International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   9/11 Conspiracy Theories (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=64)
-   -   9/11: How they Faked the Videos (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=341275)

curious cat 15th January 2020 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955519)
I see. So this changes the evidence of the lateral impact of cruise missiles, how? Perhaps thousands of people did report seeing missiles, but why would the media tell us about it when they were selling us planes? Like all my questions you don't need to answer.

I am treating your question as any other assaulting my intelligence.

ProBonoShill 15th January 2020 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12954558)
And yet until a TV was shoved in their faces, most people said they saw small planes, no planes (bombs), and missiles.

Liar

Robin 15th January 2020 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955579)
The box wasn't square, was it.

So what do you think would happen to the steel square section and aluminium cladding I am talking about? Do you think I could dent the steel square section without completely severing the aluminium?

That is the general case.

Then we can move on to find out why you think that this particular case would be different.

Blue Mountain 15th January 2020 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadie
Quote:

Originally Posted by Leftus (Post 12955438)
Those people whose existence and memories you spit on to advance your theory. Pilots, flight crew, passengers. All GONE. What happened to them in your theory?

He's gonna say:

1. They didn't exist.
2. They are conspirators and in on the plan in some capacity (crisis actors).
3. They were executed after their flights landed at secret airports shortly after takeoff. However, I do not know if he thinks those specific planes or particular flights ever existed in the first place.
4. Some combination of the above on a person to person basis.

He's actually studiously avoided answering the question ever since I first asked it way back in post 179.

Hey yankee451, If the aircraft N334AA and N612UA did not hit the WTC towers on September 11, 2001, what happened to the airframes and to the people who were aboard the flights? The people and the aircraft existed at 8:30 AM EST that day, but by 9:30 AM they were no more. What happened to them?

Robin 15th January 2020 06:14 PM

yankee451,

Maybe use this one
https://robinsrevision.files.wordpre...ge-7.png?w=620
So your contention is that the aluminium wing spar could not exert any force on the steel column until it has "passed through" the aluminium cladding, yes?

BStrong 15th January 2020 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955519)
I see. So this changes the evidence of the lateral impact of cruise missiles, how? Perhaps thousands of people did report seeing missiles, but why would the media tell us about it when they were selling us planes? Like all my questions delusions you don't need to answer.

If you repeat that phrase three times and click your heels you'll be invisible to
dogs, thereby avoiding being watered.

FIFY

smartcooky 15th January 2020 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin (Post 12955490)
ďAssume thousands of people?Ē

The population of the five boroughs in 2001 was a touch over eight million. Following the impact of the first airplane, there was time for more than a few of them, even those at work or otherwise not usually looking at the twin towers (plus tourists, students, workers and other non residents either on foot, on ships, or in vehicles) to be hard focused on the spot. Maybe youíve never been to NYC; I lived there, and the towers were a common visual reference for a remarkable distance, thatís how tall they were.

But letís be conservative and consider just those within a modest radius of, say, a half mile. I assume more than a million.


Pah! Holograms!

TJM 15th January 2020 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12954679)
Most people reported planes, missiles and bombs. CNN did report a large jet. Knowing that videos can be faked, and witnesses are notoriously unreliable, luckily we can thin out what's fake and what's real by examining the damage evidence.

The last time we had a moderately strong earthquake, witnesses reported bombs, freight trains, lightning, the rapture and Godzilla.

Didn't quite work out that way, did it. Seems like people engage in hyperbole when faced with traumatizing events.

Or are you a no-quaker too?

yankee451 15th January 2020 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12955631)
yankee451,

Maybe use this one
https://robinsrevision.files.wordpre...ge-7.png?w=620
So your contention is that the aluminium wing spar could not exert any force on the steel column until it has "passed through" the aluminium cladding, yes?


No, that's not my contention, and you know it. Before it could cut the steel, it would cut the aluminum. That's my contention. My conclusion is that it was not struck from the front, as seen in the aluminum cladding that was not cut.

yankee451 15th January 2020 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJM8125 (Post 12955687)
The last time we had a moderately strong earthquake, witnesses reported bombs, freight trains, lightning, the rapture and Godzilla.

Didn't quite work out that way, did it. Seems like people engage in hyperbole when faced with traumatizing events.

Or are you a no-quaker too?

Wow. So this means the steel wasn't bent sharply in a completely different direction than the mostly hollow aluminum wing was traveling.

yankee451 15th January 2020 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blue Mountain (Post 12955614)
He's actually studiously avoided answering the question ever since I first asked it way back in post 179.

Hey yankee451, If the aircraft N334AA and N612UA did not hit the WTC towers on September 11, 2001, what happened to the airframes and to the people who were aboard the flights? The people and the aircraft existed at 8:30 AM EST that day, but by 9:30 AM they were no more. What happened to them?

I see, so that means the lightly bent cladding and the gouged and sharply bend steel columns are consistent with the head on impact of a jet. I get it.

yankee451 15th January 2020 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beachnut (Post 12955541)
Why would I be outraged about someone making up the dumbest lies lies, and mock the murder of thousands.

Who did your fantasy version of 9/11?

You can't grasp physics.

I was on active duty on 9/11 and find your claims to be false, and an insult to all Americans. You live in a fantasy world based on ignorance and hate of others, and those who died on 9/11.

Wipe your chin.

yankee451 15th January 2020 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beachnut (Post 12955556)
Here you go a few of the thousands killed on 9/11, and you make up lies about missiles.

Vincent Paul Abate, 40, Brooklyn, N.Y., Cantor Fitzgerald, World Trade Center.

Laurence Christopher Abel, 37, New York City, Cantor Fitzgerald, World Trade Center.

Alona Abraham, 30, Ashdod, Israel, Passenger, United 175, World Trade Center.

William F. Abrahamson, 55, Westchester County, N.Y., Marsh&McLennan Companies, Inc., World Trade Center.

Richard Anthony Aceto, 42, Marsh&McLennan Companies, Inc., World Trade Center.

Heinrich Bernhard Ackermann, 38, Aon Corporation, World Trade Center.

Paul Acquaviva, 29, Glen Rock, N.J., Cantor Fitzgerald, World Trade Center.

Christian Adams, 37, Passenger, United 93, Shanksville, Pa.

Donald LaRoy Adams, 28, Cantor Fitzgerald, World Trade Center.

Lives ended by 19 failed humans who hated American, and you make up lies.


And here some at the end of the alphabet...

Zhe Zeng, 28, Bank of New York, World Trade Center.

Marc Scott Zeplin, 33, Westchester, N.Y., Cantor Fitzgerald, World Trade Center.

Jie Yao Justin Zhao, 27, New York City, CompuCom Systems, Inc., World Trade Center.

Yuguang Zheng, Passenger, American 77, Pentagon.

Ivelin Ziminski, 41, Tarrytown, N.Y., Marsh&McLennan Companies, Inc., World Trade Center.

Michael Joseph Zinzi, 37, Newfoundland, N.J., Marsh&McLennan Companies, Inc., World Trade Center.

Charles Alan Zion, 54, Greenwich, Conn., Cantor Fitzgerald, World Trade Center.

Julie Lynne Zipper, 44, Paramus, N.J., Sandler O'Neill visitor from SunGard Data Systems, Inc., World Trade Center.

Salvatore J. Zisa, 45, Hawthorne, N.J., Marsh&McLennan Companies, Inc., World Trade Center.

Prokopios Paul Zois, 46, Lynbrook, N.Y., Marsh&McLennan consultant from American Express, World Trade Center.

Joseph J. Zuccala, 54, Croton-on-Hudson, N.Y., Fuji Bank, Ltd., World Trade Center.

Andrew Steven Zucker, 27, Riverdale, N.Y., Harris Beach LLP, World Trade Center.

Igor Zukelman, 29, Fiduciary Trust Company International, World Trade Center.


Tell me, have you told all those who knew these people, their parents, family, kids, that you know the truth?

Did you try to confirm those who were killed before spreading the dumbest lie in history? You failed to prove the videos are fake - FAILED

Oh the horror!

How have you verified all of these stories? I think the're B.S., therefore I don't really worry about their fictional families. I'm in the book if they want to reach out to me.

Their emotional tales don't change the evidence that proves they're B.S.

yankee451 15th January 2020 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProBonoShill (Post 12955587)
Liar

Until the media broadcast the cartoon plane flying behind the towers, followed by the fireball that erupted from the opposite side of the tower, no one was sure what happened, but most of the reports were that something other than a large jet struck. The truth hurts, but it will set you free.

TJM 15th January 2020 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955771)
Wow. So this means the steel wasn't bent sharply in a completely different direction than the mostly hollow aluminum wing was traveling.

Wow, no. It means that people will often respond to a sudden traumatic events with hyperbolic terms which aren't accurate descriptors.

Has nothing to do with your provably inaccurate photo analysis.

Robin 15th January 2020 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955770)
No, that's not my contention, and you know it.

How would I know that? You are not exactly forthcoming on this topic. "Pass through" was your expression.

