• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories

What are the finest examples of 9/ll Truther stupidity that you've ever encountered?

Brain S. Staveley doesnt think there were any deaths on 9/11 from the WTC collapsing, thinks the jumpers were faked. Not only that the planes were all CGI/Hologram...and that any plane debris didnt exist, not to mention any and all eyewitnesses are state paid actors.

A quote from his blog:

" The only deaths we saw with our own eyes on 9/11 were the jumpers. Everyone remembers seeing that. Guess where almost all the jumpers came from... Right about the 91st floor. Before everyone jumped they did something very odd. They would all wave their shirt, wait a second then jump when the camera was on them. Just like the Israeli Art students little stunt. Very strange behavior for someone about to jump to their death from a burning building. Come on now. What type of art school is going to have you remove a window on the 91st floor of the trade tower and construct a balcony that would support naked people waving. Not only that but the helicopter??? That's quit the budget the art school has there. These art students were the jumpers from 9/11. It was a special effect. They filmed all that footage leading up to the jump and then just threw out mannequins or filmed in front of a green screen where they added the WTC in the background and they definitely did this in almost all of the pictures, they photoshopped them in there!"
 
Adam Fitzgerald said:
Brain S. Staveley doesnt think there were any deaths on 9/11 from the WTC collapsing, thinks the jumpers were faked. Not only that the planes were all CGI/Hologram...and that any plane debris didnt exist, not to mention any and all eyewitnesses are state paid actors.

A quote from his blog:

" The only deaths we saw with our own eyes on 9/11 were the jumpers. Everyone remembers seeing that. Guess where almost all the jumpers came from... Right about the 91st floor. Before everyone jumped they did something very odd. They would all wave their shirt, wait a second then jump when the camera was on them. Just like the Israeli Art students little stunt. Very strange behavior for someone about to jump to their death from a burning building. Come on now. What type of art school is going to have you remove a window on the 91st floor of the trade tower and construct a balcony that would support naked people waving. Not only that but the helicopter??? That's quit the budget the art school has there. These art students were the jumpers from 9/11. It was a special effect. They filmed all that footage leading up to the jump and then just threw out mannequins or filmed in front of a green screen where they added the WTC in the background and they definitely did this in almost all of the pictures, they photoshopped them in there!"
Click to expand...

Nothing new. This crap has been around over 15 years now.
Don't know any comment except people can believe some really stupid s__t.
 
I've got at UM, indicating that
"There was no Serial Number from the FDR - which was "found" in 3 different locations at various times by several different people - identifying this plane as N644AA. Nor was a Serial Number found on any other piece of wreckage, to confirm that this was N644AA.
According to the official NTSB data, N644AA never left the ground that morning."

If there was no NTSB evidence that the plane never left the ground, then why did they do a report(s) on it?

https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/pentagonattackpage2
http://www.911myths.com/AAL77_fdr.pdf
 
I'm so glad this thread exists. I think the stundies are gone and I didn't know where to post this.

I commented on a 9/11 video interviewing pilots who were on duty that day, and predictably a CTer made themselves known, and pretty early on in our discussion delivered this gem:

Monica Palmer said:
OK. My question to you: can you come up with a logical reason why CT-ers would make up stories if it wasn't true? What do they benefit from it? The only thing we get is constant insults. Do you think that's fun for anybody? Are we ALL insane masochist???
Click to expand...

A conspiracy theorist. Who believes 9/11 was a made-up story. Asking. Why. People. Would. Make. Up. Stories.

I quit.

eta: it's in response to my comment reading "Don't want to read the comments thread in case it's full of edgy conspiracy theorists, but this is pretty powerful." in case anyone goes looking.
 
Last edited:
Safe-Keeper said:
I'm so glad this thread exists. I think the stundies are gone and I didn't know where to post this.

I commented on a 9/11 video interviewing pilots who were on duty that day, and predictably a CTer made themselves known, and pretty early on in our discussion delivered this gem:



A conspiracy theorist. Who believes 9/11 was a made-up story. Asking. Why. People. Would. Make. Up. Stories.

I quit.

eta: it's in response to my comment reading "Don't want to read the comments thread in case it's full of edgy conspiracy theorists, but this is pretty powerful." in case anyone goes looking.
Click to expand...

Wow. The "paid shill" claim turned up rather quickly.
 
I have for some weeks now been writing with rabid Truther Daniel Plesse, who spams spams spams a few FB groups.

For two weeks I asked him to link to a video, with timestamp, where he thinks he can clearly hear explosions just before any of the collapses begins.

For two weeks, he posted very long videos without timestamps, telling me they are "full" with explosion sounds, I should go look for myself.
But I insisted that he find me a timestamp.
He posted several different videos, never any timestamp.
He posted the well know video with rescue workers at a pay phone when a single powerful explosion sound is heard - at a time when no building collapsed.
He posted several linkt to eye witness testimony.

But for two week, he failed to link to explosion sounds, with timestamps, that are consistent with explosive demolition




After more than two weeks, he caved in, sorta: Didn't admit outright that there are zero explosion sounds that are consistent with explosive demolition recorded on any 9/11 video.
But.

He presented a new theory:

That all videos have been edited and the sounds deleted!


:jaw-dropp :D
 
Oh, and the influential Canadian Truther and journalist Craig McKee thought that my claim that when the engine of a 757 collides with anything (columns, ceiling, floor, wall, but also office furniture, even people) inside the Pentagon, it would slow down at least because of momentum transfer.

I now know why he is a Pentagon no-planer and overall Truther: He doesn't understand the very first thing about basic mechanics. His world view is informed solely by imagination plus faith in cherry-picked "experts".
 
Oystein said:
Oh, and the influential Canadian Truther and journalist Craig McKee thought that my claim that when the engine of a 757 collides with anything (columns, ceiling, floor, wall, but also office furniture, even people) inside the Pentagon, it would slow down at least because of momentum transfer.

I now know why he is a Pentagon no-planer and overall Truther: He doesn't understand the very first thing about basic mechanics. His world view is informed solely by imagination plus faith in cherry-picked "experts".
Click to expand...

But it will slow down because of momentum transfer. When the engine collides with the wall inelastically, the fragments of the wall and the fragments of the engine after collision will have momentum, and their total momentum will equal the momentum of the intact engine before collision.

Ergo, all the parts of the engine after collision (except under extraordinary circumstances) will have lesser velocity.

I think you skipped a step somewhere.
 
Oystein said:
After more than two weeks, he caved in, sorta: Didn't admit outright that there are zero explosion sounds that are consistent with explosive demolition recorded on any 9/11 video.
But.

He presented a new theory:

That all videos have been edited and the sounds deleted!


:jaw-dropp :D
Click to expand...

That's a classic truther bait-and-switch; claim that a piece of evidence exists which has been crucial in informing their thinking, then, when asked to produce that piece of evidence, point out that its non-existence doesn't prove anything because it could have been suppressed, then cite that suppression as evidence for the conspiracy theory. It's almost common enough to be named as a new logical fallacy, but I'm not sure what to call it. It goes beyond simple shifting of the burden of proof in that it deliberately begs the question of why they believed this rubbish in the first place.

Dave
 
Last edited:
It's about the same argument that Craig McKee makes - we can't trust the government, we can't trust the media, so how do we know we have all the evidence?

The burden of proof will never be met since it's based on the 'no evidence is good enough' rule.
 
Can't trust the media or the gov? So everything that they say, report, publish is completely false? Could it be 98% true? 80% true? Discard everything?
 
JSanderO said:
Can't trust the media or the gov? So everything that they say, report, publish is completely false? Could it be 98% true? 80% true? Discard everything?
Click to expand...
According to the former head of the American CIA, William Casey, the answer is 100 % . From his own mouth:


“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.” _William Casey

​
 
Dearest Fonebone - great to see you here. Might you share a source for that quotation please? I would love to see it in context. Thank you in advance.
 
Fonebone said:
According to the former head of the American CIA, William Casey, the answer is 100 % . From his own mouth:


“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.” _William Casey

​
Click to expand...

And the 9/11 Truth Movement is the vanguard of the American public! :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
Oystein said:
I have for some weeks now been writing with rabid Truther Daniel Plesse, who spams spams spams a few FB groups.
For two weeks I asked him to link to a video, with timestamp, where he thinks he can clearly hear explosions just before any of the collapses begins.
For two weeks, he posted very long videos without timestamps, telling me they are "full" with explosion sounds, I should go look for myself.
But I insisted that he find me a timestamp.
He posted several different videos, never any timestamp.
He posted the well know video with rescue workers at a pay phone when a single powerful explosion sound is heard - at a time when no building collapsed.
He posted several linkt to eye witness testimony.
But for two week, he failed to link to explosion sounds, with timestamps, that are consistent with explosive demolition

After more than two weeks, he caved in, sorta: Didn't admit outright that there are zero explosion sounds that are consistent with explosive demolition recorded on any 9/11 video.
But.
He presented a new theory:
That all videos have been edited and the sounds deleted!

:jaw-dropp :D
Click to expand...
Perhaps you missed this post Qystein
"HUGE EXPLOSION !!! Raining debris down on all of us "_n.j. Burkett on
live TV as the WTC2 south tower disintegrates into a neat pile of dust and steel
in the background.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=12818365#post12818365

First 30 seconds into the interview NJ Burkett screams into his microphone !
 
carlitos said:
Dearest Fonebone - great to see you here. Might you share a source for that quotation please? I would love to see it in context. Thank you in advance.
Click to expand...


Always happy to comply with reasonable requests Carlitos. Complete with context.


http://truthstreammedia.com/2015/01...ything-the-american-public-believes-is-false/

[excerpt]

I am the source for this quote, which was indeed said by CIA Director William Casey at an early February 1981 meeting of the newly elected President Reagan with his new cabinet secretaries to report to him on what they had learned about their agencies in the first couple of weeks of the administration. The meeting was in the Roosevelt Room in the West Wing of the White House, not far from the Cabinet Room. I was present at the meeting as Assistant to the chief domestic policy adviser to the President. Casey first told Reagan that he had been astonished to discover that over 80 percent of the ‘intelligence’ that the analysis side of the CIA produced was based on open public sources like newspapers and magazines. As he did to all the other secretaries of their departments and agencies, Reagan asked what he saw as his goal as director for the CIA, to which he replied with this quote, which I recorded in my notes of the meeting as he said it. Shortly thereafter I told Senior White House correspondent Sarah McClendon, who was a close friend and colleague, who in turn made it public.”
— Barbara Honegger
 Not only does Honegger claim he said it, but apparently he said it in response to what he saw as his goal as CIA Director!
This statement was further backed by an email posted by Quora user Greg Smith from Honegger regarding the quote which is consistent and apparently prompted her to tell the story above:
“Seriously — I personally was the Source for that William Casey quote. He said it at an early Feb. 1981 meeting in the Roosevelt Room in the West Wing of the White House which I attended, and I immediately told my close friend and political godmother Senior White House Correspondent Sarah McClendon, who then went public with it without naming the source… “


[/excerpt}
Fonebone< You're welcome
 
Fonebone said:
Always happy to comply with reasonable requests Carlitos. Complete with context.


http://truthstreammedia.com/2015/01...ything-the-american-public-believes-is-false/

[excerpt]

I am the source for this quote, which was indeed said by CIA Director William Casey at an early February 1981 meeting of the newly elected President Reagan with his new cabinet secretaries to report to him on what they had learned about their agencies in the first couple of weeks of the administration. The meeting was in the Roosevelt Room in the West Wing of the White House, not far from the Cabinet Room. I was present at the meeting as Assistant to the chief domestic policy adviser to the President. Casey first told Reagan that he had been astonished to discover that over 80 percent of the ‘intelligence’ that the analysis side of the CIA produced was based on open public sources like newspapers and magazines. As he did to all the other secretaries of their departments and agencies, Reagan asked what he saw as his goal as director for the CIA, to which he replied with this quote, which I recorded in my notes of the meeting as he said it. Shortly thereafter I told Senior White House correspondent Sarah McClendon, who was a close friend and colleague, who in turn made it public.”
— Barbara Honegger
 Not only does Honegger claim he said it, but apparently he said it in response to what he saw as his goal as CIA Director!
This statement was further backed by an email posted by Quora user Greg Smith from Honegger regarding the quote which is consistent and apparently prompted her to tell the story above:
“Seriously — I personally was the Source for that William Casey quote. He said it at an early Feb. 1981 meeting in the Roosevelt Room in the West Wing of the White House which I attended, and I immediately told my close friend and political godmother Senior White House Correspondent Sarah McClendon, who then went public with it without naming the source… “


[/excerpt}
Fonebone< You're welcome
Click to expand...

Cool, do you have a relevant by anyone who hadn't been dead for 14 years by 2001?

The key to this mess is this part:

Casey first told Reagan that he had been astonished to discover that over 80 percent of the ‘intelligence’ that the analysis side of the CIA produced was based on open public sources like newspapers and magazines.
Click to expand...

It still is. The CIA learns more from public media than it does from its classified techniques. CIA has never been good at misinformation because it has never been nimble or agile enough to stay ahead of the curve.

Either way, Casey's quote has no relevance to 911.
 
Axxman300 said:
Cool, do you have a relevant by anyone who hadn't been dead for 14 years by 2001?


Fonebone< Yes William Colby's quote is relevant...
“The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media.” ― William ColbyAxxman>

The key to this mess is this part :


quote:



"Casey first told Reagan that he had been astonished to discover that over 80 percent of the ‘intelligence’ that the analysis side of the CIA produced was based on open public sources like newspapers and magazines. "

Fonebone<
Colby learned of the "astonishing discovery" his first week on the job .In his second week on the job Colby learned of Operation Mockingbird.



Axxman >


It still is. The CIA learns more from public media than it does from its classified techniques. CIA has never been good at misinformation because it has never been nimble or agile enough to stay ahead of the curve.
Either way, Casey's quote has no relevance to 911.
Click to expand...

Flapdoodle -Colby's statement is spot-on concerning September eleventh 2001. Everything the American public knows about 9/11/2001 is FALSE !
Good job Mr Colby
 
Could Fonebone please cite Sarah McClendon going public with what B. Honegger claims to have scribbled down in 1981?
 
Fonebone said:
Perhaps you missed this post Qystein
"HUGE EXPLOSION !!! Raining debris down on all of us "_n.j. Burkett on
live TV as the WTC2 south tower disintegrates into a neat pile of dust and steel
in the background.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=12818365#post12818365

First 30 seconds into the interview NJ Burkett screams into his microphone !
Click to expand...

What's your point, Fonebone? There are no explosion sounds in this video consistent with explosive demolition, or are there?
 
AJM8125 said:
"The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity."

- General George S. Patton
Click to expand...


Difficult, but not impossible. In this post an anonymous cucurbita attempts to impeach the words of Seneca by denial.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5788337#post5788337


Seneca's authenticity was verified several posts later...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5816768#post5816768


Yes , difficult -But - with a little effort - not impossible.
 
Oystein said:
Could Fonebone please cite Sarah McClendon going public with what B. Honegger claims to have scribbled down in 1981?
Click to expand...


Are you attempting to question ms Honegger's veracity?


https://amallulla.org/casey/

[excerpt]
Barbara Honegger
Written 25 Nov 2014
I am the source for this quote, which was indeed said by CIA Director William Casey at an early February 1981 meeting of the newly elected President Reagan with his new cabinet secretaries to report to him on what they had learned about their agencies in the first couple of weeks of the administration. The meeting was in the Roosevelt Room in the West Wing of the White House, not far from the Cabinet Room. I was present at the meeting as Assistant to the chief domestic policy adviser to the President. Casey first told Reagan that he had been astonished to discover that over 80 percent of the 'intelligence' that the analysis side of the CIA produced was based
on open public sources like newspapers and magazines.
As he did to all the other secretaries of their departments and agencies, Reagan asked what he
saw as his goal as director for the CIA, to which
he replied with this quote, which I recorded in my notes of the meeting
as he said it. Shortly thereafter I told Senior White House correspondent Sarah McClendon, who
was a close friend and colleague, who in turn made it public. Barbara Honegger[/excerpt]
 
Fonebone said:
Are you attempting to question ms Honegger's veracity?


https://amallulla.org/casey/

[excerpt]
Barbara Honegger
Written 25 Nov 2014
I am the source for this quote, which was indeed said by CIA Director William Casey at an early February 1981 meeting of the newly elected President Reagan with his new cabinet secretaries to report to him on what they had learned about their agencies in the first couple of weeks of the administration. The meeting was in the Roosevelt Room in the West Wing of the White House, not far from the Cabinet Room. I was present at the meeting as Assistant to the chief domestic policy adviser to the President. Casey first told Reagan that he had been astonished to discover that over 80 percent of the 'intelligence' that the analysis side of the CIA produced was based
on open public sources like newspapers and magazines.
As he did to all the other secretaries of their departments and agencies, Reagan asked what he
saw as his goal as director for the CIA, to which
he replied with this quote, which I recorded in my notes of the meeting
as he said it. Shortly thereafter I told Senior White House correspondent Sarah McClendon, who
was a close friend and colleague, who in turn made it public. Barbara Honegger[/excerpt]
Click to expand...

The problem is, the quote isn't something someone at that level would say. It's something that a conspiracy theorist would say that someone at that level would say. Surprised a bit she didn't add in some anti-Semitism into the quote. Also, as a response to that question, it wouldn't have satisfied Regan. Regan would have understood the role that the CIA was to project American influences to the outside world, and not to work inside the borders.

Regan asked "how do you see your role of Director" and he responded with "we will know our program …" and saying nothing about his role, but about a single program. It's not an answer to the question. So, yes, I'll question her veracity.
 
09:00 AM carlitos “ I love the luxury of a fine Corinthian leather” _Seneca Bozell




http://www.thehogring.com/2019/10/08/corinthian-leather/


[excerpt] But do you know where it comes from?
Most people would guess Corinth, Greece. After all, nothing says old world craftsmanship like sourcing your leather from a city founded in 700 BC.
It’s a good guess. But it’s about 5,000 miles off.
The real source of Corinthian leather? Newark, New Jersey.[/excerpt]


Seton leather to be exact.
 
Fonebone said:
Flapdoodle -Colby's statement is spot-on concerning September eleventh 2001. Everything the American public knows about 9/11/2001 is FALSE !
Good job Mr Colby
Click to expand...

Colby, died in 1996. His supposed quote was attributed to him in the 2000's. He left the CIA in 1976. So two and a half decades pass since any information he had would be relevant, and four years after his death, someone said he said something. Honestly, is this the best you've got? Quotes attributed to the deceased after they died?
 
Fonebone said:
Are you attempting to question ms Honegger's veracity?
Click to expand...
I not only attempt to, I totally DO question Honegger's veracity: she is a Truther and batcrap crazy.

Fonebone said:
https://amallulla.org/casey/

[excerpt]
Barbara Honegger
Written 25 Nov 2014
I am the source for this quote, ...
... Shortly thereafter I told Senior White House correspondent Sarah McClendon, who
was a close friend and colleague, who in turn made it public. Barbara Honegger[/excerpt]
Click to expand...
Quoting Honegger does nothing to support what Honegger claims is correct.

She claims Sarah McClendon made the quote public. I asked you for evidence to support that. Which of course means an article by or transcript of Sarah McClendon actually (and verbatim!) writing or saying the quote publicly.
 
Fonebone said:
Flapdoodle -Colby's statement is spot-on concerning September eleventh 2001. Everything the American public knows about 9/11/2001 is FALSE !
Good job Mr Colby
Click to expand...
oops, everything you know about 9/11 is false, you are projecting and failing

Wrong on this one too, like all your 9/11 truth lies and delusions. Where is your inside job evidence? Right, it is in the bit bucket


What is the point of the CIA BS about misinformation? It appears the 9/11 truth expert liars have succeeded with you, as all you post are lies and misinformation of an inside job you can't define or support with facts and evidence.
 
abaddon said:
Wow. The "paid shill" claim turned up rather quickly.
Click to expand...
She was trolling other peoples' comments, too, while unable or unwilling to answer a single question in return, but with all the time in the world to write snide remarks to people talking about their experiences. Probably one of those people who did it for the edgyness and attention more than actual, sincere belief.
 
The past two or three days, I had a lot of fun with a maximally stupid and dishonest debunker!

His name on Facebook is Daniel Grant Wilks.

He is a debunker, as I said, who likes to post against CD at WTC, Pentagon no-planers, nanothermite fans etc, so just my piece of cake.
Problem is, he doesn't understand the evidence, misrepresents it, and draws invalid conclusions. I frequently call him ion his errors, which makes him think I am a Truther, and he responds with insults and by throwing YouTubes and wildly copy&pasted stuff at me that barely ever addresses what I wrote.
In short, a guy with the mindset of a Truther, he is accidentally on the right side of history, but for all the wrong reasons.

The other day, he write a series of three or four comments at Facebook against me, where I recognized some of the text as copied from Steven Jones, some from someone arguing with Steven Jones, and some words apparently Daniel Grant Wilks' own commentary - but the lot without any credits, links or even just quote marks.
Simple googling revealed that he has lifted some of that stuff from a discussion at Metabunk:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/in...d-in-dust-from-the-9-11-wtc-catastrophe.9485/

Then he wrote a comment that was unusually clear, correct and well-written - implausible that it was his post. He had not marked it as a quote, but it had to be one:

Daniel Grant Wilks (impostor) said:
Yes, this is true. The WTC steel ame from half a dozen or more different steel manufacturers: I remember Pittsburgh Steel for part of the exterior columns, LaClede Steel for the floor trusses. Some other company provided the rest of the exterior columns, two or so companies shared in providing core columns, and then you have steel in the foundations and elsewhere, for which yet other companies were contracted.
And indeed, different paints were specified: The floor trusses (LaClede) were specified as LaClede's shop primer - epoxy matrix, iron oxide, aluminium silicate, strontium chromate. The exterior colums were to be painted with Tnemec Red 69 or 99, which is alkyd resin with linseed oil, and pigments of iron oxide, zinc chromate, plus talc, silica and calcium aluminates. We do not know what paint(s) were specified for the core columns. We do not know what was specified for WTC7. No doubt other paints were used.
Click to expand...
Again, I suspected immediately he had stolen this, so Google was my friend, and I found the author:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/in...om-the-9-11-wtc-catastrophe.9485/#post-220424

Yep, that's true: Wilks had plagiarized me, yours truly, Oystein! :D


So I asked him why he quoted Oystein, and why he didn't attribute the quote to Oystein, and whether this Oystein is an expert, an authority. Indeed, who is this Oystein?

He first gave evasive answers, babbling something about a good friend of his who was "a WTC7 building engineer", and the Port Authority, and he frequently said things like "both are correct" or "both quotes confirm...", without ever making the context clear - which "both" did he mean?

Anyway, I kept pressing on, inquiring about this Oystein, and today, he cleared things up:

Oystein, he claimed, is not his friend, the WTC7 building engineer, but Oystein is another WTC7 building engineer who had worked there prior to and during 9/11.

And he had claimed that Oystein got comic relief from my misrepresentation of the Oystein quote, and my inability to identify Oystein, and that I was too stupid to understand the context of what Oystein had written.

:D

Man, what a hoot I had!

So today, about one and a half hours ago, I revealed to him (on Facebook) that I (Facebook name initials E.M.) am Oystein.
To prove it, I logged in at Metabunk and wrote a short message to Daniel Grant Wilks, identifying myself as E.M.


Now, you all get to guess who has put me on his block list :D
 
Very few technically qualified people will spend time debating or even discussing the collapse of the 2 towers. Lots of intelligent people with some to no expertise jump in believing they have the critical thinking to debate. And to do so they google and lift or quote statements of others which sound intelligent. Lots of dillitantes!

As an architect I have some knowledge applicable to those buildings. All architects study statics, strength of materials, design of steel structures and so on. The structural issues on high rises is a narrow discipline.

What I found interesting is the study of the visual record... movements of the building and interpreting what those movements meant. I've seen nothing which can be interpreted as having a CG origin without a non CD explanation making more sense. Since you can't seen inside the building... it's much like diagnosing a patient by examining external signs.

Most of the discussions are a waste of time. Witness Steve Da'ak aka Yankee. If you like to witness dumb then 9/11 discussions would be a good place to find it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom