Fortunately for them these nincompoops will never get as far as the witness stand, because everyone recognizes that they are imbeciles parroting legal jargon.
We have already had an impressive display of nincompoopery from the skank and the one who shall not be called deaf.
Now, to return to the finer and important things in life, when shall I expect my catalogue?
@Fancyponies1 Whats the matter Azelda not getting anymore bites on your fishing trip? sadly you have failed at an attempt at provocation and information gathering. So now you revert to ad-homienem insults. Logic, truth and reasoning all fail you so what do you do is shoot the messenger. nuff said
This ought to be a soap....get your afternoon suspense....do they have hidden guns...will she get shot in an elevator....or will she trip on the stairs and blame the handsome undercover guy...who are you really, Handsome Steve...are you related to Hairy Steve? which one has CK undershorts?....lets get to the bottom of this, what is under the RocketPop skirt???
@fred1999DULLNUTZ: Neither; she drove in to see why her vacant property was on fire. They've admitted that the driveway ran directly to the fire; now they excuse their inability to show photos of the alleged skidmarks. Were they 17foot marks, as Wenda originally claimed? 20ft? 30ft? They prove their ignorance - first, by being unaware of the danger posed by their fire if any spark carried to the barn (full of loose hay and straw); second, in helping themselves to the previous tenant's firewood.
I don't actually believe their story for a second, simply because it varies depending on who they are aprising of it. I simply asked for a credible reason for the variance, and I have received none, so I believe "Fancyponies" on this one!
Making a big fuss because someone drove up in their car to her own property! What are they - a bunch of fairies?
So this all seems to be based on alleged skid marks. Seems to me we ought to see the photos of these so-called skid marks allegedly made by Azeldas vehicle. So how about putting them online, like, put your money where your mouth is.
@uquitwhinn too bad your parents didn't drink the Kool Aid would have saved us suffering your uneducated posts. Please feel free to get a vasectomy so your faulty dna isn't around in the future, we have enough morons in this world,, mostly in elected positions.
QUOTE (you): "...the night Azelda tried to run peaceful people down at a campfire..."
QOUTE (you): "Azelda after watching you try to scare people by driving dangerously and leaving a 30 foot skid mark you sure seem to have an angry disposition."
These two claims are at variance. You cannot claim she tried to ACTUALLY RUN PEOPLE DOWN, and simultaneously claim that she was only TRYING TO SCARE PEOPLE. It's one, or the other...
I am not going to fight you. I am going to SHOOT Ron Paul.
fred1999BOLLOCKS 2 days ago
Have fun at the cyber cafe to btw
And for one or the other well Perhaps, as it should be in law, It should be left up to a trier of fact as to what azelda's intentions were but that sill does not mitigate how her actions create a prima facie case which needs further investigation in court
My comments about Ron Paul were not serious, and you know that!
And I have never said that there is no case to answer for Azelda in this matter. I am simply trying to get a straight answer from you as to whether she tried to run you down, or merely intimidate you.
How many times have I yold you that I am on "Azelda's" side?
If I were an attorney, I would DESTROY these nincompoops on the witness stand! Even a novice fresh out of law school could expose the holes in their story!
@fred1999BOLLOCKS Threats are codified under S 264.1 of the Criminal code in Canada and it is a strict liability offense. In other words you don't need the mens rea element in order to prosecute.
@fred1999BOLLOCKS and I quote from S 265 "or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose;" key word reasonable grounds. I have already illustrated where my reasonable grounds comes from. in my previous response. Like I said before if the vehicle was pointed in a different trajectory or the length of the skid was shorter say 10 feet my fear for my well being would not have been created. ......
FP I was not in the courtroomt. While I may have missed that episode you point out your glasses were bent. Is it in your statement that the bend in your glasses was caused by interaction with George? Did you testify that your glasses were bent due to interaction with George? Now lets get to the crux of the matter if anyone is being attacked by another they have the right to defend themselves so by you going after him with his back turned doesn't that indicate he was defending himself ?
Wenda should have trouble sleeping at night - she and Steve have published a pack of lies to attract the disaffected mob to their site - seems to be working! For the truth I recommend people inform themselves elsewhere.
