If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Exeter Express & Echo)   'These things happen from time to time': Satanists slice donkey's genitals, ear, tongue and eyes out possibly while it was still alive, Livestock Protection Officer doesn't seem that worried   (exeterexpressandecho.co.uk) divider line 130
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

3899 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jul 2013 at 10:55 AM (50 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



130 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-25 11:32:48 AM
Satanists slice donkey's genitals, ear, tongue and eyes out possibly while it was still alive

What about the ass? Did they slice the ass too?
 
2013-07-25 11:34:49 AM
It wasn't a donkey, you ass. It was a pony.
 
2013-07-25 11:36:17 AM

Luminiferous Aether: hairywoogit:  I know England has far more restrictions on freedom of speech then we do, though they are working on it.

{citationplease.xkcd)
Just recalling Cameron's latest foray into limiting sexy free speech.
Clarification - citation requested for the "are working on it" part.
Now that I think about it, I probably can't even do that he++++++++[TRANSMISSION ABORTED]


Jameel vs WSJ appears to be eroding their insanely over the top anti-defamation laws, at least according to the wikipedia links.  Gaining freedom of speech once lost is pretty damn brutal though, so I expect its gonna be a seriously uphill struggle for them.  As a side note, "they" in this case does not mean the authorities in England, it is referring to agitators and other sorts attempting to disarm the legal apparatus that interferes with free speech. Please note that in no way do I claim they have anywhere near the freedoms we do, and even ours are being twiddled with in the name of "safety".
 
2013-07-25 11:38:16 AM

Di Atribe: Not sure if serious as I am still nursing the morning coffee, but.... atheists can't be Satanists?


Some don't believe in a literal 'Satan' but rather the symbolic concept. Just like people who quote Gordon Gecko, they don't really believe he's a real person, but rather the personification of their philosophical beliefs.

Neither is my cup o' tea.
 
2013-07-25 11:39:57 AM

Facetious_Speciest: I get you, but in the Bible or not, it exists as a religious reality today. Many Christians of various sects believe in the reality of a being they refer to as "Satan" or "the Devil."


Sure, but it's still a contemporary creation with no real historical backing. The only thing it has in common with any ancient texts is the actual word satan, but the meaning and usage is different. What we now commonly know and understand to be the devil has as much biblical support as the flying spaghetti monster.
 
2013-07-25 11:40:33 AM

J. Frank Parnell: hairywoogit: Kinda like any religion?

Well, most religions are based on ancient texts at least. So someone making something up thousands of years ago holds more weight than something just made up now, for some reason.


Argumentum ad antiquitatem logic gets pretty funny, for sure.
 
2013-07-25 11:41:11 AM
img.photobucket.com
 
2013-07-25 11:42:01 AM
I would be shocked if more than 1% of "Satanists" really actually believed in him.  This is all show-off crap for each other to prove how "dark" they are.

Assholes tortured an animal to show off for each other.
 
2013-07-25 11:44:23 AM

The Irresponsible Captain: meat0918: Sounds like they have a bored psychopathic teen in the area.

I'd go with this. If there's one thing we learned from the 80's, it's that Satanic Cults just don't exist, it's just Jack Chick blowing smoke up your donkey.


Well, I happened to know the bored teen accused of cutting up cows in abandoned buildings when I was in high school.  He was.... well, saying he was odd doesn't really describe it.

How many 17 year old's have you known that developed a cuneiform language for dolphins?
 
2013-07-25 11:44:49 AM

Di Atribe: Russ1642: Di Atribe: Are Satanists really a thing? Or is it just one big troll so that people have an excuse to be assholes?

I think you meant 'have an excuse to put holes in asses'

Haha dammit now I'm mad I didn't think of that. Well-played.


Facetious_Speciest: Satanists really are a thing. Generally speaking, there are three main types: atheists, Satan-as-hero people, and "OMG TEH DARK LORD MAKES ME CUT!" folks.

Not sure if serious as I am still nursing the morning coffee, but.... atheists can't be Satanists? But if one believes the Lucifer character in the Bible maybe wasn't so bad, does that make one a Satanist?

Hey, I'm just asking questions.


If I remember right, the Temple of Set is essentially atheist, in that they regard themselves as the enemy of ignorance and emplaced religion.  They believe in formulating self awareness, and superficially worship self-awareness.  They don't worship any external deity at all.
 
2013-07-25 11:45:30 AM

hairywoogit: Luminiferous Aether: hairywoogit:  I know England has far more restrictions on freedom of speech then we do, though they are working on it.

{citationplease.xkcd)
Just recalling Cameron's latest foray into limiting sexy free speech.
Clarification - citation requested for the "are working on it" part.
Now that I think about it, I probably can't even do that he++++++++[TRANSMISSION ABORTED]

Jameel vs WSJ appears to be eroding their insanely over the top anti-defamation laws, at least according to the wikipedia links.  Gaining freedom of speech once lost is pretty damn brutal though, so I expect its gonna be a seriously uphill struggle for them.  As a side note, "they" in this case does not mean the authorities in England, it is referring to agitators and other sorts attempting to disarm the legal apparatus that interferes with free speech. Please note that in no way do I claim they have anywhere near the freedoms we do, and even ours are being twiddled with in the name of "safety".


The devil in me tells you to fark off with your succinct and informative reply on the topic and question, while the angel on my shoulder just keeps saying "have faith! have faith!".

As usual, I'm siding with the devil, but now he replaces "fark off with your" for "thank you for your". Because not all devils are evil. They're a tricky lot.
 
2013-07-25 11:45:36 AM

skozlaw: mike_d85: /Nothing pisses off satanists faster than to remind them of this

Was that information provided as a warning or a tip?


Depends on the satanist. I hate my parents - tip. I love PCP - warning.
 
2013-07-25 11:52:30 AM

Facetious_Speciest: ...local horse carers believe the butchery was part of an evil occult or Pagan ceremony by Devil worshippers.

The Devil is a Christian deity. Not pagan.


Devils (devi) are of Hindu origin, actually.

And Satan is of Babylonian (Shaitain, which simply means adversary) and/or proto-Judaic (Satanel, which means adversary of El) origin.  Samael (poisoner of El) is arguably the main antagonist in Judaic literature, however, with Satanel serving under him.  Shemyaza is another big antagonist in the same vain.

The closest original thing that the modern day Christian has in their mythos would be the Lucifer concept.  They tend to use all of these other terms for him, however, because in their eyes anything not "of God" (whatever the hell that means) and the modern Christian faith is clearly pure, concentrated evil.  And they do love taking a dig at other religions wherever they can.

All of this isn't to say that there aren't clearly powerful and sinister forces at work in our lives, but you really don't have to look any farther for most of them than the D.C. Beltway.

/Demonology....it's a hobby
 
2013-07-25 11:52:41 AM
J. Frank Parnell

What we now commonly know and understand to be the devil has as much biblical support as the flying spaghetti monster.

Now you're just being blasphemous.

Exodus 12:8-9: "And they shall eat the flesh in that night, roast with fire, and unleavened bread; and with bitter herbs they shall eat it. Eat not of it raw, nor sodden at all with water, but roast with fire; his head with his legs, and with the purtenance thereof."

Meatballs (mixed parts of the animals) and pasta (unleavened bread, he even says not to make it soggy...al dente, if you please).

Psalm 78:23-28: "Though he had commanded the clouds from above, and opened the doors of heaven, And had rained down manna upon them to eat, and had given them of the corn of heaven. Man did eat angels' food: he sent them meat to the full. He caused an east wind to blow in the heaven: and by his power he brought in the south wind. He rained flesh also upon them as dust, and feathered fowls like as the sand of the sea. And he let it fall in the midst of their camp, round about their habitations."

Meatballs and pasta raining from heaven. Proof that the FSM is the true god of Israel; in their ignorance and sin, they anthropomorphised him, and named him YHWH, and thus were driven from their promised land and subjected to the arrows of those who make better meatballs.
 
2013-07-25 11:52:49 AM

Facetious_Speciest: ...local horse carers believe the butchery was part of an evil occult or Pagan ceremony by Devil worshippers.

The Devil is a Christian deity. Not pagan.


This.
 
2013-07-25 11:53:38 AM

question_dj: These guys are Satanists, eh?  Where in LeVay's work is this particular ritual?


According to the 11 Satanic Rules of the Earth by Anton LeVay:

10. Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.

http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/Eleven.html
 
2013-07-25 11:54:46 AM

Facetious_Speciest: Meatballs and pasta raining from heaven. Proof that the FSM is the true god of Israel; in their ignorance and sin, they anthropomorphised him, and named him YHWH, and thus were driven from their promised land and subjected to the arrows of those who make better meatballs.


I have a lot to think about now.
 
2013-07-25 11:55:48 AM
Yet another mountain lion story?
 
2013-07-25 11:56:03 AM

J. Frank Parnell: Like i was saying, the entirety of the satan/devil mythos was created out of thin air.


Quite probably, but as I stated in my above post a second ago, not by the Christians.  They just stole said mythos and twisted it to suit their own needs.

Seems to be a recurring theme with the faith, actually.
 
2013-07-25 11:56:28 AM
radarlove

Devils (devi) are of Hindu origin, actually.

False etymology. The Sanskrit "deva" is a development of proto-Indo-European "deiwos," from which you (eventually) get such modern words as "deity." "Devil" comes from a Latin borrowing of the Greek for "slanderer."
 
2013-07-25 11:57:01 AM
I am skeptical.

One, this type of animal mutilation is often attributed to Satanists, aliens, conspiracies, etc. But the attribution can not be proven in any way as nobody ever finds the alleged perps or unambiguous evidence that the perps exist.

Two, it is unlikely that there is any proof the animal was alive at the time of the organ losses. A live animal would resist the removal of these parts with vigour and violence. Where is the evidence of struggle wounds on the animal or of injured perps?

Three, this type of animal mutilation occurs naturally through out the animal world. Birds and small mammals, insects and other scavangers and predators typically eat the easy-to-get parts of the dead animal.

What parts of an animal can a small predator or scavenger eat easily?

The eyes. A delicacy.
The genitals. Rich in iron.
The tongue. Delicious.
The ears. Easy to gnaw with tiny teeth.
Horns. Rich in keratin.
Hair. Rich in keratin.
Bones. Once exposed, rich in calcium, etc. Good for sharpening and wearing down growing rodent teeth.

It may be objected that the cuts are too precise, surgical in nature, and thus could only be done by humans or sentient beings. This is not a solid objection because small sharp teeth and beaks can both produce remarkly neat results.

Rats and mice go into a carcass through the mouth or the anus and consume internal organs. Birds go for eyes and anything they can clip off. Ants love to eat hair and other bits rich in keratin. Horns will be gnawed by mice and other small animals which need to sharpen their teeth and which can digest and use keratin.

The easiest way into a carcass after the obvious entry points is through the belly. A butcher or a predator would slice open the carcass there.

Predators and scavengers eat hair, bones, hides and other parts for valuable nutrition that is not found in meat. In fact, if you head a protein-heavy diet, you need to eat a lot of fat and organ meats (humbles, as the British called them in former times) to balance out your nutrition.

There are several pieces of evidence not covered by these facts--the white paint on the leg and the signs of burns on the grass.

The white paint could either be a coincidence--the pony brushed up against a fence being painted recently, or a sign the pony was marked intentionally. Perhaps somebody did kill it intentionally, but that does not mean they took trophies.

As for the signs of "torches", it is unlikely that people would use torches over flashlights which are easier to carry, conceal, put on if disturbed, and so forth. This is the one piece of evidence that points unequivocally to cultish behaviour, but it is possible the pony was hit by lightning, which might have ignited the grass in the vicinity.

The allegations are not proven. The evidence does not necessarily support the proposed explanation.

Four:  how do you distinguish between the various kinds of "supernatural" explanation? Aliens, demons, devil-worshippers, conspiracies--they all operate in the same strange ways and animal mutiliations are blamed on them all. They are, in a word, fungible. You can not tell them apart or if you can, you can not always find the evidence to distinguish them meaningfully and reliably, because, one, none of them exist and two, it seems they operate in strange ways that are indistinguishable from more normal, natural explanations.

Somebody apparently slit the poor pony's belly with Occam's Razor.

I consider myself a Fortean but try to be scientific as well as skeptical, and I feel no need to make or maintain mysteries. There will always be a plentiful supply of mysteries and doubtful cases.

We are never going to run out of ignorance. It is our greatest natural resource.
 
2013-07-25 11:57:19 AM

hairywoogit: Di Atribe: Russ1642: Di Atribe: Are Satanists really a thing? Or is it just one big troll so that people have an excuse to be assholes?

I think you meant 'have an excuse to put holes in asses'

Haha dammit now I'm mad I didn't think of that. Well-played.


Facetious_Speciest: Satanists really are a thing. Generally speaking, there are three main types: atheists, Satan-as-hero people, and "OMG TEH DARK LORD MAKES ME CUT!" folks.

Not sure if serious as I am still nursing the morning coffee, but.... atheists can't be Satanists? But if one believes the Lucifer character in the Bible maybe wasn't so bad, does that make one a Satanist?

Hey, I'm just asking questions.

If I remember right, the Temple of Set is essentially atheist, in that they regard themselves as the enemy of ignorance and emplaced religion.  They believe in formulating self awareness, and superficially worship self-awareness.  They don't worship any external deity at all.


I think you may have it backwards. Temple of Set believed in an actual diety. Anton LaVey's Church of Satan was atheist.
 
2013-07-25 11:58:11 AM
Sounds more like Old Testament rednecks to me. The ball-cutting is a sacrifice to THE LORD to take note of all those gaybo folk around and to do something about it.
 
2013-07-25 11:59:29 AM
Don't care what "religion" you practice, the people that do this kind of shiat need to have there nuts cut off, deep fried, and fed to them.
 
2013-07-25 12:00:23 PM

radarlove: Facetious_Speciest: ...local horse carers believe the butchery was part of an evil occult or Pagan ceremony by Devil worshippers.

The Devil is a Christian deity. Not pagan.

Devils (devi) are of Hindu origin, actually.

And Satan is of Babylonian (Shaitain, which simply means adversary) and/or proto-Judaic (Satanel, which means adversary of El) origin.  Samael (poisoner of El) is arguably the main antagonist in Judaic literature, however, with Satanel serving under him.  Shemyaza is another big antagonist in the same vain.

The closest original thing that the modern day Christian has in their mythos would be the Lucifer concept.  They tend to use all of these other terms for him, however, because in their eyes anything not "of God" (whatever the hell that means) and the modern Christian faith is clearly pure, concentrated evil.  And they do love taking a dig at other religions wherever they can.

All of this isn't to say that there aren't clearly powerful and sinister forces at work in our lives, but you really don't have to look any farther for most of them than the D.C. Beltway.

/Demonology....it's a hobby


Not sure where you got some of your info from, because it is Ha Satan, which is "The Accuser" - and he is no demon at all.  In Judaism there can be no such thing as a "fallen angel" - angels don't have free will, and therefore cannot rebel.  He's like G-d's prosecuting attorney, with no rules against entrapment hindering his ability.
 
2013-07-25 12:02:50 PM

Lady Indica: Di Atribe: Not sure if serious as I am still nursing the morning coffee, but.... atheists can't be Satanists?

Some don't believe in a literal 'Satan' but rather the symbolic concept. Just like people who quote Gordon Gecko, they don't really believe he's a real person, but rather the personification of their philosophical beliefs.

Neither is my cup o' tea.


Ditto.

Ended up reading LaVey's Satanic Bible when I lived in Boulder back in the day and had some friends in the Church of Satan.  I found it pretty abhorrent- not because of any demon or saucy ritual, but rather because the crux of the religion seems to be about self-service, which I think I've shown by this point is very much not my bag.

Interestingly, Gordon Gecko preached much the same.

Hard-right Republicans love Satanism, they just don't realize it yet.
 
2013-07-25 12:03:13 PM

radarlove: Quite probably, but as I stated in my above post a second ago, not by the Christians. They just stole said mythos and twisted it to suit their own needs.


There are some people who believe the church invented it themselves, as an enforcer of the church. You better give money to the church and be obedient, or satan is going to get you and you'll burn in hell for eternity. Hell is another thing suspiciously missing from the bible.

I think it was probably a bit of both. Humans do tend to create supernatural villains on their own. The church just took advantage.
 
2013-07-25 12:06:38 PM

hairywoogit: Its worth noting that its perfectly legal in the US for practitioners of Yoruba, Santeria, and Voudoun to sacrifice animals to the Loa.  Of course, in all fairness, the number of animals we sacrifice to our own lardasses every single day, many of which die really horrific and painful deaths, so far outnumbers any sacrifices made by non-Christian groups that they make them simply insignificant.  I will admit though, that I am pretty damn fuzzy about freedom of religious expression across the pond.  I know England has far more restrictions on freedom of speech then we do, though they are working on it.


Conflating agriculture and religion.
I don't even know if this is an attempted carnivore troll or "all religions are death" troll. I do see you are right about being pretty damn fuzzy though. Eat a burger so you can get your energy up my friend. Vitamin M for clarity.
 
2013-07-25 12:11:42 PM

big pig peaches: I think you may have it backwards. Temple of Set believed in an actual diety. Anton LaVey's Church of Satan was atheist.


Was going to say the same.  LaVeyan Satanists are pretty much benign, even if they can be assholes.

The Setites are the ones you actually have to watch out for.  Some of their beliefs are (or were...ToS ain't around like it used to be) the ones you've gotta watch out for.  Many of their beliefs are very...dark.

The third group would of course be the Luciferians, but I've never met any and so don't know much about their beliefs other than through second hand information.
 
2013-07-25 12:11:43 PM
What parts of an animal can a small predator or scavenger eat easily?

The eyes. A delicacy.
The genitals. Rich in iron.



and, in some species, herpes.
 
2013-07-25 12:12:35 PM

Fano: What about the Virgin Connie Swale?


It's just "Connie Swale" now.
 
2013-07-25 12:14:32 PM

big pig peaches: hairywoogit: Di Atribe: Russ1642: Di Atribe: Are Satanists really a thing? Or is it just one big troll so that people have an excuse to be assholes?

I think you may have it backwards. Temple of Set believed in an actual diety. Anton LaVey's Church of Satan was atheist.


https://xeper.org/pub/pub_gil.html

Had to go look it up to be sure.  Heh.   If the blurb is right, Set is used  more as a symbol then as an actual guiding entity.

"The oldest known form of the Prince of Darkness, the archetype of isolate self-consciousness, is the Egyptian god Set "

As for the CoS, I am even more out of touch on their current teachings, haven't bothered reading it since High School.
 
2013-07-25 12:14:36 PM

Facetious_Speciest: J. Frank Parnell

What we now commonly know and understand to be the devil has as much biblical support as the flying spaghetti monster.

Now you're just being blasphemous.

Exodus 12:8-9: "And they shall eat the flesh in that night, roast with fire, and unleavened bread; and with bitter herbs they shall eat it. Eat not of it raw, nor sodden at all with water, but roast with fire; his head with his legs, and with the purtenance thereof."

Meatballs (mixed parts of the animals) and pasta (unleavened bread, he even says not to make it soggy...al dente, if you please).

Psalm 78:23-28: "Though he had commanded the clouds from above, and opened the doors of heaven, And had rained down manna upon them to eat, and had given them of the corn of heaven. Man did eat angels' food: he sent them meat to the full. He caused an east wind to blow in the heaven: and by his power he brought in the south wind. He rained flesh also upon them as dust, and feathered fowls like as the sand of the sea. And he let it fall in the midst of their camp, round about their habitations."

Meatballs and pasta raining from heaven. Proof that the FSM is the true god of Israel; in their ignorance and sin, they anthropomorphised him, and named him YHWH, and thus were driven from their promised land and subjected to the arrows of those who make better meatballs.


Ramen brother
 
2013-07-25 12:16:14 PM
Disapproves...

images3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-07-25 12:16:27 PM

Facetious_Speciest: Di Atribe

Not sure if serious as I am still nursing the morning coffee, but.... atheists can't be Satanists?

There are a lot of atheistic Satanists. They see Satan as a symbol of humanity's true or best nature rather than a literal deity.


OK. I understand more than I did, but I'm not quite there. It just seems to me that "Satanists" are more contrarian to the Christian belief system, while atheists want nothing to do with the whole thing.
 
2013-07-25 12:17:11 PM
Dead donkeys,
Dead donkeys,
Dead donkeys aren't much fun
 
2013-07-25 12:17:15 PM
Assholes.  Who does that to a poor animal?  They should be tortured.
 
