TWO MORE US BISHOPS ACCUSED OF SEXUAL ABUSE

Bishops Bransfield, Bennett restricted from exercising ministry
Catholic News Agency
11 March, 2019

bransfield
BRANSFIELD

Bishops Michael Bransfield and Gordon Bennett are accused of sexual misconduct
Archbishop William Lori of Baltimore announced on Monday restrictions on the ministry of both retired West Virginia Bishop Michael Bransfield and retired Bishop Gordon Bennett, S.J.

gordon-bennett-headshot-215x300
BENNETT

The restrictions against Bransfield are the result of a months-long preliminary investigation conducted by Lori, into allegations of sexual harassment and misconduct, as well as financial improprieties.
“Pending the assessment of the findings of the Holy See, as Apostolic Administrator of the Diocese of Wheeling-Charleston, I have directed that Bishop Bransfield is not authorized to exercise any priestly or episcopal ministry either within the Diocese of Wheeling-Charleston or within the Archdiocese of Baltimore,” Lori said in a March 11 press release.
Lori was appointed apostolic administrator of Wheeling-Charleston in September, five days after Bransfield turned 75 and submitted his resignation to the Holy See. Wheeling-Charleston is the only diocese in West Virginia.
Shortly after Bransfield’s resignation, Lori announced that Pope Francis had directed him to open an investigation into claims the bishop had engaged in repeated “sexual harassment of adults.”
Lori said in September that a hotline for the investigation received more than three dozen calls during his first two weeks as apostolic administrator of the diocese.
In the March 11 press release, the Archdiocese of Baltimore said the investigation was led by Archbishop Lori as well as five lay experts, including one who is not Catholic. The team interviewed 40 people, including Bransfield, as part of their investigation. The results have now been sent to the Holy See, where a final decision about Bransfield will be made.
In 2012, Bransfield was accused of covering up sexual misconduct by other priests, as well as molesting a minor. Bransfield denied these allegations, calling them “completely false,” and the alleged victim came forward to say that he was never abused by Bransfield.
The archdiocese also announced in the release that “similar restrictions were warranted” concerning former Archdiocese of Baltimore auxiliary Bishop Gordon Bennett, S.J. Bennett was an auxiliary bishop in the archdiocese from 1998 until 2004, when he became the bishop of Mandeville, Jamaica. He retired, reportedly due to health reasons, just two years later in August 2006, at the age of 60. The ordinary retirement age for bishops is 75.
Lori’s press release revealed that in May 2006, the archdiocese received an allegation of “sexual harassment of a young adult” by Bennett, which it reported to the apostolic nunciature. The bishop resigned from his Jamaican diocese three months later.
Upon the announcement of Bennett’s retirement, Fr. John P. McCarry, S.J., provincial of the Jesuit California province, informed province members that Bennett would be moving to California “for medical assessment and treatment for fatigue and depression.” Bennett is a member of the Jesuit California province.
Bennett will no longer be permitted to do any sort of priestly or episcopal ministry within either the Archdiocese of Baltimore or the Diocese of Wheeling-Charleston.
In January 2019, the Archdiocese of Baltimore announced a series of new protocols to investigate allegations against a bishop within the archdiocese. These protocols were developed by the archdiocese’s Independent Review Board, which will investigate claims that a bishop of the archdiocese engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior or abuse towards a child, as well as claims of sexual harassment or misconduct with adults, or if bishops “engaged in activities that constitute seriously negligent supervision or improper cover-up” of the sexual misconduct of others. Bishops within the archdiocese also signed a code of conduct.

PAT SAYS

In the beginning we thought the Christian Brothers were the sexual abusers of chi;ldren – and the nuns just beat girls up.

Then we learned that priests all over the world are guilty of sexual abuse.

Now we are learning that bishops, archbishops and cardinals were just as bad as the Brothers, Nuns and priests.

TODAY in Australia Cardinal Pell will be sentenced on TV.

It seems that sexual abuse goes all the way from the bottom to the top and all the way from the top to the bottom.

Clerical sexual abuse is now a PANDEMIC.

 

104 thoughts on “TWO MORE US BISHOPS ACCUSED OF SEXUAL ABUSE

  1. As Dell Boy might say – “Gawdon Binnit!”

    Like

  2. All we need now is for a Pope to be accused and found guilty of sexual abuse, either of children, vulnerable people, seminarians, or other priests. Could it end there….?

