• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

O'Reilly vs. Canada, Round 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

explodet

Member
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/01/29/oreilly050129.html

Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly has lashed out at a CBC documentary featuring guests who were highly critical of his show.

"Vicious attack on Fox News by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, totally out of any kind of bounds," said O'Reilly in his response Friday night to the Fifth Estate broadcast on Jan. 26. "How low will they go? We'll show you the tape and you won't believe it!" was another response found on the Fox News website.

The Fifth Estate's website says the documentary examines the "war of words that's pitting conservative against liberal." "It's loud, it's raucous, but does it have anything to do with the truth?" the site asks about the new kind of hard-hitting political debate on U.S. television. Journalists, media watchers and other talk show hosts in the documentary took aim at the O'Reilly Factor and show's relationship with the truth.

In turn, the host had two guests on his show who agreed with him about the CBC.

"The Canadian government gives them a billion dollars to put this sort of stuff on the air, and the Canadian government is really at fault here, isn't it?" O'Reilly said to one guest. "You scare the hell out of them, Bill," the guest answered.

CBC refused an invitation to appear on O'Reilly's show Friday night, and O'Reilly refused to be interviewed for the Fifth Estate broadcast.

In the past, O'Reilly has called the CBC radically to the left, the Globe and Mail a "far-left newspaper," and Canadian health care "socialist."

He and his conservative colleagues say they're doing journalism that is fair and balanced.

The Fox News Channel is the highest-rated news network in the United States. It is now widely available in Canada through cable and satellite services.
Click to expand...

A commentary from the Toronto Star reads as such:

The U.S. is at war, the Iraqis were voting, social security reform is a huge issue and this guy devotes precious TV time to denouncing Canada, Canadians and CBC, repeating the same tired and untrue lines about how Fox had been "banned" here.

Ever since Fox landed on the cable dial here late last year — Roger's free digital preview ends in mid-March — I have been mesmerized by how often O'Reilly accuses guests of not supporting the troops or being anti-American, making up factoids to suit his view of the world. For example, he once cited the "Paris Business Review," an economic journal that doesn't exist, to bolster his case that the right wing-led boycott of French goods over its anti-Iraq war stance had cost France billions — even though the value of American imports from there increased in 2002-2003.

Among the untruths allowed to stand on Fox on Friday night:

- Fox is seen "in about seven million or eight million homes" in Canada, said O'Reilly.

Not true. Not even close. There are 7.2 million homes total in Canada with basic cable. Rogers boasts about 675,000 digital households. Many cable and satellite services don't even carry Fox.

- The CBC "has enjoyed something like a monopoly on news coverage and commentary up until now, and true diversity is now arriving in broadcasting."

This from Carl Hodge, billed as a professor of "political sciene" (sic) at B.C.'s Okanagan University College. Hasn't he noticed that CTV, Global and Chum have all been doing TV news for some time now?
Click to expand...
 
G

Groder Mullet

Member
I don't think anyone would claim O'Reilly isn't biased on these issues. The guy makes a living on having strong opinions. If you ever watch his show though, he does always have both sides of the topic covered.
 
I

Incognito

Troll
i saw this piece the other night, and it was utterly ridiculous. he LOVES to attack people on the basis of "NOT SUPPORTING THE TROOPS," as his attacks on barbara boxer prove. even if he MISQUOTES freely:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200502010001

Despite multiple attempts to correct him, FOX News host Bill O'Reilly has continued to misquote a statement Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) made in questioning Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during Rice's recent confirmation hearings. O'Reilly claims that Boxer questioned Rice's "respect for the troops"; in fact, Boxer questioned Rice's "respect for the truth" (emphasis added) after citing specific statements by Rice that Boxer claimed were untrue or inconsistent.

But Boxer never mentioned Rice's "respect for the troops." Rather, Boxer told Rice that "I personally believe ... that your loyalty to the mission you were given, to sell this war, overwhelmed your respect for the truth," as the clip of Boxer's remark and the transcript of those remarks demonstrate (and as the Associated Press, The Washington Post, Reuters, and The New York Times all reported, among others).

Yet, as Media Matters for America noted, O'Reilly declared on the January 19 edition of FOX News' The O'Reilly Factor that "Boxer ... went over the line by saying to Dr. Rice, 'Hey, you know, you put the troops in the background [emphasis added] for your ideological loyalty to [President] Bush.' That's what she said." And on his radio show earlier that day, O'Reilly opined that "to say that Condoleezza Rice doesn't have respect for the troops -- 'overwhelmed the respect for the troops' -- cheap shot all day long."

Since then, two different callers to O'Reilly's radio show have tried to correct his misquotation, but O'Reilly has dismissed both. The first attempted correction came on the January 20 broadcast of Westwood One's The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly:

O'REILLY: I don't have any problem with Boxer grilling Rice. But when she says to Rice, "You allowed your loyalty to the President to override your concern for the troops" -- that's over the line. Don't you see that?

CALLER: Did she say "for the troops" or "for the truth"?

O'REILLY: No, "for the troops."

CALLER: Okay --

O'REILLY: That's when she went over the line. When she started to make it, "Hey, you're a craven politician who will do anything for power, and you don't care about the guys dying in the sand" -- which is what she was saying --

CALLER: Okay. I thought she said "for the truth," because I do believe --

O'REILLY: No, she was talking "the troops" -- and then you saw Rice get her back up by saying, "Don't you impugn my concern for those troops over there. I was involved with sending them there, and I'm" -- and dah, dah, dah, dah --

On the January 26 Radio Factor, O'Reilly lectured a caller who tried to correct him for her supposed ignorance, asking "how can we possibly take your analysis seriously" given that "anybody following that hearing knows she did it" and the remark was "played on every news show":

CALLER: Yes, Mr. O'Reilly. I just wonder, why we are speaking against Barbara Boxer? I thought she was there doing her job. She was to question Condoleezza Rice on her past performance and her present performance. What she was going to do in the future --

O'REILLY: Well, you're puttin' a happy face on it, though. Lemme ask you a question. Boxer goes in and says, "Your devotion to Bush and your obsequiousness to the administration was more important to you than the welfare of our troops." I mean, that's grossly insulting, is it not?

CALLER: I don't think she did mention our troops.

O'REILLY: Yeah, she did --

CALLER: And you were just talking --

O'REILLY: [Caller], [caller] -- whoa. Yeah, she did. That's exactly what she said. And then Rice came back and said, "Don't you impugn my integrity. I have tremendous feeling for the sacrifices the troops have made."

So, [caller], you gotta understand if you're gonna come on The Factor, and you're gonna say, "Barbara Boxer asked all the right questions and did all the right things." And then I say to you, "What about this?" And you say, "I don't think she did it," when anybody following that hearing knows she did it -- Lis Wiehl?

LIS WIEHL (co-host): Mmm-hmm.

O'REILLY: OK. [Caller], how can we possibly take your analysis seriously? And I'm not saying this to attack you. I want you to call in again. I want you to be a listener. But, I'm trying to send a message out to everybody. If you're gonna call the program -- this isn't the usual talk show where you can just blather about stuff you don't know anything about -- I'm gonna ask you questions. I'm gonna ask you to back up your position with facts. Now, [caller] didn't know about that exchange, which was the most contentious exchange, and played on every news show.
Click to expand...

he's just fucking out there in la-la land drinking the same kool-aid he claims everyone else is drinking. last night was really special, though. it was "Monday's LETS BLAME EVERYTHING ON LIBERAL MEDIA" day.

:lol
 
A

android

Theoretical Magician
From that Fifth Estate report:

Ann Coulter:(parapharsing)( in that annoying voice)
"When did Canada become such wimps?"(or something to that effect)"I mean you guys sent troops to Vietnam."
Reporter: "Actually Canada never sent troops into Vietnam"
Coulter "Yes you did.
Reporter: "Nope"
Coulter: "No your wrong. Sure you did. Maybe when it was called French Indochina"
Reporter : "No. We sent troops to World War 2 of course, and Korea. But never Vietnam."
Coulter : "Well I don't think so. I'll have to get back to you on that."
(Of course she didn't)
 
S

Socreges

Banned
It was either the Fifth Estate piece or another that highlighted how media conservatives (particularly FOX News) have been attacking Canada more and more frequently. And often you just have to run the clips to prove the point.

I'm not too sure that people such as O'Reilly actually believe in what they're saying. It may just be that there are people behind the scenes encouraging this kind of dialogue because surely the types of people that would watch this drek absolutely love when Canada is taken a down a notch, invariably placing God-blessed America above.
 
E

explodet

Member
The House of Commons just tabled a same-sex marriage bill. So the noise from American conservatives isn't going to die down anytime soon. :p
 
S

Socreges

Banned
explodet said:
The House of Commons just tabled a same-sex marriage bill. So the noise from American conservatives isn't going to die down anytime soon. :p
Click to expand...
Nope. And the Globe and Mail did a preliminary poll which asked each person how they would vote. Quebec will probably be the difference, in having Canada support gay marriage.
 
S

Saturnman

Banned
Socreges said:
Huh? Maybe you don't know what I'm talking about. Do you get the Globe & Mail? Go read it.
Click to expand...

I'm not laughing at you, I'm laughing at the situation. Legalization of gay marriage will contribute to Western alienation. :)
 
D

DopeyFish

Not bitter, just unsweetened
This dude should watch Royal canadian air farce. If that's a representation for CBCs views... I dunno what is.
 
A

android

Theoretical Magician
I'm not laughing at you, I'm laughing at the situation. Legalization of gay marriage will contribute to Western alienation
Click to expand...
Western Alienation or Bush agenda alienation? The rest of the West outside of the U.S. under the Bush administration will probably have gay mariages within the next twenty years. Even America is possible. Hell you guys already have had gay marriages. I mean it doesn't affect my life, so I really couldn't care.
 
A

AssMan

Banned
I'm not for either side, but O Reilly can't and never will admit that he's wrong. CBC attacking FNC. What else is new? Liberals can't stand it when they're "out-foxed" by channel such as FNC, so they start crying like little babies. Well guess what CBC?


213_blackbush_a1.jpg


"Ya'll can shut-the-fuck-up!"
 
V

videogamer

Banned
AssMan said:
I'm not for either side, but O Reilly can't and never will admit that he's wrong. CBC attacking FNC. What else is new? Liberals can't stand it when they're "out-foxed" by channel such as FNC, so they start crying like little babies. Well guess what CBC?


213_blackbush_a1.jpg


"Ya'll can shut-the-fuck-up!"
Click to expand...

If you weren't aware, the left has been trying to improve its message abilities for a while. Check out mediamatters.org or Air America. They are slowly building up the infrastructure that the right already has. Give it time and support and it may be able to compete.
 
D

Do The Mario

Unconfirmed Member
Can someone please ensure me that people in America don’t take this ignorant bastard for real?

I can’t stand his one eyed views and the way he rudely cuts off everyone who doesn’t agree with him.
 
O

OpinionatedCyborg

Member
Do The Mario said:
Can someone please ensure me that people in America don’t take this ignorant bastard for real?

I can’t stand his one eyed views and the way he rudely cuts off everyone who doesn’t agree with him.
Click to expand...

I love Bill O'Reilly. He inspires untalented hacks such as myself by providing us with the knowledge that intelligence, grace, and substance aren't needed to get ahead in life. When I grow up, I don't want to be a marine biologist, a cure for cancerist, or a boob inspectionist--I want to be a partisan jackass who bullies his guests into submission through intimidation and cheap tricks. Thanks, Bill O'Reilly, for showing me all that I can be.

O'REILLY: Shut up! -- Shut up!
GLICK: Oh, please don't tell me to shut up.
O'REILLY: As respect -- as respect -- in respect for your father, who was a Port Authority worker, a fine American, who got killed unnecessarily by barbarians --
GLICK: By radical extremists who were trained by this government...
O'REILLY: Fine. Out of respect for him...
GLICK: ... not the people of America.
O'REILLY: ... I'm not going to...
GLICK: ... The people of the ruling class, the small minority

O'REILLY: Cut his mic.

I'm not going to dress you down anymore, out of respect for your father.
We will be back in a moment with more of The Factor.
GLICK: That means we're done?
O'REILLY: We're done.

I <3 the rotten library: http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/entertainers/pundits/bill-oreilly/
 
D

Do The Mario

Unconfirmed Member
OpinionatedCyborg said:
I love Bill O'Reilly. He inspires untalented hacks such as myself by providing us with the knowledge that intelligence, grace, and substance aren't needed to get ahead in life. When I grow up, I don't want to be a marine biologist, a cure for cancerist, or a boob inspectionist--I want to be a partisan jackass who bullies his guests into submission through intimidation and cheap tricks. Thanks, Bill O'Reilly, for showing me all that I can be.

O'REILLY: Shut up! -- Shut up!
GLICK: Oh, please don't tell me to shut up.
O'REILLY: As respect -- as respect -- in respect for your father, who was a Port Authority worker, a fine American, who got killed unnecessarily by barbarians --
GLICK: By radical extremists who were trained by this government...
O'REILLY: Fine. Out of respect for him...
GLICK: ... not the people of America.
O'REILLY: ... I'm not going to...
GLICK: ... The people of the ruling class, the small minority

O'REILLY: Cut his mic.

I'm not going to dress you down anymore, out of respect for your father.
We will be back in a moment with more of The Factor.
GLICK: That means we're done?
O'REILLY: We're done.

I <3 the rotten library: http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/entertainers/pundits/bill-oreilly/
Click to expand...


I think Glick came out very well in that interview; he kept his cool and didn’t explode and got his message across didn’t take the bait O’reily was dangling.

Also is there a consumer commission in America?

Because in Australia the ACC might make a network like fox remove there “fair and balanced” slogan if it was deemed false advertising. I mean we don’t have these problems because most people are fairly secretive about who they are voting for and we have two central parties.
 
I

Incognito

Troll
FoxNews, and more specifically, The O'Reilly Factor, are the most watched news channel and show in America.

Sad.

We do have the FCC, but they're not going to do shit about Fox, and there is really nothing that can be done.
 
S

Socreges

Banned
AssMan said:
CBC attacking FNC. What else is new? Liberals can't stand it when they're "out-foxed" by channel such as FNC, so they start crying like little babies.
Click to expand...
Cookie-cutter and baseless responses like that only win you contempt. Sure, Cooter and co. may admire you from their spot in the read-only booth, but that hardly seems worth the effort. The fact is that the United States media has increasingly and excessively been insulting Canada, with Fox News largely leading the assault. There is something to this. Thus, the special (or "attack" as you would put it) from The Fifth Estate, which may have been inspired by observations by people internally in charge at TFE or indeed encouraged by the CBC. We don't know. And it doesn't matter. This is an interesting phenomenon that deserves attention.
 
V

videogamer

Banned
Do The Mario said:
I think Glick came out very well in that interview; he kept his cool and didn’t explode and got his message across didn’t take the bait O’reily was dangling.

Also is there a consumer commission in America?

Because in Australia the ACC might make a network like fox remove there “fair and balanced” slogan if it was deemed false advertising. I mean we don’t have these problems because most people are fairly secretive about who they are voting for and we have two central parties.
Click to expand...

Moveon.org tried, but the FCC gave this response:

"I am not aware of any instance in which the Federal Trade Commission has investigated the slogan of a news organization," wrote Muris. "There is no way to evaluate this petition without evaluating the content of the news at issue. That is a task the First Amendment leaves to the American people, not a government agency."
Click to expand...

In other words, they're not even going to bother investigating.

http://216.239.63.104/search?q=cach...g+"fair+and+balanced"+false+advertising&hl=en
 
S

Shinobi

Member
O'Reilly should concentrate on keeping his phone sex conversations better hidden and minding his own fucking business. Fuck him and his ilk.
 
D

DaMan121

Member
"I am not aware of any instance in which the Federal Trade Commission has investigated the slogan of a news organization," wrote Muris. "There is no way to evaluate this petition without evaluating the content of the news at issue. That is a task the First Amendment leaves to the American people, not a government agency."
Click to expand...

So.. A news channel can give completely false news reports (propaganda aside) and the FCC wont do anything? Pfftt... Janet Jackson's booby is more dangerous I guess.

Edit: This thread needs more Bill stupidity:
O’REILLY: Well, I don’t agree with that. Science is not always incomplete and I’ll give you an example. There are twenty-four hours in a day. Alright. That’s science. And there are four seasons. That’s science. So you can state things with certainty in biology or any other science you want.
Click to expand...

:lol
 
G

gohepcat

Banned
This is my favorite:

David Cole
Iinnocuously enough. On Monday, June 21, a producer from Fox News's The O'Reilly Factor called to ask me to appear as a guest that evening to comment on a front-page story in the New York Times claiming that the Bush Administration had overstated the value of intelligence gained at Guant?namo and the dangers posed by the men detained there. I'm generally not a fan of shout-television, and I had declined several prior invitations to appear on O'Reilly's show, but this time I said yes. Little did I know it would not only be my first time, but also my last.

I sat in the Washington studio as the taping of the show began in New York with a rant from Bill O'Reilly. He claimed that "the Factor" had established the link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, and then played a clip from Thomas Kean, head of the Senate's 9/11 Commission, in which Kean said, "There is no evidence that we can find whatsoever that Iraq or Saddam Hussein participated in any way in attacks on the United States, in other words, on 9/11. What we do say, however, is there were contacts between Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Iraq, Saddam--excuse me. Al Qaeda."


I was impressed. O'Reilly, who had announced his show as the "No Spin Zone," was actually playing a balanced soundbite, one that accurately reported the commission's findings both that there was no evidence linking Saddam and 9/11, and that there was some evidence of contacts (if no "collaborative relationship") between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Maybe all those nasty things Al Franken had said about O'Reilly weren't true after all.

But suddenly O'Reilly interrupted, plainly angry, and said, "We can't use that.... We need to redo the whole thing." Three minutes of silence later, the show began again, with O'Reilly re-recording the introduction verbatim. Except this time, when he got to the part about Kean, he played no tape, and simply paraphrased Kean as confirming that "definitely there was a connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda." The part about no link to 9/11 was left on the cutting-room floor.

Now it was my turn. O'Reilly introduced the segment by complaining that we are at war and need to be united, but that newspapers like the New York Times are running biased stories, dividing the country and aiding the enemy. "The spin must stop--our lives depend on it," O'Reilly gravely intoned. He then characterized the Times story that day as claiming that the Guant?namo detainees were "innocent people" and "harmless." He said the paper's article "questions holding the detainees at Guant?namo."

I noted that the Times had said nothing of the sort. And I pointed out that the article relied on a CIA study finding that the detainees seemed to be low-level and had provided little valuable intelligence.

That didn't convince O'Reilly, however, who again criticized the Times for misleading its readers by terming the detainees innocent and not dangerous. I replied that he was misleading his own viewers, by exaggerating what the Times had said. "No, I'm not," he retorted. So far, the usual fare on newstalk television.

But then I decided to go one step further: "It seems to me like the pot calling the kettle black, Bill, because I just sat here five minutes ago as you re-recorded the introduction to this show to take out a statement from the head of the 9/11 commission stating that there was no evidence of a link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11."

Apparently O'Reilly does not like being called "the pot." He exploded, repeatedly called me an "S.O.B." and assured me that he would cut my accusation from the interview when the show aired. He also said I would "never ever" be on his show again. At this point, I wasn't sure whether to take that as a threat or a promise.

Sure enough, when The O'Reilly Factor aired later that night, both Thomas Kean's statement about 9/11 and my charge about O'Reilly deleting it were missing. All that was left was Bill O'Reilly, fuming at the liberal media's lack of objectivity and balance, and ruing the divisive effect "spin" has on our national unity.
Click to expand...

You know it just goes to show you. It's not a simple case of not admitting you are wrong. It's a news station full of fucking liars. I'd honestly be just as concerned if the liars on AirAmerica were as popular, but people actually WATCH Fox news...Lots of them. Lots of really stupid people watch this shit every day.
 
D

Do The Mario

Unconfirmed Member
Do people think Bill O'Reilly is that ignorant or he knows what the fuck he is doing?

Great post gohepcat i think i am leaning towards the latter.
 
V

videogamer

Banned
Do The Mario said:
Wow wasn’t Indochina a French colony?

Whats your point?
Click to expand...
Yeah, that post seems to make no sense in the context of the other posts. Is there something that we're missing out on?
 
D

Do The Mario

Unconfirmed Member
Hammy said:
Yeah, that post seems to make no sense in the context of the other posts. Is there something that we're missing out on?
Click to expand...


I think assman was trying to say the French went to Vietnam but opposed Iraq so they are hypocritical?

That’s what I assume he is on about, I was merely pointing out that Indochina now known as Vietnam was a French colony and thus there involvement.
 
V

videogamer

Banned
Do The Mario said:
I think assman was trying to say the French went to Vietnam but opposed Iraq so they are hypocritical?

That’s what I assume he is on about, I was merely pointing out that Indochina now known as Vietnam was a French colony and thus there involvement.
Click to expand...
Or is he talking about how the French were once imperialists and now Americans are following the same route? Then the French would be hypocrites for not supporting America's ambitions?
 
D

Do The Mario

Unconfirmed Member
Hammy said:
Or is he talking about how the French were once imperialists and now Americans are following the same route? Then the French would be hypocrites for not supporting America's ambitions?
Click to expand...

True but there are so many countries that were imperialistic in the 17th -19th centuries that are no longer. I think it’s ridiculously stupid to compare 19th century France to 21st century America.

Even in the wake of WW2 it was America that backed France in the reoccupation of Indochina to stop the spread of communism in the region. If I recall France lost control of the region when Paris was occupied by Nazi Germany and in that time the communist powers emerged in Vietnam. (correct me if I am wrong)
 
V

videogamer

Banned
Do The Mario said:
True but there are so many countries that were imperialistic in the 17th -19th centuries that are no longer. I think it’s ridiculously stupid to compare 19th century France to 21st century America.

Even in the wake of WW2 it was America that backed France in the reoccupation of Indochina to stop the spread of communism in the region. If I recall France lost control of the region when Paris was occupied by Nazi Germany and in that time the communist powers emerged in Vietnam. (correct me if I am wrong)
Click to expand...

Eh just a guess. It was a rather cryptic remark.

The Viet Minh (abbreviated from Vi&#7879;t Nam Ð&#7897;c L&#7853;p Ð&#7891;ng Minh H&#7897;i, "League for the Independence of Vietnam") was formed by Ho Ngoc Lam and Nguyen Hai Than in 1941 to seek independence for Vietnam from France. The league was later led by Nguyen Tat Thanh - better known as Ho Chi Minh who convinced everybody that he was a non-communist patriot. Ho Chi Minh, Le Duan, Vo Nguyen Giap, and Pham Van Dong slowly established their influence and found their way to key positions in the League.

During World War II, Japan occupied French-held regions in Asia (commonly called Indochina). As well as fighting the French, the Viet Minh started a campaign against the Japanese. Due to their opposition to the Japanese, the Viet Minh received funding from the Americans and the Chinese. When Japan surrendered in August 1945, the Viet Minh tried to take control of the country and declared independence from France. The declaration of independence was followed by nearly ten years of war against France, with France's effort largely funded by the United States.
Click to expand...
 
S

Saturnman

Banned
Hammy said:
Or is he talking about how the French were once imperialists and now Americans are following the same route? Then the French would be hypocrites for not supporting America's ambitions?
Click to expand...

Who knows what happens in a poster's head named 'Assman'? :)

If the French were imperialist in the past, why would they support the ambitions of another country now? What is there to gain (unless they get a piece of the pie)?

The Vikings used to rape and pillage all over Western Europe, should Scandinavian countries drop the peace meal mumbo jumbo and just support bloody tyrants because they used to be bloodthirsty warriors themselves? It makes no sense.
 
A

AssMan

Banned
Haha. I thought she said France. Canada makes more sense, but Hammy and Do the Mario made some good points about imperialism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Starlink missed 2022 revenue projections by $11 billion
Business
43
4K
WhamBamThankYouMaam replied
  • Locked
[TNYT] Brazil Blocks X After Musk Ignores Court Orders
Social News Community 2
69
5K
ManaByte replied
Tokyo Game Show 2024 will run from September 26 to 29 at Makuhari Messe in Chiba, Japan | Main Visual also unveiled
News 2
98
6K
Thick Thighs Save Lives replied
Ridley Scott interview - sharks in the colosseum, Maximus returning from the afterlife to kill Jesus Christ, asleep at the wheel for Prometheus
45
3K
dem replied
Bobby Kotick, former CEO of Activision, Interested in Buying Tik-Tok
2 3
143
11K
Gameplay Gods Bless replied
Top Bottom