Chee, SDP and the letters!

[yellowarse]

Dear Yellow

Under Cold Store Chin Peng the CPM Boss Sec Gen declared his communist underground in SG got wiped out. They wanted a revolution on the streets, but if you were Gov in Malaya and in SG with the CPM still armed and surbodinates seeking "peaceful revolution" would you logically trust any of them ?



Locke

Like Scroobal and Omnia, you've swallowed PAP propaganda hook, line and sinker. Most of those detained (don't just take it from me — check Geoff Wade's seminal academic paper) under Cold Store were largely ex-left-wing members who had split from the PAP to form the Barisan Sosialis.

These were in the main socialists, concerned with social justice and the lot of the poor and disenfranchised. If they had any sympathies with the communist movement, it was largely with the socialist aspects of Marxist doctrine. But violence was not their modus operandi.

Moreover, declassified documents from the UK Archives have shown unequivocally that the British colonial authorities, LKY and the ISD were well aware that the 110+ arrested had not and were not planning any violent, anarchic schemes to seize power. The 'communist label' was just a convenient excuse to get rid of LKY's formidable rivals, just as Operation Spectrum 24 years later targeted social workers with the ludicrous calumny of 'Marxism'.

It's the oldest political trick in the book: smear your opponents, make it stick, and hang him for it.

That's why none of those detained - Lim Hock Siew, Said Zahari, Poh Su Kai, Chia Thye Poh, etc had ever confessed to being communists. That's why they were detained for so long, through the entire prime of their lives, for no other reason than that old fart (and the PAP) had to maintain these historical lies which are now propagated as TRUTH in our kids' history textbooks. (History, as they say, being always written by the victors.) 16, 17, 20 years were the norm, and in Chia Thye Poh's case, a whopping 32 years, an ignominious world record for political detention (5 years longer than Mandela's).

It is also noteworthy that most political historians today agree that Operation Cold Store was the single decisive factor responsible for the demise of left-wing socialist politics in Singapore.

Who knows what kind of Singapore we might have inherited if there were a left-wing ballast to PAP's decidedly right-wing and increasingly fascist polity? A messier country perhaps, lower GDP maybe, strikes and sit-ins possibly, certainly a more vibrant and rambunctious political and activist scene.

But, in all probabilities, but for Cold Store, we would also have inherited a kinder, more humane state with greater social equity and a voice for the downtrodden and under-privileged.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Yellow

My quoted source for Cold Store destroying the communist underground in Singapore, was Chin Peng's, in his biography My Side of History. I believe that is as reliable a NON PAP source as any.

So they were socialist and leftist but they were at some point cooperating knowingly or unknowingly with the communist. The same Communist which had started an armed revolution , the same communist who now decided on a somewhat more peaceful approach but still kept their guns and were still using them.

The differentiation between communist and socialist is a minor one but which allowed many of those to maintain some degree of innocence. Obviously if Cold Store destroyed left wing socialist then Chin Peng's words cannot be true, and conversely if Ching Peng's words were true then the left wing socialist were in some form together with the communist underground.

A legitimate political movement controlled from behind by an armed illegal movement is no big deal in European Politics. Some more recent include the IRA and Sinn Fein and Eta and I can't remember the political off shoot.

Those socialist leftist kind hearted souls would have been eaten alive by the dedicated communist.


Locke

 

[yellowarse]

My quoted source for Cold Store destroying the communist underground in Singapore, was Chin Peng's, in his biography My Side of History. I believe that is as reliable a NON PAP source as any.

As I've said, go read the declassified documents from the UK and Australian archives. They reveal a wealth of information to which even Chin Peng was not privy, the key of which was that the bulk of the English-educated leftists (not the predominantly Chinese-educated CPM members) were not communists but were focussed on socialist politics, no doubt to a great degree influenced by the socialist movements in the West at the time, Britain's labour movement and the US New Deal included.

And the Brits knew it too, as did the ISD personnel, according to Geoff Wade. But because of vested interests they found it opportune to go along with old fart's Machiavellian shenanigans.

So they were socialist and leftist but they were at some point cooperating knowingly or unknowingly with the communist. The same Communist which had started an armed revolution , the same communist who now decided on a somewhat more peaceful approach but still kept their guns and were still using them.

That's a slippery slope argument, and specious too. A socialist may or may not turn communist. But you DO NOT arrest and detain people without trial because of some future statistical plausibility. We do not live in an era of 'Minority Report' yet.

You arrest people because you have EVIDENCE that they're planning an armed revolt or have been known to resort to armed violence as a means to a political end.

And the declassified documents show unequivocally that the authorities and old fart had absolutely NO EVIDENCE that those detained had plans for a violent uprising. Cold Store was plain politically thuggery. Period.

Obviously if Cold Store destroyed left wing socialist then Chin Peng's words cannot be true, and conversely if Ching Peng's words were true then the left wing socialist were in some form together with the communist underground.

Well, if you quoted Chin Peng's words rightly, then he was obviously wrong, because tomes of scholarly work have emerged in recent years with the declassification of previously top secret documents, and there's a general consensus among Singaporean historians that Cold Store was decisive in decimating left-wing politics here. In fact, the irony is that Cold Store actually resulted in the radicalisation of Barisan Sosialis because the moderate leftists and leaders of genuine standing and ability like Lim Chin Siong (more than the equal of old fart in charisma, oratory and integrity) were locked up.

By the way, here's a recent article from the Straits Times touching on the issue:

Poh Soo Kai rejects Chinese historian's claim

15 July 2010

FORMER Barisan Sosialis leader Poh Soo Kai has rejected a China historian's claim that the decline of Singapore's once-powerful left was due to radical influences from China's Cultural Revolution. He said the People's Action Party's (PAP) determined suppression of its opponents - especially the Barisan which was a splinter from the PAP in 1961 - was to blame instead.

Dr Poh, 77, locked horns with Dr Cheng Yinghong, 51, during a seminar at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Dr Cheng, who was born in China but is teaching at Delaware State University in the United States, presented his thesis that China's Cultural Revolution that began in the summer of 1966 misled the Barisan and alienated the post-independence populace. The Barisan's radical rhetoric was reflected in its party newspapers, the Front and Party News, he said.

Said Dr Cheng: 'If you're familiar with the history of the Cultural Revolution, you will be amazed, if not overwhelmed by the similarities.' Similarities with Cultural Revolution propaganda could be seen in the political cartoons and editorial articles of the Barisan, for example in the use of terms like 'rebellion', 'eliminate', 'running dogs' and 'black gangsters', he added.

The radicalisation of the Barisan culminated in its remaining seven Members of Parliament, led by party chairman Lee Siew Choh, staging a walkout from the House in October 1966 to launch an extra-parliamentary struggle. Said Dr Cheng: 'The Barisan's abandonment of the parliamentary path was self-defeating and that helped the PAP consolidate a one-party authoritarian regime without an effective opposition.'

Dr Poh, a medical doctor and former assistant secretary-general of the Barisan, caused a stir in the 80-strong audience when he stood up to speak.
'The demise of the left is essentially a result of the PAP's policy not to accept opposition,' he declared. He asserted that the PAP government made plans to 'smash' the Barisan in 1962, and these came to fruition in Operation Cold Store in February 1963 when more than 100 leftist unionists and politicians were detained under the Internal Security Act.

Caught in the dragnet were 24 Barisan members, including key leaders Lim Chin Siong, Lim Hock Siew and Dr Poh. The 13 Barisan legislative assemblymen and party chairman Lee Siew Choh were spared. To Dr Poh however, Operation Cold Store was decisive in changing the Barisan, as it became 'a party without a united leadership accepted by the general masses'. The Cultural Revolution, which began only three years after the arrests, was not significant in causing the Barisan's decline, he felt, even though Cultural Revolution ideas found fertile ground within it.

A critical factor for the Barisan's radicalisation, Dr Poh argued, was that its more moderate leaders were in prison. Had leaders like Mr Lim Chin Siong, himself, Mr S. Woodhull and others not been imprisoned, they would have had a moderating influence on the Barisan rank and file such that the party would never have taken its self-destructive path after 1966.
In response, Dr Cheng stuck to his original thesis. He said that he never claimed the Cultural Revolution was a 'decisive' factor in causing the left's decline, just a 'significant' one.

He agreed with Dr Poh that Operation Cold Store was a 'decisive' reason for the left's decline, but said the Barisan could still have survived as a movement if not for its radicalisation after 1966. He added: 'Democracy is a game that you have to play; you can't give up.'

 

[steffychun]

Chee and SDP have done it again. At the next GE, they will wonder why they got the lowest number of votes. How silly can one get.

Secondly, people like Lim Hock Siew and other detainees are not deaf nor dumb. They don't need someone to speak on their behalf. Chee is not a political detainee and never was. He got himself bankrupted thru a series of tactical blunders and attempting to associate himself with political detainees is rather crass.

There is also no need to stoop to low standards of your adversaries to prove a point.

His travels have been restricted because on 2 occasions while overseas he lied about his whereabouts. He then expects people to trust him.

And finally the most important part - where is the sense of humanity.

When Ronald Reagan died, ex Presidents, regardless of theri party affiliations paied tribute to him. No leader/party leader used his death for any political note--be it his neo-liberal policies, CIA activities etc etc. When Jacqueline Kennedy died, there was no or little negative comments directly from Republicans about her riches /possible embezzlements etc

Yet, Chee, who loves Western Democracy and ideals, uses people's death as a political weapon. Is his more morally right/righteous than his opponent? Is he and his wife squeaky clean? If he challenges his opponent over so many such issues, why can't be transparent over the usage of his research funds?

 

[scroobal]

The fact that Chinese Middle School students had their faith with the old man when their numbers were arrested during their Hock Lee Bus riots and other incidents is a clear indication where old man stood in the scheme of things. He was clearly with the communists. He enjoyed their spoils and only switched when the British decided to back him as the lesser evil.

TT Rajah who were defending the communist in prison however never enjoyed the leeway that old man was given. TT was also detained without trial. A Lawyer doing his work.

Look how the brethen and their families were treated after they returned from Beijing.

Weren't the PAP then also communist sympathizers? It was nothing short of a power grab from a group of opportunists!



Actually communism was destined for failure from a socio-economic point of view. Economically there was no way that it would work. And if it couldn't work economically then socially, it too would be a failure. The thinkers who took to it knew this but it allowed them to subjugate an entire population to their wants and wishes. And to this end they pushed forth communism.

For non-thinkers it sounded very good on the surface.

 

[scroobal]

Communism and the Emergency of 12 years was not a figment of someone's imagination. It did take place and it was violent and brutal. As the armed forces of the respective govts were large in numbers and better equipped, the communist decided on a campaign of terror by going after civilians. There was torture and atrocities.

So if the 111 people were not communists, how was the communist defeated. Who cleaned up the communist. Or did they down arms and rejoin society.

Even Poh Soo Kai stated that he was a marxist at his last interview at his East Coast Home.

If the communist was not detained, presumably their work would not have been hindered and after Hanoi, we would have been next. So what happened.

I have no doubt that Ops Cold Storage gave the PAP a solid victory and set the stage for its strangehold of this country for last 48 years.

Sharma and Devan Nair while in the Teachers Union were in possession of grenades etc. What do you think those things were for.

We have to learn our history and we also have to be careful to understand many things. Both the old man and ISD are reluctant to release files because many of the communists switched sides and joindd the PAP and or PA to work for the government. Some of the work involved informing on their former comrades. Devan, Jek Yuen Tong and James Fu were communists. Jek and Fu were card carrying members.

When the MIW book was launched, those who did not attend were those who were not drawing a salary or pension from the state. Those ex-detainees that attended, many were in govt payroll.

It is also noteworthy that most political historians today agree that Operation Cold Store was the single decisive factor responsible for the demise of left-wing socialist politics in Singapore.

 

[scroobal]

The basis for not having trials was that no sane person would testify. They or their relatives would be killed. We are not talking about shoplifting or traffic offences here. The British did the same with the IRA.

But you DO NOT arrest and detain people without trial because of some future statistical plausibility. We do not live in an era of 'Minority Report' yet.

You arrest people because you have EVIDENCE that they're planning an armed revolt or have been known to resort to armed violence as a means to a political end.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Yellow

Hindsight is always perfect is it not. I would say the best reading of history comes from both reading Chin Peng and all archives including that of the ISD. I believe ascertaining the CPMs intention the best source is Chin Penv because the declasiffied archives u quote were limited In their access.

Funnily enough. The British and Australians were right. Chin Peng in 1959 acknowledged that the armed revolution had failed and he proposed the communist to go underground undertake political action to prepare in a decade for a resumption of the armed struggle.

The million dollar question about cold store is how many of those taken who were not members were never the less actively taking instructions from the CPM. From the communist archives u had non members like Juliet ChiN actively helping the CPM and in that we have examples

My own view the communist would have owned the barisan socialist.


Locke

 

[yellowarse]

Communism and the Emergency of 12 years was not a figment of someone's imagination. It did take place and it was violent and brutal.

No on denies the existence of the communist movement in S.E. Asia, nor the violence that took place. (To be sure, the Brits were not angels themselves; they were as guilty of violent conduct in various outposts of their vast empire.)

But one has to differentiate between card-carrying communists and left-leaning politicians. The vast majority of those detained under Cold Store were key Barisan members, of socialist bent but not communist, and mostly moderate from an ideological standpoint. They were more concerned with workers' rights and alleviating poverty than with the utopian classless society achieved through armed revolution.

So if the 111 people were not communists, how was the communist defeated. Who cleaned up the communist. Or did they down arms and rejoin society.

There probably were communists among the 111, not many since the most radical ones were still underground but the point remains that the key intended targets of this exercise were NOT communists but formidable leftist ex-colleagues of LKY whose brand of socialist and nationalist politics was a threat not just to the PAP, but also to whatever economic capital the Brits had hoped to milk out of the nation post-Independence in the grip of the Cold War.

That's why the Brits sided with the old fart, even as they knew that these buggers did not have a single violent bone in them. The communist bogeyman was just a political expedient in decimating old fart's rivals on the other side of the divide in a tumultuous peri-Independence era.

Even Poh Soo Kai stated that he was a marxist at his last interview at his East Coast Home.

Well, the Dalai Lama has repeatedly said that he's a Marxist monk in various interviews, but he's also made it clear that he decried Soviet and Chinese communism and its totalitarian violence:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iuVJiiZyLI36IqXtW4cUaj0bDGYQ

One can be a Marxist without being a communist, and to my knowledge none of the key detainees in Cold Store had ever confessed to being communist, Poh Su Kai included.

 

[yellowarse]

The basis for not having trials was that no sane person would testify. They or their relatives would be killed. We are not talking about shoplifting or traffic offences here. The British did the same with the IRA.

You missed the point. We're not talking about trying a bunch of known mobsters or armed revolutionaries, which trial would be rendered meaningless because no one would take to the stand.

We're talking about arresting a group of people with NO EVIDENCE whatsoever that they were guilty of violent conduct, were planning or had planned violent activities, or had concrete links to the CPM in the first place. In fact most of the leftist Barisan politicians were more inspired by the British Labour Movement in their political philosophy than by Chin Peng and his ilk.

To compare people like Chia Thye Poh, Poh Su Kai and Lim Hock Siew with the IRA is not just wholly inappropriate an insulting, it's also downright dishonest.

 

[yellowarse]

Hindsight is always perfect is it not.

For scholars today, hindsight is undoubtedly 20/20. But it needn't and definitely didn't require hindsight for the colonial ISD acting in cahoots with old fart to arrest people on scurrilous allegations which they knew very well AT THE TIME to be false and baseless. The archives have now confirmed the suspicions of many that these bleeding-heart folks from the Barisan and the Fajar generation are a world apart from the Chin Peng's CPM.

I believe ascertaining the CPMs intention the best source is Chin Penv because the declasiffied archives u quote were limited In their access.

No quarrel there. But you've disingenuously digressed: the question is not CPM's intentions, but how many of those detainees were actually card-carrying communists or para-communist helpers? And Wade's paper has resolutely maintained that the vast majority of those arrested had no militant plans and the arrests thereby patently illegitimate.

I quote excerpts from Wade:

"There was no evidence of militant plans by the Left, only efforts to attain constitutional power, expressions of opposition to merger and messages of support for the Brunei rebels in their “anti-colonial struggle”. Did any of these actions warrant arrest and detention without trial? Only if one was looking for a pretext. Essentially, the arrests and detentions under Cold Store were not legitimate and were carried out to ensure Lee Kuan Yew’s maintenance of power in Singapore and guarantee that he would lead Singapore into Malaysia, as required by the British and the Tunku...

"The arrest and detentions made under the operation were intended only to ensure that the British policy of Greater Malaysia was realised...

"By essentially eliminating one side of politics in Singapore, Operation Cold Store created the conditions where a single political force could dominate every aspect of the Singapore polity."

~Geoff Wade, ‘Operation Cold Store’: A Key Event in the Creation of Malaysia and in the Origins of Modern Singapore, 2010

The million dollar question about cold store is how many of those taken who were not members were never the less actively taking instructions from the CPM.

See my answer to Scroobal above.

 

[scroobal]

There were alot of evidence but no one to testify. The sparrow squad effectively put off any hope of witnesses stepping forward.

The evidence cannot speak for themselves. The prosecution cannot speak on behalf of the witnesses. The trial cannot be heard in camera as the accused will still who the witnesses are.

Nobody said that they were mobsters or hooligans. The communists were committed and determined individuals who had great resolve. The fought for a cause in a manner that they thought was right. There were no profit or selfish motives involved.

Life is not so simple.

You missed the point. We're not talking about trying a bunch of known mobsters or armed revolutionaries, which trial would be rendered meaningless because no one would take to the stand.

We're talking about arresting a group of people with NO EVIDENCE whatsoever that they were guilty of violent conduct, were planning or had planned violent activities, or had concrete links to the CPM in the first place. In fact most of the leftist Barisan politicians were more inspired by the British Labour Movement in their political philosophy than by Chin Peng and his ilk.

To compare people like Chia Thye Poh, Poh Su Kai and Lim Hock Siew with the IRA is not just wholly inappropriate an insulting, it's also downright dishonest.

 

[yellowarse]

The PAP itself practices a form of socialism. Every political party has semblances of socialism.

In the late 50s to the early '70s, one could argue that there were many socialist facets to PAP policies: low-cost housing, free education, lifetime pension for civil servants, free 'C' class wards, etc.

But in the absence of the leftist politicians and politics, the one-party polity has increasingly gone so far to the right such that today's PAP has completely embraced neo-liberalism, of the Anglo-American variant. To say that the PAP is still socialist today couldn't be further from the truth.

I keep harking on the PAP being a fascist politcal party and yet there are very few takers.

Indeed. I quote from my own reply to lockeliberal (post #161):

"Who knows what kind of Singapore we might have inherited if there were a left-wing ballast to PAP's decidedly right-wing and increasingly fascist polity? A messier country perhaps, lower GDP maybe, strikes and sit-ins possibly, certainly a more vibrant and rambunctious political and activist scene."

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Yellow

The words of Wade disagree entirely with the words of Chin Peng. If Wade was correct then Cold Store did not wipe out the communist underground because it arrested all the wrong people. If Chin Peng was correct then largely Cold Store arrested the communist underground. I will give you chapter verse and words exactly when I have my copy of his book around at hand.

Yellow, Why is the Communist Intent not important ? Why do u discount it so ? The Intent, strategic intent , their plans at that time were important because it set the stage for what followed later.

The peaceful way to power was a political struggle with the power of the armed and still armed CPM behind it. The efforts to gain political power were in line with the CPM's party directives as laid out by Chin Peng in 1959. I will of course give u verse and chapter later.






Locke

 

[scroobal]

Barisan and the people in it were not owned by anyone. They were the communist and committed to the cause. They were however not card carrying members in order not to jeopardise their gaol.

Any adult or any student from the middle school of that era would have known that. At the time, the press had a lot of independence and they were anti-PAP anyway. There was no propaganda like there is today with the Chua sisters and prostitutes in Toa Payoh.

It was well into the 70s that the old man fine-tuned the art of smearing people with the communist tag and after 1982 and the loss of press freedom, the domination of the press was complete.

If you have met many of these people, they will proudly tell you their background. You had to have brains before you became a communist. Many of them came from ACS besides the smart ones from the Middle schools. A thug would have no place in their outfit. The only idiot in their outfit was the leader before Eu Chooi Yip, who was a notorious womaniser and he was screwing the chicks from the Chinese Middle School. He was naturally dumped.

These are the very people that refused to admit the Marxist Conspiracy chaps into the ex-detainees association as they knew the later were no communist or revolutionaries but victims of old man's smear campaign.

My own view the communist would have owned the barisan socialist.


Locke

 

[yellowarse]

There were alot of evidence but no one to testify. The sparrow squad effectively put off any hope of witnesses stepping forward.

Sorry for the dampener, but while we were led to believe that was ostensible evidence for the Cold Store arrests by the powers-that-be, the declassified papers have revealed precisely the opposite: there was no evidence at all. The question of witnesses is then moot.

Like I said, it's one thing to arrest someone on the basis of sound evidence and not grant him trial, but quite another to make an arrest without any evidence at all. Worse, tarnish his reputation forever, hold him captive for almost an entire lifetime, separate him from family, for no greater crime than just being a worthy political threat.

The communists were committed and determined individuals who had great resolve.

Sure, but while a communist is undoubtedly also a socialist, not all socialists and leftists are communists.

Life is not so simple.

Precisely why we should finally begin to learn how to distinguish a socialist politician hoping to attain power through parliamentary processes from a communist intent on seizing power through violence.

And learn to sift real evidence from hearsay and propaganda. (See my quoted excerpts from Wade's excellent academic discourse above.)

 

[yellowarse]

The words of Wade disagree entirely with the words of Chin Peng. If Wade was correct then Cold Store did not wipe out the communist underground because it arrested all the wrong people.

Exactly. In fact historians are arguing that because the moderates were arrested, it led to the ironic situation where leftist politics became increasingly radicalised post-Cold Store, reaching its apogee during the Chinese Cultural Revolution, and effectively impaling itself.

Yellow, Why is the Communist Intent not important ? Why do u discount it so ? The Intent, strategic intent , their plans at that time were important because it set the stage for what followed later.

Read my post again. I did not say that the communists' intentions were "not important". I said that the their intent was not the basis of our discussion: namely, was there evidence that those arrested were communists, had militant plans to seize power, or were they left-leaning, socialist, anti-merger politicians committed to the parliamentary route?

The evidence from the British and Australian archives, on which Wade's paper is heavily based, is clear: there was no violent intent, and the authorities then were cognizant of the fact.

In fact the overriding question — beyond the CPM's intent — in this context is: What was the true intent of the British authorities in arresting the 111 on ostensible 'communist' charges? Again the archive papers have given ample evidence that it served then-British policy much better to go with old fart and eliminate his rivals than otherwise, and the communist bogeyman served as a useful pretext to this end.

Of course, in the broader scheme of things, the designs of the communists, both here and in the region, were immensely important insofar as they were a key shaper of the geopolitical forces of the time. This was the Cold War, remember?

 

[yellowarse]

Here's Geoff Wade's very detailed paper on Operation Cold Store, for those who are interested.

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

When Ronald Reagan died, ex Presidents, regardless of theri party affiliations paied tribute to him. No leader/party leader used his death for any political note--be it his neo-liberal policies, CIA activities etc etc. When Jacqueline Kennedy died, there was no or little negative comments directly from Republicans about her riches /possible embezzlements etc

Yet, Chee, who loves Western Democracy and ideals, uses people's death as a political weapon. Is his more morally right/righteous than his opponent? Is he and his wife squeaky clean? If he challenges his opponent over so many such issues, why can't be transparent over the usage of his research funds?

Eh CHEE BYE! Chee attacked LKY not the bitch that died! Get your facts straight! You are a typical PAP dog always twisting and turning the truth to come forth with lies and more lies!

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

Dear Yellow

The words of Wade disagree entirely with the words of Chin Peng. If Wade was correct then Cold Store did not wipe out the communist underground because it arrested all the wrong people. If Chin Peng was correct then largely Cold Store arrested the communist underground. I will give you chapter verse and words exactly when I have my copy of his book around at hand.

Locke

Heh FUCKING LYING BASTARD!!! If you popped your head out of your masters arse perhaps you can think more carefully and make some good use of the brain that you have.

ALl this while you have been harking on a total untruth and a far-fetched one at that that EITHER ALL who were arrested were communists or ALL were not communists!

What kind of a cheap fucking brain do you have to think like an idiot! :oIo:

You very well know that the truth is that some were communists while others were not. And those that were not were formidable opponents of the bastard LKY and his fascist PAP party!

KNNPCB! ANy time you post your lies or post stupid things here I will come after your arse!

PTUI! :oIo: :oIo: :oIo: