially, and look at the result. Those few weeks of political dilly > > dallying could have saved a lot of older people's lives, and some younger > > people also, in and around NYC. But I digress. The main point is that most > > of the country is not as well equipped as NYC. So their heaalth departments > > need help with technical aspects as well as guidance on what policies are > > most effective. Not that the guidance will always be perfect, but a > > consistent, unified voice is always more reassuring during a crisis than a > > fragmented response where politicians undermine what the public health > > people say, whether it be about masks, treatments, business closures, > > travel restrictions etc. You want the public to see everyone working > > together consistently in an apolitical fashion to manage the problem. > > Centralized, national leadership is a key part of getting the response > > entites on the same page. Telling the states to figure it out for > > themselves isnt using the available resources very well. Both FEMA and the > > CDC have considerable expertise and resources that could be used in ways > > they have not been so far. > > > > Re The Prez: he would have been better served to stay out of the limelight > > on the whole thing. Committing hard to specific ideas when the state of > > knowledge is poorly developed is kind of like putting all your money on red > > 22: not likely to pay out. He made a lot of foolish statements that painted > > him into a corner. He doesnt have enough technical depth to comment and > > doesnt seem to appreciate how out of his depth he is. He should have relied > > more on the CDC people to lead the response, but they were pretty much > > muzzled. They would literally normally be telling everyone what to do, > > mobilizing considerable resources to facilitate testing and telling states > > what the test and trace policies and targets should be. Instead we have had > > the JK crew telling everyone that the states are on their own for stockpile > > and other resources and POTUS telling everyone the states are responsible > > for dealing with their own epidemics and lockdown policies. CDC has > > definitely been told to stand down or they would be out in front on all of > > it. FEMA would definitely be driving the stockpile distributions and > > policies, which should be transparent and non punitive. Basically this was > > a big political opportunity for DT to let the machinery work and then > > declare victory. Instead the epidemic is poorly controlled, dragging on > > into election season, the economic impact is dragging on longer than it > > should, and there is a high chance it will all get worse again. There is a > > strong chance we will end up doing the usual public health test and trace > > interventions anyway. > > > > The lockdown was super draconian and largely unprecedented. It was never > > going to be a workable long term strategy. The best thing for the economy > > would have been to tell the nation that everyone needs to do their part to > > fight this thing, train up contact tracing teams, ramp up testing on a > > national level with proven tests and defined targets for positivity rate, > > and push CDC people and federal stockpile resources into state and local > > health departments as needed to provide support. Instead, testing lagged > > behind tremendously for unclear reasons while
Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study
We in CA have been loosening the reins to let this thing run a bit. Not everyyhing is open, but more things are than before. It was really shut down for awhile. People in town are still pretty cautious and traffic is still way down, but picking up. We are doing a lot of testing, and are down To about 5% positive results now, which is borderline adequate. 3% is better to be sure you are testing enough to pick up all cases. But we are close. You just schedule a drive up appointment and they swab your nose in a few locations. You are supposed to have some symptoms but everyone can get tested if they have a runny nose etc. LA was ticking up a bit even before things oficially opened back up. Lowest we got was 31 cases in house and now it is back up to 43 steadily increasing over a week. Timing is about right from loosening restrictions 2-3 weeks ago. We in socal represent the lions share of disease activity in the state, with LA, san diego, riverside, Orange County and san Bernardino rounding out the top 5 counties. LINK: https://public.tableau.com/views/COVID-19PublicDashboard/Covid-19Public?:embed=y&:display_count=no&:showVizHome=no I drove out to Santa Paula the other day, about an hour northwest, North of Ventura. Very different feel. Ate in a restaurant and when I walked in with a mask on everyone stared at me like I was from Mergatroid. The servers had masks on but nobody else did. Basically nobody is masked up out there. I suspect most of rural CA is similar. It maps well with disease activity. I think LA county has a lot of low income people in very high density apartment sharing situations because housing is so expensive here that people are forced into that type of arrangement. We see a huge spread (about 55%of cases per the website above) among Latinos and I think this housing issue may be the main cause. I do not know if that is driving the spread over the past week or not. 56% of total cases but 38% of total population. I will look into the uptick a bit more but honestly that website is not the easiest to get trend data from. On Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 12:08 PM Curt Raymond wrote: > Hey Karl, > > Any idea why California has cases rising so quickly? It was interesting to > see California do well early on but in about a week I expect to see the > number of cases in California exceed New Jersey where the rise in cases has > dramatically slowed. > > -Curt > > On Monday, June 15, 2020, 2:46:19 PM EDT, Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes < > mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote: > > > At their root level, public health crises driven by highly infectious > diseases are a national problem. The response alwys needs to be carried out > by state and local entities, but particularly when dealing with a novel > pathogen, allowing the best scientific and public health experts to drive > the response is critical. That is what Iceland did. The public health > department drove the entire thing. Politicians were not involved at all in > telling them what to do or how to do it. There will always be political > ramifications from any action, but those cut both ways and if the > politicians drive it and get things wrong, they pay the price. So I would > argue it is best to just rely on the public health experts and let them > take any heat. Best for the politicians and best for the country in terms > of disease control. > > Anyway State departments of health are highly variable in their resources > and levels of expertise and will therefore depend to varying levels on > national resources and guidance for their reponse plans and policies. New > York City is a world class health department on its own, for instance. > Their politicians chose not to listen to their public health officials > initially, and look at the result. Those few weeks of political dilly > dallying could have saved a lot of older people's lives, and some younger > people also, in and around NYC. But I digress. The main point is that most > of the country is not as well equipped as NYC. So their heaalth departments > need help with technical aspects as well as guidance on what policies are > most effective. Not that the guidance will always be perfect, but a > consistent, unified voice is always more reassuring during a crisis than a > fragmented response where politicians undermine what the public health > people say, whether it be about masks, treatments, business closures, > travel restrictions etc. You want the public to see everyone working > together consistently in an apolitical fashion to manage the problem. > Centralized, national leadership is a key part of getting the response > entites on the same page. Telling the states to figure it out for > themselves isnt using the available resources very well. Both FEMA and the > CDC have considerable expertise and resources that could be used in ways > they have not been so far. > > Re The Prez: he would have been better served to stay out of the limelight > on the whole thing. Committing hard to specific
Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study
Thanks Karl, for taking the time to give us a simple, factual, explanation. On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:46 PM Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes < mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote: > At their root level, public health crises driven by highly infectious > diseases are a national problem. The response alwys needs to be carried out > by state and local entities, but particularly when dealing with a novel > pathogen, allowing the best scientific and public health experts to drive > the response is critical. That is what Iceland did. The public health > department drove the entire thing. Politicians were not involved at all in > telling them what to do or how to do it. There will always be political > ramifications from any action, but those cut both ways and if the > politicians drive it and get things wrong, they pay the price. So I would > argue it is best to just rely on the public health experts and let them > take any heat. Best for the politicians and best for the country in terms > of disease control. > > Anyway State departments of health are highly variable in their resources > and levels of expertise and will therefore depend to varying levels on > national resources and guidance for their reponse plans and policies. New > York City is a world class health department on its own, for instance. > Their politicians chose not to listen to their public health officials > initially, and look at the result. Those few weeks of political dilly > dallying could have saved a lot of older people's lives, and some younger > people also, in and around NYC. But I digress. The main point is that most > of the country is not as well equipped as NYC. So their heaalth departments > need help with technical aspects as well as guidance on what policies are > most effective. Not that the guidance will always be perfect, but a > consistent, unified voice is always more reassuring during a crisis than a > fragmented response where politicians undermine what the public health > people say, whether it be about masks, treatments, business closures, > travel restrictions etc. You want the public to see everyone working > together consistently in an apolitical fashion to manage the problem. > Centralized, national leadership is a key part of getting the response > entites on the same page. Telling the states to figure it out for > themselves isnt using the available resources very well. Both FEMA and the > CDC have considerable expertise and resources that could be used in ways > they have not been so far. > > Re The Prez: he would have been better served to stay out of the limelight > on the whole thing. Committing hard to specific ideas when the state of > knowledge is poorly developed is kind of like putting all your money on red > 22: not likely to pay out. He made a lot of foolish statements that painted > him into a corner. He doesnt have enough technical depth to comment and > doesnt seem to appreciate how out of his depth he is. He should have relied > more on the CDC people to lead the response, but they were pretty much > muzzled. They would literally normally be telling everyone what to do, > mobilizing considerable resources to facilitate testing and telling states > what the test and trace policies and targets should be. Instead we have had > the JK crew telling everyone that the states are on their own for stockpile > and other resources and POTUS telling everyone the states are responsible > for dealing with their own epidemics and lockdown policies. CDC has > definitely been told to stand down or they would be out in front on all of > it. FEMA would definitely be driving the stockpile distributions and > policies, which should be transparent and non punitive. Basically this was > a big political opportunity for DT to let the machinery work and then > declare victory. Instead the epidemic is poorly controlled, dragging on > into election season, the economic impact is dragging on longer than it > should, and there is a high chance it will all get worse again. There is a > strong chance we will end up doing the usual public health test and trace > interventions anyway. > > The lockdown was super draconian and largely unprecedented. It was never > going to be a workable long term strategy. The best thing for the economy > would have been to tell the nation that everyone needs to do their part to > fight this thing, train up contact tracing teams, ramp up testing on a > national level with proven tests and defined targets for positivity rate, > and push CDC people and federal stockpile resources into state and local > health departments as needed to provide support. Instead, testing lagged > behind tremendously for unclear reasons while the disease became more and > more established and the lockdown dragged on with no clear national > strategy or even any defined national goals for controlling the disease. > E.g. Do we tolerate a certain infection rate, or try for zero? Work it > through with the states until everyone has a
Re: [MBZ] Happy 220D engine day
Thanks I am waiting for Wednesday Dwight Giles Jr. Wickford RI On Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 3:41 PM Kevin Kraly via Mercedes < mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote: > May your OM615 run well on this 6/15! > Kevin in Hillsboro, OR > 2019 Sprinter 12 passenger 144WB 875 miles, Low Mileage Lutgard AKA Der > DoodleWagen > 1982 240D, High Mileage Hildegard with a low mileage engine, no new news > > Sent from my iPhone > ___ > http://www.okiebenz.com > > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > > ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
[MBZ] Happy 220D engine day
May your OM615 run well on this 6/15! Kevin in Hillsboro, OR 2019 Sprinter 12 passenger 144WB 875 miles, Low Mileage Lutgard AKA Der DoodleWagen 1982 240D, High Mileage Hildegard with a low mileage engine, no new news Sent from my iPhone ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study
Hey Karl, Any idea why California has cases rising so quickly? It was interesting to see California do well early on but in about a week I expect to see the number of cases in California exceed New Jersey where the rise in cases has dramatically slowed. -Curt On Monday, June 15, 2020, 2:46:19 PM EDT, Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes wrote: At their root level, public health crises driven by highly infectious diseases are a national problem. The response alwys needs to be carried out by state and local entities, but particularly when dealing with a novel pathogen, allowing the best scientific and public health experts to drive the response is critical. That is what Iceland did. The public health department drove the entire thing. Politicians were not involved at all in telling them what to do or how to do it. There will always be political ramifications from any action, but those cut both ways and if the politicians drive it and get things wrong, they pay the price. So I would argue it is best to just rely on the public health experts and let them take any heat. Best for the politicians and best for the country in terms of disease control. Anyway State departments of health are highly variable in their resources and levels of expertise and will therefore depend to varying levels on national resources and guidance for their reponse plans and policies. New York City is a world class health department on its own, for instance. Their politicians chose not to listen to their public health officials initially, and look at the result. Those few weeks of political dilly dallying could have saved a lot of older people's lives, and some younger people also, in and around NYC. But I digress. The main point is that most of the country is not as well equipped as NYC. So their heaalth departments need help with technical aspects as well as guidance on what policies are most effective. Not that the guidance will always be perfect, but a consistent, unified voice is always more reassuring during a crisis than a fragmented response where politicians undermine what the public health people say, whether it be about masks, treatments, business closures, travel restrictions etc. You want the public to see everyone working together consistently in an apolitical fashion to manage the problem. Centralized, national leadership is a key part of getting the response entites on the same page. Telling the states to figure it out for themselves isnt using the available resources very well. Both FEMA and the CDC have considerable expertise and resources that could be used in ways they have not been so far. Re The Prez: he would have been better served to stay out of the limelight on the whole thing. Committing hard to specific ideas when the state of knowledge is poorly developed is kind of like putting all your money on red 22: not likely to pay out. He made a lot of foolish statements that painted him into a corner. He doesnt have enough technical depth to comment and doesnt seem to appreciate how out of his depth he is. He should have relied more on the CDC people to lead the response, but they were pretty much muzzled. They would literally normally be telling everyone what to do, mobilizing considerable resources to facilitate testing and telling states what the test and trace policies and targets should be. Instead we have had the JK crew telling everyone that the states are on their own for stockpile and other resources and POTUS telling everyone the states are responsible for dealing with their own epidemics and lockdown policies. CDC has definitely been told to stand down or they would be out in front on all of it. FEMA would definitely be driving the stockpile distributions and policies, which should be transparent and non punitive. Basically this was a big political opportunity for DT to let the machinery work and then declare victory. Instead the epidemic is poorly controlled, dragging on into election season, the economic impact is dragging on longer than it should, and there is a high chance it will all get worse again. There is a strong chance we will end up doing the usual public health test and trace interventions anyway. The lockdown was super draconian and largely unprecedented. It was never going to be a workable long term strategy. The best thing for the economy would have been to tell the nation that everyone needs to do their part to fight this thing, train up contact tracing teams, ramp up testing on a national level with proven tests and defined targets for positivity rate, and push CDC people and federal stockpile resources into state and local health departments as needed to provide support. Instead, testing lagged behind tremendously for unclear reasons while the disease became more and more established and the lockdown dragged on with no clear national strategy or even any defined national goals for controlling the disease. E.g. Do we tolerate a certain infection rate, or try for zero? Work it
Re: [MBZ] OT Wuhan Red Death mortality rate study
At their root level, public health crises driven by highly infectious diseases are a national problem. The response alwys needs to be carried out by state and local entities, but particularly when dealing with a novel pathogen, allowing the best scientific and public health experts to drive the response is critical. That is what Iceland did. The public health department drove the entire thing. Politicians were not involved at all in telling them what to do or how to do it. There will always be political ramifications from any action, but those cut both ways and if the politicians drive it and get things wrong, they pay the price. So I would argue it is best to just rely on the public health experts and let them take any heat. Best for the politicians and best for the country in terms of disease control. Anyway State departments of health are highly variable in their resources and levels of expertise and will therefore depend to varying levels on national resources and guidance for their reponse plans and policies. New York City is a world class health department on its own, for instance. Their politicians chose not to listen to their public health officials initially, and look at the result. Those few weeks of political dilly dallying could have saved a lot of older people's lives, and some younger people also, in and around NYC. But I digress. The main point is that most of the country is not as well equipped as NYC. So their heaalth departments need help with technical aspects as well as guidance on what policies are most effective. Not that the guidance will always be perfect, but a consistent, unified voice is always more reassuring during a crisis than a fragmented response where politicians undermine what the public health people say, whether it be about masks, treatments, business closures, travel restrictions etc. You want the public to see everyone working together consistently in an apolitical fashion to manage the problem. Centralized, national leadership is a key part of getting the response entites on the same page. Telling the states to figure it out for themselves isnt using the available resources very well. Both FEMA and the CDC have considerable expertise and resources that could be used in ways they have not been so far. Re The Prez: he would have been better served to stay out of the limelight on the whole thing. Committing hard to specific ideas when the state of knowledge is poorly developed is kind of like putting all your money on red 22: not likely to pay out. He made a lot of foolish statements that painted him into a corner. He doesnt have enough technical depth to comment and doesnt seem to appreciate how out of his depth he is. He should have relied more on the CDC people to lead the response, but they were pretty much muzzled. They would literally normally be telling everyone what to do, mobilizing considerable resources to facilitate testing and telling states what the test and trace policies and targets should be. Instead we have had the JK crew telling everyone that the states are on their own for stockpile and other resources and POTUS telling everyone the states are responsible for dealing with their own epidemics and lockdown policies. CDC has definitely been told to stand down or they would be out in front on all of it. FEMA would definitely be driving the stockpile distributions and policies, which should be transparent and non punitive. Basically this was a big political opportunity for DT to let the machinery work and then declare victory. Instead the epidemic is poorly controlled, dragging on into election season, the economic impact is dragging on longer than it should, and there is a high chance it will all get worse again. There is a strong chance we will end up doing the usual public health test and trace interventions anyway. The lockdown was super draconian and largely unprecedented. It was never going to be a workable long term strategy. The best thing for the economy would have been to tell the nation that everyone needs to do their part to fight this thing, train up contact tracing teams, ramp up testing on a national level with proven tests and defined targets for positivity rate, and push CDC people and federal stockpile resources into state and local health departments as needed to provide support. Instead, testing lagged behind tremendously for unclear reasons while the disease became more and more established and the lockdown dragged on with no clear national strategy or even any defined national goals for controlling the disease. E.g. Do we tolerate a certain infection rate, or try for zero? Work it through with the states until everyone has a set of goals they can live with. I think it is a mistake to look at this through a political lens primarily. The virus doesnt care. The two sides in this are pro human and pro virus. Yes the talking heads will try to score political points but trying to say the CDC or doctors or hospitals acting
Re: [MBZ] Arctic Crack
That is not a very pretty green, so ask for a 50% discount. On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 11:24 AM Meade Dillon via Mercedes < mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote: > No pix of the "new" engine? Crate engine installed by MB, or a rebuild by > billy-bob? > > - > Max > Charleston SC > > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:46 AM Clay via Mercedes > wrote: > > > > https://anchorage.craigslist.org/cto/d/anchorage-mercedes/7140555142.html > > > > Green is nice, but not that price > > > > clay > > > > I have no pronouns please do not refer to me. > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > http://www.okiebenz.com > > > > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > > > > > ___ > http://www.okiebenz.com > > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > > ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] Arctic Crack
He’ll need to get some studs in the tires. -D > On Jun 15, 2020, at 11:19 AM, Mitchell Haley EA via Mercedes > wrote: > > Maybe Clay should drive Froggy up there and sell it. > June/July is the right time for that, isn't it? > > ___ > http://www.okiebenz.com > > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] Arctic Crack
No pix of the "new" engine? Crate engine installed by MB, or a rebuild by billy-bob? - Max Charleston SC On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:46 AM Clay via Mercedes wrote: > https://anchorage.craigslist.org/cto/d/anchorage-mercedes/7140555142.html > > Green is nice, but not that price > > clay > > I have no pronouns please do not refer to me. > > > > > ___ > http://www.okiebenz.com > > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > > ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] Arctic Crack
Maybe Clay should drive Froggy up there and sell it. June/July is the right time for that, isn't it? ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] Arctic Crack
very crackish --FT On 6/15/20 1:45 AM, Clay via Mercedes wrote: https://anchorage.craigslist.org/cto/d/anchorage-mercedes/7140555142.html Green is nice, but not that price clay I have no pronouns please do not refer to me. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com -- --FT ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
