Tag-Archive for » terrorism «

What do you call an Arizonan with a lobotomy?

Senator.  Or Governor.

Just days after Janet Napolitano, the U.S. homeland security secretary, sparked a diplomatic kerfuffle by suggesting the terrorists took a Canadian route to the U.S. eight years ago, McCain defended her by saying that, in fact, the former Arizona governor was correct.

Well, some of the 9-11 hijackers did come through Canada, as you know,” McCain, last year’s Republican presidential candidate, said on Fox News on Friday.

— “John McCain says 9-11 terrorists came from Canada“, Canadian Press (via CTV News), April 24th, 2009.

Okay, I give.  Which ones, exactly?

One would think the Secretary of Homeland Security and her fellow Arizonan, the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, might have some spare staffers to go hunt down this information.

And CTV, in its role as ersatz defender of Canadian honour, might also have paid for a reporter to determine the salient facts of where the 9/11 hijackers originated from.  But no, we’ve just got to take it on faith, because actual research would be far too painful.

So let’s run down the list ourselves, ordered by flight.

___

AMERICAN AIRLINES 11
North Tower of the World Trade Center

Mohamed Atta al Sayed:  Egyptian, resided in Germany.  Applied for a five-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US embassy in Berlin, which was granted on May 17th, 2000.  Arrived in the United States on June 3rd, 2000; port of entry Newark/Liberty Intl. Airport, NJ, from Prague, Czech Republic.

Waleed al-Shehri: Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on October 24th, 2000.  Arrived in the United States on April 23rd, 2001; port of entry Orlando Intl. Airport, FL, from Dubai, UAE (via London, UK).

Wail al-Shehri:  Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on October 24th, 2000.  Arrived in the United States on June 8th, 2001; port of entry Miami Intl. Airport, FL, from Dubai, UAE (via London, UK).

Abdulaziz al-Omari:  Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received a two-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on June 18th, 2001.
Arrived in the United States on June 29th, 2001; port of entry John F. Kennedy Intl. Airport, NY, from Dubai, UAE (via Zurich, Switerzland).

Satam al-Suqami:  Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received a two-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on November 21st, 2000.  Arrived in the United States on April 23rd, 2001; port of entry Orlando Intl. Airport, FL, from Dubai, UAE (via London, UK).

AMERICAN AIRLINES 77
Pentagon

Hani Hanjour:  Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received F-1 student visa via US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on September 25th, 2000.  Arrived in the United States on December 8th, 2000; port of entry Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky Intl. Airport, KY, from Dubai, UAE (via Paris, France).  Made several previous trips (1991-2000, with associated visas) to the United States to visit family in Tucson, AZ (and later Miramar, CA).  Hanjour was the only 9/11 hijacker ever to have visited Canada, in March 1999, according to this 2002 statement by FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III.

Khalid al-Mihdhar: Saudi Arabian, resided in Yemen.  Applied for and received a one-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on June 13th, 2001.  Arrived in the United States on July 4th, 2001; port of entry John F. Kennedy Intl. Airport, NY, from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Majed Moqed:  Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received a two-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on November 20th, 2000.  Arrived in the United States on May 2nd, 2001; port of entry Washington/Dulles Intl. Airport, DC, from Dubai, UAE (via London, UK).

Nawaf al-Hazmi:  Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received a one-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on April 3rd, 1999.  Subsequent visa extension approved through January 2001.  Arrived in the United States on January 15th, 2000; port of entry Los Angeles Intl. Airport, CA, from Bangkok, Thailand.

Salem al-Hazmi:  Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received a two-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on June 20th, 2001.  Arrived in the United States on June 29th, 2001; port of entry John F. Kennedy Intl. Airport, NY, from Dubai, UAE (via Zurich, Switerzland).

UNITED AIRLINES 93
Pennsylvania

Ziad Jarrah:  Lebanese, resided in Germany.  Applied for and received a five-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US embassy in Berlin on May 25h, 2000.  Arrived in the United States on June 27th, 2000; port of entry Newark/Liberty Intl. Airport, NJ, from Düsseldorf, Germany.

Ahmad al-Haznawi:  Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received a two-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on November 12th, 2001.  Arrived in the United States on June 8th, 2001; port of entry Miami Intl. Airport, FL, from Dubai, UAE (via London, UK).

Ahmed al-Nami:  Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received a two-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on October 28th, 2000 (and again on April 23rd, 2001).  Arrived in the United States on May 28th, 2001; port of entry Miami Intl. Airport, FL, from Dubai, UAE (via London, UK).

Saeed al-Ghamdi:  Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received a two-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on September 4th, 2000 (and again on June 12th, 2001).  Arrived in the United States on June 27th, 2001; port of entry Orlando Intl. Airport, FL, from Dubai, UAE (via London, UK).

UNITED AIRLINES 175
South Tower of the World Trade Center

Marwan al-Shehhi:  Emirati.  Applied for and received a ten-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US consulate in Dubai, UAE, on January 18th, 2000.  Arrived in the United States on May 29th, 2000; port of entry Newark/Liberty Intl. Airport, NJ, from Brussels, Belgium.

Fayez Banihammad:  Emirati.  Applied for and received a B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US embassy in Abu Dhabi, UAE, on June 18th, 2001.  Arrived in the United States on June 27th, 2001; port of entry Orlando Intl. Airport, FL, from Dubai, UAE (via London, UK).

Mohand al-Shehri:  Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received a two-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on October 23rd, 2000.  Arrived in the United States on May 28th, 2001; port of entry Miami Intl. Airport, FL, from Dubai, UAE (via London, UK).

Hamza al-Ghamdi:  Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received a two-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on October 17th, 2000.  Arrived in the United States on May 28th, 2001; port of entry Miami Intl. Airport, FL, from Dubai, UAE (via London, UK).

Ahmed al-Ghamdi:  Saudi Arabian.  Applied for and received a two-year B-1/B-2 (tourist/business) multiple-entry visa via US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on September 3rd, 2000.  Arrived in the United States on May 2nd, 2001; port of entry Washington/Dulles Intl. Airport, DC, from Dubai, UAE (via London, UK).

___

So that’s the who’s who of September 11th hijackers.  None of whom were Canadian citizens, applied for US visas from Canada, or first entered the United States on flights originating from Canada.  One of them did visit Canada once, in March of 1999.

You can do your own research, if you wish, by examining the 9/11 Commission’s Monograph on 9/11 and Terrorist Travel, and also the notes and citations to their final report.

I have great respect for Senator McCain’s prior uniformed service, and his harrowing, horrible time in North Vietnam’s POW system, but past laurels in no way excuse current stupidity.

RELATED:  Mark Steyn gets the spirit right, but the facts slightly wrong.  If we are to believe FBI Director Mueller’s 2002 remarks, Hani Hanjour did visit Canada, after he had been granted a US visa (on November 2nd, 1997 at the US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia) and entered the United States for the third time (on November 16th, 1997).

FUN FACT:  In case you missed it in all that verbiage above, Hani Hanjour’s first recorded visit to the United States was in 1991, when his brother Abulrahman arranged for him to take English courses in … Tucson, Arizona!

* None of the above should be interpreted as derogatory to the people of the fine state of Arizona.  Unless you are a politician of same; then I am 100% sure you’re retarded.

Category: Foreign Affairs, Media  Tags: ,  Comments off

CUPE flight attendants: not as helpless and unmotivated as their office-bound brethren

Notwithstanding the fact that the attendants’ calm and level-headed response is largely the result of company training and simple human compassion, this is still a good and commendable deed:

CUPE’s national officers commended five CUPE flight attendants at CanJet for their work during the hostage-taking in Montego Bay, Jamaica, on April 19 and 20, 2009.  Five flight attendants were among the eight crew members and 159 passengers held captive by a lone gunman at Sangster International Airport.

Passengers on the flight heaped praise on the flight crew for calming the gunman down and convincing him to let the passengers off the plane.

— CUPE statement, “CUPE flight attendants helped end hijacking“, Aviation.ca, April 22nd, 2009.

I am now making a mental note to momentarily refrain from rhetorically kicking CUPE in the nads the next time they capriciously inconvenience the Canadian public.

The Scorpion and the Frog

beverly_giesbrecht

Useful idiot Khadija Abdul Qahaar (alias Bev Kennedy, alias Paul Morris-Read, née Beverly Giesbrecht) runs a website, Jihad Unspun, dedicated to promoting the exploits of jihadis, and exposing the alleged dastardly doings of our men and women in Afghanistan.

Last September, a Vancouver woman named Beverly Giesbrecht published her personal reflections on the anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks.

Giesbrecht, 52, used the opportunity to celebrate militant Islam. She talked about the “good news” that the Taliban in Afghanistan were killing NATO soldiers and she praised the “Iraqi Resistance” for killing Americans. The real enemy, she said, was “Zionist-controlled America,” and she called upon the Muslim Ummah — the worldwide Islamic community — to form a united front.

Canadian security officials undoubtedly read Giesbrecht’s manifesto, because they would have been monitoring her Internet site, one of the few openly pro-Islamist sites operating out of Canada. Giesbrecht has exactly the biography that would draw the attention of intelligence authorities.

— Leonard Stern.  “Radical conversions“, Ottawa Citizen, March 2nd, 2009.

Last year she put on the proverbial rose-coloured glasses and wandered off to Pakistan as a documentarist, supposedly on behalf of Al-Jazeera.  She soon found out the true nature of her scorpion.

A Canadian woman being held hostage in northern Pakistan says her captors are planning to behead her at the end of the month if a $2-million ransom is not paid.

In a video provided to the Globe and Mail and posted on the newspaper’s website, a pale and haggard-looking Khadija Abdul Qahaar, 52, begins to cry as she says her “time is very short and my life is going to end.

“I’m going to be killed, as you can see,” Qahaar says on the video, pointing at a long knife hanging behind her.

“I’m going to be beheaded just like the Polish engineer, probably by the end of the month. The deadline is by the end of March.”

Polish geologist Piotr Stanczak was beheaded by a Pakistani Taliban group on Feb. 7, 2009.

In a shaky voice, Qahaar said she’s being held by the Taliban “someplace near the Afghan border in either Pakistan or Afghanistan. I’m not quite sure where I am.”

“A previous video has been made and distributed to my embassy, the Pakistan government, to various different NGOs (non-governmental organizations) and groups in order to try to get the demands that they’re making met.

“Unfortunately nothing has happened.”

— “Kidnapped Canadian says she’ll be beheaded by month’s end“, CanWest News Service, March 20th, 2009.

Nothing has happened because the Canadian government does not pay ransoms; an eminently sensible position.

Nor does it maintain a childlike faith in the willingness of unpredictable thugs living a superstitious, violent and pre-modern way of life to accept a naïve Westerner as a peer.  That sort of wishes-were-horses make-believe lives only in the minds of people like Ms. Giesbrecht, Jack Layton and Olivia Chow.  Although the fact that the Laytons are not presently being held for ransom in Pakistan gives a vital clue that perhaps they don’t really believe it, either.

It is tempting to write it all off as karmic payback, and to flippantly suggest (like the Council of Ex-Muslims bulletin board) that we should offer money to the Taliban to keep her, or conversely to demand a dowry payment for her; but that is not how things are done in Canada.  No Canadian deserves to have their head sawed off by Islamic zealots, not even the profoundly dense who were foolish enough to publicly support the Taliban’s cause.

If Ms. Giesbrecht is to receive poetic justice it should be in this country, under the rule of law she had so little affinity for.  She should be liberated from her captors, if possible, and then stand trial in this country for treason.  The idea that a Canadian should be able to waltz off to Taliban-dominated areas of Pakistan, and perform consequence-free PR work for them is ridiculous.  We may not saw her head off, but there is certainly a penalty for assisting an enemy at war with this nation.  There is also the possibility that this is merely a ruse to generate cash for the Taliban, and if so, that would certainly be evidence worthy of a high treason conviction.

Either way, she ought to stand trial.

Negotiating with the Taliban

omar_khadrKABUL (Reuters) – Afghanistan’s Taliban on Tuesday turned down as illogical U.S. President Barack Obama’s bid to reach out to moderate elements of the insurgents, saying the exit of foreign troops was the only solution for ending the war.

Obama, in an interview with the New York Times, expressed an openness to adapting tactics in Afghanistan that had been used in Iraq to reach out to moderate elements there.

“This does not require any response or reaction for this is illogical,” Qari Mohammad Yousuf, a purported spokesman for the insurgent group, told Reuters when asked if its top leader Mullah Mohammad Omar would make any comment about Obama’s proposal.

“The Taliban are united, have one leader, one aim, one policy…I do not know why they are talking about moderate Taliban and what it means?”

— “Taliban say Obama’s call on moderates “illogical”“, Reuters, March 10th, 2009.

Somebody please tell Jack Layton.

Category: Aut disce aut discede, Foreign Affairs, Pro Victoria  Tags:  Comments off

Election observers not so good at protecting privacy

That independent, non-partisan agency charged with overseeing the integrity of our elections?  Not so good at overseeing the integrity and security of its own data.

Elections Canada’s voter database out-of-date, rife with error and unsecure… Just like everyone else’s databases.  Such is the nature of the beast.

Better yet, Elections Canada keeps tabs on minors, who can’t vote:

She found that Elections Canada currently holds identity information on about 104,000 Canadians under the age of 18, even though it is not authorized to do so because they are too young to vote.

And somehow the voters list ended up in the offices of the Tamil Tigers, a designated terrorist group.

[Privacy Commissioner Jennifer] Stoddart cited one example from 2006, when RCMP discovered lists of voters’ names and addresses at an office belonging to the Tamil Tigers, classed in Canada as a terrorist organization, which was allegedly using them to find people who might help them financially.

Excellent work, fellas.

Category: Amor Patriae, What Really Grinds My Gears  Tags: ,  Comments off

Great Moments in Liberal Appeasement

cc-106_yukonCanadian Forces CC-106 Yukon.

December 3rd, 1970: At the conclusion of Operation Ragout, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau rolls over to FLQ demands in order to safeguard the life of kidnapped British Trade Commissioner James Cross.  The five known terrorists—Marc Carbonneau, Yves Langlois, Jacques Lanctôt, Jacques Cossette-Trudel and his wife, Louise Lanctôt—are granted their request for safe passage to Cuba by the Government of Canada, following approval by Fidel Castro.

They are flown to Cuba aboard a Canadian Forces CC-106 Yukon, tail number 106922, commanded by a presumably furious Major Stu Parmalee.

Yup, invoking the War Measures Act and arresting those 400 people sure made a difference. The FLQ still got the Cuban vacation they had asked for.  And Quebec has never since had a referendum on separation, nor a series of secessionist governments, right?

Tell me again why Trudeau is considered to have taken a “tough stance” on terrorism?  What part of “tough stance” equals “flying the bad guys to a tropical island aboard government aircraft, just like they asked”?

Category: Historica  Tags:  Comments off

Terrorists don’t care about Canada?

Inspired by this post at Dust My Broom.

The kid bristles. “Speak for yourself. Canada is a safe country. We don’t have terrorists here. He (Khawaja) lives in Ottawa. He didn’t do anything to Ottawa, he didn’t do anything to Canada, he’s charged with being part of that terrorism thing in England, not here. When was there a terrorist attack in Canada? Why would a terrorist care about Canada? C’mon, get real.”

— Earl McRae, “No kidding about terrorism“.  Edmonton Sun, June 25th, 2008.

Here are a few reasons terrorists care about Canada, culled from terrorist events on Canadian soil (or those that have resulted in Canadian fatalities) within my lifetime, plus or minus a decade:

  • You travelled by train along a route that the Prime Minister was also due to travel. (FLQ bombs rail line, 1963)
  • You are a civilian security officer at a federal building that happens to house a Canadian Forces recruiting centre. (FLQ, 1963)
  • You happen to work at an establishment that terrorists think is easy to rob. (FLQ robs banks and businesses, 1963-64)
  • You happen to own a small business and your ethnicity is objectionable to the terrorists. (FLQ bombs stores and businesses, 1964-66)
  • You happen to work at a place the terrorists think is objectionable. (FLQ bombs Montreal Stock Exchange, 1969)
  • You are the democratically elected mayor of a city. (FLQ bombs Jean Drapeau’s house, Montreal, 1969)
  • You are a police officer. (FLQ kills policeman, 1969)
  • You are a minister in the cabinet of the provincial government (FLQ kills Pierre Laporte, 1970)
  • You work at a foreign embassy, consulate or trade delegation the terrorists do not like. (Anti-Castro terrorists bomb Cuban embassy, consulate or trade delegation offices in 1966-67, 1969, 1971-72, 1974, 1976 and 1980; Canadian security guard killed by Armenian terrorists occupying Turkish embassy, Ottawa, 1985; Iraqi MEK terrorists assault Iranian embassy in Ottawa, 1992)
  • You use hydroelectric power and the terrorists think your generating station is environmentally damaging (Squamish Five bomb BC Hydro station, 1982)
  • You work for a company that produces electronics that could be used in missiles (Squamish five bomb Litton plant, Toronto, 1982)
  • You have watched porn (Squamish Five bomb adult video stores, 1982)
  • You are a passenger aboard an aircraft owned by a government the terrorists do not like. (Terrorists bomb Air India 182, 1985).
  • You are visiting Canada as an official representing a government the terrorists do not like. (Assassination attempt on Malkiat Singh Sidhu, Vancouver, 1986; Turkish commercial counselor attacked and paralysed in his Ottawa apartment, 1982; Turkish military attache killed in his car by Armenian terrorists, Ottawa, 1982)
  • You take the subway or train to work, and the Pope will visit your country soon. (Thomas Bernard Brigham allegedly bombs Central Station, Montreal, 1984)
  • You publish a newspaper the terrorists do not like (Tara Singh Hayer shot and paralysed, 1988)

And that’s not even including the most famous terrorist attack of this decade, on September 11, 2001.

The motivation can all be boiled down to three basic points, which are:

  • You are doing something that somebody else doesn’t like.
  • If it’s not you, somebody else is doing something someone doesn’t like, and you just happened to be in the area at the wrong time.  You’re going to pay for it anyway, though.
  • He or she is prepared to use violence to achieve their ends, isn’t going to give you the courtesy of an argument or warning beforehand, because they don’t think you deserve it.

And as history shows, no such people exist in Canada, nor would anyone want to injure Canadians unnecessarily.

UPDATE 201058Z DEC 2008: Mr. Andrew Herten emailed to note that despite two convictions, Mr. Brigham died after gaining his second appeal, thus the courts consider him to be innocent.

Category: Amor Patriae  Tags:  Comments off

I see your fatwa and raise you a Turban Bomb

jyllandsposten_bombhead

I suppose everyone knows what this is.

Hopefully you have heard by now that the Danish police intelligence agency (PET) arrested two Tunisians and one Dane for an alleged conspiracy to kill Kurt Westergaard—the cartoonist responsible for this drawing.

This is no laughing matter, really, but I have to laugh.  A frail old man draws a picture of a major religious figure—associating said figure with violence and death, and the adherents of the religion dispute this depiction and imputation via … riots, violence and conspiracy to commit murder.  My religion is not violent!  I will kill you if you say otherwise!

All right then, if you say so.

Further, I cannot even begin to comprehend the mental gymnastics that has apparently driven three intellectual midgets to contemplate the homicide of a 73-year-old man over ol’ turban-bomb*.  Yes, I understand the Mohammedans regard the cartoon as an insult.  I am sure many Christians (Catholics especially) regard Piss Christ and Holy Virgin Mary to be slightly more offensive, both in form and content.

The worst crime in connection with either of these works was one gent who vandalised the Virgin by smearing it with white oil-based paint.  He was charged with second-degree criminal mischief (a class D felony), later downgraded to a misdemeanor because the damage to the painting did not exceed USD $1,500.  As a security measure, the Brookyn Museum of Art went to the extreme of installing a rope partition.  Heavens.  Was that special blast-proof rope or just the ordinary kind, like at cinema queues?

Meanwhile, Kurt Westergaard has been living with police protection since 2005.

A friend of mine recently linked to another blog with this declaration:

We have the right to not obey Islamic law or customs. If we do not defend that right, we will certainly lose it.

I would go one further.

We have the right to accept or reject the tenets of any faith.  We have the right to mock or satirise the central figures, beliefs, customs and adherents of any religion.  We are not obligated to treat any faith with kid gloves and avoid saying things that might hurt feelings.  It might be polite to do so, but it is by no means compulsory.  You can’t, for example, refuse public services to someone of a different religion; but you are well within your rights to say “I think your beliefs are ridiculous”.  We are not bound to obey anyone else’s spiritual authorities or directives unless we freely choose to do so.

Even the Danish left is getting aboard, as quoted in the New York Times:

“Their plans to kill Kurt Westergaard … are not just an attack on Westergaard but an attack on our democratic culture,” the editorial said.

“Regardless of whether Jyllands-Posten at the time used freedom of speech unwisely and with damaging consequences, the paper deserves unconditional solidarity when it is threatened with terror,” it said.

“That is why Politiken today … prints the drawing, even though at no time have we sympathized with Jyllands-Posten’s provocation.”

Precisely.  So here’s lookin’ at you, Turban Bomb*.

* No disrespect to the blog called Turban Bomb, naturally.

The exact opposite of what was intended

Sometimes the tone-deafness of our visual artists and performers is breathtaking.  While digging up this old clip featuring the Smurfs meeting their Just Reward, I was reminded of another anti-war work that had precisely the opposite effect.

In the 80s, it was popular for performers, pundits and laypersons to prophesy that war—particularly a full-blown nuclear apocalypse—was just around the corner, courtesy of that madman in the White House, Ronald Wilson Reagan.  As a young lad I used to believe that it was so—until I did my own research into the various iterations of U.S. nuclear strategy, coming to the conclusion that global nuclear war was about as likely as a classmate killing someone under the influence of Dungeons & Dragons.

Nonetheless, it was a big deal among the celebrity class back then, and many were convinced that President Reagan would be the death of us all.  I can recall the exact moment I switched from mild approval of the man to unbridled admiration, and it was all due to this little anti-war song on Def Leppard’s 1987 album Hysteria.

      1. Def Leppard - Gods of War - Hysteria (1987)

The big selling point for me are the quotes from Reagan and Thatcher, beginning at about 5:40 in the track.  My younger self realised these sound bites must have come from a speech following the capture of the Achille Lauro hijackers—a seminal triumph against Muammar al-Gaddafi’s resurgent Barbary terrorism.

I know Messrs. Elliott, Savage, Allen et al intended this to be a semi-profound anti-war opus, but for those of us who knew the story of the Achille Lauro (and tragic Leon Klinghofffer), the ending of the song completely undoes whatever anti-ass-whooping spirit had accrued thus far.

Category: Ars Gratia Artis, Historica  Tags: , ,  Comments off