The Phora  

Go Back   The Phora > Private Forums > Jewology
User Name
Password
Blog Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Jewology Discussion about Jews. Anyone may post here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #131  
Old 11-16-2017, 07:49 PM
Avvakum's Avatar
Avvakum Avvakum is offline
Established member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 1,847
Country: Byzantine Empire
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petr
But this attitude can also partly explain the hatred that the Jews felt towards early Christians, who were Jewish converts; they were seen as gentile-loving traitors of their own people.

http://biblehub.com/acts/21-27.htm

The difference being, that had the Jews at the time had men like the Holy Maccabees still around, they would have recognized the God and Rightful King of Israel in Jesus of Nazareth. As it was, there were men like the Macchabees who did, like the Twelve Apostles and the Seventy Disciples. Judas Maccabeus and his brothers had poor imitators in the Zealots, and the Pharisees were more popular and more powerful than the Essenes, in Christ's time.

Edit; case in point, the Maccabees had 'zeal for the Law of God', but were into the Spirit of the Law, not so tied down by legalism that they wound up being killed by their enemies because they refused to fight on the Sabbath, for example, unlike others.
__________________
"Go tell all in foreign lands that Russia lives! Those who come to us in peace will be welcome as a guest. But those who come to us sword in hand will die by the sword! On that Russia stands and forever will we stand!"

St. Prince Alexander Nevsky
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 11-17-2017, 07:53 AM
Petr Petr is online now
Established member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 26,026
Arrow The loyal Jewish servant of the Roman Empire

You are right of course, but the Jews of that era did have valid reasons to fear betrayal by their kinsmen; this astonishing figure, an Alexandrian Jew who became the right-hand man of emperor Vespasian and participated in the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem (and who was a nephew of famous philosopher Philo), is proof enough of that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius_Julius_Alexander

Quote:
Tiberius Julius Alexander (fl. 1st century) was an equestrian governor and general in the Roman Empire. Born into a wealthy Jewish family of Alexandria but abandoning or neglecting the Jewish religion, he rose to become procurator of Judea (c. 46–48) under Claudius. While Prefect of Egypt (66–69), he employed his legions against the Alexandrian Jews in a brutal response to ethnic violence, and was instrumental in the Emperor Vespasian's rise to power. In 70, he participated in the Siege of Jerusalem as Titus' second-in-command.[1]
And this man did not abandon Israel for the sake of Christ, but had rather sold his soul to Caesar, so to speak. As a loyal servant, the true "company man" of the Roman system, he even led an Einsatzgruppe-style ethnic cleansing in the Alexandrian Jewish ghetto:

Quote:
In May 66, Nero appointed Alexander as Prefect of Egypt, one of the two most prestigious posts available to an equestrian along with Prefect of the Praetorian Guard.[13] Alexander may have benefitted from a philhellenic tendency in equestrian appointments under Nero,[14] but his experience of Egypt must also have commended him.[15] However, any hope that he would be able to quell the recurring conflicts in his province between Greek and Jewish populations proved to be short-lived. The year he assumed office saw the outbreak of the First Jewish–Roman War in Judea, and aggression inevitably spilled over into the large Jewish community of Alexandria. An outbreak of ethnic violence during a Greek assembly escalated when the Greeks took prisoners, leading the Jewish side to threaten to burn the assembled Greeks to death. Alexander sent mediators to calm the Jews, warning he would have to use the Roman legions if violence continued.[16] The threat was ineffective, and Josephus describes the outcome:
[Alexander] then let loose among them the two Roman legions, and with them 2,000 soldiers who happened to have come from Libya, with fearful consequences for the Jews. He gave the men leave not merely to kill them but also to plunder their property and burn down their houses. The soldiers rushed into the area called Delta where the Jews were concentrated, and proceeded to carry out their orders, but not without bloodshed on their own side; for the Jews stood shoulder to shoulder with their most heavily armed men in front and held their ground magnificently, but when once the line gave they were destroyed wholesale. Death came upon them in every form; some were overtaken in the open, others driven into their houses, which the Romans first looted and then burnt down. They felt no pity for infants, no respect for the aged; old and young were slaughtered right and left, so that the whole district was deluged with blood and 50,000 corpses were heaped up: even the remnant would not have survived had they not begged for mercy till Alexander, pitying them, ordered the Romans to retire.[17]
Tiberius was rewarded for his loyalty after the new Flavian dynasty had risen to the throne, even though some might have despised him as a social climber of foreign origin:

Quote:
The details of Alexander's career under the new emperor [Vespasian] remain unclear. A damaged papyrus refers to Alexander as holding the position of "Praetorian Prefect", which is open to two interpretations. It could indicate his rank during Titus' campaign in 70, which would mean that he held his own independent imperium (commanding authority). According to another view, it means that he became Prefect of the Praetorian Guard at Rome, which in later years became a common position for former Prefects of Egypt.[26] In either case, Alexander attained a position in the Roman Empire that was unparalleled for a man of Jewish birth, not to mention one who suffered from the further stigma of an Egyptian origin. The xenophobic speaker of Juvenal's first Satire, composed in the late 1st or early in the 2nd century AD, complains of passing the Forum's triumphal statues, "where some Egyptian Arabarch's had the nerve to set up his titles. At his image it's right to do more than piss!"[27] This is very likely a reference to Alexander.[28]

The Jewish Encyclopedia article, written at the beginning of the 20th century, estimated that Tiberius might have been the highest-ranking Jew ever to serve in a gentile army:

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...lius-alexander

Quote:
In the contest between Vespasian and Vitellius for the position of emperor, Alexander, on receipt of a letter from Vespasian, caused (July 1, 69) the Egyptian troops to swear the oath of allegiance to the latter ("B. J." iv. 10, § 6; Tacitus, "Hist." ii. 79; Suetonius, "Vespasian," vi.). This was probably done at the instigation of Berenice, who was a relative of Alexander. As a reward for this service the latter was appointed to accompany Titus in the Jewish war as prafectus prœtorio—"general of the army" ("B. J." v. 1, § 6), probably the highest military office to which a Jew ever attained. In the council of war before Jerusalem Alexander voted for the preservation of the Temple (Renier, "Conseil de Guerre Tenu par Titus," in "Mémoires de l'Institut," 1867, xxvi. 294; Grätz, "Gesch. d. Juden," 4th ed., iii. 531).

He is not all that well known figure, and those modern Jews who pay attention to him have conflicting views. Here is the nationalist view, seeing him as a race traitor plain and simple:

http://www.jpost.com/Blogs/Past-Impe...rusalem-436073

Quote:
Titus’ Chief of Staff in his campaign to conquer and raze Jerusalem in 70 CE was born a Jew. His name was Tiberius Julius Alexander and he was the scion of one of the most important Jewish families in the ancient world. His uncle was Philo, a communal leader of the Jews of Alexandria and the first prominent philosopher in Jewish history. His father Marcus was an important Alexandrian official under the Roman administration and was famed for his gift of gilded gates to the Jerusalem Temple. His brother had married into the Jewish royal family in Judea. While he did not officially convert to paganism, simply by fighting in the Roman army and participating in the Roman administration of the ancient world he cut his ties with his Jewish roots. According to historian Martin Goodman in his study of Rome and Jerusalem, the Roman elite ignored Tiberius’ Jewish origins and he was treated as a Roman and not a Jew.
...

Tiberius Julius Alexander must have been the black sheep of his family. But if he were alive today, he would fit comfortably among the Jews who hate themselves and hate Israel and would not regret the destruction of Israel. You can go to any college campus in the world and find the Jewish ideological heirs of Tiberius Julius Alexander.

Whereas this piece, written by a liberal academic, seeks to find some "nuance," and refuses to deny his Jewishness:

http://www.academia.edu/2543723/The_..._and_Jerusalem

Quote:
“The relationship between Rome and Jerusalem was complicated by the fact that a Roman could be Jewish and a Jew could be Roman” (Goodman 155), and so too were there Jews outside the walls and Romans within when Jerusalem was destroyed. During the siege, a small number of Roman soldiers had gone over to the Jewish side, convinced perhaps that god was on their side or that some kind of messianic time was approaching, while long before the siege began, Jews had already been participating actively in the Roman Empire, with varied results.
...

The Roman historian Tacitus ignores Tiberius’ Jewishness throughout his writings, describing him only as an Alexandrian; other writers have judged his ‘defection’ from Judaism harshly. Typical of this style is the following modern description:
Sadly for Philo, the wealth, status and renown of his family made them susceptible to assimilation. Philo’s nephew, Tiberius Julius Alexander, renounced Judaism. He became prefect of Judea, and later governor of Egypt. He was one of the Roman generals who ruthlessly suppressed the Jewish Great Rebellion. This man showed no fraternal feeling at all for his ancestral people. (Wylen 115)
Even among more academically-minded historians there is a tendency to use language which attributes motives to Tiberius. Murphy calls Tiberius “thoroughly Hellenized” (314), rather than one who was thoroughly absorbed into Roman society and politics; Peter Schäfer writes that he “had abandoned Judaism and made his career in the Roman service” (Schäfer 114), when it is not clear if these were contradictory desires.

Jewish historians, then and now, simply do not seem to know what to do with Tiberius Julius Alexander, with the result that they either disparage him as near-heretical or better, ignore him entirely. The painful complexity of a Jew who helped to destroy the Temple is swept aside, unless he becomes useful as a warning: stay too long in the fleshpots of Egypt and your children too will turn against their tradition! And in this reduction of Tiberius to either a footnote or a warning, we lose the story of an individual whose complex identities should be familiar to those of us in the contemporary Jewish world.
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 11-17-2017, 04:23 PM
Avvakum's Avatar
Avvakum Avvakum is offline
Established member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 1,847
Country: Byzantine Empire
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petr
You are right of course, but the Jews of that era did have valid reasons to fear betrayal by their kinsmen; this astonishing figure, an Alexandrian Jew who became the right-hand man of emperor Vespasian and participated in the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem (and who was a nephew of famous philosopher Philo), is proof enough of that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius_Julius_Alexander


And this man did not abandon Israel for the sake of Christ, but had rather sold his soul to Caesar, so to speak. As a loyal servant, the true "company man" of the Roman system, he even led an Einsatzgruppe-style ethnic cleansing in the Alexandrian Jewish ghetto:


Tiberius was rewarded for his loyalty after the new Flavian dynasty had risen to the throne, even though some might have despised him as a social climber of foreign origin:



The Jewish Encyclopedia article, written at the beginning of the 20th century, estimated that Tiberius might have been the highest-ranking Jew ever to serve in a gentile army:

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...lius-alexander



He is not all that well known figure, and those modern Jews who pay attention to him have conflicting views. Here is the nationalist view, seeing him as a race traitor plain and simple:

http://www.jpost.com/Blogs/Past-Impe...rusalem-436073



Whereas this piece, written by a liberal academic, seeks to find some "nuance," and refuses to deny his Jewishness:

http://www.academia.edu/2543723/The_..._and_Jerusalem

Basically, the ' Jews' that have some power in this world and wealth, are of the sort like Tiberius Alexander. " We have no king but Caesar".... And yet that's a lie too, as witness the intrigues of the Herodian family
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 11-18-2017, 03:35 PM
Petr Petr is online now
Established member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 26,026
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avvakum
Basically, the ' Jews' that have some power in this world and wealth, are of the sort like Tiberius Alexander. " We have no king but Caesar".... And yet that's a lie too, as witness the intrigues of the Herodian family
The 1911 edition of Encyclopedia Britannica had a pretty good article on the Sadducees, who were those kind of worldly Jews - after the destruction of the Temple priesthood in 70 AD, they pretty much went out of business, so to speak, and the Pharisees with their Talmudic traditions were left alone to carry on the Judaic banner, until the era of the French Revolution gave birth to secularized "neo-Sadducees":

http://www.thefullwiki.org/Sadducees#1911encyclopedia

Quote:
But though some of those who bore the title [of Sadducees] may be reckoned at their best as orthodox conservatives, their position was, as far as our mainly Pharisaic authorities permit us to learn, merely negative; and all the information we possess, whether it rests on facts or on prejudice, points to their close affinity with the Jews who renounced their faith altogether and advertised the fact - say by habitual and unwarranted breach of the Sabbath, for example. In fact, broadly speaking, the Sadducees for the period during which they are reported to exist, represent and embody the tendency to conformity with neighbouring Gentiles, which is deplored and denounced by Jewish writers from Moses to Philo.
...

With the approval of Antiochus Epiphanes, the Sadducean section embraced the outward forms of Hellenism, and out of the persecution of the orthodox which followed was born the hope of a future life which was in the circumstances the necessary corollary of God's righteousness and was discovered to be latent in Scripture. Later Sadducees, who actually bore the name, resisted this and all the characteristics of the Pharisees and continued to flatter the predominant foreigner - Greek or Roman - by imitating him with less reckless bravado than the first Hellenizers and with growing assurance. They were men of the world, and men of this world, and, so far as they still professed and practised Judaism, they preferred to repudiate the additions for which they felt no need, but which had entered into the faith of their fathers. The Pharisees, who pruned and fed the tree of Judaism so that it might bear fruit for the healing of the Nation - and the nations in the latter days - gave them the opportunity of posing as the champions of the primitive standards. But, though the reformers thus played into the hands of the Sadducees, the people were not deceived by the badge which Sadducean priests adopted and paraded to save their faces: they loved the Pharisees and were ready to go to death at their bidding. The Sadducees were the hypocrites of the Jewish world, just as the Epicureans were the hypocrites of the Greek world. The rest of the Jews rated the Sadducees as atheists, just as the rest of the Greeks rated the Epicureans as atheists and discerned, as Plutarch said, the sardonic grin behind the mask of their obsequious devotion to the ceremonies at which the force of public opinion compelled their attendance. The Sadducee was a Jew outwardly so long as he so retained place, power and profit. The destruction of Jerusalem, long before it was consummated in A.D. 70, robbed them of the place and nation which alone compensated them for the inconveniences of their nominal allegiance. They knew well enough the power of invincible Rome; and her advance warned them to take themselves and their talents to the market of the wide world, to which in heart and mind they had always belonged.

Josephus (Ant. xiii. 5.9, §§ 171-173, Niese) introduces the Sadducees along with the Pharisees and Essenes in his account of Jonathan's reign (161-143 B.C.) as the third of the sects of the Jews, and defines their tenets thus: "They deny the existence of God (Josephus says "Fate", as he is speaking to pagans) and the Divine government of human affairs; and they assert that everything lies in our power, so that we are responsible for our good or bad fortune." Similarly, in the earlier history of the Jewish War (ii. 8.14, §§ 164-166, Niese) to which he refers, he says: "The Sadducees do away with Destiny altogether and set God beyond the possibility of punishing or supervising men. They assert that man is free to choose good or evil since both are set before him, and that he receives good or evil according to his choice. They deny the immortality of the soul and the punishments and rewards of Hades. In contrast with the mutual friendliness and loyalty of the Pharisees, their behaviour towards one another is lacking in courtesy, and when they mix with their fellow-countrymen, they are as offhanded as if their fellows were aliens." Josephus might have added that they were disposed to treat aliens as they should have treated their friends.
In other words, typical jet-setting elite liberals (or prototypes of modern liberals) with the attitude of oikophobia - fawning on the aliens while shitting on your kinsmen.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 11-20-2017, 03:08 PM
Petr Petr is online now
Established member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 26,026
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avvakum
"We have no king but Caesar".... And yet that's a lie too, as witness the intrigues of the Herodian family
I am not quite sure what you are referring to here. Perhaps you could clarify?

But queen Berenice was indeed like an archetypal example of the intermarrying sort of cosmopolitan Jew, being like female equivalent of Tiberius Alexander, to whom she was connected:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bereni...pa)#Early_life

Quote:
Josephus records three short-lived marriages in Berenice's life, the first which took place sometime between 41 and 43, to Marcus Julius Alexander, brother of Tiberius Julius Alexander and son of Alexander the Alabarch of Alexandria.[4][5] On his early death in 44, she was married to her father's brother, Herod of Chalcis,[3] with whom she had two sons, Berenicianus and Hyrcanus.[6] After her husband died in 48, she lived with her brother Agrippa for several years and then married Polemon II of Pontus, king of Cilicia, whom she subsequently deserted.[7] According to Josephus, Berenice requested this marriage to dispel rumors that she and her brother were carrying on an incestuous relationship, with Polemon being persuaded to this union mostly on account of her wealth.[7] However the marriage did not last and she soon returned to the court of her brother. Josephus was not the only ancient writer to suggest incestuous relations between Berenice and Agrippa. Juvenal, in his sixth satire, outright claims that they were lovers.[8]
Sounds like a typical proto-liberal (or libertine) degenerate, resembling Herodias, a kinswoman of hers, who got John the Baptist killed. But she did get on in the world:

Quote:
Affair with Titus

It was during this time that Berenice met and fell in love with Titus, who was eleven years her junior.[18] The Herodians sided with the Flavians during the conflict, and later in 69, the Year of the Four Emperors—when the Roman Empire saw the quick succession of the emperors Galba, Otho and Vitellius—Berenice reportedly used all her wealth and influence to support Vespasian on his campaign to become emperor.[19] When Vespasian was declared emperor on 21 December 69, Titus was left in Judaea to finish putting down the rebellion. The war ended in 70 with the destruction of the Second Temple and the sack of Jerusalem, with approximately 1 million dead, and 97,000 taken captive by the Romans.[20] Triumphant, Titus returned to Rome to assist his father in the government, while Berenice stayed behind in Judaea.

It took four years until they reunited, when she and Agrippa came to Rome in 75. The reasons for this long absence are unclear, but have been linked to possible opposition to her presence by Gaius Licinius Mucianus, a political ally of emperor Vespasian who died sometime between 72 and 78.[21] Agrippa was given the rank of praetor, while Berenice resumed her relationship with Titus, living with him at the palace and reportedly acting in every respect as his wife.[22] The ancient historian Cassius Dio writes that Berenice was at the height of her power during this time,[22] and if it can be any indication as to how influential she was, Quintilian records an anecdote in his Institutio Oratoria where, to his astonishment, he found himself pleading a case on Berenice's behalf where she herself presided as the judge.[23] The Roman populace however perceived the Eastern Queen as an intrusive outsider, and when the pair was publicly denounced by Cynics in the theatre, Titus caved in to the pressure and sent her away.[22]

Upon the accession of Titus as emperor in 79, she returned to Rome, but was quickly dismissed amidst a number of popular measures of Titus to restore his reputation with the populace.[24] It is possible that he intended to send for her at a more convenient time.[21] However, after reigning barely two years as emperor, he suddenly died on 13 September 81.[25]

It is not known what happened to Berenice after her final dismissal from Rome.[21] Her brother Agrippa died around 92, and with him the Herodian Dynasty came to an end.

In modern history, her aspirations as a potential empress of Rome have led to her being described as a 'miniature Cleopatra'.[26]
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 11-20-2017, 03:14 PM
Avvakum's Avatar
Avvakum Avvakum is offline
Established member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 1,847
Country: Byzantine Empire
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petr
I am not quite sure what you are referring to here. Perhaps you could clarify?

But queen Berenice was indeed like an archetypal example of the intermarrying sort of cosmopolitan Jew, being like female equivalent of Tiberius Alexander, to whom she was connected:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bereni...pa)#Early_life


Sounds like a typical proto-liberal (or libertine) degenerate, resembling Herodias, a kinswoman of hers, who got John the Baptist killed. But she did get on in the world:

I was referring to Berenice, but I suspect that the Herodian Clan had long grasped for the Imperial power, Berenice being just the most well known intriguer
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 12-08-2017, 01:01 AM
Petr Petr is online now
Established member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 26,026
Default

I got this tip from the WN news-site "New Observer Online":

http://newobserveronline.com/netanya...-jews-by-2070/

Quote:
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has reportedly predicted that racial mixing between liberal Jews and non-Jews will wipe out Reform Judaism in America by 2070—and that as a result, the Jewish ethnostate must prepare itself for survival without being supported by the US.
https://www.jta.org/2017/12/01/news-...e-away-by-2070

Quote:
Netanyahu denies saying Reform Judaism will assimilate away by 2070

December 1, 2017 7:59am

(JTA) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu denied that he said in closed talks that Reform Judaism in the United States would disappear within two generations due to assimilation.

Netanyahu’s bureau said the reports, which appeared Friday in the Makor Rishon daily, were “inaccurate and do not reflect the Prime Minister’s views.”

But Makor Rishon’s diplomatic correspondent, Ariel Kahana, reported that Netanyahu repeated the assessment several times in private talks, and that Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer, has been heard making similar projections.

Netanyahu and his government have come under harsh criticism in recent months from leaders of Reform and Conservative Judaism in the United States and beyond over his government’s refusal to implement a compromise that enlarges the space devoted to egalitarian prayer at the Western Wall, as well as its support for a bill that would give the Orthodox Chief Rabbinate formal control over conversions.

Yet according to Kahana’s reports, Netanyahu spoke of the scenario of the demise of Reform Judaism as a threat to Israel, saying the Jewish state needs to prepare for a day when it would no longer enjoy the base of support provided today by the Jewish community in the United States.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 12-16-2017, 06:59 PM
Petr Petr is online now
Established member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 26,026
Default

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/239318

Quote:
'Hellenists, go back to Greece'

Activists protest J'lem community center's Hanukkah celebration, which incorporated Santa Claus, Christmas trees, and Mohammed's birthday.

Arutz Sheva Staff, 14/12/17 12:41


Activists from the Otzma Yehudit and Lehava organizations protested on Wednesday night outside a Jerusalem community center hosting a multi-faith "Hanukkah" celebration which included a celebration of Mohammed's birthday, as well as Santa Claus and Christmas trees.

The protesters called the participants "Hellenists" and told them to "go back to Greece." Otzma Yehudit leader Baruch Marzel said the celebration represents the exact opposite of the entire story of Hanukkah, when the Maccabees fought every attempt to integrate foreign religions and values into Judaism.

Otzma Yehudit CEO Tzvi Succot said, "One of the heroic stories of Hanukkah is that of Hannah and her seven sons, who were murdered for refusing to even seem to act in accordance with any other religion. And here, we're opening our front door and mixing everything up."

Succot added, "If Hannah were here today, I don't know how she would manage."

One of the women running the celebration attacked Succot in an attempt to grab his cellular phone from him. However, Israel Police officers at the scene refused to detain her, allowing the violent woman to escape the scene.

Several of the activists who attempted to enter the community center were physically forced away from the area.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 12-16-2017, 10:34 PM
Avvakum's Avatar
Avvakum Avvakum is offline
Established member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 1,847
Country: Byzantine Empire
Default


Hey, from their perspective I can't say that I blame them at all, the protesters. A Christmas tree for Christmas? Is Christ honored in that, or sharing the celebration with Hanukkah (which was a miraculous story recorded in the OT) and Muhammad's birthday?

"Hellenism'', yes, Paganism is what this is, a Hindu or African Animist might have the same mindset as these Ecumenists...

Not only is this contrary to the Spirit of Hanukkah, but the Spirit of Christ also, as He is the same Spirit.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 0.04682 seconds with 11 queries