George Galloway In the UK Big Brother House
January 6, 2006 10:56 AM   Subscribe

George Galloway is in the Celebrity Big Brother house. My jaw dropped when I read it. He's a prominent member of the Respect Coalition, an antiwar figure and a frequent target of corruption claims. He claims his strategy is to reach a new audience of young people and to offer the public a "chance to show a large and different audience what I'm really like". There's already a debate about the war on the official show message boards.
posted by By The Grace of God (73 comments total)
 
well, "big brother" has a different status in some countries, more along the lines of a "survivor" or something. i.e. not as lame and cheesy.
posted by taumeson at 10:59 AM on January 6, 2006


Galloway seems to me to be like the British equivalent of Al Sharpton: Love him or hate him, he's an expert at drawing attention to himself.
posted by wabashbdw at 11:04 AM on January 6, 2006


I was flipping stations last night and happened to see that he was on the show. Completely lame and cheesy on his part I thought. I guess he'll be doing "I"m A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here" next.
posted by gfrobe at 11:05 AM on January 6, 2006


I've never watched it before. I'm certainly going to tonight. I try to avoid reality TV, but This I Have To See. It's certainly a high-risk/high-reward strategy. I can't imagine a US politician having the gazungas to do such a thing, but I'm not sure I support what he's doing, and I'm a big Galloway fan.

He represents the heck out of his constituents, by the way, albeit rarely in Parliament. They've got a whole small party backing them up. Right now a big issue in his constituency is at the council housing in Tower Hamlets, where Respect is fighting for the right of the residents to keep local control of their housing.

At least he's not as badly off as Kennedy.
posted by By The Grace of God at 11:08 AM on January 6, 2006


What I really want to see is a Surreal Life with Dick Cheney, Gloria Steinem, Tom Cruise and his Zombie Bride, Ted Rall, Sarah Silverman, Don King, Ann Coulter and Shane McGowan.

Is that too much to ask, television executives?
posted by you just lost the game at 11:09 AM on January 6, 2006


I guess it's more popular than Syrian state television...
posted by SweetJesus at 11:11 AM on January 6, 2006


er, fixed Kennedy link.
posted by By The Grace of God at 11:11 AM on January 6, 2006


He represents the heck out of his constituents, by the way, albeit rarely in Parliament. They've got a whole small party backing them up. Right now a big issue in his constituency is at the council housing in Tower Hamlets, where Respect is fighting for the right of the residents to keep local control of their housing.

Well he's not now, as politicians have pointed out his constituents no longer have a voice in parliament or in the community because he has decided to take an unnannounced three week holiday on a TV Game Show.

Don't know which opinion to lower my opinion of, Galloway or Celeb BB.
posted by Navek Rednam at 11:13 AM on January 6, 2006


He's an MP! - isn't he supposed to be at work?
posted by Lanark at 11:14 AM on January 6, 2006


To me this is just further evidence that Galloway is a scumbag
posted by snoktruix at 11:14 AM on January 6, 2006



To me this is just further evidence that Galloway is a scumbag

How so?
posted by the cuban at 11:16 AM on January 6, 2006


" He's an MP! - isn't he supposed to be at work?"

Do you mean representing the interests of some multinational corporation or towing the line of a singular party leader (under the whip) as opposed to representing the majority of their constituents, or otherwise doing something more connected with the ideals of democracy, rather than the grubby, dishevelled, maggot-infested and self-soiled reality?
posted by Blue Stone at 11:19 AM on January 6, 2006


What I really want to see is a Surreal Life with Dick Cheney, Gloria Steinem, Tom Cruise and his Zombie Bride, Ted Rall, Sarah Silverman, Don King, Ann Coulter and Shane McGowan.

Throw Andy Dick in there and I'd totally watch!
posted by jeffmik at 11:19 AM on January 6, 2006


Well it seems that the activist campaign for Tower Hamlets is certainly going on, and him being on the show might very well raise its profile. We Shall See.

He represents his constituents, albeit rarely in Parliament, I said. The way he represents them is quite unorthodox and is not accepted by a great number of people. He is indeed like Al Sharpton in that way - he's more likely to stage a protest than to make a vote in Parliament about the topic. What can he do in Parliament anyway as a one-man party bloc where the majority hates him as a traitor? If he can attract support for the Tower Hamlets residents in other ways, more power to him.

