The history of Halloween… according to Kenneth Copeland Ministries.

You wanna read something reeeaaallllyyy scary? Then check out this brochure produced by Kenneth Copeland Ministries on the history of Halloween and why good Christians don’t celebrate it. Talk about revisionist history!

UPDATE: OK, I’ve already received an email from someone asking what exactly is wrong with the “history” I linked to and I sometimes forget that I’ve read up a lot more on this stuff than many other folks so I promise to come back and update this more once I get home tonight with a better explanation.

UPDATE: I’ve addressed some of the claims made by the KCM brochure.

OK, let’s see how badly the folks at Kenneth Copeland Ministries have distorted the history of Halloween:

In order to understand Halloween, it is important to understand the history of this fall holiday. Halloween, which directly stems from Irish, Scottish, Welsh and British folk customs, was celebrated as the Druids’ autumn festival. The Druids were an order of priests who worshiped nature. They were accomplished magicians and wizards at the height of their influence some 200 years before the birth of Jesus.

Well, so far it’s not too bad, though one has to wonder what is meant by the Druids being “accomplished magicians and wizards” as it implies they had actual supernatural powers. And it would probably be more proper to identify the ancient Celts as the actual people responsible for creating the holiday.

This holiday was originally celebrated to honor Samhain, lord of the dead, on October 31 (the end of the summer). The Druids believed that on this date, Samhain called all the wicked souls that had been condemned within the last year to live in animal bodies. He was believed to have released them in the form of spirits, ghosts, fairies, witches and elves.

Boy, that didn’t take long to degenerate into nonsense. “Samhain” is not the name of any Druidic Lord of the Dead, it’s just a name for the holiday. Though there is evidence of an obscure mythological Celtic character named Samhain, he wasn’t a deity and there isn’t anything in the way of a Celtic God of the Dead. The myth about a Celtic God of the Dead appears to have started in the year 1770 by Col. Charles Vallency in a series of books he wrote while attempting to prove that Irish people came from Armenia. W.J, Bethancourt III has an excellent essay on his website (currently not responding) where he tracks down the origins of this myth. The rest of the above paragraph is nonsense as the Druids didn’t believe in any Lord of the Dead as claimed.

According to Druidic tradition, these souls of the dead roamed the city on Halloween night and returned to haunt the homes where they once lived. The only way the current occupants of the house could free themselves from being haunted was to lay out food and give shelter to the spirit during the night. If they didn’t, the spirit would cast a spell on them. That is where the phrase “trick or treat” comes from: They would be tricked if they didn’t lay out a treat.

The best lies have a shred of truth to them, or so it is said, and that is certainly the case here. The Celts did believe that on Samhain the veil between this world and the next was at its thinnest making it possible for the spirits of those who had died to cross over for the evening, but not for the purposes of “haunting” their living relatives. Samhain was a festival and there was much feasting and dancing and the like going on and the spirits of the relatives were encouraged to join in on the celebrations. Hardly as sinister as it sounds above, eh? Yes, food was laid out during the night for the visiting spirits, but more out of hospitality than any fear of retribution. As near as some scholars can tell the phrase “trick-or-treat” wasn’t even coined until the early 20th Century, around about 1939.

The jack-o’-lantern was also a part of this belief system. The carved pumpkin symbolized a damned soul named Jack. According to the tale, Jack was not allowed into heaven or hell. So, he wandered around in the darkness with his lantern until Judgment Day. Fearful people hollowed out turnips (and later pumpkins in the United States), carved an evil face on them, and a lit candle inside to scare him and other evil spirits away.

The Jack-O’-Lantern came out of Ireland and Scotland and were carved out of turnips, though not the kind you’re thinking of. Pumpkins originated in North America and never grew in Europe until modern times. There is no historical evidence that suggest the Druids carved Jack-O-Lanterns nor that it had anything to do with a damned soul. Considering that concepts such as souls that could be “damned” and “Judgment Day” are Christian in origin it’s impossible for those to have been a part of the Druid’s belief system.

The Druids had other outlandish beliefs which have since turned into tradition. For example, they were afraid of black cats because they believed that when a person committed evil, he would be turned into a cat. Cats were thus considered to be evil. To scare them away, the Druids decorated their homes with witches, ghosts and the like. They also decorated with cornstalks, pumpkins and other goods in offering of thanks and praise to their false gods.

Wow, the bullshit just keeps getting deeper. Fear of cats, black or otherwise, was common among Medieval Christians and the black cat was feared most of all because it could sneak around “invisibly” in the dark (being black and all). Christians in Europe at that time period killed cats by the tens of thousands giving free reign to rats and mice and probably contributing to the Black Plague in the process. Not that it matters, the Christians just blamed the millions of deaths from the Black Plague on Gothic Witches that the Church conveniently invented. Witches being evil and cats being evil made for a natural association between the two for the Church. Let’s also consider that cats weren’t even introduced into Northern Europe until around 1050 CE and as such don’t show up in any Celtic myths or legends. The Druids certainly didn’t decorate their homes with pumpkins for the previously stated reason that they didn’t exist in Europe at all during that time and witches, again, were a Christian concept the Druids wouldn’t have been familiar with.

In addition to being Halloween, October 31 was also the New Year’s Eve of the Celts and Anglo-Saxons. To celebrate, they built huge bonfires on hilltops to frighten away evil spirits, and often offered their crops and animals to them as a sacrifice – sometimes they even offered themselves or others.

Again with the lie that holds a shred of truth. Samhain is, indeed, the Celtic New Year as the word literally means “summer’s end” (Sam + Fuin = Samhain) and there was only Summer and Winter as far as they were concerned. Yes, they did celebrate by building big bonfires on hilltops, but not to frighten away evil spirits. Bonfires were built during all four of the major Celtic holidays with Samhain being but one of them and the rest being Oimelc, Beltane and Lughnasadh. Fire was a physical symbol of divinity for the ancient Celts as well as most other Indo-European Paleopagans. Offering crops and animals up as sacrifice isn’t surprising at all. Fall was a common time to cull sick or old animals from the herds as they wouldn’t be likely to survive the winter anyway and the offering of sacrifices of both crops and animals to the Christian God is described in many places in the Bible. Human sacrifices by the Celts are hard to document, though some scholars do think they happened on occasion though, again, that wasn’t uncommon in a number of different cultures. Julius Caesar used tales of such as propaganda to justify trying to conquer the Celts which is ironic considering the Romans had only abandoned the practice a short while earlier.

The rest of this “history” doesn’t get much better and I think I’ve made my point so I’m going to stop now. It appears the folks at KCM adapted the writings of Sylvan Margadonna and Mrs. Gloria Phillips along with two additional tracts on the holiday that were written anonymously which make many of the same claims that this brochure throws out.  All four of those texts are rebutted quite well by W.J, Bethancourt III’s essay which I mentioned earlier.

48 thoughts on “The history of Halloween… according to Kenneth Copeland Ministries.

  1. This dude could have written those Fractured Fairie Tale cartoons… A little bit o’ this, a little o’ that.

  2. I guess I don’t have a substantial enough fear of black magic to think that, whatever the origins of the holiday—what KC says or even something worse—it has any power over how the day is celebrated today

    It would be like arguing that the historically improbable assignment of 12/25 as Christmas, when in reality was any number of other pagan winter celebrations, makes that holiday an Evil Pagan Plot of Satan as well. Which, to be sure, some folks do.

  3. Les, you should hack Copeland’s site and add your corrections to the page. It may take a while for them to notice and readers would assume they had corrected themselves. Come on I dare ya!

  4. I think it would be good if you did offer your suggestions to the KCM site and send them a link to Mr. Bethancourt’s essay also, but if you hack their site, you will just be lending credence to the belief that people who don’t agree with them will go to extreme and illegal measures to get their point across.  That wouldn’t be good for any of us. Thank you for the good insight.

  5. Yeah, I was just kiddin about the hacking idea. Les isn’t a hacker (that I know of).

    Truth be told, the only way to counter bad information is to offer facts and include a link to the fallacies so everyone can see the twisted intentions of the liars. Christianity has always been about fooling (and therefore controlling) as many people as possible. I don’t think that will ever change.

  6. You people are way too arrogant!
    Do you think that Copeland’s website is hackable by you chums?
    What is all this gile? Don’t you think there’s more important issues than this?
    So.. Mr. Authority knows everything and no one else knows anything, huh?
    Well, isn’t that special?
    Did Mr. Authority ever consider asking KC about this article?
    Of course not!
    He has no concern about the article whatsoever. But how else can he get a hit on this vulgar website? He’s using Kenneth Copeland’s popularity to “cop” a hit. You don’t see Kenneth Copeland headlining his website with this crack pot to get hits, do you?
    Someday you will all face Kenneth Copeland’s God and he’ll verify some very important historical facts (think JESUS). But you won’t be copping any hits off him, then. Your link will be broken but your “home”page will be “hot”.

  7. Mr. Authority? I am guessing you mean Les but that would be Mr. Jenkins. You are very funny but I have to say my favorite line was:

    He

  8. Clever Terri, the way you use internet-speak to make your point.

    By the way, did you know that Copeland considers God a hermaphrodite?

    “People have even argued about whether God is male or female. But the Bible itself tells us that He

  9. kenneth copeland nor his teachngs/nor his followers represent most Christian views.  he teaches many things that are not in line with scripture thus no doubt the error in his halloween article.  no doubt it was copied from something else either.  kenneth copeland is also not as widely followed as terri would think.  true christians follow Christ and back up His teachings, not the teachings of man.

  10. I would be verrrrr…y cautious about the words I speak against this man.
    You better put a guard to your mouth.

  11. I’m curious as to what you think I have to fear? Other than being sued as I’m told he’s rather fond of litigation.

  12. If you say so, though you’ve given me absolutely no reason to think any differently about him. If you have something to say then say it, otherwise you’re just wasting your time.

  13. This lying in the name of god(s) is one of the main reasons I’m a born-again Atheist!

    PS. Halloween is the only “holiday” I “observe”. Mrs Spocko (T’Pringo?) and I got married on Halloween!

  14. “Stupid”(Evil Bastard)….hmmmmmm…couldn’t have labeled you better myself..’)=)  p.s. Ya got shit in your eye fella….

  15. Hey: Im a Christian and a fundie and still know that Kenny worships a different god and a different jesus. And save all the “dont touch the anointing crap”.The only thing that Kennys is anointed with is Brylcream on that weird head of his.
    Kenny preaches a false give to get gimmie gospel of greed thats not based on scripture. His prophecies dont come true (someone pick up a rock) and he grabs simple minded peoples money who dont have the smarts to check with what he says stacks up with the Bible or not.
    Its not enough that this guy has his own zip code but now he wants some his and her planes for him and Gloria. (I guess the several planes he already owns are not enough).
    What part of the love of money is the root of ALL evil dont you blind Kenny followers dont understand.
    And I dont want to hear any-O Kenny dont love money from anyone. He loves it all right cause he figured out how to get your mula.
    And all disguised like he’s getting blessed by God right-
    He’s getting blessed ok but its not by God

  16. Just to stir things up a little

    What’s to say that your book and the way YOU use it is right, definitely 100% true? ie, you’re worshipping in exactly the right way and going to the exact place that you think you are?

    Then, what’s to say that he isn’t worshipping in exactly the right way? Perhaps his inerrancies with your book are actually because God came down and told him those parts of your book were wrong as it was only written by the hands of men?

    How can you be sure he’s not right and you’re wrong?

    What’s to be sure either of you are right?

  17. Fair question: Let me try to answer it simply. The Bible teaches us to check the fruit. It talks a lot about good fruit and bad fruit and the right and wrong way to live. Plus I try to look at the way Jesus and his early followers lived to get a fair comparision of how we should live as Christian. I notice that Jesus had a robe and not a wardrobe and lived very simply. Plus when he sent his apostles out to preach he sent them out with no money just basically the shirt on their backs. But told them to accept hospitality (food and shelter) no where does he say to take up a offering. Paul the apostle took up offerings but not for himself (he had a day job making tents) but he took a offering for the poor. Poor Christians and poor non Christians alike because Jesus told us to take care of the poor and clothe the naked. Jesus also came down to serve others not Himself. Jesus said that we had to become servants.
    Now I see Kenny and his homies as self serving its all about them. And other WOF or W.O.L.F(Words.Of.Looney.Faith) preachers teach that if you send them $100.00 God is duty bound to pay you back $1000.00 ie the 100 fold blessing.
    Now in principle if the W.O.L.F preachers really believed their own supposed based bible principle what stops them from sending everyone of their simple minded followers on their mailing lists just $100.00 each-if it worked as they stated what a haul they would make.
    See they dont even practice what they preach.
    So I guess thats how I kinda check things out for myself.
    Peace
    Tim

  18. Let me use one other analogy about the whole truth is relative thing-Lets use heavy metal music drummers . Because Im older I think guys like Ian Paice of Deep Purple, or John Bonham of Zep are the best heavy metal drummers. Someone else may like Paul Crosby of Saliva,Matt Sorum, Lars or Joey. But those choices are relative to ones individual taste.
    With the Bible you cant make it into something its not. So how come there are so many truths in Christianity?
    Even though the Bible was written by humans it was still inspired by God. And as a Christian I believe Gods words passed by the writers own intellict and baggage and were acuratly recorded because the Bible itself states this to be true. So why does Kenny and the other W.O.L.F.s belive what they believe and others believe different? Who does Kenny serve? God? No he serves Kenny? Is Kenny blessed by God? No Kenny blesses himself because he has found out clever ways to get ahold of peoples money.(and the fruit from this guys minesery-opps I meant ministry serves Kenny not God)
    The Bible teaches us to serve others not ourselves.
    And this is a great way to see if something is true or not.
    Great discussion though-I hope I explained this in a way for all to understand.
    Peace
    Tim

  19. (sigh) THIS old argument again …

    … because the Bible itself states this to be true.

  20. Let me state for the record that I believe the Bible to be true because it states itself to be true and Im going to stand by that. I have a sister in law who is a Wiccan she is a great gal and even friendler than a lot of Christians I know. And she stated that I will go where I believe I go (after death) and she will go where she is going (after death).
    I guess what Im trying to say sooner or later we will find out the absolute truth-the bottom line will still be the bottom line.
    Now if Im wrong and my sister in law is right Im still good to go.
    But if Im right in what the Bible teaches she is heading for trouble.Not because of me-Im not sending anyone to hell-its not my call.
    And hey Im not better than any Wiccan, pagan, non-believer of any kind.
    When I go to heaven it will be because of what Jesus did on the cross and took the punishment for me. Not because of anything I did.
    Does God still expect us (saved Christians) to be holy and be nice-of course and we fall short because we try to act like we are better than others -when the absolute truth is we are not better than anyone else.
    Its about Jesus leading a perfect life not me-that still doesnt give me the right to act like a jerk though.
    Peace
    Tim

  21. So, the Bible is true because it states itself to be true…

    Does this mean anyone can write a book and say ‘this book is true’, which automatically makes it the unquestionable authority on it’s topic?

    Why does your book have the right to say it is true and other [religious] books can say they are true, but aren’t because yours is?

  22. I believe the Bible is the only writing that claims to originate with and by God. People naturally are threatened with anything that claims to be a ultimate authority in their lives.Ultimate truth can only come from a infallable being-which God is.
    Peace
    Tim

  23. Ultimate truth can only come from a infallable being-which God is.

    I don’t know about God being infallible.  Why did He create mosquitos?  But I know Someone who’s infallible- the Pope.  Since 1854.

  24. I believe the Bible is the only writing that claims to originate with and by God.

    Don’t the book of Mormon and the Koran both claim their writings originate from God?  Didn’t people like David Koresh and Jim Jones claim they communicated directly with God?  And the Reverend Moon as well?

    This post, by the way, originated from our Father in Heaven, God, so everything in it is true.  He came to me in a vision, three nights in a row as I slept.  He showed me His wisdom on tablets carved in gold and silver, and gave them to me so that I may share them with mankind.  Unfortunately, I put them in a box of goods I was donating to charity, so they are lost to me, but I memorized what He wrote.  If you are filled with the spirit of God, you will know I am speaking the Truth.  Who are you to deny it?

    The earth is flat.  The sun goes around the earth.  Jimmy Hoffa lives in Las Vegas and works at the Luxor casino as a hatcheck girl (yes, girl:  you see, he had a little accident, and …).  There really is a Godzilla, and he really did destroy Tokyo nineteen times (not eighteen, as described in the Bible, book of Habakkuk, chapter 3, verse 20).  Women in Spain have seventeen nostrils.  The Emperor of Canada will be assassinated in 2007 by extremist diplodocus’ rights advocates.  Geddy Lee is really John Lennon, who only faked his death (Yoko confirmed this with me when we had lunch last week).  And one phrase I didn’t understand, but here it is:  “Cigam srewop ekat annataz emoh!”  To me it looks like “kick ‘em, whomp cats, and tazer ‘em, oh!”  So simply because God said so, I’m out kicking, whomping, and tazering every cat I see.  I was doing that anyway, but now I have divine justification!

  25. Hello. I would just like to point out that the “how can you know who’s right” nonsense is basically a fruitless discussion. If there is no such thing as truth, there is no use in calling KC’s tract “BS” since, well, there’s no such thing as truth. Anyone’s truth is as good as another’s in this scenario. SO, if we agree that there is such as thing as truth, then it logically follows that (1) it is at the very least PROBABLE that one can discover if the Bible is either true or untrue, and (2) some people (such as KC for example) could either intentionally or unintentionally misrepresent it (of course, this would have no affect whatsoever on it’s worth in terms of objective truth). Total, complete and absolute agreement is not necessary to establish the truthfulness of anything. For example, there is huge inconsistencies in secular thought, such as the die-hard beliefs in natural selection and civil rights. I find it amusing that atheists will try to convince me, simultaneously, that I should believe that man is nothing more than an animal while at the same time condemning me for supposedly “oppressing women.” If Christianity IS oppressive (not saying that it is) then it helps the human race according to Darwin. Inequality can do nothing more than rid us of the weak according to Nietzsche. Regardless, to hold up KC and his tract on Halloween as examples of absurdity in Christianity is nothing more than a straw man. Try dealing with a real theologian for a change, lazy skeptics.

  26. I wasn’t making a straw man by pointing out that there is no use criticizing people for taking a position on an issue if there is no such thing as truth. If you read some of the posts that appear before my original one, you will see that I was responding to part of the discussion. For example, Tim’s post, the one about eight posts before my first one, confuses claims about personal taste (who is the best drummer) with claims about objective reality. The whole “truth is relative” nonsense is based on such errors. All those posts in that general area are related to my statement, and I certainly wasn’t claiming that YOU don’t believe there is such a thing as truth, since you didn’t post anything until after I did. Unless I’m psychic, I could not have been making a straw man. As far as morality goes, there isn’t anything about your statement that tells me WHY I should be moral, how it benefits me to be moral, or where in the heck “morals” came from in the first place. You say “the oppression of women is a moral wrong.” Says who? According to Nietzsche, the weak feign vulnerability to evoke sympathy from the strong. Sounds to me that this is exactly what you are doing. If I were not a Christian, there would be nothing you could say that would convince me that I should have mercy on anyone weaker than myself. You have no authority over me. The State has limited authority; in Hegel’s world, getting caught is the only sin. To say that this is “subhuman,” (as you seem to suggesting in reference to me), is awfully Christian of you. There is no reason to think that whatever a human does, whether it be murder, rape, or other forms of oppression, is “non-human.” If I am a non-Christian, that sounds like another defense mechanism on the part of the weak to me. I must tell you Sadie, I find that most self proclaimed skeptics are very bad at being skeptical. No one ever talks about it, but the truth is, believers and non-believers hold 95% of their ethics in common. Some values are hyper-emphasized one way or the other depending on where you stand, but there isn’t anything really amazing about our ethical differences. The concept of “civil rights” originated with religious people. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…” Take out the moral authority (GOD) and there is no logical reason to accept any of this as binding on anyone. A law or truth is only as good as the authority on which it is invoked and enforced. What “progressives” “atheists” or “liberals” suggest in terms of cultural or political reform is no where in the neighborhood of a revolution. In other words, your skepticism is, in fact, LAZY, wishy-washy, lukewarm nonsense that determines the vast majority of “right” and “wrong” from within the very system it claims to be skeptical of. FURTHERMORE, I find most people have no idea how to be good hedonists. Why perverts are interested in being sanctimonious about their perversions is silliness to me. I recommend a healthy dose of Marquis de Sade for advice on this topic if you are really committed to being godless. (Maybe you aren’t, I don’t know.) In other words, if there was no God, I would tell all of you to your face that you were weak, sentimental creatures who could do nothing for me unless you were on your back or your knees. As it stands, I am captive to the will of God, so I wish you nothing but the very best, and that with many blessings. I’m not much for half-assing anything, and that is what I see in the godless; they lack the objectivity to even know how to sin right. If you insist on elaboration on the whole evolution topic, and how religion is beneficial to oppressing the weak (which would be a good thing if there was no God), then I am willing to offer it. But surely you can see where I’m going with this. And as much as you don’t like it, surely you must see that civil rights and the strong bowing to the needs of the weak inhibits the evolution of man. And, if there is no God, then surely religion is a very valuable tool for controlling the weak. I recommend Nietzsche for more on this topic. As far as sinners go, I at least give Nietzsche and de Sade credit for getting wickedness and cruelty right, unlike the blind masses of sentimental, haiku-writing, gay-marriage crusading, hypocritical, mall-roaming dullards. Or, you could give your life to Jesus, and suddenly all of this becomes a non-issue, or something you do for entertainment once in a while.

  27. I didn’t bother reading that whole thing (hint, the enter key is your friend), but I’m going to respond to what I did read.

    First, you don’t have to be aware that you’re making a strawman. You might do it thinking that it’s a good point. I could easily use an argument from authority, but unless you put stock in that authority, it wouldn’t be a good point with you.

    As for morals, read Shermer’s The Science of Good and Evil and get back to me.

  28. I glanced over that a second time, and I saw something about perversion and the Marquis de Sade.

    I gotta tell you, Georges Bataille wrote better porn as literature.

  29. Wow.  That was, er, enlightening, ed.  I hardly know where to start.  But this will do.

    Try dealing with a real theologian for a change, lazy skeptics.

    Are you a “real theologian”, ed?  If so, I’ll try to shake off my laziness and “deal” with you.  You say

    If Christianity IS oppressive (not saying that it is) then it helps the human race according to Darwin.

    I’ll second Sadie’s request that you explain this.  Please quote chapter and verse from Darwin.  Where did he say this?  I know his works pretty well, and lots of his correspondence, and I don’t recall his saying anything remotely like this.

    If I were not a Christian, there would be nothing you could say that would convince me that I should have mercy on anyone weaker than myself. You have no authority over me.

    Been there, done that.  We’ve had this discussion ad absurdum here.  What are you saying- that if you were not a Christian, that you would rob widows and orphans?  Or that atheists and Buddhists regularly rob widows and orphans, since they’re not Christian?  Gimme a break.

    The concept of “civil rights

  30. Bach: I didn’t bother reading that whole thing (hint, the enter key is your friend), but I’m going to respond to what I did read.

    Too many words, A?
    hint, the enter key is your friend. hint, the enter key is your friend. hint, the enter key is your friend. hint, the enter key is your friend. hint, the enter key is your friend.

    It clearly points to the fact that he loves the sound of his own voice.
    He’s an ego-tripper and so much smarter than any damned atheist.
    on and on and on and on on and on and on and on on and on and on and on on and on and on and on LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL raspberry

  31. It’s not what he said, it’s how he said it. I wouldn’t mind giving that post a good once over provided it was properly punctuated, had (mosty) perfect grammar, and appropriate paragraph breaks.

    I know that seems trivial, but if you can’t be bothered with the rudiments of English, I’m not going to read it anyway even if I agree with you.

    What time is it in Australia?

  32. Hey Ed … ditto what Zilch said.

    Zilch: We have a wit here.

    Bullshit. He’s a try hard.
    I think I am much funnier.
    I make me laugh quite often. LOL

  33. Bach: and appropriate paragraph breaks.

    Yeah. Too much energy wasted in trying too …

    Bach: What time is it in Australia

    8.10 pm. Just had my medication (love saying that).
    The 2nd Rugby Union test, Oz vs England, just started.
    We won the 1st 33:3 last Saturday nite.
    This should be good, too, even if we lose.
    Goodnite mate. smile

  34. Quick with the comments aren’t we?  surprised

    Maybe I’m just tired (played a gig tonight, always exhausting) as it’s 5:24 a.m.

  35. Hmmmmmmmmm?? Kenneth Copeland….im amazed hes actually not up there with his hermaphrodite god yet….And his Wife Gloria??? whats going on there?? 64 years old and not one wrinkle??? gees god must really love her smile…..either that or theres some very wealthy cosmetic surgeons around Texas….Saw their performance from Goldcoast Australia…. wasnt quite as slick as they used to be but then i guess Old Age is catching them up thesedays….Wont be long before their both off to Visit their good ol god anyway… but for glorias sake i hope theres a good makeup artists and cosmetic surgeon up there smile

  36. First one in 2007

    Les I think there is a good chance KCM would want to here you facts on the matter – it wouldn’t hurt to try – may you have a great year

  37. is it me or does everyone online not have any clue to what they’re bitching about?

    puh…

  38. Wow. You all take a big swipe at KCM. Whereas if you take a good read into the “rebuttal” by Les, it seems only to corroborate what Copeland is saying. You can look it all up for yourself – in Wickipedia (Wicktionary).

    It would be good to investigate these things, before commenting on an issue. But then again, say hello to the countrymen that elected Barry Soetoro as their president.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.