Jump to content
The Education Forum



Recommended Posts

Please forgive the use of "agitation" in the title to get your attention. I know I won't win any of you by telling you that you are deluded or stupid; I'll only push you away by doing so, which doesn't serve the bigger picture. I am human as the rest of you, prone to be drawn into the petty arguments on here or egotistical oneupmanship. I'd like you all to consider what is being said very carefully, putting ego and personal differences aside. Read it, go out for a few hours, have a walk by the sea, a river, or in a forest and mull over what is exactly being said, and to what extent this affects you. 

As some of you know, I work in Public Relations. During my education in this domain, I read essential books by people like Edward Bernays, who wrote "Propaganda", which is still the PR bible and "Crystalising Public Opinion." Bernays was heavily influenced by his uncle, Psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud, and people like Walter Lippmann and Gustav Le Bon. Bernays is credited with getting women addicted to cigarettes, convincing them that it was liberating. He also worked for the US government in WW2, including "The office of war information", the US Navy & US Army. He maintained that you could tap into the ancient instincts of human beings, utilising the theories espoused by Freud. He really was the godfather of PR and incredibly effective. He wrote the following in the book "Propaganda": 

".... in almost every daily act of our lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind, who harness old social forces and contrive new ways to guide and bind the world." 
Edward Bernays - Propaganda

That's not a conspiracy theorist; that's a very successful guy who shaped the thoughts of the masses throughout his entire life, using techniques known to the few for big corporations and government. His ideas and skills were not compatible with democracy. You have to conclude that as bright as you think you are, as much of an independent thinker you profess to be, many thoughts and ideas in your lives, including your likes and dislikes, are shaped by people like Edward Bernays, using his techniques. 

Plato's Cave Allegory.

On the forum and in the broader America, there seems to be an opinion from the Democrat supporters that 1/6 was an attempted coup d'etat in America, that democracy almost fell in that moment when organised Trump supporters pushed their way into the unguarded Capitol building. 
On the opposing side, a minority of ill-educated Republican supporters think they almost sized the country when it was taken away by a fraudulent election result. The rest of the more rational Republicans believe it was a protest gone wrong, frustrations spilt over, and people pushed their way into a government building. I think we can all agree that the opinions are contrasting. You've all spent a year now going back and forth with "confirmation bias" materials from your favourite news outlets that are always on point with your opinions. Let me explain something very clearly, almost every man who went to WW1 and WW2 believed he was virtuous; he was on the righteous side. So many of the people in the wars of the last thousand years thought God was on his side and that he was carrying out God's will. In each case, someone had to be wrong, or perhaps even both sides were right and wrong on some levels. 

You've spent your lives with your ideas being shaped by your parents, who had their ideas shaped by people like Bernays. Then you went to school and were taught obedience and conformity through a mix of classical and operant conditioning. You were taught to respect the institution of government and its affiliate organisations. In popular culture, these institutions were portrayed as virtuous. You bought into the classic good vs evil narrative; your brains were trained to recognise that and look at the world in those terms. People like Bernays knew the value of this structure. As long as the government and its acolytes were portrayed or represented as virtuous, the public would get behind them. As long as you portrayed your enemies as villains, the people would go against them. To illustrate that in real-time; you've watched decades of neo-colonialism and covert ops by the CIA, making leaders of central and south American countries appear to the American public as villains, when in fact some were virtuous, they just weren't willing to give away their resources to the US for next to nothing. Your security apparatus and the government used that good vs evil paradigm to trick you all. Few here can say they haven't seen that when researching JFK and his assassination. 

Another thing you have seen is "divide & rule" strategy used on these countries that America wished to destabilise. The idea is you split the population into factions; their differences distract them, whipping up passions and hatreds. This old tactic permits a ruler or invader to manipulate the masses. They appear as the fair mediator whilst they milk the assets and resources of the country. The British did a great job of this in India; they recognised that one man's dislike for a neighbour was far more potent than his mistrust for a stranger. Britain was far outnumbered; no army could control India's massive population. Britain used "divide and rule" to control the second most populous nation on earth, to excellent effect. Your CIA has done the same thing in countries worldwide; division creates weakness, and unity builds strength. 

Any of you who are students of history or political science can surely see that the two paragraphs above reflect reality. Ask yourselves; why couldn't the same methods be used on America's population? To break that down, you accept that it happens abroad, but you can't buy or entertain even the theory of it happening at home? I would ask you to sit there for half an hour, ponder how that might work in America, and make some notes as if you are the architect of such a plan. For such a thing to occur, you would need America to be split on two societally. You'd also require both sides to believe they are virtuous. 

Something that has touched me lately and is incredibly sad is that various people on the forum express struggling financially. This is happening all over Europe too. Before our very eyes, we are watching the most powerful nation on earth run itself into the dust. America is the country that we looked up to in Europe as our saviours during the darkest times of the Cold War. With this Covid policy, we're accelerating the demise as fast as humanly possible. You buy into humanitarian reasons for this because your politicians tell you it is the only way. At the same time; you don't have money to do the things you did when younger, to have even a fraction of the lifestyles your father or grandfathers had. You have fears and worries about how you'll survive and what life will be like for your children and grandchildren. Whilst all of that is going on, one class of people has an ever increasingly better quality of life. They are doing better than ever; the political class and above are thriving. They are the people you believe are serving you and making your lives better. You trust them as honest, God-believing patriots with hearts full of humanity. Meanwhile, they get richer while you get poorer. Before your very eyes, you see the largest passing upward of wealth in history. A transfer from the poor and middle class to the super-wealthy. Indeed the greatest trick is that you're defending these people, worshipping them, looking for salvation from people who have no incentive to save you. It's heartbreaking to see that. 

In the coming years, you will likely see all of the following: an energy crisis, supply chain collapses, food shortages, economic collapse, and cyberattacks that disrupt your way of life or perhaps impact the possibilities of surviving. It's already started. How will you cope if you suddenly have no internet, electricity, gas, or access to food? Inflation is at 6-7% and is climbing. Do you remember Russian's queueing for McDonald's in the '90s with bags full of currency the size of household bricks? It looks like we are entering the Dalton Minimum; the output of crops/food will slow in this mini ice age if scientists are correct. I am no fan of Marx, but, in my opinion, he got one thing right; that was his prediction for the end days of capitalism. He described a world where corruption would be rife, with oligarchs cannibalising state institutions. What do you think he meant by that? As your extortionate taxes are passed into the hands of private corporations, or your government takes on debt, devaluing your currency, making you poorer. Wake up guys. 

"In (totalitarianism) shortages of material goods, even of necessities, were not a drawback but a great advantage for the rulers. These shortages were not accidental to the terror, but one of its most powerful instruments. Not only did shortages keep peoples minds strictly on bread and sausage, and divert their energies toward procuring them so that there was no time or energy left over for subversion, but the shortages meant that people could be brought to inform, spy and betray eachother very cheaply." 
Theodore Dalrymple 

I pay 1% income tax where I live. I pay my own medical insurance, property tax and fees for rubbish collection, but that's about it, and it's all 100% legal, and people accept it as fair in the community. Your instinct will be to feel resentful or angry toward me for that, as it seems unfair. You might want to consider whether the taxes your government shakes you down for are unfair or unjust. Have you ever read the reason why you fought for independence? You didn't want to pay the taxes to the king of England. Did the original constitution include taxation? If so, how much and what for? They tax you for the maximum, making it barely possible to live, taking you right to the point of protesting. They do the same thing in Britain and wider Europe. They use Bernays methods to make you think that is normal and justified. You nod acceptingly when your taxes line the pockets of Pfizer, Halliburton, Northrup Gruman, Raytheon and the big oil companies. 

The media manufactures consent for all of the above. It shapes your opinions using the techniques of Bernays and psychologists; it divides you, lies to you, and influences every aspect of your life. Yet you think, despite roughly 90% of it being owned by 9 conglomerates, that the stuff you read is honest and impartial. You have watched those media outlets lie to you about JFK, foreign policy, and history, yet you trust them when representing the party views. Do you feel you understand the nature of the beast? You hear the Daily Beast is a CIA front, and there is silence. Yet you revert to type unquestioningly as if it's something random. You see the owner of The Atlantic hanging out with her friend, Ghislaine Maxwell, and you quote the journal as if it's gospel. Some of you acknowledge Operation Mockingbird, you believe it, yet you can't face reality or even the possibility that such a thing may have expanded since then and got worse. All of the answers you need are in the JFKA research, yet, you look the other way. 

Have you ever looked at how much money presidents make when they leave office? Prime Ministers in the UK too. Tony Blair made £100m after leaving office, what would you do for £100m? We somehow think it's expected or normal that people doing bad things have wealth lavished on them when leaving office. I would stop and think about that culture for a moment and why it exists. 

On the one hand, going back to 1/6, it astounds me that some of you can't see any other motive than an organised Trump coup d'etat attempt or the bypassing of accession. But, also understand why you might not see any alternatives and the answers are psychological. I'll give my hypothesis of what is happening, which seems obvious. 

Nobody who believes it was an attempted coup, can explain how this rabble of the disenfranchised was going to take over the government, the army, the navy, the pentagon, the NSA, the CIA, The FBI, the National Guard etc. Some of the aforementioned government organisations were actually dead against Trump; perhaps the FBI is the most prominent. In my view, the protestors, a rabble of the disaffected, pushed into a government building with no security and ran amuck. The media did what they do best; they blew the event out of all proportions and magnified it. Why would they do that? Besides the whole media industry functions on the principle that agitation sells, there was also a distinct purpose for government. The government will always size power in crisis; they will always use such events to increase their control over the population. 9/11 gave the state the powers to surveil its people and keep those it accused of being terrorists indefinitely, without charge. By making 1/6 something it wasn't, you have the opportunity to keep domestic citizens who dissent in indefinite custody under the guise of them being domestic terrorists. If you can create a public perception that protestors are bad, akin to terrorists, you discourage people from protesting in the future, and you make sure the masses are against people that do protest or see them as a threat. The right to protest is one of the core values of a free and open society; we should be able to protest injustices or things we feel strongly against. If you're against protests, you are against the civil rights movement and MLK Jr marching on Washington; you are against all those protesting the Vietnam War. It shows how human beings can change their moral values when it's a cause they believe in and one they don't. 

Speaking of Vietnam and protesting, perhaps you should understand the culture of protesting and America's history. During the Nixon era, there were many protests. Do you remember the stink around those protests being infiltrated by undercover cops put in there to turn the protests violent? If you can turn them violent and show news coverage of that, you change public perception, and people only think of protestors as villains instead of the virtuous. You have undercover cops clashing and attacking actual cops; the public thinks all protestors are bad. Ultimately that is how authoritarian regimes crush protests. Even if there aren't undercover cops involved, riot police are itching for a scrap; that is what they are trained for; they are on edge, with heightened emotions, as are the protestors. You have a recipe for violence. It all gives food for thought. 

You may want to think about the embellishment and magnification of 1/6, the tightening of domestic terror laws, and the weaponising of linguistics as serving a vast purpose. Unlike us, who live in the present, distracted by one crisis after another in the media, governments and our ruling class don't think like that; they plan and strategise. You may well expect mass protests if you were proposing something controversial that people will get up in arms about, like V mandates or V passports (biometric IDs). If you want to stop or suppress those protests, you may want to paint protestors as villains in the public consciousness in advance. At the very least, it puts ordinary non-violent people off protesting; at best, it makes a nation look at protestors as violent troublemakers. 

You may be thinking that V mandates and V passports fix the crisis so that we can return to normality. You couldn't be more wrong. The V's are for life; every three months, it's a perpetual racket for the manufacturers to pass taxes to wealthy owners. The V passports or digital ID was in the works before the pandemic began. They need this V procedure to become normality, but they also want the App that will include your medical data, access to money, criminal record data, and social credit score to be used as an instrument of control to do anything. They are walking us into technocracy. If you don't believe me, take a look at China and how they are using the social credit scoring system as an instrument of control. It's so dystopian, Orwellian. No tyrants ever try to get you to do something and tell you it's a bad thing. They'll all dress things as a benefit to coerce you. If you indeed acquiesce and let the Nuremberg Code be bypassed and you lose body autonomy, they'll be putting God knows what it your bodies, whether to dumb you down, drop your fertility or to flat out reduce the world population. Let's say you disagree with that. Do you really want to put in place the conditions for that to happen? In popular culture and media, we are devaluing the significance of the individual, making it about collectivism or the greater good. We're actively making people feel guilty about feeling alive or having children through the climate change push in the media. The conditions are in place for bad things. We have had this extraordinary period of safety and comfort in the west since WW2; we've been wonderfully lucky but, consider the whole of human history has been almost exclusively at the hands of tyrants. We lost 50-100m people last century at the hands of a collectivist ideology called communism. They all believed in the greater good too. They all thought they were doing the right thing. The commanders of the Third Reich managed to turn one of the most liberal, educated societies in Europe into mass murderers. They were collectivists, too, acting for the greater good. If you are to analyse the holocaust step by step and work out how it happened, there were 10 or 11 stages. We're up to about stage 7 of that process now (in some countries), with the dehumanisation of those who have chosen not to have the treatment. Ask yourself which side of history you'd prefer to be on? If you think it's over when everyone takes that, you're. Next, the one thing we know about bullies and tyrants is, the more you acquiesce, the more they pick on you. Tyranny is incremental, they keep pushing, and you keep stepping backwards. They do it a little at a time. If you don't stand your ground, you feed the problem, and you are in part responsible for the fall of western civilisation and democracy. As ashamed of Western civilisation as you might be, consider that it gave you the life you've had so far and consider what life was like before and what it will be like afterwards. 


Also, please start reading about transhumanism and human augmentation. The UK government has human augmentation on its website; the WEF website had this under its strategic intelligence section until recently. I would recommend that you all take a close look at the World Economic Forum website, they have our whole future mapped out, planned, and nobody elected them.


I wrote a thread some time ago, explaining why people can't see what is directly in front of their eyes, why the most simple conspiracy or deception can't be seen, and gave 20 reasons. 

The tendency to process information by looking for, or interpreting, information that is consistent with one's existing beliefs. We all do this and it's the hardest one to resist. How many of us have read JFK books one after another, without purchasing any that make the contrary case to our beliefs? 

Groupthink is a phenomenon that occurs when a group of individuals reaches a consensus without critical reasoning or evaluation of the consequences or alternatives. Groupthink is based on a common desire not to upset the balance of a group of people. It's significantly easier to fall in line with the herd and not risk being ostracised for expressing different ideas and theories. There is less risk and it allows us to be intellectually lazy and feel safe in our group views. For anyone doubting this, see the Soloman Asche experiments proving the case. 

Cognitive dissonance is a theory in social psychology. It refers to the mental conflict that occurs when a person's behaviours and beliefs do not align. It may also happen when a person holds two beliefs that contradict one another. The state is fundamentally good, you vote for their representatives, but, the state seems to have been involved in the JFK assassination. One of them can't be true, which is it? If it can happen with JFKA, why can't it happen again, and again in different ways? We face the same mental conflict each time where we default back to the state as the good guys that we voted for. What if they are not? 

The acceptance of contradictory ideas at the same time, especially as a result of political indoctrination. The word comes from George Orwell in 1949 in his book titled "1984". This can only happen if people have abandoned critical thinking and their trust in those who supply them with information is completely blind. 
ie we're going to bomb democracy into Iraq because they might be linked to 9/11, destroy the country, kill a million Iraqi's, steal their oil, and it's going to make American's safer. 

With societies heavily conditioned by the flag and the nation, if the perpetrators of a conspiracy are seen as patriots, it is very hard for the average person to see any wrong in them. This is the exact reason Presidents and candidates are photographed with the flag. It cements that they are the same as us in the public psyche. We are much more likely to vote for a candidate who talks of his sacrifices in the military and how much he loves this nation. Just about everyone watching Fox has a firearm and flag, ready to defend the nation. Perceived patriots are the last people suspected of a conspiracy, they are seen as loyal. 

It's in the PR handbook if you are a wealthy elite or political candidate. You must be seen as charitable and doing good in society. JD Rockefeller famously got reporters to film him giving dimes to children for the news. The public perception was that he was a kind old man, and not a guy using his foundation to fund eugenics movements and further spread his influence in business, science and academia. The playbook is the same whether it's the Carnegie, Rockefeller, Clinton or the Gates Foundations. Donors are private, you get tax breaks and it goes under the guise of doing something good. If the accused in a conspiracy is appearing to give lots of wealth away, regardless of our financial naivety as to how much they are making, we find it abhorrent that a perceived kind person is being accused of conspiracy or impropriety. Again, we need to cast emotions aside and examine the facts. 

This is waning for children now but, many of us grew up entirely indoctrinated by religion, sitting through a school assembly of conditioning and brainwashing. We came out of it with morality and conscience. Every election we hear how devout a candidates faith is and how important it is to him/her as a guiding force. We can't help but think that's wonderful, something they have in common with us. When such a person is accused of a conspiracy or corruption, we can't even comprehend it as they have the same religious values as us. Our mind seldom lets us accept the notion of their guilt. 

If your IQ is less than 90, you can't even polish someone's boots in the US Army. The average IQ is 100. If your IQ is low, you're going to have to see a conspiracy step by step with your own eyes to believe and accept it. If your IQ is 95, you're not going to have the same faculties as someone who has an IQ of 167 to see and understand a conspiracy taking place. Some things will occur to one person, that another can never be able to comprehend. That's life. 

A wise man once said, that if a lie is told enough times, it becomes the truth. This is a fundamental rule of propaganda and psychological warfare. Unfortunately, some of us are more susceptible to this than others. If the perpetrators of a conspiracy have the media on their side, most of the population will nod like psychiatric patients who are high as a kite. After some time, the proportion of the population who believe otherwise will be very small. Maybe the same proportion that was put in gulags or executed in the Soviet Union, Maoist China, Cambodia and North Korea. When intellectuals are speaking out against the state, worry. 

Most of us don't have the first clue how ruthless it is in business, or an inkling of the tricks and deceptions used to achieve in that world. There are many tricks and cons that people in that world use to achieve their goals, that they see every day. When they catch a rival using them, they laugh, an acknowledgement they are in the game. The masses are completely asleep to such deceptions, they play out time and time again. They'll leave the average person thinking they just got a deal, the reality is they had their pants pulled down. Even Machiavelli's "The Prince" doesn't cover a fraction of these tricks but, it's certainly worth a read. I live in a tax haven, I listened to a ruthless proprietor of an offshore trust company negotiating with a local painter (decorator). The finance guy was conning the decorator something chronic, I called across the bar to the decorator "Dave, you could get £500 more for that", the other guy called me the FC-word combo. Don't assume because you are smart in your field that you understand the array of skills educated elites use. If you think you're immune to being conned by a conspiracy, you'll need to be seriously switched on and familiar with the techniques, most of us aren't. 

If you don't understand why you do the things you do or, why human beings do the things they do, what hope do you have or identifying a conspiracy? You need a basic understanding of human psychology to evaluate the behaviour and actions of a possible conspirator. You can't see behavioural patterns if you don't know what to look for. This is absolutely vital education.

History is cyclical, it repeats itself. "Those who are ignorant of history are destined to repeat it". In my opinion, if you're very well-read in historical terms, it equips you almost as well as the psychology. You'll see patterns, the same moves, repetition and be conscious of when a conspiracy is happening in real-time. If you're unaware of history, your chances of identifying a conspiracy are close to zero. Human history may be short in the scheme of the age of the planet but, there is plenty to educate yourself and observe the same surreptitious behaviour over and over again. 

It's no secret as with IQ, there is a disparity in human beings when it comes to the attributes to do certain things. Some of us will be strong at one thing and incompetent at another. Most of us will look at world events in isolation, with a myopic view and no context. A small proportion of people will be very good at seeing the bigger picture, those with incredibly analytical minds. They'll see patterns, commonalities and connect things. Their very logical minds are alerted by their subconscious, that something doesn't look right or fit logic. Those people go to the end of the earth with analysis looking for answers and, they draw a conclusion that is probable and logical. Not many of us have the cognitive function to do that. Those guys will identify a conspiracy. 

We are so used to CNN, SKY, FOX, BBC etc producing our news with very high production quality and a huge budget, that when we're communicated to by other sources with a modest budget who may be saying very valuable things, we instinctively doubt it because it doesn't look like what we're used to. People buy into a news brand like they would their favourite car or golf clubs, after a while, we develop blindness to everything else. Take everything on its merit and critically think, weighing up all sides. Don't be dazed and confused by special effects and fancy delivery. It's the truth that counts. 

From tiny children, we read comics, watch cartoons, watch TV, read books, watch films and they all have this good vs evil narrative. There is a virtuous good guy who wins, or a CIA, 007 or military guy who saves the world. Whether you realise it or not, we're conditioned to that as a reality and because it fits our moral value set, we feel good when the inevitable happy ending comes. In the exceptions where it doesn't, we feel sad, unhappy, like an injustice has taken place, it leaves us upset. All a government needs to do to perpetuate a conspiracy is propagate the message that they are on the side of the good guys, the righteous. If any conspiracy appears as well-intentioned, the public will support it, as their value set from media is geared up to do that. If you can make the victim the archetypal villain, you've done 90% of the job. We hear words like "undemocratic", "anti-freedom" and "against liberty" when it concerns countries, not pro-UK/US/Israel trade deals that exploit them and when someone is a friend of the UK, Israel or US, they're a democracy and they believe in freedom and liberty. We sit there and say; "my life is good, those guys don't believe in that, we need to change that or they'll take our freedoms away". Our media prevents us from seeing whether we are the hero or the villain in any situation. It manufactures consent for us to use taxpayers money to line the pockets of a handful of companies who do best when there is a war on the go. Our psyche is super susceptible to this manipulation and it plays out in perpetuity. 

Given the American wealthy elite might be 1% of the population or less, how many of you encounter these people regularly and understand the way they think and how ruthless they are in business? You're trained to be an obedient worker, a cog in a machine that has an output for other people. Why would you assume they think the same? Because of well-polished PR and less than forthright public demeanour? Simple PR makes you think they're the good guys. 

17). FEAR
Those who get a conspiracy theory wrong, never regain their reputation amongst family, friends, work colleagues etc. You can side with the state and the state can be wrong over and over again, yet you don't lose face. For the conspiracy theorists its social suicide being on the wrong side. This prevents people from raising concerns and thinking outside of the box. 

Whether we know it or not, we gravitate to people we like, admire and look up to. We create a bias and these celebrities are often used to deliver messages to the public. Because we have these celebs on a pedestal, corporations and governments often hire or co-opt them to enhance their message, as it's so effective. If your favourite athlete or actor says LHO killed JFK and anyone else is a tinfoil hat wearer, you're likely to go along with it. It's incredibly effective marketing. What we often don't understand is the upside for the very financially driven celebrities to jump on the bandwagon. They want to further their network and increase their earning potential and aspire to being part of the elite. Their PR agent will actively encourage them to take this line. With Insta, FB, Twitter and TikTok, and them having millions of followers, their endorsement is worth its weight in gold. 

We, hook, line and sinker, buy into the idea that red or blue is everything (in the UK too), we invest our emotions, hope and aspirations in these people who don't care about you or me. They're the guys that cut our healthcare, send us to some hellish foreign land to die in a ditch with a rifle, or sell us products that give us cancer. They're the guys that tell us we're destroying the environment while they profit from oil shares. They tell us we're destroying the oceans while they profit from the last saleable fish being mopped up. They tell us population is the worlds biggest problem while they have 6 kids and fly about in private jets. They tell us GM foods are healthy while they eat only organic. They drink deuterium free water while telling us ours dosed up with fluoride, is fine. Despite all this, we trust that the president or prime minister is the highest authority in the land and cannot be corrupted. This is one of the main reasons people don't see conspiracies. They believe in these demi-gods offering salvation through well-scripted dialogues organised by PR experts. Yet, we live with the very real reality of Napoleon Bonaparte's definition of madness; "people doing the same thing over and over, yet expecting different results". Every election we get a choice of Pepsi & Coke, hope & change, make America great again. 4 years later we sit there bought into the same pantomime. It never dawns on us that its theatre. That the status quo for the elites is the same, regardless of red or blue. It doesn't matter how many times they fail us, we're ready to believe in the next one who offers hope. How stupid are we really? We're like kids at a magic show seeing rabbits being pulled from hats, starry eyed and delusional. If you're not going to acknowledge the reason we only have two prominent parties, the reason we have such little choice in policy is a fix, then what hope do we have in seeing any conspiracy? 

Many of us don't like to believe the world is a bad place, that it's unfair or unjust, or that those we trust in politics could betray us. It's the red pill, the blue pill choice. Escapism is easier in the short term, but, leads to long term misery. 

Edited by Chris Barnard
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now
  • Create New...