When I hear some bias comment from high graduate people looklike Dr.... that were given comment before.
That are root real problem of this politic crisis ,because the group of high graduate just talk and talk and talk to much. They choose make more discusion to look for the best way for Thais(all group opinion) But they don't like becuase in they class their job is talk and talk only.
But I cheer you Ta Bun Heng (You can show your opinion and you have some channel to recieved many different opinion.
We should learn more historic cartoon in Ta Bun Heng blog for understanding about polictical game in Cambodia. Sihanouk to Lonnon to Pol Pot to Yaun to Hun Sen. Who win in this game?
Monarchy to Democracy? to Socialist to...????
Just big dramatic political show. Thais should think what is best solution for us.
I agree with you comment about the high graduate people in Thailand that give a many stupid opinion, I don't like them, too.
But I'm not a doctor in politic or economic or law... I'm just a medical doctor...in a small province close to Thai-Lao border.
You see...
I cannot do anythings when Thailand in crisis. People who are not in Bangkok may be looked as "second-class" people. Someone in Bangkok (Like Sumo Tuu) thought, people in suburban is very stupid, they should not have right to vote the election !!!???
So I can just see the TV, finding the truth in internet, sometime I join with anti-coup and some democretic group...I have a "Anti-PAD" sticker on my car and bicycle....Oneday I found that someone scratched around my car.
I'm not a Royalist.... I think, King and Royal family is made by (?) to be God, whom untouchable. The story of the king and his family is like a myth. That is not true, somebody or somegroup try to make this propraganda to all Thais.
In Thailand, we cannot see cartoon or journal like this, but many Thais have some concept that cannot speak in their mind...
Some of These cartoon tell us, the things we think, and I want all Thais to stop looking themselve as the center of everything and look into the world outside Thailand. And open their mind for every opinion.
If we can, Thailand will not go into crisis, again
In thailand, there had been an explosive situation faced under the leadership of the millilary government, that has been going on for 55 years. Since 1932, Siem had 14 constitutional laws, 16 elections, 18 Coups d'Etat militaires, and 17 cabinets of government. Among the 17 changed prime ministers, 8 of them were high ranking millitery commander, 9 of them were high ranking civil servants. This country was powered for 40 years by the millitary leaders, and for 11 years by the civils; however, the ministers of any ministeries were millilarians. All of the prime ministers nominated in the Thailand history used to be millarians.
All of things were exercised on the peasants for attraction because its city was built for infant trafficking ( children captured from the north-east and sold in Bankok). Because of the unemployment and drug problems, the rich and civil servants were forced to share their markets and powers. And most of the businessmen were Chinese.
In Thailand, there were a numerious separatist organizations, called Pattant National Liberation Organization (PNLO) that rovolt with army weapons against the power of Bangkok. The security problems took place all over the north-east part of Thailand and mountainous areas where 10% of people were controlled by the Thai Communist Party (TCP) formed since 1939 with the support from China and north Vietnam. It was known that in 1978, Deng Xia Ping, Vice-president of China, visited QG (Quartier General), means " Anti-querillar school, located in Lop-Buri of Thailand." However, Bejiing was extremely concerned about this movement, because this party had a closest tendency to Hanio. There, a Radio station, named as "Thai People Voice Radio" broadcasted from Yun-Nan that its broadcasting strength was equal to the one in Bejiing so as to have an influence on the public. ( continued......) From: S K M France
Who believe that the Thai King has no political power is wrong. The Thai King is a real ruler of Thailand. Thais pretend to put the blame on each other, the PAD blame on the PPP, the PPP blame on the PAD, the Thai govt blame on the Thai military, the Thai military blame on the PPP, but at the end the Thai King is the benefit and he is the only one look so clean and so innocent.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008 The king and them [-This article is banned in Thailand]
Thailand's monarchy
Dec 4th 2008 From The Economist print edition
The untold story of the palace’s role behind the collapse of Thai democracy
THAILAND’S tourism business, its export industries and its reputation have been wrecked by recent events. Crowds of royalists have occupied the government’s offices for months and then seized Bangkok’s airports. The police refused to evict them. The army refused to help. This week the siege was ended after the courts disbanded three parties in the ruling coalition. But the parties plan to re-form under new names and continue governing, so fresh strife threatens. It is as if a thin veneer of modernity, applied during the boom of the 1980s and early 1990s, has peeled away. Until recently a beacon of Asian pluralism, Thailand is sliding into anarchy.
The conflict began three years ago as peaceful rallies against corruption and abuse of power in the government of Thaksin Shinawatra. The protesters, wearing royal-yellow shirts and accusing Mr Thaksin of being a closet republican, got their way when royalist generals removed him in the coup of 2006. But on democracy’s restoration last year, Thais elected a coalition led by Mr Thaksin’s allies. The yellow-shirts of the inaptly named People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) revived their protests and adopted increasingly thuggish tactics, prompting Mr Thaksin’s supporters to don red shirts and fight back.
Speak it not
Throughout this conflict, the great unmentionable, not just for the Thai press but also for most foreign reporters, has been the role of King Bhumibol, his family and their closest courtiers. The world’s most ferociously enforced law against lèse-majesté (offending the crown) prevents even the mildest discussion of the palace’s role in Thai public life. Such laws are mostly in disuse elsewhere, but Thailand’s was harshened in the 1970s. Absurdly, anyone can bring a lèse-majesté suit. The police have to take seriously the most trivial complaints. All this makes the law a useful tool for politicians and others seeking a way to damage their foes. Often, the press is not allowed to explain the nature of any supposed offence against the crown, so Thais have no way to tell whether it really was so disrespectful.
The lèse-majesté law is an outrage in itself. It should not be enforced in any country with democratic pretensions. Worse is that the law hides from Thais some of the reasons for their chronic political woes. For what the king himself calls the “mess” Thailand is in stems in many ways from his own meddling in politics during his 62-year reign (see article). In part, the strife also reflects jockeying for power ahead of the succession. With the king celebrating his 81st birthday on December 5th, that event looms ever larger.
Much of the story of how the king’s actions have hurt his country’s politics is unfamiliar because Thais have not been allowed to hear it. Some may find our criticisms upsetting, but we do not make them gratuitously. Thailand needs open debate if it is to prepare for the time when a less revered monarch ascends the throne. It cannot be good for a country to subscribe to a fairy-tale version of its own history in which the king never does wrong, stays above politics and only ever intervenes on the side of democracy. None of that is true.
The official version of Thai history dwells on episodes such as the events of 1992, when Bhumibol forced the resignation of a bloodstained dictator and set his country on course for democracy. But many less creditable royal interventions have gone underreported and are seldom discussed. In 1976, paranoid about the communist threat, the king appeared to condone the growth of the right-wing vigilante movement whose members later took part in the slaughter of unarmed student protesters. In the cold war America saw Bhumibol as a staunch ally and helped finance his image-making machine. This long-standing alliance and the fierce lèse-majesté law have led Western diplomats, academics and journalists to bite their tongues and refrain from criticism.
After the 2006 coup, the 15th in Bhumibol’s reign, officials tried to tell foreigners that protocol obliged the king to accept the generals’ seizure of power. Thais got the opposite message. The king quickly granted the coupmakers an audience, and newspapers splashed pictures of it, sending Thais the message that he approved of them. In truth the king has always been capable of showing his displeasure at coups when it suited him, by rallying troops or by dragging his feet in accepting their outcome. And he exerts power in other ways. Since 2006, when he told judges to take action on the political crisis, the courts seem to have interpreted his wishes by pushing through cases against Mr Thaksin and his allies—most recently with this week’s banning of the parties in the government.
No fairy-tale future
In the imagination of Thai royalists their country is like Bhutan, whose charismatic new king is adored by a tiny population that prefers royal rule to democracy. In reality, with public anger at the queen’s support for the thuggish PAD and the unsuitability of Bhumibol’s heir simmering, Thailand risks the recent fate of Nepal, which has suffered a bitter civil war and whose meddling king is now a commoner in a republic. The PAD was nurtured by the palace and now threatens to engulf it. An enduring image of the past few days is that of PAD toughs shooting at government supporters while holding up the king’s portrait. The monarchy is now, more clearly than ever, part of the problem. It sits at the apex of a horrendously hierarchical and unequal society. You do not have to be a republican to agree that this needs to be discussed.
As The Economist went to press, on the eve of the king's birthday, he was reported to be unwell, and unable to deliver his usual annual speech to the nation. So he had still not repudiated the yellow-shirts' claims to be acting in his name. His long silence has done great damage to the rule of law in Thailand. He could still help, by demanding, as no one else can, the abolition of the archaic lèse-majesté law and the language in the current charter that supports it, and so enable Thais to have a proper debate about their future. He made a half-hearted stab at this in 2005, saying he should not be above criticism. But nothing short of the law’s complete repeal will do. Thailand’s friends should tell it so.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008 "The Economist" banned over critical article on Thai king [-So much for democracy in Thailand!]
9 December 2008 SEAPA (Southeast Asian Press Alliance)
The Thai distributor of "The Economist" banned the 6-10 December issue of the magazine because it contained an article critical of the country's monarch, news reports said.
The Agence France Presse (AFP) Bangkok bureau quoted bookseller and distributor Asia Books as saying it decided not to import this week's issue because the story on King Bhumibol Adulyadej's alleged role in politics "risks insulting the monarchy".
Under Thailand's lese majeste law, anyone who insults the king or the royal family faces a jail term of up to 15 years.
"We received excerpts of the magazine beforehand and we considered that it's sensitive and not appropriate, and also risks insulting the monarchy. So we decided not to import that edition," an Asia Books staff member told AFP.
The article, which is also available online, questioned the alleged involvement of the monarchy in the country's political affairs and its support for military interventions, the latest of which was the 2006 coup that ousted Thaksin Shinawatra.
Thai police said the importer had agreed to a self-imposed ban on the story because of its critical stance on the monarchy.
"Police have talked to importers and distributors who agreed not to import the issue of December 6-10 because an article in the magazine criticised the monarchy," said Lieutenant General Thiradet Rodphothong, commander of Special Branch Police. "Therefore the police do not have to officially ban the magazine," he said.
"The Economist" website, which features the article, continues to be accessible and has not been blocked, according to Reuters.
The incident came on the heels of the latest political turmoil in Thailand which led to the shutdown by anti-government protesters of Bangkok's international airport for a week, paralyzing the country's economy, stranding tens of thousands of passengers, and hurting Thailand's biggest dollar earner—tourism. AddThis
I think you have teach us by many of your experience in Khmer history (only from the time of period independent from France to now). In Khmer country I learn many Yekae tactics from political creature from your cartoon. What they are doing when they are popular with their Khmer people?, What is real hidden goal of their?
Start from the time of Heros King Sihanauk to Lon Non(American democratic puppet) to Pol Pot(Eutropia worker and farmer socialist,puppet of Chin) to Hun Sen (the lovely kid of Yaun).
I use to listen some opinion from many of my Khmer friend who are very common middle class citizens that they pro Hun Sen and they have many negative opinion with Khmer people who live out side cambodia.
For my Thai comrades
We should learn about history of Cambodia. If we don't want hardly period life like our Khmer friend that show story in his nice cartoon.
I love my country I don't want fire for destroy everything. Power is in our hand We are prachachon ,that aren't cattles puppet or inocents kids for play by political creatures.
Stop red or yellow (PPP and PAD) thinking. They grow from the same seed. But they need very active fertiliser from us.
Manut Siem
P.S. I hope "Three kingdom" is only the name of famous chinese writing and true hardly life story of our niegbor country.
The patrilineal tradition of the Chakri dynasty is unlikely to be broken. And the prominent role played by the crown prince in Princess Galyani’s cremation removed any doubts about whether he was the chosen heir, says a Thai academic. Even so, many Thais, a superstitious people, will remember an old prophecy that the dynasty would last for only nine generations—Bhumibol is the ninth Chakri king—and that a tenth would be a disaster.
14 comments:
Dear, Bun Heang Ung
Your blog, last friday, is very popular....
I hope you be patient to many cruel Thai people, because you touch the forbidden fruit of Thai....
But I like you opinion so much,
....
Today, we will select the new PM....may be from PPP or from Monarchy....
waiting for next cartoon about it,
When I hear some bias comment from high graduate people looklike Dr.... that were given comment before.
That are root real problem of this politic crisis ,because the group of high graduate just talk and talk and talk to much. They choose make more discusion to look for the best way for Thais(all group opinion) But they don't like becuase in they class their job is talk and talk only.
But I cheer you Ta Bun Heng
(You can show your opinion and you have some channel to recieved many different opinion.
Cheer Cheer Cheer
Manut Siem
For my Thai family
We should learn more historic cartoon in Ta Bun Heng blog for understanding about polictical game in Cambodia. Sihanouk to Lonnon to Pol Pot to Yaun to Hun Sen. Who win in this game?
Monarchy to Democracy? to Socialist to...????
Just big dramatic political show.
Thais should think what is best solution for us.
Khmer has 3 Kings as Hun Sen, Jia Sim and Sok Arn........ The king never done like king.
Dear, Manut siem
I agree with you comment about the high graduate people in Thailand that give a many stupid opinion, I don't like them, too.
But I'm not a doctor in politic or economic or law... I'm just a medical doctor...in a small province close to Thai-Lao border.
You see...
I cannot do anythings when Thailand in crisis. People who are not in Bangkok may be looked as "second-class" people. Someone in Bangkok (Like Sumo Tuu) thought, people in suburban is very stupid, they should not have right to vote the election !!!???
So I can just see the TV, finding the truth in internet, sometime I join with anti-coup and some democretic group...I have a "Anti-PAD" sticker on my car and bicycle....Oneday I found that someone scratched around my car.
I'm not a Royalist....
I think, King and Royal family is made by (?) to be God, whom untouchable. The story of the king and his family is like a myth. That is not true, somebody or somegroup try to make this propraganda to all Thais.
In Thailand, we cannot see cartoon or journal like this, but many Thais have some concept that cannot speak in their mind...
Some of These cartoon tell us, the things we think, and I want all Thais to stop looking themselve as the center of everything and look into the world outside Thailand. And open their mind for every opinion.
If we can, Thailand will not go into crisis, again
the only one thing that u guys here'd done is just makin' a stupid comment.
but i can't see none of u try to improve Thailand at all.
let me tell u sth "ACTION SPEAKS LOUDER THAN WORD".
u r good at talking like desperate house wives who enjoy gossiping
in reality, u can not even show ur thought to Thai society.
just keep talkin' in here
oh!! how pittiful and hopeless u r
In thailand, there had been an explosive situation faced under the leadership of the millilary government, that has been going on for 55 years. Since 1932, Siem had 14 constitutional laws, 16 elections, 18 Coups d'Etat militaires, and 17 cabinets of government. Among the 17 changed prime ministers, 8 of them were high ranking millitery commander, 9 of them were high ranking civil servants. This country was powered for 40 years by the millitary leaders, and for 11 years by the civils; however, the ministers of any ministeries were millilarians. All of the prime ministers nominated in the Thailand history used to be millarians.
All of things were exercised on the peasants for attraction because its city was built for infant trafficking ( children captured from the north-east and sold in Bankok). Because of the unemployment and drug problems, the rich and civil servants were forced to share their markets and powers. And most of the businessmen were Chinese.
In Thailand, there were a numerious separatist organizations, called Pattant National Liberation Organization (PNLO) that rovolt with army weapons against the power of Bangkok. The security problems took place all over the north-east part of Thailand and mountainous areas where 10% of people were controlled by the Thai Communist Party (TCP) formed since 1939 with the support from China and north Vietnam. It was known that in 1978, Deng Xia Ping, Vice-president of China, visited QG (Quartier General), means " Anti-querillar school, located in Lop-Buri of Thailand." However, Bejiing was extremely concerned about this movement, because this party had a closest tendency to Hanio. There, a Radio station, named as "Thai People Voice Radio" broadcasted from Yun-Nan that its broadcasting strength was equal to the one in Bejiing so as to have an influence on the public. ( continued......)
From: S K M
France
Who believe that the Thai King has no
political power is wrong. The Thai King is a real ruler of Thailand. Thais pretend to put the blame on each other, the PAD blame on the PPP, the PPP blame on the PAD, the Thai govt blame on the Thai military, the Thai military blame on the PPP, but at the end the Thai King is the benefit and he is the only one look so clean and so innocent.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
The king and them [-This article is banned in Thailand]
Thailand's monarchy
Dec 4th 2008
From The Economist print edition
The untold story of the palace’s role behind the collapse of Thai democracy
THAILAND’S tourism business, its export industries and its reputation have been wrecked by recent events. Crowds of royalists have occupied the government’s offices for months and then seized Bangkok’s airports. The police refused to evict them. The army refused to help. This week the siege was ended after the courts disbanded three parties in the ruling coalition. But the parties plan to re-form under new names and continue governing, so fresh strife threatens. It is as if a thin veneer of modernity, applied during the boom of the 1980s and early 1990s, has peeled away. Until recently a beacon of Asian pluralism, Thailand is sliding into anarchy.
The conflict began three years ago as peaceful rallies against corruption and abuse of power in the government of Thaksin Shinawatra. The protesters, wearing royal-yellow shirts and accusing Mr Thaksin of being a closet republican, got their way when royalist generals removed him in the coup of 2006. But on democracy’s restoration last year, Thais elected a coalition led by Mr Thaksin’s allies. The yellow-shirts of the inaptly named People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) revived their protests and adopted increasingly thuggish tactics, prompting Mr Thaksin’s supporters to don red shirts and fight back.
Speak it not
Throughout this conflict, the great unmentionable, not just for the Thai press but also for most foreign reporters, has been the role of King Bhumibol, his family and their closest courtiers. The world’s most ferociously enforced law against lèse-majesté (offending the crown) prevents even the mildest discussion of the palace’s role in Thai public life. Such laws are mostly in disuse elsewhere, but Thailand’s was harshened in the 1970s. Absurdly, anyone can bring a lèse-majesté suit. The police have to take seriously the most trivial complaints. All this makes the law a useful tool for politicians and others seeking a way to damage their foes. Often, the press is not allowed to explain the nature of any supposed offence against the crown, so Thais have no way to tell whether it really was so disrespectful.
The lèse-majesté law is an outrage in itself. It should not be enforced in any country with democratic pretensions. Worse is that the law hides from Thais some of the reasons for their chronic political woes. For what the king himself calls the “mess” Thailand is in stems in many ways from his own meddling in politics during his 62-year reign (see article). In part, the strife also reflects jockeying for power ahead of the succession. With the king celebrating his 81st birthday on December 5th, that event looms ever larger.
Much of the story of how the king’s actions have hurt his country’s politics is unfamiliar because Thais have not been allowed to hear it. Some may find our criticisms upsetting, but we do not make them gratuitously. Thailand needs open debate if it is to prepare for the time when a less revered monarch ascends the throne. It cannot be good for a country to subscribe to a fairy-tale version of its own history in which the king never does wrong, stays above politics and only ever intervenes on the side of democracy. None of that is true.
The official version of Thai history dwells on episodes such as the events of 1992, when Bhumibol forced the resignation of a bloodstained dictator and set his country on course for democracy. But many less creditable royal interventions have gone underreported and are seldom discussed. In 1976, paranoid about the communist threat, the king appeared to condone the growth of the right-wing vigilante movement whose members later took part in the slaughter of unarmed student protesters. In the cold war America saw Bhumibol as a staunch ally and helped finance his image-making machine. This long-standing alliance and the fierce lèse-majesté law have led Western diplomats, academics and journalists to bite their tongues and refrain from criticism.
After the 2006 coup, the 15th in Bhumibol’s reign, officials tried to tell foreigners that protocol obliged the king to accept the generals’ seizure of power. Thais got the opposite message. The king quickly granted the coupmakers an audience, and newspapers splashed pictures of it, sending Thais the message that he approved of them. In truth the king has always been capable of showing his displeasure at coups when it suited him, by rallying troops or by dragging his feet in accepting their outcome. And he exerts power in other ways. Since 2006, when he told judges to take action on the political crisis, the courts seem to have interpreted his wishes by pushing through cases against Mr Thaksin and his allies—most recently with this week’s banning of the parties in the government.
No fairy-tale future
In the imagination of Thai royalists their country is like Bhutan, whose charismatic new king is adored by a tiny population that prefers royal rule to democracy. In reality, with public anger at the queen’s support for the thuggish PAD and the unsuitability of Bhumibol’s heir simmering, Thailand risks the recent fate of Nepal, which has suffered a bitter civil war and whose meddling king is now a commoner in a republic. The PAD was nurtured by the palace and now threatens to engulf it. An enduring image of the past few days is that of PAD toughs shooting at government supporters while holding up the king’s portrait. The monarchy is now, more clearly than ever, part of the problem. It sits at the apex of a horrendously hierarchical and unequal society. You do not have to be a republican to agree that this needs to be discussed.
As The Economist went to press, on the eve of the king's birthday, he was reported to be unwell, and unable to deliver his usual annual speech to the nation. So he had still not repudiated the yellow-shirts' claims to be acting in his name. His long silence has done great damage to the rule of law in Thailand. He could still help, by demanding, as no one else can, the abolition of the archaic lèse-majesté law and the language in the current charter that supports it, and so enable Thais to have a proper debate about their future. He made a half-hearted stab at this in 2005, saying he should not be above criticism. But nothing short of the law’s complete repeal will do. Thailand’s friends should tell it so.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
"The Economist" banned over critical article on Thai king [-So much for democracy in Thailand!]
9 December 2008
SEAPA (Southeast Asian Press Alliance)
The Thai distributor of "The Economist" banned the 6-10 December issue of the magazine because it contained an article critical of the country's monarch, news reports said.
The Agence France Presse (AFP) Bangkok bureau quoted bookseller and distributor Asia Books as saying it decided not to import this week's issue because the story on King Bhumibol Adulyadej's alleged role in politics "risks insulting the monarchy".
Under Thailand's lese majeste law, anyone who insults the king or the royal family faces a jail term of up to 15 years.
"We received excerpts of the magazine beforehand and we considered that it's sensitive and not appropriate, and also risks insulting the monarchy. So we decided not to import that edition," an Asia Books staff member told AFP.
The article, which is also available online, questioned the alleged involvement of the monarchy in the country's political affairs and its support for military interventions, the latest of which was the 2006 coup that ousted Thaksin Shinawatra.
Thai police said the importer had agreed to a self-imposed ban on the story because of its critical stance on the monarchy.
"Police have talked to importers and distributors who agreed not to import the issue of December 6-10 because an article in the magazine criticised the monarchy," said Lieutenant General Thiradet Rodphothong, commander of Special Branch Police. "Therefore the police do not have to officially ban the magazine," he said.
"The Economist" website, which features the article, continues to be accessible and has not been blocked, according to Reuters.
The incident came on the heels of the latest political turmoil in Thailand which led to the shutdown by anti-government protesters of Bangkok's international airport for a week, paralyzing the country's economy, stranding tens of thousands of passengers, and hurting Thailand's biggest dollar earner—tourism.
AddThis
Dear Ta Bun Heng
I think you have teach us by many of your experience in Khmer history (only from the time of period independent from France to now). In Khmer country I learn many Yekae tactics from political creature from your cartoon. What they are doing when they are popular with their Khmer people?, What is real hidden goal of their?
Start from the time of Heros King Sihanauk to Lon Non(American democratic puppet) to Pol Pot(Eutropia worker and farmer socialist,puppet of Chin) to Hun Sen (the lovely kid of Yaun).
I use to listen some opinion from many of my Khmer friend who are very common middle class citizens that they pro Hun Sen and they have many negative opinion with Khmer people who live out side cambodia.
For my Thai comrades
We should learn about history of Cambodia. If we don't want hardly period life like our Khmer friend that show story in his nice cartoon.
I love my country I don't want fire for destroy everything. Power is in our hand We are prachachon ,that aren't cattles puppet or inocents kids for play by political creatures.
Stop red or yellow (PPP and PAD) thinking. They grow from the same seed. But they need very active fertiliser from us.
Manut Siem
P.S. I hope "Three kingdom" is only the name of famous chinese writing and true hardly life story of our niegbor country.
The patrilineal tradition of the Chakri dynasty is unlikely to be broken. And the prominent role played by the crown prince in Princess Galyani’s cremation removed any doubts about whether he was the chosen heir, says a Thai academic. Even so, many Thais, a superstitious people, will remember an old prophecy that the dynasty would last for only nine generations—Bhumibol is the ninth Chakri king—and that a tenth would be a disaster.
Thai Prince and Thai Princess are too busy making porn showing around the world.
http://www.revu.nl/6273
uhh excurse me ,the last comment
pls exchange words in the civilise way of Mankind should do.
Thais are the well educated.
we do not like to make porn showing like your family members and relatives like to do in their freetime
i do understand that you obsess addict, and like fucking and raping and including being raped.
but please keep your vulgar and animal behavior in your bedroom.
you smell like a pollution to the mankind
we have sth much better than that to do.
we are not like you who like fucking 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Post a Comment