Quote:

Before it could cut the steel, it would cut the aluminum. That's my contention. My conclusion is that it was not struck from the front, as seen in the aluminum cladding that was not cut.
So are you saying that the column will not be affected at all until the aluminium cladding is "cut"?

Or will you at least concede that the column itself will start to compress almost as soon as the aluminium starts to compress?

Regnad Kcin 15th January 2020 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955520)
Almost 20 years later and some people can still remember the lies that got the world into its current mess. You can go back to examining your navel now.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

I prefer clementines, thanks.

curious cat 15th January 2020 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955790)
Oh the horror!

How have you verified all of these stories? I think the're B.S., therefore I don't really worry about their fictional families. I'm in the book if they want to reach out to me.

Their emotional tales don't change the evidence that proves they're B.S.

I think this is getting out of hands. I was following with a mild amusement this clowns insulting members of this forum left right and centre, but there is no way to be amused by his outrageous attitude to the victims of this tragedy and their families. If there is a vote to ban him from this forum, you have both my hands up. I am sure such a decision would't cause any grief or damage.

Axxman300 15th January 2020 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12954607)
Again, not shown live, and according to Evan Fairbanks himself it flew into the building, "...like a bad special effect."

You're right about the illusion part, according to this photo, the jet couldn't even slide like butter through the aluminum sheeting that covered the column.

https://911crashtest.org/wp-content/...ith_circle.png

Here's the problem, Skippy, the aluminum sheet WAS CUT and later fell off.


https://i.imgur.com/W89yUZ1.jpg





https://i.imgur.com/NIS9e5k.jpg

Robin 15th January 2020 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axxman300 (Post 12955814)
Here's the problem, Skippy, the aluminum sheet WAS CUT and later fell off.


https://i.imgur.com/W89yUZ1.jpg





https://i.imgur.com/NIS9e5k.jpg

Different tower.

yankee451 15th January 2020 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12955553)
You will do anything to avoid answering my question, won't you?

I could do it for real, but I want to find out what you think would happen.

You are saying that unless the aluminium cladding is sliced all the way through, including the parts around the sides, there won't be any damage to the steel square section?

(Edit: I can add a layer of fire retardant between my aluminium and steel if you like, just name the material)



Sure, why not. Please demonstrate using a wing and some steel box columns built to the same specifications as the WTC, and show me how the wing slices the steel without slicing the cladding. And then you can explain why only this one piece of cladding remained standing (even though the hole behind it was huge), albeit bent in the wrong direction, but the aluminum cladding to the left and right of this lone column, were sliced off. Don't mention the steel columns also bent sharply in the wrong direction.

https://911crashtest.org/wp-content/...1-1024x912.png

https://911crashtest.org/wp-content/...ith_circle.png

https://911crashtest.org/wp-content/...s-1024x640.png

yankee451 15th January 2020 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axxman300 (Post 12955814)
Here's the problem, Skippy, the aluminum sheet WAS CUT and later fell off.

:jaw-dropp

Robin 15th January 2020 10:21 PM

Here is the full damage for the tower in question:

https://robinsrevision.files.wordpre...outh.jpg?w=800

Here is a close up of the loose cladding:

https://robinsrevision.files.wordpre...ge-4.png?w=567

It looks like there is a hole in the middle, but the sides are still intact.

That is consistent with it being hit from the front.

Not consistent with a cruise missile having hit it from the side.

Robin 15th January 2020 10:28 PM

You are still to explain what kind of a missile could do that. Don't forget the wing on the right side.

Something like this?

https://robinsrevision.files.wordpre...ge-5.png?w=706

Robin 15th January 2020 10:33 PM

https://robinsrevision.files.wordpre...ge-8.png?w=767

yankee451 15th January 2020 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12955820)
Different tower.

Beat me to it.

TJM 15th January 2020 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12955820)
Different tower.

Doesn't matter.

Every facet of the attack are an outrageous lie perpetrated by the US government spread through their puppet mainstream media. This is clearly evident from the fuzzy crops Steve has created from images released through mainstream media sources.

Entirely plausible.

yankee451 15th January 2020 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12955834)

Yes. Something like a JASSM can explain it nicely. The warhead is designed for punching through hardened targets with or without detonating. At an angle of attack of somewhere around 15 degrees from parallel to the tower, the wing of the missile would hit first, which is why at the far left of both towers the cladding is only lightly damaged. The progressively worse damage to the columns is explained by the warhead penetrating deeper into the tower, but it loses energy as it penetrated so what began with gouged steel columns ends up only bending them as it slows down.

A rocket sled test center can put this conclusion to the test.

http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uplo...3/Approach.jpg


Something like this:
https://youtu.be/5_a1foRId6M

yankee451 15th January 2020 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12955827)
Here is the full damage for the tower in question:

https://robinsrevision.files.wordpre...outh.jpg?w=800

Here is a close up of the loose cladding:

https://robinsrevision.files.wordpre...ge-4.png?w=567

It looks like there is a hole in the middle, but the sides are still intact.

That is consistent with it being hit from the front.

Not consistent with a cruise missile having hit it from the side.


Sure it is, it cut through the sides of both the steel and the cladding, but only through the face of the steel. The warhead pushed out the cladding from the inside as it passed behind it. I'm surprised it was damaged as little as it was, considering a 900 lb warhead just blew a big hole in the steel that cladding was covering.

yankee451 15th January 2020 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12955832)
You are still to explain what kind of a missile could do that. Don't forget the wing on the right side.

Something like this?

https://robinsrevision.files.wordpre...ge-5.png?w=706

I explain it in detail in this post.
https://911crashtest.org/9-11-truth-...e-shaped-hole/

The first 9 columns from the left of both impact holes are enough to prove what didn't do it, and what probably did. However the right side is a bit different from the left.
https://911crashtest.org/wp-content/...ngTipright.jpg

curious cat 15th January 2020 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955842)
................. I'm surprised it was damaged as little as it was, considering a 900 lb warhead just blew a big hole in the steel that cladding was covering.

Wouldn't be more accurate to say "The damage is too little to be consistent with the explosion of a 900 lb warhead?" :D

yankee451 15th January 2020 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by curious cat (Post 12955852)
Wouldn't be more accurate to say "The damage is too little to be consistent with the explosion of a 900 lb warhead?" :D

"Blew" as in cut through without detonating.

Elagabalus 15th January 2020 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955538)
I see. So you think the photographs of all the damage evidence was doctored to make it look like the lateral impact of small projectiles, rather than what they were showing on television. Your logic gives me chills.

That's exactly what we wanted you to think, Steve.

curious cat 15th January 2020 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955860)
"Blew" as in cut through without detonating.

Whatever :-). But without going in semantics, doesn't "surprises me" mean something like "appears to be inconsistent with..."?

yankee451 15th January 2020 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJM8125 (Post 12955837)
Doesn't matter.

lol

yankee451 15th January 2020 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by curious cat (Post 12955864)
Whatever :-). But without going in semantics, doesn't "surprises me" mean something like "appears to be inconsistent with..."?

If you bothered to read the thread, or any of the links I provided, you wouldn't be so confused.

curious cat 15th January 2020 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955866)
If you bothered to read the thread, or any of the links I provided, you wouldn't be so confused.

I don't think reading this thread is the best recipe for treating confusion :-).

Robin 16th January 2020 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12955834)

Light bits the aluminium sides, dark bit, the hole between.

You can see the window cleaning track leading right up to that hole from underneath, and continuing above.

JSanderO 16th January 2020 03:24 AM

Consider the fact that the cladding was applied after the steel panels were in place. I suspect the insulation was part of the cladding AND the joints of the cladding did not align with the steel. This may mean that the alum panel saw some different forces from the steel. Panels could have sprung (out) in some cases not be severed.

But a few odd sections of alum does not render the plane hitting the tower as fantasy... especially in light of the vast amount of what appears to be evidence that a jumbo hit the tower.

There were very few eye witnesses to AA11, but there were tens of thousands to UA175... and it was captured on multiple cameras from many locations.

Steve is tilting at windmills here... and is not and should not be taken seriously.

Jack by the hedge 16th January 2020 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin (Post 12955827)
Here is the full damage for the tower in question:

https://robinsrevision.files.wordpre...outh.jpg?w=800

Here is a close up of the loose cladding:

https://robinsrevision.files.wordpre...ge-4.png?w=567

That's interesting.

In the first photo, the oft-circled piece of cladding is in front of the 5th column along from the wingtip impression. That photo appears to have been taken from a position to the left of the other one, as you can see the west side of the tower.

In the photo yankee451 posted several times also taken from a position to the left, the cladding is further to the right, not covering column 5 at all and closer to column 6.

Did the cladding move? Which photo was taken first, I wonder. Is the cladding perhaps dangling from some connection we can't make out, like a piece of window frame, and gradually slipping?

abaddon 16th January 2020 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955771)
Wow. So this means the steel wasn't bent sharply in a completely different direction than the mostly hollow aluminum wing was traveling.

The wing was not "mostly hollow". Why must you lie?

Regnad Kcin 16th January 2020 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by curious cat (Post 12955801)
I think this is getting out of hands. I was following with a mild amusement this clowns insulting members of this forum left right and centre, but there is no way to be amused by his outrageous attitude to the victims of this tragedy and their families. If there is a vote to ban him from this forum, you have both my hands up. I am sure such a decision would't cause any grief or damage.

Of course.

But thatís the pathology. Everything must succumb to the ego and its righteousness; that which threatens it must be dismissed, often with extreme prejudice. So take pity.

Then again, it could just be a chain-yanking poe.

Robin 16th January 2020 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955771)
Wow. So this means the steel wasn't bent sharply in a completely different direction than the mostly hollow aluminum wing was traveling.

Different direction? This is the South Tower we are talking about, right?

Jack by the hedge 16th January 2020 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin (Post 12956001)
Ö Then again, it could just be a chain-yanking poe.

My thoughts did turn to whether driving traffic to one's website might be a reason to stoutly defend an absurd claim, but the tiny audience here surely make that explanation implausible.

Crazy Chainsaw 16th January 2020 06:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955866)
If you bothered to read the thread, or any of the links I provided, you wouldn't be so confused.

And if you had bothered to note there is a soft rubber portion of the leading edge of
the wing known as a deicing balloon.
If the planes wing was dragged along the edge as physics of impact say it should have been that would account for that observed deformed but left piece of Aluminum.
It's your theory please provide competent Evidence of it.

Oystein 16th January 2020 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers (Post 12953557)
Yesterday afternoon, while planting bulbs, my son pressed down a bit too hard on the steel bar sticking out of the side of the coring tool he was using to make holes for the bulbs. The 8mm steel bar promptly sheared off, snapping at the base. He was wearing imitation leather boots (he's a vegetarian) with no steel reinforcement. What I need to know is, are his feet harder than steel, or is it the plastic soles of his boots, and if it's the boots, how come he didn't break any toes? I think a more parsimonious explanation is that, as he pressed down on the tool, a cruise missile struck the bar at its base, shearing it off, but he and my wife failed to notice it because they weren't expecting anything like that to happen.

Or, y'know, maybe there's no absolute physical law saying that hard things can only be damaged by harder things. But that's just crazy talk.

Dave

Midgets with saws. I have kept telling y'all for years, but no one pays attention :boggled:

Blue Mountain 16th January 2020 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451
Quote:

Originally Posted by Blue Mountain (Post 12955614)
He's actually studiously avoided answering the question ever since I first asked it way back in post 179.

Hey yankee451, If the aircraft N334AA and N612UA did not hit the WTC towers on September 11, 2001, what happened to the airframes and to the people who were aboard the flights? The people and the aircraft existed at 8:30 AM EST that day, but by 9:30 AM they were no more. What happened to them?

I see, so that means the lightly bent cladding and the gouged and sharply bend steel columns are consistent with the head on impact of a jet. I get it.

I see some words here, but they bear no relation whatsoever to the question I asked.

Please try again.

Are you saying the airframes are myth along with with the people that were in them?

Dave Rogers 16th January 2020 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oystein (Post 12956126)
Midgets with saws. I have kept telling y'all for years, but no one pays attention :boggled:

My son certainly doesn't, so that's probably why he didn't see them.

Dave

GlennB 16th January 2020 08:08 AM

More weird mechanics -

I was clearing junk from around the garden and found a thin, pretty rotten piece of wood, maybe 18" long. Propped it against a breeze block, thinking that one good stamp would easily break the wood and I can chuck it in the wood stove.

The breeze block shattered. My foot hurts a little but no great damage done.

Such a thing is clearly impossible, so I reckon I must have taken some reality-altering drugs.

Leftus 16th January 2020 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12955519)
I see. So this changes the evidence of the lateral impact of cruise missiles, how? Perhaps thousands of people did report seeing missiles, but why would the media tell us about it when they were selling us planes? Like all my questions you don't need to answer.

Cruise missiles don't do lateral impacts. They aren't designed that way. They are designed to avoid those very things.

Why do you think that the wing on those missiles, held on by hinges BTW, would hold together better than a wing on an airliner? The wings aren't welded on to survive multiple flights. Missiles are a one shot item. They don't get to be re-used. The hinges are constructed to maintain flight for a few hours, tops.

So were the missiles, which didn't exist, specially constructed, reinforced, programmed by some unknown parties or do you think they were off the shelf?

Do you have any actual working knowledge of the weapon system in question? It doesn't sound like it.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-20, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.