Wednesday, September 27, 2017

It's Staring At Me!


On Bigfoot Eyewitness Radio - Guest Eric Benoijt
E.C.B.R.O. (East Coast Bigfoot Research Organization) and is an investigator for the organization. Because of all the Sasquatch eyewitnesses Daniel speaks with, it comes as no surprise that he has quite a few sightings to share. On tonight's show, which is part 1 of a 2-part series, Daniel's going to share some of those sightings with you.

Click here to listen

61 comments:

  1. A camp fire story with zero evidence? Par for the course in the LARPing delusion of footery.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Its a costume, very easily seen with the lines on the frontal waist, the way the leg sucks in and out like a turtle head on the top portion of the hamstring, (the line on the upper portion of the thigh) also the right leg calf muscle is located on the outter part of the leg, when calf muscles are on the inner parts of the legs, the left leg has no calf muscle at all during the entire walk. Sorry, but people who make claims of the costume being so realistic are more or less just saying, I believe and nothing you can show me can change my mind. I wish it was true, but this is just a guy in a bad suit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “Patty” has a third fold, parallel to the breast fold, but more inferior. It is seen at her approximate waist level posteriorly, but runs more inferiorly towards the center of the abdomen, making the turn at an anatomic landmark consistent with her ASIS (anterior superior iliac spine), a bony prominence we all have at the top front of our pelvic girdle. The skin is adherent to that structure by a strong ligament. A second structure, the inguinal ligament, runs from the ASIS to the pubis, with the skin attached along its length. The anterior fold in the film conforms to this ligamentous attachment. Continuing to the posterior aspect of the fold, it merits comment, due to the fact that the human body can develop these “festoons” of excess skin and fat in a bilateral manner, with the posterior spine serving as a division between the two sides. Even in the most obese individual, there is minimal fatty deposition found in the midline of the back. The skin is attached to the spinal column by a series of ligaments that stabilize it from motion in a superior and inferior direction. The excess skin folds hang from that line similar to the attachment of a hammock. In looking at the pictures of the model in the costume used for the MMP, the costume folds cross the midline of the back in several views, violating the above anatomic rule. “Patty’s” buttocks area has a classic inferolateral sag, with the excess skin draping below the musculature of the buttocks. The suspensory ligament that provides us with the buttock crease, the ligament of Luschka, prevents the skin from draping in a single sheet. The ligaments of Jacque, however, tend to lose elasticity with age, with the resultant tendency of the buttock to sag to the side. The fold in this area was commented on in the MMP, but the fact that it is present in humans merits restating, since the “buttock lift” is a relatively common operation performed by those of us in the plastic surgery field, and is designed to address this problem.

      The folds in the upper thigh/hip area were well covered by the authors in the MMP. There was, however, another finding on the lateral thigh that was not mentioned. It is worth emphasizing for two reasons: 1) it can be clearly seen in the film footage; and 2) the fact that it is caused by a suspensory ligament that is probably only understood by a very select group of people, i.e., plastic surgeons. I, as one of that group, am aware of its existence since it has to be surgically released when a lateral thigh lift is performed. In my review of two separate anatomy texts, neither documented the presence of the ligament. Its main function is to support the lateral leg skin. When the skin becomes stretched out due to fat accumulation, a depression is seen in the upper 1/3 of the thigh, inferior to the creases that the MMP researched. The ligament in humans is relatively large, measuring approximately 4 inches long, and running across the axis of the leg. In the PGF subject, it may be a bit larger, as documented by the shadowing from the depression. Not quite as noticeable as the above suspensory ligament, but still visible in the PGF, is the axial depression in the mid-lateral thigh caused by the skin attachment to the underlying TFL (tensor fascia lata), a band that runs down the middle of the vastus lateralis, one of the thigh muscles. As with the triceps, it becomes more and less visible with the synchronized firing and relaxing of the muscle during the action of striding...

      Delete
    2. The next observation is of the popliteal fossa, or the hollow area behind the knee. In the PGF, it is seen on both legs, but probably more evident on the left. The hollow is caused by the tendons from the two posterior thigh muscles, the biceps femoris and the semitendinosus. As they cross the back of the knee, a tenting of the skin occurs laterally, with the central, unsupported area of the skin sagging inward. It is most prominent with the knee flexed and less apparent with the leg fully extended. In an individual that is walking, it appears and disappears, as seen in the PGF. As with the triceps and scapula, the ability to have an area of a costume change with use would be extremely difficult to replicate. In this case, however, it could be impossible. Even with modern stretch cloth (such as Lycra® spandex), not generally available in 1967, the sulcus (depression) seen with the knee flexed in a person wearing a fitted pair of pants is missing. The cloth is
      stretched across the two tendons, similar to a drum. The only way to reproduce the depression would be to glue the cloth to the posterior aspect of the individual’s knee. While this would produce the sulcus, it would then be present in all positions, and not appearing and disappearing with flexion and extension of the knee – clearly a daunting task for a costumer. My last areas of observation are of the posterior lower leg and ankle. The two heads of the gastrocnemius muscle (medial and lateral) can be seen in the right leg. In spite of the “grainy” characteristic of the film, the contraction and relaxation of the heads of the gastrocnemius are observable, comparable to that seen in the triceps described above. The tendon of this muscle is of further interest. The Achilles’ tendon runs to its attachment on the calcaneus (heel bone). The tendon is seen with a depression anterior to it, correlated with the elongated heel and distance between the tendon and the tibia, as with the posterior knee, the creation of a depression with a costume is essentially impossible. Additionally, the end of the pant leg made from non-stretch material needs to be made wider to accommodate for the foot being passed through. This is clearly seen in the costume used in the MMP. There is no such excess of material seen in the PGF, with the gastrocnemius tapering into the ankle, and then widening out to the foot."
      O. Allen Guinn, III, M.D., F.A.C.S. Aurora Plastic Surgery
      Lee’s Summit, MO
      http://www2.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Munns%20&%20Meldrum%20Commentary_2013.pdf

      Delete
    3. I like the fur covered hip waders the best

      Delete
    4. "Figure 3a. Above, on the PGF Hominid the red dotted line indicates an indentation marking the boundary between the upper thigh and the buttocks. The yellow dotted line is a secondary fold and the green dotted line indicates the “notch” (see text). Below, human surface anatomy on obese and or geriatric individuals, exhibit the equivalent indentation between thich and buttock."
      http://www2.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Munns-%20Meldrum%20Final%20draft.pdf

      In the above link, Page 15, there are comparative photographs to recognised biological tissue that destroy any suggestion of hip waders.

      Delete
  3. They look so fake on the film. They are saggy yet firm as apples in a sack. They look so unnatural. There's no female in the animal kingdom which has hair on their breasts. In fact most of the female mammals have the whole breasts area completely hairless. Dogs, monkeys, horses (almost every kind of mammal) have no hair in the breasts area. Even polar bears have naked nipples, they are hidden a bit by the fur but they are naked.
    Some say they see the muscle movement. What about nipples? (and I am dead serious here!!!). You can clearly see "her" breasts (almost full frontal lighted by the sun) in the film and they are completely covered with hair and have no nipples. And as I wrote earlier they look so fake. They are saggin in unnatural way. Check some photos on the internet of female gorillas or orangutans or even human women from tribes all over the world who live beyond our civilisation. Breasts on the PGF film look like they are hanging too low and they are very oval (like a tennis ball). In reality they would be located a bit higher, they would be more flat and directed more to the sides of the body. The "bigfoot" on the video looks like she has breasts implants of the size and firmness of a tennis ball attached too low to her chest.
    I am a bigfoot enthusiast but this film has always looked fake for me. My gut is telling me it's fake. I see it from the first glimpse. There's just something awkward and unnatural in the way this supposed animal walks and behaves. The way it turnes its head to the camera. I have watched too many nature films to believe that this is the way how this animal would behave. There's almost something very "robotic" in its movements.
    This is almost something like that when you point a camera on a person who isn't happy about the fact that you filming him or her and tries to behave as usuall but later on the footage everyone (who know this person) can tell that this person doesn't behave naturally.
    Big foot on PGF looks exactly like that. Like an animal which tries too hard to behave like an animal but fails.
    I bet Andy Serkis (an actor who played Gollum in LOTR and Cesar in the new Planet of the apes) would make more believable Big foot movements.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Based on the skin folds and excess adipose tissue seen on her body, it is very likely that “Patty” has at least reached middle age, and almost certainly has had one or more offspring, based on the size and shape of her breasts. In the mature, fertile human female, it is very common for the breasts to undergo a significant change in shape as a result of child-bearing. Prior to becoming pregnant, the woman’s breasts may be located in a relatively high position on her chest, and be prominent anteriorly. With pregnancy, the change in hormonal levels results in the glandular (milk-producing) tissue in the breast increasing its size, with the degree dictated by that individual’s genetics. If the woman then opts to breast feed her infant following delivery, the glandular size increase will persist as long as that process is ongoing. Once nursing has been discontinued, the glandular tissue will reduce in size, with the breast becoming smaller. The skin envelope around the breast tissue will attempt to contract back to its original size and shape, but if the increase in volume during (and after) pregnancy was significant, and if nursing was continued for a prolonged period of time (several months), the overlying skin may have actually grown to the larger size. As such, it will not be able to contract back to the pre- pregnancy dimensions. In appearance, it becomes more flattened and longer, with a resultant “drooping” characteristic. Multiple pregnancies only serve to make this condition more prevalent. In my observation of the PGF, “Patty’s” breast size and shape are, in my opinion, more consistent with those of a multiparous female (one that has had multiple pregnancies), rather than an overweight one. With obesity the breast tends to be fuller throughout its shape, to include the upper pole. With a post- pregnancy breast, the upper pole tends to be
      flatter, with the majority of the fullness located in the inferior quadrants."
      O. Allen Guinn, III, M.D., F.A.C.S. Aurora Plastic Surgery
      Lee’s Summit, MO
      http://www2.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Munns%20&%20Meldrum%20Commentary_2013.pdf

      Dr. Guinn is board certified as a Plastic Surgeon by the American Board of Plastic Surgery. He is also a published author in both medical texts and journals, including articles on breast reduction techniques that he personally designed.
      MEDICAL SCHOOL
      Tufts University - School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
      General Surgery
      Fit*simons Army Medical Center, Aurora, Colorado
      University of Massachusetts, Worcester, Massachusetts
      Hand Surgery
      University of Connecticut, Hartford, Connecticut
      Plastic Surgery
      University of Missouri, Kansas City, Missouri
      Certifications
      American Board of Plastic Surgery
      Fellow American College of Surgeons

      There are many segments of footage showing chimps and bononbos with hair on thier breasts, those two primates live in tropical and subtropical areas. The mountain gorilla lives in the colder mountains and has the thickest hair of the gorillas. If you Google 'Rare Mountain Gorilla Born in Congo' you'll find a nice National Geographic image of a female gorilla with hair on her breasts. Would it not be logical, perhaps even expected for a primate living in the colder climate of North America to have a thicker coat of hair than those other primates living in the tropics?

      Delete
    2. 3:28

      You don't have a clue do you ? Your mama got hairy tlts

      Delete
    3. ^ Oooh Joe..whatever will mommy think of your swearing ? Go to your room and wait for her to flagellate your scrawny ass.

      Delete
  4. Not to speak ill of the dead, according to much that has been written about Patterson's character, ostensibly from people who knew him personally, he was a self promoting, perenially broke charlatan. Patterson wrote a self published book about bigfoot before releasing his famous 1967 footage (the book was mentioned by others above), and before he shot his famous October 1967 film, Patterson supposedly tried to make a film about some cowboys tracking a bigfoot with the help of an Indian guide. Also, there is supposedly a second reel of Patterson footage taken during that same 1967 Bluff Creek trip showing two guys on horseback in the film (that would make at least three people there including Patterson who was filming). Since I did not know Patterson personally, I have no idea if what others have written about Patterson is accurate. There is much written about Patterson's history that leads to the (admittedly strong) ad hominem argument that Patterson perpetuated a hoax. I personally don't entirely dismiss the famous footage as showing an actual sasquatch. However, I do not agree with the many people who claim that a realistic suit could not have been constructed by an amateur such as Patterson. What if Patterson (or a Patterson friend) was a very talented costume maker? The idea that the image in the footage is too realistic (muscle tone, size, etc.) to be faked is also not true. This could have been faked in 1967 or before or after. Many critics of the footage have shown how it could have been done (check the internet for these stories). If Patterson was an upstanding person with an impeccable reputation with no prior bigfoot history, I would be more inclined to believe the validity of the footage. Given his past prior to the famous footage, it seems absolutely incredible that he just happened to find a bigfoot after traveling to California to film one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I do not agree with the many people who claim that a realistic suit could not have been constructed by an amateur such as Patterson."
      ... Cool! Got monkey suit?

      (Yawn)

      "The idea that the image in the footage is too realistic (muscle tone, size, etc.) to be faked is also not true."
      ... Cool! Got monkey suit?

      (Yawn)

      Delete
  5. Blah, blah, blah, nothing new Harriet Slubman. Same tired b.s.!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Everywhere roger went there were bigfoots. He described an account of a bigfoot lifting up his truck while he was sat in it.

    The guy was also actually deeply involved in bigfootery, writing books and making plans on making documentary films etc in order to make a buck. He wrote about a drew an account of a female bigfoot encounter. A year later what happens? Yep the exact same encounter. .. lol.

    So many holes. Why does gimlin deny bob h was there when theres photographic evidence he was part of their gang. It doesnt matter if it was bob h in the suit or not, gimlin isnt being straight. He also refuses to be interviewed alongside bob h. Once again it doesn't matter if it was bob h in the suit or not, gimlins actions are very suspect with how he is treating the situation.

    Also gimlins horse hoof depth, rogers beard growth, the trackway film issues, the actor roger used to pretend to be gimlin during their money making tour, the film processing timeline issues and of course the complete and utter 100% lack of a monkey can all lead even the least intelligent people to understand the pgf was a hoax.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. HOMO HOMO HOOOOO MOOOO AHHHHAAAA HAAA HAAA LOL!!!!!!!!!

      Hey Superfriends LOL!!

      Delete
    2. "Everywhere roger went there were bigfoots. He described an account of a bigfoot lifting up his truck while he was sat in it."
      ... Yet you'd question it if a researcher hadn't any experiences of his/her own. Isn't one of the most damning cases against some long-term researchers, that they don't have any experiences of their own for their time spent? Oh... And a singular experience like the one mentioned up top, does not equate to "bigfoots being everywhere he went" in Roger's world. Roger researched this subject hard, he would naturally come across a lot of anecdotal evidence.

      "The guy was also actually deeply involved in bigfootery, writing books and making plans on making documentary films etc in order to make a buck. He wrote about a drew an account of a female bigfoot encounter. A year later what happens? Yep the exact same encounter."
      ... Classic rhetorical nonsense from a pseudosceptical mind. Pseudosceptics will demand that researchers provide substance, and then condemn them for simply achieving that which they set out to accomplish. Roger tried making a documentary to educate people on historical reports of "Bigfoot" and researched the subject hard, writing a book. If both endeavours were to make him money, that's what people get for their hard work. None of which is a blemish on his integrity... Unless you NEED him to be a hoaxer.

      "So many holes. Why does gimlin deny bob h was there when theres photographic evidence he was part of their gang. It doesnt matter if it was bob h in the suit or not, gimlin isnt being straight. He also refuses to be interviewed alongside bob h. Once again it doesn't matter if it was bob h in the suit or not, gimlins actions are very suspect with how he is treating the situation."
      ... Bob Gimlin was a neighbour to Bob H, and there are very likely photos of them together, as there likely is with any number of people from the same town. To draw a link between that and Bob H allegedly being at scene of the footage in 1967, is utterly void of any substance. Bob H has tried making Bob Gimlin look like a liar many years. He's lied about Gimlin's late friend for many years. He has even boasted to people in his local community that he himself would somehow make money from the footage one day... I really don't blame Bob Gimlin for not wanting to be anywhere near the guy. Gimlin is ten of him.

      "My point was that Kitkaze and Co. were playing on an implicit presumption that all true believers think / claim the two scenes were filmed the same day, thus creating the straw man he pretty convincingly knocked down with the beard discrepancy. This presumption may be true for some, but not all ... In the same thread / same page it's noted that some P & G defenders claim the cast display scene was filmed a year later, on a return trip to the area."
      - EnolaGaia
      http://forum.forteantimes.com/index.php?threads/patterson-gimlin-bigfoot-film.1395/page-14

      Delete
    3. "Most horses are not 1300 lbs, and depending on the gait, a horse is never putting it's full weight on any given hoof at any given time. A bipedal animal that weighs 800 lbs is putting it's full weight on one foot while it swings the other. I have a 14 hand quarter horse in the barnyard right now that doesn't weigh over 800 lbs. Add a rider and a saddle and he still is right around a thousand lbs. But I do not pretend to know what size horses Bob brought down to bluff creek. But if the horse and squatch were roughly the same weight? I could see where the squatch is leaving a heavier impression. If we are to assume that it was a real creature....... Otherwise we then need to figure out how someone could hoax such a heavy impression, without leaving tell tale signs behind."
      - Norseman
      http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/topic/2388-the-patterson-film-trackway/&page=1

      And to the timeline... How does all that unsubstantiated conjecture provide an explanation to what isn't... The subject in the footage? Does conjecture explain away an alleged costume that defies all SFX & costume methods to this day? Here's the smoke & mirrors proponents of the timeline red flag expect us to swallow... You have a creature that cannot be explained away with any known SFX fur cloth technique known to even today's standards... To be side stepped due to conjecture over a processing timeline.

      Where's that bloody magic monkey suit?

      Delete
    4. Unless you can produce the p/g costume, bigfoot is real. Simple science.

      Delete
    5. ikdummy finds a paper written by someone that agrees with his opinion and that's it, case closed. Irrefutable. ikdummy produced a paper that said sub-Saharan Africans had higher IQs than Askenazi Jews. Done! Case closed. Paper. Irrefutable. How can anyone argue against something that was written? You can't.

      Delete
    6. Negative proof fallacy...

      • Body - The data is not present to analyse, therefore the data cannot be assumed to either exist or not exist (even though the evidence points to it existing).
      • The footage - The data is present, there is no question of the data existing, and the nature of it has only one means it must be tested in accordance with what premises are drawn from that data. In this case, the premise is organic tissue.
      • Monkey suits - The data is present, whole databases of suit making techniques & artistry that can be drawn from, that need to be utilised to determine that the source can be replicated. If it can't, then there is data on that footage that accounts for genuine organic tissue.

      ... Data. If it exists then it can be scientifically tested, therefore requiring no assumptions on it's existence either way. If a critic asserts that there is evidence for disproof, he is making a claim and therefore also has to bear a burden of proof. If you don't like expert opinion obliterating your uneducated drivel, then you're just gonna have to live with it.

      Also Stuey? Your pasted BFE comment up top from June 2013, is EXACTLY the same content-wise as "River's" comment here;
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/patterson-death-bed-confession.html
      ... Who has published comments at the ISF. Another one of your aliases I see.

      Delete
    7. Stuey has multiple personalities

      All of them dullards

      Delete
    8. Joerg, if you want to be taken seriously, you need to learn the difference between "it's" and "its."

      https://www.amazon.com/English-Grammar-Dummies-Geraldine-Woods/dp/0764553224

      Delete
    9. No wonder you're on this six year meltdown... You really had purpose when you thought you had the PGF all nailed down.

      And you need capitals for the first letters of names, Stuey.

      Delete
    10. The sad thing is that I've pointed out your error to you at least a dozen times and you remain willfully ignorant -- hopefully this experience can be a lesson to you.

      Delete
    11. ^ Patterson was known for pilfering,lying and cheating and also for duping people out of cash...
      http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/grand-larceny.htm

      Delete
    12. Obviously you're feelin' very DmAkEr-ish on the above comment Warts. Your wording sounds so like him.

      Delete
    13. Try putting my typing error into a word finder on any BFE comment section. It's a shame for you that the same method wouldn't reveal anything different than a sheer inability to use the same basic grammar you like to flag when deflecting from is your best arguments getting crushed.

      Poor "River".

      Delete
    14. Stuey... You were spanked over Patterson's character here;

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/cryptid-con-tour.html

      ... I know you're so drunk that you can't remember one day from the next, but please try and keep up with your schoolings. There IS always a chance someone might end up getting spammed.

      Delete
    15. ^ "WARTS"? HAAA HAAA HAAA
      Lol----idot!

      Delete
    16. ^Homeless lunatic laughs to himself in the dark alley. Nobody knows whats so funny. They just grab the mace in their pocket and walk faster.

      Delete
    17. ^ Bigot racist fears negro homeless vets! Yet glorifies non existent apes in "The Woods"!!
      HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA LOL!

      Delete
  7. http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/belly-crawling-bigfoot-caught-on-camera.html

    Cry at your pics DS?it's true i do cry at them.





    I cry laughing :) xx

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unlike your botanical pics the belly crawler is a video and it looks like there might be some movement and eye blinking.I'm not saying it is a bigfoot but it could be.
      Also note there are no drawings of dangly bits xx

      Delete
    2. I have movement and eye blinking in tons of video's, just like this one, and a way better camera!
      Again, you're just a pathetic Troll.

      Delete
    3. It's ok DS, these liberals don't appreciate hard work, DS lives in a blacks neighborhood so he likes to get out of there and go to the woods, who can blame him? If he was making a lot of money as a chiropractor or on YouTube he wouldn't be living in a blacks neighborhood. The blacks in his church are Godless. DS is a good guy to have to live like that, also, why don't the feet of those skeletons match up with those wonderful plaster casts you submit as evidence of species? You can show them skeleton feet pictures all you like but you're just deflecting from the fact that the glove don't fit and you must acquit. Remember how them blacks was so happy about that, murdering white women and walking free? DS knows living in a blacks neighborhood like he does

      Delete
    4. http://www2.isu.edu/~meldd/jpg/024.jpg

      Stuey... Serious question, do you have genuine delusions about not being a racist conservative when you TRY and make fun out of Zabo? Just trying to fathom the severity of your hallucinations. Do you genuinely believe in your mind that people don't notice these things?

      Delete
    5. My question is why you defend that ugly, disgusting racist Zabo?

      Delete
    6. I think that Iktomi guy is an Arab even though he uses a blacks picture, I know he lives In a blacks neighborhood full of terrorism Arabs, the only shocker is his deflecting about those skeletons, but that really ain't no surprise. DS puts up unlike the Arabian terrorist, and Chick laughs at ass jokes cause she smells like that and sleeps with them Mexicans, ICE going to call on her for sure, Arab you should shut your Muslim trap, DS got more evidence than you even if he lives In a blacks neighborhood

      Delete
    7. If Adolph Hitler rose from the dead and announced that he believed in bigfoot, ikdummy would declare him to be a fine human being whose politics are misunderstood. That's how obsessed with this subject ikdummy is.

      Delete
    8. Those tablets don't define you Stuey... don't give up on taking them.

      Delete
    9. Sorry for making things up about those skeletons, that was all me on that, and Joe, and Vegas, and Chick, tee hee

      Delete
    10. Halitosis, you are schooling them Iktomi, heavenly father said it's okay to lie about those skeletons and archaic sloping skulls

      Delete
    11. ^ In desperate need of a big thick Stiff up the GUGWE!!

      Delete
    12. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    13. Stuey... If you want to aggravate someone about a particular area of this subject, it helps if you've somehow got something over someone in that area first. Like an actual exchange to reference favourably. Harping on about something that made you look stupid, and continues to make you look stupid with just one link... Is just a little bit weird.

      Delete
  8. See how he runs, see how he runs, those pesky skeletons

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/bigfooter-catches-7-foot-tall-monster.html

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/bigfoot-banged-on-outhouse.html

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/cryptid-con-tour.html

      Delete
  9. Just because people likes me more than Arab Iktomi he gets all jealous, he's been reading all my posts an racking his tiny liberal brain to know who I am. DS don't worry because Iktomi lives in a worse blacks neighborhood than you, his is full of Muslims from all shitehole countries, that's a Leeds word. Anyway he needs the escape of Bigfoot real bad to forget about them acid throwing Muslims and you're a good guy to provide that for free DS, Zaskey charges for his pictures of homeless blacks and Mexicans

    ReplyDelete