Poll
Question:
How soon before Trump has a 'reichstag fire'?
Option 1: Never. He's too nice
votes: 15
Option 2: Over a year from now
votes: 1
Option 3: Between six months and a Year
votes: 8
Option 4: within six months
votes: 5
Option 5: Any day now...wait for it.
votes: 4
Option 6: What's a Reichstag fire?
votes: 3
Look...he doesn't have to burn the White House down, but he orders something, a minor terror attack, perhaps, or somesuch that will give him the authority to do away with civil liberties, the press, democracy. (Look, Bush almost did it after 9/11)
:lol:
:tinfoil:
This is giving Trump way too much credit.
The correct premise would be: How Soon before Steve Bannon orchestrates a 'reichstag fire'? :P
Never, too hard to do without getting caught.
There won't be false flag but I certainly fear the moment when the first terror attack of his presidency hits US soil - because it will happen at some point.
He doesn't need to set up his own.
He has already, maybe even unwittingly, set the stage for himself.
We know there will be another terror attack on the US, that is just a matter of time.
There are, in theory, two checks on his power - Congress and the Judiciary.
Congress has shown that they are uninterested in challenging him at all, and Congress is the one government entity that Americans might despise even more than Trump. They are, for all practical purposes, completely neutralized from their ability to check the executive.
That leaves the judicial system.
Well, Trump has already set that one up as well, right? He said stright up that if there is a terrorist attack on America, it will be the fault of the judiciary for challenging his over-reach.
Most people just kind of "ho-hummed" that - but Trump (or those running Trump) just fired a shot across the bow of checks on executive power. They just stated that if there is an attack on the US, the blame will be laid not at the feet of those charged with defending the US (the executive) but rather at the feet of those who are charged with making sure the executive operates under the restricted powers granted to it.
So, what then is left to challenege executive power if they are clearly setting up the judiciary to be circumvented in the event of an attack?
What if there is a bad one, for example - the "9/12" attack?
last time we got the Patriot Act, and a huge erosion in civil liberties that still has not been rolled back, and that was with a executive branch that was NOT authoritarian and dismissive of the concept of checks and balances, and with a Congress that was considerably more functional and willing to challenge the President.
If we have another major attack, Trump and Bannon will immediately propose sweeping powers for themselves and tell the Supreme Court to go fuck themselves. And the American people, I fear, will go along with it enough to let them do it. And this, BTW, is *precisely* the effect those who would engage in such an attack would desire. There is no better payoff ever available to those interested in taking down the American/Western/Liberal myth/ideals than what is available right now.
The fundamentals of the American democratic system hAs NEVER been in the danger it is in today.
Quote from: Berkut on February 17, 2017, 10:44:39 AM
The fundamentals of the American democratic system hAs NEVER been in the danger it is in today.
If only the South had been allowed to go in peace, you could've had the enlightened socialist government you deserve. :cry:
I don't have any doubt that he would do something like that, if he thought he could get away with it. As an aside, I could see a good chunk of his supporters being fine with him allowing a terrorist attack to occur to show why we need increased security (surprisingly, I remain able to think less of trump supporters - I think him ordering a false flag terrorist attack could conceivably be too far for them).
All of that said, once we reach this fast approaching hellscape, do we get the cool uniforms?
I have been worried about what the next big terrorist attack might mean for our country for a long time. The fact that Trump is President only makes that more concerning. Will Muslims be detained next time? It is not completely out of the question.
I don't think Trump is the kind of dude to fake something like that though.
This is stupid. Hell there's good reason to believe the Nazis weren't even involved in the fire.
Quote from: Lettow77 on February 17, 2017, 10:53:51 AM
Quote from: Berkut on February 17, 2017, 10:44:39 AM
The fundamentals of the American democratic system hAs NEVER been in the danger it is in today.
If only the South had been allowed to go in peace, you could've had the enlightened socialist government you deserve. :cry:
The "socialist" governments we have had got elected with massive support from the South. :P
Quote from: Razgovory on February 17, 2017, 11:30:18 AM
This is stupid. Hell there's good reason to believe the Nazis weren't even involved in the fire.
Yeah. An honest to God terrorist attack is inevitable and that is the real concern.
Quote from: Josephus on February 17, 2017, 10:29:43 AM
Look...he doesn't have to burn the White House down, but he orders something, a minor terror attack, perhaps, or somesuch that will give him the authority to do away with civil liberties, the press, democracy. (Look, Bush almost did it after 9/11)
I don't think he would do it himself. Bannon, sure. Just give them time to put the right people in place. And they might not do it themselves, not give any order. But just make sure it happens. Then instrumentalize the attack.
Quote from: Lettow77 on February 17, 2017, 10:53:51 AM
Quote from: Berkut on February 17, 2017, 10:44:39 AM
The fundamentals of the American democratic system hAs NEVER been in the danger it is in today.
If only the South had been allowed to go in peace, you could've had the enlightened socialist government you deserve. :cry:
it certainly would have been nice to have an enlightened neighbour and a country as stable as Mexico just before reaching the actual Mexico.
Right...so even if they don't do it themselves, what I can see happening is Trump/Bannon getting briefed by Homeland that there's a good chance of a terror attack at a shopping mall in Kansas, and Trump/Bannon deciding to ignore the intelligence
Quote from: Valmy on February 17, 2017, 11:30:49 AM
Quote from: Lettow77 on February 17, 2017, 10:53:51 AM
Quote from: Berkut on February 17, 2017, 10:44:39 AM
The fundamentals of the American democratic system hAs NEVER been in the danger it is in today.
If only the South had been allowed to go in peace, you could've had the enlightened socialist government you deserve. :cry:
The "socialist" governments we have had got elected with massive support from the South. :P
Of course. They maintained a South Americans style economy and society, much more likely to end up Marxist.
Quote from: Valmy on February 17, 2017, 11:31:42 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 17, 2017, 11:30:18 AM
This is stupid. Hell there's good reason to believe the Nazis weren't even involved in the fire.
Yeah. An honest to God terrorist attack is inevitable and that is the real concern.
Though, just to be safe, I wouldn't want to have tea with any people with Russian accents during this administration.
Quote from: viper37 on February 17, 2017, 11:45:59 AMit certainly would have been nice to have an enlightened neighbour and a country as stable as Mexico just before reaching the actual Mexico.
Interesting observation here for those of us a reasonably long memory. Back in 2002, 2003 comments like this against the entire US, then brought on by Dubya's actions and statements started a humongous war of the internet between Yanqui pigdogs and Euroweenies. Today, no one seems to care about the entire nation being called medieval...
Quote from: Josephus on February 17, 2017, 11:52:28 AM
Right...so even if they don't do it themselves, what I can see happening is Trump/Bannon getting briefed by Homeland that there's a good chance of a terror attack at a shopping mall in Kansas, and Trump/Bannon deciding to ignore the intelligence
Just make sure the carriers aren't there at the time.
Quote from: Delirium on February 17, 2017, 12:58:37 PM
Quote from: viper37 on February 17, 2017, 11:45:59 AMit certainly would have been nice to have an enlightened neighbour and a country as stable as Mexico just before reaching the actual Mexico.
Interesting observation here for those of us a reasonably long memory. Back in 2002, 2003 comments like this against the entire US, then brought on by Dubya's actions and statements started a humongous war of the internet between Yanqui pigdogs and Euroweenies. Today, no one seems to care about the entire nation being called medieval...
Well, for me at least, differing facts make for differing conclusions.
Acting like Dubya '03 in '03 justifies a response as if he had been acting like Trump '17 is good reason to call someone a tool in '03. And I think history pretty much proved that out.
Now? Pretty hard to argue that the US is in a pretty terrible place...
The knowledge that there exists a large and politically important support for racist and anti-semitic ideas in this country is certainly something I was not aware of in 2003. I mean sure I knew that we had racial problems but that kind of blatant stuff I thought was in the past. And certainly I would never imagine a man mixed in with that crowd would ever be an important force in national politics like Bannon is.
If somebody had suggested such a thing in 2003 I would have attacked them as a crazy left-wing anti-American nutcase. Oh well.
Quote from: Valmy on February 17, 2017, 11:31:42 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 17, 2017, 11:30:18 AM
This is stupid. Hell there's good reason to believe the Nazis weren't even involved in the fire.
Yeah. An honest to God terrorist attack is inevitable and that is the real concern.
Is it?
I mean we've had numerous terrorist attacks in the US (both islamic and otherwise). Heck the most recent was just last month - the Ft Lauderdale airport shooting. They don't seem to have much influence on anything.
There's just been one terrorist attack that really "moved the needle" - 9/11. But that's the only one since at least WWII.
Perhaps another terrorist attack on that level isn't inevitable. In fact the authorities have done a pretty good job at breaking up any such planned attacks.
Quote from: Valmy on February 17, 2017, 01:46:43 PM
The knowledge that there exists a large and politically important support for racist and anti-semitic ideas in this country is certainly something I was not aware of in 2003.
Because it wasn't there. It still isn't.
Quote from: Valmy on February 17, 2017, 01:46:43 PM
The knowledge that there exists a large and politically important support for racist and anti-semitic ideas in this country is certainly something I was not aware of in 2003. I mean sure I knew that we had racial problems but that kind of blatant stuff I thought was in the past. And certainly I would never imagine a man mixed in with that crowd would ever be an important force in national politics like Bannon is.
If somebody had suggested such a thing in 2003 I would have attacked them as a crazy left-wing anti-American nutcase. Oh well.
It seems to me that there is an even stronger case for making the distinction now then? The left-wing anti-Americanism is still around and feeling stronger than ever now, I think it is a bad idea for anti-Trump Americans (for lack of a better phrase) to just give up and accept each and every accusation.
Quote from: Barrister on February 17, 2017, 02:13:47 PM
Perhaps another terrorist attack on that level isn't inevitable. In fact the authorities have done a pretty good job at breaking up any such planned attacks.
They did a really good job breaking up planned attacks before 9/11 as well. But one will break through...eventually.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on February 17, 2017, 02:16:03 PM
Quote from: Valmy on February 17, 2017, 01:46:43 PM
The knowledge that there exists a large and politically important support for racist and anti-semitic ideas in this country is certainly something I was not aware of in 2003.
Because it wasn't there. It still isn't.
Evidence suggests otherwise. What do I have wrong?
Quote from: Berkut on February 17, 2017, 01:36:58 PMWell, for me at least, differing facts make for differing conclusions.
Acting like Dubya '03 in '03 justifies a response as if he had been acting like Trump '17 is good reason to call someone a tool in '03. And I think history pretty much proved that out.
Now? Pretty hard to argue that the US is in a pretty terrible place...
For most of us on the outside, facts have very little to do with it I think. You realized in 2003 how many people outside the US were just waiting for an excuse to go after you, do you really think that has changed? I meet people on a daily basis who spew out opinions of Yanquiland (not to mention Israel) and it doesn't matter to them who's President. I had a student who accused Obama for hating muslims, that is the level of outside world nuanced opinions about American politics. Facts are completely irrelevant.
Of course, having Trump as president does not make it easier.
Quote from: Delirium on February 17, 2017, 02:19:06 PM
It seems to me that there is an even stronger case for making the distinction now then? The left-wing anti-Americanism is still around and feeling stronger than ever now, I think it is a bad idea for anti-Trump Americans (for lack of a better phrase) to just give up and accept each and every accusation.
Good point. I don't think I really accept much of what Viper has to say. He is not even left wing.
I guess our morale is just low right now. Even if Hillary had been elected things would be rough right now.
Quote from: Valmy on February 17, 2017, 02:25:45 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on February 17, 2017, 02:16:03 PM
Quote from: Valmy on February 17, 2017, 01:46:43 PM
The knowledge that there exists a large and politically important support for racist and anti-semitic ideas in this country is certainly something I was not aware of in 2003.
Because it wasn't there. It still isn't.
Evidence suggests otherwise. What do I have wrong?
What evidence? Do you really think someone with openly racist and antisemitic ideas would be able to run anywhere in the USA and not get completely destroyed?
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on February 17, 2017, 02:28:16 PM
What evidence? Do you really think someone with openly racist and antisemitic ideas would be able to run anywhere in the USA and not get completely destroyed?
Well that depends on specifically the constituency in question.
But I was not saying openly racist and anti-semitic politicians were being elected.
Quote from: Delirium on February 17, 2017, 12:58:37 PM
Interesting observation here for those of us a reasonably long memory. Back in 2002, 2003 comments like this against the entire US, then brought on by Dubya's actions and statements started a humongous war of the internet between Yanqui pigdogs and Euroweenies. Today, no one seems to care about the entire nation being called medieval...
Well, one, that wasn't serious. Two, I have no idea how the United States and the Confederacy would have evolved seperatly, say, how long before the South abandons slavery, if they could do a land grab to the west as easily as the whole US.
Quote from: Josephus on February 17, 2017, 11:52:28 AM
Right...so even if they don't do it themselves, what I can see happening is Trump/Bannon getting briefed by Homeland that there's a good chance of a terror attack at a shopping mall in Kansas, and Trump/Bannon deciding to ignore the intelligence
Well we need to make sure then that Carrie is on the job.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on February 17, 2017, 02:16:03 PM
Quote from: Valmy on February 17, 2017, 01:46:43 PM
The knowledge that there exists a large and politically important support for racist and anti-semitic ideas in this country is certainly something I was not aware of in 2003.
Because it wasn't there. It still isn't.
Heard a lot of racist talk int he last 8 years.
Quote from: garbon on February 17, 2017, 03:27:14 PM
Quote from: Josephus on February 17, 2017, 11:52:28 AM
Right...so even if they don't do it themselves, what I can see happening is Trump/Bannon getting briefed by Homeland that there's a good chance of a terror attack at a shopping mall in Kansas, and Trump/Bannon deciding to ignore the intelligence
Well we need to make sure then that Carrie is on the job.
yeah, but she whines so much, she's annoying.
Obama had several "reichstag fire, aka mass shootings" moments but failed to capitalize.
Quote from: Josephus on February 17, 2017, 05:26:54 PM
Quote from: garbon on February 17, 2017, 03:27:14 PM
Quote from: Josephus on February 17, 2017, 11:52:28 AM
Right...so even if they don't do it themselves, what I can see happening is Trump/Bannon getting briefed by Homeland that there's a good chance of a terror attack at a shopping mall in Kansas, and Trump/Bannon deciding to ignore the intelligence
Well we need to make sure then that Carrie is on the job.
yeah, but she whines so much, she's annoying.
We still on Homeland or Sex and The City? :D
Quote from: Delirium on February 17, 2017, 02:26:08 PM
Quote from: Berkut on February 17, 2017, 01:36:58 PMWell, for me at least, differing facts make for differing conclusions.
Acting like Dubya '03 in '03 justifies a response as if he had been acting like Trump '17 is good reason to call someone a tool in '03. And I think history pretty much proved that out.
Now? Pretty hard to argue that the US is in a pretty terrible place...
For most of us on the outside, facts have very little to do with it I think. You realized in 2003 how many people outside the US were just waiting for an excuse to go after you, do you really think that has changed? I meet people on a daily basis who spew out opinions of Yanquiland (not to mention Israel) and it doesn't matter to them who's President. I had a student who accused Obama for hating muslims, that is the level of outside world nuanced opinions about American politics. Facts are completely irrelevant.
Of course, having Trump as president does not make it easier.
Which is why I don't really care what non-Americans think about our country. What's the point; facts don't matter, so why should I worry about what they think. Sure, if someone posts something here (or on Paradox OT in the old days), I'll join in on calling them on it, but I don't really care. In fact, the fact that Europeans generally didn't like President Bush the Younger and did seem to like President Obama more tended to make me think better of GWB and less of BHO.
I wouldn't be surprised if there were attacks against medias. Local medias, first, to test the waters, how the people supporters react. Then larger, national medias.
Since Bannon is apparently mounting his own private security force parallel to secret service and his own intelligence gathering operations, I can imagine something like that happenning.
Quote from: dps on February 17, 2017, 06:40:55 PM
Quote from: Delirium on February 17, 2017, 02:26:08 PM
Quote from: Berkut on February 17, 2017, 01:36:58 PMWell, for me at least, differing facts make for differing conclusions.
Acting like Dubya '03 in '03 justifies a response as if he had been acting like Trump '17 is good reason to call someone a tool in '03. And I think history pretty much proved that out.
Now? Pretty hard to argue that the US is in a pretty terrible place...
For most of us on the outside, facts have very little to do with it I think. You realized in 2003 how many people outside the US were just waiting for an excuse to go after you, do you really think that has changed? I meet people on a daily basis who spew out opinions of Yanquiland (not to mention Israel) and it doesn't matter to them who's President. I had a student who accused Obama for hating muslims, that is the level of outside world nuanced opinions about American politics. Facts are completely irrelevant.
Of course, having Trump as president does not make it easier.
Which is why I don't really care what non-Americans think about our country. What's the point; facts don't matter, so why should I worry about what they think. Sure, if someone posts something here (or on Paradox OT in the old days), I'll join in on calling them on it, but I don't really care. In fact, the fact that Europeans generally didn't like President Bush the Younger and did seem to like President Obama more tended to make me think better of GWB and less of BHO.
:hmm: Sounds like you do care if you are basing your opinion of presidents on what Europeans think.
Major media is the declared enemy; local and niche media are most likely to be co-opted. A much more benign Canadian conservative .. Stephen Harper .. had a similar strategy in his media fights; his party deliberately courted local media in order to get around perceived bias by national and parliamentary reporters.
Quote from: Barrister on February 17, 2017, 02:13:47 PM
I mean we've had numerous terrorist attacks in the US (both islamic and otherwise). Heck the most recent was just last month - the Ft Lauderdale airport shooting. They don't seem to have much influence on anything.
Then why do
We Keep Getting Scared by Smaller and Smaller Terrorist Threats (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/09/11/we-keep-getting-scared-by-smaller-and-smaller-terrorist-threats.html)?
Quote from: DGuller on February 18, 2017, 02:48:03 AM
Quote from: dps on February 17, 2017, 06:40:55 PM
Quote from: Delirium on February 17, 2017, 02:26:08 PM
Quote from: Berkut on February 17, 2017, 01:36:58 PMWell, for me at least, differing facts make for differing conclusions.
Acting like Dubya '03 in '03 justifies a response as if he had been acting like Trump '17 is good reason to call someone a tool in '03. And I think history pretty much proved that out.
Now? Pretty hard to argue that the US is in a pretty terrible place...
For most of us on the outside, facts have very little to do with it I think. You realized in 2003 how many people outside the US were just waiting for an excuse to go after you, do you really think that has changed? I meet people on a daily basis who spew out opinions of Yanquiland (not to mention Israel) and it doesn't matter to them who's President. I had a student who accused Obama for hating muslims, that is the level of outside world nuanced opinions about American politics. Facts are completely irrelevant.
Of course, having Trump as president does not make it easier.
Which is why I don't really care what non-Americans think about our country. What's the point; facts don't matter, so why should I worry about what they think. Sure, if someone posts something here (or on Paradox OT in the old days), I'll join in on calling them on it, but I don't really care. In fact, the fact that Europeans generally didn't like President Bush the Younger and did seem to like President Obama more tended to make me think better of GWB and less of BHO.
:hmm: Sounds like you do care if you are basing your opinion of presidents on what Europeans think.
OK, let me clarify--I don't really give a shit whether or not Europeans like or dislike our President, but I have so little respect for their opinion that if they feel one way about the current office-holder, it can shade my opinion in the opposite direction. But just shade it--the fact that Europeans in general have strongly negative opinions of President Trump isn't enough to make me like the man at all.
Quote from: dps on February 18, 2017, 01:37:38 PM
Quote from: DGuller on February 18, 2017, 02:48:03 AM
Quote from: dps on February 17, 2017, 06:40:55 PM
Quote from: Delirium on February 17, 2017, 02:26:08 PM
Quote from: Berkut on February 17, 2017, 01:36:58 PMWell, for me at least, differing facts make for differing conclusions.
Acting like Dubya '03 in '03 justifies a response as if he had been acting like Trump '17 is good reason to call someone a tool in '03. And I think history pretty much proved that out.
Now? Pretty hard to argue that the US is in a pretty terrible place...
For most of us on the outside, facts have very little to do with it I think. You realized in 2003 how many people outside the US were just waiting for an excuse to go after you, do you really think that has changed? I meet people on a daily basis who spew out opinions of Yanquiland (not to mention Israel) and it doesn't matter to them who's President. I had a student who accused Obama for hating muslims, that is the level of outside world nuanced opinions about American politics. Facts are completely irrelevant.
Of course, having Trump as president does not make it easier.
Which is why I don't really care what non-Americans think about our country. What's the point; facts don't matter, so why should I worry about what they think. Sure, if someone posts something here (or on Paradox OT in the old days), I'll join in on calling them on it, but I don't really care. In fact, the fact that Europeans generally didn't like President Bush the Younger and did seem to like President Obama more tended to make me think better of GWB and less of BHO.
:hmm: Sounds like you do care if you are basing your opinion of presidents on what Europeans think.
OK, let me clarify--I don't really give a shit whether or not Europeans like or dislike our President, but I have so little respect for their opinion that if they feel one way about the current office-holder, it can shade my opinion in the opposite direction. But just shade it--the fact that Europeans in general have strongly negative opinions of President Trump isn't enough to make me like the man at all.
The fact that he pisses off the Euroes who we don't mind being pissed off is a very slight silver lining in an otherwise very ominous cloud...
Quote from: dps on February 18, 2017, 01:37:38 PM
OK, let me clarify--I don't really give a shit whether or not Europeans like or dislike our President, but I have so little respect for their opinion that if they feel one way about the current office-holder, it can shade my opinion in the opposite direction. But just shade it--the fact that Europeans in general have strongly negative opinions of President Trump isn't enough to make me like the man at all.
I think this attitude when taken to extremes is a good percentage of the problem. There's an assumption that "if someone I don't like doesn't like something, it must be good." That's only true if the person you don't like has exactly the opposite opinions to you on everything. There's nobody like that, and using it as a signal on anything is worse than useless.
It's easy to go from that to saying "I don't like Hillary, Hillary doesn't like Putin, Putin must be good." It's lazy and will only serve to ignore that actual common ground that we have with people we don't like. We have more commonalities with Europe than any other comparable land mass in the world, yet them not liking Trump (who you also don't like) would actually move your opinion in the opposite direction?
Quote from: frunk on February 18, 2017, 02:17:00 PM
Quote from: dps on February 18, 2017, 01:37:38 PM
OK, let me clarify--I don't really give a shit whether or not Europeans like or dislike our President, but I have so little respect for their opinion that if they feel one way about the current office-holder, it can shade my opinion in the opposite direction. But just shade it--the fact that Europeans in general have strongly negative opinions of President Trump isn't enough to make me like the man at all.
I think this attitude when taken to extremes is a good percentage of the problem. There's an assumption that "if someone I don't like doesn't like something, it must be good." That's only true if the person you don't like has exactly the opposite opinions to you on everything. There's nobody like that, and using it as a signal on anything is worse than useless.
It's easy to go from that to saying "I don't like Hillary, Hillary doesn't like Putin, Putin must be good." It's lazy and will only serve to ignore that actual common ground that we have with people we don't like. We have more commonalities with Europe than any other comparable land mass in the world, yet them not liking Trump (who you also don't like) would actually move your opinion in the opposite direction?
Not on Trump, no, because there's nothing to like there.
He's spending too much time in Florida to be arsed to do something like this.
Though maybe he'd set fire to a aircraft hanger at a US regional airport in the South East?
well yeah, he's busy on the campaign trail for 2020 already
Quote from: Josephus on February 19, 2017, 11:13:03 AM
well yeah, he's busy on the campaign trail for 2020 already
I thought he was just getting with folks that would cheer him on. Donald has been taking a lot of flak since taking office, he just needed some soothing.
Soon I hope. I'm tiring of the crybaby brigade and chicks with the pussy hats.
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 19, 2017, 07:52:40 PM
Soon I hope. I'm tiring of the crybaby brigade and chicks with the pussy hats.
Quit your sniveling, your scooter doesn't go that fast. They'll catch you.
Who is "they". Just curious, gate guard.
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 19, 2017, 08:38:06 PM
Who is "they". Just curious, gate guard.
Pussy hatted femnazis
Oh noes.
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 19, 2017, 07:52:40 PM
Soon I hope. I'm tiring of the crybaby brigade and chicks with the pussy hats.
Yeah, we need to get over this Trump presidency and move on to the next one. He's way overstayed his welcome. The fuckups are starting to get repetitive.
:D
Grumbler wished he had a pussy hat when Caligula went Captain Insano in the capital.
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 19, 2017, 10:03:48 PM
:D
Grumbler wished he had a pussy hat when Caligula went Captain Insano in the capital.
Yeah.
Sure.
*Runs away*
Quote from: grumbler on February 20, 2017, 02:10:39 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 19, 2017, 10:03:48 PM
:D
Grumbler wished he had a pussy hat when Caligula went Captain Insano in the capital.
Yeah.
Sure.
*Hobbles away*
Fyp.
And broke your own bones when you tried to run. :(