Yes, Olmert and Peretz should resign, but people like Oppenheimer, Peres and Beilin should have the decency to shut up and take responsibility for the incredible damage they have already done
by Naomi Ragen
www.ynetnews.com
August 27, 2006
What I find most upsetting about the last month and a half is how little people talk about history.
The disastrous war with Lebanon was a long time in the making, with roots that go back many years: The decision to unilaterally run out of Lebanon in the middle of the night and to allow Hizbullah to endlessly arm itself on our borders, the disastrous unilateral disengagement that convinced our enemies we were morons prime for the taking and the budget cuts and politicization that have weakened the IDF.
All these things did not happen yesterday, and so a political party that was elected yesterday cannot be held solely responsible.
Now, don't misunderstand me. I said before the elections that Kadima was a bunch of losers that had gathered together in one place, and I was unfortunately correct. I am of the firm belief that Ehud Olmert, Amir Peretz, and Mr. Halutz should have the decency to resign over their incompetence. No question.
But that doesn't mean that the individuals and organizations responsible, including Ehud Barak, Shaul Mofaz, Peace Now, Women in Black, Four Mothers, Shimon Peres, and Yossi Beilin -- should sit back and get an exemption.
They were fighting, you had a Frappacino.
When I see smug peace-nowers like Mr. Oppenheimer on television attacking the head of the reservists protest movement, I want to shout at him: What right do you have to open your mouth and say anything to soldiers who fought in Lebanon to save your skin?
Haven't you and your kind done enough damage with your policies and your insane vision that has put our reservists on the front lines while you continue your diet of cake and Frappacino in Tel Aviv cafes, safe from rockets and mortars?
Where is the responsibility of the entire "peace" movement for all that has happened here, starting with the brainwashing of the Israeli people to take in Arafat, to give up land that is now being used as basis for the war of annihilation against us?
For policies that have proved an unmitigated disaster? They just go on and on, sharing their "wisdom" giving us their opinions, as if nothing has happened, priming us to get the next bunch of soldiers killed.
Yes, Mr. Olmert should resign, along with Mr. Peretz and Mr. Halutz. And people like Mr. Oppenheimer and Mr. Peres and Mr. Beilin should not be interviewed on television or have their words printed in newspapers. They should have the decency to shut up and take responsibility for the incredible damage they have already done to this country.
Shimon Peres
An obstacle to peace
Sunday, August 27, 2006
Monday, July 17, 2006
Lying through his teeth
by The Perescope
Guess who lied through his teeth last night on TV and got away with it?
Interviewed by legendary anchor Haim Yavin on Mabat, Israel Television's evening newscast, Shimon Peres stated that the "Grapes of Wrath" operation against Hizbollah terrorists, which he conducted in Lebanon during his brief tenure as Israel's prime minister in 1996, "was a great success." And in response, Yavin, a political Peresite known as Israel's "Mr. Television," didn't even wink.
With hindsight, there is no doubt that Operation Grapes of Wrath was a tremendous failure. After an Israeli shell went off-course and accidentally killed more than a hundred Lebanese civilians, Peres was anxious to end the hostilities, which began when Hizbollah launched katyusha rockets on Israeli towns and villages. Under international mediation, Peres agreed to a ceasefire, under whose inequitable terms Israel and the Hizbollah would not fire on each other. As a result of agreeing to tie the hands of the Israeli army, Peres's ceasefire allowed Hizbollah to rearm. This was ultimately untenable, and, as a result, Israel was eventually forced to withdraw overnight from Lebanon in 2000 with its tail between its legs.
The Hizbollah saw that, correctly, as a great victory on their part. They became the first Arab fighting force to expel Israel from territory without any quid-pro-quo. The great Hizbollah victory over the Israeli army was hailed by jihadists and rejectionists across the Muslim world as the precedent for future action, and was a model for Yasser Arafat's decision to launch his terror war against Israel later that year. If, after all, a Shi'ite militia could expel Israel by force from Lebanon, Arafat, who fancied himself as a later-day Saladin, could settle for no less in Palestine.
The war Israel is now waging in Lebanon is the inevitable result of its abandonment of its south Lebanon security zone in 2000. As long as Israel exercised control there, either directly or through the now-disbanded pro-Israel South Lebanon Army (SLA), Hizbollah was unable to launch rockets against Israeli towns and villages in the Galilee. In the past six years, Hizbollah has used its freedom of action in south Lebanon not only to re-arm, but also to import vast quantities of weapons from Syria and Iran, together with Iranian "advisors."
While Peres lied through his teeth, hundreds of thousands of Israelis were huddled in bomb shelters. Katyushas and Iranian-made Fajar rockets had brought death and destruction across the Galilee, from Haifa to Tiberias. And the man whose diplomatic malfeasance paved the way for such a tragedy continues to escape responsibility.
Guess who lied through his teeth last night on TV and got away with it?
Interviewed by legendary anchor Haim Yavin on Mabat, Israel Television's evening newscast, Shimon Peres stated that the "Grapes of Wrath" operation against Hizbollah terrorists, which he conducted in Lebanon during his brief tenure as Israel's prime minister in 1996, "was a great success." And in response, Yavin, a political Peresite known as Israel's "Mr. Television," didn't even wink.
With hindsight, there is no doubt that Operation Grapes of Wrath was a tremendous failure. After an Israeli shell went off-course and accidentally killed more than a hundred Lebanese civilians, Peres was anxious to end the hostilities, which began when Hizbollah launched katyusha rockets on Israeli towns and villages. Under international mediation, Peres agreed to a ceasefire, under whose inequitable terms Israel and the Hizbollah would not fire on each other. As a result of agreeing to tie the hands of the Israeli army, Peres's ceasefire allowed Hizbollah to rearm. This was ultimately untenable, and, as a result, Israel was eventually forced to withdraw overnight from Lebanon in 2000 with its tail between its legs.
The Hizbollah saw that, correctly, as a great victory on their part. They became the first Arab fighting force to expel Israel from territory without any quid-pro-quo. The great Hizbollah victory over the Israeli army was hailed by jihadists and rejectionists across the Muslim world as the precedent for future action, and was a model for Yasser Arafat's decision to launch his terror war against Israel later that year. If, after all, a Shi'ite militia could expel Israel by force from Lebanon, Arafat, who fancied himself as a later-day Saladin, could settle for no less in Palestine.
The war Israel is now waging in Lebanon is the inevitable result of its abandonment of its south Lebanon security zone in 2000. As long as Israel exercised control there, either directly or through the now-disbanded pro-Israel South Lebanon Army (SLA), Hizbollah was unable to launch rockets against Israeli towns and villages in the Galilee. In the past six years, Hizbollah has used its freedom of action in south Lebanon not only to re-arm, but also to import vast quantities of weapons from Syria and Iran, together with Iranian "advisors."
While Peres lied through his teeth, hundreds of thousands of Israelis were huddled in bomb shelters. Katyushas and Iranian-made Fajar rockets had brought death and destruction across the Galilee, from Haifa to Tiberias. And the man whose diplomatic malfeasance paved the way for such a tragedy continues to escape responsibility.
Monday, June 26, 2006
No Qassams in Peres-land
Sorry, Mr. Peres, but barrage of Qassams is good reason for hysteria
by Guy Benyovits
Yediot Ahronot
June 21, 2006
Out in Peres-land, residents have woken up to another blissful day of optimistic news. News editors, not wanting to frighten listeners, don't report the fact that several missiles have hit a school in a forlorn city in the south. A few children have been hurt, several suffered shock and will require extensive psychological counseling.
But residents of the town themselves, wanting to prevent unnecessary panic, chose to remain silent, rather than vent their pain to the country at large. The government of Peres-land has rubbed their hands together with satisfaction. Aahhh, what a well-functioning country we have. Model citizenry and media. Just like it was with Ben-Gurion.
Don't get so excited
Good morning, Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres (perhaps the greeting "Red Dawn" would be more appropriate in this case). Monday, in the presence of six of the country's most influential political reporters, you uttered the following words: "This hysteria over the Qassams must end… "We're just adding to the hysteria. What happened? Kiryat Shmona was shelled for years. What, there weren't missiles?"
The next morning, you were already on the radio complaining that you'd been misunderstood. Once again, you've been taken out of context. You really meant, "Only the media is hysterical, and a small number of Sderot residents are making a lot of noise."
No comparison
Let's spend a minute talking about your claims. True, Kiryat Shmona suffered shelling attacks for years, and drew Israel into a blood-soaked war that took the lives of hundreds of soldiers. But what, exactly, has this got to do with Sderot?
Now for the media and Sderot residents. It is the job of both of these groups to arouse your lazy government to action. Hundreds of rockets have hit this town, Mr. Peres. It is a legitimate reason for hysteria.
Hysteria about the fact that the government has failed to protect its citizens. We may not be talking about the high-class suburb of Ramat Aviv where you live, but allow me to assume that if as much as one stray rock fell there, the rock-thrower would be "done away with" immediately.
But you know, it's just Sderot we're talking about, a forlorn "southern" town. It's easy to forget it's just an hour from Tel Aviv.
Learning from London
In your imagination, Mr. Peres, Sderot residents must learn from their counterparts in London during the Nazi blitzkrieg during World War II. A "stiff upper lip," it's called.
But residents of London had no choice. They knew their government, headed by Winston Churchill, was fighting and making every military effort to ensure Britain's continued existence. Churchill may have called for Britons' "blood, sweat and tears," but he also waged war with all the weapons at his disposal.
But you, Mr. Peres, you politicians have thrown little more than empty promises, with the exception of the occasional bomb against civilians – that have helped fan the flames.
Pre-planned response?
Suddenly, we are left with the feeling that maybe, just maybe, the issue here has nothing to do with government failure, not even with its failure to defend the residents of Sderot.
Could it be that the whole exercise was planned from the beginning, with the intention of building support for the "realignment" plan? That very same, fantastic one-sided plan (we are now seeing the benefits of that plan's predecessor), based on the idea that "there is no one to talk with."
As long as we refuse to talk, we will have Qassams, we will resume targeted killings, and we will create a situation of ongoing warfare.
Saving realignment
But if we stop, things between the two sides will disintegrate. If we let Mahmoud Abbas "solve" the problem of Hamas (as he has tried to do via the referendum and other political tricks), pay attention to what the world has been telling us in recent weeks (like ignorant children) and focus on setting stable, quiet borders around Gaza – the realignment will become damaged goods that nobody wants.
Seems to me, Mr. Peres, that this is exactly what you are hoping for. That you, too, think "realignment" is but one more "scribble," part spin and part outrageous dream, based on the principle of "I'll make my own decisions and carry them out. Let the other guys jump off a cliff."
In the meanwhile, the only thing jumping are the paramedics in Sderot. That, and the neat IDF statistics about the number of Qassams falling on the city.
by Guy Benyovits
Yediot Ahronot
June 21, 2006
Out in Peres-land, residents have woken up to another blissful day of optimistic news. News editors, not wanting to frighten listeners, don't report the fact that several missiles have hit a school in a forlorn city in the south. A few children have been hurt, several suffered shock and will require extensive psychological counseling.
But residents of the town themselves, wanting to prevent unnecessary panic, chose to remain silent, rather than vent their pain to the country at large. The government of Peres-land has rubbed their hands together with satisfaction. Aahhh, what a well-functioning country we have. Model citizenry and media. Just like it was with Ben-Gurion.
Don't get so excited
Good morning, Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres (perhaps the greeting "Red Dawn" would be more appropriate in this case). Monday, in the presence of six of the country's most influential political reporters, you uttered the following words: "This hysteria over the Qassams must end… "We're just adding to the hysteria. What happened? Kiryat Shmona was shelled for years. What, there weren't missiles?"
The next morning, you were already on the radio complaining that you'd been misunderstood. Once again, you've been taken out of context. You really meant, "Only the media is hysterical, and a small number of Sderot residents are making a lot of noise."
No comparison
Let's spend a minute talking about your claims. True, Kiryat Shmona suffered shelling attacks for years, and drew Israel into a blood-soaked war that took the lives of hundreds of soldiers. But what, exactly, has this got to do with Sderot?
Now for the media and Sderot residents. It is the job of both of these groups to arouse your lazy government to action. Hundreds of rockets have hit this town, Mr. Peres. It is a legitimate reason for hysteria.
Hysteria about the fact that the government has failed to protect its citizens. We may not be talking about the high-class suburb of Ramat Aviv where you live, but allow me to assume that if as much as one stray rock fell there, the rock-thrower would be "done away with" immediately.
But you know, it's just Sderot we're talking about, a forlorn "southern" town. It's easy to forget it's just an hour from Tel Aviv.
Learning from London
In your imagination, Mr. Peres, Sderot residents must learn from their counterparts in London during the Nazi blitzkrieg during World War II. A "stiff upper lip," it's called.
But residents of London had no choice. They knew their government, headed by Winston Churchill, was fighting and making every military effort to ensure Britain's continued existence. Churchill may have called for Britons' "blood, sweat and tears," but he also waged war with all the weapons at his disposal.
But you, Mr. Peres, you politicians have thrown little more than empty promises, with the exception of the occasional bomb against civilians – that have helped fan the flames.
Pre-planned response?
Suddenly, we are left with the feeling that maybe, just maybe, the issue here has nothing to do with government failure, not even with its failure to defend the residents of Sderot.
Could it be that the whole exercise was planned from the beginning, with the intention of building support for the "realignment" plan? That very same, fantastic one-sided plan (we are now seeing the benefits of that plan's predecessor), based on the idea that "there is no one to talk with."
As long as we refuse to talk, we will have Qassams, we will resume targeted killings, and we will create a situation of ongoing warfare.
Saving realignment
But if we stop, things between the two sides will disintegrate. If we let Mahmoud Abbas "solve" the problem of Hamas (as he has tried to do via the referendum and other political tricks), pay attention to what the world has been telling us in recent weeks (like ignorant children) and focus on setting stable, quiet borders around Gaza – the realignment will become damaged goods that nobody wants.
Seems to me, Mr. Peres, that this is exactly what you are hoping for. That you, too, think "realignment" is but one more "scribble," part spin and part outrageous dream, based on the principle of "I'll make my own decisions and carry them out. Let the other guys jump off a cliff."
In the meanwhile, the only thing jumping are the paramedics in Sderot. That, and the neat IDF statistics about the number of Qassams falling on the city.
Friday, May 05, 2006
He's one horny old man
by The Perescope
You’ve got to pity the man, it was so bizarre. Having been upstaged in the news following Ariel Sharon’s two strokes and the ensuing election campaign, all Noble Prize winner Shimon Peres wanted to do was attract a bit of attention and return to the front pages. So he sat down and thought up another one of his famous Big Ideas.
The Peres Center for Peace, whose main activity is rewarding large salaries to its staff of Peres cronies and groupies, would invite aging sex symbol Sharon Stone to Israel to meet Israeli and Palestinian children, tour a farm and visit a few other sites that are ostensibly under the patronage of the institution that the megalomaniac named after himself. Most importantly, Stone would breakfast with Shimon Peres himself on March 8, after which they would hold a joint press conference. The cameras would flutter and Peres would appear on CNN and, the following morning, on page 1 around the world.
What Peres’s inflated ego didn’t take fully into account, however, was that the journalists who showed up at his manufactured press conference didn’t give a whit about him. All they wanted to do was snap their photos of Sharon Stone and, maybe, get the lowdown on the sequel to Basic Instinct, which was about to premiere half a world away in Hollywood.
Understanding that this was her opportunity to grab a bit of publicity, too, she quickly complied. Rather than babble about Peres’s New Middle East, Stone babbled about her wardrobe, or lack of it, in her new movie:
"People just are sitting there going, like, 'I don't care what she's saying, I don't care what she's saying, I just want to know, does she get naked in the movie? Is she naked? Nude nude nude naked. Do I see her boobies? I don't care what she's saying, I don't care, I don't care, is she naked?' So let's just get through to that... YES!"
Well, what can one add? Stone’s soliloquy about appearing naked in her new movie is no less embarrassing than Peres’s New Middle East. It’s also relatively quite similar to Peres’s role in Oslo, where he got caught with his pants down
You’ve got to pity the man, it was so bizarre. Having been upstaged in the news following Ariel Sharon’s two strokes and the ensuing election campaign, all Noble Prize winner Shimon Peres wanted to do was attract a bit of attention and return to the front pages. So he sat down and thought up another one of his famous Big Ideas.
The Peres Center for Peace, whose main activity is rewarding large salaries to its staff of Peres cronies and groupies, would invite aging sex symbol Sharon Stone to Israel to meet Israeli and Palestinian children, tour a farm and visit a few other sites that are ostensibly under the patronage of the institution that the megalomaniac named after himself. Most importantly, Stone would breakfast with Shimon Peres himself on March 8, after which they would hold a joint press conference. The cameras would flutter and Peres would appear on CNN and, the following morning, on page 1 around the world.
What Peres’s inflated ego didn’t take fully into account, however, was that the journalists who showed up at his manufactured press conference didn’t give a whit about him. All they wanted to do was snap their photos of Sharon Stone and, maybe, get the lowdown on the sequel to Basic Instinct, which was about to premiere half a world away in Hollywood.
Understanding that this was her opportunity to grab a bit of publicity, too, she quickly complied. Rather than babble about Peres’s New Middle East, Stone babbled about her wardrobe, or lack of it, in her new movie:
"People just are sitting there going, like, 'I don't care what she's saying, I don't care what she's saying, I just want to know, does she get naked in the movie? Is she naked? Nude nude nude naked. Do I see her boobies? I don't care what she's saying, I don't care, I don't care, is she naked?' So let's just get through to that... YES!"
Well, what can one add? Stone’s soliloquy about appearing naked in her new movie is no less embarrassing than Peres’s New Middle East. It’s also relatively quite similar to Peres’s role in Oslo, where he got caught with his pants down
Friday, April 28, 2006
Peres was for sale, now he's sold
Report: Peres accepted illegal payments
by Dan Izenberg and Jerusalem Post Staff
April 27, 2006
As first reported by The Jerusalem Post some three months ago, State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss confirmed Thursday morning that MK Shimon Peres (Kadima) is suspected of accepting illegal contributions for his Labor Party primaries campaign.
According to the allegations, Peres received a forbidden donation of some $320,000 from two overseas donors on the eve of his loss to Amir Peretz in the party leadership race.
The State Comptroller's Office reported that Peres received donations of $100,000 each, from businessmen Haim Saban and Bruce Rappaport, and $120,000 from Daniel Abrams. The figures were provided by Peres himself.
The details of the report have already been brought to the attention of Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz and Peres has employed the services of attorney Ram Caspi.
Yoram Dori, an adviser to Peres, denied the allegations.
"Shimon Peres did not violate any laws. All campaign funding was done in accordance with the regulations," Dori said.
The complete State Comptroller report was set to be published in three weeks.
"We must make sure the law is upheld exactly as legislated by the Knesset," Lindenstrauss told the Post. "We must deal with these donations with an iron fist to make sure the law is observed."
by Dan Izenberg and Jerusalem Post Staff
April 27, 2006
As first reported by The Jerusalem Post some three months ago, State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss confirmed Thursday morning that MK Shimon Peres (Kadima) is suspected of accepting illegal contributions for his Labor Party primaries campaign.
According to the allegations, Peres received a forbidden donation of some $320,000 from two overseas donors on the eve of his loss to Amir Peretz in the party leadership race.
The State Comptroller's Office reported that Peres received donations of $100,000 each, from businessmen Haim Saban and Bruce Rappaport, and $120,000 from Daniel Abrams. The figures were provided by Peres himself.
The details of the report have already been brought to the attention of Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz and Peres has employed the services of attorney Ram Caspi.
Yoram Dori, an adviser to Peres, denied the allegations.
"Shimon Peres did not violate any laws. All campaign funding was done in accordance with the regulations," Dori said.
The complete State Comptroller report was set to be published in three weeks.
"We must make sure the law is upheld exactly as legislated by the Knesset," Lindenstrauss told the Post. "We must deal with these donations with an iron fist to make sure the law is observed."
Wednesday, January 11, 2006
Peres for sale
From loss to loss, Peres' demands get more ridiculous
by Ofer Shelah
Yediot Ahronot
January 9, 2006
Following Shimon Peres announcement that he would support Ariel Sharon in the upcoming elections, Sharon aides said that as far as the could see, Peres' support gave them more than they bargained for: It "legitimized" supporting Kadima for many traditional Labor voters, and it helped Sharon stabilize his party in the center - a center in which Peres and Tzahi Hanegbi could coexist.
But Peres is what the Americans call "high maintenance." During Sharon's first term, when the Labor Party was the largest Knesset and coalition faction, this maintenance expressed itself by Sharon's special attention (and that of Sharon's right-hand man, Uri Shani).
They stressed Shimon's value as a senior coalition partner - and in practice, torpedoed every initiative Peres threatened to undertake.
These initiatives, it must be said, were few in number, and not at all ripe. The man described by Rabin as an "indefatigable underminer" today undermines with greatly reduced energy.
Full price for Olmert
Starting with the 2003 elections Sharon's power has been such that even Peres was forced to admit he couldn't offer him much, and the prime minister didn't have to pay much in order to get the beaten Peres to join his ranks after the later lost to Amir Peretz.
But Ehud Olmert? Tzipi Livni? They will have to pay full price if they hope to retain Peres.
This price includes, amongst other things, a commitment that is never really a commitment, statements that leave an opening for Peres' traditional threat: The day will come, dear leader, that the polls will not flatter you, and the vultures will be circling overhead.
And then, then who will you find to run as a candidate who will be your heir? Who will be the one, the ONLY one, who can rescue your party/vision/peace/the Jewish people from the mud? Shimon, of course.
Seizing momentum
Peres' position today is reminiscent of some of the Israeli players on some of the country's top basketball teams: More than for what they accomplish on the court, they are valued for the fact that they are not on other teams.
Campaign wizards, for whom one of their most important key phrases is "momentum," fear Peres' departure would reverse the process of legitimization - back to Labor.
Therefore, Olmert will be careful to give as much honor as he can to Peres, but it is highly questionable whether he will commit to giving him anything concrete. Such a commitment would arouse the ire of other senior Kadima members.
At his advanced age, Peres finds himself in a position in which everyone knows he must - and can - be bought. With honor, with attention, by singing his praises to attest to his value.
This will not solve the problem, because this need is also insatiable. But it's all that can be done. And from year to year, from one electoral failure to the next, the price of upkeep doesn't change. Only the honor it brings with it becomes more and more questionable.
by Ofer Shelah
Yediot Ahronot
January 9, 2006
Following Shimon Peres announcement that he would support Ariel Sharon in the upcoming elections, Sharon aides said that as far as the could see, Peres' support gave them more than they bargained for: It "legitimized" supporting Kadima for many traditional Labor voters, and it helped Sharon stabilize his party in the center - a center in which Peres and Tzahi Hanegbi could coexist.
But Peres is what the Americans call "high maintenance." During Sharon's first term, when the Labor Party was the largest Knesset and coalition faction, this maintenance expressed itself by Sharon's special attention (and that of Sharon's right-hand man, Uri Shani).
They stressed Shimon's value as a senior coalition partner - and in practice, torpedoed every initiative Peres threatened to undertake.
These initiatives, it must be said, were few in number, and not at all ripe. The man described by Rabin as an "indefatigable underminer" today undermines with greatly reduced energy.
Full price for Olmert
Starting with the 2003 elections Sharon's power has been such that even Peres was forced to admit he couldn't offer him much, and the prime minister didn't have to pay much in order to get the beaten Peres to join his ranks after the later lost to Amir Peretz.
But Ehud Olmert? Tzipi Livni? They will have to pay full price if they hope to retain Peres.
This price includes, amongst other things, a commitment that is never really a commitment, statements that leave an opening for Peres' traditional threat: The day will come, dear leader, that the polls will not flatter you, and the vultures will be circling overhead.
And then, then who will you find to run as a candidate who will be your heir? Who will be the one, the ONLY one, who can rescue your party/vision/peace/the Jewish people from the mud? Shimon, of course.
Seizing momentum
Peres' position today is reminiscent of some of the Israeli players on some of the country's top basketball teams: More than for what they accomplish on the court, they are valued for the fact that they are not on other teams.
Campaign wizards, for whom one of their most important key phrases is "momentum," fear Peres' departure would reverse the process of legitimization - back to Labor.
Therefore, Olmert will be careful to give as much honor as he can to Peres, but it is highly questionable whether he will commit to giving him anything concrete. Such a commitment would arouse the ire of other senior Kadima members.
At his advanced age, Peres finds himself in a position in which everyone knows he must - and can - be bought. With honor, with attention, by singing his praises to attest to his value.
This will not solve the problem, because this need is also insatiable. But it's all that can be done. And from year to year, from one electoral failure to the next, the price of upkeep doesn't change. Only the honor it brings with it becomes more and more questionable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)