Jump to content

Castro criticizes Cuban baseball players defectors


SuperAngels

Recommended Posts

Thursday, November 24, 2005

Castro criticizes Cuban baseball players defectors

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Associated Press

 

HAVANA -- President Fidel Castro criticized Cuban baseball players who have left the country for multimillion-dollar contracts in the major leagues, saying the island always finds better players to replace them.

 

During a five-hour appearance on state television Wednesday, Castro remarked on those players "who cannot resist the millions of the major leagues" and acknowledged that baseball "is the sport in which we have been beaten the most" when it comes to defections.

 

Still, the 79-year-old leader insisted Cuban baseball has always survived the losses.

 

"When one leaves, another 10 better players emerge," he said.

 

Among those who have left are pitchers Orlando Hernandez and Jose Contreras, who contributed to the recent World Series victory by the Chicago White Sox.

 

Castro praised Cuban athletes in general during the far-ranging appearance that dealt mostly with new increases in electrical rates and raises for skilled government workers. He singled out Cuba's boxing team, which won four gold medals in the sport's world championships that ended in China on Sunday.

 

"Who can measure up to our boxers and our athletes?" Castro asked.

 

Castro, a big baseball fan who closely follows the national team, made no direct reference to the World Baseball Classic. The tournament is being organized by the major leagues for next March. Cuban authorities have not said if the country will participate.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Castro is one sick, demented totalitrian dictator.

I'm sorry to those whom he has caused harm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From: standfan 9:30 pm

To: Victorious Ghost (10 of 12)

 

Okay here's my lyrics:>)

 

CASTRO'S CRYIN

 

He wanted to blast missiles into the US skies

but Kruschev knew better

He wanted it done that very night

Knew it was now or never

But Russia made him feel so sad

 

Oh Whoa, whoa, Castro's cryin'

Oh whoa, whoa, Castro's cryin'

 

Baseball team they swam all night

Wanted to kill them all on sight

He can't seem to forget them

Now they tell o'' Fi-del g'night

Oh, and now they're gone forever

 

He wants to send us all a letter, uh yeah yeah

Uh just tryin' to make his arthritic bones feel better

He said," Gimme"( Gimmie one more chance sometime)

But we all know he'd even put out a hit on their pet Irish Setter

 

Oh Whoa, whoa, Castro's cryin'

Oh whoa, whoa, Castro's cryin'

 

Y'Know Castro's had this feelin' before( ah ahh)

When the CIA tried to poison his danged cigar( ah ahh)

It should mean a little, just to make him drool a bit more( ah ahh)

And wipe him off that poor Cuban wasteland

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Im a Republican, and while Castro is a douchebag, he is not dangerous. He might be totalitarian, but in the big scheme of things, alongside guys like Saddam and Kim Jong Il, Fidel is small fry.

 

Also, he has pretty much cured AIDS in society with his brutality. He did the only possible cure, the one that no one else is willing to use. He removed all HIV positive people from his society. Thats the only way AIDS will ever be cured. AIDS walks and memorial blankets and science do nothing against it. I wish the rest of the world could understand that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest marlins02

Also, he has pretty much cured AIDS in society with his brutality. He did the only possible cure, the one that no one else is willing to use. He removed all HIV positive people from his society. Thats the only way AIDS will ever be cured. AIDS walks and memorial blankets and science do nothing against it. I wish the rest of the world could understand that.

 

 

 

f*** you

 

maybe if you as a person without AIDS would go through all the precautions (like getting tested with your partner, using a condom or abstinence) you wouldnt have to worry about aids and wouldnt be calling for AIDS patients to be treated like criminals.

 

ignorant motherf***er

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fine, dude, you dont like AIDS people being exiled, then please suggest another solution. Got any ideas?

 

No, you dont, because there arent any. Youre nothing but an ignorant liberal who believes we should be nice to everyone from the terrorists at Gitmo to HIV infected people. Well guess what? Sometimes brutality is the only cure! You remember the movie Training Day where Alonzo tells Jake that it takes a wolf to catch a wolf? Well, its like that. AIDS is a wolf, and to stop it, we gotta be the wolf. Being nice to everyone simply wont work!

 

Its a good thing I didnt bring up my other solution that allowed AIDS people to remain in society with slight dysfunctions. :plain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fine, dude, you dont like AIDS people being exiled, then please suggest another solution. Got any ideas?

 

No, you dont, because there arent any. Youre nothing but an ignorant liberal who believes we should be nice to everyone from the terrorists at Gitmo to HIV infected people. Well guess what? Sometimes brutality is the only cure! You remember the movie Training Day where Alonzo tells Jake that it takes a wolf to catch a wolf? Well, its like that. AIDS is a wolf, and to stop it, we gotta be the wolf. Being nice to everyone simply wont work!

 

Its a good thing I didnt bring up my other solution that allowed AIDS people to remain in society with slight dysfunctions. :plain

 

You're calling liberals ignorant??? Um....rriiight. Meanwhile, you think that we should quarantine everyone with AIDS. It's called safe sex. Would you like to gas them all as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Safe sex? Safe sex wont stop AIDS. The microscopic holes in a typical condom are BIGGER than the actual virus. So please explain to me how thats supposed to be successful?

 

Abstinence is the only way, and since no one would listen to that, I propose a quarantine. Sadly, only a communist dictator has been gutsy enough to do it so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. This isnt a liberal/conservative issue. Im sure the religious right wouldnt be too happy with taking innocent civilians and disposing of them like animals. Last time I checked, a lot of people with AIDS arent gay. Stop trying to put idiotic labels on people.

 

2. How can you defend such an extreme policy? I imagine you would go so far as to exile the disabled also since they are not productive enough to compensate their cost on society? Should we kill people with cerebral palsy? Maybe the elderly should be killed off since they take up so much health funds. Should we exile people who have weaker immune systems and often get the cold? This policy is seriously nuts.

 

3. Your condom argument is false. Stop listening to the Vatican for scientific analysis:

 

Condoms are the other important part of HIV prevention. That's latex condoms, used correctly, every time you have intercourse. Forget the stories about HIV swimming right through the pores in condoms - HIV is usually bonded on to a cell which is far too large to pass through the pores, and the surface tension of the semen is also a factor in keeping HIV in the condom. A study of 250 couples where one partner was HIV positive found that among the couples who used condoms consistently and correctly, none of the uninfected partners became infected. Condom use in Thailand has substantially reduced the HIV infection rate there, which was skyrocketing because of the very active sex trade.

 

http://www.ualberta.ca/dept/health/public_...fo/aidsprev.htm

 

Claims that latex condoms allow HIV to pass through are unfounded. The pores of latex condoms are too small to allow HIV to pass through. Condoms have been shown to be effective barriers not only to HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, but also to herpes simplex, CMV, hepatitis B, chlamydia and gonorrhea.2 "Condoms for prevention of sexually transmitted diseases," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 1998; 37:133-137.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh and not to mention that little thing called the constitution which you seem to have no regards for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think that the facts about condom useage speak louder than baseless opinions. You're not going to have any credibility in an argument if you start advocating ghetto camps for people infected with AIDS. Sorry, but this isn't Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany. People have guaranteed rights here, as it should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. This isnt a liberal/conservative issue. Im sure the religious right wouldnt be too happy with taking innocent civilians and disposing of them like animals. Last time I checked, a lot of people with AIDS arent gay. Stop trying to put idiotic labels on people.

 

 

Ok, Im sorry for trying to believe that this is a liberal/conservative thing. I WAS WRONG, and I shouldnt have tried to make it that way. However, find a post on this board in which I state that most people with AIDS are gay, or where I even give a stance on homosexuals. I never have mentioned that topic, and if you thought it was implied, I assure you, it wasnt.

 

2. How can you defend such an extreme policy? I imagine you would go so far as to exile the disabled also since they are not productive enough to compensate their cost on society? Should we kill people with cerebral palsy? Maybe the elderly should be killed off since they take up so much health funds. Should we exile people who have weaker immune systems and often get the cold? This policy is seriously nuts.

 

 

No, not at all. People with cerebral palsy arent infected with a contagious disease that is easily spread and will kill people. HIV positive people can spread their illness, and thus kill more people. Which is why I advocate removing them from society. Such a policy obviously works, because you wont find anyone with AIDS in Cuba. And whys that? Because Fidel got rid of them.

 

And if you are so insistent on their freedom, it could be that way. We could castrate the guys and sew the womens vaginas shut. How bout it? :blink:

 

3. Your condom argument is false. Stop listening to the Vatican for scientific analysis:

 

 

 

Condoms are the other important part of HIV prevention. That's latex condoms, used correctly, every time you have intercourse. Forget the stories about HIV swimming right through the pores in condoms - HIV is usually bonded on to a cell which is far too large to pass through the pores, and the surface tension of the semen is also a factor in keeping HIV in the condom. A study of 250 couples where one partner was HIV positive found that among the couples who used condoms consistently and correctly, none of the uninfected partners became infected. Condom use in Thailand has substantially reduced the HIV infection rate there, which was skyrocketing because of the very active sex trade.

 

http://www.ualberta.ca/dept/health/public_...fo/aidsprev.htm

 

Claims that latex condoms allow HIV to pass through are unfounded. The pores of latex condoms are too small to allow HIV to pass through. Condoms have been shown to be effective barriers not only to HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, but also to herpes simplex, CMV, hepatitis B, chlamydia and gonorrhea.2 "Condoms for prevention of sexually transmitted diseases," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 1998; 37:133-137.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh and not to mention that little thing called the constitution which you seem to have no regards for.

 

Fine, I was wrong on that as well. I had heard the rumor somewhere, it didnt seem that extraordinary, and I believed. You have actual facts, so, you win. Kudos.

 

But if condoms and safe sex completely prevented AIDS, then the numbers would be going down, wouldnt they? But theyre not. People continue to get AIDS. Whys that? Because not everyone uses condoms. So thats not going to work.

 

One, and only one, solution has worked. And Fidel knows what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. This isnt a liberal/conservative issue. Im sure the religious right wouldnt be too happy with taking innocent civilians and disposing of them like animals. Last time I checked, a lot of people with AIDS arent gay. Stop trying to put idiotic labels on people.

 

 

Ok, Im sorry for trying to believe that this is a liberal/conservative thing. I WAS WRONG, and I shouldnt have tried to make it that way. However, find a post on this board in which I state that most people with AIDS are gay, or where I even give a stance on homosexuals. I never have mentioned that topic, and if you thought it was implied, I assure you, it wasnt.

 

2. How can you defend such an extreme policy? I imagine you would go so far as to exile the disabled also since they are not productive enough to compensate their cost on society? Should we kill people with cerebral palsy? Maybe the elderly should be killed off since they take up so much health funds. Should we exile people who have weaker immune systems and often get the cold? This policy is seriously nuts.

 

 

No, not at all. People with cerebral palsy arent infected with a contagious disease that is easily spread and will kill people. HIV positive people can spread their illness, and thus kill more people. Which is why I advocate removing them from society. Such a policy obviously works, because you wont find anyone with AIDS in Cuba. And whys that? Because Fidel got rid of them.

 

And if you are so insistent on their freedom, it could be that way. We could castrate the guys and sew the womens vaginas shut. How bout it? :blink:

 

3. Your condom argument is false. Stop listening to the Vatican for scientific analysis:

 

 

 

Condoms are the other important part of HIV prevention. That's latex condoms, used correctly, every time you have intercourse. Forget the stories about HIV swimming right through the pores in condoms - HIV is usually bonded on to a cell which is far too large to pass through the pores, and the surface tension of the semen is also a factor in keeping HIV in the condom. A study of 250 couples where one partner was HIV positive found that among the couples who used condoms consistently and correctly, none of the uninfected partners became infected. Condom use in Thailand has substantially reduced the HIV infection rate there, which was skyrocketing because of the very active sex trade.

 

http://www.ualberta.ca/dept/health/public_...fo/aidsprev.htm

 

Claims that latex condoms allow HIV to pass through are unfounded. The pores of latex condoms are too small to allow HIV to pass through. Condoms have been shown to be effective barriers not only to HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, but also to herpes simplex, CMV, hepatitis B, chlamydia and gonorrhea.2 "Condoms for prevention of sexually transmitted diseases," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 1998; 37:133-137.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh and not to mention that little thing called the constitution which you seem to have no regards for.

 

Fine, I was wrong on that as well. I had heard the rumor somewhere, it didnt seem that extraordinary, and I believed. You have actual facts, so, you win. Kudos.

 

But if condoms and safe sex completely prevented AIDS, then the numbers would be going down, wouldnt they? But theyre not. People continue to get AIDS. Whys that? Because not everyone uses condoms. So thats not going to work.

 

One, and only one, solution has worked. And Fidel knows what it is.

 

 

 

 

Youre going to fault the solution for not being perfect because of its misuse?

 

Lets follow that logic.

 

If putting criminals in prison prevented crime by creating a disincentive(the solution), then there would be no crime and people wouldnt commit crime because they would be afraid(the demand for perfection of the solution). But crime is still around and people commit crime even when they know they will go to jail(the misuse of the solution). So the only solution to crime is to destroy humanity.(the insane alternative).

 

And here is evidence that condom use does reduce AIDS:

 

Thailand

 

After peaking at around 140,000 cases in 1991, the number of new HIV infections in Thailand declined to an estimated 21,000 in 2003. This dramatic fall was mainly due to increased condom use by men and a reduction in their use of brothels.

 

Cambodia:

 

Recent efforts to halt the spread of the epidemic, including a programme promoting 100% condom use, have enjoyed some success. Figures indicate that HIV prevalence amongst brothel-based sex workers dropped from 43% to 29% between 1998 and 2002.

 

Lao

Overall, less than 1% of indirect sex workers tested in 2000 were found to be HIV-positive.

 

 

 

One of the reasons for the fairly low prevalence rates in the Lao People's Democratic Republic might be that consistent condom use is comparatively high amongst female sex workers - 73% in 2000. About two thirds of the police and military, and three quarters of truck drivers, said they always used condoms with a paid partner.

 

 

 

http://www.avert.org/aidssoutheastasia.htm

 

 

 

And btw, where are you going to put all of these people?

 

 

 

 

 

No, not at all. People with cerebral palsy arent infected with a contagious disease that is easily spread and will kill people. HIV positive people can spread their illness, and thus kill more people. Which is why I advocate removing them from society. Such a policy obviously works, because you wont find anyone with AIDS in Cuba. And whys that? Because Fidel got rid of them.

 

And if you are so insistent on their freedom, it could be that way. We could castrate the guys and sew the womens vaginas shut. How bout it?

 

 

 

But they have an adverse affect on society don't they? Its the same inhumane approach to society in general that Im comparing. Remember, Hitler tried to take a similiar approach on people he deemed to have an adverse affect on society.

 

And the due process clause, via substanitive due process and not procedural due process, prevents such a heinous government policy. I cant believe it is even considered in this country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Youre going to fault the solution for not being perfect because of its misuse?

 

Lets follow that logic.

 

If putting criminals in prison prevented crime by creating a disincentive(the solution), then there would be no crime and people wouldnt commit crime because they would be afraid(the demand for perfection of the solution). But crime is still around and people commit crime even when they know they will go to jail(the misuse of the solution). So the only solution to crime is to destroy humanity.(the insane alternative).

 

And here is evidence that condom use does reduce AIDS:

 

Thailand

 

After peaking at around 140,000 cases in 1991, the number of new HIV infections in Thailand declined to an estimated 21,000 in 2003. This dramatic fall was mainly due to increased condom use by men and a reduction in their use of brothels.

 

Cambodia:

 

Recent efforts to halt the spread of the epidemic, including a programme promoting 100% condom use, have enjoyed some success. Figures indicate that HIV prevalence amongst brothel-based sex workers dropped from 43% to 29% between 1998 and 2002.

 

Lao

Overall, less than 1% of indirect sex workers tested in 2000 were found to be HIV-positive.

 

 

 

One of the reasons for the fairly low prevalence rates in the Lao People's Democratic Republic might be that consistent condom use is comparatively high amongst female sex workers - 73% in 2000. About two thirds of the police and military, and three quarters of truck drivers, said they always used condoms with a paid partner.

 

 

 

http://www.avert.org/aidssoutheastasia.htm

 

 

 

And btw, where are you going to put all of these people?

 

 

 

 

 

No, not at all. People with cerebral palsy arent infected with a contagious disease that is easily spread and will kill people. HIV positive people can spread their illness, and thus kill more people. Which is why I advocate removing them from society. Such a policy obviously works, because you wont find anyone with AIDS in Cuba. And whys that? Because Fidel got rid of them.

 

And if you are so insistent on their freedom, it could be that way. We could castrate the guys and sew the womens vaginas shut. How bout it?

 

 

 

But they have an adverse affect on society don't they? Its the same inhumane approach to society in general that Im comparing. Remember, Hitler tried to take a similiar approach on people he deemed to have an adverse affect on society.

 

And the due process clause, via substanitive due process and not procedural due process, prevents such a heinous government policy. I cant believe it is even considered in this country.

 

Well, since destroying humanity isnt really an option, are there other to completely prevent crime? No. Theres nothing. There will always be crime. It has many factors, mainly poverty. And since there will always be poverty there will always be crime. But is there a surefire way to prevent AIDS? Yeah, there is.

 

The main reason I support my policy is that its already been put in use. If Fidel hadnt already proven that it works, I wouldnt support it. But it obviously does, which is why I think we should use it here.

 

I cant say I appreciate the comparisons to Adolf. Thats stretching it. Adolf tried to get rid of anyone who didnt look, act and think like he did. He claimed Jews and gypsies and gays and so on were dangerous. However, no matter what he might have said, they werent. I am advocating removing from society (and not killing, btw) people who do pose a danger.

 

Now, where to put them? Thats the problem. I dont really know. I dont have any real suggestions either. Ask Fidel, he obviously knows where to put them.

 

I realize its far fetched for such a huge country. And I realize no one would ever use it, assuming Im never president. So go ahead. Try your methods. Your safe sex, your AIDS walks, your blankets. But I assure you, there will always be AIDS. None of the solutions out there are ever going to change that.

 

Whatever. I know my girlfriend doesnt have AIDS, so Im safe for now. And as meticulous as I am, I guarantee Ill never do a girl with AIDS. It simply wont happen. I am safe. So much for trying to help the rest of the world.

 

And the due process clause, via substanitive due process and not procedural due process, prevents such a heinous government policy. I cant believe it is even considered in this country.

 

 

Just out of curiousity, do you know what the Evil of Leon is?

 

Let me tell you. The basic story is that a Boston police officer was shot and killed by a known drug dealer. Police knew who did it, and they used an anonymous tip (which they had made up and faked) to go out and arrest the dealer for the murder. Upon arriving to see the suspect, the DA asked about this tipper, and when an officer confessed that he didnt exist, they released the killer, for good.

 

A cop killer. A known cop killer. Walking free, because the cops made up a tip to arrest him. This is due process, and this is what the Constitution did. Doesnt it bother you that the Constitution supports drug dealers over police officers? No where in that document is anything to protect the victims or the cops, but there are FOUR to protect the criminals. Isnt that disgraceful?

 

Also, I plan to be a cop. So I might be a little biased. Sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, since destroying humanity isnt really an option, are there other to completely prevent crime? No. Theres nothing. There will always be crime. It has many factors, mainly poverty. And since there will always be poverty there will always be crime. But is there a surefire way to prevent AIDS? Yeah, there is.

 

The main reason I support my policy is that its already been put in use. If Fidel hadnt already proven that it works, I wouldnt support it. But it obviously does, which is why I think we should use it here.

 

 

You lead to the natural question. If the main factor for crime is poverty, should we take all the poor people and put them on an island?

 

Fidel is a man who doesnt have to answer to a democratic govt where people are protected by rights. Something working doesnt always make it ok. Why do you distinguish between killing and exile? Kill saves money and time doesnt it? Why infuse some degree of humanity now?

 

I cant say I appreciate the comparisons to Adolf. Thats stretching it. Adolf tried to get rid of anyone who didnt look, act and think like he did. He claimed Jews and gypsies and gays and so on were dangerous. However, no matter what he might have said, they werent. I am advocating removing from society (and not killing, btw) people who do pose a danger.

 

 

In addition to his racial superiority ideology, he believed in improvement of society through heartless tactics-which is why I analogize to suggestion. I may be wrong, but some of the first people to go where the mentally challenged and it wasnt because of how they looked. It was their effect on society. He calculated cost/benefit also. Where is the distinguishment?

 

Just out of curiousity, do you know what the Evil of Leon is?

 

Let me tell you. The basic story is that a Boston police officer was shot and killed by a known drug dealer. Police knew who did it, and they used an anonymous tip (which they had made up and faked) to go out and arrest the dealer for the murder. Upon arriving to see the suspect, the DA asked about this tipper, and when an officer confessed that he didnt exist, they released the killer, for good.

 

A cop killer. A known cop killer. Walking free, because the cops made up a tip to arrest him. This is due process, and this is what the Constitution did. Doesnt it bother you that the Constitution supports drug dealers over police officers? No where in that document is anything to protect the victims or the cops, but there are FOUR to protect the criminals. Isnt that disgraceful?

 

 

Im not sure where to start with this, but Ill try. There are two stages of law that you are mixing up. First, its not the due process clause you refer to but the 4th amendment which requires that police officers have probable cause before they a)detain someone and b)are granted an arrest warrant. The individual you refer to clearly falls under the category of having been arrested without proper probable cause because the tip provided was not legit. But merely because he did cant be held, that doesnt mean he cant be charged and tried for the murder.

 

But in order to get an indictment, one also needs to show some small basis of evidence, not the level of trial or even more than 50% but rather around 25% of absolute proof. Its a very lax standard and anyone who has studied or worked in criminal procedure knows how easy it is to get an indictment.

 

So my first question to you is this. How did the cops know it was him? Clearly they had some basis of evidence. Even if we erase the non-existent tip, they had to have reason to know it was him right?

 

But then if they get the indictment, don't they have to prove that it was him in a court of law? They still need evidence for that.

 

The moral of your story, from what Im getting, is that our system that makes cops present even a small amount of proof to show they suspect someone, and that makes prosecutors prove in a court of law that someone is guilty, is foolish because when cops know someone is the guy, even though they cant prove it, they should be able to put that person in jail anyway. Now Im not defending drug dealers and Im a big fan of cops, but you cant be serious. You have problems with the idea of proof and probable cause?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the whole idea of my idea is to ultimately save humanity. In this case, brutality is the way to do it. The only way. I dont want these people to die, although sending death squads to their homes would certainly be more efficent. I simply want them separated from the rest of us, so they cant spread their killer disease to us, and thus AIDS eventually dies out.

 

Again, I dont support killing or isolating retards because I believe its societys job to support those people. They didnt have a choice to be that way. Their symptoms arent contagious, so theres no possibility that theyll take a bunch of us down with them. And if you havent noticed, saving the government a ton of money isnt necessarily a goal of mine. People infected with AIDS, on the other hand, had the choice when they decided to bang whoever it is that gave them the disease. Its their fault they got it. The rest of us, who arent so sexually active and a little more cautious, dont end up with murderous STDs. If they all wanted to give their promise to the rest of us, and say theyd put their wangs away forever, Id be fine with letting them stay. Like I said earlier, I am so meticulous that such a thing will never happen to me, and my girl doesnt have it. So I am safe. Go ahead and ignore my suggestions, because AIDS really isnt my problem.

 

Now, on the constitutional issue, my point was that its the same Constitution and it hasnt always been right. Some people read something from there, and say, "well, its the Constitution so we should listen", but if you really look at it, it has done some pretty lame things. Like releasing that killer (upon his arrest, they found a gun that matched the murder weapon) and like favoring criminals over cops and victims. Dont you have a problem with that? Im sick of having two time child molesters in the same neighborhood. Im sick of known killers walking free on technicalities. Im sick of cops losing to drug dealers because their successful searches were in the end unjustified. In most places, the law puts away dangerous criminals. Here, it makes sure they have every possible advantage to keep their freedom. Im sick of that sh*t. Put the crooks away!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...