• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

manufactured terrorism?

Do you think that terrorism is manufactured?

  • yes

    Votes: 4 30.8%
  • no

    Votes: 9 69.2%

  • Total voters
    13
Nobody, not even NIST would suggest such a goofy thing. You don't even understand what 'allude' means either.

If only one bit of one wall, dog almighty that is nuts, was in free fall the other three sides and the "more" you somehow imagined, would be left above the roof line of the descending building for all to see. That did not happen.

What the hell were you gazing at?

Here's a video that shows for those who are legally blind, that the entire building, tied together as it was descended in free fall.

WTC Building 7 Collapse - 23 angles

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnLcUxV1dPo

We must make note here that NIST at first denied free fall. A large number of scientists should not make such an amateur mistake. When they were caught out on their lie, they were like deer caught in headlights. It was completely apparent that they were lying from their discombobulated speech, like children caught in a known lie.

We must make note here that the usual US government conspiracy theory theorists have been denying all along that free fall even existed.


A better analysis of what happened. I posted this link for you in the past.

So back to the OP. Can
World Trade Center Evidence-Based Research

Interesting that you failed to show where this site is wrong.

"It appears that the core was slowed down by the perimeter. The core appears to have strained the floors, took down the perimeter and catapulted the outer shell downwards until the floors were once again less strained. After this it appears the whole interconnected unit fell together."

"There is further evidence of this during the collapse progression process. The section of the perimeter located farthest east fell slower than the rest of the perimeter and actually folded in on top of and over the rest of the building as shown in this short slow motion video:"

It would help if you would broaden your source list and get more facts before posting.
 
do you think that terrorism is manufactured by those (CIA/DoD) that profit from insecurity (militarization of the police, mass surveillance, etc)?

The Intercept published database of manufactured terrorism in the USA: The U.S. government has prosecuted 796 people for terrorism since the 9/11 attacks. Most of them never even got close to committing an act of violence: https://trial-and-terror.theintercept.com/

I believe they manufacture terrorism by bullying people (mostly immigrants and Muslims) and if bullying is not enough to produce the hate and attack, they poison them, to make them suicidal and not to care if they will be arrested/imprisoned.

1) all attackers in Paris and elsewhere were 2 years in the prison, after that they made attacks, they were already known to the secret service (that surely set them up to be arrested and poisoned them in the prison), for those who don't know, spies destroy your private life when they observe you, they call it sabotage of your life, not only of your political activities that they found dangerous

2) all attackers were Muslims who broke rules and never cared so much for all religious rules, they drank, sold drugs, etc. it means, they attacked because they were bullied and poisoned and not because of Islam, I believe they were chosen by spies because criminals are easier to make them hot/nervous to kill. if you bully Muslim criminals, they can get an idea to kill

3) they made wider definition of terrorism in the law, in many countries, now they arrest people for terrorism just because they express their opinion, they don't try to kill anyone, and each arrest is followed by the media paranoia about terrorism, to justify building a totalitarian state i.e abolishing civil and workers rights as it happened in France.

they manufacture terrorism to profit from insecurity but also to turn the system back to 19th century in Europe and the USA.

In Asia, they manufacture terrorism to make or prolong the war, to profit from the war and insecurity,
the biggest buyer of arms from Lockheed Martin is Saudi Arabia and the CEOs give technical help to Saudis to locate targets in Yemen, Saudis are the public face for the war, but behind Saudis are CEOs of Lockheed Martin and American intelligence. They use Saudi Arabia to kill masses of civilians and produce more jihadists, to help to Al Qaeda to get more people, the same as they did with ISIS in the last 4 years. In that way, they produce and prolong the war i.e. they profit.

https://theintercept.com/2016/08/03...onviction-in-canada-citing-police-entrapment/
https://theintercept.com/2015/03/16/howthefbicreatedaterrorist/

The ACLU of Massachusetts’s Kade Crockford notes this extraordinarily revealing quote from former FBI assistant director Thomas Fuentes, as he defends one of the worst FBI terror “sting” operations of all:
If you’re submitting budget proposals for a law enforcement agency, for an intelligence agency, you’re not going to submit the proposal that “We won the war on terror and everything’s great,” cuz the first thing that’s gonna happen is your budget’s gonna be cut in half. You know, it’s my opposite of Jesse Jackson’s ‘Keep Hope Alive’—it’s ‘Keep Fear Alive.’ Keep it alive.

That is the FBI’s terrorism strategy — keep fear alive — and it drives everything they do.

In a way, yes, these terrorist attacks are manufactured. We know what the end result of Muslim migration is; sharia law, the caliphate, terrorism against innocents.

If anyone is guilty of manufacturing the terrorist attacks, it would be the Council on Foreign Relations, the ultra rich, and those who want to erase borders in an attempt to bring about a Universal Government.
 
Nobody, not even NIST would suggest such a goofy thing.

More FAIL for you ... for that a BIT of an UNSUPPORTED wall fell a BIT faster is NOT such a big deal.

Which is WHY all you truthers CANNOT actually ever articulate as to WHY it is "goofy" or suspicious or meaningful ... CAN you camlok ???

You all push this TINY BIT of freefall as some big deal, yet for the lives of you all you CANNOT actually EXPLAIN as to WHY is supposedly such a bid deal ... NOT once have any of you lot explained as to WHY it is important ... you all just faithfully, mindlessly regurgitated the mantras ... yet CAN'T show WHY in engineering or science it is significant.

WHY can you not do that camlock ... WILL YOU be the first truther EVER to actually explain WHY it is significant and as to HOW in science it helps prove whatever controlled demolition FANTASY you subscribe too ???

Course you WON'T !!!


You don't even understand what 'allude' means either.

MORE abject fail for you ... but of course your Dunning=Kruger is too well developed to grasp it.

If only one bit of one wall, dog almighty that is nuts, was in free fall the other three sides and the "more" you somehow imagined, would be left above the roof line of the descending building for all to see. That did not happen.

Really, so ONE wall of a failing building cannot be unsupported ... My Goodness !!!

STOP THE PRESSES ... little camlok here, some NOBODY who is patently NOT qualified in ANY of the relevant fields here has a HOOOGE ... seriously, its big, the hooogest thing ever ... he can refute all of established science here

FACT ... ONE BIT of the NORTH FACE was in freefall ... INESCAPABLE HARD FACT !!!

So YES, it DID happen ... ONE BIT of ONE FACE only was observed in freefall for ALL OF EIGHT STOREYS !!!


What the hell were you gazing at?

Reality !!!

A place you and your ilk fear to tread ...

Here's a video that shows for those who are legally blind, that the entire building, tied together as it was descended in free fall.

WTC Building 7 Collapse - 23 angles

Yet MORE fail for you ... you lot just PRETEND to see what you WANT to here ... NONE of that shows a controlled demolition.

And what a pile of crap, claiming "no tall building had ever collapsed primarily due to fire" either.


Julio-caidaWTC7_zps66d6d73b.jpg
 
We must make note here that NIST at first denied free fall.

CRAPTACULAR FAIL ... and an outright LIE.

For at NO point did NIST ever "deny" freefall ... for they had ALREADY MENTIONED IT IN THEIR DRAFT ... WHICH MEANS BEFORE CHANDLER EVER SPEWED THE WORD "FREEFALL".

NIST WERE FIRST TO MENTION IT ... FACT !!!

A large number of scientists should not make such an amateur mistake. When they were caught out on their lie, they were like deer caught in headlights. It was completely apparent that they were lying from their discombobulated speech, like children caught in a known lie.

REAL scientists made no mistakes about 9/11 ... th ONLY people making mistakes are you truthers.

FAIL too for NIST were NOT "caught out" for they ALREADY MENTIONED that BIT of freefall IN THEIR DRAFT.

Read and weep camlok ...

But the simple REALITY is that NIST had ALREADY put that infomation out ... Chandler and truther promotors are outright LYING when they say they were the authors of that ... and because, once AGAIN, you automatically believe their claims you take it as gospel and do not check up first.

For if you did check up B'man ... it is easy to see that NIST had already made mention of this freefall period in even the DRAFT version of NCSTAR 1-9 published in AUGUST 2006 inviting public comment.

Draft Report NIST NCSTAR 1-9: “Structural Fire Response and Probable Collapse Sequence of World Trade Center Building 7”, issued August 21st 2006 ... NCSTAR 1-9 Vol 2 Chapter 12.5.3 ... to be exact ...

•In Stage 1, the descent was slow and the acceleration was less than that of gravity. This stage corresponds to the initial buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the North face, as seen in Figure 12-62. By 1.75 s, the North face had descended approximately 7 ft.

•In Stage 2, the North face descended at gravitational acceleration, as exterior column buckling progressed and the columns provided negligible support to the upper portion of the North face. This free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories (105 ft), the distance traveled between times t=1.75 s and t=4.0 s.

•In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased somewhat as the upper portion of the North face encountered resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below. Between 4.0 s and 5.4 s, the Northwest corner fell an additional 130 ft.

Chandler brought up this point during the PRESS CONFERENCE which was AFTER publication of the DRAFT, a draft report which took years to collate, so this information was ALREADY at NIST's hand and being looked into ... yet Chandler first spoke of it on August 28th during the press conference ... a full SEVEN DAYS later !!!

Have you ever realized that Chandler was ONLY responding to information ALREADY out there ... and that he is outright lying when he says he forced them to admit it ... it is shown in his OWN words when he made reference to the draft itself !!!

https://www.debatepolitics.com/cons...ave-been-done-were-told-2.html#post1059126613

We must make note here that the usual US government conspiracy theory theorists have been denying all along that free fall even existed.
 
You seem to think that yelling and stamping your feet, big bold letters, huge print, ... is an effective way to get a point across. It isn't. It simply illustrates how childish you are.

Firstly, the usage of majuscules is CLEARLY used to DEFINE and CLARIFY certain RELEVANT world and points ... NOT for any sort of emotional use.

How enormously inept that it passed you by.

Secondly, we all note how you CAN'T actually show WHAT I say wrong ... you JUST complain about HOW I wrote it.

Feeble stuff from you camlok ... but it's ALL you have !!!

As for HUGE print ... well truthers ARE rather dense really and so NEED things make as clear as possible for them !!!
 
All your posts are nothingness, gamolon.
That's why you can't refute them? Good one camlok.

That's ok. You don't have to refute them. Your non-response to facts is just a good. Seems like other truthers here have taken the same route.
 
Here's a video that shows for those who are legally blind, that the entire building, tied together as it was descended in free fall.
Why do you continue to lie camlok?

It was not the entire building that was in freefall.

How do you explain the 1.75 seconds of non freefall when the roofline stary d to descend. I thought explosives went off and caused the roofline to defend immediately into free fall?

Keep up with the non-responses...
 
Your first sentence makes zero sense. It doesn't matter if FEMA were tenth. They did a scientific study, in a manner of speaking.

Except it DOES matter ... for FEMA were NOT the agency tasked with the explanation of this event and so their study is NOT the accepted narrative of authority.


The attack on the steel came from a thermitic reaction, that of thermate, a substance that has sulfur in the mix, a eutectic mix, whose design, with the addition of the sulphur is to lower the melting point of the steel.

NOPE ... from a EUTECTIC reaction ... NOT thermitic.

You CLEARLY know nothing of physical chemistry!!!

For a eutectic, is by definition SOLID, therefore it CAN'T "attack" anything ... there is NO "design" ... he eutectic is a BY-PRODUCT of the high temperature diffusion of oxygen and sulphur into the steel

Sulphidation of steel is NOT some super rare or unknown thing you know ... it EVEN follows a PARABOLIC RATE LAW ... x2=2k't2 where x is scale thickness, k' is parabolic rate constant and t is time.

Sulphidation of steel is NOT ANY kind of "thermitic" anything.

The presence of sulphur DOESN'T automatically mean thermite/ate ... , just like carbon DOESN'T mean gunpowder !!!

Truther idiots like to claim the presence of sulphur somehow proves that there was some sort of thermite/ate reaction ... all the while MISSING that the gypsum sheetrock ... DRYWALL ... was obviously used in MASSIVE quantities ... THE THIRD most abundant building material used ... and is PURE HYDROUS CALCIUM DISULPHATE.

NOT that you will know what that means ...

So if the sulphur supposedly comes from the "thermate", then there should be plenty of aluminum, and/or aluminum oxide as by-products, but NONE of the reports that indicate the presence of sulphur EVER mention any aluminum ... that ALONE ruleS out "thermate" !!!

Still, sulphur is one of the SMALLEST constituents of thermite (except for the binder) and so other elements would be MUCH more abundant. Aluminum Oxide and Elemental Iron, as well as Barium Nitrate.

Ba(NO3)2 >2Ba(NO3)2 + O2 -> Ba2O + 2NO3-

ERGO ... there was NO actual thermite, thermate or ANY of the other dumb truther claims about thermite ... the whole "nano" one being the most ridiculous.

But you WON'T know that camlok since you FAIL utterly in science !!!


That created the molten and vaporized steel. It also created the molten molybdenum, the vaporized lead, the iron microspheres, a product of thermitic reactions.

CRAPTACULAR fail in simple chemistry for you camlok.

For a start molybdenum is NOT a by-product of thermite/thermate reactions !!!


The molten steel seen by myriad firemen, first responders, scientists, clean up workers, Leslie Robertson, Rudy Guiliani, Ken Holden, ... for months after 9-11.

SO WHAT ... for it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE to correctly identify a molten substance by EYE alonw.

NONE of those people are TRAINED METALLURGISTS ...

And considering that the buildings were COMMONLY KNOWN and CITED as "steel-framed" then it is perfectly understandable as to grasp they ASSUMED it was steel they saw ... such testimony is NOT gospel evidence or proof ... JUST assumptions made at the time/

Hardly scientific either of you ...

Again ... read and weep, for this crap has been claimed before by truthers ...

Besides, finding molten metal in fires is NOT uncommon or suspicious ...

https://www.debatepolitics.com/cons...1-richard-gage-irish-tv-8.html#post1059597834
 
Typical nothingness from a US conspiracy theory supporter.

Cam why do you feel the need to lie about the collapse?
 
do you think that terrorism is manufactured by those (CIA/DoD) that profit from insecurity (militarization of the police, mass surveillance, etc)

One of my colleagues posted on Facebook recently that she believed the UK Conservative Govt was behind the recent terror attacks so that people would vote for what was seen as the more secure party to look after us.

I disagreed and then a whole bunch of people joined in telling me how wrong I was....

It's all hooey conspiracy ****.
 
do you think that terrorism is manufactured by those (CIA/DoD) that profit from insecurity (militarization of the police, mass surveillance, etc)?

The Intercept published database of manufactured terrorism in the USA: The U.S. government has prosecuted 796 people for terrorism since the 9/11 attacks. Most of them never even got close to committing an act of violence: https://trial-and-terror.theintercept.com/

I believe they manufacture terrorism by bullying people (mostly immigrants and Muslims) and if bullying is not enough to produce the hate and attack, they poison them, to make them suicidal and not to care if they will be arrested/imprisoned.

1) all attackers in Paris and elsewhere were 2 years in the prison, after that they made attacks, they were already known to the secret service (that surely set them up to be arrested and poisoned them in the prison), for those who don't know, spies destroy your private life when they observe you, they call it sabotage of your life, not only of your political activities that they found dangerous

2) all attackers were Muslims who broke rules and never cared so much for all religious rules, they drank, sold drugs, etc. it means, they attacked because they were bullied and poisoned and not because of Islam, I believe they were chosen by spies because criminals are easier to make them hot/nervous to kill. if you bully Muslim criminals, they can get an idea to kill

3) they made wider definition of terrorism in the law, in many countries, now they arrest people for terrorism just because they express their opinion, they don't try to kill anyone, and each arrest is followed by the media paranoia about terrorism, to justify building a totalitarian state i.e abolishing civil and workers rights as it happened in France.

they manufacture terrorism to profit from insecurity but also to turn the system back to 19th century in Europe and the USA.

In Asia, they manufacture terrorism to make or prolong the war, to profit from the war and insecurity,
the biggest buyer of arms from Lockheed Martin is Saudi Arabia and the CEOs give technical help to Saudis to locate targets in Yemen, Saudis are the public face for the war, but behind Saudis are CEOs of Lockheed Martin and American intelligence. They use Saudi Arabia to kill masses of civilians and produce more jihadists, to help to Al Qaeda to get more people, the same as they did with ISIS in the last 4 years. In that way, they produce and prolong the war i.e. they profit.

https://theintercept.com/2016/08/03...onviction-in-canada-citing-police-entrapment/
https://theintercept.com/2015/03/16/howthefbicreatedaterrorist/

The ACLU of Massachusetts’s Kade Crockford notes this extraordinarily revealing quote from former FBI assistant director Thomas Fuentes, as he defends one of the worst FBI terror “sting” operations of all:
If you’re submitting budget proposals for a law enforcement agency, for an intelligence agency, you’re not going to submit the proposal that “We won the war on terror and everything’s great,” cuz the first thing that’s gonna happen is your budget’s gonna be cut in half. You know, it’s my opposite of Jesse Jackson’s ‘Keep Hope Alive’—it’s ‘Keep Fear Alive.’ Keep it alive.

That is the FBI’s terrorism strategy — keep fear alive — and it drives everything they do.

Manufactured, no. Way too many dead and wounded around the world. Terrorism is an attention getter. Is it worth all the money we spent/spend on trying to keep a terrorism incident from happening here? All the additional security measures? The loss of rights? I don't know. I think we do have to be careful not to overdo it. We may end up living in a police state just for the security, protection against terrorist attacks. The money spent on keeping us safe from terrorism may indeed be better spent elsewhere. Who knows for sure? Perhaps that is something for each individual to think about and decide for themselves.

Ben Franklin was credited with stating, "Those who choose security over liberty soon will have neither." Maybe it was Gerald Ford who said something akin to that, but I like giving old Uncle Ben credit. Regardless, I think that is something we need to keep in mind.
 
The attack on the steel came from a thermitic reaction, that of thermate, a substance that has sulfur in the mix, a eutectic mix, whose design, with the addition of the sulphur is to lower the melting point of the steel.
Hey camlok. You refered to Harrit's paper as proof of thermite.
Nanothermite. Discovered in WTC dust.

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

Can you explain why Harrit's 3 of 4 samples of "thermite" do NOT show sulfer in their respective XEDS spectra? Are you saying you know better than Harrit?


Then can you explain why Harrit, who works in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark, makes this statement below (taken from the corresponding screenshot below the quote) in the same document regarding another sample? Why does Harrit, a chemist, say the sulfer may be SURFACE contamination due to wallboard and not say it was mixed in with the thermite?
Fig. (14). XEDS spectrum of red side before soaking in MEK. Notice
the presence of Zn and Cr, which are sometimes seen in the red
layers. The large Ca and S peaks may be due to surface contamination
with wallboard material.


Trying to sound smart has again gotten you into trouble.
;)
 
Of course the US manufactures terrorism, just as they manufactured the "commie" scare. Not only does the US/UK manufacture terrorism, they are the world's leading terrorists, the us ahead by a wide margin.

The only country ever to be convicted of international terrorism, the USA!

The only country continuing their terrorism around the world, the USA! In Ukraine, Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, ... !
 
Of course the US manufactures terrorism, just as they manufactured the "commie" scare. Not only does the US/UK manufacture terrorism, they are the world's leading terrorists, the us ahead by a wide margin.

The only country ever to be convicted of international terrorism, the USA!

The only country continuing their terrorism around the world, the USA! In Ukraine, Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, ... !

Of course truthers hate the truth, that's why they lie so much
 
I don't believe that the CIA deliberately made a terror group to justify government surveillance and warmongering but I do believe that they were responsible for training the same people who formed Al Qaeda. Bin Laden was trained by the CIA to fight in the Mujaheddin which was an insurgency against the communist regime of Afghanistan. And Isis is blowback from the Iraqi invasion; many of their generals used to work for Saddam Hussein.
 
julian assange, hillary funded by the same money as ISIS:



filmmaker and journalist, John Pilger about MI6's connection to the Libya-Manchester group that killed kids at the concert in Manchester:

 
Yes, manufactured terrorism, meant to keep the populace agitated and in a state of fear.

The GWOT is a fraud of epic proportions.

More people die on US highways than in terrorist events, but most americans are very fearful of the phantom terror attacks.
 
Yes, manufactured terrorism, meant to keep the populace agitated and in a state of fear.

The GWOT is a fraud of epic proportions.

More people die on US highways than in terrorist events, but most americans are very fearful of the phantom terror attacks.

Not a good comparison T72.
People choose to drive. When is the last a US citizen made the choice to die by a terrorist attack on US soil?

But you also believe all of the attacks on US soil have been false flags or faked by the govt.
 
Not a good comparison T72.
People choose to drive. When is the last a US citizen made the choice to die by a terrorist attack on US soil?

Americans choose to support US terrorism which begets terrorism. When the US uses terrorism/war crimes to retaliate for things that they falsely accuse others of having done themselves, they call it justified revenge but when others retaliate for infinitely worse US terrorism, war crimes, crimes against humanity, ... the US calls it "terrorism".

Stunning hypocrisy, but then that is what the US has always been, stunning hypocrisy.

Noam Chomsky: The phrase 'war on terrorism' should always be used in quotes, cause there can't possibly be a war on terrorism, it's impossible. The reason is it's led by one of the worst terrorist states in the world, in fact it's led by the only state in the world which has been condemned by the highest international authorities for international terrorism, namely the World Court and Security Council, except that the US vetoed the resolution.
 
Americans choose to support US terrorism which begets terrorism. When the US uses terrorism/war crimes to retaliate for things that they falsely accuse others of having done themselves, they call it justified revenge but when others retaliate for infinitely worse US terrorism, war crimes, crimes against humanity, ... the US calls it "terrorism".

Stunning hypocrisy, but then that is what the US has always been, stunning hypocrisy.

Noam Chomsky: The phrase 'war on terrorism' should always be used in quotes, cause there can't possibly be a war on terrorism, it's impossible. The reason is it's led by one of the worst terrorist states in the world, in fact it's led by the only state in the world which has been condemned by the highest international authorities for international terrorism, namely the World Court and Security Council, except that the US vetoed the resolution.

We know your hatred for the US govt.

Noted: Once again you do not answer questions.
"When is the last a US citizen made the choice to die by a terrorist attack on US soil?"
 
We know your hatred for the US govt.

Noted: Once again you do not answer questions.
"When is the last a US citizen made the choice to die by a terrorist attack on US soil?"

You do not understand the difference between hatred and mistrust. A dictionary could help you overcome that problem, but I doubt anything at all could help you overcome your propensity for asking really stupid questions like your last sentence.
 
You do not understand the difference between hatred and mistrust. A dictionary could help you overcome that problem, but I doubt anything at all could help you overcome your propensity for asking really stupid questions like your last sentence.

Yes I do. Do you?

Your illogical statement of "More people die on US highways than in terrorist events, but most americans are very fearful of the phantom terror attacks." is what I expect from someone who mistrust the govt so much.

It is your problem not mine you can't see how stupid it is to compare US highway deaths to terror events.

One solution for you. You could move out of the country to one more suited to your liking. Bet you do "trust" the govt. to provide you with a check each month.:mrgreen:
 
Yes I do. Do you?

Your illogical statement of "More people die on US highways than in terrorist events, but most americans are very fearful of the phantom terror attacks." is what I expect from someone who mistrust the govt so much.

It is your problem not mine you can't see how stupid it is to compare US highway deaths to terror events.

One solution for you. You could move out of the country to one more suited to your liking. Bet you do "trust" the govt. to provide you with a check each month.:mrgreen:

Every month, the government pays me back a bit of the money it began taking from me under color of law starting in 1963.
 
Every month, the government pays me back a bit of the money it began taking from me under color of law starting in 1963.

Sure HD I am sure you have paid a ton of taxes on your welfare
 
We know your hatred for the US govt.

Noted: Once again you do not answer questions.
"When is the last a US citizen made the choice to die by a terrorist attack on US soil?"

I don't hate the US gubmint, mike. You don't seem to have the necessary intelligence to discuss these issues. You can even formulate a sensible question.

Compare your gibberish to Noam Chomsky's eloquence.
 
Back
Top Bottom