@Fancyponies1 So educate us FP great giver of conflicting police statements. Then again how about you making the claim that you can't be sure that Georges supporters aren't armed,, just a tad inflammatory and vexatious. Azelda after watching you try to scare people by driving dangerously and leaving a 30 foot skid mark you sure seem to have an angry disposition. It also comes out in your vernacular / typing . Really the only lies being put out there seem to be coming from you
@nycullaSUCKS why is it you say that? I know it was because you were there the night Azelda tried to run peaceful people down at a campfire, leaving a 30 foot skid mark just to make sure those sitting there peacefully knew that she meant business / violence in a very real way. Leaving 30 foot deceleration marks are proof that this woman isn't violent at all. I know its the inflammatory and slanderous statements she made to officer lisa and her lawyer . res ipsa liquitor in legal terms.
So your argument is, even if it's true - she drove AT people, with the intention of MOWING THEM DOWN, or that she drove NEAR them, in an attempt at intimidation?
Now, which is it? If you people make up your minds, I might be able to see the wood for the trees! You can't have it both ways. Did she try to mow them down in her Explorer, and they scattered, running for their lives? Or did she drive NEAR them, and they felt intimidated by this? Skid matks are irrelevant.
@fred1999BOLLOCKS crim code 265. (1) A person commits an assault when:
(b) he attempts or threatens, by an act or a gesture, to apply force to another person, if he has, or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose;
skid marks are used all the time in courts
30 foot skid mark = gesture
vehicle's front end pointed / skidding directly at individuals sitting there goes to intent
@fred1999BOLLOCKS Well that is the criminal code, and while it might seem a bit absurd to you think about it for a minute. How do you think society would be if we all walked around making threatening gestures? What would the end result be? This law is there for a reason, and a valid one at that. It gives people the ability to function on a daily basis without having to be constantly worried whether or not the next person will cause them harm. .......
Nonsense! People go around making threatening gestures, verbal threats of violence, and actual acts of violence seven days a week. The society you dread is already here, and the law is utterly POWERLESS to stop it. You can't put them ALL in jail.
You are basically arguing that the law is a deterrent. This is unproven, in any society. Funny how nations that have the death sentence always seem to have the highest incidences of homicide.
@fred1999BOLLOCKS ... and while those 2 acts might get you charged with the same general section I suspect the punishment would be different in both cases. In the first instance you carried out the act in the second you implied the act one caused physical damage the other caused a mental damage. If you have a problem with the law feel free to write your MP or write a letter to Vic Toews*(sp) and try and have the law changed.
Okay. Same section of the legislation, different sanction.
But you know what REALLY gets me? It's the way you folks disparage HER so-called "act of violence", and in the same breath dismiss her allegation of violence by her husband with such contempt. You want to have it both ways, don't you?
Personally, I saw no good reason to believe either side of the story (domestic violence), until I read the testimony her son, Byron, gave in court. Are you calling HIM a liar, too?
@Fancyponies1 Azelda have you read that section of the criminal code or have you just been reading Danielle Steele's interpretation of the criminal code? Sure looks like you've been using Ms Steele's law dictionary. Try reading something like : Duhaime, Blacks or some reputable law dictionary
Is this brain death that is being referred to here...then Azelda is not guilty, as it would seem this happened before their appearance on the Owen Sound scene.
@fred1999BOLLOCKS it was not that she skidded to a halt near us it was that she skidded to a stop with the front end pointed directly at us. I am not some wilting wallflower who takes offense to a vehicle skidding to a stop a fair distance away but when the vehicle is pointed directly at me / us and the front end rests somewhere within a body's length away I do tend to get worried for my well being. Wouldn't you? If the vehicle stopped to the left or the right of us it would be a different story
The one that is telling the truth -remember George's comment that he didn't hit her on the right side, he hit her on the left! This was a loud whisper to his "advocate" Josh.
@Fancyponies1 a whisper and where in the court room were you located FP ? But lets look at some of the police report on that ,, no bruising not even your glasses were bent either ,,must have been one hell of a hit. Now lets take a trip to a place some call reality. If you were truly hit there would have been some evidence of it. Either bent glasses or a bruise but none of this was present was it?
@blackbeard200969 Obviously you were not in the courtroom that day, and the whispers were loud enough that other people heard them and also commented on them...actually, yes, the glasses were bent, and that was documented by the police...guess you missed that too in your zeal for presenting facts that suited you. And I guess that means you are ok with a husband abusing his wife as long as they damage wasn't too great...or as long as it doesn't become public.
We would not be mocking you if it were not for your determined defence of a man who has consistently used violence on his wife and children. If you really wanted to know the truth you would have informed yourself of more than what you have been spoon-fed. It would summarize your position more correctly if you carried a sign that says "Wife-beaters Rule."
@Fancyponies1 Really the only witness I heard was the son who seen the mother going after the father. Really lets look at which sex is the more violent,, Stats Can reports that about 6% of men & 7% of women have experienced spousal abuse in the last 5 years. Also mothers routinely punish their male offspring harsher then their female offspring. Then lets look at infanticide any guess which is the more violent sex ? Reciprocal abuse accounts for about 50% of D.V. .........
@Fancyponies1 ... Then there is the monetary rewards for alleging abuse when divorce proceedings are started. It is known as the silver bullet in family law circles. Women are 48% more likely to use a weapon in an attack against their spouse. uht oh do I hear fancyponies glass house starting to crumble well it is the tip of the iceberg. How about the Campione case yah again women can never be the criminal only victims yah right ,, how about the Lucio Jonson case out of London Ont. .........
@Fancyponies1 How about Cdn Senator Ann Cool who is on public record informing us that the government knows the data coming out of abused womans shelters is bogus. Want more?? Try reading some of Barbra Kays articles from the National post on this topic. I don't know who abused whom in this case for I was not a witness but I do know that to automatically assume that a male is always the criminal and the woman is always the victim is hogwash. So really with only 1 witness who should be believed ?
@Fancyponies1 Psychologist John Archer, president of the International Society for Research on Aggression, ( until 2004 ) claims women are more likely to dish out domestic violence. He added: 'The more freedom they get, the more violent they tend to become."
The International Society for Research on Aggression (ISRA) is a society of scholars and scientists interested in the scientific study of aggression and violence. The Society is both international and interdisciplinary.
I like, and wish for truth to permeate to the surface of this theatre in which georges is taking part of for... more time than anyone could bear... you guys are awesome! Keep up fighting that goat by the horns!
Waiting impatiently...can't publish naughty pics sans new and appropriate attire...Senior Men and Toyboy sites need photos :)
Fancyponies1 4 months ago
Fortunately for them these nincompoops will never get as far as the witness stand, because everyone recognizes that they are imbeciles parroting legal jargon.
We have already had an impressive display of nincompoopery from the skank and the one who shall not be called deaf.
Now, to return to the finer and important things in life, when shall I expect my catalogue?
Fancyponies1 4 months ago
@Fancyponies1 Whats the matter Azelda not getting anymore bites on your fishing trip? sadly you have failed at an attempt at provocation and information gathering. So now you revert to ad-homienem insults. Logic, truth and reasoning all fail you so what do you do is shoot the messenger. nuff said
blackbeard200969 4 months ago
@Fancyponies1
Ah - the new catalogue is currently in production. It will be available in the new year!
fred1999BOLLOCKS 4 months ago
This ought to be a soap....get your afternoon suspense....do they have hidden guns...will she get shot in an elevator....or will she trip on the stairs and blame the handsome undercover guy...who are you really, Handsome Steve...are you related to Hairy Steve? which one has CK undershorts?....lets get to the bottom of this, what is under the RocketPop skirt???
franklypuzzled 4 months ago
@fred1999DULLNUTZ: Neither; she drove in to see why her vacant property was on fire. They've admitted that the driveway ran directly to the fire; now they excuse their inability to show photos of the alleged skidmarks. Were they 17foot marks, as Wenda originally claimed? 20ft? 30ft? They prove their ignorance - first, by being unaware of the danger posed by their fire if any spark carried to the barn (full of loose hay and straw); second, in helping themselves to the previous tenant's firewood.
hbothwell 4 months ago
Comment removed
fred1999BOLLOCKS 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@hbothwell
I don't actually believe their story for a second, simply because it varies depending on who they are aprising of it. I simply asked for a credible reason for the variance, and I have received none, so I believe "Fancyponies" on this one!
Making a big fuss because someone drove up in their car to her own property! What are they - a bunch of fairies?
fred1999BOLLOCKS 4 months ago
So this all seems to be based on alleged skid marks. Seems to me we ought to see the photos of these so-called skid marks allegedly made by Azeldas vehicle. So how about putting them online, like, put your money where your mouth is.
Fancyponies1 4 months ago
@uquitwhinn too bad your parents didn't drink the Kool Aid would have saved us suffering your uneducated posts. Please feel free to get a vasectomy so your faulty dna isn't around in the future, we have enough morons in this world,, mostly in elected positions.
blackbeard200969 4 months ago
@blackbeard200969
This is my basic problem with your claims:
QUOTE (you): "...the night Azelda tried to run peaceful people down at a campfire..."
QOUTE (you): "Azelda after watching you try to scare people by driving dangerously and leaving a 30 foot skid mark you sure seem to have an angry disposition."
These two claims are at variance. You cannot claim she tried to ACTUALLY RUN PEOPLE DOWN, and simultaneously claim that she was only TRYING TO SCARE PEOPLE. It's one, or the other...
fred1999BOLLOCKS 4 months ago
@fred1999BOLLOCKS Fred I understand why you don't like to have a law that prohibits threatening language:
@Jshadel92
I am not going to fight you. I am going to SHOOT Ron Paul.
fred1999BOLLOCKS 2 days ago
Have fun at the cyber cafe to btw
And for one or the other well Perhaps, as it should be in law, It should be left up to a trier of fact as to what azelda's intentions were but that sill does not mitigate how her actions create a prima facie case which needs further investigation in court
blackbeard200969 4 months ago
@blackbeard200969
My comments about Ron Paul were not serious, and you know that!
And I have never said that there is no case to answer for Azelda in this matter. I am simply trying to get a straight answer from you as to whether she tried to run you down, or merely intimidate you.
fred1999BOLLOCKS 4 months ago
@fred1999BOLLOCKS Btw, Azelda is only answering to the lingerie, she is not on trial for anything.
Fancyponies1 4 months ago
@Fancyponies1
How many times have I yold you that I am on "Azelda's" side?
If I were an attorney, I would DESTROY these nincompoops on the witness stand! Even a novice fresh out of law school could expose the holes in their story!
fred1999BOLLOCKS 4 months ago
@fred1999BOLLOCKS Threats are codified under S 264.1 of the Criminal code in Canada and it is a strict liability offense. In other words you don't need the mens rea element in order to prosecute.
blackbeard200969 4 months ago
@blackbeard200969
Mens rea? Since we are dealing with a females in this case - what about the women's rea?
Sorry - I studied law - couldn't resist that one!
fred1999BOLLOCKS 4 months ago
@fred1999BOLLOCKS and I quote from S 265 "or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose;" key word reasonable grounds. I have already illustrated where my reasonable grounds comes from. in my previous response. Like I said before if the vehicle was pointed in a different trajectory or the length of the skid was shorter say 10 feet my fear for my well being would not have been created. ......
blackbeard200969 4 months ago
FP I was not in the courtroomt. While I may have missed that episode you point out your glasses were bent. Is it in your statement that the bend in your glasses was caused by interaction with George? Did you testify that your glasses were bent due to interaction with George? Now lets get to the crux of the matter if anyone is being attacked by another they have the right to defend themselves so by you going after him with his back turned doesn't that indicate he was defending himself ?
blackbeard200969 5 months ago
Wenda should have trouble sleeping at night - she and Steve have published a pack of lies to attract the disaffected mob to their site - seems to be working! For the truth I recommend people inform themselves elsewhere.
Fancyponies1 5 months ago
@Fancyponies1 Please tell us what the truth is, enlighten us
wethepeoplepressca 5 months ago
@Fancyponies1 So educate us FP great giver of conflicting police statements. Then again how about you making the claim that you can't be sure that Georges supporters aren't armed,, just a tad inflammatory and vexatious. Azelda after watching you try to scare people by driving dangerously and leaving a 30 foot skid mark you sure seem to have an angry disposition. It also comes out in your vernacular / typing . Really the only lies being put out there seem to be coming from you
blackbeard200969 5 months ago
@Fancyponies1 Grasshopper Media?
finditherefirst 5 months ago
Yep, keep defending your reporting of the "truth".
Fancyponies1 5 months ago in playlist More videos from wethepeoplepressca
This has been flagged as spam show
Yep, keep defending your reporting of the "truth".
Fancyponies1 5 months ago in playlist More videos from wethepeoplepressca
@Fancyponies1
PUT FARMER BOTHWELL IN JAIL FOR 25 YEARS, WITH HARD LABOUR! HE SHOULD BE WHIPPED IN A PUBLIC MARKET!
nycullaSUCKS 4 months ago in playlist More videos from wethepeoplepressca
Comment removed
blackbeard200969 4 months ago
@nycullaSUCKS why is it you say that? I know it was because you were there the night Azelda tried to run peaceful people down at a campfire, leaving a 30 foot skid mark just to make sure those sitting there peacefully knew that she meant business / violence in a very real way. Leaving 30 foot deceleration marks are proof that this woman isn't violent at all. I know its the inflammatory and slanderous statements she made to officer lisa and her lawyer . res ipsa liquitor in legal terms.
blackbeard200969 4 months ago
@blackbeard200969
So your argument is, even if it's true - she drove AT people, with the intention of MOWING THEM DOWN, or that she drove NEAR them, in an attempt at intimidation?
Now, which is it? If you people make up your minds, I might be able to see the wood for the trees! You can't have it both ways. Did she try to mow them down in her Explorer, and they scattered, running for their lives? Or did she drive NEAR them, and they felt intimidated by this? Skid matks are irrelevant.
fred1999BOLLOCKS 4 months ago
@fred1999BOLLOCKS crim code 265. (1) A person commits an assault when:
(b) he attempts or threatens, by an act or a gesture, to apply force to another person, if he has, or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose;
skid marks are used all the time in courts
30 foot skid mark = gesture
vehicle's front end pointed / skidding directly at individuals sitting there goes to intent
people fearful : yes
ability to injure: yes
blackbeard200969 4 months ago
@blackbeard200969
I see. So they were assaulted, but not assaulted, at the same time.
In other words if I punch someone in the mouth, but only gesture to someone else that I'm going to punch them also, I'm equally guilty on both counts?
What a crock!
fred1999BOLLOCKS 4 months ago
@fred1999BOLLOCKS Well that is the criminal code, and while it might seem a bit absurd to you think about it for a minute. How do you think society would be if we all walked around making threatening gestures? What would the end result be? This law is there for a reason, and a valid one at that. It gives people the ability to function on a daily basis without having to be constantly worried whether or not the next person will cause them harm. .......
blackbeard200969 4 months ago
@blackbeard200969
Nonsense! People go around making threatening gestures, verbal threats of violence, and actual acts of violence seven days a week. The society you dread is already here, and the law is utterly POWERLESS to stop it. You can't put them ALL in jail.
You are basically arguing that the law is a deterrent. This is unproven, in any society. Funny how nations that have the death sentence always seem to have the highest incidences of homicide.
Deterrent, my foot!
fred1999BOLLOCKS 4 months ago
@fred1999BOLLOCKS ... and while those 2 acts might get you charged with the same general section I suspect the punishment would be different in both cases. In the first instance you carried out the act in the second you implied the act one caused physical damage the other caused a mental damage. If you have a problem with the law feel free to write your MP or write a letter to Vic Toews*(sp) and try and have the law changed.
blackbeard200969 4 months ago
@blackbeard200969
Okay. Same section of the legislation, different sanction.
But you know what REALLY gets me? It's the way you folks disparage HER so-called "act of violence", and in the same breath dismiss her allegation of violence by her husband with such contempt. You want to have it both ways, don't you?
Personally, I saw no good reason to believe either side of the story (domestic violence), until I read the testimony her son, Byron, gave in court. Are you calling HIM a liar, too?
fred1999BOLLOCKS 4 months ago
@blackbeard200969 And my take on both those sections is that they caused harm leading to death :)
Fancyponies1 4 months ago
@Fancyponies1 Azelda have you read that section of the criminal code or have you just been reading Danielle Steele's interpretation of the criminal code? Sure looks like you've been using Ms Steele's law dictionary. Try reading something like : Duhaime, Blacks or some reputable law dictionary
blackbeard200969 4 months ago
@Fancyponies1 Oooo, this is scary - now I have a virtual alter ego :) But fortunately, brain dead doesn't count....
Fancyponies1 4 months ago
Is this brain death that is being referred to here...then Azelda is not guilty, as it would seem this happened before their appearance on the Owen Sound scene.
Fancyponies1 4 months ago
@fred1999BOLLOCKS it was not that she skidded to a halt near us it was that she skidded to a stop with the front end pointed directly at us. I am not some wilting wallflower who takes offense to a vehicle skidding to a stop a fair distance away but when the vehicle is pointed directly at me / us and the front end rests somewhere within a body's length away I do tend to get worried for my well being. Wouldn't you? If the vehicle stopped to the left or the right of us it would be a different story
blackbeard200969 4 months ago
@blackbeard200969
Right - so at no point did she actually try to make the vehicle actually connect with anybody.
So I am wondering why you have previously described her behaviour as "violent", rather than "intimidating".
