Luke lashes out
12 Oct 2008
Luke Watson has slammed the “Dutchmen” who control South African rugby, and says he wanted to vomit on his Bok jersey last year.
In a speech on transformation at the Ubumbo Rugby Festival at the University of Cape Town on Friday, 3 October, the Bok flank spoke about his family’s fight against apartheid and said he accepted the “burden” of wearing the Bok jersey because there is a “bigger picture”.
“We need to realise that the here and now is not just the here and now, but the here and now only exists because of those who went before us and because of those who are still to come,” Watson said. “Me having to wear the Springbok jersey, to keep myself from vomiting on it, because there is a bigger picture, because men and women have bled for me to get there.”
Watson claimed that South African rugby’s biggest problem is that it is being run by “Dutchmen” (white Afrikaners). He called the Varsity Cup an elitist competition, saying it was run by the “biggest Dutchman of them all” in World Cup-winning Bok captain Francois Pienaar. He also reportedly said that the only way blacks could make money out of the sport was if Afrikaners were removed, and that he hated losing his place in the Bok team to an Afrikaner (Schalk Burger).
Watson then spoke for the first time about his controversial debut for the Boks against Samoa last year, when he was included in the team at Saru president Regan Hoskins’s insistence.
“I sat with my father [Cheeky], last year in the Springbok camp. I was in the hotel. I said: ‘Dad, I’m leaving. This place is despicable, it’s disgusting. The men won’t talk to me, they won’t greet me, the very coach won’t greet me. They walk past me. I sat at a table by myself; they wouldn’t eat with me, because I was a political pawn.
“But yet, Danie Craven has stadiums named after him. Danie Craven, the very man that said a black man will never play for the Springboks; he’s got stadiums named after him, he’s got traditions [tournaments] in honour of his name, statues erected. But yet I’m a political pawn? The little white boy in the corner, that sits with his mouth shut eating by himself?
“My father said: ‘Luke, unpack your bag’. I said: ‘Why?’. “He said: ‘Too many people, Luke, have bled, so that you can be here, whether you play or not, your very presence symbolises victory, symbolises a step forward, symbolises us coming up against South African rugby, an institution that is rotten to the very core’.”
He added that “the men who sit on my left and right of me in the [Springbok] change room despise me for who I am .. The man next to me automatically gets uncomfortable. He looks at me and says: ‘There is something different about this man, there is something different about Luke Watson. He can’t be bought – I can’t throw the Springbok jersey at him and expect him to beg for it, to be on his knees, because it is not going to happen’.”
691 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] Show All
12 Oct 2008, 21:06 pm
We should start the ball rolling-we all phone WPRU tomorrow-Either Luke or Us paying people
12 Oct 2008, 21:10 pm
Luke doesn’t get that he was not reviled by the Boks and Jake because his dad was a struggler, but because he was NOT GOOD ENOUGH to be there.
He still isn’t.
Did he not find it strange that even the black boys did not sit with him? Or did the black and white BOKS sit together and leave him out?
Whether Luke likes it or not, “dutchmen” are an important part of the game in SA. Also, most of the dutchmen playing now have grown up in a free SA and have never voted under Apartheid. And as for the game being run by dutchmen, well that is because most clubs are in and are supprted by Afrikaans communities.
He is out of line and too far biased. He needs to understand that dutchmen are not just going to dissappear out of SA – this is their home too. He needs to understand Afrikaners, and learn to have a bit of pride in what they have achieved too. They- and the english speaker- have all done bad stuff in the past. They have also acknowledged that, and many have reinvented themselves and seen the error of their ways.
But ultimately, sport is about whether you are GOOD ENOUGH. Not about your color.
Also, from where I am sitting, it seems like rugby is being run by a coloured guy?
12 Oct 2008, 21:15 pm
who the **** cares what you racist bigots think your time has come and gone.Hell i wont even mind seeing the bok buried if only to watch some of you moegoes squirm
12 Oct 2008, 21:18 pm
viva LUKE you r truly and inspiration to the 30 million majority.
one day a movie might even be made about your heroics ala hansie cronje
12 Oct 2008, 21:22 pm
wow! luke is stirring big time!
i agree that its the way sa rugby is run that is the major problem. thats administrators in general, dutchmen or not, the game in sa is not run properly!
i agree with luke being angry at how he was treated by fellow rugby players. rugby players should be respectful of each other. no man is bigger than the next. no man is more important than the next. WE are all servants of the game, so WTF is disrespecting a player, who might or might not be a politcal pawn, all about. he is a rugby player so he deserves the respect you would give any other opposing rugby player.
BUT i dont agree with how luke has aired this all. it seems too over the top. its too headline hunting. it almost feels as though cheeky wrote the speech for luke and demanded he read it. this promising talent, luke watson’s career is going to hit the wall. he might as well take a contract abroad now.
a major shake up in sa doesnt look like it will shake off the bad dutcmen or the shockingly incompetent administrators.
bugger
12 Oct 2008, 21:26 pm
and his comment about losing his place to the incredible schalk? does he not realise that schalk is international rugby player of the year alumni? who gives that he speaks afrikaans! geez luke you are not helping yourself here.
12 Oct 2008, 21:41 pm
Just lost any respect I had for him, if it’s true. Realy felt sorry for him with the fallout of the selection debacle but I’m afraid his lost my sympathy vote as well. Rugby has always been a teamsport and for him saying the things attributed to him- he can never be accepted in that environment again. I know I wouldn’t. You’d have to wonder what the agenda is. He’s finaly made it into the team on merit, some would believe otherwise, but he’s been part of the set-up. Now he lashes out on how it wears him down! F@ck him and his dad! We need responsible people to lead SA into the nxt generation. Not ones who creates contoversy whereever he goes! Funny, when I saw the clip of the Bok’s cloakroom after Dunedin, he luked unhappy! Now we find out that it was nuasea! I’ve just joined the ‘Bash Luke’ campaign! Like I said, f@ck him!
12 Oct 2008, 21:59 pm
Fokkkkkkkk jou en al jou ongebore kinders Luke Watson…. jy is ‘n misgewas, ‘n tweegesig buffel (‘n klein enetjie) !
Dit sal goed wees om jou einde te sien aanbreek !
12 Oct 2008, 22:00 pm
#643 saru1983: Pot calling the kettle black, excuse the pun. You are pretty bigoted yourself. Or is a bigot only applicaple to whites discriminating against blacks??
You need to move out from your bitter racism, you are obviously incapable of logical debate. You resort to denigrating, and inciting comments.
12 Oct 2008, 22:02 pm
#643 saru1983: The Bok will live on forever whether you like it or not. RE Hansie – He had talent and influence which is more than can be said for your pin-up. Viva Bokke Viva
12 Oct 2008, 22:06 pm
# 627 Jeremiah. Wat ‘n patetiese redenasie. As jy in ‘n vliegtuig is met 300 passasiers, en die enjins gaan staan, vertrou jy die kaptein wat opgelei is om jou veilig op die grond te kry of gaan jy eers ‘n stemmery hou omdat daar meer passasiers is as bemanning?
Gaan doen jou navorsing of vra dat iemand jou help, en verstaan tog waar kom die Springbok vandaan. Ek as ‘n trotse Afrikaanssprekende Suid Afrikaner is nou keelvol vir julle nonsens. Julle het julle sokker opgefoeter, sonder dat die Dutchmen daaraan geraak het. So los die rugby nou uit. As jy nie dit verstaan nie, vra die nuwe minister van sport, Luke Watson om dit te vertaal. Hy is net skaam om dit te praat, maar verstaan goed.
Hierdie is ‘n forum vir rugby, nie vir politiek en haat nie, en vat jou tjommie Colouredklong saam met jou. Ek was waarskynlik baie blyer as jy met jou agenda toe Enrico sy drie gedruk het in die 3 Nasies. Vir geen oomblik het ek aan sy velkleur of afkoms gedink nie.
12 Oct 2008, 22:11 pm
#642 saru1983: Pot calling the kettle black you idiot.
12 Oct 2008, 22:13 pm
#633 goyougoodthing2: Ek as ‘n Bul ondersteuner het ook gedink dit is vorentoe. My buurman is ‘n ex-provinsiale skeidsregter (blaas nog klub rugby in Jhb) wat ‘n groot Leeu ondersteuner is. Hy het bevestig dat dit wel ‘n wettige drie was en die verduideliking van FrenklyMuDeah is korrek. Kyk na Wynand se hande wat agtertoe beweeg.
12 Oct 2008, 22:16 pm
Was it on the other thread some NZ supporter shot his mouth of about this? Then read this: w. w. w.rugbyheaven.co.nz/4724608a22459.html
12 Oct 2008, 22:19 pm
She’ll be white, bro
Why did the Auckland rugby team bomb this season? Too many Polynesian players in the critical, thinking positions, apparently. That’s what I’ve been told, anyway. Almost on a daily basis, come to think of it. Auckland were eliminated from the quarterfinals because they were an undisciplined, Pasifika rabble; Canterbury qualified because they realised how important it was to play the white boys where they were most needed.
I kid you not. An emailer last week sent a message (addressed to a who’s who of the rugby and media world), in which he unashamedly blamed Auckland’s dismal 2008 campaign on the continual selection of non-white players in the most crucial positions. The team was doomed to fail, he wrote, because the brown brothers couldn’t read the game as well as the honkies. Let them range wide and use their speed, by all means, he said. But, for goodness sake, make sure some white brains were picked inside them.
It was the same with the tight five, apparently. Not enough of the old Anglo-Saxon yeoman; that stoic breed who enjoyed nothing more than dull, grinding, labour. Too much flashy, Islander stuff. When did Canterbury last field a team that didn’t have three or four Caucasians in the front and second rows? Ditto for the Warriors: too few white New Zealand players in the decisive positions. I’m sure you’ve heard it before. It’s the on-going debate the rugby fraternity refuses to acknowledge. The “too many coconuts” syndrome.
To be fair, you don’t hear as much of this from the younger brigade, many of whom probably understand the meaning of tolerance far better than their mothers and fathers. No, you hear it mostly (and especially in Auckland rugby circles) from ageing, white, narrow-minded rugby-heads, who probably still hanker for the times when you could call fish and chips a “Maori roast”, a ditch a “Maori drain”, and underarm deodorant a “Maori bath”. How they used to laugh. Now they’re getting old and can’t understand the world, poor blighters.
No one’s suggesting people shouldn’t be entitled to hold nonsensical or preposterous views (clearly they are, as Winston has been at pains to demonstrate). But neither should the rest of us feel compelled to tolerate them or, in our silence, offer complicit support. The claim that white sportsmen have more intelligence than non-white sportsmen is an obscenity, and should be challenged at every turn. It is an ugly myth, with no basis in science, invented by folk who grew up in times of such institutionalised racism that they never, really, learnt to know otherwise.
Let’s think about it. White men need to play in the most important positions because of their decision-making and leadership ability? Yet George Gregan wasn’t a bad halfback, or a bad leader. Graeme Bachop wasn’t too shabby, either. Nor Sid Going for that matter. Non-whites are best as outside backs or loose forwards? What about players such as Jeff Wilson, John Kirwan and Graham Mourie? Don’t tell me these guys were exceptions to the rule. The entire point is that there is no rule.
It wasn’t so long ago that American basketball was a white man’s game facing the same irrational fears. It was OK to have the occasional black centre or power forward, but if you started selecting non-whites at point guard the sky would start falling. Same with football and baseball.
Almost all the early West Indies cricket teams had a white man as skipper because Imperial Britain considered non-whites incapable. It wasn’t until Frank Worrell’s appointment in 1960 that a black man captained the West Indies for an entire test series. Yet, nearly 50 years later the white supremacy argument continues in New Zealand.
The worst part of the debate? Not merely the offence and hurt it must cause to many fellow Kiwis, but also the very real likelihood that it encourages some people to judge athletic endeavour on, not skills and ability, but skin colour and ethnicity. The “he’s an Islander so he must be an outside back” mantra only gains more traction, as does the concept of white superiority in sport. Non-Caucasian sportspeople in New Zealand are being continually and unfairly pigeon-holed on account of lazy thinking and unsophisticated reasoning. You might have thought we’d moved on from the days when the first thing we noticed about a poorly-performing rugby team was the colour of the players’ skins.
It remains the dirty little secret of New Zealand rugby. Racist British and European football fans tend to yell and chant their warped abuse at the ground on game day; Aussies favour hurling obscenities and/or missiles.
Over here it’s whispered among friends and behind backs, and rationalised into a language that attempts to deodorise the stench of the core message: that it’s OK to judge folk on the basis of race.
Maybe it’s time for the New Zealand Rugby Union to start up its own “it’s not OK” campaign, and pitch it at the main demograph of offenders the white, middle-aged to elderly, male, rugby supporter.
At least then they might have the good grace to feel embarrassed.
On the strength of previous feedback, I’m sure some will rubbish this view on the grounds that it’s naive to believe that all people can be equal. With respect, I think they’re deliberately avoiding the point. Of course everyone is different; that’s why it’s so important that everyone is treated evenly and judged individually, rather than on the strength of racial stereotypes.
Auckland failed this season because they had an inexperienced side which didn’t play as well as expected. To suggest it had something to do with the ethnic mix of the squad, or the lack of Caucasians in “thinking positions” is simply a cop-out; a desperate backlash from an element who are clearly losing touch with the modern world. Presumably they feel the same way about Pacific Islanders fulfilling other roles in the community as well. I’m pretty sure there’s a name for that.
12 Oct 2008, 22:19 pm
Hmmm interesting thread.
Shame some or alot of people on here have a problem with the way someone is treated or feels like.
I am with Tomsta here,ok Luke said what he believes but he did it the wrong way.Maybe he feels he has to let it all out,who knows.But to the people on here who call him names or are now anti him,maybe you guys are the problems with South Africa and not him.
12 Oct 2008, 22:21 pm
It is interesting to see that there has being no debate on the Danie Craven issue Luke mentioned in his interview. I am not sure whether or not Danie Craven had made such remarks and if he did Luke is right in what he says. The silence on this issue is surprising or is it just a sign of acceptance????
I do not rate Luke as a player better than Schalk. Yet he is a player who is a professional and has made his name in the rugby world. An unbiased opinion comes from the pundits in Aus and NZ who do rate him. But maybe not good enough to be a bok as there is better talent around in the mould of Jaque Boetes & Wikus Van Heerden.
I am a huge bok fan. I am an Indian by race and know a lot about rugby. The game that is. I have been to places proudly wearing a bok jumper only to find a lot of white people staring at me and thinking… What the F***??? I have comes to terms with that as I support the bok team as a South African and I would care less what the Vit Okes think of me in a bok jersey. The boks represent South Africa and a South African I am. I amongst others cheered to my last breath the night we won the world cup. However the disappointment remains as I am not able to share that enthusiasm with my white buddies in this country without animosity. Like it or not, racism is still a factor in SA and this would never end unless we look an treat one another with respect. We have over 600 posts on this thread and you can clearly see that’s not the case. I agree that Luke has acted immaturely although he could have handled things differently and I am sure he would realize that one day.
I do support the bok emblem to remain. It represents history not apartheid.
12 Oct 2008, 22:28 pm
#654 gecko:
Cool.Dont always believe the media,but some of this post does point out some of the thinking that does happen here in NZ, but its a bit different when someone who is actually in the mix like a player instead of a journalist comes out.
Racist remarks and thinkings happen in all the world and all countries,just some countries hide it better than some,whether its hidden or in your face,racism is sad but i believe will remain no matter how hard anyone tries
12 Oct 2008, 22:30 pm
#656 Hurricane: Dunno, there are ways to deal with issues, and as a professional sportsman, and a person that some were grooming as a leader at any level, his outburts was irrational, and unprovoked, given his recent participation in the very same squad he is now denigrating!!
12 Oct 2008, 22:30 pm
#643 saru1983: No problem you idiot. We will leave you alone. The sponsors will leave you after the first year. Do you think the Habana / Jacobs / Mujati / Beast etc will stay? No, they will follow the real rugby and money. They will rather play in a private non-racial team (SA Kavaliers !!!!) where they deserve their place than play in YOUR stupid environment where Luke Watson is the captain, vice-captain and goalkicker. Imagine when you have to play Romenia to qaulify for a World Cup and loose 30-7.
12 Oct 2008, 22:35 pm
#656 Boks-Rule:
Nice post.
The last line is the way alot of people must feel but the bok emblem represents one races history and not the other,if you know what i mean.So you can see the way some of these guys must feel.
12 Oct 2008, 22:38 pm
#658 Cheetah 4 Eva:
Hi Cheetah
I dont know whether his outburst was unprovoked but there are other ways of sorting this out than going through the channels he has done.
12 Oct 2008, 22:42 pm
#657 Boks-Rule</a The Boks, Bafana Bafana and Proteas need all the support they can get. Nobody is excluded. You are welcome to visit Loftus with me if in Pretoria. If people stare it is most probably out of respect that you support the Boks. Put on a Bafana shirt, and see the reaction!!!!
12 Oct 2008, 22:46 pm
#656 Boks-Rule:
Very nice post. You must keep on posting here and give us the story from your perspective. This site must never become an “old-boys club” as some would like it to be.
Craven was quoted to have spoken those words and as far as I know never withdrew it until his death.
12 Oct 2008, 23:09 pm
#220 cane:
That’s simply because none…I repeat, none…of those many undeserving Boks (and I agree with you on that score) had their daddies fight their fight, pull strings and basically do whatever was needed to get the youngster a game.
It’s a huge difference.
I respect what Cheeky Watson did, am on record as having said that many, many times.
I do not believe that gives him – or his family – the right to national colours.
Luke Watson is an ordinary rugby player. End of story.
12 Oct 2008, 23:40 pm
Oh boy. Here we go.
I’ll reserve my judgment for later when all the information has filtered in, but I do want to say one quick thing.
If these truly are quotes as attributed here (in other words, re-printed verbatim), then it’s going to be very difficult to claim they were taken out of context. Watson provides his own context within the quotes. If these words are true, he truly will be Twatson.
12 Oct 2008, 23:52 pm
i hope luke is quoted out of context, because he comes across as a racist who hates afrikaners.
and the quotes he attributes to his dad makes it sound like the watsons have an elevated opinion of whothey are exactly.
12 Oct 2008, 23:54 pm
This self righteous p.o.s Funny that he accepted all that money from this rotten to the core industry. Things are changing daily and we shouldn’t kill the springbok emblem for half witted vigilantes. More and more everyday are guys from the other color turning heroes. nokwe, habanna, peterson. But im sure this nobody would love to see the whole team filled with sephakas,nkumane. Wake up you biggot you and your father do not deserve to have pulled the wool over african prides eyes for your own gain.You have forever discraced yourself for being a coward tha hides behind a wonderful country that has come a very long way. Listen to desmond tutu and ask your god to forgive you you garbage.
13 Oct 2008, 06:25 am
#654 saru1983: SARU1983 jys ‘n regte niks werd. Het jy nie gelees wat Watson gese het nie. Dis ‘n skande dat iemand met so houding na vore kom en dit oor een van DIE GROOTSTE simbole/merktekens wat sport betref op aarde. As jy nie verstaan nie asb vra net en ek sal jou ‘n pre-premere Juffrou se nommer gee dat sy jou kan van voor af leer lees!!! Ek ‘comment’ amper nooit nie en lees net maar jy my maat kan die grootste klomp bol praat op die aarde. En as jy ‘stir’ asb gaan weg die ooms probeer gesels…..
O en groot asb moenie Luke en Hansie in dieselfde asem eers noem nie. Hansie was ‘n wonderlike mens en kaptein. Luke wel kom ons se net maar niks oor Luke nie hy verdien nie eers al die woede en ‘hype’ wat hom toegestaan word nie…
13 Oct 2008, 06:30 am
When Cheeky says too many people have bled for his son, who is he talking about? Am I missing something here…I thought Luke was white?? Just wondering out aloud.
13 Oct 2008, 07:41 am
Luke, really dissapointed in you. I have supported you so far. No more. Who is the racist now? Maybe, just maybe, the problem is with you and not the rest of the world.
13 Oct 2008, 07:50 am
Fluke was given enough rope and — like fools the world over — duly hanged himself.
Serves him right.
13 Oct 2008, 07:56 am
He wants transformation?!? Why does he have to refer to himself as the ‘little WHITE boy in the corner’? What has your whiteness got to do with anything mate? If your truly want transformation you will stop referrring to your or anyone’s colour. Agree with 680 Dawnpre… Why did all these previously disadvantaged people bleed for this little white boy in the corner?
Luke, stop being so flippen arrogant mate they bled so that everyone could have a fair chance to get into the Boks. As for your arguments, whilst they may hold a lot of water (yes, I believe we have a long way to go before we really see transformation of our people – I have loved watching the likes of Beast, Mujati & Chavanga play for SA but to me they are international imports not truly transformation players… I’d love to see more stories the likes of Jongi) you need to learn the art of persuation (sp?) and stop srepwing out rubbish off the top of your head. This is an EXTREMELY delicate situation and all you have succeeded in doing in is alienating Afrikaaners and widening the divide that is slowly being closed by people who really want transformation to happen. As I stated before, I want to see you out there in all your free time helping out with the underpriviledged – coaching them and providing them with kit for example. If you truly believe in transformation this will not be a big ask! If you can’t use your own dosh then make a strong effort to get sponsors on board. Unfortunately mate, your comments have probably alienated you from their help too because they wont want to associate… Good luck finding friends in people who want transformation!!
13 Oct 2008, 08:06 am
Watson’s a rugby pariah now. A leper.
13 Oct 2008, 09:21 am
Doc Craven may have been racist (although he was considered “liberal” by the establishment back then) – but Doc taught us all one fundamental truth: “Your not bigger than the game!”
This little ***** however think he is bigger than the game, the team, the jersey, the coach…
13 Oct 2008, 09:35 am
#618 jeremiah:
You are telling me nothing new about the swastika anybody with Discovery channel knows this. The swastika was a symbol of a system that led directly to the deaths of 6 000 000+ jews in european concentration camps. To even begin to compare the Bok emblem and the swastika is ludicrous.
The Bok emblem was not and has never been a symbol of apartheid. The old flag was and it has been, except for a few notable instances, eradicated from our rugby grounds. In fact the last time it was seen at a rugby match it was donned by a black South African. It was widely reported that it was racist whites waving the flag until due to the wonders of modern technology it was shown to be a young black Saffa obviously causing mischief. I ask you would a young jewish kid drape himself in a swastika in order to make a controversial point. I seriously doubt it!!!
When the world world cup was won in 1995 and 2007 the Bok was a uniting force and black and white were all chanting Amabokoboko. By and large it is a very small minority that call for the abolishing of the Bok emblem and it is that same minority that chant wonderfully democratic things like “kill the boer” “one bullet one settler”. The danger we run in South Africa is being swayed by a hate filled militant minority.
I am confident that if we had a national referendum on the Bok emblem an overwhelming majority would vote to keep it.
13 Oct 2008, 11:26 am
#257 Pietman: I agree with that. It needs to be accessable to everyone, not just the satellite subscribers..
13 Oct 2008, 12:38 pm
#278 sharks_lover: You bring up good points.
I just keep hearing people talking about an even spread of sports resources and funding. That is ludircous, like in the Eastern Cape there is a strong cricket and rugby culture, among blacks and coloureds, this does not exist so much in Limpopo and certain parts of KZN. Instead they prefer soccer so play to their strengths. It’s like buying a boat in a land locked desert with no rivers, lakes,streams or dams.
13 Oct 2008, 14:39 pm
I may have been wrong bout Danny Craven according as according to Wikpedia Dannie pushed for all race players being selected to play rugby in Craven Week… From 1980 he is supposed to have pushed for transformation before SA even knew what transformation was about.
13 Oct 2008, 14:58 pm
Just a few minor corrections…
#381 ET: “This heinious inhumanity of man on man started very soon after 6 April 1652 and exists still today in the form of the likes of you.”
…it actually existed millenia before that…think about the great unwashed mess that Europe was in during the dark ages…or how about going back to the dawn of Christianity…just think about the poor jews, better still, go and watch 300, its based on the truth and look at the hordes of slaves used by Zexus…or if you want something a bit closer to home, how about the herders who virtually wiped out the local SAN in their quest for land. You see, it’s not only the white European who has a need to subjugate ‘inferior’ people as you would want us to believe. This actually ties in quite nicely with my next point; ie the origin of the word kafre and not kafeer (possibly different spelling) #388 saru1983: which is what the Romans called African slaves and loosely translated means unbeliever or someone who does not practice Christianity.
OK, enough of the History lesson…I’m outta here…Shalom
13 Oct 2008, 18:36 pm
#671 Hurricane: I do understand what you say. However the Bok emblem represents South African history. Thats the way the World of Rugby looks at it and thats the way we should start looking at it. It may represent “one race’s history” only if we choose to look at it that way. But the world would never. All they see is South Africa. We need to move on and leave the past in the past.
Pages: « 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.