The Census – The Law – Your Private Rights

The rule of law, as described in this treatise, remains to this day a distinctive characteristic of the English constitution. In England no man can be made to suffer punishment or to pay damages for any conduct not definitely forbidden by law; every man’s legal rights or liabilities are almost invariably determined by the ordinary Courts of the realm, and each man’s individual rights are far less the result of our constitution than the basis on which that constitution is founded. – A.V.Dicey, Law of the Constitution (1915)

census regalis [royal revenue]. – William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England.

Census means revenue eh!

There are a few things about law/rules and rights that I’ve come across over the past couple of years that when thought about, give the common man a nice little trump card to play when unacceptable demands are made of him by authorities claiming to have so called “authorities” to take away your “absolute rights”.

Bare in mind though, I’m not legally trained (and might have some detail arse about tit) but have just taken an interest because of the appalling “State” of things.

Please take your time to comprehend the quoted text laid out below because and understanding of what’s written is fundamental to your knowing what the law originally intended. You’ll also recognise how much its been perverted. Also, you’ll need this knowledge to make sense of what I’ll say later!

English law dictates that (while exercising a duty of care!) we the people are free to do what we like so long as there isn’t a law or a rule preventing it.

William Blackstone sums it up nicely.

The absolute rights of man, considered as a free agent, endowed with discernment to know good from evil, and with power of choosing those measures which appear to him to be most desirable, are usually summed up in one general appellation, and denominated the natural liberty of mankind. This natural liberty consists properly in a power of acting as one thinks fit, without any restraint or control, unless by the law of nature: being a right inherent in us by birth, and one of the gifts of God to man at his creation, when he endued him with the faculty of free will. But every man, when he enters into society, gives up a part of his natural liberty, as the price of so valuable a purchase; and, in consideration of receiving the advantages of mutual commerce, obliges himself to conform to those laws, which the community has thought proper to establish. – William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England.

So there you go, from the big man himself (Vinerian Professor Of English Law And Solicitor General To The Queen (1765).)

Natural liberty being defined as above, and civil liberty defined below:

Political therefore, or civil, liberty, which is that of a member of society, is no other than natural liberty so far restrained by human laws (and not farther) as is necessary and expedient for the general advantage of the public. – William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England.

… and not further!!!

For the principal aim of society is to protect individuals in the enjoyment of those absolute rights, which were vested in them by the immutable laws of nature; but which could no be preserved in peace without that mutual assistance and intercourse, which is gained by the institution of friendly and social communities. Hence it follows, that the first and primary end of human laws is to maintain and regulate these absolute rights of individuals. Such rights as are social and relative result from, and are posterior to, the formation of states and societies: so that to maintain and regulate these, is clearly a subsequent consideration. And therefore the principal view of human laws is, or ought always to be, to explain, protect, and enforce such rights as are absolute, which in themselves are few and simple; and, then, such rights as are relative, which arising from a variety of connections, will be far more numerous and more complicated. These will take up a greater space in any code of laws, and hence may appear to be more attended to, though in reality they are not, than the rights of the former kind. – William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England.

The aim of the law then is first and foremost to regulate human behaviour AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE so the we can enjoy our absolute rights and freedoms which don’t need regulating or the protection of the law.

Its our “absolute rights” that are most precious and to me what distinguishes freedom from slavery.

Absolute rights, private rights and inalienable rights it seems to me are one and the same concept within the laws definition.

If you don’t understand all that you’ve just read, re-read it until you do.

From here on end I’m talking mainly about statutes so I’ll refer to them as they are in their true nature as rules and regulations, or just “rules” for short, because they are NOT laws – see here.

The “rule of law” dictates that ALL are equal under the law and ALL are bound by the law (this INCLUDES those representing the State!). There isn’t “one law for them and one law for us”. The same law apples equally to all. I do realise that this isn’t always the case when “the corrupt” and “the tyrannically minded” abuse the system, but the principle stands, no one is above the law.

rule of law 1. The supremacy of law. 2. A feature attributed to the UK constitution by Professor Dicey (Law of the Constitution, 1885). It embodied three concepts: the absolute predominance of regular law, so that the government has no arbitrary authority over the citizen; the equal subjection of all (including officials) to the ordinary law administered by the ordinary courts; and the fact that the citizen’s personal freedoms are formulated and protected by the ordinary law rather than by abstract constitutional declarations. – Oxford Dictionary of Law 5th Edition Page 441.

As those “individuals” representing a “concept” called “the State” (think about that!) make rules preventing you from doing some thing (smoking in public buildings) or compelling you to do some thing (pay THEIR council tax), it stands to reason then that before the rule was enacted you had the (absolute) right and was free to do that thing or in the case of council tax not pay it because it wasn’t demanded of you.

If there is a rule preventing you from or compelling you to do a thing, it will be documented in the relevant Act and as such, that information will be retrievable. There can be no doubt when you have “physical proof” of such a rule existing and being enforceable.

Now, this lawful “authority” below is very encouraging because it IS LAW and it protects our private (absolute) rights and goes something like this – if a public authority interferes with the private rights the individual, the BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE PUBLIC AUTHORITY TO PROVE THEIR AUTHORITY (meaning that THEY have to show which Act of Parliament (authority) gives them the authority to interfere with those private rights. It must show by EXPRESS WORDS or implication that that private right is no longer there.)

“It is clear that the burden lies on those who seek to establish that the legislature intended to take away the private rights of individuals, to show that by express words, or by necessary implication, such an intention appears.” – Metropolitan Asylum District Managers v. Hill (1881) 6 App.Cas. 193.

So you see that when you question an authorities “authority” to interfere with your private rights, they are LAWFULLY BOUND TO SHOW PROOF OF THAT AUTHORITY (the Act). If they cannot produce the authority then CLEARLY they do NOT have the authority to make demands of you that interfere with your private right to do as you like.

Therefore they are bullshitting and so legal obligation to comply!!

Now the juicy bit.

So long as it isn’t legislated against, you by default, have the absolute right to choose to do something AT YOUR OWN EXPENSE or NOT, as the case may be.

The phrase AT YOUR OWN EXPENSE is a good one because it has been documented only ONCE in an Act where, the Act compels a publisher to deliver a book to the library AT HIS OWN EXPENSE, therefore his absolute right to not suffer a loss was removed, EXPRESSLY.

It was enacted and so enforceable at law. The publisher is legally obliged to comply and AT HIS OWN EXPENSE. The wording is very specific and leaves no doubt that he has to pay any losses for doing what is demanded of him himself.

15†Delivery of copies to British Museum and other libraries

(1) The publisher of every book published in the United Kingdom shall, within one month after the publication, deliver, at his own expense, a copy of the book to the [F1British Library Board], who shall give a written receipt for it. – Copyright Act 1911

The rule (you must complete our Census form for example) might be that you have to do a thing AND suffer a financial penalty for non compliance BUT, does the Act imply or state EXPRESSLY that you must comply AT YOUR OWN EXPENSE?

If it doesn’t imply or expressly state the removal of that particular right then, it stands to good reason that particular private right is not curbed and thus still intact!

It is then lawful to NAME YOUR PRICE (if you wish) and the “authority” then has the choice whether to accept your fee for doing something you’re not legally obliged to do at your own expense, or not.

The law puts that “authority” in a bind because, how can they prosecute for non compliance when it’s their choice not to pay your fee which you are lawfully entitled to require?

So, I will be enquiring as to whether I’m legally obliged to fill in their census form at my own expense and requiring them to provide legally sustainable EXPRESSLY WORDED proofs should they assert that I do.

As I’m not interested in monetary gain I will be attaching the ICHOR Trust contract for their consideration.

To conclude then, the laws ultimate intention is to protect mans absolute rights; absolute rights are the laws term for our natural freedom to do as we see fit; if it’s not legislated against EXPRESSLY or by implication, those absolute rights remain intact; an “authority” is lawfully burdened to proving the legislator intended to remove a private right; no intention equates to NO AUTHORITY and so you are protected by the law.


The Occupier
Dear Sir


The ICHOR TRUST of which I am a beneficiary at alleges evidence of Home Office theft of people’s rights that involves the office of the Prime Minister and the Lord Chancellor’s department in what is obviously theft by deception of authority and a fraud on a duty of care to know authority relied on according to The Theft Act 1968 section s2b that the Home Office, amongst other bodies natural and corporate, including central and local government departments are legally obliged to show the ICHOR Trust but, have failed to do so. failing to produce the authority in question is in it’s self evidence of fraud and corruption aimed at maintaining the balance of power in favour of a criminal conspiracy to financially exploit the general public for reasons alien to the administration of justice.


I have no legal training.

In consideration of the terms and conditions outlined in the contract overleaf, please provide irrefutable proof that a statutory authority exists, one that uses EXPRESS WORDS compelling a private man in his private time to give freely his personal and private details to a public body for public use and for the profit of that public body, AT HIS OWN EXPENSE.

I am aware that, according to English Law it is every mans right to be free to do as he wishes so long as he exercises a duty of care and, the Law does not prohibit it. I am also aware that, under the rule of law, ALL are subject to the law EQUALLY. Your claim affects my private rights therefore the burden of proof is on you, “the authority”, to prove conclusively that your “firm belief” (you can only firmly believe if you have documented proof using EXPRESS WORDS) in that I have to give up my personal private information in my private time AT MY OWN EXPENSE. That is what the Law of the land dictates. It is therefore my right and duty to protect that freedom should an authority who is mistaken or, a tyrant, dictate otherwise – unless of course you can provide the relevant authority disproving that statement!

Should the relevant statutory authority exist, stating emphatically using EXPRESS WORDS that, I must provide my personal private details AT MY OWN EXPENSE then, I will comply and provide them AT MY OWN EXPENSE.

Case law and other supporting my position:

Metropolitan Asylum District Managers v. Hill:
In Metropolitan Asylum District Managers v. Hill (1881) 6 App.Cas. 193, this House determined that an Act of Parliament which authorised an asylum did not authorise the asylum to commit a nuisance. Lord Blackburn said, at p. 208:

“It is clear that the burden lies on those who seek to establish that the legislature intended to take away the private rights of individuals, to show that by express words, or by necessary implication, such an intention appears.”

Regina -v- Dyment (1988) 45 CCC (3d) 244
1988, CCC, La Forest J, Human Rights.
The court referred to “informational privacy” – “This notion of privacy derives from the assumption that all information about a person is in a fundamental way his own, for him to communicate or retain for himself as he sees fit.”

Copyright Act 1911:
15†Delivery of copies to British Museum and other libraries

(1)The publisher of every book published in the United Kingdom shall, within one month after the publication, deliver, at his own expense, a copy of the book to the [F1British Library Board], who shall give a written receipt for it.

No statute apart from this prevents one or compels one to do something “at your own expense”.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
ARTICLE 12 – Privacy & Reputation:
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Until further notice and/or satisfactory documentation is produced, the implied right of access to the home addressed above is forthwith REVOKED for all agents,representatives and authorities pertaining to the Census. Any of the aforementioned visitors to this home do so on the strict understanding that they are liable, by performance, to the terms and conditions outlined overleaf.

You have 40 days to discount my claim of right.

Yours sincerely,

The occupier.


(Infinite Covenant for Human rights, Obligations and Reparation.)


1. My MINIMUM fee for doing or suffering anything I am not legally obliged to do or suffer at my own expense is until further written notice and with immediate effect £900,000,000,000,000,000.00p (nine hundred thousand million million pounds sterling ) plus expenses plus compound interest on the whole amount due at the rate of 2% per full calendar month without prejudice to my right to sue for debt at any time without further notice and or in the alternative without prejudice to my right to sue for damages at any time without further notice and or in the alternative without prejudice to my right to exercise recaption at any time without further notice.

2. PAYMENT of the whole amount due must be into the Woolwich plc account of ICHOR Sort Code 10 – 80 – 04 Account Number 79372187. The whole amount due must be paid before noon on the fortieth (40th) day after your receipt of this offer counting the day you receive this offer unless another method of payment is agreed in writing between the offeree and the trustee of the ICHOR Trust.

3. TO ACCEPT THIS OFFER IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM INCLUDING BY PERFORMANCE OF CONDUCT WITHOUT NEED OF FURTHER NOTIFICATION IS TO AGREE THAT (A) You have licensed anything and or in the alternative any person natural or corporate and or in the alternative any state of being or personality not yet discovered, even if not yet in existence, to help and assist in any way shape or form each and every offeror authorised to be an ICHOR Business Angel from now on referred to as an Angel to use whatever means are available in order for each and every Angel to remain safe and secure in the pursuit of the truth as due under this offer and or in the alternative to enter any property in your possession in order to assist recaption of any property belonging to the ICHOR Trust. (B) Any none payment of debts due when due instantly transfers title of property, goods and services and or in the alternative control of property, goods and services of the offeree up to the value of debts due by that particular offeree to the ICHOR Trust. (C) Each and every Angel taking action to assist recovery of property belonging to the ICHOR Trust is entitled to charge the minimum fee stated at paragraph 1 above and each and every Angel has an equal right to the benefits of all property vested in the ICHOR Trust. (D) Any attempt to refuse to accept this offer and or in the alternative any attempt to refuse to accede to this offer is an attempted theft because it is impossible for you to CONTINUE to have an honest belief in your authority to make such an attempt now that you know the only way to avoid accepting and or in the alternative acceding to this offer is to admit you have no IMPERATIVE words in a primary statute and or in the alternative a treaty and or in the alternative any other previous agreement which when given a strict and literal reading entitles you to claim and or in the alternative obliges you to CONTINUE to appropriate the property in question unless you show me those authorities before noon on the fortieth (40th) day after your receipt of this offer counting the day you receive this offer because you now know that is the only way you can CONTINUE to have an honest belief in your authority to appropriate the property in question. (E) The descendants of any Angel whose property is not vested in the ICHOR Trust within time after acceptance of this offer have an irrevocable right to pursue debts due to the ICHOR Trust according to this offer. (F) In plain English, you now know my terms and conditions of business and the terms and conditions of business of each and every Angel for doing or suffering anything irrespective of whatever that doing or suffering may be on each and every separate occasion that you perform an act and or in the alternative omission sufficient to form a contract and you know that the Trustee of the ICHOR Trust is only an Angel with Trustee status. (G) If you had any you have now waived all absolute and qualified privileges and immunities and I may choose the law governing the contract formed by your acceptance of this offer. (H) Trusteeship of the ICHOR Trust belongs to the founder trustee until inherited by the next of kin Angel of the founder Trustee under the obligatory condition that each and every Trustee must continue to approve the exercise of recaption and enforcement of each and every debt due irrespective of irrelevant considerations such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or any other status of the offeree. (I) If you wish to claim you were misled into accepting this offer you must do all within your ability to convince each and every Angel that you were misled into accepting this offer. (J) Any attempt to prevent an Angel with two witnesses from pursuing evidence of any debt due to the ICHOR Trust shall be met with the appropriate necessary and unavoidable force required to pursue debts due. (K) This offer is a gateway to Angel status because if you are refused Angel status your goods and services and the goods and services of those with whom you associate must be ignored by each and every Angel because no Angel whatsoever may knowingly associate with nor buy the goods and services of known deceivers and those referred to in Revelation 22:15 as without. (L) You will comply with Malachi, 4:3. (M) The passages we refer to in the Holy Bible are those referred to in the King James version. (N) That pursuing all rights to the highest and most powerful authority in existence is in the interests of promoting the psychological and physical welfare of all beings and all their Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. (I will come near to you to judgement; I will be a swift witness… Malachi, 3:5), (it shall leave them neither root nor branch. Malachi, 4:1.), (And ye shall know the truth, the truth shall make you free. St. John 8:32.), (Great is truth and mighty above all things. Apocrypha 1 Esdras 4:41.), [Satyam (truthfulness). Bagavad-gïtä.] (Buddhism leads to enlightenment.), (The Accessions. These are the believers in truth; they shall have from their lord exalted grades and forgiveness and an honourable sustenance. The Holy Quran [8.4].) The founder of the ICHOR TRUST has seen technology radiating the colours of the rainbow, that enables the two swift witnesses to determine between victims and deceivers by joining different dimensions of infinity. (O) Each and every offeree and those for whom that offeree is liable may be given a state of the art lie and deception test without further notice or warning and the offeree is duty bound to notify those affected of this fact as a duty of care. (P) Deceiving subversives, amongst others, lost status and wealth and power exposed by this the Covenant preparing the way for ending time and judgement day with the almighty unarguable truth that fraud unravels everything. (Q) Everything fraudulent in reality is already unravelled assisted by the messenger of this Covenant saying “COME” to the Faithful and True we have unravelled the devils work for Angels to simply take back what is theirs without wasting time and or in the alternative wasting money and or in the alternative wasting energy seeking a favourable Court Order to do so. (R) If you think your property has been appropriated contrary to law you can go to Court and waste your time and or in the alternative your money and or in the alternative your energy but you will not waste what belongs to Angels.

4. TO AVOID ACCEPTING THIS OFFER BY PERFORMANCE simply comply, without let or hindrance, with all rights, duties and obligations owed to the offeror before noon on the fortieth (40th) day after your receipt of this offer counting the day you receive this offer.

5. TAKE NOTICE. If you fail to make payment when due the offeror reserves the right to issue a summons, claim, other process for debt and or in the alternative damages, as well as the right to exercise recaption without first obtaining a Court order to do so, without a letter before action and costs will be as between solicitor (lawyer) and client. END OF OFFER.


9 thoughts on “The Census – The Law – Your Private Rights

  1. Very good post. But I always have the niggling doubt that more recent legislation could have been introduced to cancel out what earlier laws/legislation say. All this new legislation that has already been misused could be misused to deprive us of out rights.

    THEY can always say that one form of law/legislation is superior to another form when it suits them. And then say exactly the opposite, when it suits them.

    However a piece of legislation that hasn’t been superceded, and that can’t be misused without being taken again in a modified form, is the Coronation Oath. Our head of state promised in her oath to govern us according to the laws of God, and to maintain the true meanig of the Gospel. One law of God tells us not to kill. The gospels preach peace and love.

    Her oath gives us the legal right to live by those laws and by the Gospel, because she promised to use those laws. She should defend our rights to have those rights. Her oath is based on them.

    Many conscientious objectors were allowed to take no part in fighting during the Second World War. Claiming ethical opposition to helping an arms dealer to profit from the census (they profit if people take part) is no more a crime than claiming the right to not fight and kill. Taking part in the census will make someone an accessory to the crimes of Lockheed Martin. In courts of law, an accessory can be convicted.

    • Very good post yourself. 😎

      Yes they could very easily change legislation, however, we need to get clear in our minds exactly what the roll of the law is supposed to be within a consensual society. Once it is clear, it doesn’t matter what legislation is changed because you will ALWAYS BELIEVE the truth, which is that, you have the natural born right to do whatever the hell you like, SO LONG AS, your actions are the result of intelligent conscientious thought that limit or dispels any negative effect on others.

      When you believe this to be true because it doesn’t make any rational sense to believe anything else then, you have the upper hand because, who can argue against the fact that the sun shines everyday.

      The Law is ONLY necessary for those that are NOT conscientious of any negative impact of those actions on other people.

      For example, the Human Rights Act is on the whole ONLY there to protect the people from the State!

      What does it tell you when the people need the protection of the law from those that are supposed to be protecting them?

      I agree with what you say about the Coronation Oath in so much as its a contract between the Queen and The People. She agreed that she would rule according to our laws and customs and in return we accept her rulership.

      This authority below (used by the peers in their petition to the queen) defines “royal prerogative”:

      “Prerogative is created for the benefit of the people and cannot be exercised to their prejudice.” (The Royal Prerogative is the power delegated by the sovereign to ministers to sign treaties on behalf of the nation.) – Nichols v Nichols 1576

      Essentially she has welched on her side of the contract and so both her and her parliament no longer hold any sort of authority over The People.

      The people aren’t aware of this and are still under the influence of habitual thinking.

  2. Yes, she has broken her oath many times. Well before she broke her oath by assenting to let a foreign power make our laws, she broke it when the first person was hanged after her coronation. Regardless of what anyone thinks about capital punishment (I’m against it) she promised to rule by, amongst other things, the law that says Thou Shalt Not Kill. She allowed people to be killed by the state. At the very least, she should have told the government that she would not invite anyone to form a new government after the next election and would not give her assent to any new laws if they didn’t immediately abolish capital punishment.

    If she knew she could not live up to her oath, she shouldn’t have made it. She made a contract with us. She hasn’t kept it and so she is no longer the head of state. You’re right about parliament having no authority over us. And various other officials swear allegiance to the head of state before taking office. Their oaths or affirmations are made to someone who doesn’t exist and they have no meaning.

    The legislators all know she has broken her contract with us but they do nothing. They are all corrupt and they sweep inconvenient facts of great importance under the carpet.

    As for the census, I will ignore all attempts to contact me. I never open the door when anyone knocks unless I know who it is and I am willing to talk to them. I would only need to use the conscientious objection strategy if the worst came to the worst.

  3. I haven’t seen that video before. Thanks.

    I live in rented accommodation and can’t claim it to be my property. But I really never answer the door unless I’m expecting someone.

    I’m slowly drafting a statement to be issued if ‘the worst comes to the worst’. The woman who signs the censeless would get a copy and so would Dave Cameron and Elizabeth Windsor. I have changed it to include a conditional agreement that I would be willing to fill it in if they could prove my argument is wrong.

    But then there is also my real concern that my information could be (would be) passed to the National Socialist Soviet Union of Europe (to give it a more appropriate name) and that we are not legally part of it. As I have publically criticised that body, and they have a law against such criminal activity, they could demand my extradition. I would need assurances that my fears are unfounded and that we are legally part of the NSSUE, despite what Elizabeth promised and despite what that Bill Wright bloke said in 1688 or 1689 about not allowing foreign potentates to run our affairs.

    And that I would be expected to give my labour free of charge. So I would ask for payment to fill it in. I would need them to prove to me that I must work for nothing.

  4. “And that I would be expected to give my labour free of charge”.

    Despite the “Legislative Law”, governments have lost sight of one very important right to the people & that is the right to decline. No one but NO ONE can force anyone else to do something, in fact you could go so far as saying, show the precise law that gives one man the authority to compell another man to perform.

    Under GODS’ law all men are created equal. regardless of position of presumed authority, except heavenly father of course.

    Under contract law: UCC there are 6 key requirements to make a contract legally valid & binding,
    1) offer & acceptance, in the census issue, “they make an offer” fill out & sign the form. If you comply to filling out & signing the form you have agreed, that completes offer & acceptance. If however you decline “their offer” they say you must, fill it out & sign it, but they can’t legally enforce it because you declined their offer.
    2) equal contribution: all alleged parties involved with the alleged contract must provide equal contribution, so lets say you fill out the form & sign it which in turn endorses the contract by your signature, where is their equal contribution? They take your details, but offer nothing in return.
    3) A meeting of the minds: At least two people must agree to all conditions for a meeting of the minds to be established.
    4) Under UCC a contract is NULL & VOID if a signiture is obtained by force.
    5) Full Disclosure: under UCC a contract must be true, correct, certain, not mis-leading and first-hand-personal-knowlege.
    6) I can’t remember the wording for it off the top of my head.

    The problem is this, “those” who come out & annoy us with “you must fill this out & sign it” are only drones & cannot fathom what it is you are on about, they see it as” I have this job to do” & we read them the private sentient being act & the drones simply have no idea.

    Lets face it a mushromm grows well when its kept in the dark & fed bullshit, which is exactly why drones work so well.

  5. Looks like I am going to court. I just opened the door to 2 ladies. I answered with a recording device. They asked if I was ****. I asked who they were, they said they were from the office of National Statistics. I asked where they had got my name from and where was Data Protection? I told them that I had no problem filling in the form for the British Government, but that when that government gave the info to a foreign war mongering power, I consider that treason. I then asked them if they knew what was going on at Fukishima and why had their govt not told them they shouldn’t be standing in the drizzle and to look it up on the BBC where they would find NOTHING. They told me £1000 fine **criminal record, trouble etc. I said fine, prison, whatever as someone, however small has to make a stand. One of then said she would like to reassure me that Lockheed Martin was a British company. !

  6. Pingback: Common Law vs Statutes – Living by the Rule of Law |

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s