ProPublica found Clarence Thomas was thousands of dollars in debt before he started receiving lavish gifts. Getty/Alex Wong



Comments from the pro-IDF crowd saying that shooting unarmed escaped hostages with a white flag is /totally/ not the IDF's fault incoming in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

I may have to revise my previous statements. Earlier, I said that infantry action can reduce civilian casualties because troops have the option to cease fire if they see civilians. In practice, of course they have to actually not shoot civilians which is apparently /very hard/ for the IDF. One wonders how high up the chain of command the IDF's investigation into shooting unarmed hostages will go, and whether anyone will look at how the soldiers are trained.


@1: It’s rather tougher to shoot hostages if no one was taken hostage in the first place, but apparently the same absolute rule against criticizing Hamas’ other atrocities applies here, too.

Feel free to speculate; meanwhile, I’m going with “fog of war,” pending investigatory results.


Flashing tits on the South Lawn at the WH's LGBTQ+ event and now buttfucking in Senate Hearing rooms - we really need to start behaving ourselves.


"because I cannot in good conscience link to the the Daily Caller."

Apparently Stranger writers can link to Elon Musk's X (formerly twitter) in good conscience though.


“…these little blessings should not be confused with the sacrament of marriage. Marriage for same-sex couples in the eyes of the church is still off the table.”

First, why would anyone WANT to be Catholic?

Second, looks like the old guys in dresses still don’t want to be upstaged by even-more-fabulously-gay attire at weddings.

@3: Yeah, whatever happened to good old-fashioned bathroom-stall tapping?


@2 I knew I could count on you to defend "shoot first, ask questions later" policies! Good job! You never disappoint!

Hey, do you work for SPD Public Relations? If not, they might have a job opening for someone who never questions the motives or training of the uniformed person holding a gun.


People pay to ride the light rail? Who knew??


you cant have sex in there, this is where the senate fucks america


@1: it's totally the IDF's fault, and they admitted it, white flags, yelling in hebrew, all of it. they've also admitted that like 25% of IDF casualties have been friendly fire.

what's your standard for urban warfare against a foe embedded in the local population willing to attack wearing a suicide belt? zero fuckups allowed? is there a fixed number of allowed?


@8: He’s chosen not to recognize Hamas’ long-documented tactics of using Palestinian civilians as shields against the IDF. Therefore, your questions are meaningless to him, and he’ll continue to go with “zero” as his final answer, not-Alex.


clarence thomas is in a sham marriage and clearly has many republican sugar daddies. come out the closet, clarence. move to san fran and be your true self.


@8, 25% of IDF casualties were friendly fire.

That is a normal, irreducible fact of war. In the Gulf War, 24% of U.S. casualties were friendly fire. Broader studies of the issue across multiple conflicts in the modern era find similar proportions of friendly fire.

The best way to not have friendly fire, is to not have the war. If you have the war, there will be friendly fire. It is inherent in war. "Fog of battle" and all that.

The whole point of an enemy's attack is to disrupt the adversaries communications, situational awareness of the battlefield, etc. and generally sow disorder and confusion. The better that is done, the higher the rate of friendly fire deaths of the adversary.


@1, @8, @9,

The IDF has to look at what they can control and do. Self-evaluate and learn on the fly.

That said, they are dealing with a group that's main M.O. has been to disguise suicide bombers to get them into position to do maximal damage and disruption. They also use hostages to lure rescuers into ambush. I can understand why that would make an IDF soldier jumpy and put self-preservation over taking a risk that the hostages were what they appeared to be.

Either way, hostages as a ruse, or hostages being killed by their rescuers, it's P.R. win for Hamas.

Hamas has been VERY GOOD at shaping the strategic landscape so that if it's heads Hamas wins and if its tails Israel loses. Israel has been on its heels in the information war of this conflict, and remains so.


@14: What, do you think military organizations do not care about friendly fire incidents? That they do not try to prevent them? The entire point of the comment is how common friendly fire incidents are, despite such efforts.

The reason for noting this is the obsessive focus persons like yourself have placed upon this one incident — even as you carefully ignore the hostage-taking which created the opportunity for friendly fire in this case. The literal Dark Age barbarism of taking civilians as hostages bothers you not at all, whilst the well-known issue of friendly fire is treated as exceptional in this case.


Oh, NOOOOOOO about the fire that gutted the Historic Fairhaven Terminal Building!!!! How horrible!
I would really hate to learn that it was another arson caused by homeless people, whether or not they're drug addicts. The Clark Feed and Seed Building on Railroad Avenue met the same fate [December 14, 2020, Bellingham Herald]. Clark Feed and Seed and Avalon Records were destroyed by two people who, desperately trying to stay warm, set the entire building ablaze. The location is now an empty, fenced in vacant lot.


Clarence Thomas his Ginny bitch are yet two more RepubliKKKan billionaire coddling stains, feeding off the inside of the Orange Turd's deeply cavernous buttcrack.
RepubliKKKans are truly terrible excuses for people.


I know it's a drop in Sound Transit's fiscal bucket, but paying Julie Timm a full year's salary while offering no explanation is not a good look.


This was not the first time a motorcade was hit!


@8 That's an entirely reasonable answer in my view, mainly because it includes the statement that the IDF fucked it up. Where @2 goes wrong is in starting from the premise that because Hamas did some evil acts, the IDF cannot be wrong. Every civilian casualty is about human shields, for example. @10 is a perfect example. In this case, there were no human shields (the hostages had escaped capture), but they were shot because Hamas uses human shields. Oh, and they use suicide belts. Note also that the hostages had no shirts on when shot, so suicide belts weren't a factor either.

@15 The reason I am interested in whether the IDF review actually gets into review of training is that training is extremely relevant. If soldiers are trained that anyone who appears to be a civilian is a threat, then just randomly shooting civilians is an understandable outcome. If they're given more nuanced training, then they're less likely to shoot people on sight. It depends on whether they prioritize force protection or reducing civilian casualties. If they prioritize force protection and screw the civilians, then it's no great shock that they're losing the propaganda war.

@17 Careful in advocating for basic human rights. You'll get labeled a terrorist sympathizer! Many years ago a history teacher said that you can tell when a revolution is coming by the unemployment rate among 18-24 year old men. If people have nothing left to lose, folks like Hamas will have more appeal. If recognizing the state of Israel and cooperating in rounding up extremists (as Fatah did) gets you nothing but more land stolen from your citizens, then why would you recognize the state of Israel?


@17: “The hostages being taken…”

Not all of whom have been released or have successfully escaped, meaning the Dark Age barbarism continues. It’s not a past event, it’s an ongoing one. Yet you write as if this is all ancient history, with all of the hostages’ families and friends just being obstinate grudge-holders.

“I think taking hostages is evil and wrong but is clearly the only tactic these folks have.”

No, they also slaughtered hundreds of civilians, and continue to launch attacks from behind civilians. They have plenty of tactics; it just so happens that most of them involve intentional war crimes. And they have clearly said they’ll do these things again and again and again if they possibly can. None of this is over yet.

“Twisted religion is to blame for sure, but at the heart of it is nothing to lose.”

On 9/11, 15 of the 19 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, one of the wealthiest places on earth. They had plenty to lose.

As for the rest of your comment, Hamas explicitly exists to prevent peaceful solutions. Until Hamas is destroyed or rendered irrelevant, this horrible situation will continue, sadly enough.


@14, In general, you imagine a level of precise and targeted use of force in armed conflict that is beyond current technology and the limitations of human performance. If it did exist, then a diligent enemy would be figuring out how to defeat that technology and again exceed their opponents human capabilities.

Successfully prosecuted war sows chaos amongst the enemy in the physical space (e.g. disrupts communication, supply lines, a clear view of the battle space, etc.). Very successful war messes with the enemy's mind, getting them error even when the you haven't succeeded in disrupting the enemy's communications, perception of the battle space, etc. It gets the enemy to make unforced errors (e.g. killing the hostages they are trying to rescue, etc.).

By the measure of getting the IDF to make unforced errors, Hamas has been very successful. Heads (e.g. inflicting casualties on the enemy, damaging their bases, etc. as on 10/7) Hamas wins. Tails (e.g. Getting IDF to kill their own troops, the hostages, etc. and keeping images of non-combatant deaths on the worlds media screens) Israel loses. Hamas has been three steps ahead of the IDF and Israel in the information war at every turn.

IDF gets to own their unforced errors.

That doesn't mean that Hamas doesn't have culpability as well. It's a long recognized principal. In any Western European, or North American legal system, if the rescuers kill the hostages, who gets charged with the homicide? The rescuer who fired the fatal bullet, or the hostage taker? It's the latter. We have parallels in international law and laws of armed conflict as well.

Hamas is doing a very successful job of putting Israel in a position of winning the battle and losing the war. Israel winning tactically and losing strategically.

Hamas is undeterable, and has indicated in their charter, and in their subsequent conduct, they will pay any price, including their own destruction to rid the Holy Land of Jews and other infidels. That makes them uncontainable and makes backing off of them merely leaving them alone to figure out how to top 10/7 next time. They are the party in the game of automotive chicken, that have thrown the steering wheel out the window as they hurdle toward the other car. How do you fight that? Israel hasn't figured that out, other than to try and take away the enemies car. Keeping cars away from them in the future, is like putting your thumb in the dike, against a rising sea.

The U.S. has faced the same dynamic in the War on Terror. We have prevented another 9/11, or worse, only by a perpetual scan of the world for terrorist activity, and sending in drone strikes or special forces (with collateral damage in all cases) every time we detect a threat. Perpetual low-level war, WITH COLLATERAL DAMAGE, at similar ratios to the Hamas/IDF conflict, but done quietly, a few dozen at time, out of site and out of mind in remote Bumfuck of some ungoverned part of Africa or Asia.

The only places we don't do that on the planet are places that are governed in such a manner that they police their own geography for that stuff, so that those places and the U.S. aren't threatened (e.g. Western Europe, China, Russian, etc.). Lawless places like the Horn of Africa, rural and lawless parts of the Philippines, etc. we police, and inflict collateral damage in so doing, quietly, on a near daily basis.

If Gaza and the West Bank can get their shit together so they police themselves of terrorists that target Israel, and target internal opposition, then, and only then, does the IDF truly win. Israel, the U.S., and the international community, have never been able to figure out how to impose that outcome from without, on Gaza, the West Bank, or anywhere else in the world. Local people have to choose that for themselves.

Israel does even worse. They can't even figure out how not keep getting in the way of Gazans and people on the West Bank figuring that out for themselves.


"If Gaza and the West Bank can get their shit together so they police themselves of terrorists that target Israel, and target internal opposition, then, and only then, does the IDF truly win. Israel, the U.S., and the international community, have never been able to figure out how to impose that outcome from without, on Gaza, the West Bank, or anywhere else in the world. Local people have to choose that for themselves.

Israel does even worse. They can't even figure out how not keep getting in the way of Gazans and people on the West Bank figuring that out for themselves."

The shitty thing is that your first paragraph was what happened immediately after the Oslo Accords in 1995. The following peace negotiations fell apart over issues like Jerusalem but also that Israel was unwilling to give Palestine a contiguous state ( Israel was also unwilling to dismantle several settlements "with large populations," populations that had increased significantly during the Oslo negotiations process. Palestine was unwilling to compromise on the right of return. I am not by any means fully blaming Israel for the collapse of the talks--there is plenty of blame to go around.

On the issue of a contiguous state, imagine for a moment that Seattle is the West Bank and Washington is Israel. Washington says that Seattle can be independent, but Washington controls I-5 and I-90 and all bridges over and under. They can close those links at any time to turn Seattle into 4 separate islands. Imagine the difficulty of maintaining city services when you don't know if you'll be able to get across town tomorrow. That's what Israel was proposing. It's not a recipe for a viable state.

So tensions were running high. What does the leader of the Likud party do? Take a trip to the Al-Aqsa mosque with a large force of armed police. Sharon was warned that this would lead to violence, and it did, kicking off the Second Intifada. After that, Israel dramatically expanded settlements, built a defense wall that carved Palestine into ungovernable chunks, and otherwise made it nearly impossible to form a Palestinian state. Oh, and while Israel was engaged in large land grabs in the West Bank, they dismantled settlements in Gaza because they had become too dangerous to support. So the clear message to Palestinians is that threats and acts of force get results, cooperation gets nothing.



when your
Facts disrupt
Narrative then Suddenly

they don't Matter.

he'll Never
address all of those
Very Legitimate Concerns.

Permanent Ceasefire
END the War Crimes
and let Israel go in
Peace . as a Bene-
volent Caretaker
of its Open-air
Prison. oh


@26 the problem with your statement is no one at the UN has been talking about fighting evil. Their preferred state is to allow Hamas to continue inevitably leading to more Israeli deaths. Not one member of the UN is asking for the Hamas leaders to be tried or have their I’ll gained assets seized while their people suffer. In the absence of a solution you are going to get what you have now.

Fwiw a few Hamas fighters may be what you describe but there is a great many who view Jews as less then human and have no problem exerting cruelty upon them. Thr barbaric acts perpetrated on Oct 7th can only be done by someone who views their victim as a non person much like a serial killer.


@30 You might wish to take gander at the actual UN resolution before making bold claims about what's in it. It's 7 sentences (OK, technically it's all one sentence, but there's 7 clauses) long, so it shouldn't be too taxing. Even the bureaucratese isn't too bad.

Note, in particular: "Demands the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, as well as ensuring humanitarian access"

Which is pretty much the opposite of "allow Hamas to continue." But never mind letting the facts get in the way of a good story. Oh, and it's also worth reading the referenced letter from the Secretary General of the UN ( You'll note the specific and direct condemnation of Hamas' acts of terror in the opening paragraphs.


@7: Careful, the Dems control the Senate.


@32 The resolution nor the letter makes no mention of how to prevent future attacks by Hamas. The humanitarian access is focused on the Palestinians and doesn't even mention other measures to be taken to secure a lasting peace. I stand by what I said, there is zero will at the U.N. to actually do anything about Hamas and their past atrocities nor their plans for future atrocities. In that vacuum you are going to get what you have now.


@34 See here for a comprehensive list of when the UN has addressed the I/P conflict from 1947 to the present, including several that were intended to resolve the underlying issues and lead to a lasting peace. (

Oh, and the UN General Assembly specifically did respond to Hamas' actions in a resolution on 10/26:
"Condemning all acts of violence aimed at Palestinian and Israeli civilians, including all acts of terrorism and indiscriminate attacks, as well as all acts of provocation, incitement and destruction"

"Emphasizing also the need to pursue accountability, and stressing in this regard the importance of ensuring independent and transparent investigations in accordance with international standards"


Of course the humanitarian access is focused on Palestine. That's the area being reduced to rubble and the area that has limited humanitarian access. This resolution starts with a long list of UN resolutions already passed and ignored. You know, the ones intended to resolve the conflict and secure a lasting peace. No, those weren't repeated in the last resolution, but that's primarily because the people who write these expect you to do the tiniest modicum of homework.


@35 great. I'm glad the UN is on top of it. So if Israel agrees to the ceasefire what are the next steps for the UN? Which countries have volunteered to provide peacekeepers? Qatar of course has agreed to hand over Hamas leadership to be tried and have their assets stripped to used for relief aid? The wiki page you listed has resolutions going back to 1947. I don't understand what the problem is then if the UN has been this great guiding force all along? Give me a break. The UN can pass all the resolutions they want (much like our own SCC) but there is no will to actually follow through on anything. Get snarky with me when someone actually steps up and commits to taking action.


@36 Congratulations. It only took you from 30 to 36 to completely backtrack from "The UN never mentions Hamas!" to "The UN doesn't have any power to do anything so they're irrelevant!" It only took being led by the nose through the relevant resolutions. No doubt you could have googled those on your own, but it might have disturbed your carefully curated worldview.

You don't seem to limit when you get snarky with anyone who disagrees with you, so you don't really have the moral high ground here. I don't generally get snarky until people show willful ignorance.

Hint 1: The UN can't send peacekeepers without a Security Council resolution, which no doubt the US would veto on Israel's request. There's no point in starting to recruit peacekeepers when it will never pass anyway. It's /almost/ like the UN's powers were limited by its charter!

Hint 2: Sending in UN peacekeepers is rarely a solution to armed conflict since they rarely have the rules of engagement to even return fire when attacked, let alone actually defend civilians. See, for example, Bosnia.

Hint 3: UN peacekeepers are already in Lebanon on Israel's northern border. Israel fired on a clearly marked UN vehicle a few weeks ago. And dropped an artillery shell into a local peacekeepers' HQ. So that's going well.


@1- if you were going to have a sham marriage to convince people you were straight, wouldn’t you pick a fake wife that a heterosexual man could plausibly want to fuck? I mean, it’s far more believable that someone actually wanted to marry, say, Katie Holmes than that horrific beast Clarence is attached to.


@28, "After that, Israel ... built a defense wall ..."

That wall has dramatically reduced terrorist bombings originating from the West Bank. It essentially ended the Second Intifada, by allowing Israel to withdraw behind the wall, screening Palestinian workers coming through it.

@35, How many divisions is the U.N. prepared to commit to preserve domestic and international security in and around Gaza? It's all symbolism and no substance.

The de facto U.N. position is that Israel accept a cease fire so that Hamas can rearm and reorganize, until it can replicate or exceed the 10/7 attack.

It has the problems you mention, but would not have been necessary, absent the terrorism.


@35, The U.N. being all symbol and no substance cuts the other way as well.

How many bulldozers, and divisions of soldiers to protect them, is the U.N. going to commit to tearing out a wall it has declared illegal in one of its many symbolic resolutions?


@39 Conveniently for Israel, the wall has also effectively allowed Israel to effectively annex 11%-13% of the West Bank (estimates vary in the Wikipedia article). There's also some really exciting stuff like how Palestinians living in areas now behind the wall have to get special permits to continue living in their homes. But do not, under any circumstances, refer to Israel as an apartheid state. That is totally inappropriate to the situation!

See discussion of peacekeepers in 37. UN peacekeepers are never going to happen in the West Bank.

The Boston Massacre (1770) would never have been necessary absent the terrorism. And yes, that incident did start with rock throwing against armed troops who then shot a bunch of civilians, much like the second intifada. If only the Continentals had been more reasonable, a lot of terrorism against innocent civilians could have been avoided. Think of how many innocents died horrible deaths via tarring and feathering for being on the wrong side!


@41, Six of the eight soldiers in the Boston Massacre were acquitted, and none was convicted of murder. The sentences of the two were commuted.


@41, Also under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (and other states) that exist today, no charges against those soldiers, let alone convictions would be possible.

Thrown rocks are capable of causing serious physical injury, which is the threshold in law that allows for use of deadly force in self-defense. Further, the rock throwers, under the felony murder rules of most states, would be charged with the deaths from the fired bullets, not the soldiers that fired them.

What is difference 200 years makes in the law.


@43 I know, fog of war, right?

No, what I was getting at is that most violent insurgencies can either be described as understandable resistance or unprovoked terrorism depending on what side you're on. In another parallel, the French Resistance in WWII used most of the same tactics as the Second Intifada, yet they're the heroes. There wasn't direct suicide bombings, but there were plenty of attacks where the Resistance fighters didn't expect to get back alive. The IRA were the heroes to a noticeable slice of the Irish (and Irish-American) population. They certainly targeted civilians as well.


@3: Blame the GOP, raindrop dear. They're the ones overdue for a trip to the woodshed.

@31 & @42 STII: Your woeful ignorance is lightyears beyond pathetic.
Get off your glut of FOX TeeVee STAT!

@38: dvs99 for the WIN!!!


In happier news (unless he feels differently), Brad Pitt hit the big 6-0 today.


@47, That Pittiful.


@42 - Ginni Thomas is repugnant in every way before you even GET to the body shaming. Inclusivity has its limits.


"The barbaric acts perpetrated Since Oct 7th can only be done by someone who views their victim as a non person much like a serial killer."

there. fixed it
for ya.


@52 -- speaking of Serial
Killers, @30, the Only
Difference being:

Israel's got the blood of
20,000 Gazans on its hands.


@51: Hence you are saying that only Israel is committing barbaric acts but not Hamas? That's a logical takeaway from you negating the last sentence in @30.


@48: They'll be calling YOU pitiful, too, when you turn 60, Cap'n Crunch.

@49 dvs99: For the WIN!!!

@50 STII: Ooooooo-kay. Then why do I sense you're really a willfully misinformed MAGAt with everything to lose, who can't wait to shove the Orange Turd back into the White House in 2025?


@54: Because you don't really read comments but just skim them. Sir Toby is actually more anti-Trump than you are.


@54, Nope, since my name isn't Pitt, there is no way I can be Pittiful. He has exemplified Pitt since the day he was born, making Pittiful the most apt, and literal adjective to describe him.



set it Off
on Oct 7th.

BiBi's been Bombing
Civilians to smithereens
Ever Since. see* the Difference?

Good Luxk!

you may need
to squint and
Severely too

you just need
a Pair of Atrocity glasses

they come with hearing
ehancers so's you can
Hear the screams of
the 10,000 children
massacred since
10/8/23 and
Yes! you'll
also hear


said Glassses may
be too Uncomfortable
for sustained wearing by the
Kind of Heart & have been been
Known to even override Ideologies.

wear (or don't!) at
your humanity's
own Risk.


"As someone said on Bluesky, it’s as if there were an active shooter in a school, so local police call in an airstrike to level the place entirely." --Tom Tomorrow

Fault is
it Anyway?!


I hope no
Coppers read tS.


@58: Ironically, that would have worked just about as well as did the actual police response in Uvalde.



Irony even
in War (Crimes).


@51 that is really pitiful, even for you.


@63 speaking of Pitiful:

War IS Serial Killing
WRIT LARGE 'specially
when only ONE side has
modern Weapons of Mass
Destruction & is Delighted to
Use them on the Civilians* in Gaza.

*there's just Gotta be
a Terrorist or two in
there Somewhere


Where tf's
the Pity?


@37: Your fake quotes notwithstanding, D13 made several points:

The UN’s resolutions and documents you cited do not acknowledge that Hamas is a violent criminal conspiracy, one which has publicly and clearly stated it intends to continue violent criminal acts in Israel.

The UN’s resolutions and documents you cited do not acknowledge Hamas is an international criminal conspiracy, one which has looted international aid efforts to Palestine, and transferred some of that stolen wealth to leaders of the criminal conspiracy who reside in Qatar.

The UN’s resolutions and documents you cited do not demand Hamas, or any member, or any individual or government which funds Hamas, or harbors Hamas members, or otherwise aids and abets Hamas’ violations of laws, be brought to justice for their crimes and/or conspiracies to commit crimes.

Absent any UN recognition of the above points concerning Hamas, the current situation will continue.

D13 and boatgeek, my apologies for anything I did not state correctly, and I welcome any and all corrections.



how you
Struggle so
to Legitimize
Genocidal behavior:

"Thr barbaric acts perpetrated on
Oct 7th can only be done by
someone who views their
victim as a non person
much like a serial
killer." --@d13r

and the Acts
carried out by
Israel -- what gives
"legitimacy" to 20,000
Dead Palestinians since 10/7?

is all that
damage" merely
the Cost of being
taken Over by a Terorist
Organization? are Gazans NOT
Human fucking Beings as Fucking well?

do Their
even Matter?

now show us
your Gift
for obfu-


@66: Please indicate which part(s) of my descriptions of Hamas you find to be incorrect.

If you do not find anything wrong in my descriptions of Hamas, then please explain why the international community should not immediately begin taking effective actions to shut Hamas down.

If you do not find anything wrong in my descriptions of Hamas, and if the international community does not begin taking effective actions to shut Hamas down, then please explain why Israel should not defend itself and its citizens from Hamas, with force if necessary.

Go ahead, we’ll wait…


@55: The only times I skim through, raindrop dear, is when scrolling past obvious trolls such as tensorna, who is generally all fight and nothing to say.
I have to disagree, too, about STII:: for someone who allegedly hates Trump more than I do, he sounds like true conservative GOP fodder. Sound familiar?

@56 Cap'n Crunch: Before you bodyslam Brad Pitt or anyone else over 20 with ageism, consider this: one day you'll have someone younger than you calling you pitiful, too.

@62 STII: How little you know me. I HAVE met some MAGAts. They're shamefully ignorant as well is xenophobic, and many, while brainwashed by willful Trumpist misinformation, don't seem at all concerned about their personal hygiene, let alone what's really going on. Quite often they're the ones cheering on dystopian government while ironically being the ones with the most to lose. When any sign of enlightenment strikes it's too late: "Wait........................WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAT??"

@66 kristofarian: Ol' teenieweenie's just pissed that he's still flunking Remedial 7th Grade Math, despite his militant dedication to online trolling. There must be something in his tap water.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.