Pledge of Allegiance: Unconstitutional.

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

xirtam

Diamond Member
Aug 25, 2001
4,693
0
0
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: zendari
Why not just refuse to recite the pledge if it bothers you so much?

That can cause serious issues. After getting in trouble for leaving out the 'under god' part, I chose to refrain from saying the pledge at all. That led to ostricization by my peers and even violence. Anything that forces discrimination (especially when involving kids in a peer setting) simply shouldn't be allowed.

Add to that the fact that the pledge was horribly disfigured from its original version by such an abhorrent movement as McCartheism and you've got more than enough cause to revert it to its original form.

Your refusal to say the pledge led to violence?
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: marvdmartian
Its a problem if you don't worship the Christian gawd

No, it's a problem if you ASSUME it means the Christian god. Could mean Zeus, couldn't it? Honestly, everyone but atheists believe in some sort of a benevolent entity, and assigning a generic term of GOD doesn't make it Christian. If you used a more specific term, then you'd have a case.

Funny thing, tho......you take just about anyone that says they don't believe in the big GOD, or says they believe in something else......put them in a supremely stressful situation.......and see just how many "nonbelievers" start either praying to the god they don't believe in, or cussing him (her? it??) out!! :roll:

I personally don't care either way what they do with it. I learned it with "under God", and that's the way I'll always think of it. Perhaps the better solution for this country would be to stop trying to legislate and lawsuit everything to death?? :thumbsup:

You're overlooking the intent though. When you recite the pledge you're dedicating yourself to an idea. The inclusion of 'under god' has some serious connotations to it.

#1 That our nation is somehow divinely honored.
#2 That our nation owes homage to a god.
#3 That you are pledging yourself in part to that god.

Rather it's Christian or not, it's still wrong. The pledge is a secular thing, a commitment of a citizen to the ideals and foundings of his nation, not his faith.

It's a direct infringement on personal rights, it's coercive, it's damaging, it's a violation of the concept of seperation of church and state and it blemishes the country itself, not to mention insulting the memory of the founders who specifically kept religion the hell out of our government.
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: xirtam
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: xirtam
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: xirtam
The whole "under God" issue seems to be child squabble. If you don't like it, don't say it. It's a free country, and saying the pledge of allegiance is supposed to remind you of that.

Oh, the irony...
"It's a free country, so either say it my way or just shut up."

Or say it without "under God" as an expression of your freedom. I don't care. It's your freedom. There's no irony. If you can gain a better appreciation for your country by saying the pledge of allegiance minus two words, I'd be a moron for telling you you can't. What's ridiculous is trying to create a movement to change something that you think is just a worthless addition. If it was actually causing a problem, that's one thing. But other than a few random people getting butt-hurt because they don't think God exists, there's no problem. Those same people aren't trying to start crusades to take Santa Claus out of the stores at Christmas time because he doesn't exist.

Stores, as far as I'm aware, are pretty much always private property and free to have as many Santas as they want no matter who it offends. Not so with the Pledge of Allegiance being repeated in tax-funded schools. The pledge is a statement of allegiance to the country, and those two words have absolutely no place in it (in schools). If it's that important for your kids to say it with those extra words, feel free to have them do it at home or at church, where that sort of thing belongs.

All of our enlisted force that joins the tax-funded military repeats "so help me God" at the end of their oath of enlistment.

Like hell we do. You can replace that with 'I so affirm'. I've never found out if the president can do it to, but you can otherwise ALWAYS affirm instead of swear to god or upon a holy text.
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: xirtam
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: zendari
Why not just refuse to recite the pledge if it bothers you so much?

That can cause serious issues. After getting in trouble for leaving out the 'under god' part, I chose to refrain from saying the pledge at all. That led to ostricization by my peers and even violence. Anything that forces discrimination (especially when involving kids in a peer setting) simply shouldn't be allowed.

Add to that the fact that the pledge was horribly disfigured from its original version by such an abhorrent movement as McCartheism and you've got more than enough cause to revert it to its original form.

Your refusal to say the pledge led to violence?

Yup. Other kids started questioning me about it, picking on me, singling me out for crap. I'd insult them in return of course (we were kids after all), and that would often lead to beatings. It was an extremely traumatic event which had lasting repurcussions until this day (25 years later).
 

xirtam

Diamond Member
Aug 25, 2001
4,693
0
0
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: xirtam
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: xirtam
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: xirtam
The whole "under God" issue seems to be child squabble. If you don't like it, don't say it. It's a free country, and saying the pledge of allegiance is supposed to remind you of that.

Oh, the irony...
"It's a free country, so either say it my way or just shut up."

Or say it without "under God" as an expression of your freedom. I don't care. It's your freedom. There's no irony. If you can gain a better appreciation for your country by saying the pledge of allegiance minus two words, I'd be a moron for telling you you can't. What's ridiculous is trying to create a movement to change something that you think is just a worthless addition. If it was actually causing a problem, that's one thing. But other than a few random people getting butt-hurt because they don't think God exists, there's no problem. Those same people aren't trying to start crusades to take Santa Claus out of the stores at Christmas time because he doesn't exist.

Stores, as far as I'm aware, are pretty much always private property and free to have as many Santas as they want no matter who it offends. Not so with the Pledge of Allegiance being repeated in tax-funded schools. The pledge is a statement of allegiance to the country, and those two words have absolutely no place in it (in schools). If it's that important for your kids to say it with those extra words, feel free to have them do it at home or at church, where that sort of thing belongs.

All of our enlisted force that joins the tax-funded military repeats "so help me God" at the end of their oath of enlistment.

Like hell we do. You can replace that with 'I so affirm'. I've never found out if the president can do it to, but you can otherwise ALWAYS affirm instead of swear to god or upon a holy text.

In my oath of enlistment, it was "I [state your name] do solemnly swear" at the beginning, and you could replace the "swear" with "affirm." But the "so help me God" at the end was irreplacable. This was the Air Force... I haven't seen the enlistment for the other services, but I assumed they were about the same.
 

kogase

Diamond Member
Sep 8, 2004
5,213
0
0
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: kogase
Originally posted by: azazyel
Lost religious meaning? To whom? Also the Viking age ended in 900 AD and the days were adopted later to supplant the Latin version which used Roman gods. Anyways, if you don't believe in the Norse gods then fine, they have no meaning for you. Same can be said with the Christian god, just ignore it.

Then why was it added? Why not leave the pledge neutral in regards to religion? The answer is that it is a clear effort to encourage all Americans to acknowledge the Christian god. It is best left as it was originally intended: a secular pledge to the country of America.

It's only a Christian god if you want it to be a Christian god.

As I already have stated in this thread, that is a silly semantics argument. Even if you want to get into semantics, the word "God" is capitalized, and therefore refers to the Judeo-Christian god. But that doesn't matter very much. The fact of the matter is that we all know what it is referring to, and you are simply grasping at straws to play the "could be any god you want" card.
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: xirtam
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: xirtam
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: xirtam
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: xirtam
The whole "under God" issue seems to be child squabble. If you don't like it, don't say it. It's a free country, and saying the pledge of allegiance is supposed to remind you of that.

Oh, the irony...
"It's a free country, so either say it my way or just shut up."

Or say it without "under God" as an expression of your freedom. I don't care. It's your freedom. There's no irony. If you can gain a better appreciation for your country by saying the pledge of allegiance minus two words, I'd be a moron for telling you you can't. What's ridiculous is trying to create a movement to change something that you think is just a worthless addition. If it was actually causing a problem, that's one thing. But other than a few random people getting butt-hurt because they don't think God exists, there's no problem. Those same people aren't trying to start crusades to take Santa Claus out of the stores at Christmas time because he doesn't exist.

Stores, as far as I'm aware, are pretty much always private property and free to have as many Santas as they want no matter who it offends. Not so with the Pledge of Allegiance being repeated in tax-funded schools. The pledge is a statement of allegiance to the country, and those two words have absolutely no place in it (in schools). If it's that important for your kids to say it with those extra words, feel free to have them do it at home or at church, where that sort of thing belongs.

All of our enlisted force that joins the tax-funded military repeats "so help me God" at the end of their oath of enlistment.

Like hell we do. You can replace that with 'I so affirm'. I've never found out if the president can do it to, but you can otherwise ALWAYS affirm instead of swear to god or upon a holy text.

In my oath of enlistment, it was "I [state your name] do solemnly swear" at the beginning, and you could replace the "swear" with "affirm." But the "so help me God" at the end was irreplacable. This was the Air Force... I haven't seen the enlistment for the other services, but I assumed they were about the same.

I know, and if you look them up out of context that's all they say. However, during in-processing they're 'supposed' to inform you that you can choose to affirm INSTEAD of swearing to god, and you're 'supposed' to cross out the one you don't choose (along with the so help me god bit). They didn't mention it to me until they handed me the oath to review and I mentioned that I wouldn't be saying that part. Then they let me in on the rest. A citizen is NEVER forced to take any oath or particiapte in any ceremony where god/religion/religious texts are involved (except maybe office of the president, like I said I'm not sure about that one).
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,369
6,663
126
It just doesn't make sense. God is greater than anything and even greater than Himself. You get under Him and you are just going to be crushed I don't care how many tanks you got. That big Uber is going to weigh billions and trillions of tons. Anybody under God is going to be f@cking dead. We gotta change it to next to God or on top of God or something cause it's giving millions of children bad dreams. Mogogo will fit in your lap. You can be under Mogogo and still walk away. And every time I survived that damn pledge I'd squint my eyes open and know it was a big lie. We ain't a molecular smear cause we ain't under God.
 

FuzzyBee

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2000
5,172
1
81
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: xirtam
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: zendari
Why not just refuse to recite the pledge if it bothers you so much?

That can cause serious issues. After getting in trouble for leaving out the 'under god' part, I chose to refrain from saying the pledge at all. That led to ostricization by my peers and even violence. Anything that forces discrimination (especially when involving kids in a peer setting) simply shouldn't be allowed.

Add to that the fact that the pledge was horribly disfigured from its original version by such an abhorrent movement as McCartheism and you've got more than enough cause to revert it to its original form.

Your refusal to say the pledge led to violence?

Yup. Other kids started questioning me about it, picking on me, singling me out for crap. I'd insult them in return of course (we were kids after all), and that would often lead to beatings. It was an extremely traumatic event which had lasting repurcussions until this day (25 years later).

Honestly, doesn't the same thing happen when a kid can't climb the rope in gym class. Maybe we should get rid of PE, too.
 

xirtam

Diamond Member
Aug 25, 2001
4,693
0
0
Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: xirtam
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: zendari
Why not just refuse to recite the pledge if it bothers you so much?

That can cause serious issues. After getting in trouble for leaving out the 'under god' part, I chose to refrain from saying the pledge at all. That led to ostricization by my peers and even violence. Anything that forces discrimination (especially when involving kids in a peer setting) simply shouldn't be allowed.

Add to that the fact that the pledge was horribly disfigured from its original version by such an abhorrent movement as McCartheism and you've got more than enough cause to revert it to its original form.

Your refusal to say the pledge led to violence?

Yup. Other kids started questioning me about it, picking on me, singling me out for crap. I'd insult them in return of course (we were kids after all), and that would often lead to beatings. It was an extremely traumatic event which had lasting repurcussions until this day (25 years later).

Honestly, doesn't the same thing happen when a kid can't climb the rope in gym class. Maybe we should get rid of PE, too.

The difference is that it's his right to refuse to say the pledge for personal/religious/political reasons. Depending on the age/maturity level, which apparently wasn't very high, the response could definitely be pretty traumatic, and I guess it was. I don't put the pledge at fault, though, but it was definitely handled wrong. If you feel like you have to say something else risk being beaten, it doesn't matter what it is that you have to say, it's a coersive and therefore bad environment.
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: xirtam
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: zendari
Why not just refuse to recite the pledge if it bothers you so much?

That can cause serious issues. After getting in trouble for leaving out the 'under god' part, I chose to refrain from saying the pledge at all. That led to ostricization by my peers and even violence. Anything that forces discrimination (especially when involving kids in a peer setting) simply shouldn't be allowed.

Add to that the fact that the pledge was horribly disfigured from its original version by such an abhorrent movement as McCartheism and you've got more than enough cause to revert it to its original form.

Your refusal to say the pledge led to violence?

Yup. Other kids started questioning me about it, picking on me, singling me out for crap. I'd insult them in return of course (we were kids after all), and that would often lead to beatings. It was an extremely traumatic event which had lasting repurcussions until this day (25 years later).

Honestly, doesn't the same thing happen when a kid can't climb the rope in gym class. Maybe we should get rid of PE, too.


While I understand your point (and it's somewhat accurate), why should something that causes increased fragmentation of the populace, abuse and discrimination that is itself a corruption of an original ideal and testiment to one of the greatest of American shames not be changed when it's SO easy to do so?

Just reverse the decision to change it and put it back the way our founders intended it. No more problem. Doing so doesn't restrict anyones religious freedoms in any way, it merely cleans up a civil technicality.

As to your analogy, while I agree that kids will continue to find reasons and ways to single-out and abuse, the pledge is significantly different in many respects.

For one, it's a national thing...a part of our identity as a citizen. Two, it forces people to associate religion and patriotism...makes them believe that they can't be one without the other (at least it infers that if you're not religious you can't be patriotic). Three, you can learn to climb the rope if you try hard enough, you can't (or rather you shouldn't) learn to lie about your values and ethics.

I was singled out for much more than my stand on the pledge (which also got me thrown out of the boy scouts before I ever finished the oath btw). I was massively obese, a smart-ass, idealistic and much more. But this oath thing was one of the first really big social issues that led to my problems. Moreover, I had an extremely strong sense of heritage and pride which I was denied exploring, and that led to a lot of issues beyond the mere physical attacks.
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: kogase

As I already have stated in this thread, that is a silly semantics argument. Even if you want to get into semantics, the word "God" is capitalized, and therefore refers to the Judeo-Christian god. But that doesn't matter very much. The fact of the matter is that we all know what it is referring to, and you are simply grasping at straws to play the "could be any god you want" card.

According to who? You? Me? The public? The same public that overwhelmingly wants the words to remain?

The problem of pressuring teachers is the teachers, not the law which they are disobeying.
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: zendari
Why not just refuse to recite the pledge if it bothers you so much?

That can cause serious issues. After getting in trouble for leaving out the 'under god' part, I chose to refrain from saying the pledge at all. That led to ostricization by my peers and even violence. Anything that forces discrimination (especially when involving kids in a peer setting) simply shouldn't be allowed.

Add to that the fact that the pledge was horribly disfigured from its original version by such an abhorrent movement as McCartheism and you've got more than enough cause to revert it to its original form.

Out of curiousity, how, in a class of 20-25 kids, did everyone manage to pinpoint you as an individual not saying the pledge? I never used to do it and nobody even noticed. Of course there were a pair of asshats who would skip over under god and say indivisible in a loud obnoxious voice who were detected.
 

kogase

Diamond Member
Sep 8, 2004
5,213
0
0
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: kogase

As I already have stated in this thread, that is a silly semantics argument. Even if you want to get into semantics, the word "God" is capitalized, and therefore refers to the Judeo-Christian god. But that doesn't matter very much. The fact of the matter is that we all know what it is referring to, and you are simply grasping at straws to play the "could be any god you want" card.

According to who? You? Me? The public? The same public that overwhelmingly wants the words to remain?

Like I said, you're playing a silly semantics game. Even if the "God" in the pledge could be referring to any god (which is clearly can't as a result of the capitalization), that still refers to a god, doesn't it?
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: kogase

Like I said, you're playing a silly semantics game. Even if the "God" in the pledge could be referring to any god (which is clearly can't as a result of the capitalization), that still refers to a god, doesn't it?

According to you then, I suppose. Funny how the same people who don't believe in a Christian god are the ones who most want to believe the pledge to refer to the same god.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,965
279
126

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
There's no such thing as Mogogo, like all the other God Like Entities he was made up byacients who needed answers for questions that were beyond their comprehension.

Not answers, RD, but rather just control over dumbasses.
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
76
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: kogase

Like I said, you're playing a silly semantics game. Even if the "God" in the pledge could be referring to any god (which is clearly can't as a result of the capitalization), that still refers to a god, doesn't it?

According to you then, I suppose. Funny how the same people who don't believe in a Christian god are the ones who most want to believe the pledge to refer to the same god.

Huh? The world God refers to a Christian God, not a Islamic god. The term for that would be Allah. Not to mention they're two completely different characters.


 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
76
Originally posted by: Rainsford
I actually got in trouble for refusing to say "under God" in 3rd grade. That was the first time I heard "this is a Christian nation", and it certainly wasn't the last. With all due respect to the Christians, you guys simply are incapable of understanding the other side's point of view in this country. I still don't think fighting over the pledge is worthwhile, but at least I understand where those against "under God" are coming from. It's a non-Christian thing, because of all our talk of religious freedom and equality of beliefs, that is simply not the case.

What'd you parents say? I am curious...

I don't think fighting over the pledge is worthwhile either, it gets a lot of unnessecarry emotion running, a more important issuse is having the 10 commandments in courtrooms. However, I am not the one paying for lawyers, and I would perfer if we would stop putting any religious overtones into our secular goverment.

I wish the group thats sueing the best of luck, I would perfer if it wasn't in their either. I can however, live with it though.
 

t3h l337 n3wb

Platinum Member
Apr 22, 2005
2,698
0
76
In Indiana, we have a state law that requires that everyone in a public school must recite the pledge of allegience every day... Kind of stupid if you ask me, but w/e...
 

alphatarget1

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2001
5,710
0
76
under god was added during the mccarthy red scare, or something, to distinguish between the soviets that banned religion to many extents. If religious people didn't have a problem without under god before, why are they having a fit now?

This is the last thing people should be arguing about. I honestly don't give a rat's ass. It is very important that people understand the seperation of church and state. Making students to recite it mandatorily when they do not believe in god should be unconstitutional.

Or you can start putting students that believe in god in one room and the atheist students in one room, problem solved.
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
76
Originally posted by: alphatarget1
under god was added during the mccarthy red scare, or something, to distinguish between the soviets that banned religion to many extents. If religious people didn't have a problem without under god before, why are they having a fit now?

This is the last thing people should be arguing about. I honestly don't give a rat's ass. It is very important that people understand the seperation of church and state. Making students to recite it mandatorily when they do not believe in god should be unconstitutional.

Or you can start putting students that believe in god in one room and the atheist students in one room, problem solved.

True, the phrase "under god" was put in during the Red Scare. It was used to motiviate the nation agaisnt those "godless" communists.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: Rainsford
I actually got in trouble for refusing to say "under God" in 3rd grade. That was the first time I heard "this is a Christian nation", and it certainly wasn't the last. With all due respect to the Christians, you guys simply are incapable of understanding the other side's point of view in this country. I still don't think fighting over the pledge is worthwhile, but at least I understand where those against "under God" are coming from. It's a non-Christian thing, because of all our talk of religious freedom and equality of beliefs, that is simply not the case.

What'd you parents say? I am curious...

I don't think fighting over the pledge is worthwhile either, it gets a lot of unnessecarry emotion running, a more important issuse is having the 10 commandments in courtrooms. However, I am not the one paying for lawyers, and I would perfer if we would stop putting any religious overtones into our secular goverment.

I wish the group thats sueing the best of luck, I would perfer if it wasn't in their either. I can however, live with it though.

That was also the first time I heard the "pick your battles" speech

Actually though, my Dad said something I still remember. He told me that the words weren't the important thing, what was important was what I felt and thought when I said them. He pointed out that they are just words, and if the school thought they had won a big victory getting me to say their words, it was no skin off my back to let them go right on thinking that.
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
76
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: Rainsford
I actually got in trouble for refusing to say "under God" in 3rd grade. That was the first time I heard "this is a Christian nation", and it certainly wasn't the last. With all due respect to the Christians, you guys simply are incapable of understanding the other side's point of view in this country. I still don't think fighting over the pledge is worthwhile, but at least I understand where those against "under God" are coming from. It's a non-Christian thing, because of all our talk of religious freedom and equality of beliefs, that is simply not the case.

What'd you parents say? I am curious...

I don't think fighting over the pledge is worthwhile either, it gets a lot of unnessecarry emotion running, a more important issuse is having the 10 commandments in courtrooms. However, I am not the one paying for lawyers, and I would perfer if we would stop putting any religious overtones into our secular goverment.

I wish the group thats sueing the best of luck, I would perfer if it wasn't in their either. I can however, live with it though.

That was also the first time I heard the "pick your battles" speech

Actually though, my Dad said something I still remember. He told me that the words weren't the important thing, what was important was what I felt and thought when I said them. He pointed out that they are just words, and if the school thought they had won a big victory getting me to say their words, it was no skin off my back to let them go right on thinking that.

Sounds good...

Now that I think about the issuse more, it is without any doubt in my mind wrong and unconsitiutional for "under god" to be force feed to our nation childeren in public schools.

 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |