Earthpulse Earthpulse

  Home |  Contribute Now |  Submit an Article |  Flash Sign-Up 

Earthpulse  
Email This Page to a Friend

Change Agents And Reality Creation

by Dr. Nick Begich

Reprinted from Earthpulse Flashpoints, Series 1 Number 1.

This is an article about what can be done to awaken our own potency as individuals and seize some level of control over the world we outwardly face. The idea of recognition of our own potentials in creating and shaping the reality we live within is fundamental to our success as created beings. This article is written as a "how-to" for creating changes in the world of politics.

This article is intended to give some practical ways to affect part of the reality we collectively form...politics. The article is further intended to develop a perceptual view toward change and provide practical tools for pursuing a change agenda. The information presented can be selectively applied and may be modified to meet local conditions and specific situations within democracies. It is hoped that the ideas being presented will give readers tools which are useful in altering political outcomes. The article is based on the experience of the writer in political and union organizing but can be applied to many other types of group interactions.

Fear and Conspiracy

It is disturbing to see the increase in general paranoia because of government over-control. A good deal has been asserted by many individuals about the political, social, economic and banking "conspiracies". Many of these reports accurately reflect factual observations and should be considered a significant cause for concern. Moreover, thinking people should attempt to "course correct" the wayward road our democracies have been traveling as special interests continue to dominate political outcomes at all levels. Democracies have deteriorated in many respects as a result of apathy coupled with power interest's domination of the machinery of political systems - special interest politics. This article is written to offer an alternative approach to the agenda of fear which has become the predominate symptom, and the outgrowth, of conspiratorial awareness.

The difficulty in most of what has been written about the "conspiracy" is it is based on facts which are colored by fear. The stories generally begin with some observation on the part of the writer that brings one to the conclusion that we are being sold out, manipulated or played like a good violin by some unknown virtuoso. After the initial observation, the writer pursues a line of research which leads to the uncovering of more details leading to a stronger conviction that there is a "unseen hand" plotting to slap us all around a bit. The conclusion that all of these observations, in the smallest detail, are the result of some infinitely detailed conspiracy is difficult for many to swallow.

Is it a conspiracy by default or by design? Is it a conspiracy built through those little cubicles of chance, through synchronicity, or is it built by the evil Machiavellian plan of some black-hatted villain? It is, perhaps, a combination of some planned activities combined with synchronistic happenings.

The recognition of the problem of over control can become a trap for the observer. The observer becomes changed, and no longer functions out of confidence and intellectual curiosity but, rather, gets pulled into a vortex of fear. What is meant here is that once the problem is recognized and confirmed by research, the response becomes one of fear and frenzy to inform the world. In so doing, all the world sees is a raving glassy eyed fanatic who is a brick short of a full load. Fear is the clue we are moving in the wrong direction. The discovery that we have been deceived is disheartening, at a minimum. Today's deceit discovered becomes tomorrow's conspiracy disclosed. Fear motivated course corrections cause problems for all concerned with these issues. An alternative is required which builds the strength of people and creates change in a positive direction. Rather than fear a forward confident push for change is needed.

Any time two people get together to plan anything, it can be said that they are engaging in a conspiracy. Most human interactions can be characterized as conspiratorial in that they require the cooperation of more than one individual in creating an outcome and someone likely will judge the action contrary to their interests. There is seldom full agreement on anything. All things, not yet realized, will likely emerge out of conflicting efforts. Conflicts can be resolved intelligently. This must be an accepted premise worked under if positive change is expected. It could be said that all are participants in an "open conspiracy" to see our version of reality created around us. This is what we each do with each action we engage in...assert our will into reality.

Certain circumstances lend themselves to government interference and intervention. These kinds of circumstances can be made increasingly worse by people who are acting out of fear. If we engage in the kinds of activity fear creates, we will become reactionary and subject ourselves to more controls by government at a time when most of the population remains unaware of the erosion of their basic rights. Some engaged in the conflict have decided that armed marches on government offices, withholding tax payments to the government or hiding out in some remote place "armed to the teeth" in wait for the attack by the brown-shirted new age Nazis is the answer. What value are these kinds of reactions? Do they further the cause of democracy, of liberty, of freedom, or do these reactions become self-imposed prisons of fear? We must seek more productive ways of addressing the problem with confidence. Confidence can be gained through the knowledgeable development and implementation of plans to create change. Confidence can replace fear.

In thinking about the types and nature of decisions people make when acting out of fear, it is clear that the decisions are not generally the best ones made. The fear agenda is a death agenda, in that it robs individuals of creative vitality by focusing energy into self preservation. Fear leads to the amplification of base emotions and animal instincts, i.e. survival-of-the-fittest thinking. Fear is not the right frame of reference for change. Where does the fear come from when looking at the conspiracy agenda? It comes from a basic sense of no control over the important events that shape our individual lives or the lives of those close to each of us.

A Philosophy of Change

Anything can be changed under the right circumstances. Political activity can always be changed by those with the will for change. In this article I refer to those moving their agendas forward as "change agents". The idea of the change agent keeps one focused, to a degree, on the self-created mission. Maintaining a self concept of change assists in actualizing change.

The belief system which has motivated this article and most other aspects of this writer's life is relatively simple. It is the idea that we should strive to reach the highest level of physical, mental and spiritual development through holistic actualization of who we are individually, or, more specifically, by acting in accordance with our highest probability options at a given moment. To try to make an effort toward the good, to be helpful in all expressions is the goal. Within the idea of holistic actualization resides our responsibility to assist all of those we are in contact with in achieving their highest potentials also. The last point in this simple belief system is the most important: in helping others we learn a great deal about our own potentials, both positive and negative.

The only standing rule: "Thou shall not violate". The rule means that we can not trample, manipulate or seek control of other people. We are all in different places in our personal growth and are here to help one another.

Motives, perceptions and interests of the players don't confuse me with the facts, the fiction is too much fun.

I once heard it said, "If you don't know who's in charge, take over. If they throw you out of town, get in line and act like it's a parade." It is kind of a funny statement but it is also a reflection of reality. This is "spin control", redefining the truth to be something else or, simply, propaganda production. We can assert our individual will to shape the perceptions of others. A union organizer I once knew said, "We are in the business of creating new realities". Reality creation is what this article is all about. Perception is reality. Perception is what is usually all that is being manipulated by the professional sellers of politicians, soft drinks and used automobiles. The sad reality is that most people are asleep at the wheel of life and tend to be deceived by these manipulations. The fact is, deceit works because those deceived don't know they are deceived. Critical thinking is blocked by failing to recognize the impact of emotionally-developed propaganda.

Manipulation, in the opinion of this writer, is essentially the misapplication of information for perpetuating the interests of the agent of change. Manipulation is wrong on its face and should be replaced by persuasion. Persuasion involves disclosure of the facts to create thoughtful decision-making on the part of the participants. Awakening people's ability to intellectually make decisions rather than react to emotionalized manipulations is fundamental to positive long lasting change agendas. Truth will ring in the hearts of most people. Emotion should follow well-articulated ideas rather than having emotion propelling weakly-contrived thoughts. In other words, the emotional response of readers should come after the ideas have been thought about and not the other way around. If emotion preceeds thinking, bad decisions are made. This explains the ideas of "love is blind" and "blind rage". This thought can also be viewed in the context of control -vs- empowerment. Control results from withholding, spinning or manipulating information, whereas empowerment comes from delivering all information necessary to form an opinion and then providing a specific "action set" for use in actualizing change based on the information. Realization of the facts should elicit an emotional response to act in one's own self interest. Persuasion is preferable to manipulation.

A good deal has been made of over-control by government. The issue of conspiracy by design, or by default, is often raised in discussing whether the actions of government are being choreographed deliberately to control the rights of individuals or whether it is the result of the nature of our systems. To a great extent it is the result of the rules of the system which lend themselves to manipulations by anyone familiar with the workings of government. More is illusion than reality in how systems are engaged in debate. Much of what is believed to be power, a force or direction, is contrived by a few people with the ability to articulate and express their point of view into the public forum. It is possible for any reasonably well-thought-out set of ideas to get pressed into the main stream of media at the local level. Change begins in each of us and then can be expressed outward.

Recognition of individual strength in creating change is the first move toward reality creation. This is what is being dissipated by over-control of government. The individual's ability to self actualize his or her full creative capacity, at a point in time, is fundamental to change. Asserting individual will into factors for change is possible. Individual recognition of our own ability to do something is a precursor to actions resulting in real lasting changes. Limits are, to the greatest extent, self-imposed.

Step One. Defining the issue. Define the issue which is to be addressed and the outcome desired. It is highly recommended that iconoclasts who are new to the game of change pick a simple target. There are plenty around. Experience is the best teacher with success being the best confirmation. Success is not always apparent -- it is the honest effort, in creating change, which is important.

Step Two. Defining the Interests of the Players. All people act out of their own self interests. Some individuals self interests amplify their negative personal characteristics and others magnify their positive characteristics. Some people get satisfaction by doing good and others by selfish base gratification. Defining the motives of groups, corporations and individuals by discovering their "self interests" defines the perimeter of their "conspiracy" in reality creation.

Our own interests should be well defined personally as well as our reasons for wanting to create change. The beginning of a change agenda is self-reflection. This reflection allows for the clear structuring of beliefs in line with the project about to be initiated.

Find out the motivations and interests of the group, government or system to be engaged. In the case of governments, the documents which form the foundation of the government may not be the source of current motivation. Interests are defined by the actual reality creation - the real and specific actions of the organization. The organization's primary interest is to survive or continue. Appealing to that interest is the key to developing the strategies for political change.

My father, while a state Senator and United States Congressman, used to say, "Philosophy without office is futility. Office without philosophy is pointless." I prefer the idea that "philosophy without action is futility and action without philosophy is pointless". Both statements say the same thing; one works from a recognized position of power, "Office", while the other assumes power as an attribute of all "action". The power for change is in the present, in this very narrowly-focused point in time...power is in the now, in this very instant. It is necessary to do something even if only a small step. Some possible steps for affecting political change are presented in this article.

So, step two, define your own interests and the real interests of those you oppose. It is time to contemplate individual actions about to be engaged.

Step Three. Defining the Audience. Who are you trying to reach? Who impacts the change? Who influences the people that make the rules? These are all questions which need to be answered in order to begin to structure a message and a methodology for delivering the message.

Finding out who makes the decision is relatively easy. In the case of politics it is the elected official or, in some instances, it is someone interpreting the rules within a bureaucracy.

Try talking with the elected official to gain his or her support for your issue. Elected officials are like everyone else. Don't assume they know everything about everything. I had the experience of growing up in a political family and it always amazed me how much people assumed you knew about issues or, what the public perceived as real, which was no more than perceptual vapor without substance. Elected people are approachable in most instances. Providing good, accurate information so that they can make a supportive decision is possible and should always be attempted. If the attempt to gain support by direct access fails, it is time to use other methods.

Elected officials can be changed by organized contact by a large number of voters coupled with an organized plan for replacing a non-sympathetic official. They can be reached by special interests and they can be influenced by the people contributing money to their past elections.

In politics, the rule makers can be intellectually assaulted by a handful of people giving the impression of a multitude. The system deployed by change agents are the same as those used by special interests. Half of the energy is real and the other half is perceptual reality creation...illusion. The illusion is created by perception in that the person or organization being targeted will usually project their own level of knowledge or approach to the activities initiated by agents of change. They will, more often than not, assume a good deal more than is real. Do not fuel incorrect perceptions; however, the job of the opponent in debate is "to know". There is something to be said, at times, for silence on the part of the change agent.

Method I. In most jurisdictions within democracies, public disclosure of fund raising activity and expenditures is required of all would be office holders. A call to the local controller of elections will provide a wealth of information. A list of the names, mailing addresses, and contribution amounts can be obtained from government records, thereby providing the identifiable source of political fuel - money - flowing to the politician. These records may provide names of people or other organizations with similar goals to your own. Review the names and recruit from them individuals who are sympathetic to your issue. Any of the individuals attracted to your cause are already in a position to influence the rule maker. These folks can be attracted to your cause very easily if they are sympathetic. Political financial donors also tend to be the activists in your community. The following can be used to isolate support from the election money donor lists:

  1. Send all individual contributors a form letter which discusses the issue of concern and lays out a solution. The part of the solution which involves a political decision-maker should be defined. Give the telephone numbers and mailing address of the particular politician you would like the individual to contact.
  2. One week after mailing the letters, call each person on your mailing list and ask if they support your issue and if they called the politician. They should also be asked if they can be called on, in the future, to help in some small way with your effort in such activities as sending letters to the editor of local news papers, contacting other elected officials, or just helping with mailing or in some other way. The follow-up call is important. Personal contact is critical to success. Personal contact is what creates the highest probability of action, and can not be over-estimated in terms of effectiveness.

There are different messages to be constructed for the various audiences being contacted - message for the elected officials, a message for voters, a message for fund raising and a message for "co-conspirators in your agency of change". Each message should be designed to give information which convinces people to actively support the cause being touted. The message should also be structured to preempt, neutralize or divide the opposition. Preemption is spoken to elsewhere in this article.

A book, several thousand years old that I highly recommend for those involved in change agendas and conflict resolutions, is The Art of War by Sun Su. This book puts forward ideas which can be applied to most conflict situations.

Step Four. Creating a Group. You can act alone and accomplish a good deal. This writer had occasion to work in a one-person office situation while building a small union from 200 to 2000 members. I could create a great deal of activity through a little creativity coupled with "news creation". The organization was in the news constantly because of the kinds of initiatives we created. A group formed out of the efforts of an individual working, initially, alone.

In another instance, I was asked by friends to consider forming a special interest group to defend the fair and legal application of election laws in Alaska. I was asked to help block a voter recall of school board members which had been started under circumstances which appeared to violate the laws governing recall of public officials. The issue of whether or not to recall these officials had been activated by a small group of individuals who were in a position of seizing the public's attention by providing a way to "solve the problem of a bad local school government" by recalling the majority of the school board. This group read the city charter and the state laws which govern recall and then went out to gather the requisite signatures to remove the elected officials they found objectionable.

My friends and I opposed this move as we felt that the wrong Board members were about to be removed and, more importantly, it was being done in violation of recall rules developed under the law. I became the committee of one to stop the recall. I then became a group of two (the required number in Alaska), when my wife joined me and we formed a Political Action Committee (PAC) and registered with the state. It was a simple process which took less than an hour to complete. This step allowed the group the right to collect and expend money to support, or oppose issues to be decided by voters. We then went to a local news reporter who generally covers these types of issues and discussed with him what we were going to do and why. Our activity became the next day's and month's news. The officials did get recalled, but the rights of "public interest litigants" were further defined by the Alaska Supreme Court (See Supreme Court Nos. S-5616/5626) which set a precedence helpful to future citizen litigants. The right to pursue public interest litigation without undue fear of being economically ruined was preserved and enhanced. In addition, the lower court actions provided significant guidance to others either proposing or opposing recall efforts. This group of one became, by the end of the trail, a group of many dozens of hard-working individuals. Although the Board members were recalled, the remaining Board members, who supported the recall of their colleagues, lost reelection, one being defeated by one of our volunteers who had never sought public office before. In this instance we changed the rules, lost our rule makers, and then replaced our adversaries with new rule makers.

Method II. Letters to the editors of most newspapers provide an opportunity to create a change in how people view things. A review of past issues of a news paper's letters will provide names of individuals who share similar opinions on an issue. Putting a small group of trusted people together to write letters is a way of putting issues before the literate population. This is done in local elections all the time by those who know how to shape opinion. A group of "letter writers" gets together and each write several letters on a given subject. It is best to do this in a single location so that the work actually gets done. This activity can involve from one to ten people. Each person writes a number of letters about the subject up for debate. The letters should be written to raise awareness of the issue, provide information and give people a way to participate in the effort to make change. The letter writer's efforts should be sustained throughout the period of time where change decisions will be made. Original written letters (from the group) should be passed to others for their modification and mailing under their signatures. This tool must be used responsibly through well-reasoned information being transmitted to the public. This effort begins to press the issue into the public forum. It will also begin to draw others into the issue, which becomes a source for additional effort.

Method III. Setting up news events is not difficult. The best news is news and not paid advertisements. Moreover, well thought out news events give a direct opportunity for achieving small changes for the benefit of others, and serve as building blocks for the major thrust of change. Be creative and think about it.

The idea of news creation was brought into focus for this writer by a union organizer who asked me what our union had been doing lately. After a half an hour of describing all of our activities, he began asking these questions: Does anyone know? How did they know? How did they find out? Are they talking about the issues? The lesson learned was not to assume anyone knew anything and that we should find ways to assure that the people that need to know... do indeed, know!

The following is an example of a project that got an incredible level of public support and high visibility. A friend and I were sitting around the office trying to come up with a way for our small union to gain recognition as more than a labor group. We were at that moment listening to the radio and heard the first news reports out of Poland (1989) about their move toward democracy. The idea was born, "Democracy though Education" a book drive for Polish educators. We put together a press release and then visited the television stations and newspapers and contacted radio stations with the story. We created three separate news events: the beginning of the drive, the collection of the books and the shipping of the books. All of the books, packing materials and freight from Alaska was contributed. The total cost of the project was less than $600 whereas if we had had to buy advertising space it would have cost over $30,000. Over 1/3 of our elected state legislature signed on to a pledge of support for the democratic principles of open dialogue and reading. Educators loved the project and, at a time when everyone was looking for a way to help usher in freedom, we had an activity everyone could be a part of. The greatest benefit was to those who received the materials and those that sent them. The perception of our union was changed by this event in conjunction with others at that time.

Your local library has many books available which describe how to set up and call a press conference. If you cannot get people to your conference go to the newspaper or broadcast station and ask for the news director. Tell him or her what you are doing and on most days they will put together a story on the spot.

A story must be innovative and appeal to a mass audience. You will be truly amazed at the results achievable with a little effort and creativity.

Method IV. Voters count and the apathetic majority do not exist. Any issue which is ultimately going to be decided by voters limits the audience. Don't try to influence those who likely will not vote unless the segment of the population represents a group which might participate in the effort of change: i.e., students on educational issues, taxpayers on tax issues, etc. Direct your energy towards those who will participate in the decision or in the debate. You can get a list of voters for the area in question. These lists are obtainable from election offices in most areas. Depending on the sophistication of the election computer systems, these lists can be requested based on any number of criteria. The best way to request a list is to ask for one which gives the mailing address of each voter who voted in the last election. This shows active voters. Many people register to vote but do not exercise their right to vote. The purpose of this effort again is to narrow the focus of the message in terms of its destination. The focus at this point will be narrowed to about 20% - 30% of the total population in most areas. These are known as "frequent voters".

Personal contact is the most important part in creating political change. Personal contact includes face-to-face discussion, hand-written letters, phone calls and other forms of direct contact. Personal contact is what causes people to embrace an issue and work for change.

The tools applied here are simple. There are three ways to achieve contact.

  1. Phone calls to the voter. This can best be done by "polling" on an issue or series of issues. This gives a couple of things of use to the agent of change -- individuals who are making things change. It gives an identifiable population with interests similar to the change agent. It gives a chance to test ideas in the public forum without undo risk and it gives poll results which, if favorable, become a news conference and press event. If negative results are tabulated from the poll, it will provide guidance in reshaping your issue into a more acceptable form. Polling is inexpensive if done with disciplined volunteers.
  2. Mail. After a phone poll, it is good to follow up with a hand-written note. This should be short and to the point. If the person was undecided on the issue the note should be designed to inform and educate based on the phone call. The caller should send the note.
  3. Personal visit. This should follow the mailed note. A visit to the home is important. It should be brief and be designed to get a response. "Hi, I'm Jane Doe, I spoke with you on the phone the other day about the "whatever" agenda. Thank you for taking the time to talk to me. We are trying to change "whatever" and are asking registered voters to sign this petition for "whatever." The gathering of signatures of people in support of an issue provides another press event opportunity, as does the tabulation of the results.

I used this method in a small community in Alaska with great success. I was invited to town to train a group in community action so that they could replace a local elected official. They followed the points above and the instruction given in a three-hour training session. After a thirty day campaign effort, they were able to elect the candidate they had convinced to run for the office. They won their election with 66% of the vote against a three-term incumbent. The method should be supple-mented by the other activities defined in this article. The costs associated with these kinds of efforts are minimal where people share an interest for change and volunteer to work for it.

Thrashed by the battle

Expect to be challenged. Anything worth pursuing will be met with a challenge proportional to your effort. You can achieve success by maintaining philosophy. Compromise on issues but not on ethics, morals or means in pursuing the change agenda. To compromise on issues is part of gaining change. Change may come in "incremental bite-size bits". Compromising ethically and morally puts one in the same camp as those you oppose. Maintaining integrity, winning or losing on the immediate issue, keeps one in position to engage the next battle. Expect to be thrashed around a bit because in making change not everyone will see it from your perspective. A great deal of strength is gained by maintaining a high level of intellectual honesty and looking for the truth in all presentations of information. Likewise, getting bruised a bit by experience serves to equip us for future challenges.

Turning the tables on the program

You need to know the rules and how to change the rules. Changing the rule-makers and making new rules is an option most often focused upon by individuals. This focus on election of officials generally attracts the greatest attention of individuals but may not get an issue addressed. In most areas there are legal ways for individuals to petition for change through "voter initiatives". These are efforts where a defined number of voter signatures are collected which then allows issues to be placed on the election ballot. This is a method of direct legislation. In localities where such initiatives are not permitted then removing and replacing officials is the alternative and can be done using the methods described elsewhere in this article - change the rule makers and make up new rules.

The first step in any legislative change agenda is to determine if the issue is local, state or national in scope. Some issues overlap and require change at many levels. Because this article is intended to help people actualize change without a great deal of experience it is recommended that individuals start with local or regional issues. At this level, information will be readily available for use in creating change. Documents to become familiar with will include the city charter, state Constitution or such other governing documents for the jurisdiction which you are in. These documents will generally define how an individual can get an issue before the voters. These documents will also indicate who in the government is responsible for controlling these types of initiatives. The next step is to go to the agency or individual responsible for implementing the election initiative process. These individuals will have the detailed rules for generating ballot issues in your locality. The petitioning document then needs to be developed and should be reviewed by an attorney or the person within the government who is responsible for elections. This will assure that the petitions meet all of the requirements of law. Using the ideas in this article will help put the program forward.

Money and Change

Money can be your tool when you don't have any. The idea that the opposition may outspend, out publicize and out promote their cause is always a concern. If the issue being defended by the opposition is not popular, they will rely on money because they will not have people to insert into their equation. People power can balance the money equation if people are well organized and the undertaken tasks are always focused into gaining enough voters to affect the desired changes. Creating press events is one of the most important ways to gain attention on an issue, and goes significantly further than paid advertising in shaping opinion. Those that depend on only money as the tool for maintaining the status quo are going to use manipulative methods in most cases. They are going to use emotional manipulations to stop change. Direct challenge is the best approach. A new press event emerges... "The maintainers of the status quo have begun their program of buying their way to victory and challenging the intelligence of voters through emotional appeals. The maintainers of the status quo again are spending money to protect their positions at our expense. They are again taking in large sums from special interest groups to manipulate the population into acceptance of a substandard solution." The idea of using their money spending as an issue for a press conference will be useful. By making big money and big spending an issue, the issue may serve to restrain the opposition from spending as much money in their effort to win.

Preemptive Moves

You need to anticipate the moves of the opposition early in the change planning process. Time should be spent in trying to determine the moves of those in opposition to you so that plans to "preempt" them can be laid. Preemptive plans are activated before the opposition moves. They are intended to stop the opposition from taking some actions counter to the interest of the change agents. An example would be anticipating that your opposition, The Big Corporation, will outspend you. In this example a "preemptive" move would be to call a press conference and announce "that you are beginning the effort on the "whatever" plan and you expect that The Big Corporation will try and manipulate the population with expensive advertising as if they were selling soap, etc...".

You will not always be able to anticipate every move of the opposition because they will be operating from a different value system developed out of their self interests. If you anticipate every one of the opposition's "moves", you are probably sharing their value systems. Think about this... If we participate in their drama then we are their drama. Create and move your own agenda. Write your own script for change and stick with it.

There are many sources which can provide information supplemental to this article. A trip to the local library will provide a wealth of information. Look up material referenced under political action, press conferences, polling and other topics mentioned in the text of this article will be helpful. Take a step for change and do something. Press the new awakening into your local reality.

This article was supposed to just deliver steps or methods for change, but has reflected many more subtle opinions and views of the author. It is not this author's intent to breed controversy with this article but, rather, to provide some ideas which will empower individuals to develop "change agendas" in the communities we live within. Enjoy the adventure; each effort engaged for the good of others will lead to personal growth.

 Submit this article (What is this?)

Digg It!    Submit to Reddit!    Kiss it!    Fark It!    Submit to Netscape!    Submit to Slashdot!    Submit to Shadows!    Submit to del.icio.us!    Submit to Newsvine!    Submit to Yahoo!    Submit to Xilin.us!

 
Earthpulse  

Copyright © 2005-2017 Earthpulse Press. All rights reserved.
Cancellation and Privacy Notice