If you are going to claim that someone is violent, then you have to detail an actual, violent act, not an act of intimidation.
fred1999BOLLOCKS 4 months ago
The one that is telling the truth -remember George's comment that he didn't hit her on the right side, he hit her on the left! This was a loud whisper to his "advocate" Josh.
Fancyponies1 5 months ago
@Fancyponies1 a whisper and where in the court room were you located FP ? But lets look at some of the police report on that ,, no bruising not even your glasses were bent either ,,must have been one hell of a hit. Now lets take a trip to a place some call reality. If you were truly hit there would have been some evidence of it. Either bent glasses or a bruise but none of this was present was it?
blackbeard200969 5 months ago
@blackbeard200969 Obviously you were not in the courtroom that day, and the whispers were loud enough that other people heard them and also commented on them...actually, yes, the glasses were bent, and that was documented by the police...guess you missed that too in your zeal for presenting facts that suited you. And I guess that means you are ok with a husband abusing his wife as long as they damage wasn't too great...or as long as it doesn't become public.
Fancyponies1 5 months ago
We would not be mocking you if it were not for your determined defence of a man who has consistently used violence on his wife and children. If you really wanted to know the truth you would have informed yourself of more than what you have been spoon-fed. It would summarize your position more correctly if you carried a sign that says "Wife-beaters Rule."
Fancyponies1 5 months ago
@Fancyponies1 Really the only witness I heard was the son who seen the mother going after the father. Really lets look at which sex is the more violent,, Stats Can reports that about 6% of men & 7% of women have experienced spousal abuse in the last 5 years. Also mothers routinely punish their male offspring harsher then their female offspring. Then lets look at infanticide any guess which is the more violent sex ? Reciprocal abuse accounts for about 50% of D.V. .........
blackbeard200969 5 months ago
@Fancyponies1 ... Then there is the monetary rewards for alleging abuse when divorce proceedings are started. It is known as the silver bullet in family law circles. Women are 48% more likely to use a weapon in an attack against their spouse. uht oh do I hear fancyponies glass house starting to crumble well it is the tip of the iceberg. How about the Campione case yah again women can never be the criminal only victims yah right ,, how about the Lucio Jonson case out of London Ont. .........
blackbeard200969 5 months ago
@Fancyponies1 How about Cdn Senator Ann Cool who is on public record informing us that the government knows the data coming out of abused womans shelters is bogus. Want more?? Try reading some of Barbra Kays articles from the National post on this topic. I don't know who abused whom in this case for I was not a witness but I do know that to automatically assume that a male is always the criminal and the woman is always the victim is hogwash. So really with only 1 witness who should be believed ?
blackbeard200969 5 months ago
@Fancyponies1 Psychologist John Archer, president of the International Society for Research on Aggression, ( until 2004 ) claims women are more likely to dish out domestic violence. He added: 'The more freedom they get, the more violent they tend to become."
The International Society for Research on Aggression (ISRA) is a society of scholars and scientists interested in the scientific study of aggression and violence. The Society is both international and interdisciplinary.
Any questions Fponies
blackbeard200969 5 months ago
I love this video you have such moxy Wenda.
janescharf 5 months ago
setting the stage for another waco???
bradq 5 months ago
Make sure I understand this correctly...
Wenda is so "afraid" of the police
that she chases two of them into an elevator
to complain about how "afraid" she feels?
Does that pretty much summarize it?
hbothwell 6 months ago
@hbothwell Yes Hugh. I am afraid of being gunned down. They did not do Waco in an elevator.
The only way to protect is to put out evidence. Thank you for mocking me for this.
wethepeoplepressca 6 months ago
@wethepeoplepressca Ha ha they didnt DO you in the elevator either. Shows they have good taste. They have no interest in hysterical crackpots.
franklypuzzled 4 months ago
@hbothwell 47
Make sure I understand this correctly.
You cant understand what this woman is talking about
though it is simple and clear to anyone authentically interested in the well being of others.
But you think you understand the real situation.
Does that pretty much summarize you?
1HumanKind 5 months ago
cant believe this is not on the news
fapexis 6 months ago 2
Speak up, speak out! Bear witness and be the media!!!!
finditherefirst 6 months ago 4
I like, and wish for truth to permeate to the surface of this theatre in which georges is taking part of for... more time than anyone could bear... you guys are awesome! Keep up fighting that goat by the horns!
kingabelicio 6 months ago