Looks like anon there is just paraphrasing the new and unimproved Dilley, whose current source #2 says Q was just some excitable whippersnapper. That doesn't make any sense of course.
Looks like anon there is just paraphrasing the new and unimproved Dilley, whose current source #2 says Q was just some excitable whippersnapper. That doesn't make any sense of course.