Jack White Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 Report Calls for “Infiltration” of 9/11 Sites submitted by YT on sun, 08/29/2010 - 7:45am Source: 9/11 Truth News A new report released by a think tank called Demos warns of the hazardous effects of conspiracy theories on society and recommends strategies for governments to mitigate these effects, including the infiltration of websites. The report, called The Power of Unreason: Conspiracy Theories, Extremism and Counterterrorism, says "most notoriously and influentially, the ‘9/11 truth movement’ has questioned the official accounts of 9/11 and has become a large and growing political force." The report notes that the 9/11 truth movement is "peaceful", but makes no distinction between the legitimate questioning of the official account of 9/11 and any number of unrelated, and often racist, conspiracy theories. The report acknowledges that "some conspiracies have turned out to be true. Our institutions and governments have deceived the population to advance hidden and unstated interests", and goes on to cite Operations Northwoods, the Joint Chief of Staff's unimplemented plan to stage a false flag Cuban terror attack in 1963, as well as the CIA's involvement in the Chilean coup of 1973. But the report is only concerned with limiting the effects of conspiracy theories on operations of the state, not with justice or the accuracy of the historical record. It states: More broadly, conspiracy theories drive a wedge of distrust between governments and particular communities. Conspiracy theories - such as those that claim 7/7 or 9/11 were ‘inside jobs’ - demolish the mutuality and trust that people have in institutions of government, with social and political ramifications that we still don't fully understand. This can especially hinder community-level efforts to fight violent extremism. The report cites the writings of Cass Sunstein, an Obama appointee who recently called for the "cognitive infiltration" of 9/11 truth groups. The Demos paper in turn calls for government agents to "openly infiltrate" websites and chatrooms in order offer "alternative information" and "plant seeds of doubt". Demos makes a number of recommendations for governments to combat conspiracy theories, including a call for more government openness. The Demos report can be downloaded here. 9/11 Truth News Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Tribe Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 Report Calls for “Infiltration” of 9/11 Sites submitted by YT on sun, 08/29/2010 - 7:45am Source: 9/11 Truth News A new report released by a think tank called Demos warns of the hazardous effects of conspiracy theories on society and recommends strategies for governments to mitigate these effects, including the infiltration of websites. The report, called The Power of Unreason: Conspiracy Theories, Extremism and Counterterrorism, says "most notoriously and influentially, the ‘9/11 truth movement’ has questioned the official accounts of 9/11 and has become a large and growing political force." The report notes that the 9/11 truth movement is "peaceful", but makes no distinction between the legitimate questioning of the official account of 9/11 and any number of unrelated, and often racist, conspiracy theories. The report acknowledges that "some conspiracies have turned out to be true. Our institutions and governments have deceived the population to advance hidden and unstated interests", and goes on to cite Operations Northwoods, the Joint Chief of Staff's unimplemented plan to stage a false flag Cuban terror attack in 1963, as well as the CIA's involvement in the Chilean coup of 1973. But the report is only concerned with limiting the effects of conspiracy theories on operations of the state, not with justice or the accuracy of the historical record. It states: More broadly, conspiracy theories drive a wedge of distrust between governments and particular communities. Conspiracy theories - such as those that claim 7/7 or 9/11 were ‘inside jobs’ - demolish the mutuality and trust that people have in institutions of government, with social and political ramifications that we still don't fully understand. This can especially hinder community-level efforts to fight violent extremism. The report cites the writings of Cass Sunstein, an Obama appointee who recently called for the "cognitive infiltration" of 9/11 truth groups. The Demos paper in turn calls for government agents to "openly infiltrate" websites and chatrooms in order offer "alternative information" and "plant seeds of doubt". Demos makes a number of recommendations for governments to combat conspiracy theories, including a call for more government openness. The Demos report can be downloaded here. 9/11 Truth News I don't suppose you bothered to read the Demos report, and there is no link in your post to the report: http://www.demos.co.uk/publications/thepowerofunreason. I have selected three parts from the 55-page report which I think are worthy of further thought: "One of the greatest threats to the cohesion of extremist groups is criticism from former members and friends and family of current members. From the perspective of the group – especially the leaders – it is vital to discredit such voices quickly and comprehensively. In the groups we examined a common ploy was for group leaders to accuse critics of being patsies, even disinformation agents working on behalf of the conspirators." Sound familiar? "The last decade has seen an explosion in the circulation of false information, or ‘counter-knowledge’: misinformation packaged to look like fact. Every day, from hundreds of sources, people are assailed by thousands of pieces of counter-knowledge. Yet, as Michael Shermer writes, ‘as a culture, we seem to have trouble distinguishing science from pseudoscience, history from pseudohistory, common sense from nonsense.’ In an age of social media, peer-to-peer communications, and user-generated content, many of the established gatekeepers of knowledge – the peer reviewed journal, the traditional newspaper, the scrutinised book – have been undermined and not replaced. The limited research there is suggests that young people in particular are not being equipped with the personal critical abilities to discriminate between truth and its many imposters. New research is finding that the way we are consuming knowledge online is affecting our capacity for ‘deep processing’ skills: inductive analysis, critical thinking, imagination, and reflection. Indeed, scholars at University College London found that students' research habits tended towards skimming and scanning rather than in-depth reading, with little time spent evaluating information for relevance, accuracy or authority. According to OFCOM’s 2010 survey of internet and web-based content, around a fifth of internet users in the UK do not think about accuracy or bias of information they consume on the internet, they simply use sites they like the look of. Moreover, Ethan Zuckerman argues that one danger of on-line networking is that it can lead to people simply interacting with people who already share your opinion, creating ‘filter bubbles’: conversations of similar people running in parallel, but rarely conflicting with other conversations of different people." This would also seem to me to be a completely responsible point about which we should all be thinking, especially those of us who are involved in education. The "information explosion" has given us access to a huge range of sources but we are not providing our children with the abilities necessary to evaluate them... "Civil Society must play a more proactive role in confronting the lies and myths of conspiracy theories when they find them. There are a number of independent civil society groups that currently work to fight various forms of extremist and terrorist ideology. It is important that they also confront conspiracy theories that are part of the ideology. Such groups have more credibility than the government to factually rebut them. This applies not just to active civil society groups, but society as a whole: community leaders and individuals for example should be ready and willing to rebut conspiracy theories head-on where they find them." On this forum, of course, any attempt to "rebut conspiracy theories head-on" would lead to the sort of insults, stalking and harrassment that Evan and Len have had to put up with... Demos is a very well-respected UK "think-tank" and this report raises a number of very interesting points. There is indeed quite a lot of new ideas to think about here and several suggestions which the thoughtful reader may find worthy of support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 (edited) Report Calls for "Infiltration" of 9/11 Sites submitted by YT on sun, 08/29/2010 - 7:45am Source: 9/11 Truth News A new report released by a think tank called Demos warns of the hazardous effects of conspiracy theories on society and recommends strategies for governments to mitigate these effects, including the infiltration of websites. The report, called The Power of Unreason: Conspiracy Theories, Extremism and Counterterrorism, says "most notoriously and influentially, the '9/11 truth movement' has questioned the official accounts of 9/11 and has become a large and growing political force." The report notes that the 9/11 truth movement is "peaceful", but makes no distinction between the legitimate questioning of the official account of 9/11 and any number of unrelated, and often racist, conspiracy theories. The report acknowledges that "some conspiracies have turned out to be true. Our institutions and governments have deceived the population to advance hidden and unstated interests", and goes on to cite Operations Northwoods, the Joint Chief of Staff's unimplemented plan to stage a false flag Cuban terror attack in 1963, as well as the CIA's involvement in the Chilean coup of 1973. But the report is only concerned with limiting the effects of conspiracy theories on operations of the state, not with justice or the accuracy of the historical record. It states: More broadly, conspiracy theories drive a wedge of distrust between governments and particular communities. Conspiracy theories - such as those that claim 7/7 or 9/11 were 'inside jobs' - demolish the mutuality and trust that people have in institutions of government, with social and political ramifications that we still don't fully understand. This can especially hinder community-level efforts to fight violent extremism. The report cites the writings of Cass Sunstein, an Obama appointee who recently called for