Ludicrous Attack on Assange 113


The decision to put Julian Assange in a cell over ludicrous sexual offence allegations is a politically motivated act that must be resisted. Assange has never been in hiding from the police, and there is no reason at all to believe he would abscond if granted bail.

This is kompromat – the use of sexual allegations to denigrate a person perceived as a threat to the state. They did it to Charles Parnell and Roger Casement and, a lowlier case, to me. This is an article I wrote on August 25:

The Russians call it Kompromat – the use by the state of sexual accusations to destroy a public figure. When I was attacked in this way by the government I worked for, Uzbek dissidents smiled at me, shook their heads and said “Kompromat”. They were used to it from the Soviet and Uzbek governments. They found it rather amusing to find that Western governments did it too.

Well, Julian Assange has been getting the bog standard Kompromat. I had imagined he would get something rather more spectacular, like being framed for murder and found hanging with an orange in his mouth. He deserves a better class of kompromat. If I am a whistleblower, then Julian is a veritable mighty pipe organ. Yet we just have the normal sex stuff, and very weak.

Bizarrely the offence for which Julian is wanted for questioning in Sweden was dropped from rape to sexual harassment, and then from sexual harassment to just harassment. The precise law in Swedish, as translated for me and other Sam Adams alumni by our colleague Major Frank Grevil, reads:

“He who lays hands on or by means of shooting from a firearm, throwing of stones, noise or in any other way harasses another person will be sentenced for harassment to fines or imprisonment for up to one year.”

So from rape to non-sexual something. Actually I rather like that law – if we had it here, I could have had Jack Straw locked up for a year.

Julian tells us that the first woman accuser and prime mover had worked in the Swedish Embassy in Washington DC and had been expelled from Cuba for anti-Cuban government activity, as well as the rather different persona of being a feminist lesbian who owns lesbian night clubs.

Scott Ritter and I are well known whistleblowers subsequently accused of sexual offences. A less well known whistleblower is James Cameron, another FCO employee. Almost simultaneous with my case, a number of the sexual allegations the FCO made against Cameron were identical even in wording to those the FCO initially threw at me.

Another fascinating point about kompromat is that being cleared of the allegations – as happens in virtually every case – doesn’t help, as the blackening of reputation has taken effect. In my own case I was formerly cleared of all allegations of both misconduct and gross misconduct, except for the Kafkaesque charge of having told defence witnesses of the existence of the allegations. The allegations were officially a state secret, even though it was the government who leaked them to the tabloids.

Yet, even to this day, the FCO has refused to acknowledge in public that I was in fact cleared of all charges. This is even true of the new government. A letter I wrote for my MP to pass to William Hague, complaining that the FCO was obscuring the fact that I was cleared on all charges, received a reply from a junior Conservative minister stating that the allegations were serious and had needed to be properly investigated – but still failing to acknowledge the result of the process. Nor has there been any official revelation of who originated these “serious allegations”.

Governments operate in the blackest of ways, especially when it comes to big war money and big oil money. I can see what they are doing to Julian Assange, I know what they did to me and others (another recent example – Brigadier Janis Karpinski was framed for shoplifting). In a very real sense, it makes little difference if they murdered David Kelly or terrified him into doing it himself. Telling the truth is hazardous in today’s Western political system.

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/08/julian_assange_1.html

There are a couple of things to add. The lead complainant is a serial crier of rape who made allegations against someone else which were found groundless, and has published a guide to sexual revenge over men. She consulted with the second complainant before the second complainant went to the police; these are not two unrelated complaints. The second one relates to a Swedish offence of not wearing a condom.

This from Danish WMD whistelblower – jailed for two years for whistleblowing – Major Frank Grevil:

Comparison of crime statistics between the three Scandinavian countries,

which have historically a highly similar societal structure, gives the

remarkable result that the incidence of sexual crimes is about ten times

higher in Sweden than in Denmark or Norway. Usually Sweden’s higher

proportion of unassimilated immigrants from first and foremost islamic

countries is blamed, but it would seem to be only a minor part of the

explanation. Rather, political instructions to the police seem to be the

major reason!

Critics maintain that Sweden has turned into a gynocracy, with some of the

most hateful female politicians – front figures for a party called

“Feministiskt initiativ”* – having publicly declared that male fetuses

should be selectively aborted, and all adult males castrated!

In such an atmosphere of hate, the Swedish police has been instructed to put

all alleged crimes of even the most remotely sexual character under the

statistical heading “rape”. This includes consenting intercourse between

teenagers with the female part being slightly under-age. It also includes

consenting intercourse where the female part was drunk.

So whoever initiated the plot to go for Assange on Swedish sexual charges knew what they were doing.

I am not a fan of radical feminists. They are hate filled individuals whose very souls are ugly. They seem particularly fixated with causing trouble to political radicals. Anyone who knows the real story of the Tommy Sheridan debacle knows that. They succeeded in alienating me from the Stop the War movement

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/04/warning_this_po.html

Now, very much more importantly, they are gunning for Julian Assange at a crucial time for democracy. Silly little girls.


113 thoughts on “Ludicrous Attack on Assange

1 2 3 4
  • writerman

    Ah, Sweden. The girls from Abba, Liv Ullman, Monika Zetterlund, Robyn, Anita Ekberg, Britt Eklund, Anne Margret Olsen… I could go on.

    Sweden is a country of contrasts. Apparently very liberal, but deeply puritanical at the same time, in parallel, rather confusing – especially for the foreigner.

    Swedish sexual etiquette is a minefield, but recent changes in Swedish law to criminalize certain types of sexual behaviour and acts are so complex and subtle that only lawyers understand the details and the full consequences.

    Sweden has also enacted, arguably the most draconian and illiberal laws regarding prostitution in Europe. For example it’s no not only illegal to be a prostitute, but a criminal offence for a man to buy sex from a prostitute. These laws, unsuprisingly haven’t eradicated prostitution, but have driven it underground and criminalized the entire business beyond reason.

    Sweden has also seen the rise recently of the far-right, Swedish People’s Party, which is an openly racist and anti-Muslim party, basically Nazis in suits. This party now holds the balance of power in Sweden. Sweden’s new government is determined to wipe out the old image of Sweden, Olaf Palme’s Sweden, and position the country firmly in the sphere of the American Empire, with all that implies.

    SAPO the Swedish security service has had links with botht the UK security services and the CIA for years, even when such cooperation was banned under Swedish law. Sweden has changed subtley. Once Sweden was proud of its neutrality, now it only proclaims that it is non-aligned. In reality Sweden has turned into a client-state like the UK.

    The case against Assange is very, very, odd. For example he hasn’t actually been charge with anything, no crime. The Swedish authorities only wish to question him about alligations and possible crimes, and this is without telling him in English, verbally or in writing, what these specific alligations are!

    Also it is highly unusual under Swedish law for the authorities to contact Interpol and get them involved in an affair that isn’t even a case, as there are no real charges, only unsubstantiated rumours and alligations. It’s like the cliche that the police would like a person to help them with their inquiries, but it’s almost unheard of to seek someone’s extradition in such a high-profile case merely to talk about alligations, without reference to specific charges, without providing any evidence, only statements from the women envolved.

    And how does one prove “rape” witout any evidence, only the accusations of the two women involved? One is talking about sex here a private act between two people, with two possible versions of events, or perhaps one. Surely this is the word of the man, the man’s version of events, contra the woman’s word and version of events? Your word against mine. There were no independent witnesses in the two bedrooms and no sign of physical violence, or other physical evidence of forced sex, which is surely the definition of rape? So, unless Assange is stupid enough, or has totally incompetent legal advice that he should admit to the charge that he’s guilty of sex-crimes, proving his guilt would seem to be impossible.

    This is why the original prosecutor refused to have anything to do with the case. There was really no crime involved, and if there was, it would be virtually impossible to prove it in a court of law, so the case was dropped.

    Then the Americans got involved and the Swedish government. Both could see mutual advantage in the affair. Sweden could show its fealty to their imperial master, and the Americans saw a golden opportunity to smear Assange, assassinate his character and by extention – Wikileaks, and get him to a country like Swenden which might be willing to hand him over to the Americans without asking too many questions.

    Hell hath no fury like a groupie scorned.

    But one shouldn’t underestimate the real danger Assange is in. The open threats from the Americans are totally outrageous and unacceptable from a civilized nation.

    But then we are moving rapidly towards barbarism and are cherished bourgeois freedoms and rights are being trashed and eroded before our eyes.

    Wikileaks represents the kind of scrutiny our masters do not appriciate. The vengence and venom directed at Assange is designed to make an example of him as a warning to others not to use their democratic rights, or take them too seriously.

    Our leaders hate democracy and have contempt for the people. They rightly see democracy as a real threat to elite rule and oligarchy, and therefore in the age of perpetual, neo-imperialist warfare, with the aim of securing access to and control of vital raw materials, democracy has to go, pensioned off for the duration, and probably for good. Oh, well, it was nice while it lasted.

  • writerman

    This is a headline from a parallel universe, where The Sun is a newspaper.

    Blood-soaked Butchers in the White House claim Wikileaks is endangering lives!

  • Steelback

    Prostrate

    I shouldn’t bother providing them with links,mate.

    These guys read The Guardian (LOL) and think it’s all they need. That’s how they get to believe Assange’s a genuine whistle-blower.

    Since when did whistleblowers:

    (a) get saturation coverage on BBC and corporate media

    (b) remain upright and breathing after being exposed?

    Muad’ Dib the 7/7 Ripple Effect film-maker gave this interview just before he was extradited back to UK:

    http://mtrial.org/node/42

    Now we’ve got Assange on the front of Time and Jemima Khan ( nee Goldsmith ) speaking on his behalf and most commenters here haven’t smelled singed rat yet?

    Let’s re-name this tread:

    ASSANGE:LUDICROUS DIVERSION!

    http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2010/12/assanges-wikileaks-is-fake.html

  • writerman

    And finally… sorry. I think Assange was naive, and maybe even an idealist, perhaps arrogantly so, to actually believe that we still live in a liberal democracy, despite its obvious drawbacks, and that Wikileaks could make a valuable difference and make democracy work.

    And that liberal values, the law, and basic human rights would function to protect him, like they are supposed to. Only he believed to much and didn’t fully appriciate that we are at war. The war of the rich and powerful against everyone else. And in a global, class war, they don’t give a flying fuck about bourgeois civil rights or fundamental liberties. Fuck that, blow his head off! Democracy is dying in front of our eyes, enjoy it while you still can. It won’t be around for long.

  • Apostate

    writerman

    The only parallel universe you need to worry about is the one you’re in.

    Kerb-crawling in Sweden will get you in a lot of trouble. Mind you-seems like you know how to cruise discreetly!

    Has it not occurred to you that you’re being taken for a ride round some back-streets away from the main event?

    You’re now discussing Julian Assange’s sexual proclivities and their legal implications like they really mattered.

    Looks like they got you to take your eye off the ball and you took a sucker punch from a “silent weapon”.

    Maybe you could take the time to read around the subject a bit more and then come back and say something worthwhile.

    Currently you’re just controlled opposition. Bit like Assange.

    http://kennysideshow.blogspot.com/

  • Mark Golding - Children of Iraq

    ” Democracy is dying in front of our eyes, enjoy it while you still can. It won’t be around for long.” – ‘Writerman’ December 2010

    “Before our white brothers arrived to make us civilized men, we didn’t have any kind of prison. Because of this, we had no delinquents.

    Without a prison, there can be no delinquents. We had no locks nor keys and therefore among us there were no thieves. When someone was so poor that he couldn’t afford a horse, a tent or a blanket, he would, in that case, receive it all as a gift. We were too uncivilized to give great importance to private property.

    We didn’t know any kind of money and consequently, the value of a human being

    was not determined by his wealth.

    We had no written laws laid down, no lawyers, no politicians, therefore we were not able to cheat and swindle one another.

    We were really in bad shape before the white men arrived and I don’t know

    how to explain how we were able to manage without these fundamental things

    that (so they tell us) are so necessary for a civilized society.”

    John (Fire) Lame Deer

    Sioux Lakota – 1903-1976

  • Ruth

    As the intelligence services have control over most of the media when necessary why haven’t they restricted WikiLeaks’ revelatons?

  • Clark

    “I’d just like to say to all those beautiful people out there… There are more of us ugly motherfuckers than you.”

  • angrysoba

    Yeah, I bet this is all just a clever way in which he can be debriefed by his NWO overlords!

    Does anyone apart from Alfred and the Apostate/Steelback people still believe that?

    But seriously, I seem to remember that when this story first broke way back in August it was opined here that the charges had no basis whatsoever, as what on Earth would Assange be doing putting himself at risk like that just at the very moment he was releasing the war diaries?

    Now, does anyone here still believe there was NO basis to the allegations?

    Does anyone still take the modified position that the women involved were CIA/Mossad honey traps?

    Does anyone think that this is a plot by the radical feminist-“gynocratic” mafia?

    And finally, didn’t Assange himself arrange for the arrest, i.e didn’t he turn himself in to face the charges?

  • Toby

    From my understanding the Swedish police often do not investigate some types of sex crimes because of the circumstances writerman outlines. They know that some women will use the law to enact revenge on ex-boyfriends and others they dislike and it is often not worth their time and effort to investigate what is mostly ill conceived feminist laws. The consequence of this is that some genuine cases do not get investigated. If this was a normal case (JA) it would have been dismissed early on and the complainant would receive a letter of no further action. To issue an international arrest warrant would be totally unheard of.

    As for prostitution being driven underground, it just leads to further exploitation of women, many of whom are foreigners who have run away from countries where they had been persecuted. From the frying pan to the fire.

  • glenn

    angry: Of course he turned himself in to face the charges. Otherwise, he’d have been a fugitive on the run, which itself could be considered a punishable crime for which he’d be facing charges. As it is, he’s still in the position of not being guilty of any crime for which he is charged.

    I think he wanted to be in the UK, because this is one of the very few countries in which it is _highly_ unlikely that one is shot while trying to escape from the police. Despite its many faults, the UK has a tiny problem with gun crime. Catching a stray bullet is more rare here than possibly anywhere else. Despite their lackings, the police are about the best too. If you don’t want to unexpectedly wind up dead, poor Dr. Mitty notwithstanding, you’re probably wise to sit it out here.

    If there was more to the allegation than has been revealed so far, Sweden is surely withholding it because it wishes to be ridiculed further. (In other words, no – there doesn’t appear to be more to the story.) However, it seems probably that Sweden wants to get hold of Assange so that they can hand him over to the Yanks at the first excuse. And as we know, the Yanks don’t need to bother with niceties like charges and due process, because the US is not a civilised country.

  • Duncan McFarlane

    Mark – I’m just as critical as you of what British and US governments have done in Iraq – the invasion (purely for oil, profits and power) , the systematic torture and the death squads trained and run by US military handlers from El Salvador to Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan (though calling it ‘genocide’ is an exaggeration – it’s a war of aggression along with various war crimes. They don’t give a shit how many Iraqis die or are killed, but they’re not out to wipe them out as a race or religion, ethnic group or nationality). I also condemn Israel’s the Israeli government’s blockades and killings in the West Bank and Gaza – and the support of other governments for it.

    However Iran is not a real democracy and if you read Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch reports you’ll find they torture and kill dissidents and critics of their regime – and their government is as or more corrupt as the US or British governments.

    There are some elected officials and they have some say, but when the ‘Leader’ (Khamenei) has the final say, when half of most of the ruling councils are appointed, with the other half only indirectly elected, calling them as democratic as the US or UK is simply untrue – especially when candidates are vetoed by the hundred by religious councils at every election – and when opposition campaigners and journalists are tortured and murdered by the country’s secret police and hired thugs.

    Every election in Iran has also been rigged on an even greater scale than the 2000 US Presidential election was.

    The US and British governments do all this in their foreign policy – which is completely wrong and i condemn it – but they allow 99.9% of their people far greater political freedoms and civil rights and freedom of speech at home. The Iranian government does not.

    You say you were grateful for Press TV letting you criticise torture and on the shameful attack on the Gaza flotilla.

    Of course Press TV lets you criticise the enemies of the Iranian government – the Israeli, British and US militaries and governments. It does not let Iranians criticise torture, murders, oppression and corruption by it’s own government though – and even tortures dissidents into televised “confessions” shown on Press TV which are as bad as the “Terrorists in the hands of justice” one Ayad Allawi ran as a US puppet in Iraq.

    So i’m afraid you’re just swapping one propaganda outlet censored by it’s government for another. Press TV doesn’t even have the amount of freedom to criticise it’s own government’s actions that the BBC has – and the BBC since the purging over Kelly and Gilligan has little.

  • Duncan McFarlane

    Freeborn wrote

    “We gaze awestruck at the fortitude of self-designated “whistleblowers” like Murray, Ritter and-most improbable of all-Julian Assange! We marvel at their martyrdom on our behalf and the sordid depths to which the establishment will go to discredit them.”

    When you imply Craig Murray is not a genuine whistleblower, i stop listening to you, because i know for a fact that you’re wrong on that.

  • Alec Leaver

    The Swedes have stated that there is no chance Assange will be passed on to America unless the British and Swedish governments agree.

    Claude Cockburn used to say “Never believe a rumour until it is officially denied”.

    This guy is in serious peril.

  • angrysoba

    The Aussie PM seems to have thrown him under the bus:

    “Julia Gillard has also stated that Mr Assange acted illegally in publishing the cables.

    Mr Assange’s British solicitor, Mark Stephens, told The Australian that his legal team were examining the Prime Minister’s comments and considering a defamation action against her.

    Ms Gillard yesterday refused to specify what laws Mr Assange might have broken. “The foundation stone of it is an illegal act,” Ms Gillard said.”

    While there is a possibility that she is part of the gynocratic conspiracy, the WikiLeaks themselves are clearly not illegal.

    Glenn: “If there was more to the allegation than has been revealed so far, Sweden is surely withholding it because it wishes to be ridiculed further. (In other words, no – there doesn’t appear to be more to the story.)”

    According to this Davros-Thatcher-lookalike-owned-newspaper report, the allegations are this:

    “Mr Assange faces two counts of sexual molestation, one count of unlawful coercion and one count of rape involving two women in Sweden in August.

    In the most details yet released about the allegations, Ms Lindfield said that in the cases of both women the allegations related to him refusing to wear a condom during sex. He was also accused of having sex with one of the women by exploiting the fact that she was asleep, and another count said that he had held a woman’s arms and forced open her legs so he could have sex with her.”

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/wikileaks/assange-arrested-in-london/story-fn775xjq-1225967260554

    (Gemma Lindfield, representing the Swedish prosecution service)

    Glenn: “However, it seems probably that Sweden wants to get hold of Assange so that they can hand him over to the Yanks at the first excuse. And as we know, the Yanks don’t need to bother with niceties like charges and due process, because the US is not a civilised country.”

    This is a bit of an odd idea. Why do you think it more likely that Sweden would hand Assange over to the US than the UK?

    If the US could form a case against Assange to say that he has committed a crime and wants him extradited then surely it would be just as easy to do that through the UK. What is necessary to your theory about having him first extradited to Sweden?

  • Jaded.

    Another possibility is that Wikileaks is genuine, but was set up with these leaks from the off. They could get out all their false propaganda, take a few hits as collateral damage, take down Assange with the site and push for more internet restrictions. Anyone think that’s a feasible scenario?

  • angrysoba

    From that article, if I WERE a conspiracy theorist I would find this troubling:

    “Ms Lindfield, for the Swedish government, argued that because of the notoriety generated by WikiLeaks publishing thousands of secret US military and diplomatic cables Mr Assange risked being attacked “by an unstable person” if he was granted bail and allowed to stay at large in London.”

    “An unstable person”? Isn’t that a bit like something bad cops say on Hollywood movies, “We wouldn’t want you to have an *accident* now would we? We wouldn’t want *some crazy person* to attack you, would we?”

  • Jaded.

    Sorry, I meant to ask if anyone ‘sane’ thought that was a feasible scenario. Unfortunately, that excludes the resident forum crazy known as St. Louis Soba. Hard lines my son. 😉

  • Lucretius

    Jaded said:

    “Sorry, I meant to ask if anyone ‘sane’ thought that was a feasible scenario.”

    Ha! well now thats a different question altogether.

    But being sane, relatively, I’d say, yes, your scenario is perfectly feasible. However, it seems a little simple minded. Most likely Wikileaks is a serious project in cognitive infiltration aimed at creating a whole new alternative medium — run by bastards who brought you the war on terror.

  • Luc

    Angry said “if I WERE a conspiracy theorist”

    Christ, Angry, if you were a conspiracy theorist, I’d apply to join the CIA.

  • glenn

    Hey Angry… It appears Australia hasn’t completely abandoned Assange after all:

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/australia-vows-assange/

    That a woman subjected to violent treatment by Assange as you suggest she was here, would then ‘tweet’ about her ‘conquest’ not long afterwards seems pretty hard to believe. But you’d know that. It does not appear that you’re putting forward a case in which you actually believe, yet again. I know lawyers are sometimes required to do that, and it can be a profitable exercise on occasion to argue for something you positively _do not_ agree with. While I’m not clear of your personal reasons for doing it, it’s very clear that is precisely what you are doing.

    *

    It’s clear that Sweden is necessary for Assange’s kompromating. Once he’s in custody for that, in a country that has proved compliant enough to provide this service, he’ll be ready for whatever excuse the US brings up. The American public should be sufficiently disinterested by that point, left only with a memory that this ‘traitor’ was a sexual predator or somesuch. He needs to be pinned down on a salacious charge in a compliant country – that’s the important thing.

    *

    Jaded – I don’t think so, the US administration appears genuinely wounded by these ongoing revelations. Some very powerful players (the Clintons in particular) have been savaged, and the whole method of operation of the US diplomatic service called into serious question and disrepute. We’re seeing a genuine major battle being played out here. Assange is only alive because he’s got very serious secrets, but Powers That Be are getting rather anxious, because these secrets are going to be told sooner or later in any case. Assange’s real insurance is that the PTB _think_ he’s got their own personal secrets ready to be revealed, but might be held off for a while. He’s only buying himself a relatively small amount of time.

  • Courtenay Barnett

    Have been busy in court, but did take a little time to check on what they say Julian had done. A little randy by ‘alf – or double that – he had two bites of the cherry. But nothing to imprison a man about. The establishment is running its game – let’s see how it plays out.

  • Courtenay Barnett

    I do not know and did not study Swedish law, having been qualified in England and in the Caribbean, but let’s use reasonable sense:-

    ” He who lays hands on or by means of shooting from a firearm, throwing of stones, noise or in any other way harasses another person will be sentenced for harassment to fines or imprisonment for up to one year.”

    Well I assume that Swedish criminal law also has an equivalent of mens rea ( the guilty mind) in relation to the actus reus ( he did the act(s) – she wanted sex – he gave it to her – another wanted sex – he also gave it to her). Well the actus reus without the mens rea won’t make the charge stick, but – as I said – I never studied Swedish law.

  • Courtenay Barnett

    @ Craig,

    ” Yet, even to this day, the FCO has refused to acknowledge in public that I was in fact cleared of all charges. This is even true of the new government.”

    So what? I was arrested, charged for contempt of court and to this day remain quite pleased that they convicted me – because my points stand and the system had no answers. So be it – you do not need the establishment’s approval when you live by your own standards and are honest.

  • angrysoba

    “Hey Angry… It appears Australia hasn’t completely abandoned Assange after all”

    Hey Glenn! It appears I never said that:

    “The Aussie PM seems to have thrown him under the bus:”

    The Aussie _PM_! Kevin Rudd is no longer the Aussie PM and all he is actually saying is that Assange will receive consular support in the same way any Aussie citizen would. Hardly an overwhelming vote of confidence seeing as the same applies to drug smugglers in South East Asia.

    “That a woman subjected to violent treatment by Assange as you suggest she was here, would then ‘tweet’ about her ‘conquest’ not long afterwards seems pretty hard to believe.”

    I didn’t suggest anyone was subject to violent treatment. I merely quoted what was in the paper after you said:

    “If there was more to the allegation than has been revealed so far, Sweden is surely withholding it because it wishes to be ridiculed further. (In other words, no – there doesn’t appear to be more to the story.)”

    Now I don’t know what you had known was “revealed so far” and how you know that Sweden “wishes to be ridiculed further”.

  • Jaded.

    Angrysoba – ‘:-)

    That was one of the give-aways when you were impersonating me by the way Jaded.’

    Oh angry, has it really come to this? Trying to defend the last remaining vestiges of your sanity by clinging desperately to a few keystrokes? I am very sorry to say this, but it seems you have almost evolved into a complete caricature of yourself. They say that can be very dangerous and damaging you know. I would suggest a lengthy vacation from Craig’s blog as the necessary remedy. Also, please take notice of the other advice I have discreetly furnished you with.

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.