Opinion [normally, KD does not respond to rantings of imbeciles, but this one is too delicious to resist!!]
The Phnom Penh Post
Paul Everingham [Allen Meyers, you also go by this name?? Or, is he a cousin on your wife's side? BTW, what is the going rate for the work that you do?]
April 2, 2012
In my humble opinion [as humble as your employer, the one-eyed king], flash-in-the-pan Judge Laurent Kasper-Ansermet has been a bright, shining fool [yes!, yes!, your language has certified you as "independent" research of Eccc the Clown].
So noble and courageous, as he cavalry-charged into the midst of the Khmer Rouge tribunal on his bold, white-man’s stallion of certainty and self-righteousness [Really, what is the going rate for the type of you to do this bloody regime's bidding? Does this Commie regime pay you by the word or by the letter, with bonuses for words such as "cavalry-charged, white-man's stallion of certainty and self-righteousness"? That's quite a mouthful there, Paul Everingham!]
[CHEAP SHOT! Especially, the "white-man" reference. As is often the case, the likes of you Paul Everingham, employ cheap hypocritical words with abandon. I have a "whiteness" barometer; let's test how white you are in comparison to how white LKA is, because it matters, really, really matters, the world to us victims--oh, that's right! you speak for the victims, because you're...? you are...? Paul Everingham?? who are you again?--in pushing for Cases 003/4]
[BTW, integrity is colorblind. A universal virtue. Ageless. Obviously, the likes of you will never understand the quality of LKA.]
This foray was reminiscent, in both its nature and its ultimate failure, of such holy crusades as the French “mission civilisatrice”, of the first bright-eyed US advisers striding into Vietnam circa 1963, or perhaps the current crop of Kansas missionaries in Koh Kong. [Ooooh, ooohhh! how you defend us brown people!!! How many brownie points do you get for this? Let's cull up nasty colonial history, have cheap shots on religion, that have nothing to do with anything of wanting to see Cases 003/4 move forward!!]
It beggars belief that an intelligent person with any degree of sensitivity, understanding of history or personal humility would ever undertake the course of action that this judge chose [am at a loss for words, so will chuckle instead! No, no, make that the white-man's LOL (or is it, lol?)].
I am no expert on the current best practices of jurisprudence around the world, so perhaps somebody could advise me if there is any precedent for a judge to be criticising his would-be colleagues and commenting on cases he would soon be adjudicating in a series of 166 tweets [oooohhh, it sounds so serious! what infractions!!! Wait, there's near universal criticism of Cases003/4 in all the news articles LKA forwarded; what else was he to forward? Make up rosy stories of 003/4?] – all of this within the context of one of the most complex, sensitive and important legal exercises [you mean the cakewalk Tuol Sleng case where Duch confessed and cooperated, or the case 002 which should be the heart of the matter, but is only a mini-trial now only beginning 6 years after Eccc the Clown's operation? But aren't we talking about Cases 003/4? You are a split (or, is it spit? split spit?) image of your Big Brother! Mix, confuse the issues; employ emotional language as if defending (NOT!) the Cambodians] undertaken in recent times.
Kasper-Ansermet’s blinkered, black-letter-law justifications for riding roughshod over Cambodian [wow! there's a humble opinion of white-man-sounding-name Paul Everingham, speaking for "Cambodian", when it's your Big Brother this bloody regime's] (and, indeed, universal) courtesies and protocols were as ignorant in manner as they were counter-productive in outcome. [BTW, speaking about Cambodians, you white-man-sounding-name Paul Everingham, why is it that out of 14 M Cambodians, most if not all are "victims", only a few thousands are "civil parties" and of these civil parties, they are not given adequate information on/by Eccc the Clown. Actually, if you white-man-sounding-name Paul Everingham, who must think you're so Cambodian--maybe because of your forays in and out of Cambodia, you've gotten to know a bit of Cambodian girls' flesh among the whiteman's pubs?! No?!, or is it because the fluency of your Khmer language, "Same Same But Different, Huh! Huh! Oh, wait, that's still English"--to come to defend us valiantly [insert white-man's LOL!, or is lol!]
Did he really believe he would advance the cause of good Cambodian legal practice [yes, yes, we have so many examples of "good Cambodian legal practice"; I can count all two of them!], and the progression of the trials, by announcing to the world’s media that he would carry on his duties with a determined disregard for the majority stakeholders [oh-oh! oh-oh! I thought you're speaking for us brown people, white-man-sounding-name Paul Everingham? but you continue to only mean the international community of donors and states with their realpolitik interests in satellite Cambodia] in this partnership the Cambodians? [
Whatever the ethical rights and wrongs of his stance, the learned judge seemed to possess very little understanding of human nature, historical context or Cambodian [you mean, powerful Cambodian elite, all 20 families iron-fistedly ruling this Kingdom of Wonder, your Big Brother? why you never take side of us brown little people, Paul Everingham, even when you vulgarly professed loudly so?!??] sensitivities.
His inexplicable strategy of in-your-face public confrontation was bound not only to fail [ooooohhh, now you've become a prophet, but of course not the kind of the Kansas Christians in Koh Kong, who BTW probably speak Khmer, which by the way is the language of this Kingdom of Wonder] but, if continued, to become a very real danger to the continued existence of the tribunal [you mean, POLITICAL THEATRE].
The 33-year saga of establishing, and now holding, these trials is an extraordinary story of triumph [insert, OF POLITICS] over an incredibly complex mix of practical difficulties, political pressures [a strand of concession to make your ranting "objective", Paul Everingham?? LOL!, or is it lol!?] and red-raw human sensitivities.
All of these factors are still present today.
The robustness of the Cambodian people’s [why you insist on speaking for us brown people, when its the elite Big Brother of bloody hands you refer to?????] commitment to holding these [Stalinist SHOW] trials, and the sustained skills, goodwill and dedication of a small band of national and international facilitators over three decades, should not hide the parallel and equally true reality that this tribunal is, and has been at every stage of its history, also very fragile.
As has been the case at least half a dozen times before, the Khmer Rouge tribunal is approaching a very difficult stage – another apparent impasse.
The resignation of Kasper-Ansermet has reduced the immediate threat of collapse [you think so, eh? LOL! or is it lol!? why then Big Brother employ you to rant so?], but some crucial issues remain.
The particular “sticking point” on this occasion are the conflicting views, both inside the court and outside, on whether to proceed beyond Case 002.
Scenarios such as this, including those involving political considerations, are not unexpected; they were widely discussed and documented during the tribunal’s formative process. [What kind of a researcher are you that you can't read properly all the documents and reports by bonafide Cambodia experts, the likes of David Scheffer, Steve Heder, Brad Adams, etc.? Hey, white-man-sounding-name Paul Everingham, the devil is in the details, no?]
It has long been accepted that the formulation, the establishment and even the ongoing conduct of these trials would be an evolving creative process.
This fluid approach was validated, as experience has repeatedly demonstrated that even seemingly insurmountable difficulties could eventually be overcome with commitment, negotiation and diplomacy stage by stage.
The Khmer Rouge tribunal is a unique legal structure [in its super-majority hybrid imbicility, 'That's all, that's all'--sung as a tune, imagine Michael Buble singing so] and still a work in progress.
The judges are, in effect, creating important new legal principles and practices [No, no, "cowardice", "arbitrariness" are not new principles, nor new practices] “on the run” [we wish most of them would be on the run, get as far away from the brown people, so they cannot do more destruction] with many of their seemingly humdrum daily rulings.
On another level, a lot of new ground will also be broken over the next few months as the various stakeholders make a series of crucial decisions about what comes next.
These decisions, as always, as everywhere, will be based on a combination of human, political and practical factors as much as on matters of principle.
Personally, I believe that this searching for, and finding, new ways to actualise high principles of law and justice within the parameters of the cold, hard, real world, to be one of the many exciting and significant facets of this whole grand opera.
Indeed, it would wonderful if there was more constructive public discussion centred on these and other more instructive topics – rather than, for example, the daily undermining of the court by some of the human-rights ideologues [let see, you must mean those selfish people who daily put their lives on the line like Ou Virak, Theary Seng, Rong Chhun, Thun Saray, Kek Galabru--no, no, no, you can't mean us brown people. You mean your white brothers and sisters you don't like, Brad Adams, Clair Duffy, Steve Heder, Nate Thayer etc].
As the tribunal approaches another climax/crisis, we are going to need yet another focused bout of creative thinking, constructive discourse and mutually agreed determination to see this through – not to mention great big dollops of humility and goodwill [lots of big ideas, Paul Everingham. Lots of false humility, Paul Everingham. Lots of ill-will, Paul Everingham]. (And money! [Yeah! As in how much are they paying you for this ranting?])
So if anybody is thinking of mounting up their noble steed, donning a white Stetson and charging off to emanate the dear, departed, good knight Kasper-Ansermet, please, please, please reconsider [oh, oh, you're breaking my brown-person's heart! Stirring! the 3 pleases are so heartfelt that am teary-eyed just reading it. I'm choking up...]
The very last thing we need right now is another mythic hero [or a real-life imbecile, shameless to do the bidding of Big Brother. What the real brown Cambodians need is more of LKAs!]. It is bridge-builders and hard-core realists who will be particularly required during the coming months.
Paul Everingham is an independent researcher at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia. [Isn't that an oxymoron? "independent...at Eccc" the Clown?]
So noble and courageous, as he cavalry-charged into the midst of the Khmer Rouge tribunal on his bold, white-man’s stallion of certainty and self-righteousness [Really, what is the going rate for the type of you to do this bloody regime's bidding? Does this Commie regime pay you by the word or by the letter, with bonuses for words such as "cavalry-charged, white-man's stallion of certainty and self-righteousness"? That's quite a mouthful there, Paul Everingham!]
[CHEAP SHOT! Especially, the "white-man" reference. As is often the case, the likes of you Paul Everingham, employ cheap hypocritical words with abandon. I have a "whiteness" barometer; let's test how white you are in comparison to how white LKA is, because it matters, really, really matters, the world to us victims--oh, that's right! you speak for the victims, because you're...? you are...? Paul Everingham?? who are you again?--in pushing for Cases 003/4]
[BTW, integrity is colorblind. A universal virtue. Ageless. Obviously, the likes of you will never understand the quality of LKA.]
This foray was reminiscent, in both its nature and its ultimate failure, of such holy crusades as the French “mission civilisatrice”, of the first bright-eyed US advisers striding into Vietnam circa 1963, or perhaps the current crop of Kansas missionaries in Koh Kong. [Ooooh, ooohhh! how you defend us brown people!!! How many brownie points do you get for this? Let's cull up nasty colonial history, have cheap shots on religion, that have nothing to do with anything of wanting to see Cases 003/4 move forward!!]
It beggars belief that an intelligent person with any degree of sensitivity, understanding of history or personal humility would ever undertake the course of action that this judge chose [am at a loss for words, so will chuckle instead! No, no, make that the white-man's LOL (or is it, lol?)].
I am no expert on the current best practices of jurisprudence around the world, so perhaps somebody could advise me if there is any precedent for a judge to be criticising his would-be colleagues and commenting on cases he would soon be adjudicating in a series of 166 tweets [oooohhh, it sounds so serious! what infractions!!! Wait, there's near universal criticism of Cases003/4 in all the news articles LKA forwarded; what else was he to forward? Make up rosy stories of 003/4?] – all of this within the context of one of the most complex, sensitive and important legal exercises [you mean the cakewalk Tuol Sleng case where Duch confessed and cooperated, or the case 002 which should be the heart of the matter, but is only a mini-trial now only beginning 6 years after Eccc the Clown's operation? But aren't we talking about Cases 003/4? You are a split (or, is it spit? split spit?) image of your Big Brother! Mix, confuse the issues; employ emotional language as if defending (NOT!) the Cambodians] undertaken in recent times.
Kasper-Ansermet’s blinkered, black-letter-law justifications for riding roughshod over Cambodian [wow! there's a humble opinion of white-man-sounding-name Paul Everingham, speaking for "Cambodian", when it's your Big Brother this bloody regime's] (and, indeed, universal) courtesies and protocols were as ignorant in manner as they were counter-productive in outcome. [BTW, speaking about Cambodians, you white-man-sounding-name Paul Everingham, why is it that out of 14 M Cambodians, most if not all are "victims", only a few thousands are "civil parties" and of these civil parties, they are not given adequate information on/by Eccc the Clown. Actually, if you white-man-sounding-name Paul Everingham, who must think you're so Cambodian--maybe because of your forays in and out of Cambodia, you've gotten to know a bit of Cambodian girls' flesh among the whiteman's pubs?! No?!, or is it because the fluency of your Khmer language, "Same Same But Different, Huh! Huh! Oh, wait, that's still English"--to come to defend us valiantly [insert white-man's LOL!, or is lol!]
Did he really believe he would advance the cause of good Cambodian legal practice [yes, yes, we have so many examples of "good Cambodian legal practice"; I can count all two of them!], and the progression of the trials, by announcing to the world’s media that he would carry on his duties with a determined disregard for the majority stakeholders [oh-oh! oh-oh! I thought you're speaking for us brown people, white-man-sounding-name Paul Everingham? but you continue to only mean the international community of donors and states with their realpolitik interests in satellite Cambodia] in this partnership the Cambodians? [
Whatever the ethical rights and wrongs of his stance, the learned judge seemed to possess very little understanding of human nature, historical context or Cambodian [you mean, powerful Cambodian elite, all 20 families iron-fistedly ruling this Kingdom of Wonder, your Big Brother? why you never take side of us brown little people, Paul Everingham, even when you vulgarly professed loudly so?!??] sensitivities.
His inexplicable strategy of in-your-face public confrontation was bound not only to fail [ooooohhh, now you've become a prophet, but of course not the kind of the Kansas Christians in Koh Kong, who BTW probably speak Khmer, which by the way is the language of this Kingdom of Wonder] but, if continued, to become a very real danger to the continued existence of the tribunal [you mean, POLITICAL THEATRE].
The 33-year saga of establishing, and now holding, these trials is an extraordinary story of triumph [insert, OF POLITICS] over an incredibly complex mix of practical difficulties, political pressures [a strand of concession to make your ranting "objective", Paul Everingham?? LOL!, or is it lol!?] and red-raw human sensitivities.
All of these factors are still present today.
The robustness of the Cambodian people’s [why you insist on speaking for us brown people, when its the elite Big Brother of bloody hands you refer to?????] commitment to holding these [Stalinist SHOW] trials, and the sustained skills, goodwill and dedication of a small band of national and international facilitators over three decades, should not hide the parallel and equally true reality that this tribunal is, and has been at every stage of its history, also very fragile.
As has been the case at least half a dozen times before, the Khmer Rouge tribunal is approaching a very difficult stage – another apparent impasse.
The resignation of Kasper-Ansermet has reduced the immediate threat of collapse [you think so, eh? LOL! or is it lol!? why then Big Brother employ you to rant so?], but some crucial issues remain.
The particular “sticking point” on this occasion are the conflicting views, both inside the court and outside, on whether to proceed beyond Case 002.
Scenarios such as this, including those involving political considerations, are not unexpected; they were widely discussed and documented during the tribunal’s formative process. [What kind of a researcher are you that you can't read properly all the documents and reports by bonafide Cambodia experts, the likes of David Scheffer, Steve Heder, Brad Adams, etc.? Hey, white-man-sounding-name Paul Everingham, the devil is in the details, no?]
It has long been accepted that the formulation, the establishment and even the ongoing conduct of these trials would be an evolving creative process.
This fluid approach was validated, as experience has repeatedly demonstrated that even seemingly insurmountable difficulties could eventually be overcome with commitment, negotiation and diplomacy stage by stage.
The Khmer Rouge tribunal is a unique legal structure [in its super-majority hybrid imbicility, 'That's all, that's all'--sung as a tune, imagine Michael Buble singing so] and still a work in progress.
The judges are, in effect, creating important new legal principles and practices [No, no, "cowardice", "arbitrariness" are not new principles, nor new practices] “on the run” [we wish most of them would be on the run, get as far away from the brown people, so they cannot do more destruction] with many of their seemingly humdrum daily rulings.
On another level, a lot of new ground will also be broken over the next few months as the various stakeholders make a series of crucial decisions about what comes next.
These decisions, as always, as everywhere, will be based on a combination of human, political and practical factors as much as on matters of principle.
Personally, I believe that this searching for, and finding, new ways to actualise high principles of law and justice within the parameters of the cold, hard, real world, to be one of the many exciting and significant facets of this whole grand opera.
Indeed, it would wonderful if there was more constructive public discussion centred on these and other more instructive topics – rather than, for example, the daily undermining of the court by some of the human-rights ideologues [let see, you must mean those selfish people who daily put their lives on the line like Ou Virak, Theary Seng, Rong Chhun, Thun Saray, Kek Galabru--no, no, no, you can't mean us brown people. You mean your white brothers and sisters you don't like, Brad Adams, Clair Duffy, Steve Heder, Nate Thayer etc].
As the tribunal approaches another climax/crisis, we are going to need yet another focused bout of creative thinking, constructive discourse and mutually agreed determination to see this through – not to mention great big dollops of humility and goodwill [lots of big ideas, Paul Everingham. Lots of false humility, Paul Everingham. Lots of ill-will, Paul Everingham]. (And money! [Yeah! As in how much are they paying you for this ranting?])
So if anybody is thinking of mounting up their noble steed, donning a white Stetson and charging off to emanate the dear, departed, good knight Kasper-Ansermet, please, please, please reconsider [oh, oh, you're breaking my brown-person's heart! Stirring! the 3 pleases are so heartfelt that am teary-eyed just reading it. I'm choking up...]
The very last thing we need right now is another mythic hero [or a real-life imbecile, shameless to do the bidding of Big Brother. What the real brown Cambodians need is more of LKAs!]. It is bridge-builders and hard-core realists who will be particularly required during the coming months.
Paul Everingham is an independent researcher at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia. [Isn't that an oxymoron? "independent...at Eccc" the Clown?]
20 comments:
Thank you for the explanation KD and KI Media.
At first i couldnt work out what he was saying, was he attacking Judge Kasper-Ansermet honor or was he defending his honor.
Reading between the line, Paul Everingham is just another redneck looser leeching our last hope of finding peace. I hope CPP pays him well, and i hope his boss traitor Youk Chaang pays him handsomely for his little cheap shot attacking the Judge's integrity.
This redneck looser is definitely playing the CPP game, maybe its about time he leaves Cambodia and find another position in another office in his OWN country.
I dare this redneck looser to have an open discussion with us and see if he can still keep his so called "noble and courageous" intact with the real Khmer and real victims.
So, Paul Everingham, I ask you now, are you a COWARD or are you the knight in "cavalry-charged" stance as you self righteously believe!?
Aus.
As you all know the crossed-eye Alan Meyer is the husband Helen Jaivis from Syndey, Australia. Both are Executive members of the Australian Socialist Party, an outgrow of the australian communist party. Meyer was/is a writer and editor for the couumnist Green left Weekly (Sydney) which is/has been a mouthpiece for Hun Sen and his criminal synicate, the CPP.
Helen Jaris was head of the school of information of the univerisity of New south Wales. She was fired from the position for misappropriation (stealing) of the Austraian aid/money to the KR "trials?. The stolen money was used to buy a house in cambodia. since she is a foreigner and thus could not own a property, Hun Sen gave her khmer citizenship so she can own the property. Hellen Jaivis is currently a notetaker (calls herself Advisor to Sok An) at the Council of Ministers for the sino Sok An (born Sok Chung).
You would have noticed, alan Meyer would use the Greel left Weekly to attack any one who has an unpleasant peep on his comradethug Hun Sen and his organised crimes synocate/cpp
12:03 PM, Thank you for the information!! Its good to know the backdrop of all these redneck loosers.
What can i do as an Australian Khmer. What they are doing may be legal in the Banana Kingdom, but surely there must be something we can do to prosecute these criminals back in the Australian soil.
I want to remove these redneck from leeching more souls and send them back here. We must not blindly allow these foreigners to destroy our last hope of finding peace just so they can own villas and property!
It sounds like there may be a form of exchange in property entitlement between Sok An and these Rednecks. I founder how many properties are titled under Alan Meyer and Helen Jaivis back in Australia.
Do we have any evidence?
Thumb up, KD!
Very entertaining to read your reply to read to our "red-neckvillain" (don't you call someboby "red-neckvillain" when he is from "red-neckville"?) or is it "Koh King Kong" man?
Keep up the good work! Enough laughing me for now!
Yours truly,
Lefèvre Utile
When I first read the original article, my reaction was almost identical. Thank you for putting your thoughts in red, it's like an echo.
I also wondered about who "Paul Everingham"; and was deeply skeptical about how deliberately misleading giving his title as "independent researcher at the ECCC".
Whether he is or is not Allen Meyers or not I have no idea. I've seen his occassional letters to the Phnom Penh Post over the years, and I didn't know he is married to Helen Jarvis, and now it all makes sense.Thanks, again.
LOL! Or, is it lol?
Hahaha!
Heeheehee!
Hawhawhaw!
Paul Everinghamhamham!
I smell a rat in the Everingham!
Guys,
I would suggest you to read the link below about Paul Everingham and let us know it is him or not. If it is him, then write the letter to him if he ever involve the chat forum there or maybe he was scammed or someone stole his name on that forum
http://www.everingham.com/family/data2/article009.html
Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Everingham
This Paul Everingham must be amongst a group of White Westerners who have profitted handsomely from being "independent". He reminds me of another staunch defender of the CPP, and of hun Sen in particular, one KJE. In his blog, KJE claims to be "independent" and fair-minded, but don't go around looking for any criticism of Hun Sen or the CPP in his blog. No, no, no , that is just not possible with these "independent" people. To them, everything the CPP touches turns to gold. Their mantra is "economic development and political stability". At what cost to the local Cambodians they don't give a shit about. As long as that "development" benefits them, and that "political stability" allows them to carry on having the ears, hearts, and minds of the CPP and Hun Sen, so they can go on with gaining advantage from the "development". Often, their yardstick, like their CPP masters, is the Khmer Rouge years. They are afraid to let the CPP be compared against anyone else, in case the shortcomings- and therefore their advice- are bared for the world to see. Whether in social justice or legal justice, they attack anyone that dares to raise any suspicion about the CPP. Why? Becasue they and people like them, in reality are stooges of the CPP and Hun Sen, and they will do almost anything to ensure that the gang of traitors remain in power. While these people may sometimes go back to their country of origin and big-note themselves for "helping" Cambodia, they are in fact just helping the CPP to carry on raping Cambodia.
Is this some kind of personal crap?
and are you also another arrogant imbecile CPP dog?
And does it make you, a double arrogant imbecile bigger dog?
You ask other people to play by the rule:
“Please leave out personal attacks, do not use profanity.”
For the record I hate the CPP, without them Cambodia would be a better country.
And I don’t want to be your frenemy either.
The article sounds like your personal problem with them, it annoys me and other.
WTF!
Yes that what I would say too: WTF!
Another relative of yours, Helen Jarvis?
No offense KD but from the title, it sounds like you are not happy with some Helen Jarvis.
As I read on about half way into the article I am lost, but the people who know the story before hand may understand it.
Can you summarize in a few sentences what are you unhappy about?
I know your concern is for the good of the nation, and I like to understand it too.
11:51 PM, CPP Dog, here are some more information about Helen Jarvis.
Jarvis is an Australian academic with a longterm interest in the region, who was recently awarded Cambodian citizenship. She is also a member of the Leninist Party Faction in Australia. In 2006 she signed a party letter that included this passage: "We too are Marxists and believe that 'the ends justify the means'. But for the means to be justifiable, the ends must also be held to account. In time of revolution and civil war, the most extreme measures will sometimes become necessary and justified. Against the bourgeoisie and their state agencies we don't respect their laws and their fake moral principles."
Current position:
Advisor to Senior Minister of the Council of Ministers, Royal Government of Cambodia on the Khmer Rouge Trial, and on national information policy, information management, librarianship, Cambodian politics, international humanitarian law, information management, librarianship, Cambodian politics, international humanitarian law.
In simple terms, Helen Jarvis and her husband are
-members of Australian Socialist Party
-members of the Maxists theorists
-members of Green Left Weekly
-advisors to Sok An, one of the nine Deputy PM.
11:51 PM, Does you help you to understand who Helen Jarvis is?
6:30 AM
Ok you motherfucker, you give me no choice but to retaliate with your first sentence, and you are fully deserved it.
I don’t think anybody give a fuck about this Helen Jarvis except a few of your buddies.
Hun Sen has given citizenship to Angelina Jolie too, but nobody give a shit.
François Mitterrand was a communist but he was a good French President.
Oh I forget put Ah in front Hun Sen’s name so I meant to say Ah Hun Sen.
6:30 AM
You are hungry and you ask me for food to eat.
I give you some food with some of my stinking shit in it.
And I ask you: “How is my food, is it good?”
I hope it gets into Einstein’s head.
Theary Seng calling cheap shots as usual
Post a Comment