    Like

    1. There have been a few morally foul popes.

      The institutional Roman Catholic Church is a w…

      Therefore what might one reasonably expect of it?😆

      Like

      1. Which ones in particular were you thinking of?

        Like

    2. 12:15
      There is no end to this mess. No policy documents or talk shops will put an end to it.
      If they, the hierarchy, could have ended it, it would have happened generations ago.
      What may happen, in time,is the exclusion of the Christian Church’s from ‘ the public square.’
      CSA can be minimized, particularly at the entry point into ministry.

      Like

    3. Zanchetta will be the final nail in the coffin of this stinking papacy.

      Like

      1. ALL papacies stink, because they are self-glorying. After all, popes allow themselves to be addressed as ‘Holiness’, which is blasphemous.

        Like

      2. Clearly you are not a fan of the Holy Spirit’s choice.

        Like

      3. Since the Incarnation the universe is holy.

        Like

  3. Cardinal Pell has just been sentenced to 6 years in prison. He will be eligible for parole in 3 years 8 months. The judge took over an hour to read out his judgement

    Like

    1. Only six years?😰

      Like

      1. 6 years for being innocent, a grave miscarriage of justice!
        The monkeys in Dublin zoo can even work it out, poor Magna, still sipping from the bottle.

        Like

    2. In the context of today’s topic and child rape, what relevance has your comment @ 7:50pm to the discussion?

      Like

    3. 7:49pm
      According to Pope Benedict XVI, the Holy Spirit doesn’t always choose the Pope.

      Like

      1. @7:49 Have you not learned yet about God’s positive and permissive will? Come back to us when you have obtained at least a smigdeon of learning and we can discuss more.

        Like

      2. The very idea that the Holy Spirit chooses the candidate for papacy is too absurd even for plausibility.😅 It is just more clericalist nonsense designed to pre-empt criticism of the papacy.
        The institutional RCC doesn’t ‘do’ God very well (and how!), but historically, it has ‘done’ a marvellously effective line in bullshit for control of the sheep.
        The 20th century for this Christ-betraying institution has been its saeculum horribilis.😆

        Like

  4. Destroyers of souls, minds, bodies and reputations. Remorseless and lying bastards will burn in hell.
    A dodgy cleric is the worst form of scum on the planet because they use the most Holy God Himself and His Holy Church to perform their atrocious acts of unspeakable evil.
    Bastards have not one shred of conscience. Truth is an alien concept for them.
    The Divine Axe is poised and sharp.
    The Truth always prevails.

    Like

    1. Sounds as if you have something to hide, shouting the loudest, as you do.

      Like

      1. @7:49 pm. The Holy Spirit does not choose Popes, frail men do. Otherwise we’d have to say that Alexandra VI was the choice of the Holy Spirit.

        Like

      2. I wasn’t shouting at all 7:52. Just stating some hard truths which are unpalatable to certain ears…

        Like

  5. Cardinal Pell described as “breathtakingly arrogant”…. which neatly sums up the RC church.

    Like

    1. “Staggering arrogance” in other reports. Same difference.

      Like

  6. Diarmuid Martin is proving himself to be more and more a pro-homosexualist and anti-catholic bigot:
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NEygUObR7o4&t=178s
    He needs much prayer.

    Like

    1. 8.32 Bigotry reeking from every syllable you write cloaked by a pious reference to prayer. Hypocrite!

      Like

      1. 7::53
        That depends on your point of view.

        Like

      2. Eh no, I think you will find that DM is the hypocrite. He is a Catholic bishop but yet attacks those who uphold Catholic doctrine!
        Hypocrite comes from the Greek word, Hupokrites, which means actor.
        Diarmuid Martin needs to stop acting like a politician and defend his flock, which he was ordained to do.
        I pray very hard for the AB because he certainly needs prayers.

        Like

  7. Just Saying... 13th Mar 2019 — 9:01 am

    I note that the Vatican is not removing Pell from the College of Cardinals until his appeal has been heard and final judgement given. Presumably they must know the bad optics of this refusal to take action ? They are not stupid, surely, and what I am thinking is that they are pretty confident that he will get off on appeal. They will have their own intelligence about this matter, and they have made a judgement that Pell will win his appeal.

    I do worry, also, about the media frenzy surrounding this latest episode of the Pell case, namely the televising of the sentencing hearing. I worry that there does seem to be a concerted scapegoating of Pell and possibly the Catholic Church in Australia. That kind of stuff will get in the way of justice being done for everybody in this case. On the other hand, one could argue that the Catholic Church, including Pell, have brought this on themselves by their own actions over decades, and now the chickens have come home to roost. However, as a matter of principle, when justice is administered in an atmosphere that is not objective and impartial, then justice will be limited. Are there elements of this in the Pell case ? Just saying….

    Like

    1. @9:01, Either way, there are way too many witnesses all in all against Pell. And while much of it may not be able to be proven beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law, there is never this much smoke without fire. I was always a staunch supporter of Pell, but now in good conscience having analysed all the evidence, I have serious doubts regarding his past.
      Again, there is never this much smoke without fire.

      Like

    2. JS: Perverts like Pell know all the tricks in the book and all the places in which to practice their perversions so as to mitigate against conviction based on the principle of “beyond reasonable doubt”. That’s why Pell chose public places to molest and abuse children.
      Paedophiles are the most crafty and cunning breed of human beings that exist.

      Like

      1. MournemanMichael 13th Mar 2019 — 12:56 pm

        Anon@ 9:47: The gist of your comment on sexual abusers is accurate. I’d add the following observations:
        >>> Any individual’s court convictions probably only represent a fraction of his/her actual trangressions.
        >>>Other ‘hidden’ and secretive abusive actions go unreported.
        >>> Abusive behaviour such as Mr Pell’s in public places is as much an indication of an abuser’s arrogant beliefs and lack of inhibitions as any conscious forethought to weaken a potential victim’s complaint narrative.
        As you rightly say: ‘crafty and cunning’.
        MMM

        Like

    3. Pell will never ‘get off’, you utter fool. He’s guilty, no matter what the appeal court decides.

      Like

      1. Either way, he will never return to Rome.

        Like

      2. You poor fool Magna, get some simply common sense!

        Like

    4. As if we would trust the judgment of the Vatican regarding Pell!!?? The most efficient paedophile protection cabal in the world!

      Like

      1. Here here.

        Like

    5. An appeal is an essential component of a judicial process. They have more sense than you.

      Like

      1. 7:56 Yeah… was it vanilla or some other flavour!

        Like

      2. The vanilla comment is more complex and nuanced than your brutish analysis can handle.

        Like

  8. Fly on Th Wall 13th Mar 2019 — 9:17 am

    More bishops bite the dust hi. Thing is what motivates these boys.Has to be a common factor somewhere but. When the walls fall down the sheep’s are vulnerable. Is provision being made or is this a hafterthought. I’m thinking of holy Ireland here. Bring on Superpriest hi

    Like

    1. Hello fly, hi. What motivates these boyos is right hi. Do you know somethin’ we don’t know, fly?
      Is there a superhero clerical collared priest in holy Ireland about called Superpriest ? Where’s he to be found, fly? Hi Bye.

      Like

    2. Fly on Th WalL 13th Mar 2019 — 5:25 pm

      Maybe Hi Superpriest is as rare as a ten foot leprechaun begorra Then P B might be Superpriest who knows. Get flyin boy round up the poor old schathered sheepies but., baabies without ashepherd but

      Like

      1. Hi fly, as rare as hens teeth fly, as rare as hens toothins hi.
        Is PB a clerical collared cape crusader, hi, a Super-duper Priest, fly?
        Begorra fly, we could do with a few cape crusaders, ‘cos the sheep are a scatterin’ hi. Oh big time!
        Bye Hi.

        Like

    3. 10:06;
      The vanilla comment is an acknowledgement of guilt. You don’t seem to be able to handle Pells conviction.

      Like

  9. Why are u worrying about this JS?
    The evil man was found guilty…he should be locked away and not discussed anymore.

    Like

    1. Just Saying is highly intelligent and balanced.

      Like

    2. @ 9.28
      You are way out of order, mate.
      That’s very close to soliciting violence against someone just for commenting on this blog.
      J S is as entitled to tease out his/her thoughts on this blog as much as anyone.

      Like

      1. @ 9.55
        I am glad to see the violence agitating comment of 9.28, which I responded to, has been removed. Good for that. Fair for people to strongly vent, but not to advocate violence against mere commentators on this blog.

        Like

    3. Hi Just Saying @ 9:46.

      You are far from “intelligent and balanced”. Whoever you are, you are a twister of facts who either can’t read or willfully denies reality.

      For someone to say the the church has a lower threshold for abuse than the secular judiciary is a brazen liar.

      Now try to read this Guardian article, bristling with facts and statistics regarding the so-called ‘zero tolerance’ of Pope Francis and the Vatican, in full in order to disabuse yourself of your erroneous misconceptions:

      https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/31/zero-tolerance-the-facts-dont-support-the-popes-claims-on-child-abuse

      Like

      1. Dear 0946: If you read VERY CAREFULLY what I have said @ 0901, you will discover that I did not say that the Church has a lower threshold for abuse than a secular judiciary. I have simply said that they have not removed Pell’s cardinal’s hat, and I was musing why that might be the case. That’s quite a legitimate question to ask.

        I suggest that before you engage the keyboard, you read, read, read again, and then comment, so that you don’t get it wrong !

        Like

      2. JS @ 11:33: I refer you to your comment @ 9:21 on 11/03/19 in which you made your scandalous and untrue remark regarding church low church thresholds.
        As well as being a little dim, you have the memory of a goldfish.

        Like

      3. ‘Just Saying’, to be good liar you need a good memory. Your goosed as you can’t even remember what you wrote 48 hours ago! 👎

        Like

      4. Just Saying... 13th Mar 2019 — 4:35 pm

        Oh dear, 3:10, you are like a dog with a bone ! Again, if you read very carefully what I way saying on 11/03/19 about Church thresholds in abuse cases involving clergy, low actually means very high ! In other words, whilst it takes a considerable amount of credible evidence to convict someone in a criminal court, “beyond reasonable doubt”, in a Church court the threshold of evidence required for a case to be deemed credible is considerably lower, lower that what is required in the criminal court. So, a clergy person who has not been convicted in a criminal court could quite easily be convicted in a Church court on the same evidence, because the standard of evidence required is lower than in the criminal court. It is for that reason that clergy who are found “not guilty’ in a criminal court can be found ‘guilty’ in a Church court on the same evidence. The same distinction in thresholds of evidence exists between criminal courts and civil courts, namely you can be found not guilty in a criminal court, but a civil court can find you guilty on the same evidence. Think of OJ Simpson ! Understood ? Read it a few times, think about it, and let me know if you have any questions.

        Like

    4. Highly intelligent?😅
      He’s a paedo-priest defender.😆

      Like

    5. Is there incitement to violence going on here, + Pat ? Really, have we gone down so low that people are taking about beating me with baseball bats just because I put a point of view. Really ?

      Like

      1. That comment removed.

        Like

      2. JS @ 4:35 , your posts reflect your confused and contradictory mind.

        I know that’s what you meant, but the Guardian article refutes your bunkum theory!

        Maybe the Guardian article is a little too complex for you? Simpleton!!

        Like

    6. 11:33

      I think you’re engaging in a little mental reservation here. You may not have used those words today, on this blog, but you did express yourself in these or similar words on a previous blog.

      Like

      1. JS @ 11:33, Fr Mauro Inzoli was accused of abusing dozens of children over a ten year period and was dismissed by Benedict XVI in 2012. Pope Francis REINSTATED him in 2014 allowing him to lead a life of only PRAYER & PENANCE and restricted his public ministry.
        In November 2016, Fr Inzoli was convicted by an Italian court and sentenced to 4 years 9 months IMPRISONMENT. Francis ONLY then dismissed him again 7 months later.

        Who applied the stricter threshold of abuse here? THE SECULAR LAW COURTS.

        Like

  10. Cardinal-The-Nonce-George-Pell sentencing in full.

    Like

    1. @10.02
      In the interest of truth and fairness I have to come to the defence of JS.
      1) JS did not say that, The church

      Like

      1. JS posting on behalf of himself at 10.43
        Did you post before your praised yourself again !!!!!!

        Like

  11. Pat Bad grammar today in the title, you left out a word is should say TWO MORE “of” US BISHOPS ACCUSED OF SEXUAL ABUSE

    Like

    1. God! You’re so smart!
      Wish I had your intelligence and learning.😕
      😆

      Like

      1. Ever the w**ker “Magna Carta” aren’t you?
        Which particular persona, in your wardrobe of personae, is being given voice today? 😂

        Like

    2. Actually not correct. ‘Two more bishops’ or ‘two bishops more’ are the correct expressions. Your adding ‘of’ makes a nonsense of an otherwise perfectly good expression.

      Like

  12. “Over the last period we have witnessed in the community examples of a witch hunt or lynch mob mentally in relation to you George Pell. I utterly condemn such behaviour”. Cardinal Pell Sentencing Judge

    Like

    1. And your point is?

      Like

      1. Can’t you read the judge’s plain and simple words?

        Like

    2. The judge must have been reading the blog, lol

      Like

  13. Magna, I am a maynooth survivor, I encountered many people like you in there especially Mullaney who had me in tears one day when he banned me under pain of being known as judgmental from getting any more tai chai lattes from Cafe bum bum.

    Like

    1. He did the same to me.😨

      Like

    2. You are a sick obsessive 2:20. And someone here claims they know who you are and that one of your initials is M.

      Like

  14. @ 10:43, Read JS’s comment on 11/03/19 @ 9:21.
    It’s there in black and white!

    Like

    1. 3:17
      The comment was posted on 11 March 2019, but was published on the edition of this blog dated 10 March 2019.
      The words as they appear are:
      ‘The Church’s threshold for upholding these accusations is lower than in the secular courts…’

      Like

      1. What I wrote was that in the case of Fr Murray “Even if these cases do not go to court, the Church will then need to hold its own inquiry in to these accusations. The Church’s threshold for upholding these accusations is lower than in the secular courts, so even if not prosecuted, Fr Murray may well find that he is deemed responsible for his behaviour and the subject of ecclesiastical censure.” Clear ? Meaning the Church does not need the “unreasonable doubt” threshold that criminal courts require. Meaning Fr Murray may well be censured by the Chirch even is he is not criminally prosecuted. Seems clear to me.

        Like

      2. 5:58
        You, like JS, missed the other poster’s point, so I’ll spell it out for both of you: the Roman Catholic Church does NOT have a zero-tolerance policy for priests it canonically finds guilty of child-sexual abuse; on the contrary, it tolerates them very well, by imposing on them derisory sentences, which are a moral affront and which insult the intelligence of all reasonable people.
        In order for this church to take any kind of proportionate action against a priest who gravely offends, the threshold for it would have to be EXTREMELY high. Er, the poster was being ironic, such was his frustration.
        Do you understand now? You and JS?
        Jeez! Bloody slow learners!

        Like

  15. I don’t want to sound like a stuck record, but this is the only place I can let off steam at my fury at what has happened in Galway over the last year. The accused former Redemptorist is still offering Mass and swanning around with his evil housekeeper. Even if he is proven innocent, he should not have been allowed to continue in ministry, especially being invited into the Cathedral. Neither should he and his demonic house keeper been allowed to slander the poor priest that was only doing the right thing in reporting what was told to him. In all this he has been aided and abetted by the current and retired bishops, backed up by the ignoramus that is the priest secretary in the cathedral. It’s amazing what coming from a wealthy and connected family, with one sister a barrister and the other a forensic accountant can do for you in church circles, but, then again, the church in Ireland always cosied up to the rich and powerful. The Reds have a lot to answer for too, dumping their problem on our diocese.

    Like

    1. This won’t do your blood pressure any good, but I wanted to get a Mass Card in the cathedral bookshop this morning and he was saying the Mass when I went in. It beggars belief if what you say is true. He must have a neck like a jockeys bo***x. A good few years ago I went to what I thought was the house of Fr. Mulkerrins in Renmore. I wanted to tell him about a mutual friend who was in the hospice next door. It was the former Redemptorists house I went to by mistake. He was CC in Renmore at the time. First, the housekeeper came to the door. My God, she was as rough as a badgers arse. Then he came to the door and had what I can only describe as a melt-down as to why I had come to the wrong house. I fled.

      Like

  16. “Can things get any worse for the Roman Catholic Church and Pope Francis’s scandal ravaged papacy? The answer is yes.”
    Sounds interesting but, unfortunately, it is behind paywall of The Times.
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/cardinal-pell-conviction-could-be-start-of-something-cataclysmic-5g000k0f8

    Like

  17. Bishop Patrick, you haven’t mentioned the most interesting fact about that West Virginia diocese. And I thought it was like one of Trump’s @#$&hole countries. WRONG!!!
    Everyone should read dear Rocco and his whispers. He’s almost as informative as the great Sacerdote, of blessed memory.
    Also, please gift Rocco with a few Euros since he doesn’t sell books. Yes, I’ll do so too.

    Like

  18. Bombshell report detailing the shocking activities of paedophile priests working under Cardinal George Pell is set to be released after his sex assault conviction
    Conviction of Cardinal George Pell paves the way for release of redacted report. More than 60 pages of royal commission report were blanked out in 2017. The pages were blacked out so not to ‘prejudice future criminal proceedings’. The report will likely be released after Cardinal Pell’s legal process is finalised.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6801701/George-Pell-Unredacted-royal-commission-report-likely-released-Cardinals-appeal.html

    Like

      1. And only last week some commentators were claiming Cardinal Pell was still electable as a future Pope! Daft.
        I hope pennies are finally dropping. Media narrative claimants’ are gone dumb and are hopefully coping on to the depth and extent of corruption.
        By the way, victims don’t come first, never did come first, and most likely, never will come first.
        The state in this country, are, by all accounts, doing their best to silence victims. There’s nothing new under the sun.

        Like

  19. JS posts anonymously to tell us all how intelligent and brilliant he is.
    Honestly most of us do not care one jot.
    Keep scarting your lawn….as a retired woman a lawn is something I don’t need in my life….there is so many more interesting pursuits.

    Like

    1. As a retired woman you no longer need to keep your front lawn trimmed.

      Like

      1. @8.58 Magna
        But she still gives her back passage a good redd out.

        Like

      2. Exactly Magna….and I will ignore your innuendo…
        Lawns are for kiddies to play on…my grandkids are all grown up now.

        Like

    2. 6.04: There “are” is the correct grammar!

      Like

      1. 9 .45…..keep your grammar school going.

        Like

    3. That was not Magna.
      Didn’t you notice that the avatar was green rather than Magna’s customary blue?

      Like

      1. I knew it wasn’t the real MC because it was funny.

        Like

  20. Just Saying is an unadulterated fool. God help his lawn!

    Like

    1. Well I wouldn’t call anyone a fool.
      But he certainly ain’t fooling anyone here….praising himself every other post.
      J S…a little advice…just post anonymously like the rest of us.
      Most of us don’t actually want to know how hilariously intelligent and accomplished you are.
      And we certainly don’t need to read your posts carefully…a scan tells us all we need to know.
      You probably educated by our plate donations anyways.

      Like

      1. JS ignore all those nasty w**kers and keep posting! Your posts are well worth reading. F*** the begrudgers

        Like

  21. “The Cardinal is also not to be made a scapegoat of any failings or perceived failings of the Church and not be sentenced for any failure to prevent or report child sexual abuse by other clergy within the Catholic Church” Judge Kidd.

    Like

    1. Again, and your point is?😕

      Like

  22. Nighty-night, baby, I love you 13th Mar 2019 — 9:01 pm

    Bishop Bransfield was an associate and ‘nephew’ of Uncle Ted.

    Like

    1. The ‘family’ starting to unravel.

      Like

  23. Today, March 13 is the sixth anniversary of the election of Francis, Bishop of Rome. Ad multos annos. Deo gratias.

    Like

    1. 9:46
      A lame duck!

      Like

    2. Thanks for that, Cardinal Danneels.

      Like

  24. 5:58. Censored by the church? Does this mean that in the past three years when this individual was away playing golf in the sunshine the church has not begun, let alone concluded, its own internal investigation? Has the church done what it always does and buried its head in the sand? Has the church continued to pay this individual out of its coffers? Is the church paying his legal fees or has he applied for legal aid? As in all allegations of abuse, the RC church does sweet fanny Adams until its hand is forced. This church cares ‘nada’ about victims. It is more interested in self preservation . Another two bishops accused of abuse. I’m 100 per cent sure that this is only the tip of the iceberg. The whole shebang is rotten to the core. Bit of a generalisation? Yep but on the evidence before us what other way can an individual think

    Like

  25. JS @ 9:22, ahh you are reduced to a string of expletives having tied yourself in knots with your inability to comprehend articles and remember what YOU wrote!
    LOL!!!🤣🤣🤣

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this:
search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close