Monday, October 20, 2014
Thursday, October 09, 2014
Ramble 10/9
Women killing their own children and drugging their boys while fighting with men and so on could be said to be a "war." But there is no war on Western women. Politicians ineptly trying to say that they shouldn't kill their babies or the "infant"ry that an equally trendy Right wants to send to war later??
That's not a war. It's a political game.
A war, is war.
Seriously. The only equality there seems to be in a mirage made in hell or a nation based on divorce, is the fact that men and women are tending toward equally murderous attitudes with respect to the least of these. (Whether around the world or in their own womb.) But they frame it as something heroic, whether it's incorporating abortion in "civil rights" or supposedly bringing freedumb (aka a proxy government of nation destroyers) to weaker nations in the world by bombing their infrastructure. If the Right is not full of heroes saving the world by bringing it "freedom and democracy," then what is it full of? If the Left is actually not engaged in a grand struggle for "civil rights" to help the poor, then what is it usually actually engaged in?
Call me a cynic. But it seems like the Right is full of mercenaries serving an oligarchy (evolving into the military wing of a global government of international interests and Oligarchs Inc.)that does not even pay them very well. Supposedly they cannot even get enough ponzi from bankers to keep their open air war memorials open. After all, "You didn't build that." And, most likely: "You didn't die for that." But bankers, globalists and foreigners need to be bailed out or you need to go to war for them. Etc.etc. More rambling.
Meanwhile, much of the Leftist or "sex in the city" vote that Obama Inc. marketed the "war on women" to with help from trendies in the media amounts to someone that killed their own child in the hopes of profiting economically or socially for themselves. And they probably didn't even get what they thought they would get out of it. A college education that makes all that student loan debt/money worthwhile? Even if they supposedly "get ahead" in life by killing their own babies, they probably just signed a mortgage based on fractional reserve lending and usury that loots their wealth and keeps them behind anyway. Then there are all the other aspects of banksterism and the currency by which their supposed socioeconomic success after they got an abortion in order to complete college is denominated. So did they really need to kill their own child in order to maintain their career path or whatever else? Not enough ponzi to care? Is that really it, given that in a culture trending against men, women can choose to kill or force them to pay? Do they have "enough" now... after killing some of their children?
Is there ever enough or do you have to authentically care about other people... and then there's enough? There are happy people with children, living in huts. There are unhappy people about to kill themselves, driving nice cares and living in Mc Mansions. Why is that?
And so on. Only one thing seems certain, nothing is as it seems when people are engaged in "perceptions management."* More entertainment. Call me names or call me a cynic for not accepting things at face value... it seems to me that I'm merely trying to observe what's actually happening based on healthy skepticism and facts, logic and evidence. Although I'm beginning to wonder if trying to seek the truth based on actual evidence is generally the equivalent of cynicism. So in that way, perhaps you can call me cynical.
*Perceptions management... where War Inc. marketed to men turns into Captain America type stuff until they get their limbs blown off fighting for the interests of oligarchies, in reality. And the abortion industry marketed to women turns into a grand struggle for civil rights unless they realize that they just had their own baby torn limb from limb. Little wonder that so many are so fervent about contributing to Planned Parenthood or joining movements led by secular versions of "revolutionary" Talmudism (Friedan/Steinen/Goldstein/Guttmacher*, etc.) and any politician willing to play pretend that abortion is all about a grand struggle for civil rights based on identity politics and tribalism. (When the male tribe is being set against the female tribe, then you've gone too far with all that. Or with sitting back and allowing Jewish/tribal media to be created so that you see your own culture in that way because you're to scared to say the word: "Jew." )
*A sample:
Not sure why this is the cultural lens or "media" that Americans see themselves through. Apathy. Too scared.
Rambling. But years ago you were threatening to call the ADL on each other or something like that. (An organization that amounts to a tribal spy agency. They recently got in trouble with the Ukraine "false flag" situation. Oops. Not that it matters to the willfully clueless and scared.)
In retrospect, that's amusing. Call them up again. I have a few questions for them. If you're not on the ADL/DHS Soviet type lists as a possible threat to their Party/Tribe yet, then you're probably useless.
That's not a war. It's a political game.
A war, is war.
Seriously. The only equality there seems to be in a mirage made in hell or a nation based on divorce, is the fact that men and women are tending toward equally murderous attitudes with respect to the least of these. (Whether around the world or in their own womb.) But they frame it as something heroic, whether it's incorporating abortion in "civil rights" or supposedly bringing freedumb (aka a proxy government of nation destroyers) to weaker nations in the world by bombing their infrastructure. If the Right is not full of heroes saving the world by bringing it "freedom and democracy," then what is it full of? If the Left is actually not engaged in a grand struggle for "civil rights" to help the poor, then what is it usually actually engaged in?
Call me a cynic. But it seems like the Right is full of mercenaries serving an oligarchy (evolving into the military wing of a global government of international interests and Oligarchs Inc.)that does not even pay them very well. Supposedly they cannot even get enough ponzi from bankers to keep their open air war memorials open. After all, "You didn't build that." And, most likely: "You didn't die for that." But bankers, globalists and foreigners need to be bailed out or you need to go to war for them. Etc.etc. More rambling.
Meanwhile, much of the Leftist or "sex in the city" vote that Obama Inc. marketed the "war on women" to with help from trendies in the media amounts to someone that killed their own child in the hopes of profiting economically or socially for themselves. And they probably didn't even get what they thought they would get out of it. A college education that makes all that student loan debt/money worthwhile? Even if they supposedly "get ahead" in life by killing their own babies, they probably just signed a mortgage based on fractional reserve lending and usury that loots their wealth and keeps them behind anyway. Then there are all the other aspects of banksterism and the currency by which their supposed socioeconomic success after they got an abortion in order to complete college is denominated. So did they really need to kill their own child in order to maintain their career path or whatever else? Not enough ponzi to care? Is that really it, given that in a culture trending against men, women can choose to kill or force them to pay? Do they have "enough" now... after killing some of their children?
Is there ever enough or do you have to authentically care about other people... and then there's enough? There are happy people with children, living in huts. There are unhappy people about to kill themselves, driving nice cares and living in Mc Mansions. Why is that?
And so on. Only one thing seems certain, nothing is as it seems when people are engaged in "perceptions management."* More entertainment. Call me names or call me a cynic for not accepting things at face value... it seems to me that I'm merely trying to observe what's actually happening based on healthy skepticism and facts, logic and evidence. Although I'm beginning to wonder if trying to seek the truth based on actual evidence is generally the equivalent of cynicism. So in that way, perhaps you can call me cynical.
*Perceptions management... where War Inc. marketed to men turns into Captain America type stuff until they get their limbs blown off fighting for the interests of oligarchies, in reality. And the abortion industry marketed to women turns into a grand struggle for civil rights unless they realize that they just had their own baby torn limb from limb. Little wonder that so many are so fervent about contributing to Planned Parenthood or joining movements led by secular versions of "revolutionary" Talmudism (Friedan/Steinen/Goldstein/Guttmacher*, etc.) and any politician willing to play pretend that abortion is all about a grand struggle for civil rights based on identity politics and tribalism. (When the male tribe is being set against the female tribe, then you've gone too far with all that. Or with sitting back and allowing Jewish/tribal media to be created so that you see your own culture in that way because you're to scared to say the word: "Jew." )
*A sample:
....they [the female tribe] could change society from the bottom up by radicalizing (engaging with basic truth [Seen from her perspective.]) the [tribal] consciousness of women; by going into the streets on such [tribal] women’s issues as abortion, free childcare centers, and a final break with the 19th century definition of women as sex objects whose main function is to service men and their children. Google: NYMag, SteinemReally. And was the supposed tribal "consciousness" of women being raised by Jews like Friedman/Steinem and whoever based on the viciously tribal mentalities typical to their identity politics meant to apply to the goyim... or everyone? Because if the usual rabbinic "radical" believed in their revolutions in a universal way then the Jewish Bolsheviks would have focused on banksterism instead of having their ethnic compatriots finance their revolution. I.e. they wouldn't have used "capitalism" as an excuse for yet another tribal, revolutionary movement emerging from the bowels of the body politic. And Steinem would focus on those buses in Israel where women have to sit at the back instead of trying to police the goyim. Etc. Maybe she did at some point, I don't know. But they usually do not remove the log before going for the speck in the eye of the goyim. (Of course, the speck is actually there. But it's not worth having your eyes gouged out by standing back and letting someone with huge logs in their own eyes try to remove it)
Not sure why this is the cultural lens or "media" that Americans see themselves through. Apathy. Too scared.
Rambling. But years ago you were threatening to call the ADL on each other or something like that. (An organization that amounts to a tribal spy agency. They recently got in trouble with the Ukraine "false flag" situation. Oops. Not that it matters to the willfully clueless and scared.)
In retrospect, that's amusing. Call them up again. I have a few questions for them. If you're not on the ADL/DHS Soviet type lists as a possible threat to their Party/Tribe yet, then you're probably useless.
Wednesday, October 08, 2014
Tangents 10/8
I wonder if feminists have an opinion on the Russian army (another revolution led by Jews, great) raping German women after Talmudists were done with helping to incite a race war there? (While signing off on the Transfer Agreement with other racists in the background...)
Americans were slightly better:
Arguing that a kiss is rape, apparently?
These aren't serious minded people. There again, most people here probably are not either...
For instance, it's likely that most here have to believe that WWII was the "good war" (Thus every war or kinetic action is about "another Hitler"...) and that all the Allies were probably Captain America or Superman, etc. So I should have only mentioned the absolutely abysmal track record of the Russians stirred to "revolution" by Jewish leaders and thereby let your cultural conceits with respect to what actually happens in wars remain undisturbed.
I guess I'm pretending that you're all grown ups more interested in reality and lines of historical evidence than in nationalism, tribalism, Zionism and comic books.
Americans were slightly better:
According to the International News Service in London, January 31, 1946, when American soldier's wives were brought to Germany, they were given special authorization to wear military uniforms because "the GIs did not want their wives mistaken for Fraeuleins by other occupation troops." A writer for the New York World Telegram January 21, 1945 stated "Americans look on the German women as loot, just like cameras and Lugers." Dr. G. Stewart, in a health statement submitted to General Eisenhower, reported that in the first six months of American occupation, venereal disease jumped to twenty times its former level in Germany.But what are brain dead goyim trendies in a movement of "women's rights" created by Jews and formed around abortion by Steinen/Goldstein/Friedman/Guttmacher and the like concerned with?
I want you imagine an orgy of rape like this happening in your country, in your neighborhood, to your family, to your wife, your sister, your daughter. I want you to imagine what it would feel like to be totally powerless to stop it from happening, completely unable to bring the criminals to justice. And I want to ask you, were there ever any "war crimes" or "hate crimes" trials of these butchers and rapists and inciters to butchery and rape?
....
Few today remember that in the 1940s, the Allies, who even then were calling their world-government-in-the-making the "United Nations," were pursuing a policy of unconditional surrender, which meant that the Germans would be obligated to accept an occupation government whose announced intentions, the infamous and genocidal Morgenthau Plan, would have reduced Germany to medieval conditions and cut her population by enforced starvation. Go to a large library and check out Secretary Morgenthau's book, Germany Is Our Problem, Harper and Brothers, 1945. You will note the use of the term "United Nations" on the front flyleaf and in the foreword by Franklin D. Roosevelt. A prominent Jewish writer in America, Theodore Kaufman, had in 1941 written a book entitled Germany Must Perish, which advocated the extermination of all Germans by sterilization. Kaufman's book received favorable reviews in major American magazines and newspapers. Other books, such as Louis Nizer's What To Do With Germany, also contributed to this atmosphere of strident anti-German hatred. War propaganda and official policy combined to create an image of the German as sub-human and deserving of almost infinite punishment if not annihilation.
("Ravishing the Women of Conquered Europe" by
Kevin Alfred Strom)
Arguing that a kiss is rape, apparently?
These aren't serious minded people. There again, most people here probably are not either...
For instance, it's likely that most here have to believe that WWII was the "good war" (Thus every war or kinetic action is about "another Hitler"...) and that all the Allies were probably Captain America or Superman, etc. So I should have only mentioned the absolutely abysmal track record of the Russians stirred to "revolution" by Jewish leaders and thereby let your cultural conceits with respect to what actually happens in wars remain undisturbed.
I guess I'm pretending that you're all grown ups more interested in reality and lines of historical evidence than in nationalism, tribalism, Zionism and comic books.
More rambling 10/8
Juxtapose the end of the usual revolutionary tendencies of gay activists in America:
Although to a less extreme extent, the same thing still applies to these clueless trendies of Western pop culture and their so-called "first gay" entertainer in chief now.
Because when people with close to zero respect for the Creator and natural law become too influential, they enable the tyrants and tyranny that destroys them or their civil rights. You can't have civil rights without civilization.
Hay and Burnside returned to San Francisco in 1999 after concluding that Hay was not receiving proper care in Los Angeles for his serious health concerns, including pneumonia and lung cancer. He served as the grand marshal of the San Francisco gay pride parade that same year. While in hospice care Hay died of lung cancer on October 24, 2002 at age 90. Ib.Died of old age... only in America, due to a balanced form of civilization. Contrast with other gay revolutionaries:
Under Röhm, the SA also often took the side of workers in strikes and other labor disputes, attacking strikebreakers and supporting picket lines. SA intimidation contributed to the rise of the Nazis and the violent suppression of left-wing parties during electoral campaigns, but its reputation for street violence and heavy drinking was a hindrance, as was the open homosexuality of Röhm and other SA leaders such as his deputy Edmund Heines.[5][6] One American journalist would later write, "[Röhm's] chiefs, men of the rank of Gruppenfuehrer or Obergruppenfuehrer, commanding units of several hundred thousand Storm Troopers, were almost without exception homosexuals."[7] In 1931, the Münchener Post, a Social Democratic newspaper, obtained and published Röhm's letters to a friend discussing his homosexual affairs.It's likely that if Hay had been more successful in his revolting (supported NAMBLA for the usual reasons) revolution against American values and civilization then he would have died earlier.
Röhm with Hitler, August 1933
Hitler was aware of Röhm's homosexuality. At this point they were so close that they addressed each other as du (the German familiar form of "you"). No other top Nazi leader enjoyed that privilege, and their close association led to rumors that Hitler himself was homosexual.[7] Röhm was the only Nazi leader who dared to address Hitler by his first name "Adolf" rather than "mein Führer."[6] .....
Hitler was hesitant in authorizing Röhm's execution, and gave him the option of suicide. On 1 July, SS-Brigadeführer Theodor Eicke (then Kommandant of the Dachau concentration camp) and SS-Obersturmbannführer Michael Lippert walked into his cell, laid a pistol on the table, told Röhm he had ten minutes to use it and left. He refused, stating, "If I am to be killed, let Adolf do it himself."[11] Having heard nothing after the stipulated ten minutes, Eicke and Lippert returned to Röhm's cell to find him standing with his bare chest puffed out in a gesture of defiance, and Lippert shot him in the chest at point-blank range.[12] --Wikipedia
Although to a less extreme extent, the same thing still applies to these clueless trendies of Western pop culture and their so-called "first gay" entertainer in chief now.
Because when people with close to zero respect for the Creator and natural law become too influential, they enable the tyrants and tyranny that destroys them or their civil rights. You can't have civil rights without civilization.
Ramble 10/8
Many, from all sorts of different traditions due to general revelation, generally aren't into their own feelings and desires to the extent that failing to define yourself and ethics by your own sexual desires or sexual disorientation constitutes "Living a lie." That's the pop culture Western view where feelings are all that matter. And it's utterly childish. If most men took the same view or adhered to the same philosophy then they wouldn't remain married to their wives. After all, they wouldn't always feel like being married. So it's no surprise that in a declining and decadent Empire, that's exactly what is happening while symptoms like trying to promote a same sex mirage of marriage that many heterosexuals don't even practice arise. Marriage crumbles and everything crumbles. There's a reason that the Founders laid out Washington's Monument (the male) in symmetrical balance with the Capital Dome (the female) in order to form a more perfect union. They must have been "imposing" their views on the nation, I guess. Quick, someone fall down on the ground and snivel about it all. Call the National Association for Fat Acceptance because the Founders didn't like decadence and therefore fat people or an entire culture of crybabies either, no doubt.
"Have you ever found in history, one single example of a Nation thoroughly corrupted that was afterwards restored to virtue? ....And without virtue, there can be no political liberty....Will you tell me how to prevent luxury from producing effeminacy, intoxication, extravagance, vice and folly? ....I believe no effort in favor of virtue is lost."
--John Adams
Homosexuality and the philosophy and culture of "Sexual desires are who I am! I'm proud of having feelings... or somethin'." surrounding it are symptomatic of the decline of civilization. Then things start falling apart and people usually conclude: "Oh, maybe we should actually care about more than our sexual desires and feelings... or somethin'."
They can go in many directions from there, most of them wrong. It may be fascism, like the Golden Dawn in Greece. One thing it is not? Free little ponies and rainbows for all. Sorry, I know how childish everyone has become and how easily your feelings may be hurt but that's the reality. Have you thought about the nature of the currency in which same sex mirage benefits will be paid? Anything other than entertainment or bread and circuses? Anyone home?
For Americans it could be a more balanced view consistent with the view represented in their national monuments and former culture. But given the bread and circuses quality of the American people, the stupidity, the abject ignorance, the way so many fall for propaganda of the sort Kirk and Madsen suggested so easily and so on (Some of which has been illustrated on this thread.) it seems unlikely that liberty or the "sons of liberty" given birth to by balanced marriages is just over the horizon. What's happening in Greece now or the Wiemar Republic a short time ago would seem to be more likely models for the decadence, decline and fall of the American Empire.
"Have you ever found in history, one single example of a Nation thoroughly corrupted that was afterwards restored to virtue? ....And without virtue, there can be no political liberty....Will you tell me how to prevent luxury from producing effeminacy, intoxication, extravagance, vice and folly? ....I believe no effort in favor of virtue is lost."
--John Adams
Homosexuality and the philosophy and culture of "Sexual desires are who I am! I'm proud of having feelings... or somethin'." surrounding it are symptomatic of the decline of civilization. Then things start falling apart and people usually conclude: "Oh, maybe we should actually care about more than our sexual desires and feelings... or somethin'."
They can go in many directions from there, most of them wrong. It may be fascism, like the Golden Dawn in Greece. One thing it is not? Free little ponies and rainbows for all. Sorry, I know how childish everyone has become and how easily your feelings may be hurt but that's the reality. Have you thought about the nature of the currency in which same sex mirage benefits will be paid? Anything other than entertainment or bread and circuses? Anyone home?
For Americans it could be a more balanced view consistent with the view represented in their national monuments and former culture. But given the bread and circuses quality of the American people, the stupidity, the abject ignorance, the way so many fall for propaganda of the sort Kirk and Madsen suggested so easily and so on (Some of which has been illustrated on this thread.) it seems unlikely that liberty or the "sons of liberty" given birth to by balanced marriages is just over the horizon. What's happening in Greece now or the Wiemar Republic a short time ago would seem to be more likely models for the decadence, decline and fall of the American Empire.
Tuesday, October 07, 2014
Ramble 10/7
That's how a culture winds up with people saying that they can change their biology (being male or female) based on their feelings. But they can't change their feelings (being gay or straight) based on their biology or medical treatments.
It's contradictory unless one realizes that feelings are the be all, end all. And this is suitable for a Culture Inc. in which a fossil fueled binge of consumption (Eat this! Super sized feelings here! Here's one with a rainbow on it, can you feel the feels!) and so forth. There is less of a focus on "gay rights" (Civil rights based on or defined by feelings? Imagine that.) when people have to focus on putting food on the table themselves. Or when there's less estrogen pollution due to civilization.
Shorter and more satiric, the Empire better have some big fat* and gay Drone operators ready because it cannot run on trends created by a philosophy of hedonism indefinitely.
*And then the National Association for Fat Acceptance can be proud... is it time for a fat pride parade for the first fat soldiers yet? Another civil rights barrier broken... provided the entire "civil rights" edifice with its new forms of law for useless lawyers to create careers and "legal frontiers" with doesn't break under the weight of everyone piling on civilization. "What about me and my group defined by feelings? My feelings are hurt too! And here's this meth head that was killed in a horrific way by some other drug addled people once. Surely that means something about a group of feelings people that I speak for! You don't have feelings? How cold hearted!!!" Apparently this is the sort of thing that illiterate and ignorant people do based on false philosophies... I sometimes wonder if it's because they have nothing better to do. (Enter the depopulation people or the elite that fantasize about terrorizing them. Would that shape them up?)
*Note the questionable nature of some of the icons, saints and martyrs of "feelings people":
Would it matter if it was not true when people are basically defining themselves into groups and tribes based on feelings at this point? What if Shephard hadn't been into going to a Tribal Awareness Week or whatever and instead was more of an average guy providing for his family that got killed by some meth heads? Would that mean that he wasn't a martyr and a saint to be lifted up by the Jewish/mainstream media and their organizations?
Anyway, look at how easily people are herded based on cultural power (trendy liberals are not the only instance...)... it would almost be amusing if it wasn't tragic.
Still waiting on the formation of the Fat Tribe based on identity politics and the ADL turning every instance of bullying in school into a "hate crime"... do you discriminate against fat people? Climate of hatred! Why do you hate fat people? Going on a diet would be a form of self hatred and internalized phobias, no doubt.
You should know your own degraded, illiterate and generally pretty stupid culture by now. So use your imagination and take it from there, if you still have any of your own imagination left after the politically correct thought police of the tribe are through with you.
It's contradictory unless one realizes that feelings are the be all, end all. And this is suitable for a Culture Inc. in which a fossil fueled binge of consumption (Eat this! Super sized feelings here! Here's one with a rainbow on it, can you feel the feels!) and so forth. There is less of a focus on "gay rights" (Civil rights based on or defined by feelings? Imagine that.) when people have to focus on putting food on the table themselves. Or when there's less estrogen pollution due to civilization.
Shorter and more satiric, the Empire better have some big fat* and gay Drone operators ready because it cannot run on trends created by a philosophy of hedonism indefinitely.
*And then the National Association for Fat Acceptance can be proud... is it time for a fat pride parade for the first fat soldiers yet? Another civil rights barrier broken... provided the entire "civil rights" edifice with its new forms of law for useless lawyers to create careers and "legal frontiers" with doesn't break under the weight of everyone piling on civilization. "What about me and my group defined by feelings? My feelings are hurt too! And here's this meth head that was killed in a horrific way by some other drug addled people once. Surely that means something about a group of feelings people that I speak for! You don't have feelings? How cold hearted!!!" Apparently this is the sort of thing that illiterate and ignorant people do based on false philosophies... I sometimes wonder if it's because they have nothing better to do. (Enter the depopulation people or the elite that fantasize about terrorizing them. Would that shape them up?)
*Note the questionable nature of some of the icons, saints and martyrs of "feelings people":
Not only does Jimenez's research contradict the claim that McKinney and Henderson only met Shepard the night of the murder, but it mars the picturesque image of the 21-year-old student and the world he lived in prior to his death. The book reportedly claims that Shepard and McKinney were both dealing and using methamphetamine and, in addition to being business rivals within that venture, had a sexual relationship.But he's an ADL martyr held up to herd the goy to the Left, so actually researching anything with the actual truth in mind would probably be yet another "conspiracy theory." Real, crazy.
According to Kirkus reviews, "The tragedy was 'enshrined ... as passion play and folktale, but hardly ever for the truth of what it was': the story of a troubled young man who had died because he had been involved with Laramie's drug underworld rather than because he was gay." HuffPost
Matthew Shepard was a 21-year-old freshman at the University of Wyoming where he studied political science, foreign relations and languages. On October 7, 1998, a few hours after he had attended a planning meeting for Gay Awareness Week events on campus, Shepard was tortured and murdered by two men in a remote area east of Laramie, Wyoming, the victim of a heinous hate crime. ... Shepard’s life and untimely death changed the way we talk about, and deal with, hate in America. Google, ADLThat's their narrative because their agenda is tribal and has to do with manufacturing tribal groupings like their own perceived tribe. Is it true? Is it yet another half-truth or tribal myth narrated over a tragic event... and invented for the usual reasons?
Would it matter if it was not true when people are basically defining themselves into groups and tribes based on feelings at this point? What if Shephard hadn't been into going to a Tribal Awareness Week or whatever and instead was more of an average guy providing for his family that got killed by some meth heads? Would that mean that he wasn't a martyr and a saint to be lifted up by the Jewish/mainstream media and their organizations?
Anyway, look at how easily people are herded based on cultural power (trendy liberals are not the only instance...)... it would almost be amusing if it wasn't tragic.
Still waiting on the formation of the Fat Tribe based on identity politics and the ADL turning every instance of bullying in school into a "hate crime"... do you discriminate against fat people? Climate of hatred! Why do you hate fat people? Going on a diet would be a form of self hatred and internalized phobias, no doubt.
You should know your own degraded, illiterate and generally pretty stupid culture by now. So use your imagination and take it from there, if you still have any of your own imagination left after the politically correct thought police of the tribe are through with you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)