All They Want To Do Is Take Your Twenty


3TV on Coconino's Pursuit of the Jackson

Video: CameraFRAUD on Coconino's Pursuit of the Jackson

We’ve warned you for a while that “All They Want To Do Is Take Your Money.” Now it appears that Coconino County wants to “take your twenty,” too.

Flustered county officials are upset that they’re having to process the influx of machine-generated tickets, while not getting to cover their own costs.

Since all of the money either goes to the vendor or to the State, the court is left holding the bag– and the overloaded docket of fraudulent tickets.

The solution? Charge an additional $20 to anyone who challenges or ignores the ticket. While we’re not sure the logistics of trying to enforce the twenty dollar surcharge on those who ignore the ticket (they would still have to be served under Arizona Rule 4), one thing is certain: It’s all about the money.

75 Responses to All They Want To Do Is Take Your Twenty

  1. PhotoRadarScam says:

    That’s right, it’s all about the money.

    I have to question how legal it is to charge someone $20 for the privilege of defending themselves. If I can’t afford an attorney (for a criminal charge), they’ll give me one. But if I want to defend myself for a traffic ticket, I have to pay?

  2. George Washington says:

    Have your muskets at the ready men. And for now.. lets throw some scameras into the harbor.

  3. Rick Stone says:

    This is the trickle down effect from the culture of greed and corruption in Washington. Abuse and corruption learned from the big boys!

  4. Alice Lillie says:

    Yes, George is right…let’s have a scamera tea party!

    See my website.

  5. Tara says:

    I’m buying a new LCD-cover for my plate.. Changes from clear to 100% black with the click of a remote inside the car…

  6. RedFlexGoHome says:

    I had a long conversation with a friend who is a Phoenix Police officer last night. He, and most of his fellow officers, are as annoyed about the cameras as we are.

    He cites the same reasons most of us do: lack of accountability, invasion of privacy, questionable ethics and worst of all, the slippery slope which would make the argument that less officers are needed to patrol our streets.

    Even Law enforcement agrees with CameraFRAUD.

  7. Joe says:

    I find it most interesting that despite (supposedly) not getting compensated, they are quite happy to process the guilty pleas for FREE.

  8. Stupid Amerkin says:

    It’s all about the money? Ya think?

  9. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    i would have just raised the ticket price!!! oh well nobody asked me…. i am not sure how long they can get away with this one… ooops did i agree with you guys on something!!!

    tara- i wonder how that little remote works when the car is flipped over on top of it!!! how will it help you then?

  10. Joe says:

    Anyone know the Redflex US CEO’s plate number?

  11. RedFlexGoHome says:

    Tara-

    Please post a link to the product you’re talking about. I’m sure we’d all like to try one out if you find it successful.

  12. RedFlexGoHome says:

    Here it is, a camera scam from Italy.

    The device programmers cheated the system to rake in more revenue, and up to a million drivers may have been fleeced as a result.

    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/02/italian-red-light-cameras-rigged-with-shorter-yellow-lights.ars

  13. Scott says:

    RedflexGoHome, You are exactly right…..Most police officers hate the cameras!

  14. guttersn1pe says:

    Rather than attempting to get a piece of the action from the state and redflex, the county has decided to run its own scam on the citizens.

    It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy to know someone’s looking for a way…any way…to screw me.

  15. Dan G says:

    Is anyone tallying the number of promises made to garner public support before the cameras went up vs. promises broken since? Stuff like you’ll only have to pay x amount per ticket (lie broken here). How about they weren’t keeping video archives (they record 24/7)? The tickets wouldn’t result in points on your license, or insurance (insurance companies are working hard to break that promise). These cameras would catch speeders (yet they malfunction, sending tickets to innocent folk as well).
    Wake up folks!

  16. Tara says:

    Response to “Law”: The device automatically turns off when the (temporary)hide switch isn’t turned on, so the license plate is visible as if you’re looking through clear plastic..

  17. P. Jarklo says:

    Can the fact that the radar cameras, supposedly an agent of the law enforcement and performing duties of law enforcement, are ticketing at 11+ mph over the limit now make that speed the reasonable and prudent speed? If a vehicle passes a camera, say 100 times, at 10mph over the limit and never gets a ticket once, then 1 time gets a ticket from an officer while traveling at that same speed, is the officer’s ticketing considered “unequal treatment” and thus also unconstitutional under the judge’s ruling?

    On KJZZ today: http://kjzz.org/news/arizona/archives/200902/hereandnow-budgetcuts-photoradar

    The acceptable speed limit must now be 10 mph over the posted limit. Otherwise, why wouldn’t the cameras be ticketing for any speed over the “legal” limit? One mph over the limit is ticketable.

    Why the discrepancy and unequal treatment one instance over another?

  18. jgunn says:

    Anyone driving on the I17 N today about 5PM? I saw quite a nasty rear end accident somewhere around bethany home. I was in the vanpool going southbound and about 200yards from the accident was a scam van. So if you were going north bound, there is the scamvan, and just 200 yards later is a nasty rear end accident (both cars were damaged enough to be undrivable. It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to figure out that someone hit the brakes when they saw the scam van and the guy behind rammed into him. It has been proven without a doubt that speed cameras increase rear end accidents and here is proof positive that they do indeed. What a scam this is, causing accidents and making money off of it. The camera lovers as always will have a lame excuse to explain the situation.

  19. Glyph says:

    Good point Jarklo.

    One can point to the Equal Protection clause in the 14th Amendment. If a Photo Enforcement Camera won’t ticket me for going 10 miles above the speed limit, then a DPS officer sure as hell better not ticket me for going 10 miles over the speed limit.

    It’s a double standard to make money! I say we start garnishng the paychecks that Janet gets from the DHS.

  20. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    jgunn- no it takes an assumption that the cause of the accident was the van … thats it…. you are assuming… i am a brain surgeon so let me help you out…. going north on the 17 @ 5 pm… hummm lets think.. i will you try and follow along.. traffic at that time is CRAWLING along…. correct? so why would someone need to slam on their brakes in that type of traffic… your argument makes no sense… and it is not proven beyond a reasonable doubt…. dont throw crap out that you consider fact!! its not!!!

  21. jgunn says:

    LAB: Sorry, RIF. I said both cars were undrivable and being towed away. That means the accident was more than a fender bender and happened at considerable speed. Thanks for confirming my thoughts that the camera lovers would come up with some worthless excuse though! Makes me feel warm inside.

  22. geez says:

    Hm, wonder how many accidents happened at rush hour in the valley tonight. I bet everyone of them was caused by a camera.

    About 200 yards, so… 600 feet before a van…
    Those people must have had even more bionic vision than you to be able to look over the median wall and deduce something like this across 4 lanes of traffic.

    It’s also funny that DPS said that there normal schedule first shift is off at FOUR and second shift starts at SIX.

    Also funny that you assume it was a van (if there even was one there) and not that possible it arrived after the wreck…

    Also funny how everytime there is a wild claim about a wreck, or obstructed signs or ya ya ya… it is always YOU. And never, do you have any proof.
    You’ve already been caught lying about your fabulous claims. Stop… You so need to get in your weekly wild claim don’t you? Remember the wreck you saw on the 101n at the 60 interchange lie? Man you must be 100 places at once superman to see all these things you claim to see. Better get your bionic vision fixed.

  23. geez says:

    Oh ya, and I love all your CF goonies that call the radio shows
    “Uh ya uh I pass like 4 camera’s everydays and um I almost got hit like 4 times today and like dude this one car went sideways even! And like I’m really trying to sound professional and serious but my stories are really transparent lies. Uh ya and my name is Officer uh Johnson, uh ya I drive a taxi and man those things man people are hittin their brakes like and causing wrecks and stuff, I seen three of um just today”
    I bust up laughing when I hear those, cause the host usually eats em all up gettin all serious, when it’s an obvious CF gooney trying to get the public all worked up.

    On the other hand, I did drive past 4 i think cameras today and not one person hit their brakes and I didn’t see one wreck.

    What’s even funnier is the chick that called in last week bragging about how she had got 10 tickets and thrown them all out.

    What’s even funnier is DPS had her in custody the next day.

  24. Everyone wants to have a nice slice for themselves; soon they’ll probably want a new Carbon Tax for speeding to go to the Fed~ And then they’ll justify a demand for more, and more~

  25. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    jgunn- you are right… IT JUST HAD TO BE THE CAMERA… why.. there can be no other excuse!!! the best part is .. whomever caused it ( cause you know they cant issue a citation to the camera) can refuse taking responsibility now!!!

  26. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    i wonder which one of you is ankarlo!!!!????

  27. jgunn says:

    It seems that DPS was wrong about the cameras being the reasons traffic fatalities dropped in AZ. 40 other states had large drops in fatalities as well. Hate to say we told DPS so, but DPS, “We told you so!”

    http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/02/04/20090204gns-trafficdeaths04-ON.html

  28. JG says:

    Story from the Houston Chronicle:
    The Houston Police Department is considering changes — possibly even expansion — to its red-light camera program after a city-commissioned study showed that crashes went up at intersections where the devices have been installed.

  29. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    as paul harvey would say…. now for the rest of the story……

    what jgunn failed to mention as he distorted the content of the article…. is that high gas prices and the economy played a role but… here is some reading from the article

    ” traffic safety experts acknowledge that last years plunge in miles driven likely played some role in the drop but they say its too early know how much of the decline wwas becasue of that or other factors”

    oh and this little gem……….

    Barbara Harsha , executive director of the governors highway sfety board says ” however, states are reporting that other factors such as better laws, record high sealt belt usage and REDUCED SPEEDS played a role”

    you see guys it is crap like this…. twisting things to try and make your point….

    thats why i am here to stop the corrupt propoganda

  30. RedFlexGoHome says:

    I have an idea: how about we feature one ATS or Redflex employee per month.

    We could take a nice set of photos of their car, their home, their familiy, etc., then showcase those photos along with all of the public records available on them.

    After all…they shouldn’t be afraid if they’re not doing anything wrong.

  31. Malfeasant says:

    gohome, i have a problem with that- two wrongs don’t make a right.

  32. Joe says:

    I support RedFlexGoHome’s idea. We say it’s about privacy. They say it’s about safety (but we know its about money). Let’s show everyone how exercising one’s legal (not ethical) rights sometimes makes people feel uncomfortable.

    I think that if they are going to claim that our being on a public highway makes us fair game for being recorded, I think WE should show them how doing the same thing (and choosing to PUBLISH the results) can work if not handled responsibly. If they have the right to record me, I not only have the right to do the same, but the right to publish it.

    As we find out who the ATS and Redflex employees are, we can then use this tool
    http://maricopa.gov/Assessor/
    to further demonstrate the power of databases and the fear that widespread access to personal information can create.

  33. Malfeasant says:

    according to the taxman, my house is worth more than i owe on it… i wish the market agreed…

  34. Doc says:

    Tara- Please tell us what’s the link for the LCD covers?
    As to the $20.00 Coconino surcharge…It’s unconstitutional…the 1st lawyer that challenges it will win, & set judice precident; & that’ll be the end of that happy crappy!
    So…the legislative greed machine continues @ th’ county level…what are the names of these FINE “elected” county administrators who are wanting to be unemployed in the next election cycle??? Hopefully the good citizens of Coconino county will see who NOT to vote for @ that time!!! I’m betting that the 3 county B.O.S. members in Pima county who pushed thru the additional ticket for the Lic. plate frame fine are now realizing that they are about to need to file a claim for unemployment insurance!!!
    Remember…F R E E D O M ! ! !-Doc from Prescott

  35. geez says:

    So JGUNN
    Lying again….
    Turns out the only thing that happened at your so called accident scene yesterday was one guy ran out of gas in the emergency lane, and one lady was pulled over and towed off for not having a license.
    Your busted again.
    You give the people you represent a horrible reputation.

  36. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    you two rednecks just go right ahead and go for it…. and while i think that you will certainly find support for your caue as you have done here… going after the blue collar workers in their company and somehow trying to make them out to be criminals is not going to fly…. who do you think most of us can associate with… the govt… no…. the ceo’s … no.. but most of us can relate to the guy out doing his or her job… it will be just another splinter on the wood… and your group is already going to be splintered as it is…

    everyday people might view the camera and camera van as the enemy… they will not view the person inside it as such…

    but dont listen to me now… just as you have not before… go ahead with your plan!!! its a great idea!!!

  37. Malfeasant says:

    holy carp, law, we agree on something… i think the universe is going to implode

  38. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    i have a feeling that you and i in the coming weeks and months.. maybe even years will have more that we agree on…

  39. Joe says:

    Law says:
    “going after the blue collar workers in their company and somehow trying to make them out to be criminals is not going to fly”

    No. I’d rather make them out to be scumbags for hitching a ride on that specific truck. Plenty of $13-15 hour jobs at out local call centers. They have lots of late mortgages to collect on, and plenty of delinquennt credit card customers to call.

  40. Joe says:

    Malfeasant:

    Now try going to
    http://maricopa.gov/assessor/gisPortal/gis_portal.asp
    and click on “Parcel Maps” if you have a PC running Internet Explorer, you’ll be able to see who owns what property. Have fun playing with the different layers on the left.

  41. Dan G says:

    LAB rat, you mention the wonderful Redflex people are just blue collar workers trying to make a living (paraphrased). Tell me, what product do they produce that helps our economy? As you have mentioned, the safety issue is in question. But you do realize that taking our money without producing any tangible product and sending large amounts of money to Australia only hurts our economy? If you do not realize this, then please have your redflex employed troll self checked by a mental hospital…

  42. RedFlexGoHome says:

    So, employees of Redflex/ATS have a right to not be filmed, but employees of other companies who drive past scameras don’t have the same rights?

    Interesting double standard.

  43. Joe says:

    As for Redflex, my point is “be careful what you wish for (the right to film anyone), you just might get it”.

  44. I heard about this on the radio and was completely disgusted. $20 even if you want to dispute it? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? I can’t believe what a filthy mess so many governments have turned into. Where’s the integrity anymore? And why do people allow their elected officials get away with this?!

  45. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    dan-what?????? where you going with this? there are no rules in having a business….. they dont have to produce anything…. and they dont have to offer a service to the public… they do however offer a service to the state of arizona or whoever they have a contract with…. and i would not be surprised if they are taking the information they get when the camera is running 24/7 and compiling the information and selling the raw data to whoever seeks it.. such as the number of foreign cars vs. domestic cars, something like that… i have already stated that i would prefer that the contract had gone to an american company .. but that is the problem with the bid process!!! and just by the fact they employee people helps the economy…

    go home- my point has been made… i dont even know why you are wasting your time with me… go get your redflex employee of the month section up.. better start your own web site… my $$ tells me they will not let you do it here…. we will see who is packing between the legs or not here with what you want to do…

  46. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    maria- isnt it CRAZY!!! government trying to get people to obey the laws of the land!!! mexico is probably looking pretty good right about now…. hurry the border closes at midnight!!!

  47. Sick of Government says:

    That’s the problem.. The border never closes. Maybe the government should follow their own laws and remove the illegals. I would think that would be a higher priority than someone doing 76 down the 101. But again, it’s allll about safety.. Uh huh… We’d be a lot safer without illegals, but they won’t pay the government so they go after us instead since we would have slightly more incentive to pay the dummy notice they mail.

  48. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    gov.. if you hurry you can catch her…. you know a little villa right there on the water.. and the best part is they have laws but dont enforce them…. and the police are corrupt…. commit a murder… $100 gets you off scott free!!!what a freaking life!!!

  49. Sick of Government says:

    Unlike you, I love my country so I have no intention on moving. And that is part of why I am here… The cameras are pushing the envelope on our freedom & liberty so I feel it’s time to put politicians in their place and make this country for the people, by the people.

  50. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    blah blah blah…. blah..blah…. cameras are pushing the envelope!!??? that is nothing compared to how the govt could infringe upon us… or maybe doing now without you, me or us knowing!!!!

    isnt it about time to replace the foil in the windows?

  51. Dan G says:

    Yes, ladies and gentlemen, it’s the amazing LAB rat, a.k.a. Law A. Bidingcitizen trolling for the cams. How much are they paying you?
    I don’t know what gave you the impression that I support the cams, let alone a redflex employee section. You should go home. The only point you made is that you are a blind camera troll. The only reason you could possibly ignore so many points over so many days by so many people is that you are a redflex employee worried about his next paycheck. Don’t bother telling us you’re not, we know you are.

  52. I'm Back says:

    “Grocery Business”

  53. Lane Davis says:

    My question is how they will enforce the payment of the $20.

    I have had a couple photo radar tickets so far and I have had them dismissed by ignoring the waiver of service. If you completely ignore the ticket how do they plan on enforcing the payment of the $20.00?

  54. You cf’ers need to get a life, a job, and move out of your mother’s house. I have gotten a few speeding tickets over the years from these photo vans, but I paid the fines and want to driving school. I moved on with my life, I had no one to blame but myself for speeding. They’re are many more things in life to be concerned with then speed cameras. I am going to tell you a secret how not to get a speeding ticket,”DO NOT SPEED!”

  55. Redflex Corporate says:

    Jason’s right, just don’t speed! And someone tell that Rosa Parks chick to just not ride the bus!

  56. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    corp – you choking yet from being so full of yourself… camera debate vs. civil rights !!!! these things should not even be mentioned in the sme breath!!!

  57. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    matt knows ….. they checked my ip address !!! so sorry to disappoint you!!!

  58. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    and that is the bull crap about this site… whoever is in charge knew all along that my ip did not point to any camera comapany…why in fact i am at a residential address in gilbert but they stayed silent as i was being accused…. further illustrates how far this site will go to distort the truth!!!!

    if redflex and dps and janet are as dirty as you claim.. then you all are right behind them!!!

  59. No One says:

    King-

    Let me just point out that you are arguably the single most prolific poster here in the last week or so, and seem vehemently opposed to anyone and anything anti-camera, no matter how small or trifling. This of course begs the question of why someone who “doesn’t care” would be so devoted and spend inordinate amounts of time here, posting day and night.

    I wondered myself whether you had some unspecified tie to the camera companies, and I am normally not one to do so. As time goes on, however, it is clear to me that you are just a loose cannon with too much time and opinions on your hands. Were a camera company really in charge of you, I’d bet they’d muzzle you.

    But, to get back to the topic at hand… I think it is quite interesting that the county is charging extra for fighting a ticket. I can see why, in that they do not receive any funding from this but receive all the increased traffic and transactions, but I can’t help but halfway wonder if this wasn’t implemented by someone anti-camera.

    If I were in charge of a county, I’d do the same thing… ie charge a nominal fee, and invite someone to fight it. Once fought, this will almost assuredly lose, providing one more nail in the coffin of photo radar. Further, once this idea is proven to be unconstitutional, this means nobody else will be able to do it. So that way, no other county or governmental organization can do it, charging $100 or more for it.

    I find the thought of them doing this absolutely repugnant, but think that in the greater scheme of things it might actually be a good thing in terms of the growing anti-camera movement.

  60. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    thanks for the compliments in the first paragraph… you made me blush..

    i dont know why they just didnt raise the price of the ticket for everyone … they have the right to do so…

    your idea doesnt sound too far fetched… however i am sure that it had to come through the county attorneys desk…. and i doubt he would give the ok if he thought it was something that he could lose on.. even though it seems that it can be challenged and beaten…

    the trifling thing!! it goes both ways… i already stated why i am hanging around…. and i wouldnt worry about me and the amount of time spent here.. thats the great thing about the internet… by being basically anonymous…. i know nothing about you and you know nothing about me… except for my views and at what time i post…. but its fun to guess .. right?
    so lets give it a whirl..
    1. unemployed?
    2. so wealthy that i do not have to work at 44 years old
    3. on vacation from my job… if i really have one
    there are probably more options … but its late, i am tired … just watched a great movie… million dollar baby, with clint eastwood.. never saw it before… i recommend it..

  61. No One says:

    a) those weren’t compliments, and b) it has been specifically pointed out previously that they made the dollar amount lower in an effort to “avoid voter backlash” and to encourage people to just roll over and pay the fine rather than fight it. So obviously raising the up-front price of the ticket is not an option.

    (I do not have the link at hand let me know if you’d like me to find it but I’m not going to bother unless asked since you apparently don’t want to be too informed on such matters)

  62. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    you sure? looked like compliments to me….
    you are just being shy….

    it would be for one county…not the entire state.. i am just raising the point that they could raise the penalty.. and it is an option…. i am sure that if that county has to keep spending money on these tickets they will go to that option…

    and dont bother!!!

  63. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    so is todd the man behind camerafraud.com? i just listened to the news conference he called… very tough talk at the end.. you seemed pretty nervous there todd….

  64. No One says:

    don’t bother… I figured as much. You certainly can’t afford to be too informed, as then you’d have to confront how ignorant you really are on the subject at hand. It’s sure nice how some things are a constant.

    But hey, at least after 16 previous posts on this thread, you deigned to take the time to actually watch the video which this thread was supposed to be about.

  65. PhotoRadarScam says:

    The fine cannot be raised without an act of congress, it is set by statute ARS 41-1722.

  66. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    you sure scam? the license plate fiasco had fines in some counties at $135 to over $200 in others…. how did those counties get away with raising the fine?

  67. PhotoRadarScam says:

    I gave you the statute number, you can look it up yourself. But as you’ve made abundantly clear, you’re not interested in educating yourself or doing any research whatsoever. I’m not going to do it for you.

  68. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    cause the fact is they can raise it… and you know it! thanks for making my point for me..by not providing the link you have made it clear that i am correct!!!

  69. Sick of Government says:

    Ok, since you’re so lazy, here’s part of it. Took a whopping few seconds to google and find it. Read section B.

    41-1722. State photo enforcement system; penalties; fund

    A. Notwithstanding any other law, the department shall enter into a contract or contracts with a private vendor or vendors pursuant to chapter 23 of this title to establish a state photo enforcement system consisting of cameras placed throughout this state as determined by the director to enforce the provisions of title 28, chapter 3, articles 3 and 6 relating to vehicle traffic and speed.

    B. Notwithstanding any other law, the civil penalty or fine for a citation or a notice of violation issued pursuant to this section is one hundred sixty-five dollars and is not subject to any surcharge except the surcharge imposed by section 16-954. State photo enforcement citations shall not be included in judicial productivity credit calculations for fiscal year 2008-2009.

    C. The photo enforcement fund is established consisting of monies received from citations or notices of violation issued pursuant to this section. The director shall administer the fund. Monies in the fund are subject to legislative appropriation and are appropriated to the department for administrative and personnel costs of the state photo enforcement system. Monies remaining in the fund in excess of two hundred fifty thousand dollars at the end of each calendar quarter shall be deposited, pursuant to sections 35-146 and 35-147, in the state general fund.

    D. Notwithstanding any other law, if a person is found responsible for a civil traffic violation or a notice of violation pursuant to a citation issued pursuant to this section, the department of transportation shall not consider the violation for the purpose of determining whether the person’s driver license should be suspended or revoked. A court shall not transmit abstracts of records of these violations to the department of transportation.

  70. Sick of Government says:

    And since you probably won’t believe what I copied & pasted, here’s the link to read for yourself.

    http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/41/01722.htm&Title=41&DocType=ARS

  71. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    while you are it… find the one about the license covers… thats the one i was talking about…. and i didnt see there where it said the fine could not be raised by a county.. i did see wording in there though that makes me believe that the $20 is not lawfull.. the word surcharge!!!!

  72. I. Forcamera says:

    it amazes me how ignorant some or most of you can be.
    IF it was just all about taking your money, why do they put the signs up to WARN you? i think they should change the sign from “photo enforcement zone” to “hey dumbass, theres a camera comeing up, so slow the f**k down” that’s pretty much what they are saying with the already present signs. as for it being an invasion of privacy, your on a public road way. that is NOT comparible to having a camera in your bedroom. when your in public, anyone can take a picture of you. why dont you all just follow the rules of the road and you wouldn’t have to worry about the cameras.

  73. Garrison says:

    any updates coming ???

  74. Hedy Ehrke says:

    Hi there, just became aware of your blog through Google, and found that it is really informative. I’m going to watch out for brussels. I will be grateful if you happen to proceed this in future. Many folks will be benefited out of your writing. Cheers!

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: