• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Dis, psssst...over here

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Let's put it out there for everyone to read, Cal.

"Prologue:
Newly declassified documents captured by U.S. forces indicate that Saddam Hussein’sThe relationship between the Taliban and Saddam appears to have been mediated by a Pakistani named Maulana Fazlur Rahman. Another document captured in Afghanistan and written by an Al Qaeda operative confirms the relationship between the Maulana and Saddam. The translation provided here includes an early 1999 meeting between the director of the IIS and the Maulana.
Another notebook entry records a meeting with Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, an Afghani Islamic Jihadist and leader of the Islamic Party in Afghanistan. Hekmatyar made news recently with the BBC article Afghan Rebel’s pledge to al-Qaeda that reports on a video statement from Hekmatyar in which he states he will fight alongside A Qaeda. In this translation, Hekmatyar makes specific requests for a “center” in Baghdad and/or Tajikistan.
A third meeting involves an Islamist representing Bangladesh that we believe to be Fazlur Rahman Khalil. Another page of the notebook indicates Khalil is coming or came to Iraq. Khalil is a Taliban/Al Qaeda associate who signed the 1998 fatwa from Usama bin Laden declaring war on the United States.
's inner circle not only actively reached out to the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan and terror-based jihadists in the region, but also hosted discussions with a known Al Qaeda operative about creating jihad training "centers," possibly in Baghdad.
Ray Robison, a former member of the CIA-directed Iraq Survey Group (ISG), supervised a group of linguists to analyze, archive and exploit the hundreds of captured documents and materials of Saddam's regime.
This is the final installment in a three-part series concerning a notebook kept by an Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) agent called Khaled Abd El Majid, and covers events taking place in 1999. The translation is provided by Robison's associate, known here as “Sammi.”
The first two translations from this notebook detailed an agreement between members of the Saddam regime and the Taliban to establish diplomatic and intelligence based cooperation. This final translation further advances the link between the Saddam regime and world-wide Islamic Jihad terrorism.


Highlight #1
"appears" to have been mediated.... If you have a smoking gun, there should be no question. Or maybe it never happened?

Highlight #2
Director of the IIS is not Saddam.

Highlingt #3
What kind of "center" in Baghdad? A religious center, a terrorist center, maybe a center for orphans?

Highlight #4
Or maybe he didn't come at all. Maybe there's no such person.


Highlight #5
Ah. Now they're "jihad training centers". Isn't that interesting how that happened. First they're "centers" now they're "jihad training centers." Sure makes a better story, doesn't it?

Highlight #6
Who's "Sammi"? A fake name for a fake person? But if you want to believe, you'll overlook these little things.

Highlight #7
Still no connection with Saddam. The Taliban are not Al Quaida. They supported them, yes, but they are not one and the same.

And, again, it doesn't matter what they find now. George W. Bush did not have this information when he invaded Iraq. He took our young men and women to war on a hunch, a gut feeling. That's not acceptable. Will you be so supportive of Hillary Clinton, should she be the next president, when she has a gut feeling and wants to go to war?

I'm not going to waste my time on these translations. If you have something factual to post that you want me to respond to, post it, not just the link. This is all speculation, with unknown translators, being done by people who support this war. Show me something that Bush knew before he went into Iraq that shows Saddam was a threat to this country. This ain't it.
 

memanpa

Well-known member
dis i usually stay out of political discussions, but you are too much!

FACT i have a reason to be angry about the war, just lost a family member! I AM NOT ANGRY about it! do you have anything besides a political agenda to be angry about?
I as well as others have given a lot so that you can make your JANE FONDA stand and even assist the enemy, (IF YOU THINK YOUR RANTING ON DOES NOT ASSIST THEM YOU HAVE ANOTHER THOUGHT COMING)

irac just like nam the enemy would use the JANE FONDA"S and the DISAGREEABLE'S dissent and protests as propaganda to incite!
if i thought for one second your ranting was responsible for my family members death, GOD save your soul!

FACT
i am leaving in about an hour to go to the airport to go to his funeral!
at the airport i will set off the metal detector with the shrapnel i still carry in my body, if nothing else this gives me the right to say to you and your OVER zealous politcal views Back off

FACT you have the right to your opinion as long as it does not HURT someone, you are getting very borderline as to that

FACT if you think for one second , never mind sometimes i do not believe you really do THINK

GET OVER IT, and kiss my rosy RED ONE
good day
will see you all when i get back from putting him in the ground :cry:
 

BBJ

Well-known member
To answer your question dis about billiary YES I WOULD BACK a demo-crat "IF" in the same situation. The problem with my answer of yes is that that would be a big "IF". What I mean by that is that there are not many dems today that have the backbone to do what your President has done. No it has not made him the most popular guy in our Country, but being a leader means sometimes making decisions (tough decisions like sending young men and women into war) that hurts your popularity. A true leader can make those tough decisions and not worry too much about what a few others might think. You have obviously never been a leader in your lifetime or else you would know the difference.

As for clinton I can never trust that woman. How could anybody trust her? She is cold and calculated. Every move she makes is a planned one, nothing about her is genuine or real. She is a politician, rehearsed and molded to fit the environment she stands in at the moment.
 

Brad S

Well-known member
Hillary wants to nationalize 1/6 of the economy, but this nationalized medical plan will be the only one on the planet that works 'cause hillary is real smart.


memanpa, you got schrapnel, they got Sheehan - back off there.
Thank you for your sacrifices and courage.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Brad S said:
Hillary wants to nationalize 1/6 of the economy, but this nationalized medical plan will be the only one on the planet that works 'cause hillary is real smart.


memanpa, you got schrapnel, they got Sheehan - back off there.
Thank you for your sacrifices and courage.

We need a national health plan---the regulators have failed to provide the regulations and enforcement to do it privately. The insurance companies are just too powerful.

Hillary isn't near ethical enough to follow.

Tyson foods was on the other side of Hillary's commodity trades where she reaped over 100k in insider trading. Since Hillary's trades, there has been a time stamp required on transactions so that these connections could be made in a court of law.

Hillary is a dead end for the democratic party because she is not a statesman(woman). She is just another politician. Like a movie star, her political life is carefully scripted but not lived in real life.

Can't you guys get off of the personification of issues and onto the issues themselves? Until you do, we will keep having the same ole same ole in politics. People never measure up to ideals. Our current politicians measure up to ideals less and less.
 

Brad S

Well-known member
We need a national health plan---the regulators have failed to provide the regulations and enforcement to do it privately. The insurance companies are just too powerful.


We have a national health plan, a private one, and when compared with nationalized medicine, its working great. Medical care will only get more expensive and less effective with government control (see US public education). This call for Nationalized medicine is merely an attempt to rally the poorest 51% to tyranize the not poorest 49% - costs be damned, the evil ones are paying.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Brad S said:
We need a national health plan---the regulators have failed to provide the regulations and enforcement to do it privately. The insurance companies are just too powerful.


We have a national health plan, a private one, and when compared with nationalized medicine, its working great. Medical care will only get more expensive and less effective with government control (see US public education). This call for Nationalized medicine is merely an attempt to rally the poorest 51% to tyranize the not poorest 49% - costs be damned, the evil ones are paying.

No Brad it is not. The private one is still paying for the ones not covered because hospitals can not refuse necessary medical services. I have a good friend on a hospital board and my wife's cousin ran one as does her best friend before getting married.

It is the same story. They all have to pick up the cost of uninsureds and pass those costs onto those that do have insurance.

The biggest problem with that system is that insurance compaines try to put off high risk individuals and go for the less high risk. They do this in a lot of ways and if i had time I would explain it to you. Insurance is about pooling risks so you don't get ruined when you have a health problem. Insurance companies try to avoid the risk and get as many "high margin" payers as possible. They do this by defining the group risk and changing it. The opportunist companies have this down to highly toned skill and the Ins. commissioners of the states just can not keep up.

We have a national health care system. It just isn't very efficient and it is making a lot of money for some insurance companies that "cheat" and for some big boys at the top. Ask Scrushy.

There are a lot of things that can be done to correct the inadequacies of the current system and make it more efficient. There just are not the right incentives to do so right now because big money wants to keep bringing in big money.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Econ101 said:
Brad S said:
We need a national health plan---the regulators have failed to provide the regulations and enforcement to do it privately. The insurance companies are just too powerful.


We have a national health plan, a private one, and when compared with nationalized medicine, its working great. Medical care will only get more expensive and less effective with government control (see US public education). This call for Nationalized medicine is merely an attempt to rally the poorest 51% to tyranize the not poorest 49% - costs be damned, the evil ones are paying.

No Brad it is not. The private one is still paying for the ones not covered because hospitals can not refuse necessary medical services. I have a good friend on a hospital board and my wife's cousin ran one as does her best friend before getting married.

It is the same story. They all have to pick up the cost of uninsureds and pass those costs onto those that do have insurance.

The biggest problem with that system is that insurance compaines try to put off high risk individuals and go for the less high risk. They do this in a lot of ways and if i had time I would explain it to you. Insurance is about pooling risks so you don't get ruined when you have a health problem. Insurance companies try to avoid the risk and get as many "high margin" payers as possible. They do this by defining the group risk and changing it. The opportunist companies have this down to highly toned skill and the Ins. commissioners of the states just can not keep up.

We have a national health care system. It just isn't very efficient and it is making a lot of money for some insurance companies that "cheat" and for some big boys at the top. Ask Scrushy.

There are a lot of things that can be done to correct the inadequacies of the current system and make it more efficient. There just are not the right incentives to do so right now because big money wants to keep bringing in big money.

Actually econ- I have to agree with you on that...We (everybody) is now already paying for those that have no insurance... And the ones that own nothing never do pay anything for it- but the ones that are suffering are some of the lower middle class- the ones that have jobs, own houses, may even be farmers/ranchers that because of previous illness cannot get affordable health insurance- and then have a major health issue appear...I've seen the collection agencies and credit bureaus serving the papers to seize their houses, land, property or garnishing their wages and incomes for years to pay off these hospital bills... People having to make the choice of losing everything they worked a life for, or watch their relative die... This is wrong...Everyone needs to have access to an affordable health insurance- and everyone should be required to have some type of coverage- be it your own policy, medicare, or a national tax funded policy....
 

Econ101

Well-known member
OT the problem you describe is accurate and is all across the country. It is real and it is wrong.

I don't see anything at all wrong with a tiered health care program so your employer can induce you with more bells and whistles. We still need a better basic plan that does not finacially kill those coming out of the lower class and in the lower middle class.

There are a lot of things and ways that this could go. We need real leadership and we aren't going to get it any time soon. There is a huge amount of money getting siphoned off from a section of our economy and the people siphoning are not going to let go of their straw easily.

Maybe a real corporate tax that is across the board for all corporations that gives us a basic plan and then go from there. Instead, we allow local govts. to give away taxing rights to get businesses in their area. The Supreme Court has made a bad decision on that one. We have an interstate commerce clause that protects interstate commerce but then we have that kind of stuff going on. It doesn't make economic sense. These big corporations are just running the show when it comes to policy favorable to them.

There are just so many examples of what is going wrong. Some things are going right, I grant you, but there is a lot of governing that needs to be done that is not being done right now.
 

Cal

Well-known member
Here Dis, I was hoping that everyone would just go to the link because there are so many links and references contained within. So at least let's do a good job at "putting it out there for everyone to read".


Was Saddam Regime a Broker for Terror Alliances?

Monday , June 26, 2006

Ray Robison




Prologue | Translation | Analysis | Epilogue

Prologue:

Newly declassified documents captured by U.S. forces indicate that Saddam Hussein's inner circle not only actively reached out to the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan and terror-based jihadists in the region, but also hosted discussions with a known Al Qaeda operative about creating jihad training "centers," possibly in Baghdad.

Ray Robison, a former member of the CIA-directed Iraq Survey Group (ISG), supervised a group of linguists to analyze, archive and exploit the hundreds of captured documents and materials of Saddam's regime.

This is the final installment in a three-part series concerning a notebook kept by an Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) agent called Khaled Abd El Majid, and covers events taking place in 1999. The translation is provided by Robison's associate, known here as “Sammi.”

The first two translations from this notebook detailed an agreement between members of the Saddam regime and the Taliban to establish diplomatic and intelligence based cooperation. This final translation further advances the link between the Saddam regime and world-wide Islamic Jihad terrorism.

Click here for more on Ray Robison and the Saddam Dossier

The relationship between the Taliban and Saddam appears to have been mediated by a Pakistani named Maulana Fazlur Rahman. Another document captured in Afghanistan and written by an Al Qaeda operative confirms the relationship between the Maulana and Saddam. The translation provided here includes an early 1999 meeting between the director of the IIS and the Maulana.

Another notebook entry records a meeting with Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, an Afghani Islamic Jihadist and leader of the Islamic Party in Afghanistan. Hekmatyar made news recently with the BBC article Afghan Rebel’s pledge to al-Qaeda that reports on a video statement from Hekmatyar in which he states he will fight alongside A Qaeda. In this translation, Hekmatyar makes specific requests for a “center” in Baghdad and/or Tajikistan.

A third meeting involves an Islamist representing Bangladesh that we believe to be Fazlur Rahman Khalil. Another page of the notebook indicates Khalil is coming or came to Iraq. Khalil is a Taliban/Al Qaeda associate who signed the 1998 fatwa from Usama bin Laden declaring war on the United States.

Editor's notes: "Sammi" puts translation clarifications in parenthesis. Robison (RR) uses parenthesis for clarification and bold-face type for emphasis.

Translation:

Translation for ISGP-2003-0001412 follows (PDF):

Page 70, Left Side:

Saturday 3/20 at 11:45

Met with him Mr. MS4 (translator’s note: MS4 is the code name for the high ranking IIS official).

1. Intelligence and security cooperation.

2. Mr. MS4 informed him that the Iraqi president and Iraqi leadership are interested in him.

3. “We are ready to help you in any country and against your enemies”. (translator’s note: most probably this is MS4)

4. Fadlul Haq - The governor of Peshawar that was assassinated.

(translator’s note: points 5 and 6 are direct quotes from the Afghani)

5. “We are facing a vicious international plot against the Islamic Party and cannot find any country to help us at the time being”.

6. “Iran helped us at the beginning and we brought 2,000 fighters but things changed at the time being. Also the Russians called to help but we do not trust them. Moscow and Iran want the war to drag on.” (RR: this is probably the Taliban vs. Northern Alliance conflict). This is why he is coming to Baghdad for help. Asked Baghdad to help open a center in Tajikistan or in Baghdad and they will bring them (translator’s note: not clear what them refers to) in through Iran or Northern Iraq.

He asked for help in printing Afghani money in Baghdad or help in printing it in Moscow.

Page 69, Right Side:

Stinger missiles have a range of 5 kilometers. (translator’s note: there is only this one sentence on this page)

Page 69, Left Side:

Meeting of MS4 with 6951 on 4/10 at 8 p.m. in room 710.

He (6951) inquired about our relation with Usama (bin Laden).

(translator’s note: The Iraqi answer is not reported.).

He (6951) proposed to the Taliban to form a front with Iraq, Libya and Sudan.

He met some of them in Hajj (Translator’s note: Pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia, it is one of the five pillars of Islam) and he came to the conclusion that they do not know anything about Foreign Relations.

The Taliban defense minister is Abdul Razzak (unclear) Association of Muslim Clerics.

They openly claim that they are against America.

He said that he was ready to build relations between the Taliban and Iraq.

(translator’s note: meeting continues on both sides of page 68/76, with questions about Pakistani politics and the other Islamic parties.) The Iraqi official says, “I suggest that the parties come closer together because that means power to Islam against the American and Zionist policies”.

Page 39, Left Side:

Meeting with an Islamist leader from Bangladesh. He promises support to Iraq. He says: “Let them know that I made Bangladesh a second country to Mr. President and we have 125 million (people).” (RR: Although no name is given for this meeting, it is important to note Fazlur Rahman Khalil, noted for meeting with Iraqi officials in the previous article, signed the 1998 fatwa as “Fazlur Rahman, Amir of the Jihad Movement in Bangladesh”. This is a strong indication that this meeting is with Khalil or his representative.)

Page 27, Left side:

(translator’s note: contains notes with information on prior meetings recorded in the notebook.)

The mentioned person (Translator’s note: Fazlur Rahman) arrived to the country on 11/27/1999 and he was hosted in Al Rachid Hotel suite number 526. He will leave on 12/1/1999.

(translator’s comment: note No. 1 in a list of notes.)

He visited Iraq on the beginning of April 1999 and the ex-director of the intelligence, may God rest his soul, instructed him to mediate between the Taliban and the leader of the Afghani Islamic party, Hekmatyar following the request for mediation done by Hekmatyar to the leadership of Iraq during a visit when they met us on 3/19/1999.

End Translation

Analysis:

Because Arabic writing is right to left, the pages in this notebook go in reverse chronological order. The note on page 27 indicates that Hekmatyar met with the IIS on March 19, 1999. The translation of page 70 is dated March 20 and it refers to someone from the Islamic Party, which is Hekmatyar’s group. Therefore it makes sense that the meeting on page 70 is with Hekmatyar.

The note on page 27 also says the meeting was with the director if the IIS, so we believe MS4 is his code-name. It appears that Hekmatyar, a jihadist leader warring with the Taliban for control of Afghanistan at the time, asked Baghdad “to help open a center in Tajikistan or in Baghdad and they will bring them (translator’s note: not clear what them refers to) in through Iran or Northern Iraq.” There is a strong indication that this requested “center” is a jihadist training camp.

From a US Department of State report Patterns of Global Terrorism, 1996:

Gulbuddin Hekmatyar … maintained training and indoctrination facilities in Afghanistan, mainly for non-Afghans. They continue to provide logistic support and training facilities to Islamic extremists despite military losses in the past year. Individuals who trained in these camps were involved in insurgencies in … Tajikistan…

It looks very much like Hekmatyar, a long-time jihad leader and recently self-identified Al Qaeda associate, is asking the Saddam regime for a jihad training camp in Tajikistan and/or Baghdad.

Page 27 tells us that the Maulana Fazlur Rahman was meeting with the IIS Director in early April. The meeting on page 69 fits the time frame, has the code for the IIS director, and the guest speaks for the Taliban indicating that “6951” is the Maulana. According to these notes, the Maulana “proposed to the Taliban to form a front with Iraq, Libya and Sudan.” He also enquires about the IIS relationship to Usama bin Laden.

In researching the Maulana, a third document has been found that demonstrated the relationship between Saddam and the Maulana. The document which appears to be an IIS memo also mentions a relationship with Hekmatyar. There is no government authentication of the document. Because this document matches closely with what we find in the IIS agent notebook we will reference it so that the reader may decide.

The article entitled Exclusive: Saddam Possessed WMD’s, Had Extensive Terror Ties states:

A senior government official who is not a political appointee provided CNSNews.com with copies of the 42 pages of Iraqi Intelligence Service documents. The originals, some of which were hand-written and others typed, are in Arabic. CNSNews.com had the papers translated into English by two individuals separately and independent of each other.

The CNS report includes a translation of a memo from the IIS to Saddam. The memo is dated January 25, 1993. The subject is IIS influence with two groups: the JUI, led by Maulana Fazlur Rahman; and, the Afghani Islamic Party led by Hekmatyar. These are the same two men meeting with the IIS in Baghdad in 1999, according to the notebook.

The document states that the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) depended upon Pakistani support as well as foreign help from Iraq and Libya. It also mentions that the secretary general of the JUI has had a good relationship with the IIS since 1981, and that he is “ready for any mission”.

The IIS document reported on by CNS News also states that the Islamic Party of Hekmatyar relies on Iraqi funding. It says the relationship has existed since 1989 and has improved under Hekmatyar’s leadership. Although this document has not yet been validated by the U.S, government, we can see very specific information, not publicly available before 2004, that matches what we find in the IIS notebook. It indicates a long history of Saddam regime support to Islamic jihad groups, and that the IIS considers them organizations that will take on missions for Iraq’s interests.

Epilogue:

Let’s review what we have learned from the IIS notebook.

• We learned that in 1999 the IIS met with three significant leaders of Islamic jhad from Afghanistan: a warlord and Islamic jihadist; an Al Qaeda leader; and, a man known as the “Father of the Taliban.”

• The Saddam regime and Taliban leadership agreed to diplomatic ties and a secret intelligence service relationship. They discussed security cooperation with Hekmatyar’s Islamic Jihad group. The Taliban representative also agreed to support the Saddam regime in Pakistan’s North-West Frontier, a region sympathetic to and actively involved with the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and the world-wide Islamic jihad movement. An Islamist, most likely the Al Qaeda and Taliban affiliated Fazlur Rahman Khalil, promised the support of Bangladesh.

• We see a request to the Saddam regime for a training center in Baghdad or Tajikistan from a jihad leader accused by the U.S. State Department during the Clinton Administration of running Islamic extremist training camps.

• There is a discussion about transporting something into these centers, including a discussion that appears to mention surface-to-air missiles.

• And, we have numerous statements of Islamic fidelity between Afghani jihad leaders and the Saddam regime, with many statements of mutual animosity towards the United States and intent to cooperate.

This notebook thus provides significant evidence that the Saddam regime collaborated with and supported Islamic jihad elements in Afghanistan at a time when the Taliban and Al Qaeda were attacking United States citizens and their interests and plotting the 9/11 attacks.

In this notebook, we see a Saddam Hussein actively seeking to expand his sphere of influence in a region at the heart of the world-wide Islamic jihad movement.

This now-public relationship between Maulana Fazlur Rahman and Saddam Hussein deserves great scrutiny.

As we researched the Maulana, a picture came into focus that our team was not looking to find: The Maulana is a senior leader of an affiliation of Pakistani groups supportive of Islamic jihad. These groups include the JUI and the Jamaat Islami (JI). The JUI provided direct support to both the planner and paymaster of the 9/11 attacks. The Pakistani government accused the JI of working with Al Qaeda. The Maulana mediated an intelligence pact between the IIS and the Taliban.

Clearly, this evidence indicates that the Maulana was in a position to procure assistance from Iraq for the 9/11 attacks.

Dr. Laurie Mylroie, an expert on Iraq, testified in front of the 9/11 commission in 2003:

After al Qaeda moved to Afghanistan, Iraqi intelligence became deeply involved with it, probably, with the full agreement of Usama bin Ladin. Al Qaeda provided the ideology, foot soldiers, and a cover for the terrorist attacks; Iraqi intelligence provided the direction, training, and expertise…

This notebook demonstrates that Islamic jihad leaders in Afghanistan were seeking IIS assistance and Saddam was giving them that assistance.

The author welcomes your comment on the translation and analysis of this document. You can contact Ray Robison by emailing him at: [email protected]
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Yawn. Wake me up when those documents are translated by someone official, not someone still trying to excuse the Iraq war, when they have been reviewed and a report released by our official intelligence agencies. Until those things happen, it's just propaganda.
 

Murgen

Well-known member
dis i usually stay out of political discussions, but you are too much!

FACT i have a reason to be angry about the war, just lost a family member! I AM NOT ANGRY about it! do you have anything besides a political agenda to be angry about?
I as well as others have given a lot so that you can make your JANE FONDA stand and even assist the enemy, (IF YOU THINK YOUR RANTING ON DOES NOT ASSIST THEM YOU HAVE ANOTHER THOUGHT COMING)

irac just like nam the enemy would use the JANE FONDA"S and the DISAGREEABLE'S dissent and protests as propaganda to incite!
if i thought for one second your ranting was responsible for my family members death, GOD save your soul!

FACT
i am leaving in about an hour to go to the airport to go to his funeral!
at the airport i will set off the metal detector with the shrapnel i still carry in my body, if nothing else this gives me the right to say to you and your OVER zealous politcal views Back off

FACT you have the right to your opinion as long as it does not HURT someone, you are getting very borderline as to that

FACT if you think for one second , never mind sometimes i do not believe you really do THINK

GET OVER IT, and kiss my rosy RED ONE
good day
will see you all when i get back from putting him in the ground


Thank-you for taking metal for all of us!


Not that it would matter, but Disagreeable (how did he come up with that name anyway, has he realized his reputation from childhood), needs to find what he believes in, and have to put his life on the line.

I think we would all gain a real perspective, if we did that. Thanks again memanpa!

Disagreeable, I think you should fly to Iraq, tell them all you are an American, and tell them that you believe the US is wrong to be there.

I hope to GOD that you are not seen as DISAGREEABLE, before the hatred sets in, and you are shot or blown up!
 

Latest posts

Top