| Author | Message | ||
    Blake_p Member Post Number: 67 Registered: 07-2012 |
The filibuster is nonsense; another affective way to get nothing done when you dont get your way, I dont know about anyone else but im tired of pretty much everyone doing nothing on capitol hill,left and right. If anyone else pulled the slightest bit of bull***t in their everyday job like our political leaders they would be fired, i wish they could actually get fired so they might actually fear losing their position and accomplish something,instead of political maneuvering and nonsensical posturing. | ||
Hunter Member Post Number: 382 Registered: 03-2004 |
Smukhuti, Again, your post is full of logical fallacies. Again, this is a highly emotional issue for you and it is interfering with your ability to reason. Please study logical fallacies so that you will stop making these same errors. Let's break it down: You say "The problem is not a minor one." Straw Man. No one said this problem was minor. Stop inventing statements that no one made. The fact is that it is far less severe than all the other major causes of death. So where are you posts on tobacco deaths? On car accidents? etc. Because these things kill more people than guns. Yet you disproportionately focus on guns. Again, it's very emotional for you. But you are in error in your focus as it relates to the number of people being killed. You say "A) the one who smoke tobacco or consume drugs are actually comparable to gun suicide, not gun murder;" Ultimately irrelevant, if your intention is to protect as many lives as possible. Again, we're talking about where you focus your time in the most logical manner possible. "Now, a question to you - lets say American Government exterminate 250 million citizens to leave 50 million rulers; then these 50 millions would rule each other? Who would they rule if there are 50 million rulers?" Why would you have 50 million rulers? The oligarchy is much smaller than that. With fewer people as a whole, they then need fewer in government, law enforcement, etc. Once again, you're creating a Straw Man. Say they killed 50 million and left 250 million alive. Not a great outcome if you're one of the 50 million. "Hunter, if really gun laws are made strict (covering existing gun owners), at most the number of deaths in US can be reduced by 3-4000" There's another component - sentencing. It's not just about gun laws. Current average sentence for murder in the U.S. is 10 years. They're releasing violent criminals who then kill again. Murder should be an automatic life sentence. Remove criminals from society accordingly and you will see violent crime diminish. "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident" ~ Schopenhauer | ||
Smukhuti Member Post Number: 669 Registered: 06-2009 |
Anthony, I agree that murder happen because of a weak and confused consciousness. But certainly guns make it easier to commit murders - and in large scale. Waiting for the consciousness of majority of earthlings will take 800 years! In the meantime, don't you think it is prudent to try and sift out the person most likely to misuse guns? I also agree that guns should not be blamed 100%. If you read my previous posts, you will see where I am going - gun control will never reduce crime 100%, because they are ultimately a tool that increase the ease of murdering people. Everything comes to us that belongs to us if we create the capacity to receive it - Rabindranath Tagore | ||
Smukhuti Member Post Number: 670 Registered: 06-2009 |
Hunter, You wrote: "No one said this problem was minor. Stop inventing statements that no one made. " I did not invented this - I quoted you from your post when you wrote "Is it logical to spend time and resources on minor problems while ignoring major problems?" Then you wrote: Again, we're talking about where you focus your time in the most logical manner possible. Your point which basically you make again and again: Gun deaths in U.S....small problem....other issues...bigger problems...don't give time to gun death issue...focus on tobacco,drugs etc. But I write again, in a world where problems are rarely addressed (big or small) I think focussing on the smaller problems at least do some small good. " With fewer people as a whole, they then need fewer in government, law enforcement, etc. Once again, you're creating a Straw Man." Your sentence eerily reminds me of a person from a conspiracy site who tried to convince me (we were discussing the birth stop petition) that 500 million is the magic number that the elites want to achieve as world population because the elites are very few and it is very difficult to control 8 billion people. To de-populate the world by exterminating them, the first step is to ban gun worldwide starting with the U.S.America then also U.N. control of U.S. He went onto write that U.N. forces are already covertly occupying parts of U.S. He posted a youtube video with photos of several dozen underground bases/concentration camps and one photo I could recognize as a new railway tunnel under construction in China! Ultimately, I had to stop exchanging post with this man because I realised that reasoning with him was beyond my ability. For not replying to him, I was labelled a person spreading propaganda and got myself banned. They're releasing violent criminals who then kill again. Murder should be an automatic life sentence. Remove criminals from society accordingly and you will see violent crime diminish. Agreed. That's the same practice in all countries. And U.S. already has the highest prison population in the world. Even after that, this cannot prevent an insane person with no criminal history from going into rage and shooting 30 people using the gun in the closet. That's why you need periodic psycho-analysis of person holding lethal weapons and the weapon holder to be trained in securing and safe keeping of the guns. Hunter, this is not an emotional issue for me. I live in a distant land with bad law and order situation and rampant illegal guns but with much lower gun crime rate. I do not own guns, nether I envy those owning guns. If in a dangerous neighbourhood, I will try to train myself in shooting, but will try to find non-lethal rounds first. I do feel sympathy with the the families of the dead in America and am astonished seeing the love for lethal weapons without reasonable need to own one. Perhaps it is you who is getting emotional because you are either into hunting, or too attached to your guns and you fear loosing them if gun laws are made strict and bars people with no plausible reason to have guns/paranoia. Everything comes to us that belongs to us if we create the capacity to receive it - Rabindranath Tagore | ||
Victor Member Post Number: 24 Registered: 10-2009 |
Allo, I no post here for while but I read here all the time. I very much fear world war 3 starting because I no trust our stupid greedy world leaders not to go to war. They not right people to lead our countries except for Obama who I like very much. I live in Italy and I trying to move to Australia because if world war starts nearly all people who live in north hemisphere will die. I want to protect my family future. I have cousins living in Australia and they say Australia is very beautiful and safe country to live and they never want to live anywhere else. | ||
Flaming_pie Member Post Number: 67 Registered: 11-2012 |
Hi Smukhuti, "In the meantime, don't you think it is prudent to try and sift out the person most likely to misuse guns?" Absolutely. I have said that I think you are very reasonable about this. We have brought up a lot of good ideas already to sift out the people most like to misuse the gun. This is where gun law reform needs to go, I agree with you. But right now in the USA, the whole gun law reform is up in the air. There are proposals from banning assault rifles and high capacity magazines to an outright ban on everything and American turns in her guns -- and everything in between. Nobody really knows what is going to happen. BUT, if the politicians ban ALL guns, THE CRIMINALS WON'T TURN IN THEIR GUNS. There are about as many guns in America as there are people. And we know we are overpopulated. Even if most of the law abiding citizens turn in their guns, there will still be an overpopulation of guns in America. It would take the government YEARS to bring all the illegal guns. The point is, Smukuti, that there are way, way too many guns in circulation already to ban them in the USA to stop murder and mass murder. The reality is that once all the guns are taken away from the good people, then the bad people have an easier prey with their illegal guns. And since we know the USA is "collapsing" I would say that crime is only going to get worse. Best regards, Anthony Alagna | ||
Smukhuti Member Post Number: 671 Registered: 06-2009 |
Anthony, I totally agree with your reason. Outright ban will be foolish and impractical for U.S.America. But probably, this would not be the case because such a step would surely be a political disaster. Regarding U.S. loosing status of a superpower, a recent contact note translated and published in http://theyflyblog.com/the-future-of-america-obama-and-asteroid-apophis/01/10/2013 suggest a possible year - 2020. Everything comes to us that belongs to us if we create the capacity to receive it - Rabindranath Tagore | ||
Ferbon Member Post Number: 204 Registered: 05-2012 |
"In the meantime, don't you think it is prudent to try and sift out the person most likely to misuse guns?" "...guns are taken away from the good people, then the bad people have an easier prey with their illegal guns". These two statements, although probably written with best intentions may be understood in many dangerous ways. For this reason I suggest to those interested to be really careful about wording their thoughts because what is peaceful meaning to one person can be misinterpreted and used in the terrible way by somebody else. That's why it is so important to use words which are well thought through. First sentence: "In the meantime, don't you think it is prudent to try and sift out the person most likely to misuse guns?" - state clearly what do you mean by "sift out" and "people most likely to misuse guns". Who is "most likely" to do something if he hasn't done it yet? would you like to be branded as terrorist without a trial? What does "misuse" mean to you? Second sentence: "...guns are taken away from the good people, then the bad people have an easier prey with their illegal guns". - state who is good/bad and in what circumstances in your opinion. Formulating statements based on contrast of black and white does not apply in real life with full spectrum of grey areas. I understand that both your intentions are best, but if somebody wants to learn something from what you write, the sentences and thoughts should probably not be based on generalizations that even people with basic understanding are well aware of. In addition vague form of posts snowballs into more and more confusion so at the end well and clearly formulated thoughts save you time and unnecessary explanations. Salome | ||
Flaming_pie Member Post Number: 70 Registered: 11-2012 |
My Good Ferbon, What? Are you like one of those safety cones for everybody's' posts? "I say, we can dance, we can dance Everything out of control We can dance, we can dance We're doing it from wall to wall We can dance, we can dance Everybody look at your hands We can dance, we can dance Everybody takin' the cha-a-a-ance" It's safe to dance, Ferb. Scroll up a bit, I talk about about what a bad person is, a murder. You need to counter the people ideas like Hunter, Smukhuti and I are doing. Not nitpicking people's posts looking for the tiniest writing errors. Cheers, Anthony Alagna | ||
Votan Member Post Number: 60 Registered: 12-2011 |
There is nothing we can do to get rid of guns. Before guns there was bow and arrow which is not used much these days except for target shooting. Unfortunately it is now a part of our culture whether we like it or not. joe | ||
Ferbon Member Post Number: 205 Registered: 05-2012 |
Flaming_pie Thanks for the advice. "I talk about about what a bad person is, a murder. You need to counter the people ideas like Hunter, Smukhuti and I are doing. Not nitpicking people's posts looking for the tiniest writing errors." Should be: Scroll up a bit where I point out who, according to me, is portrayed as a "bad" person. You should consider analyzing people's ideas (an example me, Hunter, Smukhuti were trying to make). Last bit you posted is not even a sentence, not to mention -what you called "tiniest writing errors" -clearly referred to significant problems in formulating thoughts and writing them down, which you misinterpreted with spelling/punctuation/grammar etc. writing errors. Such could, in some perspective, be considered as "tiny" but not by the person who wishes to communicate properly, keep the level of conversation at the highest level possible and pay attention to details. Aforementioned are basics not only on school level but in any commitment that matters. I understand that you're having problems with taking friendly and constructive advises from me - thus you could reflect based on manner in which the contact reports are written. Salome | ||
Indi Moderator Post Number: 698 Registered: 06-2006 |
Back on topic please! Salome Robyn Denken Sie für sich selbst! | ||
Edward Member Post Number: 2650 Registered: 05-2002 |
Hi Anthony... No, I do not think GUNS are an Evil thing. Weapons have been a necessity in the existence of man. Quite, logical, of course. He has to defend himself. We should just make clear distinction: WHAT, man can bear and not. We have to keep in mind, that the Second Amendment.., was written in 1791. And, that in those days, they only had...: Muskets, Black Powder Pistols and Canon Ball...Canons. So, in those days, it would be quite understandable, but...now, in this time and age, the above mentioned weapons, are not in use anymore, and thus, there are more Destructive weapons, and thus, the Second Amendment should be 'adjusted' to the needs of the Second Amendment 'equal' to those times, today. In those days, you had no Assault ([semi-]Automatic) Rifles, etc., as we have today. Thus, the Second Amendment should be Updated...to suite the needs of the individuals. Even, when the Gatling Gun come out(1860s)...it could only be owned by the Government Military/Cavalry, and NOT by the common folk, to add. Thus, this does bring up a point? So, back then, there was ALREADY clear...distinction made...who could own the Gatling Gun(; like-wise with canons). Certainly, not the common folk. So, you see...the point, here? So, the Second Amendment...is just: Out-of-date. Sellers, etc., just interpret it as THEY want it to be. The Second Amendment is not being implemented as it should when it was first written. Weapon Industry...just 'take it with a grain of salt', and make their OWN RULES. Thus, the above mentioned...is really something to THINK...about, I would say? IF, the Third World War should break out...I think there are enough US Forces whom will aide the common folk. Some of us may know, that there has been 'quarrels' within the US Military Forces, not agreeing with each other (during Bush; which can occur, again...in the future). Thus, there will always...be those whom will Defend the American population from those (Government) Opponent Forces, when it gets to the point, is my view. Edward. | ||
Scott Moderator Post Number: 2361 Registered: 12-1999 |
Hi Edward, Actually according to SB 71 we have had 3 World Wars already: http://theyflyblog.com/the-future-of-america-obama-and-asteroid-apophis/01/10/2013 Scott | ||
Edward Member Post Number: 2652 Registered: 05-2002 |
Hi Scott... Yes, if we look at it from the mentioned point-of-view...that would indeed, be the case. Even, Bush's war was in that direction, was my thought and some of us here on the board. I guess, we were not that sure...to some point; now, the Billy/ Ptaah mentions it in that/their perceptive (going way back), it confirmed our/my pervious thoughts of WW3. Personally, I figured this out many years back, even, with the knowledge that many world countries have ALREADY been taking part of wars which was in reality: A World WAR. But...NO ONE would want to Admit it/this.... Thus, in reality, there have been MANY World Wars...from ancient times, in the past, already. Thus, with WW1,WW2 and our now defined WW3(in the making, IF, it becomes a reality)...would just refer to...in our - TODAY'S Modern Times -, definition. Thank you, for the update and Confirmation...Scott... Edward. | ||
Votan Member Post Number: 65 Registered: 12-2011 |
Scott Yes there has been all these wars,but what is the criteria for a world war. The number of countries involved and number of lives lost. At the rate we are going there will be another great war probably between christians and muslims. We might then learn to live with our neighbours. joe | ||
Hunter Member Post Number: 383 Registered: 03-2004 |
Smukhuti, One last time because I know this is off topic. When I said: Is it logical to spend time and resources on minor problems while ignoring major problems? I meant of of course is it logical to spend 90% of your time on a problem that causes 10% of deaths and spend 10% of your time on problems that cause 90% of deaths? That is what I meant. I'm not saying thousands of deaths are "minor" - but the logical truth is that thousands of deaths are indeed minor compared to millions of deaths. And it is irrational not to acknowledge the factors that cause the greater number of deaths and to address them in proportion. So you say you're not emotional about this issue, but where are all of your posts addressing tobacco deaths, automobile accident deaths, etc.? It's pretty evident that you are emotional about the issue. You are spending all of your time posting about gun deaths while ignoring all the other leading causes of death. If I am emotional as you claim, then demonstrate the flaw(s) in my reasoning. You have yet to do so. You are either misinterpreting or misjudging what I'm saying. As far as "the elite," again, that's irrelevant. The fact is that democide, or death by government is the leading cause of death over the last 100 years. So again, it is not paranoid to acknowledge and prepare for such a scenario. "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident" ~ Schopenhauer | ||
Michaelhelfert Member Post Number: 240 Registered: 09-2011 |
I have interpreted SB71's discussion of the collapse of the United States to be referring specifically to the collapse of American influence as a superpower after 2020, probably due to internal strife over political ideologies, immigration and the fast-changing demographic, and very stressing international economic challenges and debt-loads. This sounds to me like the beginnings of the unrest and violent civil conflicts which ultimately lead to civil war and the breakup of the Union into five autonomous regions. With this, we have an approximate date - look for the cracks in our 'modern' society to widen leading up to 2020. The dictatorial underbelly of the Federal government is gonna start showing. Furthermore, based on my read of the Meier material, my biased fears about the prospects for world war 3/4 are currently as follows. Read it only if you enjoy wild speculation. Hopefully, after the 2016 election we won't have to worry about attacking Iran, perhaps because the timing is off or perhaps because we will lack the economic capability to prop up Israel anymore. If Israel is actually stupid enough to attack Iran, hopefully that will be the end of only Israel, and not everyone else too. However it plays out, whether blindingly fast or more slowly and deliberately, the City of London and its Israel will lose their prominence on the global stage. With the fall of Judaism, and the resulting deflating of Christianity in Europe, the focus will turn to Russia and China for awhile. If America ceases to be a superpower, China will try to fill in the gap, but since it lacks the military wherewithal its attempts to enforce the Chinese will upon other parts of the globe will occur through economic machinations. China will threaten far more than it can act. This tactic will be only marginally successful. Eventually other parts of the globe develop their own manufacturing networks, and China loses its economic hold upon the world. The rush for resources in the Arctic, especially by an opportunistic Russia, is very troubling. How easily America will make war over those resources! For this conflict, there will be zero regard to how much that war will cost us in a time when we cannot afford it. Hopefully Russia's leadership will not play brinkmanship in this conflict, for if they do they will find that the line that they cannot pass will be moved against them before they can retreat from their position, which will then force Russia to take the initiative in the form of a preemptive NUCLEAR WAR against both North America and Northern Europe at large. The Russians have some common sense in this regard, but they also move with ALOT of momentum that cannot be so easily reversed. Please keep in mind that brinkmanship on this issue will lead to war. A common-sense solution to this is for everyone to invite a third party to fairly divvy the resources among the Northern nations, and indeed such cooperation is the only way to mitigate an environmental catastrophe of truly monumental proportions. Though downplayed by the spineless politicians and major media, and directly in the face of much protest, discrimination, and civil unrest, an expansionist program of Islamic emigration then makes large impacts on the European landscape. This will further weaken the European people in all sorts of ways, permanently, for the rest of time. Unfortunately for Earthly humanity, most non-Europeans will misconstrue any concern about Europeans as an evil racism, and won't care about the loss of this distinct people in even the slightest little bit for many hundreds of years to come, and when we finally do it will be for naught. Likewise, America will eventually rise from its ashes, but probably not in our lifetimes, and when it does its composition will be so different as to be unrecognizable as the same people of today. If a nuclear war does occur, whether through the auspices of Israel attacking a Russian-backed Iran, or an expansionist Russia attacking the rest of the Northern hemisphere (initially over Arctic resources), or the Chinese imposing their will with the wisdom of a teenager holding a nuclear trigger, if anyone uses nuclear weapons, those peoples and names will be vilified for the rest of history, long, long, long after their misplaced patriotism ceases to have the least bit of bearing. There is so much to worry about! Life | ||
Hendrikus1970 Member Post Number: 20 Registered: 04-2009 |
A London-based journalist tells Press TV that the French intervention in Mali against rebel forces will bring war into European countreis as well as Algeria. http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/01/17/284071/mali-war-will-spill-over-into-europe/ | ||
Edward Member Post Number: 2658 Registered: 05-2002 |
Hi Hendrikus1970.... Interesting you bring that up! And, I thought that Hollande was a Peace making man, which now...turns out to be other-wise! He did take out all French Forces from Afghanistan...which was positive, and now, he gives the 'OK', to take steps in Algeria. He is kinda...'flip flopping', here! And, I thought, he was reliable. If, Hollande goes on with such scenario...he may still....even fulfill the unrest in France which was mentioned by Billy. Not saying that the unrest will be caused by the Muslims per se in France....but by Outsiders, due, to what is now occurring, and, as mentioned in your link. Something to be concerned, about.... US and EU....are all after African OIL! China, can make good deals with those African countries WITHOUT War....WHY, do the US and EU ALWAYS make it come down to fighting...; like always: they Blame the Muslims; and, have certain (Greedy and Corrupted) African leaders in their pockets! Edward. | ||
Zaqwsx Member Post Number: 15 Registered: 10-2012 |
REGARDING THE 4 WORLD LEADERS' DEATHS WITHIN 7-DAY PERIOD: To whatever assumptions, analyses, conclusions, and discussions held in the past records of all kinds in forums or in written forms till this day, the following should be of significant value in narrowing down all the speculations and increase the probability of certain probable options laid by the concerned. Keep in my mind that Meier obviously and evidently restricted to answer and comment further specific details regarding the soon 4th world conflagration and hence, his frequently unsubstantial almost fruitless answers is greatly justifiable and the responsibility to accept their whatever reasons solely concerns everyone occupying themselves in regard this little aspect. *Past analytical results that i care to read/think about - thus that obviously means that the list surely is incomplete. 1. The word LEADER means a single person atop of a political hierarchy in every form,so as for example in Philippines, the most important being in this country (if i convey correctly) is the President, same as with US, UK, China, Japan etc. - all in same sense that a leader is the one responsible with majoriy of the aspects present in all countries yet their singular differece is that they are named in many form, i.e. Prime Minister, President as what was said, Kings, and so on. 2. Meier did not/does not/will not clarify whether he's speaking of world leaders from yesterdays or of present. So the conclusion that ex-world leaders are absolutely safe from being one of this 4 world leaders should be dropped. Therefore, the list of the candidates will dramatically lengthen, indeed, those dead ones should not be listed --- but on the otherhand, if those 4 world leaders dead in 7 day period is DONE ALREADY, then everything im saying is pointless. BUT IF NOT, then i'll continue. (You see, i plainly don't what to go over recent list of dead world leaders and tally who among them is the prophesied 4. That is just uninteresting thing to do and am lazy for it.) 3. Meier responded earlier to the question pertaining to this 4 that it can be stated that this world leaders NOT NECESSARILY BELONG IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES --- so Deduction 1= 2 or more of this 4 most probably belong in ONE COUNTRY; Deduction 2= Redefinition of the word LEADER may be significant. DEDUCTION 2 DETAIL- our/my perception of LEADER is narrowed down to political aspect specifically the Presidents, etc. who stands in the highest floors of governments. The other meaning of this word which follows was not considered which is, a leader or world leader is anyone who commands, supports, represents, manages, organizes, and simply leads majority of populations towards the well-being, development, growth, etc. However clearly a leader may be anyone who came into power through political means and later brings his country and fellows toward the opposites of the ideals, specifically destruction, war, death, etc and so on. This is obvious just to say in Egypt right now, Iran, France, and all over. Now to go off the political world, the revolutionisers who most of the time are just simple, ideal, clever common persons which just stand out of the crowd, gradually drive, ignite and lead the uncontrolled people towards common goal. These cases if i think correctly are evident and highly possible in immensely dictated, slaved, and the "we're just sick of it already!" populations. Possible countries of such at present are Egypt, North Korea, and others i don't know. Examples of such revolutionisers, if not mistaken, is Mandela who became the most significant african leader? Well if i am wrong i'll speak of more familiar person. (Right now i really am uninterested in researhing about mandela, surely im lazy to do that) Here we go with a person in philippines to speak of someone more explainable. I'm pertainng to Corazon Aquino, wife of assassinated Ninoy Aquino who in his time stood as the winning candidate in presidency against Ferdinand Marcos - the assassinator. Cory lead the disgusted, hateful and democratically demanding Filipinos forcing the end of dictatorship of Marcos and then there came to rise the world reknown People's Power or EDSA Revolution. Cory was once became the cover of Time magazine and indeed reached an extent whereby other dictated and slaved countries had their own democratization and was greatly influenced by this edsa revolution in phlippines those. My point of explanation is to broaden the narrower definitions and precisely unclear perceptions in understanding the terms "world leaders" said by Meier in limited measures. And with everything laid on, the list of this world leaders absolutely will lengthen yet only in this way, we won't miss a thing who is who should be this four and won't be dumbfounded whether the 4th world conflagration, have started, presently happening, or will just happen tomorrow later. | ||
Ilovebilly Member Post Number: 167 Registered: 04-2011 |
Know the current economic system in most countries and why they will fall in a heap guaranteed http://www.tomatobubble.com/id39.html To get a FULL understanding bellow link Bill Still's Wizard of Oz Documentary http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VNcnxj2Dr8 to save the video to hard drive google: keep youtube video mp4 is a good option then and not to big or google: Bill Still's Wizard of Oz When Italian currency falls so will the EU, then USA. I (think) within 3 to 4 years but could be sooner or later Fiat currency only lasts 70 years or so at most, Nixon made usd fiat Faith based institutions will ALL fall, its cosmic in nature, its a good thing in the long run Some silver and 10kg bags of rice could be handy to keep. The internet could have problems so consider saving as much figu material as you can and print important stuff and buy some books. just buy 1 10kg bag at a time so as not to alarm folks at supermarket lol The wizard of oz was a clever allegory of the monetary system so we wake up, the slippers where silver in the original novel. Salome ilovebilly Every Cloud Has A Silver Lining. Truly, I know that there is no resistance to my successes, also not in my thoughts and not in my imagination and also not in my feelings. | ||
Michaelhelfert Member Post Number: 256 Registered: 09-2011 |
Here's an interview with a woman who sees through it. She has been in a position to prevent America from being dragged into war with Iran. And now she lives in Australia... http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/02/04/iran-war-expose-what-u-s-media-does-not-want-you-to-see/ Life |
