Home / General / Freedom



For all you PC types who claim America is a “racist” country, check out these apples:

In August, officers were called to [Santiago’s] home but had no cause for arrest, Tolley said. In October they were called about allegations of strangulation and domestic violence, but again “no probable cause was established for arrest”.

On 7 November, Tolley said, Santiago arrived at the Anchorage police station to tell officers he was “having terroristic thoughts and believed he was being influenced by Isis”.

He also spoke about manipulation by an “intelligence agency”, Tolley said, and had a loaded magazine on his person. He left a firearm in his car, along with his newborn child.

Tolley said police called the FBI, which found no links to terrorism, and that Santiago was admitted into a mental health facility. On 8 December, by which point Santiago was outside the facility, his weapon was released back to him.

It’s nice to know that a person of color* can be suffering from a full-blown paranoid psychosis, and our federal law enforcement agencies will still give him his guns back right quick, once they’ve established he has “no links to terrorism.”  (Other than the whole “these voices in my head are telling me to commit terrorism” thing, apparently.]

*Offer may not be available to black people, Muslims, and women. Check with your local authorities.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • waspuppet

    *Offer may not be available to black people, Muslims, and women. Check with your local authorities.

    ** Not responsible for gunshot wounds inflicted by local authorities who feel their lives are in danger from black people, Muslims or women who allude to the possibility that they own guns.

    • ThrottleJockey

      As Paul describes it black men are just sexists and rapists anyways so we deserve whatever the boys in blue do, amirite?

      • vic rattlehead

        That’s a…tendentious reading of Paul’s post.

        • ThrottleJockey

          He accused Cornel West of being sexist because he had the audacity to support Jill Stein. White men have been criminalizing the sexuality of black men for over 400 years. It’s an tired old trick.

          If Paul has some evidence West is sexist he should release it. If not he should apologize.

          Conservatives do this shit too so my ass both sides don’t do it.

          • Paul Campos

            I didn’t respond to your initial idiocy on this in the original thread but I will now.

            I mocked West for pointing to his support for Stein as evidence that his destructive demonization of Hillary Clinton wasn’t motivated by sexism. Using the fact that you voted for a woman candidate as evidence that your opposition to another woman candidate wasn’t motivated by sexism is ridiculously lame. It’s like claiming you’re not a racist because you would vote for Ben Carson if he were running against Barack Obama.

            I don’t know whether or to what extent West’s attitude toward Clinton is motivated by sexism, but I do know that voting for Jill Stein provides exactly zero evidence that it isn’t.

            • ThrottleJockey

              Thank you for addressing the issue.

              I went back and re-read your post last year on Jonathan Butler and the University of Missouri. This was the most widely commented post in LGM history at the time and one in which people said your post had a racist tone. I defended you against many people including Aimai and Bijan because I had no reason to question you and wanted to think the best of you.

              So for starters how about you not insult a defender of yours?

              Second based on what you posted I had a legitimate reason to question the insulting insinuation that Cornel West was sexist. I wasn’t the only one that read your post as implying that he was sexist. Jameson Quinn felt so strongly about what you had written that he felt the need to defend it by saying that he had no evidence that West was sexist but that West’s “narcissistic” personality fit with him being a sexist. So, at least a few of us read you as implying that West was sexist. If that’s not what was intended that’s your fault as writer, not our fault as readers. I’ve made the same mistake of being too snark by half, so I can commiserate.

              The reason I complained about the lack of diversity on LGM’s masthead is because even well intentioned people can fall into cultural gaps and traps, where their unfamiliarity with racial issues gives others the impression that they are racist. Since white men have criminalized black sexuality for 400 years now, I hope you can see how your words, however they were intended, fell into the old trap painting black men as sexual predators. As we work and collaborate with wider numbers of diverse people, these gaps and traps diminish. I hope that LGM keeps that in mind when it has occasion to grow its masthead.

          • vic rattlehead

            Ah so you’re relitigating an older thread

            • ThrottleJockey
              • Little Chak

                Where “a number of us” means me, I, TJ: tireless defender of Cornel “any black intellectuals who disagree with my characterization of Barack Obama as a ‘house negro’ are themselves ‘house negroes'” West.

                I, TJ, who thinks that the best way to defend West is to claim in perpetuity and in every thread in which it has the slightest relevance, that when someone says that pre-emptively defending yourself against the idea that you are sexist by saying that you are voting for a woman is a lame defense, and a bit sexist in itself, they are making a racist attack against black men in general.

                I, TJ, who thinks that it makes sense to jump from snarky “since you’re trolling I’ll say he does seem like he might be sexist” to: you white racist liberals are calling Cornel West a rapist and demonizing black sexuality and you wonder why we “niggas” don’t stay on the “Democratic plantation”.

                Not “a number of us”. Speak for yourself, and stop speaking for others.

                What does Paul saying that Cornel West saying “don’t call me a sexist; I voted for a woman” is lame and wrong-headed have to do with “black sexuality”? I don’t get it.

                And from the other thread: What do campus sexual assault rules have to do with “black sexuality”? Black men being disproportionately charged and/or convicted of sexual assault is due to racism. (Black women being disproportionately not believed in sexual assault cases, more so if their attacker is white, also is due to racism.)

                Combatting rape culture is not an attack on “black sexuality”.

                Saying that “I can’t be sexist because I’m voting for a woman” is itself a sexist statement is also not an attack on “black sexuality”.

                Saying that they are is problematic.

                • ThrottleJockey

                  I see you’re in manure sales. Lucrative business I hear.

                  You’re smoking crack if you think I’m a Cornel West fan. I respect his contribution on behalf of the culture but I’ve never read a word he’s written and I couldn’t disagree more with what he’s said about Obama.

                  But I’ll be damned if I let any of my disagreements with him give white boys free reign to accuse him of being some horn dog. White boys have been doing that too long. But motherfucker you white boys are some arrogant motherfuckers!

                • brad

                  The way out of a hole is not to dig.

      • Hogan

        Do you mean Paul Campos?

      • The Dark God of Time

        That’s as convincing as your hypothesis that Bill Crosby was set up by The Man.

        • ThrottleJockey

          Bing Crosby was The Man, Chronos, just ask Grace Kelly!

          • The Dark God of Time


            That’s one of the saddest comments I’ve ever seen here.

            • ThrottleJockey

              This is what I said:

              I’m curious if anyone here can name one black man accused of rape in the last 15 years who they think is innocent of the charge?

              I asked first…What a neat country America is that when one becomes famous one ceases to be black.

              You’ll note I didn’t qualify my question with “celebrity”. I take it from your statement that the answer to my question is, “No”. There’s no black man accused of rape these last 15 years (famous or otherwise) that you think is innocent. That says a lot about this blog.

              I think if you can’t name a single black man wrongly accused of rape in this country in the last 15 years Chronos you have some serious racism issues to get over.

              This blog as I point out above to Campos is seriously myopic on the subject of multiculturalism. It’s seriously deficient on black and Latino voices. Whether that’s a feature or a bug I’m not sure.

              • ThrottleJockey

                Accepting that some black men have been wrongly accused and convicted of rape doesn’t mean agreeing that most black men have been falsely accused and convicted. It just means you read newspaper articles or Google. Hell the Innocence Project has a whole database of them.

                If you can’t accept that just some black men are innocent of these accusations then you have some serious racial hang ups man. You can’t make the blind see all you can do is pray for them.

              • brad

                And what about when you deliberately ignore and minimize those voices when they’re added?
                Shakezula seems to often be one of those “white boys” telling you that you’re full of shit.
                But then the only black woman you seem to have ever mentioned or given any value to is your mother.

    • Just_Dropping_By

      Given that according to the WaPo police shooting database (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2016/) only 4% of victims of police shootings were female, I kind of think women are going to come out OK….

  • los

    He also spoke about manipulation by an “intelligence agency”

    we all await the real news from infowars.spew

    /kek, kak

    • osceola

      I was just going to make that point. I’ll have to wait till tomorrow to listen to the conspiracy shows on Texas Liberty Radio. Jones is on in the afternoon, but another nutjob show, “The Power Hour”, is the morning show of the same stripe.

      I expect a lot of MK-ULTRA references. Also, expect to hear this wouldn’t have happened if everyone in the terminal had been packing heat.

  • efgoldman

    This us Scalia’s legacy. Hope he’s happy, in whatever circle of hell he landed in.
    Meanwhile, here in the People’s Republic…..