The critique about him not showing up in Parliament seems to be indicative of the divide between progressives who prefer to use the legislative route and progressives who prefer to use the protest route to change. Believe me I wish that divide weren't there, too. Ever try to get a US congressmember to attend a march, rally or protest? They can't because they have to do the day to day constituent service to get elected.

Galloway got elected largely because of his statements against the war, and in that sense he is fulfilling the mandate the voters gave him - speaking out loudly against the war any chance he gets.
posted by By The Grace of God at 11:22 AM on January 6, 2006


It takes a fairly deep vein of hypocrisy to engage in shady deals with Saddam and then to opportunistically start some kind of phony crusade of liberals against warmongers.
posted by snoktruix at 11:31 AM on January 6, 2006


It takes a fairly deep vein of hypocrisy to engage in shady deals with Saddam and then to opportunistically start some kind of phony crusade of liberals against warmongers.

Ans how is Galloway's appearance on BB related to this?
posted by the cuban at 11:34 AM on January 6, 2006


What can he do in Parliament anyway as a one-man party bloc where the majority hates him as a traitor?

He could turn up for debates, or maybe fucking vote, for a start.

From They Work For You:

[George Galloway]
Has spoken in 4 debates since the General Election — 556th out of 646 MPs.
Has attended 15% of votes in parliament — 634th out of 645 MPs. (From Public Whip)

For someone who stood on a platform of representing the voices of those who felt they had none in Parliament, that's a pretty horrendous record. Speaking out loudly against the war is all well and good, but there's more to being a constituency MP than that.

He's a blowhard, self-aggrandising charlatan. And I say that as someone who agrees with quite a large chunk of his politics.

On Preview:
It takes a fairly deep vein of hypocrisy to engage in shady deals with Saddam

Got a link for those shady deals, snoktruix? Because as far as I was aware, none were conclusively proven. Indeed, it was over that claim by the Daily Telegraph that Galloway won £150,000 in libel damages.
posted by Len at 11:37 AM on January 6, 2006


Ans how is Galloway's appearance on BB related to this?

I was just justifying referring to him as a scumbag. As I said, his appearance on BB is just further evidence that what he's about primarily is shallow self-promotion and generally being a deeply irritating loudmouth with a large ego.

I agree generally that the war was a mistake and the goverment bungled some things, but demagoguery is not the way to have a healthy debate. Pushing out Oona King, who actually knew something about her constituents real concerns, in order to launch a one-note one-man anti-Blair campaign is pretty shitty. Deciding to spend a few weeks lounding around with a bunch of idiots on BB is absurd. I suspect it will backfire on him.
posted by snoktruix at 11:48 AM on January 6, 2006


He represents the heck out of his constituents

Is that what he was doing all the times he has gone to Syria and praised Bashir Assad on television as a great man?
posted by dios at 11:52 AM on January 6, 2006


How is it hypocritical for someone who likes Saddam Hussein to oppose the war?
posted by delmoi at 12:00 PM on January 6, 2006


Got a link for those shady deals, snoktruix?

"Shady" isn't that strong a word is it? Something like suspicious, somewhere short of obviously being corrupt. It may be reasonable to say in this sense his deals were shady.
You don't expect a serious, genuine activist/politician to go around shaking hands amiably with brutal dictators and allegedly taking kickbacks.
posted by snoktruix at 12:01 PM on January 6, 2006


You also wouldn't expect to see one on BB. They get respectable noteworthy people like Michael Barrymore and Bez, not Ralph Nader.
posted by snoktruix at 12:04 PM on January 6, 2006


You don't expect a serious, genuine activist/politician to go around shaking hands amiably with brutal dictators


posted by Protocols of the Elders of Awesome at 12:21 PM on January 6, 2006


Maybe I should have added "non-batshit insane" to my list of desireable qualities.
posted by snoktruix at 12:30 PM on January 6, 2006


check, and mate.
posted by blue_beetle at 12:32 PM on January 6, 2006


You don't expect a serious, genuine activist/politician to go around shaking hands amiably with brutal dictators

posted by the cuban at 12:34 PM on January 6, 2006


I'm confused as to what the last two pictures have to do with Galloway. Is the point that other politicians shake hands with bad guys so to do so is ok? Or is the point that it was never wrong for any of them to do it? Or is the point along the lines of "he did it first?"

Surely you aren't taking the position that it was wrong for other politicians to do it, but it is not condemnible when Galloway buddies up to Saddam and goes to Damascus to regularly praise Bashir Assad as a great man.

Or, to put it another way, are these pictures a defense of comments made about Galloway? Or are they just there to divert attention?
posted by dios at 12:41 PM on January 6, 2006


(Not previewing is condemnable)
posted by dios at 12:42 PM on January 6, 2006


they're there so you could ask about fifteen stupid questions.
posted by wakko at 12:46 PM on January 6, 2006


Bent as a nine-bob note, is George. Why are the accounts for the Mariam appeal 'charity' held offshore in Jordan, where they can't be inspected? I speak as a rabid lefty.
posted by punilux at 12:52 PM on January 6, 2006


Who is that shaking hands with Thatcher? their reputation is now toast...
posted by Artw at 1:01 PM on January 6, 2006


I'd be more impressed with the Galloway accusations if some real, definatively un-forged evidence showed up.
posted by Artw at 1:02 PM on January 6, 2006


Real unforged evidence? So you think that the material the Telegraph found in Baghdad was planted? Ridiculous conspiracy theorising.
posted by A189Nut at 1:06 PM on January 6, 2006


He may have done us proud when he spoke to the American judge or whatever it was (I can't remember the details) but he's a dick as far as I'm concerned. I couldn't give a crap about BB, Orwell must be turning in his grave.
posted by Acey at 1:09 PM on January 6, 2006


Here's a scan of the document the telegraph case was based around. Make up your own mind.
posted by Lanark at 1:17 PM on January 6, 2006


I just wanted to say one thing about the drink statement by Charles Kennedy...


Wow. What a hatchet job the BBC did on him by using this picture!

Take a look at the picture they are using on their article and compare it to the video from the press conference. That picture clearly is an old stock photo -- no doubt picked from a wide selection of such photos -- designed to make Kennedy look as drunk as possible.
posted by insomnia_lj at 1:18 PM on January 6, 2006


you are probably right insomnia_lj. Amazing how there can be outrage when a man lies about his drink problem, but a man who lies in order to justify an invasion runs the country!
posted by Acey at 1:20 PM on January 6, 2006


No, insomnia, that picture's from the Cowley Street press conference yesterday. Check out Getty Images - it's there. And none of the other ones look much better, sad to say.
posted by flashboy at 1:45 PM on January 6, 2006


well, the forum seems to have removed that thread, in my last link, because it had degenerated into a political flamewar. Jessamyn or mathowie, could you possibly change the link to the general forums link, http://community.channel4.com/groupee/forums/a/frm/f/8216069011

Thanks.
posted by By The Grace of God at 1:47 PM on January 6, 2006


some interesting points here...

not least that a television company is keeping an elected member of parliament from his constituents. what, for example, would happen if a constituent tried to contact him? would the tv company tell them that he was incommunicado?
posted by quarsan at 1:52 PM on January 6, 2006


The Lib Dems should have dumped Kennedy ages back. Not because he is struggling with drink but because he is ginger. It doesn't matter what politics you are or how good your marketing is - nobody is going to vote a ginner into power in the UK*.

(seriously).


* possible exception - a really hot redhead chick.
posted by longbaugh at 1:54 PM on January 6, 2006


a television company is keeping an elected member of parliament from his constituents

Well, moreover, they could be said to be giving him three weeks of free, prime time political advertising. That's the problem, I think.

British MPs, whilst having a loose Code of Conduct, have no specific duties in terms of responsibility towards their constituents. They could bugger off to the Seychelles for five years, if they so choose, so I think him being out of touch with his constituents isn't really a legal problem.

On the other hand, it's also worth pointing out that MPs are supposed to represent all their constituents, not just the one who voted for them. Galloway tends to claim that he is representing his constituents by 'spreading the word' on Iraq and Palestine, the issues he was elected on. Given that Bethnal Green & Bow is one of the most deprived constituencies in the country, I can't help feeling that this is... how to put it?... utter bollocks.
posted by flashboy at 2:07 PM on January 6, 2006


Shaking hands with dictators is fine. It's called diplomacy. It prevents people getting killed. It's what you do for or with the dictator that matters.
posted by Protocols of the Elders of Awesome at 2:18 PM on January 6, 2006


Flashboy, there is an argument that the local-issue protesty stuff he does (fighting against cutbacks in local fire brigade, for Tower Hamlets residents' local control) is more effective than what he could do in Parliament on the same issues.
posted by By The Grace of God at 2:18 PM on January 6, 2006


So you think that the material the Telegraph found in Baghdad was planted? Ridiculous conspiracy theorising.

Theorising that has been repeatedly proven in the English courts.
posted by Protocols of the Elders of Awesome at 2:19 PM on January 6, 2006


Given that Bethnal Green & Bow is one of the most deprived constituencies in the country, I can't help feeling that this is... how to put it?... utter bollocks.

There is no question that Iraq/Palestine was the main reason he was elected, and it's fair for Galloway to continue focusing on it. Democracy means the people choose - it doesn't necessarily mean the people focus on the most pragmatically important issues.
posted by Protocols of the Elders of Awesome at 2:21 PM on January 6, 2006


He could do both, as pointed out, he rarely deigns to appear at the centre of British Democracy.
posted by Navek Rednam at 2:27 PM on January 6, 2006


There is no question that Iraq/Palestine was the main reason he was elected, and it's fair for Galloway to continue focusing on it.

Do you honestly believe that Galloway will end the Iraq war from the Big Brother house?
posted by dodgygeezer at 2:30 PM on January 6, 2006


No, but by doing so he has a better chance at getting at this vaunted demographic of Young People that Don't Vote than the mainstream parties do.

High risk, high reward.
posted by By The Grace of God at 2:38 PM on January 6, 2006


I agree, absolutely, that there's no set role that an MP should take - and quite rightly so. And I don't deny that local protests can be effective (although, I'd suggest, they become less effective the more the MP has a reputation as a rabble-rouser). But even explicitly single issue candidates are reasonably expected to represent all their constituents on a wide range of issues (as several others have done in recent times). Given that the BG&B election was one of the most sharply divided in recent memory, I think that taking his election as a mandate to travel the world decrying American neo-colonialism seems rather irresponsible and selfish. It's easy to dismiss MPs as ineffective, corrupt, incompetent, whatever - but a lot of them do a large amount of good work quietly in the background, sorting out matters for their constitutents, scrutinising legislation, and so on.

In any case, what about Galloway missing the Terrorism vote that the Government lost by one - because he was performing An Audience with George Galloway in Ireland? You can see why people think that he's more interested in self-promotion than even representing those who did vote for him.

To clarify, by the way, the Telegraph libel trial explicity didn't prove that the Baghdad documents were fakes. I'm fairly sure that they were, as it happens, but it's not true to say that the courts have exonerated Galloway.
posted by flashboy at 2:40 PM on January 6, 2006


I have nothing but contempt for George Galloway, all the more so since he re-entered Parliament as part of his ongoing pro-Galloway campaign. He's done nothing for the constituency, and less than nothing for some areas of it.

Bethnal Green and Bow was my constituency for three years* and the issues there are WAY more serious than just the war. For a start, there's poverty and poor educational attainment, housing, etc., which are widespread across the constituency. But there's a bigger issue with Galloway's one-note anti-warism, which is the divide in the constituency between the mainly-Sylheti (Bengali) Bethnal Green and the mainly-white Bow. For all Galloway's strong support in Bethnal Green - though even that is based on what he says rather than what he does - he's doing nothing about the issues that face Bow.

Frankly, I don't suppose that Galloway even knows the issues that face people in their day to day lives. His entry into the Big Brother house, to "campaign" for some amorphous self-regarding "cause" just shows how far he is from proper Parliamentary politics - the dull-but-worthy grind of committees, reports and debate. It may not be what gets the kids going, but it's a vital part of the political process, and not worthy of scorn.

* full disclosure: I was a member of the Labour party in the constituency, and hence a supporter of the ousted MP Oona King.
posted by athenian at 2:41 PM on January 6, 2006


I might care about this if I lived in Bethnal Green & Bow.
posted by dhartung at 2:44 PM on January 6, 2006


Oh, if we're doing full disclosure: I used to work for the company that makes Big Brother, I was working in Bethnal Green & Bow during the election, and I currently work for a Liberal Democrat.

Yeah, this thread is pretty much my life.

posted by flashboy at 2:51 PM on January 6, 2006


I might care about this if I lived in Bethnal Green & Bow.

And therfore who-so list it nat yheere,
Turne over the leef, and chese another tale;
For he shal fynde ynowe, grete and smale,
Of storial thyng that toucheth gentillesse,
And eek moralitee, and hoolynesse.
Blameth nat me if that ye chese amys.
posted by athenian at 2:53 PM on January 6, 2006


No, but by doing so he has a better chance at getting at this vaunted demographic of Young People that Don't Vote than the mainstream parties do.

Huh? He's getting Young People out to vote by being totally ineffective?

Seriously, if a voter can't think of a better reason than that to vote then I doubt they'll have the intelligence to fill out the oh-so-tricky voter registration form.
posted by dodgygeezer at 3:19 PM on January 6, 2006


forget Galloway--Pete Burns is there! (and how scary now)
posted by amberglow at 3:46 PM on January 6, 2006


Do you honestly believe that Galloway will end the Iraq war from the Big Brother house?

If Big Brother has anything to do with it, Galloway will end up as the next John McCrirrick, Vanessa Felch or Les Dennis -- visibly cracking up in front of millions of viewers, under the strain of having his pompous arrogance screwed around with while under the view of the cameras 24/7.

I can't see his posturing being at all popular with the other housemates, and my guess is that he'll be about as popular with the public as Jackie Stallone.

So my money is on Galloway for the first eviction. The only question is how big a tosser he can make of himself before he gets dumped.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 4:13 PM on January 6, 2006


Heh, so Galloway is the new Kitten?
posted by Artw at 4:26 PM on January 6, 2006


Get the facts right

1) The illegitimacy of the Daily Telegraph's Baghdad documents has not been proven in the British courts. The Telegraph lost the case because it was judged that in their presentation of the material they had libelled Galloway; no verdict was offered on the documents. As The Scotsman put it: "Mr Justice Eady criticised the newspaper for its "dramatic and condemnatory" handling of the Galloway "scoop". He said the spin placed on a "blizzard" of articles published in the Daily Telegraph on 22 and 23 April, based on documents found in the bombed-out Iraqi foreign ministry in Baghdad after the fall of Saddam Hussein, amounted to "serious defamation."

2) The documents proven forgeries were different documents - they were presented by the Christian Science Monitor, which later declared them as fake: "the Monitor's documents were different in many details from those of the Daily Telegraph, and came from a different source." and "After examining copies of two pages of the Daily Telegraph's documents linking Galloway with the Hussein regime, Mneimneh (the CSM's expert) pronounces them consistent, unlike their Monitor counterparts, with authentic Iraqi documents he has seen."
posted by A189Nut at 5:40 PM on January 6, 2006


This is the second post in two days on british TV that I almost posted myself.
I was also utterly gobsmacked by Galloway's participation.

I genaerally hate this show - but it was very much the talk of the table at dinner tonight.
[back to read the thread]
posted by dash_slot- at 5:45 PM on January 6, 2006


I might care about this if I lived in Bethnal Green & Bow.

So how's Denison, Iowa working out for you?
posted by PeterMcDermott at 6:16 PM on January 6, 2006


Shaking hands with dictators is fine. It's called diplomacy.

Er, diplomacy is conducted by appointed Government ministers (Galloway has never been such a minister).

Look, he's a self aggrandizing wanker, and wil therefore be a completely brilliant participant inn Celebrity BB 2006. I can't stand the pompous windbag - but I do admire any guy who says as persistently and correctly as he does:

BLAIR LIED, SQUADDIES DIED.

Whatever lies Galloway has told, whatever handshakes he - like Rumsfeld et al have made as well - his lies did not lead to war. He has my admiration for standing up to a fucking supine Congress, who failed in their duty of oversight in the prosecution of a disgusting illegal war.

What is the disgrace in grandstanding in CBB2006, compared to the facile deceptions of the Bush/Blair cabal?

I'd rather vote for a wanker than a liar.
posted by dash_slot- at 6:47 PM on January 6, 2006


Apologies only for the typos...
posted by dash_slot- at 6:48 PM on January 6, 2006


George Galloway missed a crucial vote which could have overturned a key part of the Government's lousy anti-terrorist legislation because he was too busy doing his one-man theatre show, and now if his constituents try to contact him urgently, alas, all they can get is his media agent who can't help them: (sorry the link is to Media Guardian, so it's registration).

In Search of Gorgeous George

It may have been fun to watch him sock it to Hitchens and the Senators but I'm afraid he's an incurable attention whore.
posted by Flitcraft at 7:23 PM on January 6, 2006


"The Lib Dems should have dumped Kennedy ages back. Not because he is struggling with drink but because he is ginger."

BTW, what the hell is it about British people demeaning other Brits because they have red hair? Hell... it's not even that red!

British in drag = good. British with red hair = bad?!

It's like a very, very tired ditsy blonde joke that's been repeated once too often. The continued repetition of such statements obviously contributes to the problem, but still there are no end of Brits with dun (dung?) hair who keep making such statements.
posted by insomnia_lj at 7:33 PM on January 6, 2006


It's not so much the British who demean our ginger brethren, it's very specifically the English.

Red hair = Celt.
posted by flashboy at 8:27 PM on January 6, 2006


flashboy - Celts generally had black hair. You might be thinking of the Picts or possibly Norsemen. The distribution of the ginner gene is primarily due to viking invasion and settlement in the 8th Century. Even taking into account population mobility over time you'll find more ginners in the north (as well as Scotland and Ireland) simply because that's where they settled.
posted by longbaugh at 1:12 AM on January 7, 2006


Galloway is "my" MP. And he certainly doesn't represent the heck out of me.
posted by rhymer at 3:53 AM on January 7, 2006


To clarify: it is commonly believed that Red Hair = Celt. Archaeogenetics is all very well, but it can't really stand up against a hundred thousand ginger-wig-under-a-tartan-hat combinations...
posted by flashboy at 4:06 AM on January 7, 2006


a hundred thousand ginger-wig-under-a-tartan-hat combinations...

...yes, Russ Abbott has a lot to answer for.

I love the fact that this thread has pulled in Charlie Kennedy's alcohol problem and a debate on why redheads have such an image problem. You see, Galloway can unite a coalition of vastly different issues!

On weightier matters, in my own experience the ginger cause took a massive nosedive with the release of "Linger" by the Cranberries in the mid-90s - even the most intellectually-challenged 15 year old school boy didn't have to think hard to come up with "do you have to, do you have to, do you have to be a ginger". Or was it just my school where this was a regularly used abusive phrase?
posted by greycap at 4:35 AM on January 7, 2006


I met Galloway during the anti-Bush protests a couple years ago. The man never met a microphone he didn't like, and no evidence I've seen would make me escape the conclusion that the cause he fights for most often is George Galloway.

In short: Unpleasant, unprincipled toad in dark glasses.
posted by LondonYank at 6:07 AM on January 7, 2006


I'm still confused on this point: Why is it that leftist figures have to be perfectly principled and in the fight for nothing more than high ideals?

Because most politicians seem to be in it for ego reasons, at least in part.
posted by By The Grace of God at 7:24 AM on January 7, 2006


In case anyone stumbles on this thread and wonders how Galloway's been doing in the BB house - in short, LondonYank's "unpleasant, unprincipled toad" description fits perfectly.

All the press commentary from google news. Highlights in this thread on Barbelith, which always has the most entertaining BB commentary in the world. Even better if you're not watching the thing.

Most cringeworthy Galloway BB moment to date described in this Guardian article, although many other lows followed, his flair for bombastic rhetoric backfiring more than once -- such as attacking two housemates (calling one a "plutocrat") for being taken by BB into a secret luxury room where they had champagne and nice food and cigars while presumably the rest of celebs in the house are starving and oppressed or something: "I'd have refused to eat and drink and smoke, I'd have stood in the centre of the room saying to BB 'you brought me here under duress'" but he would not take advantage of that position of inequality, proving he has a fine grasp of the difference between Celebrity Big Brother and Guantanamo. The producers then gave him a copy of The Communist Manifesto as a gift, which he took to read with great interest. Ah, brilliant tv.

There's a petition from his constituents to get him back to work. He's up for eviction now and getting back to Parliament won't be easy.

(I know this thread is almost three weeks old but I didn't have the guts to make this FPP material! though I sure wouldn't mind if someone else did. Feel free.)
posted by funambulist at 3:24 AM on January 25, 2006


« Older Meet Clinton Portis's "friends"   |   Jack and Chairmain London's Photos of 1906... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments