|
|
|
A short history of Australia: How it was won and lost I received the following from an Australian reader signing himself as John Moffat. The original Moffat was a remarkable man, a founding spirit of the Australian north. Indeed, he was known to his contemporaries as “The Wonder of the North”. With gratitude to both Moffats I’m pleased to post this piece. It encapsulates all that drives us to reject the course laid out by our elites, and to reach out to all those like ourselves seeking the survival of the West.
In one of history’s brighter moments, the British Empire, the greatest ever known and wearing the zenith of Western civilization like a crown, cast a far flung outpost into the deeper reaches of the Pacific – an eighteenth century equivalent to a colony on the Moon. The only previous human habitation comprised scattered bands of nomadic hunter-gatherers numbering around 300,000 in total with only the barest minimum of social organization. The descendants of these people claim as their most impressive achievement a 40,000 year long ‘occupation’. That indeed is a long period for time to stand still. Whites quickly went to work taming a most inhospitable and unforgiving land. In less than a human life span, these convicts, soldiers, free settlers, administrators and adventurers had transplanted the civilization of their former homelands so successfully it was a perfect outgrowth. Not more than a century since the first fleet of tall ships glided into what was to become known as Sydney Harbour, the country was enjoying close to the highest standard of living in the world. It had become in fact ‘the working man’s paradise’. The term, ‘the lucky country’, originally coined by a bitter cynic, seemed to fit so well it came to be innocently accepted as well meant. Luck, gold and sudden fortunes however formed a miniscule part of the story. The remainder was written in sweat, blood, grief, despair and unconquerable spirit. Gold in fact attracted a solid proportion of bad luck in the form of the original wave of Asian immigration. Notwithstanding whatever plans British overlords might have had in terms of cheap, easily managed non-white labour, it was on the goldfields that it was emphatically decided by the social class closest to this sun-blazed earth of Australia that it would be a white man’s land. The pitched battles that ensued between white and yellow (and for which we must now hang our heads in everlasting shame) ensured commonsense prevailed in regard to radically different races attempting to live within the same polity. Incidentally, the existence of a southern continent had been known throughout Asia for centuries, but its exploration and settlement had obviously not been considered worth the trouble. Why not wait until someone else had done the spadework? A strong, well organized working class gave birth to the Labor Party as a means of protecting its interests. This meant most urgently raising whole planks of its platform as a barricade to non-white immigration. The de-facto ‘White Australia Policy’ was thus born. Etched into the Australian psyche was a fear and loathing of ‘the yellow peril’. And it was not an unfounded fear. As if to eradicate the slightest possible doubt about who now truly occupied, and thus, owned this land, a mortal threat from the north ensured that the blood and treasure spent in parrying it sealed the matter of ownership for evermore. Or should have. This was an unspoken sacred pact between those who remained and those who had unhesitatingly, unselfishly let slip their hold on life so that their nation might live – a nation in the true sense of the word, held together by - to quote one of our early and visionary statesmen - ‘a crimson thread’. The excitement, euphoria and relief, not to mention hubris, attending being on the winning team in history’s greatest cataclysm blinded us for many years to just what a pyrrhic victory it had been in perhaps the most avoidable war ever fought. Perhaps being willfully blind, we could not see the chickens unleashed by being on the same side as international communism coming home to roost. With the needless deaths of 55 million people, the cultural treasure of Europe in smouldering ruins, the rubble of two Japanese cities glowing radioactively and international communism on a rampage, the wartime propaganda machine spewing out its lies about the ‘just’ war could never be turned off. Indeed, for over sixty years the foul nature of the vanquished, and far and away that of the ‘anti-Semitic’ German section, has been fortified to a point where no blacker evil could exist this side of hell. Uncomfortably though, we came to see that many of the character flaws that had typified the now crushed fascists lived on in ourselves. This process of moral inventory was aided by the chosen ones whose perennial job it is to point out the faults of the ‘cattle’. There was, for example, our sense of racial supremacy, even, God forbid, our own brand of anti-Semitism. There was oppression, injustice, ‘male chauvinism’, and even something the Germans in their mouth-frothing rabidity hadn’t gotten around to giving a name to – ‘homophobia’! And there was Nationalism: the well spring from which in logical sequence flows false pride, ethnocentricity, hatred, war, extermination, genocide, and the genocide that would render all others pale by comparison: Holocaust! The only rational response? Self loathing. Thus began national and racial suicide. Interestingly, every poison supposedly swirling about the Right end of the political spectrum could find its antidote conveniently available at the opposite extreme. The all pervasive power of Communism was so total that even when its death was officially pronounced it would reincarnate in a form that would dwarf its earlier existence. It may be more accurate to say it transmogrified. Marx would no doubt have been delighted to have been able to see his beloved dialectic actually coming to life, but at a level a U2 flight above his own modest predictions. Forget bourgeoisie + proletariat = Communism. Try Communism + Capitalism (or rather, finance capitalism) = Globalism. Now, instead of the chicken-feed game of transferring wealth between classes within a state, we could move into the main draw of transferring wealth between nations. Nationalism and nation states may put a monkey wrench into this operation, but no problem. Simply eliminate them both. And while the masses of the world participate in a race to the bottom, a fabulously rich and powerful but tiny clique become the planet’s Politburo. Those who lust after and roll like pigs in the intoxicating power of bending others to their will know that even the most evil and egregious deeds can be accomplished by gradualism. Not for nothing is Fabius, the slow acting but deadly Roman, the hero of Fabian socialists. Forming the thin edge of a catastrophically destructive wedge, the first waves of non British immigrants - albeit fellow Europeans fleeing their devastated homelands - were warily accepted into Australia. The near invasion by the Japanese had shaken us to our very foundations and rammed home the reality of our situation: a sparsely populated continent with teeming millions of envious non-whites on our doorstep. “Populate or perish”, was the cry. Ironically, it first issued from the throat of an extremely nationalistic, first class member of the old and rapidly fading school of Labor. Given the need for bolstered population in defence terms – although sheer numbers were becoming a rapidly outmoded factor in the face of exponentially growing technology – and the need for labour to accomplish the visionary projects that were a hallmark of a country undergoing a huge confidence boost, as well as the assimilability of our racially closely related new members, the immigration scheme of the early post war years was a remarkable success. Or so it seemed. Moving like a silent undercurrent beneath the glowing success stories were growing and shifting dynamics that were soon to thrust a dagger at the heart of the Australian nation. The crystallizing threat, paradoxically more lethal than that recently launched from Tokyo that had originally engendered it was given a name: Multiculturalism. Richly ironic though was that it had not been the ‘multicultural’ new arrivals who had demanded, agitated for or apparently even wanted this policy. It was do-gooder, native born ‘liberals’ behind the push to counter what they perceived as the tyranny of the majority robbing the newly arrived of their full rights as residents of the land of ‘the fair go’. Why should these unsuspecting innocents be forced to learn English, assimilate or even integrate, and jettison their rich cultures? Why in fact should they be made to feel that they’d never left home (or fled) in the first place? This was cruel and unusual punishment of the first order. This of course led to, as even those with the most frosted up crystal ball could have predicted, ghettoisation. Even some of those who had been previously happily assimilated became unassimilated and moved to the ghetto. Not to forget our most cruelly victimized minority group, the Aborigine, he became a prince amongst equals of the persecuted. Sufficiently softened up by the self-flagellation we’d been invited to participate in, it was then decided that Australia simply wasn’t multicultural enough. Evidently there were still far too many people looking roughly similar. But what luck! The first ‘boat people’ from Vietnam had just arrived. Corresponding with this eventuality and the resulting low murmur of unwelcoming resentment, the word ‘racist’ began to be flung as if from an exploding nail bomb, and with equally apparent ability to silence the recipient. The art of blaming the victim would soon need an opulent gallery to house it. In 1984, an entire bomb landed on an unassuming University professor who was indiscreet enough to opine that Asian immigration was getting a little ahead of public acceptance. He was summarily hounded out of his profession but his observation had, for a time at least, let a genie out of a bottle. Our social engineers went immediately into damage control. In a breathtaking display of enforced doublethink, we were ensured that even though it was now being claimed that Australia was now a part of Asia - at least by our elite if by no-one else, least of all Asian leaders - and the term ‘Asianisation’ was now being used openly by Australian quislings, the trickle of Asian immigrants would have no discernible effect on the nation’s racial makeup. Twenty one years later, walking any day through the centre of Sydney, one could be forgiven for mistaking the location for an Asian city. Could it be possible that we were misled? For a less insipid term, try betrayed, deceived, held in contempt, treated like fools, led to the slaughter house and nationally violated, all on a scale that could only have been perpetrated by the lying, perverted filth spewed up by what we laughingly call ‘democracy’. Worse, this has been done in such a way – fiendishly cleverly one might be tempted to concede if ignoring the awesome machinery of persuasion and mind-control available to the deceivers – that huge numbers of those deceived believe that this is what they themselves wanted! In ‘The Anatomy of Power’, John Kenneth Galbraith states: “There is a successful expression of power when the individual submits to the purposes of others not only willingly but with a sense of attendant virtue. The supreme expression, of course, is when the person does not know that he or she is being controlled. This, at the highest level, is the achievement of conditioned power; belief makes submission not a conscious act of will but a normal, natural manifestation of the approved behavior. Those who do not submit are deviant.” [Italics mine] And so it is with huge tracts of the native born population joyfully willing to lie down and die for some ‘greater good’ that has never really been spelt out but must be very good indeed given how amenable we are to remove ourselves to make way for it. A grinning madness now stalks this land, a land for which two generations earlier men unhesitatingly hurled themselves into eternity for the sake of its preservation as a home for their people, but is now being given away without a shot being fired. Only a people who have been grotesquely mentally disfigured would do this. In a Down-under now truly upside down, it is the brave, the defiant, and the sane who are seen as mentally and morally suspect – the ‘deviant’. Abstract thinking is apparently not a favoured past-time of most people. And to extrapolate from what is happening now to project into the future, even just a little way, requires this type of thinking. So, as it is now is as it will always be. Why do evil racists spread so much ‘hate’ and endanger multicultural peace, love and harmony by fanning fears of what might happen? This line of thinking is milk and honey to multiculturalists, Australian politicians in particular, and cyanide to those determined to hold on to what their ancestors created. It is fuel for the illusion created by the propaganda masters that multiculturalism and Asianisation will not fundamentally alter a country that is in fact being transformed with fanatical energy. When Australians turn on their television sets, they see reassuringly a profusion of white faces. The citadels of power are still manned by Whites. The white faces of our sporting heroes still beam from victory daises. Very comforting. As it is … But like some gigantic, loathsome, deep-sea monster, a new Australia is rising inexorably toward this thin, white surface. The day the sun strikes this thing from below will be the day the Great Southland is lost to the white man forever. A little sand remains though in the hour glass still. Not much, but enough in which to do what has to be done. If it is not done, at some point in the future, mirth will attend the legend of a weak and foolish people who gave away their own homeland. John Moffat Comments:2
Posted by Mark Richardson on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 12:29 | # John Moffat, welcome to Majority Rights. Yes, the early development of Australia was impressive. Melbourne was first settled in 1835 and by the 1880s had grown so phenomenally it was known as “Marvellous Melbourne”. I think a critical turning point was the 1930s, when the left-wing turned from nationalism to a Marxist inspired internationalism. By the early 1940s a great many journalists and academics were card carrying members of the Communist Party. There were refugee programmes in the late 1930s and in the early 1940s Arthur Calwell decided on a multicultural future for Australia on the American model. Once the left turned, there was no effective opposition to the liberalism of the establishment. 3
Posted by John S Bolton on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 13:18 | # I know very little Australian history, but it seems that the role of race and Jews could easily be greatly exaggerrated here. Here is an alternative explanation, reasoning by analogy to other countries such as America. Our officials and their scholars know that a polyglot empire can’t hold loyalty in the modern dispensation. This would be why they are prodiversity, and of language in particular. The class war failed to generate the conflict which officials would ride into dictatorship, and scholars could use to mount dystopia, so another source of conflict had to be found. Forced assimilation was tried, and failed with aboriginals. Then came anticaucasianism as the doctrine of the left. Always the goal is tyrannical power; the stated objectives of tolerance and so on, are propaganda. 4
Posted by Stuka on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:22 | # The day the sun strikes this thing from below will be the day the Great Southland is lost to the white man forever. “Forever”?? Really? Says who? Moffat just finished describing the white conquest of Australia. Why is it a given that whites won’t do it again, in Australia or North America or Africa or Europe? Is our conquering spirit dead & gone forever? 5
Posted by TRI on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 15:16 | # Excellent essay! I love how you noticed how the TV shows multiculturalism, but only choice bits. I was only just noticing that today! They are careful to show a White majority, especially in the only Kosher events for White aggression - sport. Modern day gladiator games. Where they will show ethnics are in the following roles: Yet wandering around our major cities we are forced to realize that the White population has to be down to around 60-70%. Considering that Australia is 80% urban, that puts the figure of non-Whites at around 65-75% or so at most. What’s more, demographics of fighting age men in 20 years or so down the track do not look good for Whites. It is good in a way that the Muslims bombed us, and are bombing us. We are waking up all over the place, and we WILL figure out a solution. 6
Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 15:21 | # Is our conquering spirit dead & gone forever? Australia was a relatively unpopulated frontier. This is the difference between Australia, the United States and Canada as colonies, and other colonies of the British Empire. Indeed in this fact dwells the whole fallacy of white supremacy. What we’re supreme at is not ruling over other peoples, but pioneering lands and populating them. When we look back in history at our periods of greatest fertility they were during these pioneer days. Whites forget this lesson to their peril and this is why I have focused my public energies on new frontiers such as the ocean deserts and space. Agriculture need not be land intensive. In fact, it can be removed from the vast majority of existing ecosystems with a relatively minor amount of innovation in food processing and packaging. On about 108 acres, Earthrise Farms in the Imperial Valley desert, California is producing 67kg of protein per square meter per year using relatively little water. This is better than 20 times the yield of soybeans and includes one of the broadest spectrums of amino acids of any known source of protein. The crop is spirulina, a blue green algae that is a source of nutrition at the base of the aquatic food chain. They have been doubling their production every 5 years but have limited themselves to a niche market in health food or “nutriceuticals”. The primary technology they need developed to make this protein directly consumable by humans as a staple of the diet is removal of nucleic acids—something that may be feasible as an extension of their centrifugal drying process. In any case, it is an excellent feed stock for animals and can displace many times its own acreage in conventional agricultural uses. The late John Martin at Moss Landing hypothesized in 1987 that large sections of the tropical Pacific were ready to support ecosystems nearly as abundant as the oceans off the coast of Peru except for the lack of one key nutrient: Iron. In 1995, subsequent to his death, his team tested “the Iron hypothesis” by spreading a half ton of iron sulfate (available in huge cheap quantities as a byproduct of iron smelting) over a wide area of ocean. The south Pacific ocean turned from “crystal clear electric blue”, virtually devoid of life, to duck pond green. They produced 25,000 tons of biomass for a factor of 50,000 gain from fertilizer to biomass. Once the ocean desert bloomed with phytoplankton, zooplankton, the next link up the food chain, began grazing. Had they kept going, zooplankton grazing fish could have been introduced, such as anchovies, but they terminated the fertilization and watched. When they terminated the fertilization, the artificial ecosystem eventually disappeared. The density of nutrients is important. If you have too much, the phytoplankton dies without being eaten by the zooplankton (or grazing fish) and rots, thereby removing oxygen from the water and suffocating the grazers and fish. Too little nutrient, and you have an ocean desert. There is a broad range of nutrient density where zooplankton and fish can swim from one meal to the next without starving—and the abundant fish catches off of Peru are an example of what you get when you make it easy for fish to fatten up on phytoplankton grazers. The ratio of Peru’s fish production between normal (fertile) times to El Ninio is 1000. Whites can do this. 7
Posted by TRI on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 16:48 | # James, Some very interesting points. I talked about this here, at length: I am skeptical though that we can’t learn the art of fighting back for our lost territories. We are only a small step away from copying the Islamic or Judaic Group Evolutionary Strategy for our own purposes. We’ve beaten the Muslims back before, we’ve dealt with enroaching Turks, Huns, Jews, whoever. I don’t see why we can’t adapt to this new game. And all we have to do is beat the ethnics at their own game. We are in the nuclear age; countries like the UK, USSR and the US can be taken back through methods I suggest in the above post. Due to MAD, once re-taken a Serbia solution is next to impossible. I find those outcomes to be a lot preferable than to keep putting the problem off, getting our first Mars colony up and running great only to accept our first guest with the Star of David lapel. I imagine him greating us with open arms only to regale us with tales of how evil and exploitative White civilization while our women and children lap up his lies. And I think to myself, NO! I will not allow this to happen. 8
Posted by onetwothree on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:01 | # What we’re supreme at is not ruling over other peoples I suspect two or three Marine divisions could maintain the current regime in Iraq. 9
Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:11 | # I suspect two or three Marine divisions could maintain the current regime in Iraq. So what do you make of the inability of the British to maintain power over Rhodesia, South Africa and India, not to mention the holdings in the middle east? No, I don’t think two or three Marine divisions could do it—particularly not with the polyglot Marine Corp that has been crammed down the throat of the American people by Jews. 10
Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:22 | # We are only a small step away from copying the Islamic or Judaic Group Evolutionary Strategy for our own purposes. Where is the evidence that this works for the longer term? It seems its much easier to establish a Constitution that has genetic requirements, not just for citizenship for for entry, including tourist visas, than it is to acquire the ethnocentric instincts of those who are hysterical about breaking down barriers to entry to the places we build for ourselves. Our individualism and self-reliance is a genetic trait which is a strength in a frontier setting and death to those who deny it in a multicultural society. It is an extraordinarily difficult task to overcome this weakness in a multicultural society even if you possess the media and academia means of indoctrination. You don’t. Please be more realistic about our position and stop equating open ocean farms with Mars colonies, if yoiu please. 11
Posted by Seb on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 20:32 | # So what do you make of the inability of the British to maintain power over Rhodesia, South Africa and India, not to mention the holdings in the middle east? It’s worth remembering that in most of these cases the British left because the Americans threatened to wreck their economy if they didn’t What nation has similar power over the US? 14
Posted by TRI on Sun, 14 Aug 2005 04:52 | # “Where is the evidence that this works for the longer term?” I’d say they are doing something right. You will notice that this stuff is done MEMETICALLY, not GENETICALLY. Sharia is like the ethnocentric patch for the Islamic GES. It is all rules, a legal system. It is not genetic. Death penalties for apostasy, miscegenation, etc. Imams are encouraging their youth to rape and have sex with our women. Classic tribal warfare stuff. We can adopt similar laws to help us compete. Europeans can be successful in a tribal situation. What do you think happened during thousands of years of European history, was it one big happy family? Did the vikings show up on your doorstep with milk and cookies? I don’t think so. “It seems its much easier to establish a Constitution that has genetic requirements, not just for citizenship for for entry, including tourist visas, than it is to acquire the ethnocentric instincts of those who are hysterical about breaking down barriers to entry to the places we build for ourselves.” I disagree. All it takes is insulation from mass media, something that can be done with a bit of work if you are willing to do it. We used to be a very ethnocentric society, as little as a hundred years ago. Too much is made of the genetic basis, too little attention is paid to our consumption of culture. Lastly, I think that people have been agitating for this sort of stuff for the last 50 years or so without making any way in politics. What makes you think that it can be done now? “Please be more realistic about our position and stop equating open ocean farms with Mars colonies, if yoiu please.” “Whites forget this lesson to their peril and this is why I have focused my public energies on new frontiers such as the ocean deserts and space.” Which is it? The same thing would apply to a sea colony too. Soon enough there would be a Goldberg showing up, wanting to be a part of it, and as we are now we would let him in. 15
Posted by ben tillman on Mon, 15 Aug 2005 17:29 | # Again, I express my admiration for Mr. Moffat’s fine work, before addressing the fascinating digression from Mr. Bowery. James certainly thinks “outside the box”! It has occurred to me as well that improvement in the efficency of nitrogen fixation is a research priority during perhaps the final stages of the petroleum era. I had no idea experiments like that inspired by the late John Martin had been undertaken (even if for another purpose). And the project in California generating 67kg of protein per square meter—amazing! That’s enough to feed two or three people for a year. A stupid question: The primary technology they need developed to make this protein directly consumable by humans as a staple of the diet is removal of nucleic acids…. Why? Not that I hadn’t rather eat animal flesh anyway…. 16
Posted by Andrew L on Fri, 19 Aug 2005 08:34 | # Islamo’s are not a problem to get rid of, Chuck them in the river with the Estuary Crocks and let the native Sharia law sort it out, The crocks love crapp, and there is about 500,000 meals for the crock to have.And they are all Allah F*&^%$ ‘ers. never surrender. 17
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 19 Aug 2005 16:23 | # Steady on, Andrew. Genocide by crocodile is not MR policy. 18
Posted by The War on White Australia on Wed, 03 Oct 2018 14:47 | #
19
Posted by (((Prof. Andrew Markus))) on Wed, 03 Oct 2018 15:21 | #
21
Posted by Melbourne in deep demographic trouble on Sun, 15 Sep 2019 18:29 | # A Report from Melbourne Melbourne is in deep demographic trouble - one of the key infiltration points is the universities, of course. Post a comment:
Next entry: Liberal Cities, or Black Cities?
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) Patriotic Alternative given the black spot by Guessedworker on Thursday, 14 March 2024 17:14. (View) On Spengler and the inevitable by Guessedworker on Wednesday, 21 February 2024 17:33. (View) Twilight for the gods of complacency? by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 02 January 2024 10:22. (View) — NEWS — Moscow’s Bataclan by Guessedworker on Friday, 22 March 2024 22:22. (View) Soren Renner Is Dead by James Bowery on Thursday, 21 March 2024 13:50. (View) Collett sets the record straight by Guessedworker on Thursday, 14 March 2024 17:41. (View) CommentsThorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:43. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:16. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:33. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:42. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:38. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'On Spengler and the inevitable' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 06:23. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 05:55. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 19 Apr 2024 05:26. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:58. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Thu, 18 Apr 2024 20:49. (View) Guessedworker commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Thu, 18 Apr 2024 18:00. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:22. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Wed, 17 Apr 2024 14:44. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Wed, 17 Apr 2024 14:35. (View) Guessedworker commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Wed, 17 Apr 2024 10:33. (View) shoney commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Wed, 17 Apr 2024 06:14. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sat, 13 Apr 2024 18:22. (View) James Marr commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Sat, 13 Apr 2024 15:33. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 13 Apr 2024 07:06. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 13 Apr 2024 05:28. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 13 Apr 2024 05:12. (View) Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 13 Apr 2024 05:09. (View) James Bowery commented in entry 'Soren Renner Is Dead' on Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:15. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Thu, 11 Apr 2024 14:13. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Thu, 11 Apr 2024 14:05. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Thu, 11 Apr 2024 12:28. (View) |
Posted by Tournament of Champions on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 10:58 | #
Too wordy.