Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
William Greer's Job
124 views
Skip to first unread message
Saintly Oswald
Sep 23, 2012, 7:00:16 PM9/23/12
to
According to his WC testimony, and I don't see much else to go by, William
Greer was a farmer in Ireland until he came to the US in 1930. He then
chauffeured for a family in Brookline, MA, and worked for a short time at
the "Henry Cabot Lodge estate." I assume that means Senator Henry Cabot
Lodge Jr. Then he moved to Dobbs Ferry, NY, and worked for "a private
family" for the next "13 years." Then, in 1942, which isn't quite 13
years, he joined the Navy. Two weeks after leaving the Navy, he went to
work for the Secret Service. It sounds as if the only private sector
employer who would ever have got to know him well would be that "private
family" in Dobbs Ferry. It would be interesting to know who that was. Who
do you go to work for after Henry Cabot Lodge? I have found no definite
answers, but in the July 20, 1939 issue Of the Hastings News, William
Greer of "Springhurst," Walgrove Park, which is in Dobbs Ferry, made the
society pages. It seems he had just left on a cruise ship vacation. Bully
for him! Another item in the same issue says that Colonel Franklin Q.
Brown, also of "Springhurst," Walgrove, also had just left for a vacation
to his Massachusetts summer home. I didn't find an exhaustive bio of
Fraklin Q., but it seems he was connected with banks and railroads and
stuff like that, and also, in some way with the same Browns of Brown
Brothers & Harriman fame. It must be swell to be rich and connected.
Anyway, that just happens, coincidentally of course, to be the firm in
which Prescott Bush, the father of Mr. George Bush of the CIA, was a
partner. I'm not saying this necessarily means anything, but it might. LOL
Greer was a farmer in Ireland until he came to the US in 1930. He then
chauffeured for a family in Brookline, MA, and worked for a short time at
the "Henry Cabot Lodge estate." I assume that means Senator Henry Cabot
Lodge Jr. Then he moved to Dobbs Ferry, NY, and worked for "a private
family" for the next "13 years." Then, in 1942, which isn't quite 13
years, he joined the Navy. Two weeks after leaving the Navy, he went to
work for the Secret Service. It sounds as if the only private sector
employer who would ever have got to know him well would be that "private
family" in Dobbs Ferry. It would be interesting to know who that was. Who
do you go to work for after Henry Cabot Lodge? I have found no definite
answers, but in the July 20, 1939 issue Of the Hastings News, William
Greer of "Springhurst," Walgrove Park, which is in Dobbs Ferry, made the
society pages. It seems he had just left on a cruise ship vacation. Bully
for him! Another item in the same issue says that Colonel Franklin Q.
Brown, also of "Springhurst," Walgrove, also had just left for a vacation
to his Massachusetts summer home. I didn't find an exhaustive bio of
Fraklin Q., but it seems he was connected with banks and railroads and
stuff like that, and also, in some way with the same Browns of Brown
Brothers & Harriman fame. It must be swell to be rich and connected.
Anyway, that just happens, coincidentally of course, to be the firm in
which Prescott Bush, the father of Mr. George Bush of the CIA, was a
partner. I'm not saying this necessarily means anything, but it might. LOL
Saintly Oswald
Sep 23, 2012, 9:16:48 PM9/23/12
to
I think it is reasonable to conclude that William Greer was a chauffeur
for Franklin Q. Brown during the 1930s, just based on these two newspaper
entries. And that means that there is a potential connection to Prescott
Bush. Consider: George De Mohrenschildt was GHW Bush's friend. De
Mohrenschildt handled Oswald. Jack Ruby was photographed with Prescott
Bush in 1953. Ruby shot Oswald. And there is an implication that Greer
moved in some of the same circles as Prescott Bush. And Greer shot JFK.
And, just for kicks, John Hinckley's father was a friend of GHW Bush, and
John Hinckley almost made Bush president by shooting Reagan. There might
be something fishy going on here.
for Franklin Q. Brown during the 1930s, just based on these two newspaper
entries. And that means that there is a potential connection to Prescott
Bush. Consider: George De Mohrenschildt was GHW Bush's friend. De
Mohrenschildt handled Oswald. Jack Ruby was photographed with Prescott
Bush in 1953. Ruby shot Oswald. And there is an implication that Greer
moved in some of the same circles as Prescott Bush. And Greer shot JFK.
And, just for kicks, John Hinckley's father was a friend of GHW Bush, and
John Hinckley almost made Bush president by shooting Reagan. There might
be something fishy going on here.
slats
Sep 23, 2012, 9:48:55 PM9/23/12
to
Saintly Oswald <fatol...@gmail.com> wrote in news:e0c0f94e-7079-4c07-
a24e-261...@googlegroups.com:
Put a cold washcloth on your forehead and lie down.
a24e-261...@googlegroups.com:
Saintly Oswald
Sep 24, 2012, 3:45:32 PM9/24/12
to
And, though it may be somewhat speculative, one should consider the murder of John Lennon, which preceded the Reagan attempt by less than 4 months. His assassin, Mark Chapman, shot Lennon in the same "military stance" that Hinckley used on Reagan, they both had lame-ass "random" stalking stories prior to attacking their targets, they both had a "Catcher In The Rye" fetish, and Chapman belonged to an organization called World Vision, whose president was John Hinckley Sr. But, I suppose, that could all just be cheerfully written off to coincidence, and why would the establishment elite want to murder a rock singer?
As soon as you're born they make you feel small
By giving you no time instead of it all
Till the pain is so big you feel nothing at all
A working class hero is something to be
They hurt you at home and they hit you at school
They hate you if you're clever and they despise a fool
Till you're so ****ing crazy you can't follow their rules
A working class hero is something to be
When they've tortured and scared you for twenty-odd years
Then they expect you to pick a career
When you can't really function you're so full of fear
A working class hero is something to be
Keep you doped with religion and sex and TV
And you think you're so clever and classless and free
But you're still ****ing peasants as far as I can see
A working class hero is something to be
There's room at the top they're telling you still
But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
If you want to be like the folks on the hill
A working class hero is something to be
If you want to be a hero well just follow me
As soon as you're born they make you feel small
By giving you no time instead of it all
Till the pain is so big you feel nothing at all
A working class hero is something to be
They hurt you at home and they hit you at school
They hate you if you're clever and they despise a fool
Till you're so ****ing crazy you can't follow their rules
A working class hero is something to be
When they've tortured and scared you for twenty-odd years
Then they expect you to pick a career
When you can't really function you're so full of fear
A working class hero is something to be
Keep you doped with religion and sex and TV
And you think you're so clever and classless and free
But you're still ****ing peasants as far as I can see
A working class hero is something to be
There's room at the top they're telling you still
But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
If you want to be like the folks on the hill
A working class hero is something to be
If you want to be a hero well just follow me
Anthony Marsh
Sep 24, 2012, 7:19:35 PM9/24/12
to
connect. It's no fair just making them up from your imagination.
Saintly Oswald
Sep 24, 2012, 7:21:50 PM9/24/12
to
Confirmation! William Greer shows up as a servant living with Franklin
Brown in the 1940 census. For 13 long years, William Greer worked for one
of the Browns of Brown Brothers and Harriman. I wonder why the Warren
Commission didn't ask him the name of who he worked for. Oh, that's right.
They were trying to cover up the facts, not discover them. An old
washed-up carpet layer sitting on his fat ass could have done a better
job.
Brown in the 1940 census. For 13 long years, William Greer worked for one
of the Browns of Brown Brothers and Harriman. I wonder why the Warren
Commission didn't ask him the name of who he worked for. Oh, that's right.
They were trying to cover up the facts, not discover them. An old
washed-up carpet layer sitting on his fat ass could have done a better
job.
Saintly Oswald
Sep 25, 2012, 10:19:47 AM9/25/12
to
Saintly Oswald
Sep 25, 2012, 2:15:15 PM9/25/12
to
crowd. Of course Bush lived way over in Connecticut, Greenwich, CT, which
is all of 8 miles from Dobbs Ferry. Then, it was off to World War 2! Greer
joined the navy. My dad did, too, but he wasn't assigned to the
presidential yacht, as William Greer was! The presidential yacht, eh? I
wonder how you get THAT job in the middle of a war? Not many details seem
to be available about his navy service. Afterwards, he goes straight into
the Secret Service. This boy had connections! My dad went to straight work
in a bakery when they discharged him. Wikipedia says, "Greer took a role
close to Kennedy, and can be seen in several pictures with the Kennedy
family. He chauffeured the president on many occasions, including the day
of the assassination." Took a role close to Kennedy, eh? My dad voted for
Kennedy. I wonder if Greer did?
fatol...@gmail.com
Oct 6, 2012, 4:48:01 PM10/6/12
to
William Greer's job, of course, was to shoot Kennedy, but also to shoot
Connally. He shoots the Gov immediately upon the Gov shooting JFK. This is
proven by Nellie's reaction by looking down at her husband just after
Jackie looks down at hers. This is not simultaneous. They are not, as Bob
Harris says, reacting to one shot. This is one after the other on each of
their husbands. The writer of this plot wanted to get Connally, too, just
as Connally thought when he was interviewed in his hospital bed.
Connally. He shoots the Gov immediately upon the Gov shooting JFK. This is
proven by Nellie's reaction by looking down at her husband just after
Jackie looks down at hers. This is not simultaneous. They are not, as Bob
Harris says, reacting to one shot. This is one after the other on each of
their husbands. The writer of this plot wanted to get Connally, too, just
as Connally thought when he was interviewed in his hospital bed.
fatol...@gmail.com
Oct 6, 2012, 8:39:36 PM10/6/12
to
Why would the master plotter want to kill Connally? Connally was a potent
political rival, that's why. Plus, you get to silence somebody who might
go soft later and talk. Of course, that would be tough for Connally to do,
since he is one of the assassins, but why take chances? This plan is very
neat indeed. Nobody can rat anybody out. The only one is Jackie, and she
was looking right at Connally's presumed gun before he fired. She knew
what happened. I wonder how they handled that.
political rival, that's why. Plus, you get to silence somebody who might
go soft later and talk. Of course, that would be tough for Connally to do,
since he is one of the assassins, but why take chances? This plan is very
neat indeed. Nobody can rat anybody out. The only one is Jackie, and she
was looking right at Connally's presumed gun before he fired. She knew
what happened. I wonder how they handled that.
Dave Yandell
Oct 7, 2012, 11:10:12 AM10/7/12
to
Then there's the fact that your account makes everyone act in preposterous ways. But, fortunately for some people, the dead can't sue for libel. Go for publication. If they make a movie, it'll have to be a cartoon to make your physics work, but, somehow, that seems appropriate.
Good luck!
Dave
fatol...@gmail.com
Oct 7, 2012, 11:11:24 AM10/7/12
to
But, Connally didn't die. He recovered from his wounds, and went on to run for the presidency. After all, he was qualified for the job. He had helped to murder JFK. George Bush was also running that year, with similar qualifications, and much more backing. But they both lost out to that wacky actor who thought ketchup was a vegetable. Eat your vegetables, kids! And then, the ketchup dude got shot by the son of one of George Bush's friends, and George almost became president in 1981. Who would believe this story?
fatol...@gmail.com
Oct 8, 2012, 12:07:41 AM10/8/12
to
There are some who say, "Yer lucky the dead can't sue for libel!" Ha! Say
I. There are some who say that George Herbert Walker Bush murdered JFK and
that Dubya murdered JFK Jr. Do these *living* beasts of hell sue for
libel? No they don't. Are they too noble of mind and spirit to stoop to
legal action? No they aren't. Then, why don't they sue? Heh heh heh.
I. There are some who say that George Herbert Walker Bush murdered JFK and
that Dubya murdered JFK Jr. Do these *living* beasts of hell sue for
libel? No they don't. Are they too noble of mind and spirit to stoop to
legal action? No they aren't. Then, why don't they sue? Heh heh heh.
Saintly Oswald
Oct 9, 2012, 9:54:05 AM10/9/12
to
So, how does some chauffeur boy from Ireland end up in the White House during World War Two, when most navy boys are out on the Pacific? Don't you have to *know* somebody to get that duty? Who did Greer know?
Saintly Oswald
Oct 9, 2012, 8:33:43 PM10/9/12
to
connection Willy had? Surely, you can't mean that insanely powerful people
might have had anything to do with killing the president of the United
States. That's madness! Only a lone nut would be capable of such an evil
deed. Rich people got that way out of their goodness an humility. You
can't think that one of them might do something so crass as offing our
dear beloved Jack!"
I know, I know, it's incredibly unlikely that the rich and powerful would
do anything as nasty as a poor and scrawny loser with a bruise over his
eye, But, all I ask is that you consider the possibility that this Greer,
this driver, who joined the Navy during the war with Japan, and was given
duty the White House, that this was not just some lucky roll of the dice.
Perhaps he knew somebody. And perhaps that somebody wasn't as pure and
noble as the rest of the rich people. And, perhaps his name was Bush.
Please, do not dismiss my hunch as impossible! Please grant it the life it
deserves, and let it prove itself or be disproved! Please, for the love of
God, grant me this one favor! Oh, and stop calling me Jay.
Anthony Marsh
Oct 9, 2012, 8:34:29 PM10/9/12
to
On 10/9/2012 9:54 AM, Saintly Oswald wrote:
> So, how does some chauffeur boy from Ireland end up in the White House during World War Two, when most navy boys are out on the Pacific? Don't you have to *know* somebody to get that duty? Who did Greer know?
>
Maybe he did know somebody. So what?
> So, how does some chauffeur boy from Ireland end up in the White House during World War Two, when most navy boys are out on the Pacific? Don't you have to *know* somebody to get that duty? Who did Greer know?
>
Saintly Oswald
Oct 10, 2012, 9:35:48 PM10/10/12
to
Since the JFK assassination was a CIA network hit, then, if Greer's
connected benefactor is part of that crowd, it might explain how got the
job to shoot our beloved hero, silly.
connected benefactor is part of that crowd, it might explain how got the
job to shoot our beloved hero, silly.
Anthony Marsh
Oct 11, 2012, 9:01:06 PM10/11/12
to
mean that it could be true.
You could imagine that you are the King of France, but you're not.
John Reagor King
Oct 11, 2012, 10:39:38 PM10/11/12
to
In article <321384eb-4ba6-4fc5...@googlegroups.com>,
Oh, it *was* a CIA network hit? When was this conclusively proven for
the first time ever? Source?
> then, if Greer's
> connected benefactor is part of that crowd, it might explain how got the
> job to shoot our beloved hero, silly.
Except for one little problem: aren't both of his hands on the steering
wheel the entire time?
Oh, it *was* a CIA network hit? When was this conclusively proven for
the first time ever? Source?
> then, if Greer's
> connected benefactor is part of that crowd, it might explain how got the
> job to shoot our beloved hero, silly.
wheel the entire time?
Saintly Oswald
Oct 12, 2012, 4:53:20 PM10/12/12
to
On Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:01:07 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> Just because you can make up something from your imagination does not
>
> mean that it could be true.
>
> You could imagine that you are the King of France, but you're not.
No, I am not the King of France. You got one right there. Congratulations.
> Just because you can make up something from your imagination does not
>
> mean that it could be true.
>
> You could imagine that you are the King of France, but you're not.
I think this calls for a celebration. Whoop-ti-do.
Anthony Marsh
Oct 12, 2012, 9:49:09 PM10/12/12
to
On 10/11/2012 10:39 PM, John Reagor King wrote:
> In article <321384eb-4ba6-4fc5...@googlegroups.com>,
> Saintly Oswald <fatol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Since the JFK assassination was a CIA network hit,
>
> Oh, it *was* a CIA network hit? When was this conclusively proven for
> the first time ever? Source?
>
Which network? ABC? CBS? NBC? Not Fox Network then.
> In article <321384eb-4ba6-4fc5...@googlegroups.com>,
> Saintly Oswald <fatol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Since the JFK assassination was a CIA network hit,
>
> Oh, it *was* a CIA network hit? When was this conclusively proven for
> the first time ever? Source?
>
>> then, if Greer's
>> connected benefactor is part of that crowd, it might explain how got the
>> job to shoot our beloved hero, silly.
>
> Except for one little problem: aren't both of his hands on the steering
> wheel the entire time?
>
Saintly Oswald
Oct 13, 2012, 10:41:02 AM10/13/12
to
work, too. You'll see for yourself when it comes out in braille.
bigdog
Oct 13, 2012, 11:28:13 AM10/13/12
to
On Monday, September 24, 2012 3:45:32 PM UTC-4, Saintly Oswald wrote:
> And, though it may be somewhat speculative, one should consider the
murder of John Lennon, which preceded the Reagan attempt by less than 4
months. His assassin, Mark Chapman, shot Lennon in the same "military
stance" that Hinckley used on Reagan, they both had lame-ass "random"
stalking stories prior to attacking their targets, they both had a
"Catcher In The Rye" fetish, and Chapman belonged to an organization
called World Vision, whose president was John Hinckley Sr. But, I suppose,
that could all just be cheerfully written off to coincidence, and why
would the establishment elite want to murder a rock singer?
Wow, I think you are on to something. Don't forget that both Reagan and
> And, though it may be somewhat speculative, one should consider the
murder of John Lennon, which preceded the Reagan attempt by less than 4
months. His assassin, Mark Chapman, shot Lennon in the same "military
stance" that Hinckley used on Reagan, they both had lame-ass "random"
stalking stories prior to attacking their targets, they both had a
"Catcher In The Rye" fetish, and Chapman belonged to an organization
called World Vision, whose president was John Hinckley Sr. But, I suppose,
that could all just be cheerfully written off to coincidence, and why
would the establishment elite want to murder a rock singer?
Lennon appeared the same night as guests in the booth with Howard Cosell
at a Los Angeles Rams Monday Night Football game. I think Howard was the
mastermind.
Saintly Oswald
Oct 13, 2012, 12:11:27 PM10/13/12
to
On Thursday, October 11, 2012 10:39:39 PM UTC-4, John Reagor King wrote:
> In article <321384eb-4ba6-4fc5...@googlegroups.com>,
>
>
> In article <321384eb-4ba6-4fc5...@googlegroups.com>,
>
>
> Except for one little problem: aren't both of his hands on the steering
>
> wheel the entire time?
His hands are not on the steering wheel all the time. You can clearly see this, if you bother to try. Take a look at your own Holy Bible, the Zapruder film frame 312, that nice clear one. You will deny it, of course, but Greer's left hand is not on the wheel. It is closer to his body than is the wheel, and it's grip is oriented differently than it would be if it were holding the wheel. It is holding something else. This is where your revered Zapruder scripture has been corrupted, obscuring what it he is holding, but the Lord of Truth shines through here, nonetheless. His hand is *not* on the wheel. And he does not fire in frame 313, so you need not go on (and on) about how his hand is still down there when the head explodes. He fires in frame 318, but you will claim that's just some blur descended from the heavens at the most propitious of times, when in fact, it is his arm and his hand and his gun in front of his face. Zapruder just happen to jiggle. Yeah, sure. What jiggle is going to create a blur out of thin air? If it is a blur, and it is, then something there must be blurred. What is it? What could it be? A pilgrim shadow? Where's the pilgrim? I don't see anybody standing on the hood. But, calcified brains will dismiss it as such, because their dogma will not bend for the truth. Time to ride back from the valley of the shadow, dude.
>
> wheel the entire time?
John Reagor King
Oct 15, 2012, 9:33:17 PM10/15/12
to
In article <2a733228-4fed-47fc...@googlegroups.com>,
> Take a look at your own Holy Bible, the Zapruder
> film frame 312, that nice clear one. You will deny it, of course, but Greer's
> left hand is not on the wheel.
Ah, but the reason I "deny" it is not because I am closed-minded and
refuse to even try to see what you are seeing. It is instead for an
entirely different reason: I am truthfully pointing out that it is you
who are mistaking what you are seeing.
> It is closer to his body than is the wheel,
> and it's grip is oriented differently than it would be if it were holding the
> wheel. It is holding something else.
There is nothing in his hand there.
> This is where your revered Zapruder
> scripture has been corrupted, obscuring what it he is holding, but the Lord
> of Truth shines through here, nonetheless.
There is no credible evidence of fakery in the film. You are quite
obviously pouncing on every variation of light and shadow to desperately
try to see just something, just anything, that even maybe, possibly,
perhaps fits the various theories you've concocted, which I notice have
undergone some significant changes within the past month alone. You're
the one who put a soda bottle in Connally's hand then changed it to him
putting a pistol in his pocket then changed it again to him withdrawing
a pistol from his pocket.
> His hand is *not* on the wheel.
> And he does not fire in frame 313, so you need not go on (and on) about how
> his hand is still down there when the head explodes. He fires in frame 318,
> but you will claim that's just some blur descended from the heavens at the
> most propitious of times, when in fact, it is his arm and his hand and his
> gun in front of his face.
I will claim nothing but perfectly ordinary aspects of photography and
the images captured. What you think is a gun is actually the reflection
of sunlight on top of Kellerman's head. You are nowhere near the first
to think that is a gun. You're obviously not watching the film in a
good copy very closely. You need to watch in motion at various speeds,
not just examine it frame by frame only. That reflection appears on the
top of his head several times in the film. At times it is blocked by
the frame of the windshield and at other times it is not. This is quite
obvious when watching a good quality version at various speeds and with
various stabilizations and levels of zoom.
> Zapruder just happen to jiggle. Yeah, sure. What
> jiggle is going to create a blur out of thin air? If it is a blur, and it is,
> then something there must be blurred. What is it? What could it be? A pilgrim
> shadow? Where's the pilgrim? I don't see anybody standing on the hood. But,
> calcified brains will dismiss it as such, because their dogma will not bend
> for the truth. Time to ride back from the valley of the shadow, dude.
I'm quite obviously far more objective about this film than you are. It
is you who need to ride back from all these silly claims about perfectly
ordinary and non-sinister features of those images.
Saintly Oswald <fatol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, October 11, 2012 10:39:39 PM UTC-4, John Reagor King wrote:
> > In article <321384eb-4ba6-4fc5...@googlegroups.com>,
>
> > Except for one little problem: aren't both of his hands on the steering
> > wheel the entire time?
>
> His hands are not on the steering wheel all the time. You can clearly see
> this, if you bother to try.
I have looked at the film many hundreds of times, thanks.
> On Thursday, October 11, 2012 10:39:39 PM UTC-4, John Reagor King wrote:
> > In article <321384eb-4ba6-4fc5...@googlegroups.com>,
>
> > Except for one little problem: aren't both of his hands on the steering
> > wheel the entire time?
>
> His hands are not on the steering wheel all the time. You can clearly see
> this, if you bother to try.
> Take a look at your own Holy Bible, the Zapruder
> film frame 312, that nice clear one. You will deny it, of course, but Greer's
> left hand is not on the wheel.
refuse to even try to see what you are seeing. It is instead for an
entirely different reason: I am truthfully pointing out that it is you
who are mistaking what you are seeing.
> It is closer to his body than is the wheel,
> and it's grip is oriented differently than it would be if it were holding the
> wheel. It is holding something else.
> This is where your revered Zapruder
> scripture has been corrupted, obscuring what it he is holding, but the Lord
> of Truth shines through here, nonetheless.
obviously pouncing on every variation of light and shadow to desperately
try to see just something, just anything, that even maybe, possibly,
perhaps fits the various theories you've concocted, which I notice have
undergone some significant changes within the past month alone. You're
the one who put a soda bottle in Connally's hand then changed it to him
putting a pistol in his pocket then changed it again to him withdrawing
a pistol from his pocket.
> His hand is *not* on the wheel.
> And he does not fire in frame 313, so you need not go on (and on) about how
> his hand is still down there when the head explodes. He fires in frame 318,
> but you will claim that's just some blur descended from the heavens at the
> most propitious of times, when in fact, it is his arm and his hand and his
> gun in front of his face.
the images captured. What you think is a gun is actually the reflection
of sunlight on top of Kellerman's head. You are nowhere near the first
to think that is a gun. You're obviously not watching the film in a
good copy very closely. You need to watch in motion at various speeds,
not just examine it frame by frame only. That reflection appears on the
top of his head several times in the film. At times it is blocked by
the frame of the windshield and at other times it is not. This is quite
obvious when watching a good quality version at various speeds and with
various stabilizations and levels of zoom.
> Zapruder just happen to jiggle. Yeah, sure. What
> jiggle is going to create a blur out of thin air? If it is a blur, and it is,
> then something there must be blurred. What is it? What could it be? A pilgrim
> shadow? Where's the pilgrim? I don't see anybody standing on the hood. But,
> calcified brains will dismiss it as such, because their dogma will not bend
> for the truth. Time to ride back from the valley of the shadow, dude.
is you who need to ride back from all these silly claims about perfectly
ordinary and non-sinister features of those images.
0 new messages