the "cognitive infiltration" of 9/11 truth groups. The Demos paper in turn calls for government agents to "openly infiltrate" websites and chatrooms in order offer "alternative information" and "plant seeds of doubt". Demos makes a number of recommendations for governments to combat conspiracy theories, including a call for more government openness. The Demos report can be downloaded here. 9/11 Truth News I don't suppose you bothered to read the Demos report, and there is no link in your post to the report: http://www.demos.co....owerofunreason. I have selected three parts from the 55-page report which I think are worthy of further thought: "One of the greatest threats to the cohesion of extremist groups is criticism from former members and friends and family of current members. From the perspective of the group – especially the leaders – it is vital to discredit such voices quickly and comprehensively. In the groups we examined a common ploy was for group leaders to accuse critics of being patsies, even disinformation agents working on behalf of the conspirators." Sound familiar? "The last decade has seen an explosion in the circulation of false information, or 'counter-knowledge': misinformation packaged to look like fact. Every day, from hundreds of sources, people are assailed by thousands of pieces of counter-knowledge. Yet, as Michael Shermer writes, 'as a culture, we seem to have trouble distinguishing science from pseudoscience, history from pseudohistory, common sense from nonsense.' In an age of social media, peer-to-peer communications, and user-generated content, many of the established gatekeepers of knowledge – the peer reviewed journal, the traditional newspaper, the scrutinised book – have been undermined and not replaced. The limited research there is suggests that young people in particular are not being equipped with the personal critical abilities to discriminate between truth and its many imposters. New research is finding that the way we are consuming knowledge online is affecting our capacity for 'deep processing' skills: inductive analysis, critical thinking, imagination, and reflection. Indeed, scholars at University College London found that students' research habits tended towards skimming and scanning rather than in-depth reading, with little time spent evaluating information for relevance, accuracy or authority. According to OFCOM's 2010 survey of internet and web-based content, around a fifth of internet users in the UK do not think about accuracy or bias of information they consume on the internet, they simply use sites they like the look of. Moreover, Ethan Zuckerman argues that one danger of on-line networking is that it can lead to people simply interacting with people who already share your opinion, creating 'filter bubbles': conversations of similar people running in parallel, but rarely conflicting with other conversations of different people." This would also seem to me to be a completely responsible point about which we should all be thinking, especially those of us who are involved in education. The "information explosion" has given us access to a huge range of sources but we are not providing our children with the abilities necessary to evaluate them... "Civil Society must play a more proactive role in confronting the lies and myths of conspiracy theories when they find them. There are a number of independent civil society groups that currently work to fight various forms of extremist and terrorist ideology. It is important that they also confront conspiracy theories that are part of the ideology. Such groups have more credibility than the government to factually rebut them. This applies not just to active civil society groups, but society as a whole: community leaders and individuals for example should be ready and willing to rebut conspiracy theories head-on where they find them." On this forum, of course, any attempt to "rebut conspiracy theories head-on" would lead to the sort of insults, stalking and harrassment that Evan and Len have had to put up with... Demos is a very well-respected UK "think-tank" and this report raises a number of very interesting points. There is indeed quite a lot of new ideas to think about here and several suggestions which the thoughtful reader may find worthy of support. Who on this forum is insulting, stalking and harrassing Evan and Len? I thought they were stalking CTs, as are a number of others who have joined this forum just to attack Jack White and Fetzer. Although I don't agree with them about 9/11 or many of their insights into the JFK assassination, I don't think they are the ones who are doing the stalking. You have it backwards. And this current assault on "Conspiracy Theories" by a flurry of books and web sites (Leventhal/McAdams/Demos, et al) now consider such conspiracy theories a threat to national security, and you consider them a threat to the educaiton of our children? I agree, and the Number One CT of all time - that one Lone Nut was not responsible for the assassination of President Kennedy is the souce of the lack of confidence that 80% of the American citizens have in their goverment, the same percentage who have consistantly believed that there was a conspiracy behind the crime, is also a major threat to the national security of the USA, and will remain so until it is resolved to a legal and moral certainty. Nor will this attack on CTs reverse that trend, and convince people that there was no conspiracy behind the JFK assassination, as Bugliosi wanted his book to do, and hopes that his HBO TV production will, and that these reports and web sites try to do. As is the case with the assassintion of Rabbi Kahane, http://educationforu...?showtopic=9883, like it is with the assassination of President Kennedy, when a person responsible for the investigation of a state crime fails to identify and prosecute the conspiracy behind the crime, and instead blame a "Lone Nut," the national security is realy at stake, and not just the attitudes of the citizens that are threated by the silly CT and anti-CT mindsets. When the real conspiracies are proprely investigated and resolved, then and only then will the absurd and bizzarre conspiracy theories be dismissed, as they should be, and your children can be properly educated on how to deal with such conspiracies - through the proper process of the constituion and the laws, not through official goverment propganda and pronouncements. This has never happened with the assassination of JFK and when it does, it will be the education everybody will benefit from. Bill Kelly Edited August 30, 2010 by William Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Tribe Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 (edited) "And this current assault on "Conspiracy Theories" and those who propagate them by a flurry of books and web sites (Leventhal/McAdams/Demos, et al) now consider such conspiracy theories a threat to national security, and you consider them a threat to the educaiton of our children?" Please re-read what I wrote. Your statement here bears no relation to it. I simply said that the point the Demos report made about the need to educate our children about how to evaluate what they read on the internet. A couple of years ago, I was supervisor for a student's IB Extended Essay. He intended to study law at university and wanted to write his extended essay on something "legal". He chose to do it on the Nuremburg War Crimes Trials. When he turned in his rough draft, I was a little uncomfortable with some of his quotations from one of his three major sources. I checked his source and found that some of the citations the author used didn't actually say what he claimed they said. Further investigation showed that the author also regularly contributed to the web pages of the American Nazi Party and Aryan Nation. So, the student had accepted uncritically information on an apparently "normal" web site which was, in fact, totally unreliable. This was not an unintelligent student. He was a straight-A student. He had just never been taught how to check the validity of what he was reading on the internet. You might say that "someone" should have taken care of this during his school career, but the fact of the matter is that information technology has moved much more quickly than has educational practice. When information was passed on largely through the print media, it was far easier to check up on the reliability of one's sources. Anything published by a reputable publishing house could generally be trusted, as could articles in peer-reviewed journals. That's all changed and Demos was suggesting that education needs to change to take account of this. You choose to focus your attention on what you believe to have been a conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy. You are fortunate enough to live in a free society and are therefore at liberty to believe whatever you wish. Mr White and Dr Fetzler are similarly free to believe that man never went to the moon and that no planes ever flew into the World Trade Center. Similarly, Ms Mauro is at liberty to believe that there is an international conspiracy of Jews and the British Royal Family to take over the world. Ain't free speech wonderful? However, the discourtesy with which all three of these forum members (along with several others who have left for pastures new) have treated anyone bold enough to disagree with them is so obvious that one would have to be blind not to be able to see it. By the way, have you actually read the Demos report? Edited August 30, 2010 by Mike Tribe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 "And this current assault on "Conspiracy Theories" and those who propagate them by a flurry of books and web sites (Leventhal/McAdams/Demos, et al) now consider such conspiracy theories a threat to national security, and you consider them a threat to the educaiton of our children?" Please re-read what I wrote. Your statement here bears no relation to it. I simply said that the point the Demos report made about the need to educate our children about how to evaluate what they read on the internet. A couple of years ago, I was supervisor for a student's IB Extended Essay. He intended to study law at university and wanted to write his extended essay on something "legal". He chose to do it on the Nuremburg War Crimes Trials. When he turned in his rough draft, I was a little uncomfortable with some of his quotations from one of his three major sources. I checked his source and found that some of the citations the author used didn't actually say what he claimed they said. Further investigation showed that the author also regularly contributed to the web pages of the American Nazi Party and Aryan Nation. So, the student had accepted uncritically information on an apparently "normal" web site which was, in fact, totally unreliable. This was not an unintelligent student. He was a straight-A student. He had just never been taught how to check the validity of what he was reading on the internet. You might say that "someone" should have taken care of this during his school career, but the fact of the matter is that information technology has moved much more quickly than has educational practice. When information was passed on largely through the print media, it was far easier to check up on the reliability of one's sources. Anything published by a reputable publishing house could generally be trusted, as could articles in peer-reviewed journals. That's all changed and Demos was suggesting that education needs to change to take account of this. You choose to focus your attention on what you believe to have been a conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy. You are fortunate enough to live in a free society and are therefore at liberty to believe whatever you wish. Mr White and Dr Fetzler are similarly free to believe that man never went to the moon and that no planes ever flew into the World Trade Center. Similarly, Ms Mauro is at liberty to believe that there is an international conspiracy of Jews and the British Royal Family to take over the world. Ain't free speech wonderful? However, the discourtesy with which all three of these forum members (along with several others who have left for pastures new) have treated anyone bold enough to disagree with them is so obvious that one would have to be blind not to be able to see it. By the way, have you actually read the Demos report? Okay, I get it. Sorry I jumped the gun. As my friend John Judge says, "We are allowed to believe anything and to know nothing." And I will read the Demos report when I get around to it. It's on my summer reading list. Bill Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 Who on this forum is insulting, stalking and harrassing Evan and Len? I thought they were stalking CTs, as are a number of others who have joined this forum just to attack Jack White and Fetzer. I'd just like to dispel a couple of myths here. 1. I never knew Len before here. 2. Although I came here originally to correct Jack regarding his mistake about the camera placement on the Apollo EVA suits (IIRC), but that is hardly stalking. Is there another forum where I have "followed" Jack? Is there another forum, before this one, where I "followed" Jack? 3. Because someone has views opposed to yours (or mine) does not mean they "joined the forum just to attack" people. 4. DO NOT QUESTION THE MOTIVES OF POSTERS! Why cannot some people understand that? Attack their arguments, demonstrate how wrong (or right) they are, but don't question why they are here. That is the first and final warning regarding motivations, Bill. If you feel you have proof regarding motivation and you feel it is pertinent to the topic, then contact a moderator and get approval before posting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 (edited) Who on this forum is insulting, stalking and harrassing Evan and Len? I thought they were stalking CTs, as are a number of others who have joined this forum just to attack Jack White and Fetzer. I'd just like to dispel a couple of myths here. 1. I never knew Len before here. 2. Although I came here originally to correct Jack regarding his mistake about the camera placement on the Apollo EVA suits (IIRC), but that is hardly stalking. Is there another forum where I have "followed" Jack? Is there another forum, before this one, where I "followed" Jack? 3. Because someone has views opposed to yours (or mine) does not mean they "joined the forum just to attack" people. 4. DO NOT QUESTION THE MOTIVES OF POSTERS! Why cannot some people understand that? Attack their arguments, demonstrate how wrong (or right) they are, but don't question why they are here. That is the first and final warning regarding motivations, Bill. If you feel you have proof regarding motivation and you feel it is pertinent to the topic, then contact a moderator and get approval before posting it. Evan, Didn't you just admit that "...I came here originally to correct Jack...."? That was your motivation for coming here. Nobody's questioning that. Evan, do you feel like you are being stalked, and if so, who is stalking you? And I don't know if you answered my question before, and if so I must have missed it, but did the USA moon astronauts actually tape that flag and "USA" poster to the side of the moon landing craft? Thanks, And thanks for sticking around after you corrected Jack. There's a lot of things that still need correcting. BK Edited August 30, 2010 by William Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Mauro Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 (edited) Similarly, Ms Mauro is at liberty to believe that there is an international conspiracy of Jews and the British Royal Family to take over the world Tribe, I've never made any such claim. You're repeating the same line popularly expressed by drug pusher Dennis King and company. You are a professor of history? How is it you know nothing of history? Edited August 30, 2010 by Terry Mauro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Tribe Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 Similarly, Ms Mauro is at liberty to believe that there is an international conspiracy of Jews and the British Royal Family to take over the world Tribe, I've never made any such claim. You're repeating the same line popularly expressed by drug pusher Dennis King and company. You are a professor of history? How is it you know nothing of history? And Ms Mauro thereby makes my point... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Mauro Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 (edited) Similarly, Ms Mauro is at liberty to believe that there is an international conspiracy of Jews and the British Royal Family to take over the world Tribe, I've never made any such claim. You're repeating the same line popularly expressed by drug pusher Dennis King and company. You are a professor of history? How is it you know nothing of history? And Ms Mauro thereby makes my point... And how is that? That you know nothing of history? Tell us about the "Jew" and "British Royal family" conspiracy Edited August 30, 2010 by Terry Mauro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Tribe Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 Similarly, Ms Mauro is at liberty to believe that there is an international conspiracy of Jews and the British Royal Family to take over the world Tribe, I've never made any such claim. You're repeating the same line popularly expressed by drug pusher Dennis King and company. You are a professor of history? How is it you know nothing of history? And Ms Mauro thereby makes my point... And how is that? That you know nothing of history? Tell us about the "Jew" and "British Royal family" conspiracy "The so-called Zionist families are not a power on their own. They are deployed by the Monarchies of Europe, like the British monarchy. They were called "hofjuden" (court Jews). But they're cut outs or front men for these European oligarchical families who hate the United States and have always hated the United States." Terry Mauro, The Education Forum, 22nd July, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Mauro Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 Similarly, Ms Mauro is at liberty to believe that there is an international conspiracy of Jews and the British Royal Family to take over the world Tribe, I've never made any such claim. You're repeating the same line popularly expressed by drug pusher Dennis King and company. You are a professor of history? How is it you know nothing of history? And Ms Mauro thereby makes my point... And how is that? That you know nothing of history? Tell us about the "Jew" and "British Royal family" conspiracy "The so-called Zionist families are not a power on their own. They are deployed by the Monarchies of Europe, like the British monarchy. They were called "hofjuden" (court Jews). But they're cut outs or front men for these European oligarchical families who hate the United States and have always hated the United States." Terry Mauro, The Education Forum, 22nd July, 2010 You're reaching Tribe. You might take a course in remedial reading. The word "hofjuden" existed centuries ago. It means "court Jews". This name was given to individuals and families with Jewish surnames that ingratiated themselves with the various European Monarchies ( maybe you'll tell us Europe was not dominated by monarchies). Yes Tribe the Monarchies of Europe hated the idea of a United States. Or maybe you'll tell us that the American Revolution, and the War of 1812 are also a figment of imagination. Origin: Hoffman name is based on profession, trades occupations. The German term 'HOF' can mean a farmstead, also court. 'Jews at court' were called 'Hofjuden' in German and 'court jews' in English. They were in finance, commerce, and diplomacy'. Hoffmann is a Jewish name from the 1808 in Eastern France and 1813 in Mecklenburg,Germany. This name is taken from a Hebrew given name Tikvah (Hope) abbreviation of 'Hoffnung' the German for hope in which case Hof(f)mann could mean 'hopeful man Surnames: Gofman, Hoffman, Hofman Submitted by: Rose Hoffman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Tribe Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 I see no point whatsoever in continuing this. It started as a thread discussing a report which you have no intention of reading. You have taken the opportunity to display your usual lack of civility. I have better things to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted August 30, 2010 Author Share Posted August 30, 2010 I see no point whatsoever in continuing this. It started as a thread discussing a report which you have no intention of reading. You have taken the opportunity to display your usual lack of civility. I have better things to do. Wonderful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Tribe Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 I see no point whatsoever in continuing this. It started as a thread discussing a report which you have no intention of reading. You have taken the opportunity to display your usual lack of civility. I have better things to do. Wonderful. Typical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now