    • humanoid.panda

      Is it? I mean, it’s not like America was a gun-free desert before Heller, and I find it hard to believe that Alaska, or the federal government, would be churning strict gun control laws if not for Heller.

    • (((Malaclypse)))

      I find it shocking that an ammosexual collects Nazi memorabilia as well. This is my shocked voice.

      • los

        just ‘compensating’ because he can’t acquire Zyklon B

  • Santiago, who has a girlfriend and four-month old baby in Alaska, flew to Fort Lauderdale from Anchorage via Minneapolis, and appeared to have acted alone. Piro said the suspect used a legally held 9mm semiautomatic handgun, which had been checked on to the flight in accordance with security requirements.

    And critics say security theater doesn’t work! He only killed five people instead of a whole airplane’s worth!

  • corey

    Lax gun laws in one state, like Alaska, DOES effect rest of the country, as they gun owners may travel i.e. FLA

    • Sly

      Not just traveling gun owners, but the bigger problem of state/municipalities with lax gun laws operating as effective smuggling rings that funnel gun into states/municipalities with stricter regulations on sales. The overwhelming majority of guns used in crimes in NYC and Chicago, for instance, had their last recorded point of legal sale either in other states or in neighboring suburbs outside the jurisdiction of city gun laws.

    • vic rattlehead

      Point taken, but it’s not like gun laws in Florida are terribly strict either.

      • GeorgeBurnsWasRight

        Yes, with regard to either the possession or the use of guns.

  • Nobdy

    The Florida GOP has a solution to the problem.


    To be fair, “more guns” is a GOP solution to every single problem one can conceive of. If Republicans acknowledged climate change as a problem they would propose a gun based solution (why AREN’T we shooting hurricanes, anyway?)

    When you point out the murder rate in France is a quarter that of the United States they shrug and say that that’s a result of cultural differences (or point out that France has fewer of “those people.”) If you suggest then maybe we should strive to be more like France, culturally, if that would reduce murders by 75%…they probably shoot you. I’ve never actually gotten that far in a conversation with a conservative. They tend to get angry or dismissive pretty quickly when you challenge the idea that guns are a panacea for every problem including gun violence.

    • malraux

      “oh yeah, well if you want to be like the french, then how about we copy their approach to muslim immigrants?”

      • ThrottleJockey

        This. France has done a shitty job integrating Muslims compared to the US.

        The French are no less racist or xenophobic than white Americans. They only differ in the target of their hate.

    • Gator90

      For conservatives, in this context, “cultural differences” is a more polite way of referring to “those people.”

      • aturner339


    • (((Malaclypse)))

      Conservative: We have more murders because we have more people.
      Me: That isn’t how “rates” works.
      Conservative: You still haven’t answered my objection.
      Me: Yes. Yes I have. Rates controls for population size.
      Conservative: All I know is we’re bigger than [country], so we’ll always have more of these incidents.

      • los

        Yes, twittercucks “exhibited” the same type of beyond-innumerate “thinking”[1] in the Trump Won More (Low Population) States threads, and in the Trump Won PV When We Remove Californian’s[2] Votes threads.

        I think the “smarter” cucks can be convinced lamebrain-shamed by zero and near-zero[3] counter-arguments: “If the USA consisted only two states, explain why the redstate shouldn’t be given zero electoral votes. Cite pertinent sections from the Constitution in your answer.”

        1. = disingenuity and/or severe brain damage
        2. So then soon in the cause of equal rights, Republicans will eliminate voting rights in every state.
        3. or infinity or near-infinity…

    • ThrottleJockey

      Strive to be more like France?

      Don’t you like the First Amendment? What has it ever done to you?

      • Nobdy

        I don’t see a strong connection between freedom of speech and gun violence.

        It’s possible to try and copy the best aspects of another society without copying every aspect. Americans have done this throughout history.

        I’m something of a free speech absolutist, but I very much wish that Americans venerated violence less and were less uptight around sex, for example.

        • vic rattlehead

          Free speech absolutism has never made sense to me. There are always lines that need to be drawn, “asbolutism” just muddies where you are drawing them

          Some people respond “no lines! absolutism means no lines!” Ok, how do you define “speech”? That’s a line drawing you’re obfuscating. Etcetera.

          So you can be an “absolutist,” but if you’re reading “speech” very narrowly, that doesn’t really tell anyone else very much – it just obfuscates. You can read “speech” for example to only mean “political speech” and hence that would be a very narrow 1A reading that the label “absolutist” obfuscates.

          It’s also a little too privileged for my tastes – people have to endure hate speech because of some abstract ideal? I recognize I may be in the minority in thinking that hate speech shouldn’t be protected speech, but that’s another consideration that an absolutist at least has to grapple with and have a good answer for.

          • ThrottleJockey

            The solution to hate speech is good speech, not censorship.

            • vic rattlehead

              What a cogent argument.

          • Murc

            It’s also a little too privileged for my tastes – people have to endure hate speech because of some abstract ideal?

            No, they have to endure hate speech because we straight up don’t think the government is, or ever will be, responsible enough to police speech in anything like an equitable and effective way, and because we try and be humble enough to know that one persons vile, indefensible hate speech is another persons bedrock of morality and that maybe we should use as light a hand as possible.

            Without the First Amendment I fully believe that during the Bush Administration it would have literally been made a hate crime to criticize Dear Leader, and that during the incoming Trump Administration similar laws would be put into place. That during the Jim Crow era agitating against it would have been an actual crime, “anti-social behavior” or some other such bullshit.

            Giving government censorship powers has never, ever ended well.

            • vic rattlehead

              But once again, since the US is very much an outlier among democracies, the burden of proof is on people who wish to claim that France and Germany and other countries in Europe are authoritarian hellholes where no one can speak their mind.

              Anyway, I realize I’m in the minority here and that’s fine. I still maintain that free speech absolutism is incoherent and obfuscatory for the reasons stated above.

      • los

        Strive to be more like France?

        try finding ripe muscat grapes (table, not wine) in US stores.

        Don’t you like the First Amendment?

        I’ll guess that French govrenment will convict and execute anyone who refers to french fries as French Fries
        (“What kind of devil are you? a romanian?”)


      • vic rattlehead

        This is a bizarre comment. The United States is very much an outlier in its freedom of speech legal regime. Which I think is good! But that doesn’t mean that France (among other countries) isn’t a robust democracy.

        The French aren’t perfect of course but they have a much more sensible and humane approach to, inter alia, education (especially at the university level) and healthcare. I would live there if I could. It’s not like there are government censors on every corner.

      • wengler

        Don’t you like the First Amendment?

        Most people in this country seem to interpret the First Amendment to mean free speech is fine as its something that I agree with.

    • los

      Nobdy says:

      When you point out the murder rate in France[1] is a quarter that of the United States

      Soon after Paris attack, I did quicky calculation. If France adopted the “guns for everyone” US policy[2], there would have to many many 100% foiled-by-guns Paris attacks to overcome the losses incurred by adopting “guns for everyone”

      they shrug and say that that’s a result of cultural differences (or point out that France has fewer of “those people.”)

      I want to see these altcucks argue with the (other? more likely the same, same day) altcucks who howl that europe is overrun with syrian terrorists pretending to be refugees.

      1. or whichever particular data of related data
      2. still in its current only 1/3-or-less-baked state of GOA/NRA nirvana

    • los

      Nobdy says:

      GOP solution to every single problem one

      Also, reintroducing slavery.. and for most whites too, this time.

  • malraux

    I don’t know if its a Baader-Meinhof type thing, but one of the things I’ve noticed is an apparently disproportionate number of these shootings involve returned service members.

    • NewishLawyer

      PTSD and the inability to get over being in a war zone and having war zone mentality and responses.

      • Gator90

        Fair to blame Bush? I say yes.

        • Incontinentia Buttocks

          And, secondarily, everyone else who voted for that crazy war.

      • malraux

        That’s my suspicion, obviously, but an alternative hypothesis would be that people more likely to have adjustment issues are more likely to end up in the military, especially with the lowered recruitment standards of the wartime.

        • NewishLawyer

          Could be both. A lot of people enlist in the military because they have no better options especially at the non-officer levels. It does seem to be a thing that a lot of working-class people just enlist at 18 because the alternative is a minimum wage service job.

          Hell, I know people who signed up for JAG because of the legal economy crisis and some of them admitted if there were more legal jobs, they would not have signed up.

          • ThrottleJockey

            This. Both is something we should remember more.

            The other possibility is that his mental illness results from untreated CTE from concussions he suffered in Iraq.

            • postmodulator

              The other other possibility, as long as we’re just spitballing here, is that his symptoms sound like classic paranoid schizophrenia, which usually first manifests at around his age.

              • ThrottleJockey

                True. I was wondering if PTSD or CTE might influence or cause that? Any ideas?

        • Nobdy

          More than adjustment issues, people drawn to violence are unsurprisingly drawn to the military, whose whole purpose is violence. Not to say all soldiers are inherently violent people, I’ve met plenty of absolutely wonderful veterans, but in a country with a volunteer military a certain percentage of the violent types are going to find their way there.

          Active and recent soldiers are also disproportionately young men, which is the most violent demographic.

          • ThrottleJockey

            This too.

          • los

            retaining experienced personnel is better than recruiting more fresh personnel.
            I recall reading that the military was able to be picky.

            (btw, both good arguments for reducing casualties – fatal or debilitating)

          • GeorgeBurnsWasRight

            Recent military personnel having difficulty finding decent employment doesn’t help.

            Despite recruiter’s claims, a lot of military training isn’t useful in the civilian world.

            • The Dark God of Time

              With the hell of war
              He’s come to grip
              Policing up the liter tips
              It makes a fellow proud to be a soldier.

      • Nobdy

        Not to mention familiarity with and access to guns, as well as training in how to use them lethally.

        Soldiers are trained to use guns to kill people. It shouldn’t be surprising that they use guns to kill people in disproportionate numbers (just like lawyers have a reputation for being personally litigious.)

        That being said, if you’re going to train someone to kill with guns and then expose them to wartime trauma you would think that it might make sense to give them a strong support system when they return to civilian society, especially when guns are easy to get in that civilian society.

        Republicans, however, treat soldiers in much the same way they think about abortion. When you’re part of the relevant population (the military or the unborn) they’ll sing songs of your greatness and take great care to pass all kinds of symbolic legislation “supporting” you. After you’re no longer a valuable political symbol though, you’re on your goddamned own.

        • vic rattlehead

          Maybe we should train all infranty soldiers in law. So when some of them fly off the handle they can file frivolous suits against dozens of people instead of pumping them full of bullets.

      • Hogan

        Augmented by stop-loss/repeated tours.

    • vic rattlehead

      Shrub’s wars are the gifts that keep on giving!

    • wengler

      The Forever War is the war that keeps on giving.

  • NewishLawyer

    I think one of the best things the left can do as a long-game plan is come up with some kind of education system or way (not necessarily part of formal education) that gets people to think in term’s of positive liberty.

    There are a lot of people in the United States who seem to think that the only freedom and liberty are negative based and that freedom is only about being free from government coercion. Yesterday a libertarian tried to tell me that civil rights laws were nothing more than reverse Jim Crow.*

    *I have no idea what this means. Of course civil rights laws are reverse Jim Crow. I suspect it was some clever sort of mind game that backfired.

    • ProgressiveLiberal

      Youre starting from the premises that those people are consistent and/or rational. Thats your problem right there. You cant win an argument with a lost cause. They arent thinking, theyre regurgitating vomit.

      The next “libertarian” i meet will be the first.

    • marduk

      I suspect it was some clever sort of mind game that backfired.

      You already said “libertarian”.

    • mattius3939

      That’s an idea in The Handmaid’s Tale: ~ “There’s freedom from, and there’s freedom to…” and one of the book’s central themes is that authority types think of freedom as exclusively “freedom from,” because it doesn’t require anything on their part – no sense of responsibility, no sense of consequences, no sense of doing. Whereas “freedom to” takes both work and critical thought.

      It’s just an observation in the book, not a prescription of how to change such a mindset, even within its fictional world.

      And I think you’re wrong, kind of. (No offense) You’re right that education’s effective, you’re wrong that anything dems do would be honored or even reported upon in good faith. “With great freedom comes great responsibility” would never, ever be communicated by the right-wing media. What would be communicated is that libtards have found a way to make even individual freedom into a prison of collectivism and socialism and marxism and entitlements and government overreach.*

      *this is not supposed to make sense.

    • ThrottleJockey

      There is also corporate coercion and people can get excited about that.

      In light of the fact that blacks suffered a great deal because of government coercion I can’t really get that excited about government as a guarantor of freedom. Unless you think Blue on Black violence is primarily about “freedom.”

  • ProgressiveLiberal

    Who is a poc? This white guy right here?

    Are the trumpkins ready to deport all ex-military now?

    And i guess its wrong to point out that trumpkins want terrorists to have guns on planes now (which is the logical conclusion to guns in airports cause THATS WHY YOURE AT THE AIRPORT in the first place – to get on a plane.)

    My wife and i went to the ballet the other week and for the first time ever at any dance production in 36 years of life we had to go through metal detectors. Nice country we got here.

    But if dozens of dead kindergartners wont change anything, nothing ever will.

    • Derelict

      Dozens of dead kindergartners did change one thing: They made it acceptable to call the parents of those children liars in public, to stalk those parents, and to smear those parents as participants in a grand scheme by Obama and the anti-gun left to smear firearm-fondling Americans.

      • Nobdy

        I’m not sure I’d lay all that at the feet of the dead kindergarteners.

        I would say that someday the right wing is going to have to reckon with the society they created in their endless pursuit of greed and power, but for some reason they seem totally comfortable with these kinds of vile activities. At most some of them will lightly protest those activities, but then Donald Trump goes on Alex Jones’ show and they don’t give a damn.

        I’m sure it’s not legitimizing at all to have the president elect make appearances on the primary vector of conspiracy theories in this country.

  • JBC31187

    It’s nice to know that a person of color* can be suffering from a full-blown paranoid psychosis, and our federal law enforcement agencies will still give him his guns back right quick, once they’ve established he has “no links to terrorism.” (Other than the whole “these voices in my head are telling me to commit terrorism” thing, apparently.]

    Don’t worry, I’m sure the Trump regime will fix that soon.

  • Derelict

    Sure, the FBI managed to gloss this guy over when requested to investigate. But, to be scrupulously fair, the Bureau was completely pre-occupied with a much more important investigation into Anthony Weiner’s dick pics and how those could be used to help throw the election to Donald Trump.

    • ThrottleJockey

      The FBI has messed up 3 or 4 times now. It’s fair to ask if they can get it right. We also need to rethink if our whole approach to this is realistic. We might need new ways to fight terrorism.

      • Nobdy

        3 or 4 out of how many?

        There is no acceptable way to get this stuff 100% right.

        Returning firearms to a mentally ill man seems, for lack of a better word, insane, I’ll grant you, but I don’t even know if that was the FBI’s choice. There’s all kinds of nutty right wing legislation around firearms and when they can be confiscated.

        • Davis X. Machina

          There’s all kinds of nutty right wing legislation around firearms and when they can be confiscated.

          Our state constitution (ME) was amended by referendum 20 years ago to add ‘shall never be questioned‘ to our local 2nd Amendment. (Article 1, section 16.: ““Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms; and this right shall never be questioned.”)

          • postmodulator

            It’s especially frustrating given that the People of the Gun claim the problem is mental health, not guns…then don’t want to do anything about mental health, either.

            I used to work on the same floor as this guy. My boss was at his wedding. What seems to have happened is, he was a schizophrenic who went off his meds. What the fuck was he thinking, owning guns, and what the fuck was society thinking, selling them to him?

        • ThrottleJockey

          I’m only talking about instances where the FBI had either prior contact or significant warnings about an incident. For instance with the Orlando shooter (and I think the San Bernardino shooters). This isn’t about blaming the FBI, it’s about reevaluating our game plan and improving the batting average.

          Perhaps we need more laws on the books to forcibly commit the mentally ill. We almost certainly need more money for mental health treatment. Remember the guy in Virginia who killed all the students at VA Tech? He had mental health issues and was known to mental health professionals. Clearly we need more tools in the tool box.

  • vic rattlehead

    The most important question though is: did Obama chant “radical Islamic terrorism” three times? You have to do the magic incantation.

  • Stephen Reineccius

    And because of that great decision, my grandparents have been shot. It’s just crazy. This is shit that happens on the news not to your own family. And yet here my family is. We would love your thoughts and prayers.

    • Hogan

      You have them. So sorry for your loss.

    • vic rattlehead

      That’s awful. I’m terribly sorry for your loss.

    • Origami Isopod

      Oh, god. I am so, so sorry.

    • XTPD

      Sorry for your loss.

    • jim, some guy in iowa

      I will keep you and yours in my thoughts

It is main inner container footer text