Documentary Review: The God Who Wasnt There (2005)

➡ The text discusses a 2005 film directed by Brian Fleming, which questions the existence of Jesus. The film suggests that Jesus might be a combination of stories and people from the past, rather than a historical figure. It also questions why there were no writings about Jesus during his lifetime, with the first accounts appearing around 70 AD, decades after his death. The text also discusses the film’s claim that Christians are fundamentally violent, citing examples from history and popular culture.
➡ The text discusses a documentary that compares three different portrayals of Jesus in film: Passion of the Christ, Jesus Christ Superstar, and The Last Temptation of Christ. The author argues that the popularity of these films doesn’t necessarily reflect Christian preferences, but rather a general human interest in violence. The text also explores the idea that many Christian stories are similar to older pagan myths, suggesting that these stories were understood as allegorical, not literal, in the past. The author criticizes the documentary for painting all Christians with a broad brush, implying they all love violence and war, which he disagrees with.
➡ The text discusses a film that challenges traditional religious beliefs, particularly fundamentalist Christianity. The film’s creator uses his personal experiences and frustrations with religion to question the existence of Jesus and the validity of religious rituals. However, the text criticizes the film for its oversimplification of complex theological topics and its focus on a personal vendetta rather than a balanced exploration of religion. Despite these flaws, the text acknowledges the film’s ability to provoke thought and stir emotions.
➡ The speaker shares their mixed feelings about a film they watched, noting that while it was compelling and drew them in, they found some aspects arrogant and off-putting. Despite giving it a “sink” rating, they still recommend the film. They also mention an upcoming documentary about Y2K and promote a comic about Stanley Kubrick and the Apollo space missions. The speaker ends with a rap verse, expressing their thoughts and feelings.

Know that you can sell people on this. Someone will be like, oh, I always knew Christians all loved guns and just wanted to see Jesus cry for two hours. Under the docks. Yeah, under the docks. They collect the dots. Under the docks. Under the docks, yeah, under the docks. Sam. Tis the season to piss people off. Like this is under the docks. I’m Sean Criss, Paranoid American. This is where we watch the film and tell you if you should check it out. I don’t think this should piss anyone off. I mean, if. If you do, then it’s just a test of faith.

But you’re supposed to have your faith tested, right? Comes out stronger the other end. We are going to the film the God who wasn’t there. 2005 film directed by Brian Fleming and narrated by Brian Fleming. This film explores if Jesus existed is if other films that we’ve talked about, like Zeitgeist, where like he just has the same qualities of other gods and other religion, pagan religions and to the name that we’ve seen through time, similar to Horus and. And other gods that people praise to. Did Jesus really exist? Did he? I don’t know. I mean this guy seems to feel very strongly that no, that Jesus didn’t exist.

And this one, I think I’ve mentioned this documentary at least twice. One when we did the pagan Christ and then again when we were doing Zeitgeist. Because Zeitgeist kind of goes into this angle for the first third and then it breaks away and does something else and breaks away and does something else again. So if you’re interested in someone else’s deep dive into whether or not Christ was a historical, literal human being or if he’s this amalgamation of previous stories and people. That’s kind of the entire premise of this in this full documentary, along with being one per like the actual writer, director, his kind of personal journey from being in a fundamentalist Christian to.

I don’t even know what he claims to be at the end. If I had a guess, I’d say agnostic slash atheist. But I don’t. I don’t know that for a fact. Plotting the course. This one had a lot. This was fun. A lot of the claims and I’m going to go right out the gate. One of the claims I found that I did not. I’ve never heard this claim in any of the films that we watched. Maybe I missed it, but it was new to me that none of the gospels of Mark, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written until 70 AD about 40 some odd like 37 years whatever after Jesus’s death.

And the way that it’s portrayed is that these were written like, you know, immediately after, like, you know, kind of this a memoir of like, hey, this is what happened. This is the journey we all had together. And they make this claim that not only was it written then, but that’s when it was distributed. And that’s when the argument comes to play of like, where’s the government of that time? Using it as like, hey, listen to Jesus, bro. He’s real. Like, you know what I mean? Like being like this authority figure of God on earth that was able to like kind of move people into control.

It’s a good hook line because that’s basically how this documentary starts off before, I mean, before he starts getting into the facts. He does a really good job of playing on emotion and just sort of surface level beliefs. So he does these man on the street interviews, which I’m starting to realize is like one of my favorite formats because I just love that reality aspect of it. But he’s going up to people and just asking them about, hey, have you ever heard of Osiris? You ever heard of Dionysus? Have you ever heard of all these different gods? And the responses he’s getting that are just like, nah, bro, I got to worry about is Jesus.

Like Jesus is all you got to pay attention to. And you know, and someone’s done all the other hard work for us. Jesus is here and he’s making these qu. These open ended questions. And one of the questions he’s like, look at how happy Christians are when they talk about Jesus. How come I’m not that happy? Like I want to be this happy. And this is how it kind of opens up. And then he goes immediately into the story of Jesus. And like you just mentioned, the biggest hook line is, okay, here’s this really important dude.

And it’s for thousands of years people have been worshiping him. We’ve got all these writings, we’ve got canonical texts and people that claim that he was real. How come no one mentioned him while he was alive? From year zero to 33 when he dies, there’s no mentioning, no writings of him, no modern day like, like historical writings that came from that period. The only started around 70 like you mentioned. And the only bridge between the year zero and year 70 is Paul. And Paul writes about him around 33 again after death. But Paul’s writings never mention Bethlehem or Mary and Joseph or the manger birth or like any of the pilot, like any of the whole like crucifixion yeah, he doesn’t, he doesn’t know.

He mentions a crucifixion, but not like the Roman, like, none of the politics. So the point that this documentary starts out is if Jesus was historical and he was this important, he was, you know, creating miracles and everyone knew about him, how come no one writes about him for two generations after he’s dead? And then those have contradictions in them. And I guess that was the first nugget that started the writer on his sort of journey on trying to look deeper into this. Another claim that I’m gonna go off of this one is that they. This is more of like a big chunk of it.

He basically claims that Christians are fundamentally violent, right? Like, he’s like, he goes through this whole list of like, like, hey, like, Christians love violence from the beginning of time. Like, his list is like, from the starts with the passion of the Christ and showing how bloody it was. And like, the, the gore. And like emphasizes on like at one scene where he’s hammering in the nail, the, the blood drops. He’s like, Mel Gibson would have had to have like a, an injecting blood thing. He’s called a squib. He doesn’t mention it, but yeah, you have a squib off camera that like shoots through.

Of course, bro. It’s like, it was a phenomenal movie. What do you want? Yeah, he’s. He harps on that for a minute. Like, it really, it really triggered him. It sounds like when you hit it, like he goes off and then he talks about the Spanish Inquisition and then just kind of like spitballs from there. Because again, this is a 2005 film, so you gotta imagine, you know, 9, 11 happened already. We’re deep in Iraq, you know, kind of in the Middle east and have our hold. And there’s that stigma going around where we’re all like anti government, but most of the anti government and anti war people are a little bit more left leaning now.

Times are a little bit different. I know, crazy, right? They used to be anti war and stuff. And I think that you could see it all through that lens. So he goes through that same lens of like, every Republican and Christian Republican wants to kill all these people so they can start and bring on the Rapture. I mean, he goes as far as like doing an interview with. I forgot the guy’s name. He’s like, yeah, I have a website, it’s called theraptureletters.com I actually went to it. Spoiler alert. I don’t think it’s available anymore. I went to it and it just said, we’re revamping or whatever.

And this raptureletters.com was people like, kind of like just love letters to like, hey, you know, I love Jesus and we want like cheering on the Rapture. And then he focused on that neocon evangelist Christian group that has been pushing like, ah, we want the end of days. We want the end of days. It got to be in Jerusalem blowing up. I think that part of this documentary is you see some daddy issues coming out and they take the form of you, you. He goes back and he interviews the old dean of his school, like the old vice principal or something of his, like high school that he went to that was a fundamentalist Christian school.

So I think that a large part of this movie is him also coming to terms with. I hated my high school and I hated how they taught me about religion. And chances are the high school was probably run by right wing conservatives. So now he’s like, and I’m going to make sure that some of this splashes off onto right wing and conservatives too. So he goes down this very deep tunnel of God’s not real and Republicans just want to kill you. And the rapture is silly. And Christians love violence. And I think that he kind of misses that.

It’s kind of humans that love violence. And also his metric was to take three different movies about Christ. One of them was Passion of the Christ, which he calls the Bloody Jesus or the Smashing of the Christ, because he does this big super cut of every single time that Jesus gets hit in that movie, like literally every single time index. And he just plays it in the background as he’s showing us all their stuff. He has one called the Singing Jesus, which is Jesus Christ Superstar, and then one called Sexy Jesus, which is the Last Temptation of Christ that had Willem Defoe in it.

And he mentions that Jesus singing Jesus made 55 million box office, Horny Jesus made 33 million, and that Bloody Jesus made 370 million. Therefore, Christians are more like Bloody Jesus than the other two. And I mean, that doesn’t really pass my muster of like filling out a metric. All it means is that people in general like violence more than they like musicals and more than they like Bible stories. So when, when the reviews start coming out and it’s like, what is this, you know, another Veggie Tales style Christian comedy or something like Nabro, just Jesus getting tortured for about two hours, people are like, okay, I understand that, I’ll go and see that.

And I feel that it’s just. It’s more about humans and not necessarily about Christians particular. But at this moment, you can. You are well aware that the point of this documentary is the sort of pink Christians in a certain way. And not. He met. He specifies later on that he was raised fundamentalist Christian. But throughout the course of the movie, he doesn’t necessarily always add that fundamentalist prefix. He just says Christian in general. And he says it enough that he just might not even realize that he’s yelling at, like, a very specific stone on the wall.

But it looks like he’s saying, take the entire wall down. And to your point, kill bill volume one and volume two came around. Out around the same time, I think. 2003, 2000. First one made 180 million, and the second one made 152 million. Are we to believe that everybody that went to Kill Bill was just a Christian? There are like, no other people that had any other faith or didn’t believe in God. They didn’t go see Kill Bill, no go. Like you said, Gore sells, but he tries to emphasize it to where he’s trying. It’s a hit piece, right? It’s.

It’s a personal him going at other people. Another claim that he likes to make is that which. This where we kind of get back into the whole Zeitgeist again, right? Where he’s saying, like, hey, like, what you read is just a bunch of regurgitated old pagan rituals, right? Horus is Jesus. They go through the same list of like, Horus, Mithra, all these Hercules and. And these myths. And they try to boil down of, like, they tell the stories. And then there’s. I forgot the guy’s name, but he’s like a historian and he, he, he, he bases off.

He kind of dedicates the film to him at the end, and he’s like, how many facts, like, you know, like, match each other and like, I forgot who the top one was. Like 23. And like Hercules, that in comparison had like 13 or 14. And then there are Jesus. How much did he have? 19. Like, where it matched up, you know, born in a manger, like, kind of the same thing with Zeitgeist. And I want to say that I almost feel like the zeitgeist was birthed from this. Like, I feel like the guy watched this and he was like, yeah, this guy’s absolutely right.

You know what I mean? When he was making Zeitgeist, because there’s a lot of the same information and they kind of just go to try to prove it. One of the things they try to disprove is another historian is like, there’s no way that a group of Roman Jews, Jewish powers, would go meet on the night, the eve of Passover to rule of like, hey, we need to take out Jesus. And so they argue that and to me is of a faulty argument. You’re arguing about a movie and like some written Bible which we know has been rewritten tons of times, right? Like, and they’re going like, hey, look at this movie scene.

And you’re like, well, you can’t base everything on a movie, man. Like, you know what I mean? Like, it’s different. I know that people have that faith and he’s just like going hammering home that they would never do that. Whether that be or true, like, or not, they, they, they could have brought a little bit more facts about it, but I. They killed it with a lot of the comparisons. But we’ve seen before. And unfortunately for this film, I saw Zeitgeist first. So, like, even though this film was before, I’m still going to remember Zeitgeist. And I think I saw this before Zeitgeist back in the day.

So some of it was kind of new. And Zeitgeist goes into way more depth. I think they’re more specific about the claims. They give you a lot of visuals and stuff. This one has interviews with actual researchers that were making this. The focus of their entire study was looking into all these alternatives of Christ and the pagan counterparts. And I think they make just as good of a case for some of that. I guess this is the one part where people maybe get upset is over my, my Jesus was real and historical. But they make a really strong case in this particular documentary that the historical Jesus, the one that people were talking about in, you know, the.

The centuries after all these stories came out, that they universally understood this to be allegorical and that no one believed that this was a real person just because the stories were so close to all these other gods that they were still familiar with. So it was almost a point of like, oh, yeah, your guy celebrates Christmas. Our guy celebrates Christmas. You do gifts under a tree. We do gifts under the tree. Call him whatever you want. Like, sure, he’s invited. And that that was kind of the original idea. And that over 2,000 years that this has completely shifted and made like, a political aspect out of it.

And not just the Christians love war and all this, but he also pulls up one website in particular and it shows these Christian soldiers. That’s what it says on the. The site and they’re holding like AR15s and it’s, you know, it’s got like all this very heavy militant stuff on it. But he shows that. And then he kind of just implies like, and this is what Christians are. And it’s like, wait a minute, I know some pretty left leaning Christians that would see that website and be like, who are these crazy idiots? You know, who are these flyover, like right, right wing nutjobs that we don’t associate with.

So he doesn’t, he does a very good job of painting all Christians as a certain way, like in his own regard. Like if, if this were a debate, you know, that you can sell people on this, someone will be like, oh, I always knew Christians all loved guns and just wanted to see Jesus cry for two hours so they can kind of lean into that. But again, this came across as someone who had just started challenging his own faith and he kind of feels like he’s got a bone to pick with the world now and you get a little bit of that.

But I, I love the passion. I actually really like his passion about this particular topic. And my last point really was a, a claim that they make is where they’re talking about how when they confront Christians and say, hey look man, well look how it all matches up. Like the same with Horus, same birthday, same like you know, in a manger. Look how it matches these hieroglyphs and they’re like, well yeah, that’s because the devil went back in time and he, he started fighting like 2500 years before Jesus. You know, he, he changed the narrative. And like they even have a quote in it where it says for when they say that Dionysus arose again and not evident that the devil has intimate the prophecy.

So they basically claim, and I’m not saying like, you know, I think they, they go through a couple preachers and stuff. Like I haven’t heard anybody say that, but I mean it does make sense. Like, so instead of like going yeah, maybe there is something different, maybe you know, like let’s explore this together. He kind of goes more the avenue of their like denial completely of like the devil got a time machine and he went back and he was like, I’m killing baby Jesus, why isn’t that what he does right now? Instead he just goes and plants all these false stories.

There’s also, I’m not even going to repeat the joke because I always butcher retelling jokes. But Bill Hicks has got a stand up routine where he’s talking about, you go up to the Pearly gates. And they’re like, oh, you live the great life. You know, you’re about to go in. He’s like, get in there, guy. Wait, hold on a second. What’s this about you believing in dinosaurs? And he’s like, get out of here. And you just go straight to hell. And he’s like, oh, they were. They felt so plausible. And he was talking about that the devil’s sitting there, like, digging up dinosaur bones and, like, putting them back in the ground.

Like, this will. This will get him. This will show him. You know what I mean? Like, and that is a fairly conventional explanation that shows up not just to explain away these pagan gods that on record, you know, predate Christ by thousands of years, but also when the Spanish explorers came to the Americas and they were finding all these Mesoamerican rituals where they were doing blood sacrifices to fertility gods and all of these things, they’re like, I thought we’re a thousand years and 4,000 miles removed from this, and somehow it keeps popping up. So one of the explanations is just up.

Satan must have been here, just like Satan was here in. In, you know, in Phoenicia and Carthage. Well, Satan must have showed up in Mexico at some point with his same dirty little tricks. So it. It is an ex. An explanation that I’ve heard before about why. Why are there all these correlations between, like, different pagan rituals all across the world at these consistent themes, Hidden treasure and overboard moments. I want to hear what your hidden treasure, because I feel like that you got some. Some nice gems. The. The one hidden treasure, I think is the most compelling case that he makes.

It’s not the one about. No one wrote about Jesus in his lifetime. Just because I’ve heard that one before. This one dates back hundreds of years. This is. Been a claim since forever. What. One of the things that he makes a really good point is that as he’s showing all these angry Christians, and there’s some that are talking about condemning gay people, and there’s others that he’s condemning people that aren’t following the word of Christ, like, letter by letter, and he makes this claim that the Inquisition wasn’t the exception. It was the rule that. That the Inquisition wasn’t religion going haywire, that it was an expression of the true philosophy behind Christianity in some ways.

And the. The way that he kind of underlines that is he says, imagine that you kill your own son for the greater good of your city. It’ll just. We’ll make it small, right? For the greater good of Your city, you kill your own son, and you’re God to them, but everyone in that city doesn’t even acknowledge that you even made the greatest sacrifice you ever could have sacrificed. And no one’s willing to acknowledge it. And they’re still worshiping you. They’re still like, sean, Chris, man, you’re such a God, bro. You’re the go. And you’re like, yo, I just killed my own kid for you guys.

And you’re not even going to, like, mention that. You’re not going to be like, hey, thank you for, you know, kicking us one, by the way, like, wiping us free of sin and all that. So he’s making this argument that, yes, that God is going to be mad at you if you do not acknowledge and accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior, because otherwise, what did he make this huge sacrifice for? And he also makes a point of this unforgivable sin, which we’ll get into in the Overboard moments, because I think he takes this one to, like, an emotional place, the.

The tail end of him making some of these good points, which he does not repeat when he goes to talk to his old principal. But for me, that was sort of a treasure moment, because I’ve kind of wanted to go back and talk to, like, old principals or old teachers and be like, how come you’re filling our heads with all this crap? Right? And he actually does that, but it doesn’t go as well as I think it could have or should have. So this one starts off in Hidden Treasure, and then it, like, tapers into Overboard.

Yeah, my Hidden Treasure was. I. I liked. I like how the film was presented. Like, if I were to watch this before Zeitgeist, I think it would have, like, opened my mind into, like, a lot more them delving into, like. Because in 2005, a lot of this was controversial, right? Like, to be like, dude, he’s challenging the church, bro. Like, what is he. Yeah, big time. Yeah. 2005, this movie would have hit completely different than in 2025, definitely. Right? Like, 20 years later, you’re like, oh, yeah. Everybody’s like, ah, man, we’re doing crazier things in that.

I think, to me, the overboard moment was you’ve been, like, alluding to it, like, this whole episode. There’s a lot of condescending. Like, this is a personal vendetta film. Like, I’m not saying there’s not good information in it, but he’s like, I’m going, like, he feels manipulated, whether it’s by his parents, by. And he Says, like, he goes to this scene where he’s like, after the. His principal or whatever from the school, he’s like, you know, the principal’s like, oh, well, this is not what we discussed we were going to talk about. And I’d like to talk to you off camera, right? He’s like, why don’t you talk to me right here? Why? So, like, he’s.

Mason made it seem like he was there on false pretenses, but he goes into the church, it’s like the end. And he’s like, this is where, like, you know, I. I gave myself to the Lord. And he’s like, for the first time and the second time, the third time, I’m like, dude, it sounds like you had a tr. Like, and then it made me go, oh, this is why you made this film. You were pissed off at, I don’t know, name X. Whether it’s or it’s a multiple people. And you feel like, I’m gonna take it out on them by.

I’m gonna rip out, like, what they love the most, which is religion and Jesus, and I’m gonna all over it and make you feel like crap. Yeah, I’m gonna condemn myself to hell for eternity just to make a. Prove a point against you. That’s into this. And that’s pretty much my overboard moment, is that the very end of this movie, he goes into this chapel where he was going to school. And like, you said that I can see right in that pew right over there on the right. That’s where I first gave myself to Jesus. And then again back there, and then for the third time over there, like, bro, you were only here for four years where you’re just giving yourself to Jesus once a year.

Like, at least do it once and stick to the plan. But that he’s mentioned that. And then he. He turns back around, and the last thing he says, he’s like, I deny the Holy Spirit. Credits roll right? So. And it was. It was so silly to me that this was a little bit of a juvenile. Like, take that, Mom. Like, I hate you, Mom. You know? And then he, like, storms out the room. You can almost hear him slam the door behind him after he says this, and he’s like, done recording. But I think that this is also just based on a really weird, superficial understanding of what he considers to be the unforgivable sin, which is denial of the Holy Spirit.

And the way that he’s presenting this is that if you just straight up say, I deny the Holy Spirit in, like, in words that is you denying the Holy Spirit, just saying it out loud. And I mean, this is a much deeper theological topic than how he’s kind of presenting it like is even possible to deny the Holy Spirit, even if you don’t even know what the hell the Holy Spirit is. So it was just a really good example of how he oversimplifies one particular understanding that he gets and then applies it across the board. Instead of like, let me go and talk to some gnostics, let me go and talk to some Orthodox, let me go and talk to Protestants, Baptists, Pentecostals, you know, like all these different groups.

He just keeps going back to fundamentalist Christianity, which I do think is maybe a minor. Actually. I don’t even know the stats on that, but I would assume it’s a minority compared to all the other denominations out there. So if you start talking about Jesuits, for example, like Jesuits and Catholics, you might, you might get more nuance that he was looking for. So dude is just angry at fundamentalist Christianity and his own childhood more than the story of Christ, I guess. But he expresses it in an entertaining way. You know what time it is? Sink or swim.

I’m learning about myself that I like biased documentaries. I got to give this one a swim. And even though it has so many problems with it and it’s so biased and it’s so short sighted, but, like, he was even getting me ramped up a little bit. He was even like, reinvigorating either me being like, that’s not right. You know, that’s B.S. the way that you’re thinking about that. But he’s making these, like, very compelling, argumentative points. And I figured that this moved the needle for me more than, say, a completely unbiased documentary about Antarctica or something.

This one actually made me feel like I was watching something that was getting my, my blood pressure up. I give it a sink. It’s not a bad film. There is some really good. Especially the first half. I’ll say like, the first half, it really kind of like draws you in. I don’t mind, like, the, you know, parallels with the movie and stuff. I just started like. And again, this is where I’m learning about myself as critiquing a film. Like, where sometimes, like, I think, like, the bias for me is a negative. Like, we’re like. It makes me too mad where I’m like this stupid idiot.

Like, go talk to more people, you know what I mean? Like, have more like discussions of where you can have like, hey, here’s this. A thought with b thought. And he’s like, no, like, he. It’s a little bit of gotcha at times. And like, he even goes to the point of where the guy that does the rapture letters dot com. He’s like, I like him. He’s a nice guy. I used to be that. You know what I mean? Like, I just felt like, so. It was so arrogant and kind of like I was such an idiot back then.

I was an npc. She. I was dumb. Like, this guy. Look how dumb this guy is. I used to be that dumb. Yeah. So, like, I feel sorry for him. I feel pity. So I didn’t. I didn’t really like some of those aspects of it. I. I would still suggest this film even though I’m giving it a sink. I don’t think it’s terrible. But, like, on our rating system where it’s like, you get one, one. A couple floats a year, man. Right. So I. I was leaning on the float, but it got a sink. But, you know, it barely sunk.

It was a decent film, but he just gets a little too out in the weeds for. I wonder if. If your score would be any different if you saw this before. Zeitgeist. On the horizon. What do we got up next? Well, we’re coming up on New Year’s, so I found an old Y2K documentary called Time Bomb Y2K. That’s sort of a recap of what happened in New Year’s 1999 and the years leading up to it. So maybe that one. Yeah, that we actually made it out live. Surprisingly. The. The war of 1999 that most people don’t.

The technological war of 1999 that people don’t know about. Well, this is under the docks. Don’t forget to go to paranordamerican.com kill them. Support support Share Share this is under the docs Peace. Under the docks. Yeah, under the docks. Very deep but we breaking the locks. Under the docks. Under the docks yeah, under the docks. Ready for a cosmic conspiracy about Stanley Kubrick, moon landings and the CIA? Go visit NASA comic.com comic.com CIA’s biggest com Stanley Kubrick put us on that’s why we’re singing this song. NASA comic.com go visit nasacomic.com go visit NASA comic.com. Yeah go visit nasacomic.com nasacomic.com CIA’s biggest con Stanley Kubrick put us on that’s why we’re singing this song about nasacomic.com go visit nasacomic.com go visit NASA.com yeah go visit nas never a straight answer is a 40 page comic about Stanley Kubrick directing the Apollo space missions.

This is the perfect read for comic Kubrick or conspiracy fans of all ages. For more details visit nasacomic.com paranoid. I scribbled my life away driven the right to page. Will it enlight your brain give you the flight my plane paper the highs ablaze somewhat of an amazing feel when it’s real to real, you will engage it your favorite of course the lord of an arrangement I gave you the proper results to hit the pavement if they get emotional hey, maybe your language a game how they playing it well without Lakers evade them whatever the cause they are to shapeshift snakes get decapitated met is the apex execution of flame you out nuclear bomb distributed at war rather gruesome for eyes to see Max them out than I light my trees blow it off in the face.

You despising me for what? What? Though calculated and rather cutthroat paranoid American must be all the blood smoke for real. Lord give me your day your way vacate they wait around to hate. Whatever they say man it’s not in the least bit. We get heavy rotate when a beat hits so thank us you’re welcome. For real, you’re welcome. They ain’t never had a deal. You’re welcome man they lacking appeal. You’re welcome. Yet the young one is still you’re welcome.
[tr:tra].