Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Truss: Aviation Safety Regulation Review

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Truss: Aviation Safety Regulation Review

Old 10th Dec 2014, 23:57
  #1581 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,733
BRB hypothesis - M&M's grand plan for GA decimation??

'Twas a sombre start to BRB last evening: item first, Bill Whitworth (Whitworth Aviation) has had a close encounter of the unpleasant kind with a CASA FOI and failed his MECIR with all the associated trimmings.
Most disturbing indeed - I once had the upmost respect for that FOI in question,especially after completing and passing a MECIR renewal where I was hopelessly out of IFR currency and no extra funds to do a pre-test flight.

However now I have heard of at least two similar tales about this FOI & former ATO... The first was probably one of the worst examples of FF pilot embuggerance that I have ever had cause to review - & that was before this FOI was coerced across to the dark side and into Wodger's warren...
(i) Where in the Sydney basin would be an ideal place for a large property development? The rider being, which council is developing 'river bank' areas as desirable life style projects.

(ii) Where in the Sydney basin is there a large open area suitable for development at a knock down price?

Clearly a no-brainer – Bankstown airport. Next came a curly question to which extensive research provided an answer.

(iii) Where has the most odious of CASA action against industry occurred?, the rider being which part of the aerodrome has been most affected?

Again, no-brainer; Bankstown, under Chambers has become a kill zone, 3:1 the ratio compared to the least mauled secondary airport.

(iv) Where have the most contentious brawls related to lease and rent agreements emanated? Same answer once again.

(v) Which airport has actually felt the weight of large trucks bearing fill and 'dozers to level it off. Same answer once again.

(vi) Who was responsible for 'tweeking' the rules to accommodate the sale of our secondary airports, who was running the sell off show and who has extensive influence within the infrastructure governing 'airports'. Well, it seems the Murky Machiavellian ticks all boxes.
Hmm...wish I could have made it to the BRB I have vast volumes of information that could IMO have swung the consensus to at least 60/40 for M&M being the root of all evils for the woes of the IOS/MaM...

Back at post #1550 I highlighted a speech made by M&M at the recent AAA convention which was also belatedly reported on (regurgitated) by MMSM Steve - Mrdak stresses need to protect airspace from residential projects
Infrastructure Department secretary Mike Mrdak was among those who emphasised the need to protect airspace around airports, describing it as one of the critical areas of future public policy.

“Having been through the experience of trying to get a new airport through, I think it’s very important that we as an industry talk a lot about why it’s so important to protect our existing assets,’’ he said.

“Safeguarding our airports from inappropriate development around them which will have the potential to constrain the growth of our airports, I
think, is a key fundamental planning area for reform in Australia.

“And this will become a more intense and difficult challenge as our major cities grow.’’

Mr Mrdak said that as aviation demand expanded and major cities doubled in size by the middle of the century, the issue of co-ordinated planning was assuming *increasing importance.

“It is very vital that airport planning take into account the *development around airports but also that airport planning be rigorously transparent,” he said.

“But just as important is that … planning by state and local *governments take account of airports, their role and value to the community.

“Developments around airports and under flight paths can constrain operations, either directly, where they conflict with the safety or airport operations, or indirectly where they lead to public pressure to change flight paths or impose on increasing restrictions on operations.’’

The infrastructure head said good planning was essential to protect the amenity of residents near airports,

He said every effort should be made to avoid placing residential developments in areas “which are or will be affected by significant noise’’, or at the very least making sure people understood clearly what they were dealing with when an airport introduced changes.

He recognised this was a challenge for state and local planners trying to maximise land use their own jurisdictions.

“But as we know, if we don’t protect our long-term assets, then we aren’t going to meet our growth challenge.’’
However - as he has done many times in the past - that speech was carefully crafted so that there was never any mention of major city Secondary Airports; nor does he mention any consultation with the tenants or users of these airports...:
Mr Mrdak said proscribed airspace was defined by the International Civil Aviation Organisation and any building penetrating it *required commonwealth regulatory approval informed by advice from CASA, Airservices and the industry.

“If our advice is that if the construction activity will reduce safety or efficiency for an airport, we cannot and will not approve it,’’ he said.
“I’m afraid it’s going to be that simple and we have to be much more determined on our position on these matters.

“And I know this is becoming a much more resource-intensive task for our major airport operators and it can be an unwelcome distraction, but if we don’t protect that airspace now, we will in the long term come to rue our failure to do so.

“I think it’s one of the most important tasks government and the industry must work on together.’’

The closest thing so far is a National Airports Safeguarding Framework set up in 2012 to protect airspace near airports.

The infrastructure secretary said there had been some progress with the framework, which now included guidelines for planners on particular issues such as aircraft noise, hazards, wildlife strikes, lighting distractions and windshear.

“There are further guidelines under development but implementation, unfortunately, remains patchy across jurisdictions,’’
Fascinating that certain parts of the M&M pretty much parroted statements he made back in 2011 (yes over three years ago..) at the Sup Estimates:
Mr Mrdak: This is an area of growing concern for us, as the department acknowledged before the dinner break. Mr Russell, Mr McCormick and I, as the aviation policy group, which is the CEOs of the aviation agencies, have discussed this issue at length. We have recognised the need to improve the processes involved in judging and advising. Also in relation to the point you raised, to some degree the aviation industry has worked hard to accommodate in the past some of these breaches of services. I think we have reached the point where we believe we can no longer do that. Hence there is some work happening at the moment where we have established a group of officers from our respective departments and agencies which is now working on a much more robust approach to, firstly, identifying potential breaches. As you know there are regulations under the Airports Act which provide for protection of prescribed airspace. How do we better identify those, how do we ensure that local and state governments are aware of it and how do we as the agencies get together much more effectively to make sure that those breaches of the services are no longer accommodated in the way that they have been?
This was in response to a Senator Fawcett line of inquiry, this was also the 1st appearance by DF and officially announced the new Senator's keen interest in all things aeronautical - starting with Aviation & Airports:
Senator FAWCETT: I want to confirm whether the department still acts on behalf of the Commonwealth in leases of airports?

Mr Mrdak: Yes.

Senator FAWCETT: Section 9.2 of the lease talks about maintenance of runways and pavements:

The lessee must maintain the runways, taxiways, pavements and all parts of the airport essential for safe access by air transport to a standard no less than the standard at the commencement of the lease.

Why then at Bankstown Airport has the airport operator ripped up the cross-runway, which is the only north-south runway available to light operators in the area, closed taxiways, reduced the number of runways by nearly three-quarters and moved the purpose-built compass wing area to a part of the tarmac that has ferrous material in it, which makes it not suitable, and also reduced significantly the area available for rotary wing training operations by moving it from the south to the north side of the runways?

Mr Doherty: The decommissioning of the cross-runway at Bankstown occurred in March 2005. It was identified in the master plan as a change of the layout of the aeronautics and that is provided for in the Airports Act. The new master plan was approved in 2005, so that was the basis for the action that then followed.

Senator FAWCETT: The changes were also opposed by operators at the airfield and MOPS 139 requires operators be consulted. Also with the cross-runway, particularly where there is ab initio training involved which there is—in fact the minister just in the last 12 months has reported the number of training operations at Bankstown is increasing—means the useability factor for a runway and cross-wing operations in particular should be 99.5 per cent. Was it actually established prior to that plan being approved and were the opinions of the users taken into account? The users certainly still believe that whilst they put forward contrary positions they were not considered nor in fact available publicly to see who opposed it.

Mr Doherty: I can only speak broadly. I understand that there were submissions from two of the tenants at the time which were taken into account and, I think before the decision was made, advice was sought from both CASA and Airservices. The essential advice was that the cross-runway was used very rarely, that it was inappropriate to use it while the main parallel runway system was in operation and the requirement to use the cross-runway occurred on maybe a couple of days a year for part of a day, so it was used to a very small extent, and there was no objection raised from CASA on safety grounds.

Senator FAWCETT: Mr Doherty, how often do you use the airbags or seatbelts in your car?

Mr Doherty: I use the seatbelts all the time.

Senator FAWCETT: To prevent injuries in an accident. How often are they required?

Senator Carr: It is a bit unfair to put it to these officers. A decision
was made and signed off, as I understand, by Minister Anderson at the time of the previous government. It really is a bit difficult to pursue the matter with officers some years later.

Senator FAWCETT: Minister, my point is that the process in terms of transparency around the relationship between the department, regardless of the flavour of government, and the aviation operators is not effective in terms of actually preserving the utility of airports for their primary purpose which is aviation. To quote the current minister: 'Nothing, I repeat, nothing is as important in aviation as safety.' I have no further questions.
Oh there is so much more in the Sup Estimates Hansard of 2011 - that supports the BRB hypothesis - but in the interests of not drifting I think this subject would be better discussed on the Senate thread...


Ps The worst thing in regards to the Whitworth Aviation embuggerance is that it is further proof that Wodger and his cronies are still at it - & obviously feel that the M&M campaign of GA decimation is alive & well...

Pps Feedback on yesterday's festivities in Cantberra reveals a disturbing suspicion that there are signs that GB is being wooed across to the dark side and the Miniscule (with GB support) is advising that the AICC members should knock off for Xmas i.e. standby and wait...well I say bollocks to that...
Sarcs is offline  
Old 11th Dec 2014, 06:36
  #1582 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,456
Sarcs old mate, "that" particular FOI has the nickname "The black widow" since she departed the "Industry" and was swallowed up by the dark lord.

She is now a handmaiden of the Bankstown ex RAAF baggage handler, AKA Wodger Wabbit, the dark Lord, acolyte of the Screaming Skull.

One thing is immediately apparent.

Older folk, especially those with ATO privileges, or involved in check and training are being targeted by Wodger Wabbit, and should protect themselves.

They would be well advised to have their lawyer present during any encounter with the black widow, or at least have a reliable witness present, she cannot be trusted, like a black widow spider she will eat you alive.

Perhaps the best thing would be to record the whole process so it can be peer reviewed. Always keep in your mind, CAsA cannot be trusted, there is no probity involved with CAsA, the system is corrupt.

Kharon's suggestion of a conspiracy to clean out the Southern, South Western side of Bankstown by shutting down the operators there certainly has a ring of truth given the stats. The Wodger Wabbit wrecking ball continues its rampage unabated.

Who's next??

Last edited by thorn bird; 11th Dec 2014 at 06:50.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 11th Dec 2014, 06:42
  #1583 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,733
REX on Forsyth response.

Aviation shake-up to 'reverse toxic relationship'
THE Commonwealth Government's planned shake-up of aviation safety regulations has been welcomed by the chief of regional airline Rex as an opportunity to "reverse the toxic relationship" between the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and the industry.

Neville Howell said airlines would hold the Federal Government to its word on implementing the changes without undue delay and hoped it would "move much faster than it has done in selecting the new CASA board members and CEO".

"Rex is pleased to see that the government has accepted 32 recommendations and has committed to further reviewing another four. Industry has suffered for far too long and we are happy to see the Abbott government taking firm action on this critical issue," he said.

"We note that the government has only agreed in principle with some key recommendations and we urge them to fulfil the full intent of the Aviation Safety Regulation Review report recommendations and not just pay lip service."

Among the recommendations was the reformation of CASA amid widespread concerns its current approach has resulted in the aviation industry actively avoiding engaging in contact with the body, commercial law firm Ashurst has stated in an industry alert.

The review also found CASA should delegate responsibility for day-to-day operational management to Airservices Australia, and change its regulatory philosophy to build a better relationship with airline operators.

"The government has been in office now for more than a year during which time the industry has been waiting for decisive action from the Minister," Mr Howell said.

"We do not have any more time to waste before the next election comes around again."

Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss said the implementation of the recommendations would help build a more vibrant and co-operative industry.

"Active engagement between industry and aviation agencies will help inform future regulatory priorities and the development of simpler regulations, standards and orders," he said.
Pity Nifty Howell wasn't present at yesterday's inaugural AICC love-in, reckon he would have livened up the conversation. And I don't
reckon he would have been talking about knocking off for Xmas...

Hopefully RAAA's Jim Davis relayed Nifty's message to the apparently mute and dozy man at the back of the room Skidmore...

Sarcs is offline  
Old 11th Dec 2014, 18:54
  #1584 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 0
Watch what happens to jabiru, they will be forced to close permanently at Christmas,
Sunfish is offline  
Old 11th Dec 2014, 18:55
  #1585 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 367
AICC members - AHIA Missing in Action?

At present the Australian Helicopter Industry Association consists of more than 90 company members (one third of helicopter AOCs) and over one hundred individual members, plus links to HAI and other international associations; including NZ.

For more than a year or so the AHIA has had a CASA LO (Dale South) appointed from Standards to assists our various volunteer working groups; and AHIA has invited CASA to AHIA trade shows to form face to face panels to accelerate the reviews of legalisation. At the next Avalon Airshow AHIA is sponsoring conference hall space on 26 Feb '15 to host CASA (and also Air Service) teams to continue efforts in getting feedback running between the regulators and guys trying to make a buck!

AHIA volunteers are working with the TAAAF; SCC and other government committees. In particular the National Skills Councils tasked with rewriting engineering and aircrew training legislation - which CASA has to follow; but has not at this time; subject to interdepartmental tensions. That is why an RTO has to have two sets of operational documents - one for CASA and one for skills councils. (We are talking thousands of pages here).

Why bother? No RTO approval - no foreign students; or advanced training courses if required under various contracts.

The RW fleet makes up 14% of the register and 30% of the AOC list. And 25% of all GA accidents - a fact they are not proud of).

And AHIA has been advised by HAI members Australia is now second in numbers of registered helicopters in the Western World!

But the questions is - now they have such a large membership, a CASA LO and such good attendance at CASA talk fests and working groups doing excellent work; and ongoing work with the future Air Transport changes – why ignore the AHIA?

And a final gripe. The CASA Annual Report ending 30 June 2014 confirmed over the past decades CASA RW registrations grew at an average annual rate of 6 to 8%. Always at least twice the GDP growth, It was really good news for investors and industry workers.

But with the current uncertainties associated with the paralysis of the Government - CASA - industry interface the helicopter fleet has made an increase of only .06% over the past six months. . Almost zero and dangerously close to slipping into recession.. Why have the training schools gone almost into reverse and why are potential engineers not applying for courses?

So the AHIA, with their rapidly growing association and a good knowledge of the pot holes in the road ahead is not considered to be part of the AICC? Why?

More in the next AHIA e-newsletter 'Helicopters Australasia" a freebie - no advertising - do you want one for an update - just ask!
robsrich is offline  
Old 11th Dec 2014, 20:08
  #1586 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 0
Why not? Because you might represent your members views instead of being a complaisant lap dog. These consultative bodies are merely a fig leaf - window dressing for CASA. A lot of people get their egos stroked by being invited to join. Christmas drinks in Parliament House and an annual cocktail party with the Minister is all you need.

To put that another way, watch as each member of the group does nothing to criticise CASA and justifies each and every CASA action to its members.

By way of example, how can the President of the RAA possibly sit on such a council while his jabiru owning members are being slowly crucified???. And spare be the "inside the tent p1ssing out" BS.

Last edited by Sunfish; 11th Dec 2014 at 20:51.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 11th Dec 2014, 20:21
  #1587 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Reiteration, well, why not.

Don'tcha just love the way the lobotomy machinery swings into action at the time of year when sugar plums, Reindeer and school holidays are atop the agenda, after a long hard year.

Rucking freemarkable, the way it works out, ain't it..
Kharon is offline  
Old 11th Dec 2014, 20:27
  #1588 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
It would have been nice to see Arthur Pape involved, but as Sunfish says....
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2014, 22:56
  #1589 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: OZ
Posts: 11
answer to cynical pilot

I reckon CASA personnel could easily fit this description of politicians!

While stitching a cut on the injured hand of a 75 year old farmer, the doctor struck up a conversation. Eventually the topic got around to politicians and their role as our leaders.

The old farmer said, "Well as I see it, most politicians are Post Turtles."

The doctor asked what a Post Turtle was.

The farmer said, "when you drive down a country road and come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a Post Turtle."

The farmer saw the puzzled look on the doctor's face and continued.

"You know he didn't get up there by himself;

he doesn't belong up there;

he doesn't know what to do while he's up there;

he's elevated beyond his ability to function and

you wonder what kind of dumb arse put him up there to begin with!"
greylocks is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2014, 08:19
  #1590 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,456
I'll petition the boatman for a chokkie frog for you, I believe your post deserves a Tim Tam, but he is a meany handing them out. I think Minnie keeps pinching them so he loses track of what's in stock.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2014, 18:55
  #1591 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Willyleaks Intercept

Master Aloysius Thornbird.
C/- Matrons Nest School of Beating Down Social Misfits.(BDSM).
Little Whopping.
Gentle Beating in the bushes.

Dear Master TB. (a.k.a. Lampshade boy).

In primus; as you are very well aware, the issuing of Choc Frogs (CF) is not the responsibility of the Styx river transport department. Under section 666 (i) (c) of the CF Act only the minuscule may issue a suggestive directive, which, after approval by the select committee may be sent to the Word Weasel department for amendment, before being forwarded to a department, (any department will do), where after a minimum period of due and careful consideration and an environmental impact study and a departmental safety (CYA) case generated, the draft will be returned to the minuscule. Once the minuscule is satisfied, the first draft is ratified and passed along to the transport executive (legal section) to develop a robust safety training regime before being slightly scrambled and filled with loop holes. Once the accompanying non disclosure document is signed and fees paid, then; and only then, may said CF be issued to the selected minion.

Secundus; We are well aware of the illegal, irresponsible actions of certain members of the IOS who have taken it upon themselves to issue Choc frogs without due process. This completely unsanctioned action is under review by our crack investigative team who, after much diligent searching of U-Bend video evidence have traced a clandestine supply operation to a Canadian source, buried deep within the infrastructure of the international CF oversight organisation (CFOO). Multiple layers of deep protection has, thus far prevented the 'team', despite numerous, tiring journeys to Canada from identifying the recalcitrant rebels, led by the infamous Gobbledock.

We shall continue our robust efforts to eradicate the source of the illegal CF and it's distribution network; and, although penetrating the defences of the Styx river houseboat park has proved difficult (the investigators keep disappearing) we are determined to stop the practice.

Yours In Eptitude.

A Minusculian Minion.

- - - - - - - - -Houseboat response.- - - - - - -

GL has been granted a big smile;..... however, as the article has been featured before (with a picture), the committee feel that a CF award would lower the benchmark. The CF award is only issued for true originality, wit and talent. The high standards set for the coveted Tim Tam award for excellence must not be debased. The IOS do have some rules and position in society to consider. Although it is accurate to say that any true IOS member may bestow the CF or TT award as and when pleases them best.

Toot toot....,,,,

Last edited by Kharon; 13th Dec 2014 at 19:05.
Kharon is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2014, 20:40
  #1592 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: OZ
Posts: 11
reply to hornbird and Kharon

I thankyou for wishing to bestow on me such prestigious awards, however, I must confess it is not my work; I merely adopted it. I don't know where it originated, but it was an opportunity too good to miss.

Last edited by greylocks; 13th Dec 2014 at 20:43. Reason: incorrect spelling of name Thornbird
greylocks is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2014, 05:47
  #1593 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: OZ
Posts: 11
thorn bird

Apologies for mis-spelling your name! It was a computer error! It seems to have a mind of its own. I tried to correct it but wasn't able after I sent it.
greylocks is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2014, 07:20
  #1594 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 1,445

must be the male equivalent of hornbag then.
But that's the English lanuage for ya...and spell checker
aroa is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2014, 10:01
  #1595 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 53
Question The Sneaky Buggers...


Some dot connecting.

John Sharp- CEO Pel-Air, REX
Ex Tpt Mini
Federal Treasurer for NATS, whose leader is Truss

Political donations:

From REX:

250k to Labor when they were "in", a month before release of ATSB report.

@75k to Libs
@75k to NATS - before further Senate inquiry Nov 2012

No political donation to Gov from them since 2004. Questionable.


Can the CEO of the company under investigation donate to the same party that he is Federal Treasurer for?
Does that mean the donations to the NATS from REX fall into his portfolio?
If so, what did he do with it, and is it legal to donate to, well, yourself from the company you are a CEO at which is under the microscope?

Crazy. They take care of each other. Wolf packs!
Ziggychick is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2014, 18:53
  #1596 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,456
I have the same problem. These computer thingies are developing a mind of their own, they'll be writing the posts for us soon. Thanks for your analogy, cracked me up, very apt.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2014, 21:12
  #1597 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,733
Ziggy - "..it is not what you know.."

On REX..:
Crazy. They take care of each other. Wolf packs!
Unfortunately Ziggy it seems that is the way of the world the spin offs are huge...

Here is a classic recent example of how it works..

Less than a week ago we get this article - Aviation shake-up to 'reverse toxic relationship' - where basically Nifty Howell bangs the table and tells the Miniscule & CAsA to get on with implementing the Forsyth report.

Then today we get this announcement:
REX - Regional Express (ZL, Wagga Wagga) says it has secured an Area Air Operator’s Certificate (AAOC) from the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) which will allow it to expand its vast Regular Passenger Transport (RPT) network without the need for CASA to approve each new destination.

“The AAOC authorises Rex to conduct an internal approval process for RPT services to the 16 new Queensland ports on the regulated routes that have recently been awarded to REX by the Queensland State Government," REX Chief Operating Officer Neville Howell said.

Following a tendering process, REX was awarded three additional regulated regional air routes from the Queensland government in October. The AAOC will now allow the carrier to open up flights connecting Cairns, Normanton, Mornington, Burketown, Doomadgee, Mount Isa, Brisbane Int'l, Brisbane West Wellcamp, Saint George, QL, Cunnamulla, Thargomindah, Charleville, Quilpie, Windorah, Birdsville, Bedourie, Boulia, Townsville, Winton, Longreach, Hughenden, Richmond, QL, and Julia Creek.

"We are very proud that we are now in a position to start operations on January 1, 2015, a mere 8 weeks after being awarded the contract,” Howell added.
No comment...

Sarcs is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2014, 18:21
  #1598 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
All of which simply removes one large dissenting voice; having got that which was asked for, the price will be silence. Rex has deep roots and powerful connections who may now return to golf and morning tea, knowing 'their' part of the aviation world is safe. It would be churlish to continue protesting when so much has been given.

Divide and conquer, the only way to help your mates run a democracy.
Kharon is offline  
Old 16th Dec 2014, 00:38
  #1599 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 62
More empty rhetoric from an individual who was personally responsible for a serious breach of privacy from CASA. What a hypocrite.
Greedy is offline  
Old 16th Dec 2014, 01:12
  #1600 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 1,445
Hoodoo Voodoo

Bizarre for JA to be talking about trust
Tok pekpek tru.

Last edited by aroa; 16th Dec 2014 at 11:23. Reason: Pidgin for BS
aroa is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.