Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

December 6, 2009

THE TALL TALE OF FLIGHT 297.... If you have any right-wing relatives, or spend a lot of time perusing far-right blogs, you may have heard about Tedd Petruna and Flight 297.

Petruna's version of events, written in an email that's quickly made the rounds, is quite a colorful tale. As he described what transpired, Petruna boarded an AirTran flight from Atlanta to Houston, sitting in first class. He saw "11 Muslim men" get on the plane "in full attire," and noticed that two of the eleven sat in first class, while the other nine "peppered themselves throughout the plane."

As the plane taxied the runway, Petruna's email says he saw one of the 11 in the front of the plane call another man in the back, and proceeded to speak "in Arabic very loudly and very aggressively." The two, the story goes, ignored flight attendants' requests to turn off their phones. Meanwhile, another two of the 11 "began to show footage of a porno they had taped the night before." Then, all 11 "started to walk the cabin."

Petruna claims he and another man grabbed some of the Muslims, before seven law enforcement officials escorted all 11 men off the plane. The 11 then came back, the crew revolted and left the plane, a new crew came on, prompting a passenger revolt led, of course, by Petruna. He wrote the email, it explains, because "the terrorists wanted to see how TSA would handle it, how the crew would handle it, and how the passengers would handle it.... The threat is real."

As the email, written just nine days ago, garnered more attention -- it was especially popular on Glenn Beck's site for the 9.12 Project -- more news outlets began seeking Petruna for comment. The bold hero of his own story, who was only too glad to confront those he suspected of terrorism, didn't want to talk to reporters. Now we know why.

He was not on the plane, AirTran Airways says.

"After conducting additional research into this situation, we have verified, according to flight manifests [legally binding documents] that the individual that allegedly created a first-hand account of events on-board AirTran Airways Flight 297, a Theodore Petruna, was never actually on-board the flight," AirTran said in a statement, which the The Atlanta Journal-Constitution was the first to obtain.

It turns out, the incident, if you can call it that, stems from a Spanish-speaking passenger who didn't turn off his cell phone when asked to do so, because he didn't understand the instructions. Petruna's story, not surprisingly, is bogus.

The airline went to the trouble of debunking the entire ridiculous tale, point by point.

Feel free to let that right-wing uncle of yours know.

Steve Benen 10:15 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (45)

Bookmark and Share

Arabs in full regalia, huh? and a porno movie...and the flight crew abandons the plane...

this story-teller is one sick puppy...

but if he's got more of these stories: ka-ching!

Posted by: neill on December 6, 2009 at 10:20 AM | PERMALINK

Yet another example of an inflamed emotional belief running rough-shod over empirical evidence and the truth for that matter!

You go Right Wing Nutty Conspirators of "brown take-over"! Too bad Lou Dobbs wasn't on the CNN airwaves pursuing this story of Heroism, or Pat Robertson didn't get the memo in time to air on his Praise The Lord network! -Kevo

Posted by: kevo on December 6, 2009 at 10:24 AM | PERMALINK

Facts, pesky facts. What bearing do they have on the truthiness of this story? ;>

Posted by: martin on December 6, 2009 at 10:27 AM | PERMALINK

I can hear Glenn Beck now: "Muslims. On a plane. Roaming the aisle. In full regalia. This is what we've come to, ladies and gentlemen, in the Age of Obama. He bows to the Japanese and lets Muslims walk our planes unchallenged. Get your guns and let's roll."

Re: the complete bogosity of this story, it seems to me that the gale-force hot air emitted by the right wing Wurlizter actually serves a purpose for them, like the flak in old WWII movies. Flak was fake fire sent up to confuse bomber pilots who then wouldn't know where the real anti-aircraft fire was coming from and so be more vulnerable to it. The more utter crap the teabag crowd flings out there, the more energy it takes to swat it down, leaving us exhausted when the real blows come.

Posted by: dalloway on December 6, 2009 at 10:29 AM | PERMALINK

No, Steve, the story is very real.

I was recently on another flight, Flight 341 from Walla Walla to Kalamazoo. Fourteen (13) men, dressed to the nines in their Lawrence of Arabia white robes, boarded the plane, shouting "Allah Akbar!" and "Death to America!"

Immediately sensing the impending danger and threat to our American way of life (at least the remaining way of life that hasn't been destroyed by O-bow-mao), I leapt to my feet and immediately confronted the one appearing to be their leader. He brandished an enormous boxcutter, but I knocked it from his hand and hand to hand combat ensued. Things were pretty touch and go for a time, as the terrorists at one point had opened the emergency exit and were about to push me out of the plane, aloft at 30K feet. But I was finally able to overpower five of them, and tossed them all off the plane like so much bedsheets.

Then, I lead the crew on a magnificent rush of the remaining brown men. Most of the terrorists were done in at this point very graphically, but I espied one last one in the cockpit, about to drive the plane into the Sears Tower! I immediately stormed the cockpit and boxed his ears and dropped him. Then, I took the controls of the plane, and, remembering the lessons of my only flying lesson from 20 years ago, swerved the plane away from the St. Louis arch at the last second. I landed the plane to a roar of applause.

I remember I used to feel so safe whenever I flew during the Bush administration. Not now.

Posted by: garnash on December 6, 2009 at 10:39 AM | PERMALINK

-typical Liberal cover up of the truth!

(DAY, sitting in for Al on his day off. . .)

Posted by: DAY on December 6, 2009 at 10:45 AM | PERMALINK

Now, come ON! You know it COULD have happened! Therefore, it's legitimate news to repeat this story because people are talking about it, therefore it's news! Besides, we all know that O-bow-mao wishes Muslims would take over airplanes anyway, so what difference do FACTS make?

Posted by: Eeyore on December 6, 2009 at 10:59 AM | PERMALINK

garnash: Did you get to take a stewardess home as your reward? ;>

Posted by: martin on December 6, 2009 at 10:59 AM | PERMALINK

The story continues...

... as we disembarked from the aircradt who should I meet but the next preznit Sara Palin.

She was standing at the end of the jetway in a stunning low cut red number. She had a six-pack in one hand, a large sausage pizza in the other, and an autographed copy of "Going Rogue" in the other. Sarah winked at me and said "thanks on behalf of Joe Six-Packs and Hockey Moms all over this great land of ours." We then went to the executive lounge where Sarah and Michelle Bachmann hosted a teabagging party for me.

Posted by: Banana-Eating Jungle Monkey on December 6, 2009 at 11:14 AM | PERMALINK

garnash actually received 72 virgin "flight attendants" of the opposite sex.

Posted by: Dave on December 6, 2009 at 11:16 AM | PERMALINK

I much preferred Petruna's earlier work in Penthouse Forum. This one just didn't have the same plausibility.

Posted by: biggerbox on December 6, 2009 at 11:21 AM | PERMALINK

Do the wingnuts ever bother to verify their facts? Or is the fact that such a big "story" goes unreported in the press tell them that it must be true? Fear for a once-great democracy, my friends...

Posted by: George on December 6, 2009 at 11:29 AM | PERMALINK

When you say "point by point," they don't miss a thing: "Furthermore, how would anyone know what was on this alleged videotape or when it was made?"

I'd like to see Petruna explain how he knew when the porno was recorded.

Posted by: Grumpy on December 6, 2009 at 11:40 AM | PERMALINK

This is the sort of thing that happens when you
have a president who won't reproduce his birth
certificate and pals around with terrorists.

Posted by: Sweet Sarah on December 6, 2009 at 12:06 PM | PERMALINK

What passes as right-wing chatter over in the echo-o-matic chamber only needs the barest of plausibility. But, always the same story plot..... which is real Americans being asked to join in the fight against scary people out to destroy the country. Exhibit A: the presidential campaign and right wing chain emails flying everywhere about flag pins, America hating preachers, and American flags being erased off of campaign aircraft.

Posted by: oh well on December 6, 2009 at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK

I keep waiting with bated breath and crossed fingers for my winger cousin to forward this email, but it just doesn't arrive. Damn. Maybe I should just send him a link to the original and see what he does, but lt would be unsatisfying to bait him that way. Please Cousin R, please!!! Me an' Snopes gotcha terrerists right HEAH!
BTW, I read that someone on Malkin's blog (commenter?) said that TP COULDN'T confirm his tale of adventure-- because he was undercover CIA!! I went to Malkin's site and Hot Air to see if I could verify it, but after a few minutes....I just.... couldn't stand it anymore. So take it as hearsay, unless one of you brave souls is willing to check it out.

Posted by: Stan on December 6, 2009 at 12:44 PM | PERMALINK

I'm guessing the Arabs couldn't defend themselves because they were sneezing too hard after all that peppering.

Posted by: Bernard Yomtov on December 6, 2009 at 12:56 PM | PERMALINK

the ridiculous thing is that even if you take Petruna's story verbatim as truth, there's no evidence in it that the "muslims" were terrorists. They were talking loudly, watching porn, and using cellphones. All rude and against the rules, but hardly evidence of a terrorist plot.

Posted by: Tom on December 6, 2009 at 1:07 PM | PERMALINK

What I don't get is if you're going to fabricate such an elaborate story what does cellphone porn have to do with it?

As for debunking this story, I doubt Glenn Beck or anyone who believes it will care what the airline says-- they'll just say that they're lying to cover up the truth, yadda, yadda. They live in a world where only what they believe matters, truth and facts do not.

Posted by: zoe kentucky on December 6, 2009 at 1:26 PM | PERMALINK

Although I do believe AirTran's version of the story in every detail, I am curious to hear how Petruna got the details that he did, distorted or not.

My first guess is that he somehow spoke to one or more of those 12 upset, voluntarily deplaned passengers and got a hysterical rendition of what had transpired. After all, he would have booked on a later flight to Houston, as would some or all of the 12. Why he chose to cast himself as the hero in a distorted, easily debunked tale is anyone's guess.

Posted by: Rathskeller on December 6, 2009 at 1:49 PM | PERMALINK

Mr. Tardtuna is a real scream. Crapping himself over seeing some brown people. It must be difficult for him to carry on with his daily retarded life with all these brown people surrounding him. I'll bet it really puts pressure on his hydrocephalus head. In the future when people find out who he is I'll bet they yell " Hey Goober seen any terrorists lately, you ignorant shitheel".

Posted by: Impressed with Tardtuna on December 6, 2009 at 2:06 PM | PERMALINK

Nobody yelled "Allah Akbar" ?

It's not a good made-up fake RightWing story unless somebody yelled Allah Akbar.

Posted by: Joe Friday on December 6, 2009 at 3:44 PM | PERMALINK

Joe Friday, @15:44,

One of them yelled "death to the infidel", which is almost as good as "Allah Akbar", though I wonder which language he yelled it in. If English, why bother to learn that one phrase, when "Allah Akbar" would have been ever so much easier?

Zoe Kentucky, @13:26, re cellphone porn: Mr Petruna has studied Muslim customs (read his e-mail; it's a hoot) and knows (though doesn't understand why it should be so) that god jihadis, about to enter on their last trip, are allowed to look at such. A "teaser preview" of the final virginal awards awaiting at the end, I suppose.

My favourite bit (mentioned in the Atlanta Journal article) was his dismay at how fast and how far the story spread; he meant it to be read just by family and friends, he said... Probably to make himself a hero in a more credulous environment. How was he to know, that some of the recipients would be so fired up by his heroics that they'd forward it to all and sundry. Some of which "sundry", unfamiliar with Petruna's sterling qualities (probity among them), would actually be cleared eyed enough to start checking the fishy details...

Posted by: exlibra on December 6, 2009 at 5:20 PM | PERMALINK

"It turns out, the incident, if you can call it that, stems from a Spanish-speaking passenger who didn't turn off his cell phone when asked to do so..."

Yeah, but how do you know the guy wasn't Cuban, calling ahead to Havana to let them know he was hijacking the plane?
How was he dressed? Decked out with a beret and Che Guevara beard?

I want answers, dammit.

Posted by: 2Manchu on December 6, 2009 at 5:22 PM | PERMALINK

Banana-Eating Jungle Monkey--I'm still laughing over your post. I didn't know Palin had 3 hands. Wow! She is talented. NOT

Posted by: majii on December 6, 2009 at 5:57 PM | PERMALINK

So the airline is covering it all up, eh? Last time I'll fly AirTran, or AirMuslim I should say.

Posted by: Quaker in a Basement on December 6, 2009 at 6:43 PM | PERMALINK

I hope Tedd Petruna was wearing a Christmas Sweater!

Posted by: Padre Mickey on December 6, 2009 at 6:50 PM | PERMALINK

One of them yelled "death to the infidel", which is almost as good as "Allah Akbar",

Even better, madam, one of them called the "stewardess" (1957 called and wants its airline terminology back) an "infidel dog." It doesn't get any better than that.

I second exlibra: if y'all haven't yet read the full email, don't deny yourself this simple pleasure. It is beyond hilarious.

Posted by: shortstop on December 6, 2009 at 7:35 PM | PERMALINK

My apologies... Shortstop is right (as usual) and it was "infidel dog", that the testing-terrorist yelled, not "death to the infidel".

I agree, it *is* a tad peculiar that he should have called her a "dog", rather than a "bitch"; why the sudden onrush of Political Correctness? My only explanation is the language barrier (if, that is, he yelled in English, not in Spanish).

Not that the airline ("Inside Tran" article) is all that much better, IM, ex-blonde, O. Petruna, without a moment's thought or any malice, refers to her as "stewardess"; the airline's explanation uses the term "Crew Member". I'm not sure that I see any improvement here (but then I have a dirty and warped mind).

Posted by: exlibra on December 6, 2009 at 8:46 PM | PERMALINK


Posted by: pbg on December 6, 2009 at 9:32 PM | PERMALINK

Sweet Sarah, I don't know if your comment is snark or not, but if your are trying to be real, you fail big time.

The President has released his birth certificate and it has been examined by people who don't have problems with the truth.

You, obviously, do. Grow a pair and move on.

Posted by: Sammy on December 6, 2009 at 9:52 PM | PERMALINK

The only surprising part of this story is that the airline does not post at least one bilingual stewardess on a flight going to Houston.

Posted by: Nancy Irving on December 6, 2009 at 11:14 PM | PERMALINK

Nancy Irving, @23:14,

Bilingual crew is getting rarer than hens' teeth, these days, even on international flights. And we don't know for certain that the language *was* Spanish. That's what one of the passengers said, but the airline has not confirmed it. I think, had it been Spanish, more passengers would have at least recognised it, since even I can *recognise* Spanish (well.. not sure I'd be able to tell Spanish from Portuguese, since I don't speak either, but...), and I have v. little contact with it. Could have been any of the hundreds of languages that our stalwart Citizen Petruna neither speaks nor recognises; they all would sound like Arabic to him, as long as the speakers had dark eyes and hair :)

Posted by: exlibra on December 6, 2009 at 11:38 PM | PERMALINK

This is the sort of thing that happens when you
have a president who won't reproduce his birth
certificate and pals around with terrorists.

Posted by: Sweet Sarah on December 6, 2009 at 12:06 pm

Hi, Sarah?
2008 called...FAUX wants their talking-points back.

Posted by: Cognitive Dissident on December 6, 2009 at 11:56 PM | PERMALINK

I'm rightwing and never heard of this story so don't feel the need to "let anyone know"

However, you may need to inform your leftwing uncles that the census taker was not killed by rightwing talk radio show listeners, he committed suicide...

Just sayin...

Posted by: Jo on December 6, 2009 at 11:59 PM | PERMALINK

However, you may need to inform your leftwing uncles that the census taker was not killed by rightwing talk radio show listeners, he committed suicide...

The difference here, genius, is that if ture, the census worker went to great lengths to STAGE HIS DEATH TO LOOK LIKE A MURDER. He wrote "FED" on his chest, bound himself with duct tape, and hanged himself.

This was not a tall tale invented out of whole cloth like the airline muslim fairy tale. Local residents believed it was a murder, it took months of investigating to rule out homicide, and that's not to say the police still don't have it wrong.

The other difference is that this year right wing talk radio listeners shot up a Holocaust museum, killed an abortion doctor, have been found stockpiling bombs and weapons, and have been carrying around automatic weapons and signs about watering the tree of liberty.


Posted by: trex on December 7, 2009 at 12:25 AM | PERMALINK

When somebody like Petruna makes up these sorts of stories to get their moment of fame, isn't it the equivalent of shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theatre? Shouldn't he prosecuted for incitement? Race incitement? something?

Any attornies out there?


Dalloway: Talk about bogus stories. "...Fake fire sent up...?!"

Flak = FLieger Abwehr Kanonen and was plenty real enough, as many Allied pilots who died or spent time entertained in the Stalag Lufts knew only too well. You are being a little flakey or a flack to suggest otherwise. Stop talking through your nether orifice.

Posted by: notthere on December 7, 2009 at 2:09 AM | PERMALINK

What notthere said.

Posted by: Lex on December 7, 2009 at 10:03 AM | PERMALINK

I was on this flight...I SAW the homemade porno that the men were watching. They weren't in "full regalia" but were organized, orchestrated and at least "wanted" us to think thtey were hijacking the plane. There isn't ONE person on that flight, that wasn't sure the flight was being hijacked.

Posted by: Brian Hoffmann on December 7, 2009 at 3:06 PM | PERMALINK

Not only was I on the flight, I starred in the porno! Petruna saved the entire world as the muslim/hispanics planned on deploying their new weapon upon the world as they flew about the planet before crashing their plane into Oral Roberts University, we should all be thankful!

Posted by: dirk diggler on December 7, 2009 at 8:10 PM | PERMALINK

A humble suggestion:
On the AirTran page Mr B links to, there's a "Let AirTran know what u think" e-mail form. I'd guess that they're likely to be receiving all manner of vile stuff from the FReePer brigade, accusing them of treason or worse. Might help to get some counterbalancing appreciative input from some of us -- especially (tho not exclusively) if you've ever flown AirTran and can thus write as an established paying customer. I suspect some (many? all?) of their attorneys would have argued against such a strong public stance; in this environment, I think their action was unusually brave.
I think it's atrios who's fond of saying "reward good behavior"? (Or is that kos?)
Also, fwiw (which is zip, but still), I don't remember seeing the name "Sweet Sarah" a lot here before, so if she's known as a troll, I'm obviously wrong -- but I took her comment to be snark, and a slap at the wingers' likely take. Then again, I've historically got little more skill than Big Bang Theory's Sheldon at discerning sarcasm...

Posted by: smartalek on December 7, 2009 at 9:46 PM | PERMALINK

not quite the joke you're celebrating. the original story was flawed, yes, but two other passengers verified that questionable behavior did occur on the part of middle east men -- also known as adherents of the religion described here:


the issue of how to respond to islam is not left or right wing. the issue is whether people have developed a positive prejudice rather than insight.

Posted by: Dissenter on December 7, 2009 at 11:16 PM | PERMALINK

not quite the joke you're celebrating

Yes it is.

yes, but two other passengers verified that questionable behavior did occur on the part of middle east men

No they didn't.

the issue of how to respond to islam is not left or right wing.

Well, you tipped your hand there, if not with the link. Why does Islam need a "response" and not Judaism or Hinduism? Oh, because Islam has some fundamentalist members? So does the Christian religion, and the Hindu religion, and the Buddhist religion -- and they kill people too! And so does the mafia and so do corrupt political leaders who leverage the power of the state.

The issue isn't Islam, it's fundamentalism of any kind, and broadly speaking that includes mouth-breathing reactionaries who soil their pants with a variety of issuances when they read a fabricated story like this one that plays into their preconceived notions, prejudices, and fears -- and who can't even fucking let it go and come back to reality when the story has been proven to be a complete and utter hoax.

The biggest threat to our country isn't scary foreign men who we just can't understand, it's rednecks and rubes and "good people" who believe they are "true Americans" who will advocate any atrocity visited upon those they fear by the power of the state even if it means giving up the basis of what it means to be human or civilized.

In the words of Graham Greene: God save us all from the "innocent" and the "good."

Posted by: trex on December 7, 2009 at 11:52 PM | PERMALINK

"Why does Islam need a "response"?

a good question. Islam needs a response because islam is both a social order and a religion -- no scholar says it is otherwise. and when we need to move on to the next sentence, we do better to say "social order" instead of "religion" because the usage clarifies the issue.

the issue is that the social order has much that is deeply intolerant of human variation; and the social order has a place for you in it, even if you are not a believer. the social order has no moderate strain and no moderating strain.

mohammed's behavior is a model for all time, regardless of changes in history. a 9-year-old wife for him? then, 9 is an appropriate age for girls to marry.

are there real-world effects of mohammed's example? yes, khomeini changed the marriage law in iran. 9 is fine.

moderate muslims are people who are from islamic culture but don't take islam all that seriously. however, even many moderate muslims take seriously the attitudes that spring from islam. and the wealth of the saudis is now injecting the full tenets of islam into islamic cultures that have previously been less strident. the resurgence of islam is a historical event.

are there many in the west who are inclined to enforce islam with violence? if you have millions, a small percent is a large number. the more important point is that a large minority of muslims sympathize with those who want to hasten the imposition of islamic law.

you are correct: many of the people who see islam as a threat are cultural conservatives, perhaps because those people feel that significant aspects of our life ought to be conserved. for example, the relative division of public life into church and state is a Christian innovation, as in, "give unto Caesar what is Caesar's."

in contrast, Islam is a complete directive for life, far more encompassing and detailed than Christianity. the fact that people think Pat Robertson is akin to an ayatollah is a destructive phenomenon because the idea is not only false, it keeps people from seeing the significant differences.

am sorry if i've made you angry; but i ask you to learn more about the source of islamic intolerance rather than simply accepting, at face value, the koranic verse "there is no compulsion in religion." the acceptance of islam as a "religion" without seeing that it is a social order is a real problem in social thought.

for further details, of which there are many, please consider the blog entries at http://www.jihadwatch.org ; in particular, those of hugh fitzgerald.

Posted by: Dissenter on December 8, 2009 at 7:25 AM | PERMALINK

the issue is that the social order has much that is deeply intolerant of human variation; and the social order has a place for you in it, even if you are not a believer. the social order has no moderate strain and no moderating strain.

False. These claims, while example of shallow stereotypical thinking, don't begin to describe the variety of experience, culture, and belief contained with the adherent of the Islamic religion.

First of all, there is no overarching monolithic "Islam." There are a variety of sects, and subsets of cultural traditions and beliefs within sects. A Sunni in Baghdad will have virtually nothing in common with a Sunni in Afghanistan: in general the Baghdadi will be observant but secular minded and a professional and the Afghani will a Taliban, and this has everything to do with economic and cultural differences. The Afghan Sunni will be bitter enemies with the Persian Shiite in Tehran, who while conservative and observant is also cosmopolitan and believes in higher education, even for women. The Takfiri and the Sufi will be diametrically opposed to one another in understanding of theological belief, and the Sufi will be trying to enlighten the Takfir while the other accuses him of apostasy. And the variations go on and on with Moroccans and Indonesians and American Muslims being as different as Swedish Lutherans and Missouri Synod Lutherans and Evangelical Lutherans.

So the one thing we can see with complete and utter certainty is that there is no such thing as an "Islam" that needs a "response" any more than there is a coherent Christianity that needs one: there are only a very loose collection of sects organized around some basic beliefs.

There are Islamic terrorists. There are also Buddhist Terrorists (Tamil Tigers), Christian Terrorists (IRA), anarchists, gang members, drug cartels, mafias, warlords, and oppressive governments. Only a few crazy individuals belief in a worldwide caliphate and they aren't in the same ballpark as the threat of nuclear annihilation from the former Soviet Union or the future threat of a Chinese government were it to decide to make trouble.

You are a dupe. You don't understand this issue at all and try and force it to fit your preconceived notions and xenophobia. When Christians were committing genocide against Muslims in Kosovo or bombing other Christians in Northern Ireland or invading Iraq without provocation and causing the deaths and dismemberment of over a million Iraqis, no mouthbreathing whitebread morons like yourself starting selling conspiracies theories about how we need to "respond" to Christianity because if just a tiny percentage of Christians are willing to do these things then "the West" is in mortal danger.

And if your theory is that just a tiny percentage of Muslims represent an existential danger because there are so many Muslims -- then that contradicts everything else you wrote about Islam being a monolithic social order, and the reality is that 99.99% of Muslims are ordinary people and not the criminals you paint them to be. And this doesn't even begin to address the historical context of the United States knocking over democracies in Arab countries since the 1940's and replacing them with repressive governments that suited our needs because we wanted unfettered access to that oil. If you'd grown up under a hardline dictator that the U.S. put in place you might be a little pissed off yourself.

Right now the greatest threats to America are economic and ecological catastrophe, and the greatest violent threat is from within: right wing whack jobs who believe it's time for a revolution because they don't like their tax rate and believe the minorities have gotten too uppity.

Fuck you and fuck your mewling racism.

Posted by: trex on December 8, 2009 at 5:28 PM | PERMALINK



Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM

buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly