Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Lance Payette

The H&L "two schools at the same time" mystery

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

Again, the DATA is already on the second form.  It is a SUMMARY of the year, 1953/1954, so the grades from LHO's earlier school, PS#44 in New York City, were obtained by the clerks of the Beauregard Junior High School in Louisiana, from the clerks at the PS#44 Junior High School in New York.  SOP, obviously.

I talked about this way back on page 1 of this thread.  Here's what I said:

Without any evidence whatsoever, at least one H&L critic claimed that the 89 days in the top “Re-Ad” column of the Beauregard cumulative record included days Oswald attended one of the PS 44s in New York City.  But there are no forwarded records from any PS 44 in Oswald’s Beauregard file.  The only mention of PS 44 in the Beauregard file is in a record that indicates he previously attended “PS #44-Byron Junior High" in New York City.

But there is no “Byron Junior High” in New York City and, according to the New York Historical Society, there never was.  Since there are PS 44s in at least four of the five New York City boroughs, how would Beauregard have requested information from an incorrectly identified school?  And if they had received information, why didn't they know the name of the school?  And if they did get information about Oswald's course work in NYC from a school they couldn't identify, why was the Oswald in New Orleans given a passing grade in an entirely different course from the NYC courses he supposedly took, and passed, that very semester? John wrote: “Perhaps a false name for the school was provided so that Beauregard school personnel would be unable to obtain Oswald's New York school transcripts by mail.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For Lance (emphasis added) ....

United States[edit]

Primary and secondary[edit]

In the United States, the K–12 school calendar is determined by the individual states, and in some cases by the local school district, so there is considerable variation. The academic year typically consists of two 18-week semesters, each divided into two nine-week marking periods (or quarters) or three six-week marking periods, and constituting 170 to 186 instructional days (with an average of 180).[citation needed] An instructional week is five instructional days, measured Monday–Friday at all public and most private schools; Saturday–Wednesday or Sunday–Thursday at Muslim private schools; and so on. Grades are usually reported per marking period, but major examinations are given per semester or per year.

Above from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_term

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

I talked about this way back on page 1 of this thread.  Here's what I said:

Without any evidence whatsoever, at least one H&L critic claimed that the 89 days in the top “Re-Ad” column of the Beauregard cumulative record included days Oswald attended one of the PS 44s in New York City.  But there are no forwarded records from any PS 44 in Oswald’s Beauregard file.  The only mention of PS 44 in the Beauregard file is in a record that indicates he previously attended “PS #44-Byron Junior High" in New York City.

But there is no “Byron Junior High” in New York City and, according to the New York Historical Society, there never was.  Since there are PS 44s in at least four of the five New York City boroughs, how would Beauregard have requested information from an incorrectly identified school?  And if they had received information, why didn't they know the name of the school?  And if they did get information about Oswald's course work in NYC from a school they couldn't identify, why was the Oswald in New Orleans given a passing grade in an entirely different course from the NYC courses he supposedly took, and passed, that very semester? John wrote: “Perhaps a false name for the school was provided so that Beauregard school personnel would be unable to obtain Oswald's New York school transcripts by mail.”

Jim,

The following is my opinion.

You are jumping to many conclusions that support your CT.   For example:

1.  You expect to see "forwarded records from any PS 44 in Oswald's Beauregard file."  

1.1.  It is possible some records were misplaced.  

1.2.  Or, the entry you read was office-coded in a way that you don't understand.  

1.3.  Or, it is possible that the records were accepted over the telephone from a supervisor named "Mrs. Byron."  

2.  You presume that you have all of Oswald's school records, without any idea that you might be missing any.

3.  You presume that you know all about how Beauregard Public School kept their records.    

4.  You presume that Beauregard Public School was never sloppy in their record-keeping process.

5.  You presume that your personal grading system must be the way that all US public schools operated a half-century ago.

6.  Your logic doesn't connect, Jim.   John Armstrong's imaginative logic doesn't connect, by my reading -- it requires leaps of faith.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

I have now done a fair amount of online research concerning school years and grading periods in New York and Louisiana public schools in the 1950's and 1960s, including school calendars published in contemporary newspapers.  I have not found anything suggesting the extraordinary system that you say P.S. 44 and Beauregard were both using.  I have found no reference to a "semester" at the elementary, junior high or high school level.  I have found only what I have been describing - a school year extending from September to May or June, broken into grading periods of approximately six weeks.  The most that I have found are a few casual references to a "fall term" and a "spring term," meaning "the portion of the school year beginning in the fall" and "the portion of the school year beginning after the Christmas break and continuing into the spring."

 

Lance,

I showed in this post:
 


that both P.S. 44 and Beauregard divided their school years into semesters. The definition of "semester" is "Half of a school year (US) or academic year such as fall or spring semester." (Source) In your research you assumed that school districts use the word "semester" for their half-year terms. What you've discovered is that they apparently don't. Semester is a generic word when used in the context of primary and secondary education.

But that doesn't negate the fact that both P.S. 44 and Beauregard divided their school years into two semesters (half-year periods) each.

Perhaps you would have had greater success had you searched using the word "term." A semester where I went to school was called a term. I recall that we had a final exam at the end of the term, and a "mid-term" exam in the middle. However, the danger with using the word "term" is that it means different time periods at different school districts. For example, a term could mean half a semester. The word "semester" is the best choice of words to use because, by definition, there are always two per year.

 

Quote

You cannot simply say your interpretation is obvious from the records when (1) it is not obvious at all, at least to highly educated moi,

 

First, it is not my interpretation... it is a fact.

Second, given just a little thought, it is obvious... especially after it is explained by someone who does understand it. In my opinion it should be obvious to any highly educated person. (Those with a declining facility excepted, of course.)

But I think that your problem is that you don't want to consider the possibility that we are correct. And that stifles your thought process.

 

Quote

and (2) it would have been an unusual system, one out of synch with the historical records that I have been able to locate.  You cannot simply force every item of evidence into a Harvey & Lee mold to suit your purposes.  Your interpretation is "easy" to you only because, like most conspiracy theorists, you start with the result you want and make the evidence fit that result.

 

You are making a fool of yourself. Here is a quote from the Wikipedia article on "academic terms:"

In the United States, the K–12 school calendar is determined by the individual states, and in some cases by the local school district, so there is considerable variation. The academic year typically consists of two 18-week semesters, each divided into two nine-week marking periods (or quarters) or three six-week marking periods, and constituting 170 to 186 instructional days (with an average of 180).

So you see, I am right. We are right.

You are the one who is trying to make the evidence fit the result you want. I, in contrast, am merely using common sense and the reference material I've quoted.

 

Quote

It should be a simple matter to determine from New York and Louisiana educational officials, either at the state level or at the level of P.S. 44 and Beauregard themselves, what the school year was in 1953/1954, how often grades were assigned, and what these records really reflect. 

 

That's like saying that a workman should consult a tool manufacturer to see if that really is a hammer he has in his hand. When in fact it is you who should consider doing that because it is you who has doubts. I mean, just because you can't understand something doesn't mean that the rest of us can't either.

 

Quote

(I recently visited the elementary school that I attended from 1956-1962, and they had all sorts of old records.  I still have my report cards from 1956.)  This would, of course, involve the risk of the H&L Sect being exposed for having spent years screaming "MYSTERY!!!" where no mystery actually exists.  But perhaps you'll get lucky and the officials will be mystified.  I am not going to do this because I don't think there is any mystery at all - and I'm betting you aren't going to do it because you fear there isn't any mystery at all.  It's much more fun to preserve the "MYSTERY!!!"

 

You're right, there is no mystery. The fact that there were two Oswalds explains it.

Though in your case there is no mystery because your buried head precludes you from seeing one.

 

Quote

While suggesting that I have poor chart reading skills, you seem oblivious to the fact that the Beauregard record plainly states LHO was "Originally Admitted 1954-1-13," which is (1) when he in fact was originally admitted, and (2) the nail in the coffin of your interpretation.  What a hoot you Flat Earthers can be.


Again you get everything wrong. First, I'm not oblivious to the 1/13/1954 Originally Admitted Date. Second, that date doesn't make Oswald's Fall 1953 school record go away -- the semester you seem to be oblivious to yourself.

The record shows that Oswald was attending only part time (taking only two classes) prior to that admission date. Jim Hargrove believes or surmises that an official admission is required only when the student is enrolled full time. That seems reasonable to me. Another possibility is that that field wasn't filled in when it was supposed to be. A third possibility that occurred to me is that Oswald had two records at Beauregard, one for the fall semester of 1953 (Harvey) and the other for the remaining semesters (Lee). Somebody at some point saw the two, noted that the student names were identical, as were the mothers' names, and so the person merged the Harvey record over to the Lee record. The Originally Admitted Date could not be copied over because " 1/13/1954" had already been written in.

Regardless, this is a minor point. It doesn't affect the existence of the seemingly impossible fall 1953 semester.

 

Edited by Sandy Larsen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

Yes, references to semesters are more common at the K-12 level TODAY.  A 12-month school year is more common TODAY.  The educational system is organized quite differently TODAY from what it was in the fifties.

What else do I want?

1.  Show me that New York and Louisiana school years were divided in the manner you are suggesting during the 1953/1954 time frame.

2.  Ideally, show me that P.S. 44 and Beauregard Junior High divided their school years in the manner you are suggesting during the 1953/1954 time frame.

 

I showed you precisely that a few days ago in this post:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other fields of weirdness, it irritates me when the debunkers' fallback position is always the axiom "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - and no amount of evidence ever quite rises to the level of extraordinary.  But here the axiom fits to a tee.

The H&L zealots are claiming there was, at the 8th-grade level, a HARVEY and a LEE already being groomed by the intelligence community and that HARVEY attended Beauregard during a portion of the 1953/1954 school year while LEE began attending the same school later in the same school year.  To characterize these claims as "extraordinary" would be charitable in the extreme.  They are "extraordinary" in the same way the claims that We Never Landed On the Moon are "extraordinary."

The school records that the H&L zealots regard as sufficiently extraordinary evidence simply are not.  I have read the extended debate between Sandy and Greg Parker at Greg's forum.  Is Greg also suffering from "a declining facility," Sandy?  (I graduated magna cum laude from law school, have a documented IQ in the 99.7th percentile, and have been an appellate lawyer for decades without anyone having noticed my "declining facility," whatever that is supposed to mean.  And your credentials are ...?)

Greg has suggested one plausible explanation for the records.  I personally don't find that the explanation requires even the level of complexity Greg suggests.  In order for LHO to be deemed to have satisfactorily completed the 1953/1954 school year, Beauregard was obviously going to have to credit his attendance in New York.  Since families move all the time, this is a common occurrence.  It appears to me that the Beauregard attendance record reflects only attendance at Beauregard, but I could be wrong.  The larger point is, both Oswald Student Greg and Little Old Lance both think the school records show something far less extraordinary than the H&L zealots claim - so those records obviously do not speak for themselves.  If you want to convince people they show the extraordinary things you claim, you must produce some reasonably extraordinary evidence.

We have bogged down in the minutiae as to how the 1953/1954 school year was divided.  Those who are wedded to a wacky theory love to bog down in minutiae because their theory looks so wacky when viewed from a broader perspective.  My point does not hinge on precisely how the school year was divided or what "semester" means.  I simply suggest that the 1953/1954 school year was indeed a school year extending from early September to late May, with interim grade reporting periods during that time, and the issue at the end of that time was simply whether the student would be promoted to the next grade level.  I suggest this because it is pretty much how all schools operated back then and because this is what LHO's school records seem to me to show.  I see nothing mandating a conclusion that LHO or HARVEY or LEE or GLADYS KNIGHT & THE PIPS were attending Beauregard before January of 1954.

(Contrary to your experience, I indeed did not encounter the notion of "semesters" or "terms" or "mid-term exams" until I entered college in 1968.  If my experience was bizarre, so be it.  It's not even clear to me how that would work:  If I were in the 7th grade and failed the "first semester" thereof, what would happen?)

No, the burden of proof is on the proponents of the wacky theory, not on those who regard the wacky with skepticism.  I know how the game works:  The proponents of the wacky theory will never initiate the steps that would definitively prove or disprove their wacky theory.  Because at some level they know their theory is wacky, and because they derive a certain level of enjoyment from reveling in their wackiness with their fellow true believers, their goal is always to preserve the "mystery."

One simply cannot discuss an issue rationally with a Young Earth Christian, a Flat Earther, a We Never Went to the Moon zealot, an Alien Abduction zealot ... or an H&L zealot.  And thus, I am going to move on from this thread.  Please, declare victory and pat yourself on the back.

Edited by Lance Payette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:

In other fields of weirdness, it irritates me when the debunkers' fallback position is always the axiom "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - and no amount of evidence ever quite rises to the level of extraordinary.  But here the axiom fits to a tee.

The H&L zealots are claiming there was, at the 8th-grade level, a HARVEY and a LEE already being groomed by the intelligence community and that HARVEY attended Beauregard during a portion of the 1953/1954 school year while LEE began attending the same school later in the same school year.  To characterize these claims as "extraordinary" would be charitable in the extreme.  They are "extraordinary" in the same way the claims that We Never Landed On the Moon are "extraordinary."

The school records that the H&L zealots regard as sufficiently extraordinary evidence simply are not.  I have read the extended debate between Sandy and Greg Parker at Greg's forum.  Is Greg also suffering from "a declining facility," Sandy?  (I graduated magna cum laude from law school, have a documented IQ in the 99.7th percentile, and have been an appellate lawyer for decades without anyone having noticed my "declining facility," whatever that is supposed to mean.  And your credentials are ...?)

Greg has suggested one plausible explanation for the records.  I personally don't find that the explanation requires even the level of complexity Greg suggests.  In order for LHO to be deemed to have satisfactorily completed the 1953/1954 school year, Beauregard was obviously going to have to credit his attendance in New York.  Since families move all the time, this is a common occurrence.  It appears to me that the Beauregard attendance record reflects only attendance at Beauregard, but I could be wrong.  The larger point is, both Oswald Student Greg and Little Old Lance both think the school records show something far less extraordinary than the H&L zealots claim - so those records obviously do not speak for themselves.  If you want to convince people they show the extraordinary things you claim, you must produce some reasonably extraordinary evidence.

We have bogged down in the minutiae as to how the 1953/1954 school year was divided.  Those who are wedded to a wacky theory love to bog down in minutiae because their theory looks so wacky when viewed from a broader perspective.  My point does not hinge on precisely how the school year was divided or what "semester" means.  I simply suggest that the 1953/1954 school year was indeed a school year extending from early September to late May, with interim grade reporting periods during that time, and the issue at the end of that time was simply whether the student would be promoted to the next grade level.  I suggest this because it is pretty much how all schools operated back then and because this is what LHO's school records seem to me to show.  I see nothing mandating a conclusion that LHO or HARVEY or LEE or GLADYS KNIGHT & THE PIPS were attending Beauregard before January of 1954.

(Contrary to your experience, I indeed did not encounter the notion of "semesters" or "terms" or "mid-term exams" until I entered college in 1968.  If my experience was bizarre, so be it.  It's not even clear to me how that would work:  If I were in the 7th grade and failed the "first semester" thereof, what would happen?)

No, the burden of proof is on the proponents of the wacky theory, not on those who regard the wacky with skepticism.  I know how the game works:  The proponents of the wacky theory will never initiate the steps that would definitively prove or disprove their wacky theory.  Because at some level they know their theory is wacky, and because they derive a certain level of enjoyment from reveling in their wackiness with their fellow true believers, their goal is always to preserve the "mystery."

One simply cannot discuss an issue rationally with a Young Earth Christian, a Flat Earther, a We Never Went to the Moon zealot, an Alien Abduction zealot ... or an H&L zealot.  And thus, I am going to move on from this thread.  Please, declare victory and pat yourself on the back.

I don't blame you Lance, there is only so much of this you can take at any one time. 

This isn't about a theory though is it? This is all about MONEY! That's it! Jim and JA have their eyes on a big prize, a multi million dollar bonanza, if they can get the film rights sold to the highest bidder. That is the only explanation for their pig headedness and stubborn refusal to accept the facts. Like true cult leaders who attract folk with profound 'issues' they are focused on the big chance of making money.

Neither believes a single word of all this. Neither of them!

Jim presents as a sane rational well loved Granddad, which I'm certain he is. I have heard that JA too is a pleasant affable chap, successful in his business enterprises and, despite the ridiculous conclusion, he overcame a Herculean task in writing H&L. You two know EXACTLY what you are doing! It's an iron in the fire; a finger in a pie, a low risk business opportunity that could potentially rake in millions. I get it. You are Americans. The world is one gigantic business opportunity. Anything goes, as long as it is legal. And this is legal. It' wrong, immoral, incredibly cynical and extremely damaging to the cause of discovering the truth...but it's legal. And possibly very profitable. That always trumps truth!

It's a sad observation but if Jim, or anyone else, had been selling the theory that Elvis had killed JFK they would probably attract similar people to the ones aggressively punching and spitting for H&L. Someone somewhere will follow ANYTHING! For some it is the only way to make sense of the world. For others it is a cheap way to make themselves appear 'interesting' and 'smart'. But like abused cult members world wide, they are merely little pawns in a bigger unseen game. And they will get NOTHING! No recognition. No money. No thank-yous. You simply won't hear from them again. 

Jim I believe you are a hustler, a business man, a money man, a chancer and a survivor. You'll never be poor; you're too smart. You've got plans. Big plans. If it were anything other than this silly nonsense you are promoting I would actually have a fair bit of respect for you.

So let me ask you directly. Would you be pleased if an established film studio offered JA a handsome price for the film rights to H&L and also wanted to hire you as an advisor on silly money including subsequent royalties?

Or would you turn it down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lance Payette said:

(I graduated magna cum laude from law school, have a documented IQ in the 99.7th percentile, and have been an appellate lawyer for decades without anyone having noticed my "declining facility," whatever that is supposed to mean.  And your credentials are ...?)


(145 IQ, cum laude, 3.9 GPA, MS in electrical engineering, began taking college courses when in 6th grade. Cofounded Magnetic Research Inc. and New Wave Instruments. The former now owned by NovaRad Corp. and the latter recently closed due to my health issues and resulting retirement.)

My exception for those with "declining facilities" was meant as an escape clause for smart people who are becoming less so due to aging or failing health. I had no person in mind when I wrote that. Though I do include myself among that class.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

Greg has suggested one plausible explanation for the records.  I personally don't find that the explanation requires even the level of complexity Greg suggests.  In order for LHO to be deemed to have satisfactorily completed the 1953/1954 school year, Beauregard was obviously going to have to credit his attendance in New York.  Since families move all the time, this is a common occurrence.  It appears to me that the Beauregard attendance record reflects only attendance at Beauregard, but I could be wrong.


Why would  Beauregard give credit to Oswald for classes he completed at P.S. 44?  P.S. 44 would have given credit for classes completed there.

Even if you were somehow right, why would the credits transferred  from P.S. 44 to Beauregard be in different classes? Specifically in Science and Phys Ed instead of English, Math, and the other classes he took at P.S. 44?
 

You're just making up excuses because you are determined to make the evidence match your beliefs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

I suggest this because it is pretty much how all schools operated back then and because this is what LHO's school records seem to me to show.  I see nothing mandating a conclusion that LHO or HARVEY or LEE or GLADYS KNIGHT & THE PIPS were attending Beauregard before January of 1954.

 

 

There are three rows marked 54-55. I proved in the other post that the third row gives the average score for the two rows above it. Therefore those two rows are scores for the first and second semesters of the the year... the 1954/55 school year.

Naturally, the same thing is true for the three rows marked 53-54. The first row gives the scores  for the first semester, the second row for the second semester, and the third row for the average of the scores.

This is a no-brainer and by fighting it you're looking goofy

 

Beauregard%20Record.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

(Contrary to your experience, I indeed did not encounter the notion of "semesters" or "terms" or "mid-term exams" until I entered college in 1968.  If my experience was bizarre, so be it.  It's not even clear to me how that would work:  If I were in the 7th grade and failed the "first semester" thereof, what would happen?)

 

First, understand that in junior high school it isn't necessary to take every single class available, or a class every single hour of the day. You just need to get a certain number of credits in each core class before you can be admitted to high school.

So, having failed your 1st-semester 7th grade classes, you'd need to take whatever classes you could during the 2nd semester that would add credits that you still need. That could be tough because a lot of core classes are taught both semesters, with the 1st semester class being a prerequisite to the 2nd semester class. You'd certainly need to take classes during the summer break. (I've never done that so I don't know how it is decided which classes will be taught.) There's a good chance you'll be held back a year. In which case I suppose you wouldn't need to take summer school.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

You have the same question about LHO and the "bus" regarding his journey from the TSBD after the JFK assassination -- why did he take the bus (taxi, etc.)   My question to you is the same!  What evidence do you have that LHO actually took any bus?   Have you read the WC testimony of the alleged bus driver, the alleged bus passenger, or the alleged taxi driver?  Each one falls apart like a house of cards.  These were all cases of "mistaken identity" -- to be generous to them.

So, Mary Bledsoe was wrong? And what about this bus transfer, Paul? You must think it's a fake, right?....

Oswald-Bus-Transfer.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, David Von Pein said:

So, Mary Bledsoe was wrong? And what about this bus transfer, Paul? You must think it's a fake, right?....

Oswald-Bus-Transfer.gif

I wondered what relevance this all has to the H&L topic until I realised that we have a very diverse meeting of minds going on.

It turns out that you are not alone David. The H&L gang also believe in Bledsoe's testimony and the whole public transport 'escape' scenario.

You'd have to be either an extreme LN or a H&L fantasist to believe any of it. But of course both you and Jim believe ALL of it.

Fair do's David you totally support the WC and so it is at least fully consistent with your flawed belief.

The H&L gang however have total and utter contempt for any official finding and constantly mock those who they think underestimate the extent of this dastardly cover up.

But they believe in Bledsoe because....... it says so in the WC!!!

Ha ha ha!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernie,

Please give me your opinion as to WHY ON EARTH the cops felt ANY NEED to plant the paper bus transfer on Lee Oswald's person. (Or did they merely just SAY they "found" it in LHO's pocket, but didn't physically "plant" it on his person?)

There was NO logical reason for the police to want to say that LHO rode on a bus for a few blocks on Elm Street. None whatsoever. The cab ride with Whaley could have easily sufficed for the "evil" DPD purposes. So what was the point of that ruse, Bernie? Just to play some games?

Even Oswald admitted he took the bus. But he saw the need to lie about it too, right? Or you probably think LHO never said a word about taking a bus. It was FRITZ who just made that up. Correct?

This kind of "IT NEVER HAPPENED" nonsense that you believe, Bernie, makes you almost as ridiculous as the H&L fantasists.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad you put "almost".

As scintillating as it may be to discuss the perfectly sound narrative of why the DPD behaved the way they did, it would, firstly, be repetitive because it has been adequately discussed numerous times on here and, secondly, it would have nothing to do with the subject of this thread. 

I was merely pointing out how H&L gang have no qualms about siding with LNs and will cherry pick at will from the WC when it suits their ends. As you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×