WikiLeaks... do you think any attempt to restrict the site justified?

1. 0

   andycoolposted 13 years ago

   WikiLeaks is involved in uncovering many hateful activities of the US government. In this respect would it be justified to restrict their activities by the US government?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Toby Hansenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      You mean the US government is involved in non-hateful activities?

      replyreport
   2. 60

      uncorrectedvisionposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      US Cyber Command should use Wikileaks for target practice.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Petra Vlahposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Why am I not surprised by such view?! Since when should we know the truth?
         Since when should governments act in moral and decent ways?
         Let's KILL the messanger and celebrate the lies; we are good at that

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Joe Badtoeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I agree Petra
            
            isn't it interesting that those in the US who are blaming the messenger choose to ignore it was a serving US soldier who gave up the information?
            
            And how was it that it was so easy for this soldier to get access to such valuable information? Lapse in US security perhaps? Not the first time that's happened but there will always be someone else to blame.
            
            The leaks have simply exposed US senior polticians as arrogant and dismissive of so many politicians of other countries. Not the most diplomatic thing to do really.
            
            Maybe the right wing cosevatives should just keep pretending things didn't happen until Palin is in the White House then everything will be alright-right?

            replyreport
2. 67

   SparklingJewelposted 13 years ago

   in several of the segments I posted on secrets of the Federal Rserve in this forum today...there was some perspective on the Wikileak issue...
   
   it was stated that if the stuff that was leaked is so unimportant...why is the leak a problem
   
   a congresswomen called the leaker a terrorist...
   
   the gov't has not denied any of the leaks as untrue...
   
   who gave the leakers clearance and why...surely that little guy was doing the bidding of a bigger guy...
   
   
   I think sunshine is a good thing...especially since it slams Americans in the face with the truth of what the gov't is doing
   with their liberties and their money

   replyreport
3. 67

   SparklingJewelposted 13 years ago

   Throw the WikiBook at Them
   
   By Charles Krauthammer (Archive) · Friday, December 3, 2010
   
   WASHINGTON -- It is understandable for the administration to underplay the significance of the WikiLeaks State Department cables. But while it is wise not to go into a public panic, it is delusional to think that this is merely embarrassing gossip and indiscretion. The leaks have done major damage.
   
   First, quite specific damage to our war-fighting capacity. Take just one revelation among hundreds: The Yemeni president and deputy prime minister are quoted as saying that they're letting the U.S. bomb al-Qaeda in their country, while claiming that the bombing is the government's doing. Well, that cover is pretty well blown. And given the unpopularity of the San'a government's tenuous cooperation with us in the war against al-Qaeda, this will undoubtedly limit our freedom of action against its Yemeni branch, identified by the CIA as the most urgent terrorist threat to U.S. security.
   
   Second, we've suffered a major blow to our ability to collect information. Talking candidly to a U.S. diplomat can now earn you headlines around the world, reprisals at home, or worse. Success in the war on terror depends on being trusted with other countries' secrets. Who's going to trust us now?
   
   Third, this makes us look bad, very bad. But not in the way Secretary of State Hillary Clinton implied in her cringe-inducing apology speech in which she scolded these awful leakers for having done a disservice to "the international community," and plaintively deplored how this hampers U.S. attempts to bring about a better world.
   
   She sounded like a cross between an exasperated school principal and a Miss America contestant professing world peace to be her fondest wish. The problem is not that the purloined cables exposed U.S. hypocrisy or double-dealing. Good God, that's the essence of diplomacy. That's what we do; that's what everyone does. Hence the famous aphorism that a diplomat is an honest man sent abroad to lie for his country.
   
   Nothing new here. What is notable, indeed shocking, is the administration's torpid and passive response to the leaks. What's appalling is the helplessness of a superpower that not only cannot protect its own secrets but shows the world that if you violate its secrets -- massively, wantonly and maliciously -- there are no consequences.
   
   Time to show a little steel. To show that such miscreants don't get to walk away.
   
   At a Monday news conference, Attorney General Eric Holder assured the nation that his people are diligently looking into possible legal action against WikiLeaks. Where has Holder been? The WikiLeaks exposure of Afghan War documents occurred five months ago. Holder is looking now at possible indictments? This is a country where a good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich. Months after the first leak, Justice's thousands of lawyers have yet to prepare charges against Julian Assange and his confederates?
   
   Throw the Espionage Act of 1917 at them. And if that is not adequate, if that law has been too constrained and watered down by subsequent Supreme Court rulings, then why hasn't the administration prepared new legislation adapted to these kinds of Internet-age violations of U.S. security? It's not as if we didn't know more leaks were coming. And that more leaks are coming still.
   
   Think creatively. The WikiLeaks document dump is sabotage, however quaint that term may seem. We are at war -- a hot war in Afghanistan where six Americans were killed just this past Monday, and a shadowy world war where enemies from Yemen to Portland, Ore., are planning holy terror. Franklin Roosevelt had German saboteurs tried by military tribunal and electrocuted. Assange has done more damage to the U.S. than all six of those Germans combined. Putting U.S. secrets on the Internet, a medium of universal dissemination new in human history, requires a reconceptualization of sabotage and espionage -- and the laws to punish and prevent them. Where is the Justice Department?
   
   And where are the intelligence agencies on which we lavish $80 billion a year? Assange has gone missing. Well, he's no cave-dwelling jihadi ascetic. Find him. Start with every five-star hotel in England and work your way down.
   
   Want to prevent this from happening again? Let the world see a man who can't sleep in the same bed on consecutive nights, who fears the long arm of American justice. I'm not advocating that we bring out of retirement the KGB proxy who, on a London street, killed a Bulgarian dissident with a poisoned umbrella tip. But it would be nice if people like Assange were made to worry every time they go out in the rain.
   
   (c) 2010, The Washington Post Writers Group

   replyreport
   1. 95

      wildernessposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you.
      
      In a war (which we are indeed in) there are three categories; friends, enemies and neutrals.  By intentionally and maliciously damaging our war fighting capability and aiding our enemies this idiot has declared he is neither friend nor neutral.  Enough said.

      replyreport
   2. 60

      Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Krauthammer is an idiot.  He's advocating murder for exercising internationally a right guaranteed in the Constitution in two places.
      Freedom of Speech & Freedom of the Press.
      
      Legal experts have looked at Wikileaks and leaks, general & specific. Here's the legal reality. It's against the law if you have a secret clearance to spread secret information - ONLY for the US citizen who broke the law by disseminating the info. The Pentagon Papers case went to the Supreme Court. The newspapers who published the secret Penatagon Papers were NOT in violation of the law.
      
      Of course, most wingnuts seem oblivious to the fact that the guy who runs Wikileaks is not an American - and he's not in America. Stupisity among the conservative masses I expect, but the big K thinks we can charge an Austrian not in America with a violation of the Espionage act of 1917 - when the ruling from the USSC in the 70s clears Assage of any criminal wrong.
      
      To be fair to Krauthammer - he has a back-up plan. Murder with no charges and no trial. Suppose a foreign power took exception to something Charlie wrote for whoever publishes his tripe. Should that foreign power send over a hit man to knife or poison Krauthammer? Why not - if he thinks we can conduct international hits against a journalist doing what's totally legal for the NY Times.

      replyreport
      1. 76

         lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         The Death of the Conservative Mind
         Posted by Christopher Manion on December 4, 2010 10:18 AM
         
         "I appreciate William Grigg’s comments regarding Dr. Krauthammer’s Kriegslust. It reminds me of Krauthammer’s grimly consistent irrationalism  after 9-11, when he was screaming loudly for war and shouting down anyone who disagreed. When sane people —yes, the man is a psychiatrist, and sane people don’t need psychiatrists, so perhaps he resents us — when sane people insisted that the U.S. not rush into an undeclared war without a constitutional debate and a legal declaration, with a dash of proof thrown in,  Dr.  Krauthammer called us  “navel gazers,” a term which apparently took him twelve years of medical studies to derive.
         
         Krauthammer shares this anti-intellectualismwith Karl Marx:  Marx’s 11th Thesis on Feuerbach complains that philosophy has only tried to understand the world; “the point is, to change it.” Enough of those navel-gazers, scream Karl and Krauthammer! On with the revolution! (Nor does the revolution of Krauthammer differ in essence from that of Marx: both accord to the intellectual elite and its “raised consciousness” the right to worldwide domination).
         
         Back in the old days, when the nascent conservative movement actually cherished  ideas (they have consequences, remember?), the point was to understand the world. I note Lew’s earlier post indicating the high regard for Krauthammer held by what passes for “conservatives” today, and what it says about their intellectual priorities: No “navel-gazing,” please! Move along! Nothing to see here!
         
         The age of the rational conservative is over. The entire stage “right” is now full of forbidden questions (What forces drive our Middle East policies? What are the goals of our wars? How do you spell “Constitution”? Yes, greed is bad, but what about the lust for power?) and arguments by assertion (Ignorance [ban Wikileaks!] Is Strength!). Perhaps psychiatrist Krauthammer might culminate his career by telling us why the conservative mind committed suicide."

         replyreport
      2. 58

         C.J. Wrightposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         All true regarding our jurisdiction in the case of Mr. Assange. However, the US does have provisions for letters of Marque and Reprisal. Your thoughts?

         replyreport
4. 80

   2besureposted 13 years ago

   Don't just expose the US government; expose all the countries governments.  Blow the lid of off everybody.

   replyreport
   1. 70

      Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      The lid on Governments of the world have already had their lids blown off, the problem is that people are refusing to step forward to hold them accountable.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         SparklingJewelposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         that's it...mass civil disobedience...the only way, they can't throw millions into jail

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Anesidoraposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            You mean you haven't heard about the waiting FEMA camps and the secret stash of ready coffins?

            replyreport
5. 0

   china manposted 13 years ago

   I wonder why so much stuff has to be kept secret from the citizens of a country - maybe its because if government told the truth we might vote them out ?  Then we would see the hypocrisy and lies we are told and might even be able to get some vague idea of the big picture that our elected loonies are pursuing for their own gain.  The more leaks the better, the more breaking into secret places and turning on the lights the better.

   replyreport
6. 77

   Shadesbreathposted 13 years ago

   Who care's what diplomats say about each other?  Anyone who thinks everyone doesn't know how the politicians really think about one another and the situations around the world, personally and politically, is naive or ignorant. 
   
   What's troubling is that there's a website leaking information about what our soldiers are doing on the ground in a war zone.  How can there be any question whether or not something should be done?  We should have every hacker on government payroll doing something to take that a-hole's website out.  Frankly, we should send some people over there to take out the servers and capture, or arrange accidents for, those responsible for providing information to the people we are fighting against.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      logic,commonsenseposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      100% right on!
      the private that leaked the information should be executed immediately.
      If it was just embarrassing, who cares.  But when the national security is threatened then all bets are off.
      If it happened in almost any other country, the private would be dead, Assange would be dead, and anyone trying to assist them would be dead or in jail.
      I'm guessing Assange surrendered to the British on the rape charges just to stay alive.  Too bad.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      MeGunnerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I completely agree. Assange should come and try it in Nigeria... How can people possibly be justifing such leaks when the lives of patriots are being put in danger. I don't care about the authenticity or legality of his actions. It's just not right!

      replyreport
7. 77

   Mighty Momposted 13 years ago

   I agree with you, Shadesbreath.
   How does the saying go... My right to free speech ends with yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater (something like that).
   
   Not trying to be melodramatic here, but Assange has essentially declared war on the United States.

   replyreport
8. 65

   fettyposted 13 years ago

   I wholeheartedly agree with Shadesbreath. This creep appears to be a rapist and is wanted in Sweden. Those who live in glass houses...

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Toby Hansenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      And you believe that the allegations against Assange in Sweden just happened to be made now?
      Please!

      replyreport
9. 60

   Evan G Rogersposted 13 years ago

   DEATH TO THE INFIDELS!!
   
   By infidels, i mean those who would argue that they want freedom of speech, but then get mad about hearing about how their government spends their money.
   
   Assange is a hero, and will most likely soon be a martyr.

   replyreport
   1. 95

      wildernessposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I may be mistaken here, and if I am please correct me, but did not Assange publish the names of informants helping to locate and identify Al Quaida members?  Thereby giving them a death sentence.
      
      If so, he should be a martyr and is certainly no hero.

      replyreport
   2. 58

      foreignpressposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Mr. Rogers: Children cry for absolutes. Adults know where to draw the line. You have some growing up to do.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         So the bible is wrong? thanks for the info!!

         replyreport
   3. 77

      Shadesbreathposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      1. He's not a U.S. citizen, so our Constitutional rights don't apply to him. And they ESPECIALLY don't apply to him when he's putting our troops at risk.
      
      2. Free speech is not about telling enemies we are CURRENTLY ENGAGED IN COMBAT WITH where our guys are, what they are doing, who our under-cover and civilian informants are in the WAR ZONE, and what tactics they are using to try to defeat the notorious organizations whose rule is 100,000,000 times more brutal, degrading and rampant to personal liberties than anything you can accuse the U.S. of no matter how clumsy, inept, and hypocritical we often are.
      
      I'm not trying to pretend the U.S. hasn't created most of it's own problems.  But this guy is a hero only to hippy utopians with no concept of how the real world works.  Not everyone thinks that someday the world will just be all fairies and unicorns grazing in the meadow under a happy rainbow and clouds of dancing butterflies.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Toby Hansenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Julian Assange is an Australian citizen, and  the way the undemocratically elected Labour (socialist) and Tree hugging, kangaroo molesting Green coalition government here are bowing and scraping to the State Department's every whim is a disgrace.
         
         This is a "government" that will spend millions of taxpayers dollars defending low life drug smuggling junkies when they are arrested in Bali, but buddy up with Washington when it comes to someone doing something to uncover the deceit and hypocrisy of the world's self proclaimed global police force.
         
         Currently engaged in ILLEGAL combat you mean?
         
         What was the excuse for the invasion of Afghanistan? 9/11.
         What nationality were the hijackers? Saudis.
         
         Yet while you everyday Americans were unable to fly home across the US to be with loved ones, your government was flying Saudi nationals - including members of the Bin Laden family - home to Saudi Arabia in chartered aircraft at your expense.
         
         There is a heck of a difference between Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. What happened? Did someone let Gee Dubya programme the navman?

         replyreport
         1. 77

            Shadesbreathposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Colossal non-sequitur(s).
            
            You can choose to omit whatever details you like to make your story of Evil America work for you.  It's far more complicated than that, but, sadly, too many are still out there looking for the simple "good guy" and the "bad guy" story so they can feel good and righteous in a difficult world populated by extremly imperfect people.

            replyreport
10. 0

    ahorsebackposted 13 years ago

    Wiki should be shut down , there is a difference between free speach and the divulging of state secrets and military policy, logistics and strategy. The owner should be tried for treason and hung.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       Brenda Durhamposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Agreed.  At least, tried for treason and jailed.

       replyreport
       1. 82

          CMHypnoposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          But he is not a US citizen, so he technically cannnot commit treason against the US, it would be up to the Australian government if they wanted to see if they could make that kind of charge stick

          replyreport
          1. 0

             Brenda Durhamposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             Traitor, spy...not much difference.
             Still accountable to the U.S. government or any other nation he's leaking info about.

             replyreport
    2. 60

       Petra Vlahposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       I would not be surprized is you also chanted Barabbas, Barabbas, Barabbas...

       replyreport
       1. 0

          Brenda Durhamposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Oh goodness.
          Are you comparing Assange to Jesus? 

          replyreport
          1. 60

             Petra Vlahposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             All I am saying is that speaking the truth will get anyone crucified

             replyreport
             1. 0

                Brenda Durhamposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Indeed.
                But that "truthspeaker" isn't doing it for a good reason;  he's doing it to cause major trouble.  And some, like you, will make him a martyr, in effect.

                replyreport
                1. 60

                   Petra Vlahposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                   I don’t have to make him into a martyr, Brenda. The ones whom ho exposed already did it. As we know, the best defense is to accuse the one who dares speaking the truth and the coved ups, and the governments of the “fair and righteous world” they did just that.
                   Should we look into Justine’s past a little closer, I am sure we will find out that he sank the Titanic as well.

                   replyreport
11. 0

    shazwellynposted 13 years ago

    Well, it is in the true nature of democrasy - NOT!

    replyreport
    1. 0

       andycoolposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Julian Assange arrested in London
       
       
       
       WikiLeaks' Julian Assange denied bail, remanded to custody in UK.
       
       A British judge has denied bail to WikiLeaks founder  Julian Assange, who told a London court he intends to fight his extradition to Sweden on sex crime allegations.
       
       Judge Howard Riddle told Assange that he had "substantial grounds" to believe the 39-year-old Australian wouldn't turn up for subsequent proceedings. He then put Assange into UK custody ahead of an extradition hearing.
       
       Assange showed no reaction as Judge Howard Riddle denied him bail in an extradition case that could see him sent to Sweden to face allegations of rape, molestation and unlawful coercion.
       
       Assange faces allegations of sex crimes in Sweden. He denies the accusations.
       
       The WikiLeaks founder told a London court on Tuesday he intends to fight his extradition to Sweden on sex crime allegations, setting up what could be a drawn-out legal battle.
       
       Assange appeared at before City of Westminster Magistrates' Court in London after turning himself in to Scotland Yard earlier on Tuesday, capping months of speculation over an investigation into alleged sex crimes committed in Sweden over the summer.
       
       He was asked whether he understood that he could consent to be extradited to Sweden, where he faces allegations of rape, molestation and unlawful coercion.
       
       Clearing his throat, Assange said, "I understand that and I do not consent."
       
       Assange denies the allegations, which stem from a visit to Sweden in August. Assange and his lawyers claim the accusations stem from a "dispute over consensual but unprotected sex," and have said the case has taken on political overtones.
       
       Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny has rejected those claims.
       
       Lawyers for Assange and the British government were still arguing on Tuesday over whether Assange should be granted bail.
       
       The decision to fight the extradition could be difficult. Extradition experts say that European arrest warrants like the one issued by Sweden can be tough to beat, barring mental or physical incapacity.
       
       Even if the warrant was defeated on a technicality, Sweden could simply issue a new one.
       
       Visa suspends all payments to WikiLeaks.
       
       Assange's website, meanwhile, came under increasing financial pressure Tuesday -- with both Visa and MasterCard saying they would block payments to the controversial website.
       
       In a statement e-mailed to The Associated Press, Visa Inc. said it was taking steps "to suspend Visa payment acceptance on WikiLeaks' website pending further investigation into the nature of its business and whether it contravenes Visa operating rules."
       
       MasterCard sent a similar statement, saying it would suspend payments "until the situation is resolved."
       
       The move chokes off two important funding avenues for WikiLeaks, a loosely knit group of activists who rely on individual donations to fund their operations.
       
       PayPal Inc., a popular online payment service, has already cut its links to the website, while Swiss authorities closed Assange's bank account on Monday, freezing several tens of thousands of euros, according to his lawyers.
       
       WikiLeaks is still soliciting donations through bank transfers to affiliates in Iceland and Germany, as well as by mail to an address at University of Melbourne in Australia.
       
       Swiss authorities closed Assange's new Swiss bank account on Monday.

       replyreport
       1. 63

          prettydarkhorseposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          He is in jail already.

          replyreport
12. 60

    Petra Vlahposted 13 years ago

    Taking on the establishment will ensure a first class ticket to jail

    replyreport
13. 74

    Reality Bytesposted 13 years ago

    The United States needs to be concerned with the leaking of information.  This must be an introspection of its own intelligence agencies.
    
    Leaking confidential information to any source by a government individual is Treason.
    
    Pointing at Wikileaks is a distraction to hide the governments own inadequacies in keeping secrets.

    replyreport
14. 61

    theirishobserver.posted 13 years ago

    The founder of that site has been charged in England today with sexual crimes - dont know what is going on

    replyreport
    1. 74

       Reality Bytesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       He is being held without bail also!

       replyreport
15. 79

    Mark Ewbieposted 13 years ago

    I so wish to contribute to this thread but I don't want to alienate half my potential audience.  Must be so difficult for media and governments, and even Wikileaks to deal with that conundrum.
    
    I'll take a chance.
    
    I am sick of the crap that goes on in the world, especially when apparently I voted for it.  In fact I have always apparently voted for it, although I thought it was more to do with school fees and parking fines when I cast my vote.
    
    I honestly wonder whether we should be more concerned with keeping secrets than with our actions.
    
    And if Julian had exposed Chinese secrets he would be now receiving a congressional medal.
    
    Bye, bye Hubnuggets nomination.
    
    ps. The rape charge isn't a big lie.  Oh no.  Now Iraq, that was class.

    replyreport
    1. 79

       Mark Ewbieposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Sheesh!  That was quick.  My credit card just got rejected, and there's a large car parked over the road outside my house.  The woman three doors down has filed a complaint against me for gross misconduct, and my boss rang to say I am not needed at work tomorrow.
       
       If I don't see you guys again... it's been

       replyreport
       1. 59

          rotlposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          LOL!  So I guess now even wikileaks defenders are being persecuted.

          replyreport
          1. 60

             Petra Vlahposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             That can very well happen! We are part of the crime of suspecting the governament is not without sin

             replyreport
             1. 0

                andycoolposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Assange granted bail today. What's the road from here for him? Is it a gimmick to grant him bail just to tame his well wishers? And now the actual process to penalise him will start?

                replyreport
16. 76

    lovemychrisposted 13 years ago

    I don't think he'll be penalized. He did his part well. They are after the Internet.
    
    "That Islam can be linked to terrorism is a no-brainer for the congressman and many other conservatives and Republicans. This same thinking has now infected the controversy over WikiLeaks. Why not, King wonders, label the largely volunteer WikiLeaks group a terrorist organization, thus facilitating seizure of its assets and arrests of anyone remotely associated with it, including presumably readers? Tom Flanagan, a former aide to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, has gone one step further, offering an idea that Republican leaders and conservative commentators appear to find appealing. Flanagan has proposed assassination as the fate for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
    
    Sarah Palin seems to agree. In a note on Facebook, she likened WikiLeaks to al Qaeda.  Of Assange, she wrote: "He is an anti-American operative with blood on his hands. His past posting of classified documents revealed the identity of more than 100 Afghan sources to the Taliban. Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders?" (There is, in fact, no evidence whatsoever that Assange has “blood on his hands.”)
    
    Same rhetoric that led up to the Patriot Act.
    It's for our own good, you know. Shut down the Internet.
    
    "Rep.-elect Allen West (R-Fla.) may have proven himself a prime pupil for fellow Rep. Michele Bachmann's forthcoming constitutional classes, when he recently displayed selective reverence for the Tea Party's most sacred document by calling for American news outlets to be censored for running stories based on the recent WikiLeaks cable dump."
    
    The writing is on the wall...just a matter of seeing whether Americans will fall for it again.
    
    Let's see if they also use this: Anyone who doesn't agree with censoring the Internet is Anti-American.

    replyreport
17. 60

    VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 13 years ago

    Restricting Wikileaks is good for USA. It is helpful for other countries.... It helps to evaluate the US attitude towards the world.  Under-estimation of potential friendly countries... Over-estimation of dangerous terrorist countries. But usually USA fails to estimate the pros and cons of its actions.

    replyreport
18. 61

    MeGunnerposted 13 years ago

    How could he?

    replyreport