2013-07-25 12:18:10 PM

studs up: hairywoogit:
Conflating agriculture and religion.
I don't even know if this is an attempted carnivore troll or "all religions are death" troll. I do see you are right about being pretty damn fuzzy though. Eat a burger so you can get your energy up my friend. Vitamin M for clarity.


No attempt at trolling.  I simply see no real moral difference, and I am fine with eating meat, I occasionally do it myself.  The end result is the animal dies in order to serve humans in some way, and I am pretty sure that the difference in service is pretty irrelevant to the animal.  If you wish to pretty it up by calling it a different name, go right ahead.  Death is death.
 
2013-07-25 12:19:44 PM

roadmarks: Not sure where you got some of your info from


Mostly from the older Hechaloth and Babylonian writings and occasionally some other assorted proto-Judaic literature.  You're correct that that is the modern (if 4000ish years can be considered modern) Judaic view of the entity, but I'm speaking of its origins, when it was first taken from the Babylonian mythos.
 
2013-07-25 12:22:29 PM
Di Atribe

OK. I understand more than I did, but I'm not quite there. It just seems to me that "Satanists" are more contrarian to the Christian belief system, while atheists want nothing to do with the whole thing.

All Satanists are, by definition, contrary to Christian beliefs in some way. Atheistic Satanists don't believe in the existence of gods (thus, atheists), but see Satan as a representative symbol of what they see as proper modes of behavior or philosophy.
 
2013-07-25 12:25:03 PM
That's why you don't duel to the pain.  Though the ears were supposed to remain intact, I think...
 
2013-07-25 12:26:32 PM

radarlove: Was going to say the same. LaVeyan Satanists are pretty much benign, even if they can be assholes.

The third group would of course be the Luciferians, but I've never met any and so don't know much about their beliefs other than through second hand information.


Yeah, LaVeyan satanists basically take it to mean self worship, so naturally are insufferably arrogant.

And all you really need to know about Luciferianism is that it is not the same or even remotely similar to satanism or devil worship. There's been a bit of a smear job going on regarding it. It shouldn't even come up in these discussions.
 
2013-07-25 12:27:12 PM
Could it be...

threatormenace.com
 
2013-07-25 12:29:12 PM

J. Frank Parnell: And all you really need to know about Luciferianism is that it is not the same or even remotely similar to satanism or devil worship. There's been a bit of a smear job going on regarding it. It shouldn't even come up in these discussions.


So is it just like Masonic or something?  I've read several different conflicting accounts.  This stuff is relevant to my interests.
 
2013-07-25 12:30:16 PM

hairywoogit: studs up: hairywoogit:
Conflating agriculture and religion.
I don't even know if this is an attempted carnivore troll or "all religions are death" troll. I do see you are right about being pretty damn fuzzy though. Eat a burger so you can get your energy up my friend. Vitamin M for clarity.

No attempt at trolling.  I simply see no real moral difference, and I am fine with eating meat, I occasionally do it myself.  The end result is the animal dies in order to serve humans in some way, and I am pretty sure that the difference in service is pretty irrelevant to the animal.  If you wish to pretty it up by calling it a different name, go right ahead.  Death is death.


Ah, I see. They are both the same because in the end, someone has steak for dinner. We should then be sure to include the Military Industrial Complex, the Illuminati, the habadashers of Alcoa and this farkin guy...
i-love-cartoons.us
 
2013-07-25 12:32:24 PM
radarlove

So is it just like Masonic or something?

Luciferians hold the believe that Lucifer is a promethean figure (either literal or symbolic) that guides humanity into independence and knowledge, free of dogmas or superstitions.

In my experience. Not a Luciferian.
 
2013-07-25 12:32:53 PM
ecx.images-amazon.com
 
2013-07-25 12:33:14 PM

question_dj: These guys are Satanists, eh?  Where in LeVay's work is this particular ritual?


Where does it say that LaVey has sole ownership of the "Satan" brand?
 
2013-07-25 12:34:09 PM

brantgoose: The genitals. Rich in iron.


More testicles means more iron.

/there's very little meat in these gym mats
 
2013-07-25 12:34:44 PM
Clearly the work of Rawhead Rex.
 
Displayed 50 of 130 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report