Test Bed -- brainstorming Weather Gods, or, a thrillah about the world's weather system and its manipulators


william.scherk

2,404 views

I thought Caroljane and Michael had some interesting  brainstorm results, laid out below. I also had some storms of creativity ... which I will add once I finish furiously scribbling notes on a break by the river. We have secretly kept everything green behind our fencing, despite the water-restrictions. I hate when Israel steals our clouds all summer.

My basic notion is weather weapons, weapons of war, that is what the protagonists come to be up against, discovering and destroying the military-industrial-scientific projects that have been used to manipulate weather events in aid of endless war. 

The thing is, it is a Deep kind of thing that our heroes have to get at. My favourite character-in-mind so far is a refugee from an intelligence agency. He is justifiably paranoid about his design of a master database. He knows too much, courtesy of his eidetic memory.  But which of his fears of rogue action are true?  Is he really just one of thousands on The List, the Kill the Designers list?

In my flight of fancy we would get to fabulous settings, some of them mirroring or paying homage to Atlas Shrugged. Glaciers, underground CERN-style secret facilities. Low earth-orbit nuclear 'climate helper' satellites, that thousand screen command room deep underground. The 'database cities' of the INTEL surveilance future. On supersonic 'chemtrail' secret weapons.

I'd also keep the political shenanigans sort of in your face but slightly out of focus, save that just as in Atlas Shrugged we are in a kind of alternate era where implausible events have already taken place.  One of the questions the protagonists learn to ask is, "Does the President Know?"  

In my characters I want a 'rescue team slash commando force' to coalesce so I am looking to ex-military intelligence people, disparate people from a disbanded training unit, who have made the transition out of the forces for successful contract or independent careers. I want them to be bonded somehow conceptually, as a Protect Whistleblowers and Defectors unit, in the end. As if they all swore an oath and the oath comes in handy. Meaning the team our hero assembles or acquires should have a point of identity in common, to make the whole shelf of sinister secrecy and secret agent of technology stuff plausible.

I need a bad-ass name for the Giant Computer Cloud that eats snow and steals clouds from nations and regions, thus 'false-flagging' weather manipulation events that may be possible in the next thirty-odd years. If Rand could have a free-energy motor, then we and the Frankensteins of CERN-7 can have gravity-enhancers, dark-matter sinks and sleeves and other theoretical devices almost ready to go. This on top of a semi-secret Space Programme where local weather is enhanced, altered, made wet or dry or whatever to punish Mexico.

Somehow we got to stick the Vatican and on-three-continent catacombs in there. I want to avoid the nightmare pace of State of Fear, by having characters sleep and eat and so on. Not too much, just enough so that they don't seem freaky.

So, plausible or wildly not -- Iranians can't get used to Israel-CERN-rogues-hidden-hands stealing their snow and clouds.  Things is gonna blow up if we don't stop the sinister secret organization from carrying out its plans.

And Caroljane gets to write all the terse sex scenes.

 

On 7/3/2018 at 11:14 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:
On 7/3/2018 at 2:00 PM, caroljane said:

Want to collaborate? I can't plot worth a damn...

Carol,

Not a bad idea.

Imagine.

The story can be a thriller about a protagonist, let's call him Caysin Skylo, who works for a wind power company--an idealist in the progressive mold. One day Caysin inadvertently overhears a cartel of globalists (the details of which can be worked out later) discussing their plans to scam the world with a carbon credit scheme. But worse, he overhears them laughing about the future suicide of an eminent scientist who opposes manmade climate change and is in the way of their evil plans. As there are some very famous people in the middle of this cartel meeting, Caysin, conflicted and disillusioned, believes them.

So off he goes to warn the scientist before he can be "suicided." Except he arrives too late and witnesses the murder of the scientist. The hired thugs are dressing it up to look like a suicide. Caysin stumbles across a lady secretly witnessing the same crime and their accident causes the thugs to botch the suicide staging. This is because the scientist has been meeting with several other famous scientists who oppose manmade global warming and they emerge to see what the fuss is all about. They discover the dead body of their colleague. The thugs take off. But one of the thugs panics, returns and kills all the scientists. He tries to kill Caysin and the lady, but they escape.

The lady, let's call her Harper Hale, will turn out to be a private investigator for some small oil fields in Texas and Caysin's future love interest. Maybe she's even the daughter of the owner (Hale and Shale Corporation :) ). She's trying to build a case against the cartel, but Caysin, ever the idealist, barges in where several of the globalists are, confronts them and appeals to their sense of ideals that he has heard them preach for decades. He makes a very moving speech about saving the planet to them. They go along with him pretending to be friendly, but when he isn't looking, they try to kill him. Harper, who has been secretly following him (cussing to herself at his bullheadedness) saves him, but now the chase is on. The cartel people are after him and after this lady who, to them, appeared out of nowhere.

The cartel frames the two for the murder of the group of scientists, so, in addition to the bad guys chasing them, law enforcement the world over is after them. The stakes keep getting steeper and surprising twists and turns keep unfolding as the chase goes through its ups and downs--including the introduction of some very colorful characters. There are some gruesome deaths, explosions, gun fights, and so on. Maybe there is an inside friend in a law enforcement agency they can communicate with who helps them a bit and believes them, but who is limited by the law and the regulations of the agency.

They can even secretly meet with the lady's boss (or father), who is a good guy and who provides them with funds and resources to continue their running. He might even be a mentor figure. And there has to be an obligatory torture scene somewhere--maybe the mentor (father) turns out in a painful reversal for Harper and is actually one of the bad guys. He later tortures them both after offering his daughter part of the scheme, which she refuses. He not only wants to ingratiate himself more deeply with the leaders of the cartel, but also to get secret information out of them that he knows they have witnessed. This information will allow him to become one of the leaders of the cartel. They escape, obviously.

The cartel is going to have a huge save-the-planet event that will be broadcast to the entire world. Once it is presented, the US President and leaders of the governments the world over are going to announce the adoption of the universal carbon credit scheme as a save-the-planet initiative, and sign a treaty to formalize it all. Some climate disaster somewhere can be part of this, a disaster secretly triggered artificially by the cartel, just to add urgency to adoption of the initiative.

But Caysin has video evidence of the meeting of the cartel's leaders where they brag about their evil plans. He decides to use this event to expose them to the entire world. What's worse, the video also shows the Big Seven Oil Conglomerates (crony corporatists) are actually the ones funding the carbon credit scheme and the entire manmade climate change movement, including this event (these folks are crony corporatists, too). This is proven by statements and villainous laughter coming from the mouths of the most famous global warming people in the cartel meeting. They even joke about rationing air the globe over and seriously discuss how this can be achieved. At root, the elites on both sides are the same damn people. And they are working together to ultimately rule the world through dictatorship by technocrat.

Things develop to a heart-pounding climax, the climate disaster is foiled, some of the bad guys are killed, some disgraced in front of the whole world and some arrested on the spot as the cameras catch them doing bad things. Caysin and Harper finally kiss in the middle of the chaos swirling all around them. (The music swells. :) )

The evil father of Harper just barely escapes and lands defeated, but not broken, in a place, maybe a secret island he owns, where it is clear there will be a sequel.

As to the stealing of clouds and snow, this can be a rich metaphor running throughout the entire story--the clouds representing idealistic innocence and the snow representing the painful hard-won truth about the evil elitists. Appearance versus reality. Or whatever. Anything worth stealing. :) This can be enhanced in the settings: snowy mountain climbs, airplane flights in cloudy skies, winter in the city with snow falling, etc. The climate change folks can even have a cocktail they invent called the Snow Cloud. There can be paintings that feature clouds and snow. Etc.

That's just a brain dump I did on the spot and needs a lot of work, but whaddya think?

:evil:  :) 

(btw - Not to be difficult, but I prefer not to collaborate on fiction writing at this stage. After I have a few works under my belt and selling in the market, I might be game if you are serious. I mean, why not? You do have a creative streak. Somehow, though, I don't think this particular story will be to your liking. :) )

Michael

 

91 Comments


Recommended Comments



51 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

Further to the eco-justice screech of a wood-chipper ...

[Argh, gotta leave this at half-ass for the moment]

Not bad, if a bit familiar ... I am looked at my brainstorm notes and poke them in here via dictation:

"Half-ass", "not bad", c'mon, throw me a pork chop!

Under the heading of division of labor, we need someone to concoct the relevant techno-babble.  Volunteers?

Link to comment

Oh no! Florence is weakening! Damn!

But, well, let's not cancel the wood chippers just yet. There's still hope that heavy rains will do enough damage to support the climate scare stories and convince enough people that it's time for some seriously bloody eco-justice.

J

Link to comment

Here's some intriguing animation on what various strengths of Florence's storm surge could mean for distinct geographies.  The video is by Carl Parker and the team at the Weather Channel. 

I haven't found my other fiction notes, which suggests they were a fever dream. One thing I have been thinking about today is how many fears can be exploited in "Weather Wars"?

I will include some speculative hooey from Jordan Sather, who has morphed into a hurricane-directed-energy expert.  Later.

[Now: insert Sather video mashup]

 

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment

Here's a lady that might help with some of the fictional elements in our script/novel ... Deborah Tavares has been beating several crazy drums for some time. I have cued up the video to where she invokes a Rothschild involvement in targeted energy whatnot about wildfires in California. Like Jon Letendre, she acts as if everything she fears is true ...

 

Link to comment

Trump administration sees a 7-degree rise in global temperatures by 2100

 

Quote

 

By Juliet Eilperin ,
Brady Dennis and
Chris Mooney
September 28 at 9:00 AM

The document projects that global temperature will rise by nearly 3.5 degrees Celsius above the average temperature between 1986 and 2005 regardless of whether Obama-era tailpipe standards take effect or are frozen for six years, as the Trump administration has proposed. The global average temperature rose more than 0.5 degrees Celsius between 1880, the start of industrialization, and 1986, so the analysis assumes a roughly 4 degree Celsius or 7 degree Fahrenheit increase from preindustrial levels.

 

We can probably work this into the script.  Clash of the Titans!

 

Link to comment

I think I may have been missing some great ideas about fictional Weather Gods. 

One of the most productive makers of climate-conspiracy videos is a fella called Dane Wigington.  His output is wonderful from the perspective of 'implausible but fun to speculate.'  My question for the DEW (directed energy weapons) whoopsters is "how much energy?"  I mean, how much energy is needed to, say, make a hurricane get worse?  How much energy is in the bruited 'beams' that spot-fried parts of California (and Australia and Canada and the Russian Federation)?  How is that energy produced?  How big a 'tank' of energy of whatever kind does the weapon in the sky carry?

I figure we could just fold this in ...

Wouldn't you know it --  Mick West & Co at Metabunk.org has applied skeptical instruments of reasoning to Wigington's wiggy business.  Somehow we could finesse the obvious sinkholes and soft spots in the Wigington oeuvre.  So, both Mysterian Q-Anon fanatics -- and fictionizers -- these links are not necessarity good for The Narrative:

Still, there may be some middle-way to introduce Wigington-type plot elements into the tale, perhaps a character 'unmasked' as a Deep State Rogue with a big fat black ops budget ...

On 12/26/2017 at 10:33 AM, Jon Letendre said:

When President Trump threatened “fire and fury like the world had never seen,” he meant he would use undisclosed technologies, such as those air-or-space-borne directed energy weapons tested on wildfire homes in CA, which homes are being reduced to white ash, even all the metals, while green trees remain, trees that were nearly in contact with the homes. In CA these weapons are turning engine blocks and aluminum wheels to liquid so hot it runs along asphalt for several yards. Some white ash pits where there homes contain no sinks, water heaters, tubs, ovens, or hardware. Just white ash. And the wheels of the car in the driveway turned liquid and ran into the street. While the trees and all the landscaping is green everywhere. Forest fire. Go see the pics, you tell me.

 

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
7 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

Wouldn't you know it --  Mick West & Co at Metabunk.org has applied skeptical instruments of reasoning to Wigington's wiggy business...

Bu buh but skeptical instruments of reasoning are bad. Skepticism and criticism are acts of kooky science denial. Deniers, deniers! No? Did the rules change at whim again?

J

 

Link to comment

Gentlemen and Ladies, choose your tools ...

5 hours ago, william.scherk said:

Mick West & Co at Metabunk.org has applied skeptical instruments of reasoning to Wigington's wiggy business.  Somehow we could finesse the obvious sinkholes and soft spots in the Wigington oeuvre.  So, both Mysterian Q-Anon fanatics -- and fictionizers -- these links are not necessarity good for The Narrative:

Still, there may be some middle-way to introduce Wigington-type plot elements into the tale, perhaps a character 'unmasked' as a Deep State Rogue with a big fat black ops budget ...

This one has a high whoopee quotient!

Again! GeoEngineered Genocide by Laser Fire ~ DEW Attacks on Shasta County, CA

 

 

Link to comment

I finally found a catastrophic event large enough for the climax of the thriller outlined at the start of this thread. I was reading a most charming book called Storytelling in the Pulps, Comics, and Radio: How Technology Changed Popular Fiction in America by Tim DeForest.

On page 44, he was discussing an author in Weird Tales named Edmund Hamilton circa 1928. (btw - Farnsworth Wright, the Wright mentioned at the beginning of the quote, was the editor at the time. His day job when he took over Weird Tales in 1923 was music critic for the Chicago Herald and Examiner:) )

Quote

Wright was open to all sorts of tales of the fantastic, not just the scary stuff. In 1928 he began publishing a series of science fiction stories by Edmund Hamilton featuring the Interstellar Patrol.

The first story was "Crashing Suns," in which an alien race attempts to ram their dying sun into the Earth's sun in order to re-ignite it. This would have the unfortunate side effect of destroying mankind. The plot is foiled by the Interplanetary Patrol, but only after the main characters are captured, manage a violent escape, organize a battle fleet, fight a massive space battle and destroy the alien sun in the nick of time.

Ah... now we're talking...

:) 

Except nothing could attack the sun with today's technology.

Not even close...

Er...

Oops...

From CNN:

Dimming the sun: The answer to global warming?

From the article:

Quote

The research by scientists at Harvard and Yale universities, published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, proposes using a technique known as stratospheric aerosol injection, which they say could cut the rate of global warming in half.

 

Well, this is still confined to Earth, but it shows you the manmade global warming folks (who some would call invading aliens taking control of human bodies and minds) are thinking about attacking the sun. It starts with blocking the sun's rays for all of Earth. Later, someone will want to preserve the atmosphere and have the big idea of dimming the sun itself.

:) 

That could be a race of nasty evil villains worthy of the fight. But when I think about the manmade global warming folks, I don't know why this damn meme keeps popping up in my head.

 

11.24.2018-22.58.png

 

:) 

Michael

Link to comment
On 11/24/2018 at 9:04 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Well, this is still confined to Earth, but it shows you the manmade global warming folks (who some would call invading aliens taking control of human bodies and minds) are thinking about attacking the sun. It starts with blocking the sun's rays for all of Earth. Later, someone will want to preserve the atmosphere and have the big idea of dimming the sun itself.

A fiendish cabal of geoengineering rogues!

globalistGeoengineering.png

 

Quote

The globalists are once again using their geoengineers to fabricate a weather calamity that is both deadly and highly destructive.

This is called false flag environmental terrorism.  This quite stealthy type of terrorist attack is far more devastating and lethal than other CIA black ops using bullets and bombs.

Weaponized weather events also have a psyop component that is difficult to tease out.  The average person is unable to discern that they are really manmade disasters because the geoengineers essentially hijack a real weather pattern that is common to the season.

Of course, these weather weapons are always aimed at particular regions of the USA with great purpose and calculation.  In this case, however, Canada is also getting hit hard by the worst Polar Vortex on record.  Even Niagara Falls is freezing up!

Why are we experiencing this so-called Polar Vortex throughout much of the country now? Was it quite deliberately designed to freeze the nation to further induce a sort of paralysis?

The overall context

It’s of paramount importance to correctly understand the multi-decade conspiracy that has been run against the United States by the New World Order globalist cabal.

The panoply of catastrophic weather events over the past many years clearly demonstrates the most powerful weapons in their geoengineering arsenal.

[...]

 

Link to comment
On 10/17/2018 at 11:28 AM, william.scherk said:

I think I may have been missing some great ideas about fictional Weather Gods. 

Fresh!

 

Link to comment
On 7/10/2018 at 9:51 AM, Jon Letendre said:

Have you seen the “contrails” that persist for hours, Bob?

Yes. And I see clouds that persist for hours.  Both the same thing. Condensed water vapor.

Link to comment
48 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Yes. And I see clouds that persist for hours.  Both the same thing. Condensed water vapor.

Contrails are fine ice, not vapor. And they cannot persist more than about 90 seconds. What you see emitted from jets that persists for hours is a chemtrail.

I am about 50. I had a telescope by age nine for watching the sun, moon, planets. I learned to identify over a dozen hawk species from thousands of feet, in the fourth grade. I watched the sky with great interest, on my back on the ground for hours per week my entire childhood. This was less than an hour from Boston so I saw planes at varying altitudes coming and going. I saw terminal height flyover traffic between Europe and New York/Chicago. Never, not once did I see a contrail persist longer than two minutes, and that was a very, rare event. A one minute contrail always got my attention. Even thirty seconds was a “long contrails” day.

Note: The above is for any interested reader, and do know I would like to hear what you have seen in the skies over the years. Bob I am not so much interested in hearing from. Bob puffs his chest, slings insults and nerdy bigbrain put downs, then disappears when he is shown to be 110% wrong. I find it dishonorable in the extreme. See Where Are You thread as example. Bob can keep it intellectual, and then walking away is at least honest. Or he can do his usual walk in like a god, and then walking away without plainly acknowledging error is an order of magnitude worse than simple dishonesty. I don’t like being near it.

Link to comment

Updating a reference to Metabunk.org's forum posts regarding so-called "chemtrails." This is in the interest of those who have a conspiracy bent -- are there decent, rational arguments that answer the most common claims about chemtrails?  If so, those friendly to the 'chemtrails are not contrails' position can discover how to maintain or improve an argument in the face of reasonable objections, observations, historical investigations and counter-arguments. 

Mick West also has a couple of videos that pertain to chemtrails. If you know what the 'debunker side' claims, then your own argument will take into account counter-evidence. If your argument pretends that counter-evidence is not pertinent, they you lose a persuasive contest before it begins. 

For example, above is a sky-watcher's report. Essentially it proposes that Contrails Do Not Persist -- on the basis of personal observation.  Now, one set of observations, if true and correct, will be reported by other observers.  

Here is a direct link to the "Debunking Contrails Do Not Persist ..." forum thread at Metabunk.

metabunk-Contrails-Threads.png

Link to comment

Metabunk provides a "Politeness Policy" to guide discussants there. I am tempted to insist on a similar set of conditions -- but I do not own this forum and don't want to put restrictions here that do not apply to other parts of the ObjectivistLiving forum.

Still, are these reasonable conditions for a relatively to-the-point-not-the-man discussion?

Quote

The goal of Metabunk.org is honest debunking. Exposing and removing falsehoods. It has been my experience that being polite is very helpful when debunking. If someone feels that you are not being polite, or that you have in any way denigrated or belittled them, then they will start complaining about that instead of addressing your points, and will be far less likely to listen to you with an open mind. It also greatly affects the perception of more neutral readers, who respond similarly to the person being insulted.

On a more fundamental level, everyone deserves your respect until you really understand where they are coming from. It's easy to jump to conclusions about people just because they say something a little strange. But immediately labeling people, in whatever way, is a sure way of shutting down an honest and open conversation. Polite respect and openness must be the starting point.

So, please:

  • Do not insult people either directly or indirectly
  • Do not call them names, such as "stupid", "ignorant", "uneducated", or "liar"
  • Do not describe their theory as "stupid", "moronic", "idiotic", "delusional", etc
  • Do not suggest they get an education, or take some classes
  • Do not criticize their spelling or grammar
  • Do not respond to the tone of their post instead of the content
  • Do not mock people, or make jokes at their expense
  • Do not suggest they are mentally ill, or that they need help
  • Do not suggest anyone who believes in [any particular theory] is mentally ill.


The above applies regardless of if it is true or not. If someone perceives something as rude, then it is impolite.

Instead, please:

 

  • Show them where they are wrong
  • Try to help them understand their misconceptions. Politely.
  • Stick to the facts
  • Ignore any insults that they might use
  • Focus on individual key points, not the general tone


The above policy will be enforced. I will delete or edit posts that do not conform to it, and I will ban people who repeatedly violate it (initially for 24 hours, then for longer periods).

It will not be applied evenhandedly. Since censoring the bunk believers is often viewed as impolite and is hence counterproductive, then they will be given more leeway. Debunkers generally have far thicker skins. The bunk believers' insults do not help their case, and so it's not so important to remove them. I will still remove more extreme insults that would derail the conversation.

It will be relaxed to allow criticism of credentials and skill level only in the case of appeals to authority. For example, suggesting something is correct because someone is a "doctor" (when they actually have a mail order doctorate). Or for people with seeming relevant qualifications on paper who demonstrate ineptitude in the actual work or statements.

Threats of any kind will not be tolerated, and will likely lead to a ban.

Remember, this is not about politeness per se. It's about debunking. We are being polite so that the debunking is more effective, not to conform to some code of manners, and not to avoid hurting their feelings. The only goal here is honest debunking. Politeness just helps a lot.

I greatly appreciate your help with this. I know this is not for everyone, but there are many places on the internet where you can interact with bunk believers with no such restrictions. The politeness policy is the basis for the nature of Metabunk.org, and for this to remain the unique little debunking site it has become, the politeness policy needs to be observed.

Me, I basically ignore comments from folks who have shown bad faith or histrionic animus.  With a few exceptions. So, if I do not quote you or appear to have even read your comments at the blog, it is because you have racked up formidable Asshole Points and I find discussion with you to be impossible.  

If you really really want me to pay attention to some non-asshole comments, drop me a note via OL Inbox. I will keep that open even to folks I generally ignore.

Link to comment

Links and debunkings quite aside, contrails do not persist. I know it from tens of thousands of observations over a period of decades. “Contrails” that persist for many minutes even hours snuck past my observations for decades, or “contrails” that persist for hours are something utterly new.

I don’t care what your links purport, Billyboy, I have the evidence of copious observation. You are a link-hunting armchair moron. And up yours with the be gentle with the morons stuff. You are a weak minded and weak willed passive aggressive little twat.

You are as out of your league in basic physics in this debate as you are on the climate hysteria “debate.” Why don’t you get back to your discussants on that debate instead of disappearing when your ignorant ass can’t proceed with the substance. They miss you over there. Show us you can be a responsible adult intellectual, go respond in that debate. Stop whining and show us what you have.

Link to comment
21 hours ago, Jon Letendre said:

Contrails are fine ice, not vapor. And they cannot persist more than about 90 seconds. What you see emitted from jets that persists for hours is a chemtrail.

I am about 50. I had a telescope by age nine for watching the sun, moon, planets. I learned to identify over a dozen hawk species from thousands of feet, in the fourth grade. I watched the sky with great interest, on my back on the ground for hours per week my entire childhood. This was less than an hour from Boston so I saw planes at varying altitudes coming and going. I saw terminal height flyover traffic between Europe and New York/Chicago. Never, not once did I see a contrail persist longer than two minutes, and that was a very, rare event. A one minute contrail always got my attention. Even thirty seconds was a “long contrails” day.

Note: The above is for any interested reader, and do know I would like to hear what you have seen in the skies over the years. Bob I am not so much interested in hearing from. Bob puffs his chest, slings insults and nerdy bigbrain put downs, then disappears when he is shown to be 110% wrong. I find it dishonorable in the extreme. See Where Are You thread as example. Bob can keep it intellectual, and then walking away is at least honest. Or he can do his usual walk in like a god, and then walking away without plainly acknowledging error is an order of magnitude worse than simple dishonesty. I don’t like being near it.

Bullshit. Cirrus clouds persist for hours on end.  The water trail from a jet  is  made of the same stuff as Cirrus Clouds. H2O in a solid state which occurs shortly after gaseous H2O  condenses into liquid  H2O.  All the nasty gasses are invisible.  SO2, NOx  CO2. 

 

Link to comment
26 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Bullshit. Cirrus clouds persist for hours on end.  The water trail from a jet  is  made of the same stuff as Cirrus Clouds. H2O in a solid state which occurs shortly after gaseous H2O  condenses into liquid  H2O.  All the nasty gasses are invisible.  SO2, NOx  CO2. 

 

I might respond after you go to Where Are You? and humbly retract your insults and forthrightly acknowledge your errors. We shouldn’t allow these to pile up, so, first things first.

https://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/topic/16950-where-are-you/

 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Jon Letendre said:

I might respond after you go to Where Are You? and humbly retract your insults and forthrightly acknowledge your errors. We shouldn’t allow these to pile up, so, first things first.

"Fuck off, pedophile."

Link to comment

Guest
This blog entry is now closed to further comments.