At home with SWAT

“It strikes us as perverse and absurd that the people in Watertown are being told to stay indoors and let the ‘professional protectors’ handle it. That is exactly backwards from what a free people in a Republic are supposed to do. In the Founders’ time, the hue and cry would have gone up, the people would have turned out en masse, muskets and hatchets in hand, and hunted the bastard(s) down post-haste . . .

How could a jihadist on the run escape if everyone in the community is actively hunting for him? They all know who lives in their neighborhood and who doesn’t. They could all search their own houses and help search their neighbors’ homes in short order and hunt him down.

But the message from the government is ‘there’s a wolf on the loose! So all you sheep must stay in your pens and barns and let us authorized professional shepherds and sheep dogs handle it. Be afraid! Don’t try to stop the wolf. We will search your pens one by one till we find him. Til’ then you cannot come out of your pens, or we will punish you.’ Disgusting.

How far we have fallen into slavery and servile dependence. And how far from being a strong, free people in a free Republic.”

– Steward Rhodes, Oath Keepers Lexington rally endangered by ‘Bull Connor’ tactics [via examiner.com]

89 Responses to Quote of the Day: Slavery and the Boston Bomber Edition

    • I stated as much to my wife and threw in that I would not allow a search of my house. She thought I was nuts. I told her that the suspect would have more to fear IN my house than outside of it. I am more than capable of protecting my own. Move on to the next house full of sheeple.

  1. I saw video taken by some of their victims last night. I certainly hope that they get slammed with dozens (if not hundreds) of lawsuits for their blatant violation of the 4th amendment. They literally were going door to door, banging on the door then shoving a gun in the face of the person who opened it (or smashing it down if no one did) and forcing all the occupants out at gun point before another illegal search by officers on the street. It’s absolutely sickening that there are Americans defending this behavior.

    • The message from the authorities: “this is what we do when something really bad has happened… you’ll eventually accept it when nothing has happened.”

      • Hence why people are pissed when I explained why I would refuse them entrance without a warrant. The police thrive on people being too afraid of being assaulted (by the police) and giving up their rights. They need decent people to stand up and force them to obey the law, not to let them just run rampant.

        • They’ll really be pissed when they realize their property insurance probably won’t pay for kicked in doors, bullet riddled cars, blown up business etc because it will be an excluded, “terrorist” event.

        • +1 My coworkers were like WTF? When I told them I wouldn’t allow law enforcement into my home. Some of these sheeple are even CCW/CPL holders. Iwould have met the jackboots with my weapon at the door, until they presented a warrent P.S. I don’t have anything to hide.

        • The courts have time and time again said that there are exceptions.

          The Emergency Exception

          As a general rule, the police are authorized to make a warrantless search when the time it would take to get a warrant would jeopardize public safety or lead to the loss of important evidence.

          The example given by courts are

          •A police officer “in hot pursuit” of a fleeing suspect continues the chase into a dwelling in order to make the arrest.

          In these types of emergency situations, an officer’s duty to protect people and preserve evidence outweighs the warrant requirement.

          You assume that searches without warrant are absolute, they are in fact not and the courts have ruled this way for some time. There are other exceptions as well.

        • Sorry Pascal, the courts are often wrong and they are always wrong when they provide any exceptions to the rights of free men. Besides, these cops were not in “hot pursuit” they were doing blanket searches of citizen’s homes.

        • @csmallo:

          You do not get to make up your own laws or rulings. You many not like them and you may need to work to have them changed, but as it stands, that is what the courts have ruled (many times). You are subjected to and must follow those laws like them or not.

        • “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

          Where does the 4th amendment imply that the police can do whatever they want as long as they suspect there is a criminal somewhere in the vicinity of a major metropolitan area? Unconstitutional laws are passed all the time, and it’s unfortunate that the courts often forget what they are there for.

        • Pascal, so they saw this man run into ten thousand different homes, yeah? So they immediately have the right to search every one? FLAME DELETED That isn’t even supported by any precedent you could come up with, nevermind common decency and civilized behavior. This should not be happening.

        • While I hate to admit it, Pascal’s line of reasoning does have merit. It could reasonably be classified under “emergency.” Plus the blanket, door-to-door search was a manhunt; there was no warrantless tossing of homes for contraband. Plus even if the cops did come across a meth lab in operation I doubt any court would hear evidence presented that was obtained incidental to a warrantless emergency search for a suspect at large. They would have to come back with a warrant after demonstrating independent probable cause to prosecute an individual.

    • You assume that the 4th amendments is absolute, it is not and the courts have ruled many times that there are exceptions:

      The Emergency Exception

      As a general rule, the police are authorized to make a warrantless search when the time it would take to get a warrant would jeopardize public safety or lead to the loss of important evidence.

      An example that is often given is as follows:

      •A police officer “in hot pursuit” of a fleeing suspect continues the chase into a dwelling in order to make the arrest.

      In these types of emergency situations, an officer’s duty to protect people and preserve evidence outweighs the warrant requirement.

      There are also other exceptions.

      • And what about SCOTUS ruling that the police have no duty to protect you unless a special relationship exists? That doesn’t sound like there’s a duty to protect people to me…

        They contradict themselves. Therefore, Amendments MUST BE ruled as ABSOLUTE.

        • One of the cases is Castle Rock v. Gonzalez. And regarding absoluteness, I think that is why there is the supremacy clause in the constitution.

        • …And yet no 2A proponent Lawyer or privacy advocacy group utilizes this argument to absolute slap the stupidity of tyrants or judges. -_-

          So much for Rights…

      • One small point here: judges & courts don’t make laws, they interpret them. As already pointed out, they often interpret them erroneously. Indiana Supreme Court recently interpreted the law to say a citizen has no obligation to comply with an unlawful arrest and can resist with deadly force. So which court do you base your actions on?

  2. And yet it was a private citizen who found him. I don’t think I would have let the cops in my house either. “Officer, I’ve been in possession of my property since last night, I know that he isn’t her. Thanks for checking in. You want to come in, go get a warrant please. Oh, and get that gun out of my face before I call 911 for someone menacing with a firearm.”

    • How are you going to say that, when they just grab you and force you outside. WATCH THE VIDEO! These guys aren’t listening to anyone – they are employing force.

  3. Not much talk about how the police were able to search homes? I can understand if the homeowners allow it…but if my city were on lockdown, I’d answer the door with my sidearm on my hip and my AR-15 sitting on my coffee table. I’d assure them the house is secure and that no search is required…would they accept this? Would they do an illegal search? If a criminal being loose is grounds for a warrantless search, then we have no 4th amendment as there is ALWAYS a criminal on the loose SOMEWHERE…

    • Didn’t you watch the second video above? The police banged on the door, then shoved a gun in the man’s face and forced him out. Then a squad entered and forced everyone else out at gunpoint. They certainly weren’t asking. Now we get to wait for the government apologists to wake up and start commenting about how the police had every right to violate their 4th amendment rights.

  4. Instead of yammering about secession, maybe we could start with sanctions against these human rights-violating, civilian disarming, apartheid loving police states. You won’t see me visiting one, and there will be icicles in hell before I’ll live in one.

  5. Great rally speech! Thanks for posting it. In this particular criminal hunt the one issue that probably could justify the help of the professionals in the final capture was the possibility the guy had on a suicide vest or other such weapons. BTW, I’m all for the masses of citizens to grab their guns and axes and go after muggers, gang bangers, and others such as them.

  6. Searching our own houses and helping our neighbors: I get that, and I totally agree with it. In fact, it turns out that’s what ended the hunt! A homeowner saw blood on the boat in his back yard, and called the cops.

    Still, I *do not* think that you’ve proposed a good idea in general. Several problems:

    -You’re saying that the community at large should go hunting for a “running jihadist”. Particularly in the early part of this manhunt, all we had to go on was a fuzzy picture of the guys on the loose. How many innocent brown people would have been apprehended by vigilantes before they found the right guy?

    -In the Founders’ time, the citizens would have been called upon to do this because we *didn’t* have a police force. We pay the police to catch criminals. There was a criminal on the loose. What’s the problem?

    -Police were (legitimately!) worried that the guy had a suicide vest or other explosive device. I, with my M&P-15 and my Glock 19, am not equipped to deal with a suicide bomber.

    • – How many people were falsely detained by the Police? How many people were falsely accused by the media? Doesn’t seem like the citizenry could do much worse.

      – We pay police to uphold the law, not blatantly disregard it.

      – Suicide vest? That’s even easier to take care of. One round and Jihadist go boom. If a citizen isn’t comfortable apprehending a dangerous criminal, they can always call the police once they have found them and let the police do the arrest. Oh wait, that IS what happened. The police violated the law for nothing.

  7. Was there a question about whether the police would follow orders when they come for your guns? I’m curious to hear from those LEO’s that say they nor their buddies in blue would ever violate the Constitution if ordered.

  8. I can’t imagine the thought process that allows one to live in that kind of fear. The homeowner with the boat only ventured out to survey his property after hearing of a virtual all-clear.

    If this had happened in my own neighborhood, I would have stayed put as they asked and cooperated with the autoritah. I would not have consented to a search; I would have conducted that myself. But in the nearly 24-hour period of the “shelter-in-place” (i.e., curfew and martial law), I would have also conducted at least a few armed surveys of my property and perimeter, looking for evidence of presence or disturbance. A shed or certainly a tarped boat would be the first place I’d look to hide in a suburban area. Are you kidding me?

  9. The “wild card” in this situation is that suspect #2 could have been armed with an anti-personnel IED. So I am good with locking everyone down, while the people trained to deal with this possibility do the search.

    However, I think everyone should have been at the window of the highest floor in their house with a phone, binoculars and if they choose, armed and possibly this could’ve ended sooner on Friday than it did. If they choose to be armed, they also have the right to determine to what extent (i.e. AR-15, standard capacity magazines, etc.) they choose to be armed.

  10. ridiculous that people allowed this for one nutjob. If they can do this for one nutjob that killed 3 people they can do this for gang members, drug cartel leaders, the list is endless.

    They were patting people down as they left the house. What if they found drugs or other items?

    no, no, and no. you cannot come in. there are no terrorists in my house, and if there were one of us would be dead.

  11. Keep in mind that the same posse that the author refers to would have hung the “suspect” immediately upon capture, no due process, no trial by jury. While i sort of agree with must of what the author says, I think that he is selectively ignoring certain vital aspects of the evolution of our society.

  12. That is the most disturbing thing I’ve ever seen. Posting to FB immediately so my lib friends can glimpse the wonders of the police state they so fervently advocate for.

  13. Well, if you are lazy (and/or a coward) is certainly is easier to just sit back and let the police do all the work.

    If you are a more “proactive” type having your neighborhood at least vaguely organized ahead of time wouldn’t hurt but it takes some effort and persistence especially with the modern attitudes that runs rampant. In my old neighborhood we had a “block committee” which was a sort of modified neighborhood watch and also dedicated to emergency response. Just after 9/11 it was EASY to get people onboard for that. We had a “neighborhood directory” that we passed around that listed address, residents names, and contact phone numbers so we could all get in touch with each other.

    On the other hand, where I live now, most of the people I contacted viewed me with serious suspicion when I tried to make a similar directory for everyone. 15 houses on my street and I had to give up on the project because nobody saw the value in knowing how to contact your neighbors.

    If I can’t get the neighborhood organized enough to have an emergency contact list, I despair of creating a search party.

  14. Dan:

    Just playing the devil’s advocate here so please no flaming.

    So do you know everybody who belongs in your neighborhood? What about the new Eastern European family with the funny accent down the street that you have never met. Getting the neighborhood out doesn’t always work out as planned.

    Back in the day when people got out the pitchforks to hunt down the perpetrator sometimes the wrong guy got strung up. South of Mason-Dixon line that someone was often the first Negro they ran into.

    • who cares. If they suspect the funny people down the street, get a warrant.

      Basically Boston just gave the terrorists a roadmap how to paralyze every major city in the country.

      • Dan wasn’t writing about warrants. He was talking about the “good old days” when patriots would have rooted out the evil doer on their own. I am merely pointing out that “armed citizens doing their duty” don’t always get it right either. One more thing, warrants only apply to the government and a group of armed citizens aren’t bound by the Bill of Rights. In the absence of governmental authority the people can basically do what they want. The Constitution restrains government not the people. Therein lies the danger of citizen action.

        • well, in some places those militarized police are confiscating guns without a warrant and tracking down bicycle thieves.

          As far as I am concerned, we may have delegated the responsibility to civilians armed with more than pitchforks, but that does not make a witchhunt any more justifiable.

  15. The really ironic thing is, this didn’t work. The cops are being lauded for finding the guy except THEY DIDN’T FIND THE GUY. He was out of the search area. It was an observant citizen who found the dude.

  16. Agree with sentiments above that the Police and others in the search in Boston area violated the rights of common people. But these Cops and their buddies were pretty amped-up owing to the situation and killing/injury to their kind of the past dozen hours or so. Their extreme tactics and bad mindset might have put any number of you all on a slab next to suspect 1 in the morgue if you played the ‘not searching my house without a warrant’ card. In the USA we all want and wish for those reactions might have worked, but in the USA we live in it would have just elevated the death/injury count. Much as you may not like it you have to live in the reality you face particularly when facing overwhelming deadly odds with a mind to use it. After some over excited cops have shot you and yours all to hell for making a one man stand for what you believe = your fight for rights is pretty much overwith and forgotten in a week or less. The liberals would just spit on your graves. They’d like nothing better than to kill a lot of us off and shut us up permanent so we can’t speak out against them and vote against them. Think it over. Take a stand where you have a even chance to win not a sure chance to get killed and put out of the bigger fight.

    • After some over excited cops have shot you and yours all to hell for making a one man stand for what you believe = your fight for rights is pretty much overwith and forgotten in a week or less

      Who here has forgotten incidents such as Ruby Ridge or Waco?

  17. The fourth amendment does not apply under martial law and emergencies.

    It will be up to the voters to decide if the actions taken were appropriate. We should soon learn the facts.

    All I know is that Chechens were the best trained, most ideological and most ruthless of all the terrorists my battalion encountered in Iraq. There was a real threat, I don’t know if the city believed more might be around. It doesn’t on it’s face appear to be an unreasonable reaction by a government in a city that is largely unarmed.

  18. The way the world is going is people don’t want to do things for themselves, it’s not about getting together as a group. It’s to easy for “them” to do it for me. I want “them” to protect me. I want “them” to feed me. I want them to ” heal” me. I want “them” to take care of me. So for “them” to do their job, “I” have to sit back and watch and vote for “them”.

  19. Do you think the police would try this in an inner-city housing project if they were in pursuit of some gangbanger who just killed a dozen people in a drive by shooting?? I doubt it, and if they did, the blowback from the media and the professional racial agitators would be like nothing you’ve ever seen.

  20. Police search tactics (such as these door to door searches and lock downs) in a very Blue State/area will go unquestioned by local sheeple. The civil liberties implications will be ignored by most so-called journalists.

    Taco Ninja made an excellent point above…
    If a criminal being loose is grounds for a warrantless search, then we have no 4th amendment as there is ALWAYS a criminal on the loose.
    A debate about reasonable search during an emergency IS NECESSARY. Especially because it didn’t work. A homeowner, post-lock down, found the guy!

    That said, police attitudes and tactics are also local. A similar bombing in nearby New Hampshire would probably bring a much more nuanced law enforcement response. NH sheriffs/cops would be much more deferential to the homeowner. In Florida or Texas, such deference would increase substantially.

    Any cops in other jurisdictions want to comment? What are proper search tactics if a known terror suspect is hiding in small urban/sub-urban area?

  21. SWAT should be held accountable, or they will continue to operate this way. I’m not sure what would make this right – when armed men enter your home, remove each member at gunpoint, and frisk you for weapons. Looks like a class action lawsuit – although the government and media clearly don’t care.

    I did a quick YouTube search (on a slow connection), and this was the only video I have found. I would be interested to see if there was any other specific information on this house, why there were so many people, or exactly what information that police were operating on.

  22. What do you think would have happened to one of those people coming out of the house if they had a gun on their hip?

  23. people have abdicated responsibility for themselves to the government. You know, because society is so “civilized” and all…

  24. We can’t have this “of the people, by the people” thing. daddy obama(daddyo for short) & his big guberment will watch out for us all. The price? just your freedom. Yes, preaching to the choir & the few trolls, Randy

  25. TO: All
    RE: The FACT of the Matter Is….

    ….that the government wants all of US to be dependent on their ‘good judgement’. As politically correct as that may be.

    My point is that if the FBI has ‘scrubbed’ the concept of ‘Islamic Terrorism’ from their training and protocols—DESPITE LAST WEEKS FUN AND GAMES IN BOSTON—none of US can trust the federal government to do ANYTHING!

    Their blatant failure to do their ‘job’, let alone their ‘duty’ to US, is rank evidence of the nature the federal government has become under the Obama administration.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [The Truth will out….should anyone care to examine it…..]

  26. That video chills me to the bone. My dog would almost unquestionably be dead if I was in that house. She is loud and obnoxious and sounds completely unfriendly to strangers, and for that reason I don’t lock her up until after I’ve checked and/or answered the door to see who it is. If it’s someone I’m going to allow in, I tell them “Let me put the dog up” and I close the door, do so, and come back. In that situation, if I was ordered outside at gunpoint, she would still be loose in the house, barking and growling like a demon (head down, low and deep in her throat), and would almost certainly get shot.

    • That’s an interesting point. Since that is very common canine behavior there must have been a lot dogs shot the last few days.

    • +1. We have an Anatolian Shepherd. Turkish nationals we have met recognize the breed and won’t come near her. One guy saw her out for a walk, and (backing up) misidentified her – “Kergal hound, very dangerous!”

      We love her – she’s very socialized and great with kids, but if you are in her territory and she does not know you – she is going after you. I do worry about what that would mean in a “home invasion by police scenario”.

      Which is what we should start calling it.

      If you are not engaged in illegal activity, it is not a “no-knock raid”, it is not a “mistake” – it is a home invasion. By the police.

  27. I made a joke when I saw them going door to door on the news, I said I would probably be brutalized or killed because I would tell them
    F*** O** that I would not allow them to search my place.

  28. I’m not aware of any homes in Watertown being searched without the consent of the owners. In most cases, the police knocked on doors and asked the owners if they were okay. They were looking for signs of a struggle or that the owners were frightened to speak because there was an armed punk behind them threatening to shoot. If nobody was home, the cops checked doors and windows from the outside and then moved on.

    What I understand from a couple of friends in the area is that the police didn’t trample any homeowners’ rights. They were respectful. What y’all need to understand is that there’s a major difference between Boston area cops and NYC or LA cops. While all three can be arrogant dunces, at least Boston area cops are not trained to be thugs.

    • Watch the video. Does it look like the home owner gave consent after considering the request? Or does it look like a home invasion?

    • I’m not going to call your friends liars, but in that video you can clearly see them pound on the door, and when the first guy opens it, they immediately wave him out while yelling, “HANDS! HANDS! LEMME SEE YOUR HANDS!” When he gets outside the door and starts to drop them again, one cop immediately grabs his arm and hoists it over his head again. Every successive person that came out did so with their hands over/on their head, to repeated yells of “KEEP ‘EM UP!”

      Admittedly this is only film of one group of cops at one house, but that doesn’t sound like knocking on the doors and asking if they’re OK.

    • Sorry, Ralph, watch that video. It is frightening. I have three children, and I can’t imagine what they’d be going through having to walk out of their home into a kill zone, an area surrounded 180 degrees with armed soldiers carrying hi power rifles aimed right for them, or their mom and dad.

      I am as law and order as they come, but what I saw in that video is not right.

  29. Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Jefferson.

    • Isnt that Franklin? And from the Declaration of Independence codified in to US law under the title of Organic Law

      But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government…

  30. The latest doings in Boston should be sobering for all sides and highlight the importance of taking strong, political action before it comes to situations of this sort.
    The mess this can make is unthinkable and I don’t believe even the most dedicated grabber or gun guy would want that.
    The usual professions of bravado by the militants sound a little more nervous and rightly so – I think some of us have looked into the abyss and felt a chill. On the other hand, since both this and the Dorner case involved police causalities I doubt they are anxious to sacrifice themselves for anything other than a real emergency and not for the greater glory of forming a police state or the ambitions of some political hack.

    Strangely enough, this also demonstrates another reason the Founding Fathers wanted an effective Militia that’s often forgotten. I refer to the idea of “domestic tranquility” in that they could keep order and fend off any cabal or coup by an undemocratic minority, or in modern parlance – terrorism. The wisdom of these paragons still amazes me.
    Contrary to these ideals, we have the “professionalization” and permitting off most human activities – even people giving shampoos at hairdressers are licensed now-a-days – why not guns? In the matter of policing, the gradual professionalization and lately the militarization is simply a continuation of a “leave it to the pros” attitude extant today for many activities of all sorts. The sight of the entire Boston area, cowering in their homes, while the cops rumage around, shows this clearly.
    The ruling class loves this of course. The only people they want armed are the ones they can control.

  31. Had a half hour conversation with my father about this yesterday. He’s from NJ and lives in NYC, so guess how that turned out.

    • I agree, the media would be painting a completely different story. They would blame the administration for a failure to stop it from happening. Yet Obama gets praise no matter what happens. Never mind his DOJ failed to prevent this, he responded quickly and assured everyone he is doing everything to find the people that did this. Better award him another Noble prize for this.

  32. Are you guys kidding me? You agree with this?

    “Til’ then you cannot come out of your pens, or we will punish you”

    Ok, the lockdown was VOLUNTARY. Moreover, police officers have resources and training that the average citizen does not. It was a recommendation for the citizen’s own safety. We pay these people for a reason. How dare the government recommend that I stay in my home until the crazy bomber is captured. The nerve of some people.

    • I was wondering what would happen if you didn’t listen and went out anyway? What if people needed to go out to get their medication or thousands of other legit reasons. Heck, legit or not it’s none of the governments business why you are out. Would they arrest you?

  33. Several times on the news coverage, they mentioned how the search was implemented.
    Knock on door, if people answer, ask if they have seen anything, ask questions to see if they are under duress. They did not enter all of the occupied homes.
    While there could be exceptions to this process in such a large search, that was the process. This was not a wholesale trampling of rights as the story made it sound.
    You can and probably will think the worst, as that seems to fit your view, but try to keep an open mind.

    • They didn’t do that. Watch the video. They laid hands on that guy – took him into custody (however briefly) and did the same with everyone else.

      This is how the Nazis got the Jews on the trains.

      What in the Hell was he supposed to do? He had at least 8 guys, in body armor, with locked and loaded full auto weapons pointed at his house.

      When he answered the door could he say, “Come back with a warrant”? I don’t think that would have worked.

      And are we supposed to believe it’s okay because the trampling of rights was only limited, and not wholesale?

  34. This is why you have a way to gard your door.

    You need a way that you can communicate without opening your door. Like a mini door you can speak though or an intercom.

    You inform them that you have your property under control, that you do not consent to a search without a warrant, and if they proceed to forceably enter you will defend yourself and your home.

    This is when you decide to roll over and give in or get armed and get into position. When/if that door comes down open fire.

    However this path will, most likely, get you killed but you will die free.
    If you survive the initial wave get a lawyer and with them negotiate your surrender.

  35. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE9b5pKatCg
    This person describes having 15 locked and loaded guns in his face when he came out of his house. He was scared , but under the circumstances how can you say no to a search of your house?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2LrbsUVSVl8 This one a woman brings a german shepard out on a leash toward the end.

    Some of the other you tube videos show a bit calmer search, some show more tense. Use the search keywords Watertown Martial law to find several pages of video of searches in Boston

  36. When a 19yr old punk can shut down a city, we lose. Yes, there may have been some tactical advantages to doing so. But at what cost?

  37. And while everyone has been distracted by watertown, boston and west, texas…. more rights are being taken away…with the cybersecurity act… no cause, no ssearch warrant required…. govt can obtain all internet activity at will… not just Homeland Security.. but the IRS, dept of Ag, FDA… any agency that wants… and you dont even get to know when they do it. OH, and they can share it with whomever they want…. Distraction works really good for getting unconstitutional laws passed.

  38. Words cannot express how angry that video makes me.

    “Protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”, my ass.

  39. This should be more than sufficient proof to those who say that the Govt. won’t go door to door to confiscate your firearms!

    This is the most disgusting thing I’ve ever seen in my life and far worse than any supposed “Terrorist” attack.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *