Skip to content

The RCMP: An Example of Fascism?

Jul 09

I recently came across an article entitled the “Fourteen Defining Characteristics of Fascism” by Dr. Lawrence Britt.  I thought it might be an interesting exercise to see how our national police service measured up.  Dr. Britt studied past fascist regimes in Germany, Italy, Spain, Indonesia, and several Latin American countries.  Here are the fourteen defining characteristics common to each as applied to the RCMP:

  1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism – Fascist regimes employ patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs and other paraphernalia.  Flags and insignias are seen everywhere; on clothing and in public displays.  Doesn’t the RCMP spend several millions of dollars yearly peddling the brand?  Don’t they have a deal with Disney?  Don’t they have a presence at most government (federal, provincial, municipal) photo ops and professional or world class athletic events?
  2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights.  The people who live in fascist regimes are persuaded, for a variety of reasons, that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of a greater need.  Has the RCMP not been accused of looking away from its female members’ complaints?  Is the RCMP not embroiled in at least one class action suit where nearly 300 female members are alleging harassment?  Have the RCMP in some parts of the country not been accused of looking away from the rights of aboriginal women?
  3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause.  The people are whipped into a unifying patriotic delirium focused on the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or enemy.  Does it not appear that the RCMP has turned some of its own members into a common enemy?  Has the RCMP not launched an all out attack on members who are on medical leave?  Has the Force not attempted to discredit some of the women alleging harassment?  Have these members not been identified as having “expectations that exceed their abilities”?  Have these members not been demeaned; as “not having the right stuff”?  Doesn’t it appear to you that Bill C-42 has been created (at least in part) to usher them out the back door without addressing their complaints?
  4. Supremacy of the Military – Soldiers and military service are glamorized even when there are more important issues to deal with.   Today, isn’t the RCMP glamorized even though dysfunctional?   Doesn’t the RCMP have a slick recruiting campaign complete with a professionally produced video?  Do they mention to their target audience that engaging with them could make them sick (Duxbury, 2007)?
  5. Rampant Sexism – The governments of fascist countries tend to tip heavily toward male dominance.  Under fascist regimes traditional gender roles become rigidified.  Has the RCMP not been criticized for gender based harassment (see Summary Report on Gender Based Harassment and Respectful Workplace Consultations)?  Has the Force not been criticized for gender based hiring practices?  Does the RCMP not have to dispel the perception of it being an “old boys club”?
  6. Controlled Mass Media – Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government.  At other times it is indirectly controlled by government regulations etc.  Are Mr. Paulson and his senior executive not under a directive from the PMO?  Do they not have to have their meetings and public commentary approved by the PMO?  Mr. Toews?  Wasn’t Mr. Paulson rebuked by Mr. Toews for speaking out of turn?
  7. Obsession with National Security – Fear is employed by the government as a tool to gain the obedience of the masses.    Won’t it be interesting to see just how credible a threat John Nuttall and Amanda Korody were to our security?
  8. Religion and Government are Intertwined – Fascist governments have a tendency to use the most prevalent religion to manipulate the public.  Religious rhetoric is constantly used even when it is in opposition to the government’s  policies/actions.  Aren’t the Division Staff Relations Representatives (and Mr. Paulson?) trying to tell you that you don’t need a union?  Isn’t that based upon the (almost) religiously held belief that you are different than other police services?  Are you really?  Don’t you have the same rights as your municipal/provincial brothers and sisters?  Isn’t the Div. Rep’s motto of “members first” opposed to the way they act?
  9. Corporate Power is Protected – The industrial/business aristocracy are the ones behind who is in power in a fascist nation.  This creates a mutually beneficial relationship between the government and the power elite.  Isn’t the Commissioner of the RCMP a Deputy Minister of the government?  Isn’t the RCMP a portfolio of the Minister of Public Safety?  Have you ever witnessed the government dictate to the RCMP?
  10. Labour Power is Suppressed – As labour has a certain power to organize, it presents a threat to fascist governments; so labour unions are either eliminated, suppressed, or prevented.  Have the Div. Reps ever used your legal fund money to prevent you forming an association?  Has Mr. Paulson ever called the Mounted Police Professional Association an “upstart union”?  Is he in favour of enshrining and protecting worker’s rights in the RCMP?
  11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts – Fascist governments openly target intellectuals.  They often promote and tolerate open hostility toward higher education as it can lead to education of the masses, new ideas, and change.  Were you ever told, in the field, to forget all you learned in Depot?  Have you ever felt like there is an “old guard” in place that looks down on the “new breed”?  Have you ever been criticized for trying to create work/life balance?  Have you ever been criticized for leaving when your shift is done or not coming in on days off?
  12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment – Fascist governments provide their police with near limitless power to enforce laws.  Citizens are often willing to ignore police abuses and even sacrifice their civil liberties in the name of patriotism.  Are you familiar with the alleged Charter abuses in Bill C-42?  What are you going to do about them?
  13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption – Fascist governments can be characterized as “old boys clubs”.  They are stocked with friends and associates who appoint each other to positions of power, and then use that power to protect each other from accountability.  It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for money, resources, or national treasures to be appropriated or outright stolen.  Do you remember Mr. Zaccardelli?  Are you aware of how many of his supporters are still in the Senior Executive?  Have you ever seen a senior manager or executive of the RCMP escape accountability?  Have you ever seen someone promoted, because of connections, who shouldn’t have been?
  14. Fraudulent Elections – Elections in fascist countries are a joke.  They can be manipulated by smear campaigns, assassinations, or manipulation of the media.  Do you know who hires a municipal Chief Constable?  Do you know how Mr. Paulson got his job?  Why does the RCMP not have a “police board” overseeing its operation?  Is the RCMP really a portfolio of the ruling political party in Canada?

Well there it is.  What do you think?  Does our national police service share some of the characteristics of well known fascist governments of the past?

Dr. Mike Webster, R. Psych.

  1. Anonymous permalink

    11 could have included attacking intellectuals like psychologists.

  2. Rolly permalink

    There is an old saying, “If it looks bad and smells bad, it probably is bad”.

    As a member who currently has just under 27 years in the RCMP, I have seen just about every one of the 14 defining characteristics mentioned above while employed with the RCMP.

    Nothing short of an inquiry will fix the problem. Along with the inquiry, a public apology to all the RCMP members and the public would be required before change really begins.

    The Brown and Duxbury reports were meant to assist in changing the RCMP with recommendations. I do not blame the RCMP for not changing. The change really has to come from the RCMP Masters – (The Government). After all, tax payers dollars were spent on the reports. The government did not endorse the reports nor did they order the RCMP to follow the reports recommendations.

    To me, if there is no political will to fix the problem, no fix will come. With power comes responsibility and with responsibility comes accountability. I just don’t see it happening any time soon.

    Rolly Beaulieu

  3. E Famia permalink


    At a time when the Conservative Gov’ts Deficit Reduction Action Plan (DRAP) has become a problem for its officers and the citizens they serve, the Commissioner and his Senior Executive have continued to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on unnecessary travel expenses and hospitality. This excess spending is occuring at a time when the same Senior Executive have ordered drastic cuts to the administration and operation of the RCMP. Mr. Paulson has spent $135,112.61 on travel expenses and hospitality since he became Commissioner in an 18 month period ending June 1st, 2013. These numbers don`t include his Senior Executive spending. How can the Commissioner and his Senior Executive justify spending this money during the cuts prescribed by the Fed. Gov`t through the DRAP ? Is the Commissioner being a good steward of tax payer money ? Is the Commissioner continuing a double standard of treatment for himself and his Senior Executive while cutting from the rank and file and the canadian tax payers he speaks about often ? Please check out the following link to the RCMP public website for proactive disclosure for all the details.

  4. Greg permalink

    Ignorance is bliss, isn’t it “doc”. You should have your Internet disabled.

    • Anonymous permalink

      Hello Greg,

      In this case Greg, it’s your ignorance that’s bliss. You’ve been far too busy spending time goosing up your kissy-lips on chap stick, choking back tube-steaks smothered in underwear, for anyone reading your post to waste their time (including the good doc’s) qualifying your one-liner of debris. Do you actually get off your Monica Lewinsky knee-pads to see what’s happening around you or has the force molded you as their ‘ oral shine boy’. I guess this is what makes you ‘proud to be a member of the RCMP’. So go ahead Greg, go sport up your red serge and have a good look at yourself in the mirror and bask in the glory of how proud you are realizing the only courage you’ll ever show to the force or the public is playing the top brass’s skin flute – and that is all you will ever amount to. Maybe you’re in the commissioned ranks, or perhaps you’re a boot-licking NCO looking to make his way up playing “snakes and ladders”, but the fact is, you and I both know, the amount of horseshit that carries on in the way of: harassment, top brass collusion, deceit and disloyalty in your ‘neck of the wood’s’ you potentially operate from, is commonly played down by white shirts. For all I know, you’re probably responsible for the demise of good members’ careers, and only concerned with making sure you hold all the ‘get out of jail free’ cards on the monopoly board when the chips fall.

      Just curious but do senior officers do a 2-month stint in Hollywood? I hear you have to be a good actor and pretend to have concern over member issues? Why you must have several years acting experience convincing other cops that you’re listening when they talk about their issues, when you’re really thinking about robots, your affections for squirrels, or what might happen if a car made of diamond drove really fast into a wall made of diamond. Hey, do you need anyone to role play a perpetrator in a crime re-enactment? I have about 3 months experience from 35 years ago playing the bartender who throws drunks out of the bar in the play “My Fair Lady”, when i was 10, but as i’m trying to relate it to police operations, I would prefer to play a Hispanic drug dealer, or an Asian bus driver. Actually i’m currently writing a movie script that I think you’d be perfect for which features a genius of superior police wit and intellect who uses his atypical abilities to protect the innocent. Aided by his loyal pet, a masturbating orangatun, he endeavours to right wrongs and solve crimes. At the end of the show, he will leave us with a profound, thought-provoking and politically correct statement such as “say no to drugs kids” or “Ignorance is bliss isn’t it doc, you should have your internet disabled”. A vital part of the character development and utmost success to this movie as I see it, is the developing relationship between yourself and the orangatun. I haven’t come up with a title yet but i’m open to ideas….possibly “OrangaGreg”? “Gregorangatun”? If the Orangatun makes you look good will you promote it? Don’t worry Greg, if Clint Eastwood can make a movie with an Orangatun called “every which way but loose” (1978) you can too. This movie still scores a 6-rating on ( and just look how the orangatun nestles up to Clint, you’re missing out. You have to trust your partner to back you up don’t you Greg?

      I remember a S/Sgt telling me one time that even when you don’t like senior mgmt. figures “that I
      don’t have to respect the individual, but respect the rank”. I will always respect that particular member because he tried to do the right thing even though possibly brain-washed by these mundane soliloquys, through years of service and social programming the force carries out. Unfortunately, because the force is a broken toy, not only do I not respect many of the ‘brassholes’ in senior mgmt., but I don’t respect the rank either. Let’s be reasonable, if I have to respect inanimate objects or false idols like ‘rank’, then I will also respect the scarecrow in a cornfield as equally. At least the scarecrow has a purpose.

      If ignorance is bliss, why would you want the doc, or anyone to have their internet removed if it’s an educational tool? You agree it is an educational tool right? Glad you agree, so Internet for all as well as freedom of speech. Well i’m glad we had this conversation, why I feel much better already.


      To my biggest fan
      and #1 advocate of internet use for all,

      To Greg,

      Sincerely and Forever Yours, Anonymous

      (i’m just practising writing autographs when my movie and all of us become famous).

      • Anonymous permalink

        Why you most certainly can have my autograph but i will have to send it telepathically or perhaps i’ll bait one of the local ravens with some bread, get a hold of it, tape my autograph to it’s leg and have it flown to you. On a serious note, the doc’s web forum is very good, and let’s the affected membership know they aren’t alone in their circumstances.

  5. Hello Greg,

    If you are in fact an Officer (Inspector or Above) in the RCMP you should know better than to utilize a forum such as this to attack someone. This shows me the disdain that the Officer ranks have for free speech and any other Constitutional rights that RCMP members or anyone for that matter has in this country.

    Greg YOU are not above the law. Never forget that your purpose in the RCMP is to manage not to abuse your subordinates. It is officers such as yourself that need to go back and read the Constitution and try to understand why this was voted in. It is EVERYONE’s right to be protected from abuse, be it in the workplace abuse or not.

    You Sir, need to educate yourself before you spout off. I highly recommend that you seek help for your self righteous thoughts.

    If you are not an officer in the RCMP then your ignorance can be excused and explained as that of someone who is not in touch with reality or themselves.

    My two cents


  6. E Famia permalink

    #2, 3 and 12.

    The following decision out of the Federal Court is an overwhelming reason why the Commissioner should not be invested with the ultimate power of dismissal alone. It is apparent he ignored the evidence and the External Review mechanism and replaced it with his own “speculation” of what he thought occured to meet his own political needs. He sacrificed someone for political gain to show he was going to get tough on the “dark hearted bad apples”. Its quite telling how far he will go to make himself look decisive. Ethical ? Is this the type of person you want to run a law enforcement agency ? Who is next to be sacrificed for his own political gains ? There likely will be more. Please read the included article below and make up your own mind.

  7. code-two permalink

    Interesting how one comment that does not fit with the general theme here is pounced upon ungraciously. Personally I think the fascist label is a bit over the top. Plus the assumption the one contributor is a “white shirt” is without foundation and falls within the Ad Hominem argument fallacy.

    With respect to the expenses point, It is found, as Efamia does note, under the proactive disclosure area of the RCMP website. Really trying to hide there eh? You would do better to support your argument if you had some comparisons to previous Commissioners or even other entity heads and their compensation.

    Where does the conclusion that this greg is even a member rolly? Your comments are in fact demeaning, conclusive, and impolite. Here is a neat little website that I am sure you will find informative.

    It is also interesting that a number of members and non members have posted here and their comments never appear. Sounds like censorship to me, uh, number 14 as noted above, manipulation of the media. Substitute EXXON for the RCMP Mike, and your fascist points fit better.

    • E Famia permalink

      Hi Code-Two,

      E. Famia here. No where in my observation did I say he was trying to “hide” anything, If you can find it within my observation please let me know. Furthermore, a “comparison” was also not part of my observation because I asked if you or others felt he was being a good steward of public funds by spending that large amnount of money when the RCMP is required to cut millions of dollars from its budget because of DRAP. I used the word steward because the Commissioner, in my opinion utilizes it for his own political benefit quite often in his responses to the media about tax payer money. By the way I am also a tax payer and I found it interesting that he and his Senior Executive spent so much tax payer money on there travel expenses and hospitality at this time. But a review of past Commissioners expenses might be a good idea as well if you are interested in doing the research. Let us know how that works out please. But all in all I think you need to re-read my observation because you missed the point or ignored it.

    • Anonymous permalink

      Code-two, It’s also ungracious to claim that the doc is ignorantly bliss isn’t it? You seem to conveniently avoid pointing this out which appears to me you’re defending Greg’s stance. People make assumptions, and yes, some may be incorrect, and others quite accurate. You may very well be correct that Greg isn’t even a member at all, in which case, he most likely doesn’t have inside work experience with the force, thus, making Greg’s opinion and position more ignorantly bliss than anyone else’s on this blog.

  8. JOHN SMITH permalink

    Hi Greg,

    Its been awhile since I have posted on this site. Roland and others have already identified what we are all thinking.

    But more importantly. Do or have you stopped and thought your comment out?

    Dr. Webster has no hidden agendas nor is he applying for any political or professional position.
    More importantly if it was not for his courage and determination, we as members would not have this forum to allow “freedom of speech and expression”.

    Which I might add is what you did here. Its ok to dislike or not agree. As a 30+ year veteran of the R.C.M.P. I can attest to having had many if not countless gag orders placed onto me hence not allowing me to express my thoughts about some of the ridiculous ideas and policies put through.

    Let me just give you some food for thought if I may “Greg”. I like the fact that you feel it is important to be heard.

    Lets hear more from you. Not just a few nasty words but lets hear your honest, truthful thoughts on the issues that come across this site.

    Surely if you are a member of this fine organization then you have input. You have knowledge. You have wisdom. So again, lets hear you speak out.

    I will warn you however, we will not let you attack our loved ones. I must also warn you that the people who frequent this site are “honest” and have the best intentions for all members. Now if you do and are one of us then, say so. Do not hide Greg. Be honest. Just like Dr. Webster is.

    To sensor Dr. Webster will only fuel us all to start more websites more blogs more open and honest discussions on the failing organization I served in.

    Come out and play Greg. I challenge you. Don’t be a meanie , play nice. You see you were allowed to post your comment we did not sensor you. Well have the same respect for Dr. Webster and the rest of us.

    Dr. Webster merely places his ideas on the site. He leaves opinions for us to figure out. In a democratic society I wish we all had the same rights. I wish the RCMP would allow and publish the countless pages on this site and let the public decide after all they are the ones paying our salaries.

    So, Greg, lets hear from you. Tell us why Dr. Webster should have his computer “disabled”. Let us all know what Dr. Mike is doing that is so bad, so horrible that you want to take away his rights.

    Of note Greg, you know that you will be allowed to place these comments on this website with no fear of having your computer disabled.

    Have a great and wonderful day.

    John Smith

  9. Hello code-two,

    I do believe that I did state above “If you are not an officer in the RCMP then your ignorance can be excused and explained as that of someone who is not in touch with reality or themselves.”

    You went on to state ” Your comments are in fact demeaning, conclusive, and impolite. Here is a neat little website that I am sure you will find informative.

    Now who hasn’t done there homework here? You will note that my comments were made to Greg. However, since you do not agree with my remarks to Greg and I see his comments to Dr, Webster
    as an attack on someone who has been very successful in opening the eyes of the public and members alike about the abuses in the RCMP.

    I ask you code-two, what would you do if you were the target of an attack by your employer? An employer that has the full and final say in any venue outside of the Federal Court? By the way, it costs tens of thousands of dollars to take the RCMP to court. So those of us that have been abused have to pay the money to get justice. Remember these are employment issue’s not criminal or civil issues.

    I would like to hear what your solution would be on dealing with this issue.

    Look forward to reading what you have to say.

    Rolly Beaulieu

  10. Anonymous permalink

    Hey Greg,

    at the top of this blog it states it’s purpose, for “intelligent commentary and critical analysis”. Your comments were neither of those things. You called Dr. Webster ignorant and mocked his professional credential. You then suggested censorship.

    By all rights, your input could have and perhaps should have been moderated out. Maybe the moderator is the bigger person.

    John’s called you out now, are you going to step up?


    Anonymous ASKED if Greg was a white shirt; Rolly said “if”. You’re criticizing argument fallacies while making them yourself.

    Re-read Famia, unless I missed it, not a word about hiding. For all the high sounding Latin, you just got spanked pretty bad.

    Your worst fallacy was your opening sentence; stating that Greg was attacked because his comment did not fit with the general theme. Read Greg’s comments again…weren’t they ad hominem…? So, you falsely accuse others of making ad hominem comments in defence of a person actually making ad hominem comments…in the same paragraph.

    I’m beginning to think you’re the white shirt.

  11. code-two permalink

    “If you are not an officer in the RCMP then your ignorance can be excused and explained as that of someone who is not in touch with reality or themselves.”

    This is hardly polite don’t you think? Would it not be more polite to opine that the contributor may be missing certain indigenous facts only obtained by membership in the organization? To insinuate that they are not in touch with reality, or themselves and relate that to their comment no matter how impolite or suggestive, lowers you to the same level you purport them to be on.

    As far as my suggestions for interactions with an organization “if you were the target of an attack by your employer” , there is nothing that I could possible contribute at this late date if the question was of rhetorical benefit for you, and if initial and general in nature, my first response would be the minute examination of the available avenues, and the procession through there to an outcome. I have never observed any process that cannot be undone with intelligence and forethought. Legal aspects are just a contributor to the process. In simpler terms, what the employer has written can be their undoing as rarely does an organization follow the excruciating minutiae it has wrought over years of activity. You could always get a law degree while off and sue the Force like Ms Katz. Saves a lot of money.

    As you hit Federal Court with ANY decision made by the RCMP, you pay your 50 dollars and the case is reviewed. You do not need a lawyer. Been there, done that (in case you do not think I am familiar with the process). The entirety of processes used by the RCMP are never without mistakes. Ask any competent internal investigator.


    You intimate there is an issue with the spending habits of the Commissioner, however fail to provide any context other than a juxtaposition to his remarks. If in fact he has spent far more than other Commissioners or like Executives, then he is definitely guilty of saying one thing and doing another. You provide no such information. It is not up to me to support/refute your hypothesis, its your observation and it would carry a lot more weight if it had context and reference. That is my point. The reference to having the information out in the public domain and not hidden would belie your argument if in fact he is not spending more, and support your argument if he is. I pointed out its out there and not hidden, a crucial aspect to any mispending.

    “Now Greg, are you a “white shirt” within the RCMP? The way you have commented indicates to me and the general public EXACTLY what the respectable “doc” is talking about.”

    Its not so much a discernible question as it is an accusation the way it is written intended to color the person with a certain disdain you hold about others (white shirts).

    The assertion that Greg makes “Ignorance is bliss, isn’t it “doc”.” and in suggesting that Mikes internet usage should be disabled is also impolite and condescending (not ad hominem). There is a free speech aspect to our constitution that applies to everyone. It may well ring more to the point if you excoriate Greg on the points of law that allow Mike et al to say whatever they like.

    “Your worst fallacy was your opening sentence; stating that Greg was attacked because his comment did not fit with the general theme.” Better read up on the website I gave you. If you look at the overall theme as displayed in the comments for Mikes fascist points post, one could easily surmise that they are, anti “white shirt”, anti RCMP management, and by demonstration anti contrary assertions that do not fit with said theme. If you are assign a fallacy label, you must first insure there is one, and not an observation based on the obvious.

    “I’m beginning to think you’re the white shirt.” This fallacy is committed when a person draws a conclusion about a group based on a sample that is not large enough. You obviously think all white shirts are poor managers as your references to the entire group are derogatory. Hasty Induction. There was no ad hominem in my remarks.

  12. john smith permalink

    Hello Code 2 …

    Wow, here we are having a great discussion on simple thoughts presented by Dr. Webster.
    You sound angry my friend. Angry because someone dares step up and challenge for the better good of a once prestigious organization.

    If you are indeed a member and possibly an officer then take heed. The members are fighting back.
    They are just absolutely petrified to do so. “Fear”. Instituted by upper manager types who have been given a responsibility but cannot handle it accordingly.

    Having been in this organization for over 30 years I can assure you that I have seen my share of injustices and I can assure you that in this forum “” no one “” is polite and condescension is so common that it has become regular practice.

    My point is this “code 2”. Dr. Wesbster is simply putting things out for comparison. To open our minds as to how to make this organization a better place. No need for snide remarks. You will never see it coming from him.

    So play nice. Do not send people to assorted websites. Say what you have to say and back it up with fact or perhaps try to understand the toxic environment our members live in and did I mention the “fear” of constant reprisal.

    Careers have and will continue to be shattered by RCMP upper management. Its crystal clear.
    Talk to the members you will see.

    Have a great day.

    John Smith.

  13. code-two permalink

    I am not in the least bit angry John. I believe in the power of civilized discourse on any topic. I do not see in any of my comments a defense of anything other than civilized discussion. The practice of assuming people are disreputable because of a station in life or work is of no tangible benefit to any forum. In my comments you will note the reference to Exxon. The mistreatment of employees is not limited to certain persons in the RCMP nor any other agency. Emotions are a fact of life but in order to address certain issues they have to be put aside. The management structure of Exxon has mistreated employees such as it did my relative, however he does not condemn the entire organization over his experience.

    “…in this forum “” no one “” is polite and condescension is so common that it has become regular practice.”
    I am truly sorry to hear that statement as I do not feel that it contributes to solutions.

    I have over 35 years in the organization and I will not generalize that it is completely one way or the other in any capacity as is intimated here. When dealing with people of such a wide variety of make up, nothing is truly comprehensive. Every organization is made up of individuals, some perhaps not worthy, some more than worthy. First class work is done by employees of any organization, and the RCMP is no exception. The people that work with me are smart, dedicated, passionate, and doing commendable work every day regardless of rank.

    The comments of Greg are of no value to the discussion, just as the accusation of contrary opinion emanates from a white shirt/management and is somehow less contributory.

    As for sending people to various websites, education is a key component of life and when we fail to educate ourselves we become stagnant. As a mentor once said to me, you can learn something from everybody, even if it is what not to do.


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

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: