stai leggendo...
Malaparte’s Stance

Western Jesters

Western Jesters

It’s no easy feat reckoning with the brutish reality of this foul year 2015 that’s about to end. The presstitute whores have issued unsubstantiated surmise as news all year around, flouting in any conceivable way even basic ethical practices. Last two weeks made no difference.
On 17 and 18 December, the final European Council of the year was held in Brussels. Heads of State and Government of the EU had a hectic schedule filled with a number of pressing issues: the ongoing refugee crisis, fight against terrorism, Economic and Monetary Union, energy supplies, Syria and Libya, the upgrading of EU internal market, the 2016 in-out referendum on the UK membership. How many of them imply dealing with the psycho-Sultan Erdogan and relate to relationships with Russia?
The non-elected president of the European Council Donald Tusk called it a serious political discussion about completing the Economic and Monetary Union. Incidentally, his remarks after the meeting weren’t anything but the usual lot of platitudes and lies badly fraught with congratulations and appreciations for his despicable peers.
Nothing new, of course. Just one day before the European Council, Tusk met with the corrupted oligarch and war criminal Petro Poroshenko – the puppet-president of Ukraine that in October 2014 promised that while the Ukrainian children will go to schools and kindergartens, the children of Donbass will hole up in the basements. Despite mainstream media find increasingly difficult to hide his heinous and disgraceful policies, this subspecies of a man still has the blessings of the West.
Tusk called him by name – Dear Petro! – and asserted that one year before, the EU leaders pledged to stay the course on Ukraine and then helped stabilize the situation. He also restated their non-recognition of the ‘illegal annexation’ of Crimea. Well, the only reason because Tusk and the likes of him are not illegal is the fact that they are members of the elite of decision-makers ruling the EU.
Of course, little Donald wasn’t hanging around Donbass, and thus missed the fact that the ceasefire of February 2015 followed the Debaltsevo cauldron, where some thousands ‘illegal’ troops belonging to NATO members and fighting alongside the Ukrainian Army were surrounded by DPR and LPR Armies. During the withdrawal they were allowed to, they left behind some of their stuff (over 80 tanks, over 100 armored fighting vehicles, over 50 howitzers, about 15 multiple rocket launchers) and a huge volume of ‘illegal American aid’ for hundreds of millions of dollars (20 LCMR radars, a number of Humvee and British armored personnel carriers, Paladin M109 self-propelled howitzers, portable Javelin anti-tank weapons systems, drones, thermal imagers ballistic computers, digital radio stations, anti-tank systems, ammo, grenades, bulletproof vests, M16 rifles and tons of small arms, whole storehouses of food and med kits).
The event drove Europe to the verge of a fracture. Germany rejected the U.S. request for arms deliveries to Ukraine. German Foreign Minister Steinmeier slammed Washington’s strategy for being counterproductive. Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy came out in support of Russia. He stated that Crimea had chosen Russia and that it was necessary to protect Russian speakers in Ukraine. Hollande called for a greater autonomy for Eastern Ukraine. Cyprus offered Russia an agreement to use its soil for military facilities – just 40 kilometers from the British Air Force base that provides support to NATO operations in the Mideast. Kerry strove to deny any division between the U.S. and the EU over how to handle Russia, and emergency meetings took place. Suddenly, everyone was calling for peace and the EU leaders rushed to Moscow.
And that was the sole time some EU leaders worked to stabilize the Ukrainian mess. On the contrary, they bear the gross responsibility of having pushed for the destabilization of the country by backing the violent uprising that led to the Maidan coup.
Tusk foisted further delusional statements. The reforms supported by the EU have started to bring results – yeah, now Ukraine is a state in bankruptcy and social benefits were cut to secure loans from the IMF. We are engaged on securing Ukraine’s energy supplies – sure, but Kiev buys coal from Donbass. The Free Trade Agreement will lead to the gradual economic integration of Ukraine in the EU internal market – so, will Ukrainians buy the alimentary products they’ve bought so far from Russia from the EU members? You haven’t gone much to the grocery, right Donald? And what about prices? By the way, how many hryvnias for one Euro at the moment? Who will buy Ukrainian products? Oh, that’s a blooper on my part. Likely, there will be no more Ukrainian products, right?
“Europe will stay the course,” he concluded. “Ukraine must stay the course of reforms. And Russia must change its course!”
Actually, Russia has changed its course pretty well, Donald. You’d better get some updates during holidays time.
So, everything is going great in Ukraine! Press freedom, freedom of association, freedom of worship! No Nazis, no corruption, no plundering of the public asset! GDP and wages are not falling sheer, inflation is not skyrocketing. And Poroshenko is the Real Deal. He leads the new independent and democratic Ukraine towards the EU integration enlightened by those very Western values that Tusk proudly cherishes – indiscriminate shelling of civilians included.
Fine. Going back to the two-day get-together in Brussels, the Polish lunatic told us all in a nutshell. They agreed to find solutions – European Central Bank President Mario Draghi also attended, and he’s a downright master in finding solutions that please the financial elite. They were ready to take difficult decisions on banking union and economic governance – that’s their specialty, and the ‘difficulty’ solely affects European citizens. They agreed on new major energy infrastructure projects and diversification of suppliers, sources and routes – lest we forget, €3 billion of EU taxpayers’ money to Erdogan in aid to ‘take care of refugees’ and the South Stream is in standby after the downing of a Russian bomber by the Turkey-backed moderate terrorists, while the North Sea gas pipeline, so dear to Merkel, was not budgeted.
Quite a gaggle of chatterboxes, no doubt, but what did they accomplish eventually? Jack-shit! The official conclusions of the summit were published on the website of the European Council: eight pages filled with no decision and no solution. Everything was postponed to 2016.
As regards migration, they issued a sort of shopping list with a number of must-do chiefly intended to safeguard its system of open borders, but not a single word on the real cause of the migratory flows. They agreed to establish an EU border patrol with a rapid-reaction force to secure the frontiers, but some members complained that it would impinge on national sovereignty. Germany demanded that other EU countries share the refugees arrived in 2015, but the most part of them refused.
About the internal market issue, the European Council urged to conclude the TTIP negotiations as soon as possible, in total disinterest towards the many voices of dissent arisen.
Four lines reporting about an alleged constructive debate with the UK to find mutually satisfactory solutions failed to mention British demands that the EU undergo a radical reform in order to allow the UK a four-year ban on welfare benefits for non-UK EU citizens. David Cameron has hinted he might support the country’s withdrawal from the union if such proposals won’t be adopted.
As for the Monetary Union, enough the declaration of European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker at the close of the summit: “There’s nothing new to report.”
To properly fight against terrorism they promoted cooperation with the U.S. – aka further funding/training of terrorists – and an enhanced information-sharing between countries. Somebody is really gung-ho about it!
French President François Hollande paid tribute to the ‘progress’ made on several anti-terror measures. For example, due to the new ’emergency’ laws that the government has passed, now protests are illegal in France. In late November, over 200 people were arrested in Paris for daring to raise their voice against the Climate Conference. Thanks to new pre-crime laws, twenty-four climate activists guilty of organizing a rally were arrested as well. French Police are now free to search people and houses without a warrant on suspicion of ‘conspiratorial activity’ – a purposely vague term that allows them to target virtually anyone who engages in anything they brand as ‘extremist’ though he poses no threat whatsoever. Moreover, Hollande urged the EU to lead the fight for arms control with more coordination and even more ambition. Bang on, François! Any government engaged in establishing a dictatorship must make sure the citizenry is disarmed.
“Every weapon at some point or another can end up in the hands of a terrorist,” he said. Sure, mostly if a political body allows a full-scale trade with terrorists and calls them ‘moderate’.
The conclusions stated that the Council and the Commission will take rapidly further action against terrorist finance in all domains, such as asset freeze and other restrictive measures, and that priority should be given to tackle ISIS-related activity throughout the EU. A good point indeed! For example, France refused to sell Russia two Mistral warships but sold 24 fighter jets to Qatar, which funds terrorism and promotes Sharia to Europe. Mourn your dead, François.
And more, the conclusions reported the EU will strengthen counter-terrorism engagement with partners in North Africa, Middle East, Turkey and the Western Balkans. Which partners does the EU have in North Africa? Post-Gaddafi Libya turned into a hotbed for terrorism thanks to 2011 NATO invasion? The Middle East? Do you mean the oil-rich gulf dictatorships that have fostered the growth of ISIS? Turkey? Turkey is into business with ISIS – the stolen Syrian oil racket. Assad has fought terrorists for real since 2011, and Hollande out of the summit insisted that he could not be the future of Syria.
Such statement is included in the last point of the European Council conclusions: “There cannot be a lasting peace under the present regime”. Regime? Unlike the members of the European Council and European Commission, Assad was re-elected by its people in 2014 after 3 years of fighting against an array of foreign-backed mercenaries, aka moderate terrorists, backed by the U.S., the EU, Turkey, Israel and the Persian Gulf states. 65% of Syrians voted for him. Many countries allowed Syrians within their borders to vote at their respective embassies. Those who didn’t allow it, they were the U.S., Canada, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE, Turkey, and the EU members Belgium, France, and Germany.
Democratic Western values comprehend the removal of a legitimately elected president. And much more. Sanctions, for example, which bring a variety of troubles ranging from economic hardship to death in targeted countries. In 2011, the EU introduced an embargo, and therefore sanctions, against Syria with the stated objective of ‘paralyze its economy and push the population to rise up against the Assad government’ – Syrian uprising was not spontaneous enough. In April 2013, the embargo on oil extracted in the areas under rebel control was lifted, thus allowing ISIS to get revenues from oil smuggling. In May 2013, the embargo on weapons was lifted as well, while hospitals, waterworks, and power plants, which couldn’t receive replacement parts, ceased to function. Far from bringing more democracy, the EU engagement has turned a prosperous, peaceful and secular country into a devastated land plunged into chaos.
The conclusions end stating that the European Council looks forward to the Syria Conference scheduled in February 2016. That’s kinda jesters’ work!
Hardly any wonder the anti-Russian sanctions were once again extended by six months. It’s pretty clear the EU fake leaders don’t know any better than blind obedience toward their transatlantic masters. It’s the European non-Union!
But the Western Jesters had way more foolery to offer lately!
On December 15, emerging from Moscow meetings with Russian foreign minister Lavrov and President Putin, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry stated, “The U.S. and our partners are not seeking so-called regime change in Syria.” Thereby, Assad can stay!
On December 18, the five permanent UN Security Council members agreed on a draft of a resolution calling for a ceasefire and political settlement in Syria, providing a framework for continued meetings, starting in January, for working out which opposition forces would be accepted in the talks and which ones must be classified as terrorist organizations and thus barred from the process. It was agreed that President Assad would be allowed to remain in power as the process began. Fine, Assad can stay!
That very day, at his end-of-year press conference, President Obama said that Assad must go in order to stop the bloodletting and move forward in a non-sectarian way. Heck, the Obama Administration sounds incapable of keeping its story straight – it’s the White House Schizophrenia!
Before 2011, Syria had never been troubled by any form of sectarian violence. The stirring up of sectarian tensions was the aftermath of the entanglement of foreign fomenters to prompt armed insurgency. Syrians know it very well, and that’s why they elected Assad once again. He has worked hard to prevent a Libyan-style collapse and save the country from the terrorist armies backed by its enemies in the West and the Mideast. Interviewed by a Dutch news channel on December 17, President Assad answered one of the biased customary questions by asking back: “How could you withstand for nearly five years in such circumstances if you don’t have public support? And how can you have public support if you are torturing your people?” Actually, inordinately challenging questions for the mainstream media.
On December 6, President Obama addressed the nation from the Oval Office, reiterating and defending his strategy against ISIS. It was an obscene attempt to save appearances after NATO member Turkey downed a Russian bomber pounding Turkey-cherished moderate terrorists and the consequent exposure of Turkey/IS large-scale oil trade. Obama stated that the U.S. will use all capabilities to fight IS. He said, “In Iraq and Syria airstrikes are taking out IS leaders, heavy weapons, oil tankers, infrastructure,” but forgot to mention that he was referring to Russian airstrikes. For 15 months, nobody in the U.S.-led coalition had noticed the thousands of trucks crossing back and forth between Turkey and ISIS-controlled Syria. And after all this time, they came up with such a cool plan: give ISIS a 45-minute warning before bombing their tankers by dropping leaflets advising jihadists to flee before airstrikes. The leaflet read, ‘Get out of your trucks now, and run away from them. Warning: airstrikes are coming. Oil trucks will be destroyed. Get away from your oil trucks immediately. Do not risk your life.’
Lest we forget, the U.S. sophisticated military hardware mistakenly bombed Syrian and Iraqi army positions instead of ISIS targets – no leaflet previously dropped – while weapons and food supplies at times were unintentionally dropped on ISIS controlled zones.
On December 25, the General Staff of Russia’s armed forces reported that Russian intelligence spotted almost 12,000 delivery trucks on the Turkish-Iraqi border. The military presented data on changes in the ISIS oil smuggling routes, which now run through north-western Iraq, regions in the focus of attention of the U.S. As a Christmas gift, Russia received the Pentagon’s refusal to cooperate on rooting out terrorism and share intelligence data on ISIS positions. U.S. Defense Department spokesperson Lt. Col. Michelle Baldanza said, “We are not going to cooperate with Russia until they change their strategy of supporting Assad and instead focus on ISIL.”
Those who are aware of the facts about Syria but not familiar with Pentagon’s releases likely find such statement pretty idiotic, since the government forces are the main fighting force against ISIS on the ground, but such misrepresenting of reality is part of the strategy of the U.S. big propaganda machine – and it has worked pretty well so far.
Twelve weeks of Russian intervention have brought results, and they look good. The Syrian Army has made sweeping ground advances on several fronts and recaptured vast areas and some positions somehow ended up under ISIS control or other jihadist factions during the U.S.-led campaign launched in September 2014.
Russian involvement has prevented the U.S. and its allies from furthering their agenda, which top-priority has never been defeating ISIS but a regime change and partition of Syria. One main step was the creation of a ‘safe zone’ along the Syrian-Turkish border where a vetted Turkish-leaned government was to be promptly installed while waiting for one terrorist faction or another to succeed in taking Damascus. Israel was to keep the oil-rich Golan Heights region it has occupied after the Six Days War in 1967, Saudi Arabia the eastern desert, and Qatar would have had its own pipeline to Europe.
A considerable chunk of Western politics is about having an acceptable narrative to foist on the public, and mainstream media assist in this. By avoiding appropriate questioning, peddling half-truths and sly omissions, they help justify the West’s support of terrorism – moderate, of course – in the name of democracy, though the U.S.-led anti-ISIS campaign resulted in ISIS dramatically increasing its territory.
Russian air power has carried out over 5,200 sorties in three months and the terrorist backbone has been broken – as Putin recently put it. The Russian President didn’t lose time in idle chats and made no phony distinction between moderate or non-moderate terrorists, and he’s never been in need of any sort of justification for his actions. That’s pretty embarrassing for the Obama administration, which has left unanswered Putin’s rightful question: why isn’t the U.S. partnering with Russia in the war on terror?
From September onwards, Obama spoke several times with Putin on the phone and even met him three times on the sidelines of international events – what’s left of Obama’s policy of isolating non-compliant Russia, I wonder? Likely the public will never know what sort of words the leaders exchanged, but on December 20, Putin stated, “We are far from using all the means we have there. We do have additional means, and we will use them if required.”
That’s no joke, folks! Enough to remember that Pentagon spokesman Jeff Davis admitted back in November that Russia’s sophisticated air defense systems S-400, deployed in the wake of Turkey’s downing of the Su-24, had complicated the situation up to force the U.S. to halt manned flights over certain parts of the country.
Obama Administration officials predicted a disastrous failure for the Russian intervention and the servile MSM promptly parroted with sensationalist headlines: ‘U.S. to Putin: Welcome to the ISIS Quagmire’, ‘Russia risks Syrian quagmire’, ‘Putin’s Quagmire in Syria Proves Obama Prescient’, ‘Putin’s Middle East Misadventures’, and so on. Well, while at last some U.S. officials have admitted that Russia is achieving its goals in the conflict, moreover by facing relatively low costs and minimal casualties, the MSM keep on with the shit shoveling.
On October 21-23, several Western media outlets blamed Russian aviation for hitting medical facilities in some villages in Syria, causing collateral damage and civilian casualties. The U.S. maintained that narrative officially through a press-briefing on October 29. The jester on stage was State Department spokesperson John Kirby. He said allegations were based on ‘press reporting’ and accounts from Syrian civil society groups, without naming any. As a U.S. spokesperson, he is used to make a fool out of himself, so he added they have some ‘intelligence and operational information’, but he firmly refused to share it – as always, they have evidence of everything they say but cannot show it for a reason they cannot say.
Instead, the International Committee of the Red Cross stated they had no reports of such bombings of hospitals in Syria. It turned out that out of six hospitals mentioned in the reports, the only one really existing was in the village of Sarmin, in Idlib province, and a photo taken on October 31 showed the building was intact. Furthermore, it came out that the prime source for the mainstream media was the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which reports from the two-bedroom house of Syrian immigrant Rami Abdel Rahman in England’s countryside relying on unidentified sources telling him whatever happens in Syria via phone-calls impossible for anyone to verify.
Abdel Rahman (real name Ossama Suleiman) is a member of the so-called ‘Syrian opposition’ and supports the ouster of President Assad. After three short spells in prison – for pro-democracy activism, according to him – he fled Syria in 2000 paying a human trafficker to smuggle him into England – nice guys get along well. Once there, he broke new ground up to get direct access to the Foreign Secretary William Hague, whom he met in person on multiple occasions at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London. Moreover, his one-man organization, always blaming the Assad government and glorifying the Free Syrian Army, aka moderate terrorists, is funded by the EU – and likely by the UK as well, considered its contacts in the upper echelons of British politics.
For any real journalist, he would be a pointless, utterly biased source of information, but how many real professionals can be found in the Western MSM apparatus? Before dismissing my question as useless sarcasm, you should know that many mainstream news outlets, which published derogatory articles against Russian intervention, quoted solely the SOHR reports as proof of civilian casualties, though such reports provided no shred of evidence – including Reuters and the New York Times, which respectively in 2011 and 2013 portrayed Abdel Rahman as an anti-Assad political activist, thereby far from being a reliable source.
On December 23, Amnesty International issued a report on alleged casualties from Russian airstrikes in at least 25 incidents occurred since September – lest we forget, Russian campaign began on September 30. Since Amnesty didn’t send its own investigators on the spot, its report was based on the accounts of anonymous witnesses gathered via phone interviews and some footage/pictures posted online.
The report is crammed with stock phrases such as ‘suspected Russian attacks’, ‘evidence suggesting’, ‘some Russian air strikes appear to’, ‘suspected Russian sea-launched cruise missile’. A lot of groundless assumptions without providing any proof or factual backing. Some tragic scenes to enhance emotions were added, making the script appropriate for a Western audience grown up watching war movies. Oddly, a number of witnesses appear to own remarkable military expertise, while whoever has operated in a war-zone knows very well that nobody caught under airstrikes/shelling can point to the perpetrator.
This so-called report is far from being independent and impartial. A politically motivated approach is pretty evident. Suffice to say that despite its investigation was ‘remotely’, Amnesty went as far as to accuse Russia of ‘possible’ war crimes for an alleged use of internationally banned cluster munitions.
The Russian defense ministry had no hard time dismissing the report as a fake, and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said the UN couldn’t verify the NGO’s sources and findings.
Well, as for the sources, Amnesty International quotes the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. What a surprise! Amnesty also relies on the UK-based and EU-subsidized one-man band. How can a well-known human rights group be so incompetent?
But it gets worse.
British security analyst and former counter-terrorism intelligence officer Charles Shoebridge stated, “For a large part of Syrian conflict, Amnesty has made no secret of its support for Syria’s rebellion, even at some point a couple of years ago calling for the arming of rebels, even though at the time Syrian rebels were known to be carrying out human rights abuses themselves of very serious nature.”
What? A human rights group calling for further weaponize a war-torn country?
The gentlemen on the board of directors of Amnesty International and some of the main executives are exclusively pulled from the U.S. political establishment, such as the State Department and other governmental agencies. This allegedly non-governmental organization is another U.S. Government proxy. They are not incompetents at all. On the contrary, they do their job very well, and their job is pushing the Washington line each and every time.
Despite the lack of unbiased sources and factual data in the report, the mainstream media parroted its content with no further questioning whatsoever and sensationalist anti-Russian headlines were read worldwide. Such articles are manufactured in order to divert public attention from what is really going on. The language is purposely vague and general, and since they rely on anonymous witnesses nobody is to be called answerable for spreading false news. Matter of days and the narrative disappears from the media, but the masses will remember the accusations, and they’ll recall it as a valid issue because nobody told them it was a fake.
So, no concrete evidence against Russian Air Force. The U.S. satellites as well have nothing to provide to the public – that’s no wonder, several representatives in the West condemned the rows of non-existing Russian trucks and tanks entering Donbass territory, but those very satellites had no evidence to provide. As for banned munitions allegations, having been in Donbass for over nine months, I’m still waiting for a single Amnesty International report about the white phosphorus bombs dropped by the U.S.-backed Ukrainian troops. By the way, how many reports has Amnesty International issued on jihadist atrocities in Iraq and Syria? And on Saudi airstrikes against civilians in Yemen?
The question is, Why wage an information war on Russia? Sad but true, because all of this is way more convenient than showing Russia successfully fighting terrorism in alliance with the Syrian Army, Hezbollah, Iran, and YPG Syrian Kurds.
Likewise and on the same grounds, Western MSM termed the terrorists as ‘rebels’ or ‘opposition groups’, as if they were mere political parties representing a share of the Syrian electorate, and then promoted them as moderate, liberal, secular, democratic, therefore deserving of the West’s support.
As a final circus act of 2015, instead of reporting Syrian Christians celebrating Christmas in the streets of Latakia – didn’t Obama say Assad’s Syria is sectarian? – Western MSM have lamented the death of commander Zahran Alloush, leader of the 17,000 militant strong faction Jaysh al-Islam, which is funded by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and serves as a conduit for CIA weapons to other terrorist outlets. Here are some of the headlines: ‘Leader of powerful Syrian rebel group killed in airstrike’ (The Guardian), ‘Powerful Syrian Rebel Leader Reported Killed in Airstrike’ (The New York Times), ‘Top Syrian rebel leader killed in air strike in Damascus suburb’ (Reuters), ‘Killing of Syrian Rebel Faction Leader Imperils Planned Peace Talks’ (The Wall Street Journal), ‘In death, Syrian rebel chief haunts peace hopes’ (France 24), ‘A top rebel’s death casts doubt over Bashar al-Assad’s intentions’ (CNN). Some others joined in mourning: the Turkey-backed Syrian Islamic Council, the NATO-backed militant extremist front Free Syrian Army, the terrorist group Ahrar al-Sham, al-Qaeda, and the head of Human Rights Watch, Kenneth Roth.
Zahran Alloush usually was busy shelling civilians in Damascus, but on December 25, he attended a meeting with some colleagues and the Syrian Air Force flattened the building they were in with air delivered missiles.
Such a nice guy since the 90s was involved in the Salafist-Wahabbist terrorist network, called for cleansing Damascus of all Shiites and Alawites, kidnapped innocent civilians, suppressed dissent through torture and slaying, carried out public executions of prisoners, put Alawite women into cages to use them as human shields, launched the chemical weapons attack of August 2013, perpetrated a massive artillery shelling on central Damascus and the massacre of Alawite, Christians, Druze, and Ismailite civilians in the town of Adra – no doubt a moderate terrorist, a pro-democracy and secular leader, definitely not sectarian, likely a potentially valid choice to represent the Syrian people.
That’s politics in the West – a stage for one lot of jesters who spin a yarn to the public, and the public acquiesces. The whole show boils down to a sham display of democracy, that’s it. The thing is, jesters of that breed are dangerous.
Next year’s prospects are far from optimistic. “The crises we have seen will remain and others will join them,” said European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, when asked about his hopes for a smoother 2016. “I am under no illusions.”
So do I, Junky – once in a lifetime I can agree with you. Well, isn’t it a good way to wish Happy Holidays and say goodbye 2015?

* Published by The Voice of Idaho on 31st of December 2015

About Christian B. Malaparte

Christian B. Malaparte is a freelance writer mainly engaged in debunking the misrepresentation of facts in the mainstream media. He was in Donbass from the outbreak of hostilities in April 2014 until February 2015, and reported in real time the shelling of civilian homes in Kramatorsk and Donetsk by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. He currently resides in Russia.


No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: