Extremist Propoganda, Sedition, and Subversion

[ndv]

They should be highly disciplined and will react only upon a verbal order from the chief. In case the chief participates in a religious concentration, a funeral or any other type of activity in which they have to behave in an organized fashion, the bodyguards will remain in the ranks very close to the chief or to the placard or banner carriers in order to give them full protection. The participants in this mission should be guerrilla combatants in civilian clothes, or hired recruits who are sympathizers in our struggle and who are against the oppressive regime. These members must have a high discipline and will use violence only on the verbal orders of the one in charge of them. Messengers. They should remain near the leaders, transmitting orders between the inside and outside commandos. They will use communication radios, telephones, bicycles, motorcycles, cars, or move on foot or horseback, taking paths or trails to shorten distances. Adolescents (male and female) are ideal for this mission. Shock Troops. These men should be equipped with weapons (Knives, razors, chains, clubs, bludgeons) and should march slightly behind the innocent and gullible participants. They should carry their weapons hidden. They will enter into action only as "reinforcements" if the guerrilla agitators are attacked by the police. They will enter the scene quickly, violently and by surprise, in order to distract the authorities, in this way making possible the withdrawal or rapid escape of the inside commando. Carriers of Banners and Placards. The banners and placards used in demonstrations or concentrations will express the protests of the population, but when the concentration reaches its highest level of euphoria or popular discontent, our infiltrated persons will make use of the placards against the regime, which we manage to infiltrate in a hidden fashion, an don them slogans or key words will be expressed to the benefit of our cause. The one responsible for this mission will assign the agitators ahead of time to keep near the placard of any contrary element. In that way, the comandante will know where the agitators are, and will be able to send orders to change slogans and eventually to incite violence if he wishes. Agitators of Rallying Cries and Applause. They will be trained with specific instructions to use tried rallying cries. They will be able to use phrase such as "WE ARE HUNGRY, WE WAND BREAD," and "WE DON'T WANT COMMUNISM." There work and their technique for agitating the masses is quite similar to those of the leaders of applause and slogans at the high school football or baseball games. The objective is to become more adept and not just to shout rallying cries. 6. Conclusions In a revolutionary movement of guerrilla warfare, the mass concentrations and protest demonstrations are the principle essential for the destruction of the enemy structures. MASSIVE IN-DEPTH SUPPORT THROUGH PSYCHOLOGICAL OPERATIONS 1. Generalities The separate coverage in these sections could leave the student with some doubts. Therefore, all sections are summarized here, in order to give a clearer picture of this book. 2. Motivation as Combatant-Propagandist Every member of the struggle should know that his political mission is as important as, if not more important than, his tactical mission. 3. Armed Propaganda Armed propaganda in small towns, rural villages, and city residential districts should give the impression that our weapons are not for exercising power over the people, but rather that the weapons are for protecting the people; that they are the power of the people against the FSLN government of oppression. 4. Armed Propaganda Teams Armed Propaganda Teams will combine political awareness building and the ability to conduct propaganda for ends of personal persuasion, which will be carried out within the population. 5. Cover ("Facade") Organizations The fusion of several organizations and associations recognized by the government, through internal subjective control, occurs in the final stages of the operation, in close cooperation with mass meetings. 6. Control of Mass Demonstrations The mixture of elements of the struggle with participants in the demonstration will give the appearance of a spontaneous demonstration, lacking direction,which will be used by the agitators of the struggle to control the behavior of the masses. 7. Conclusion Too often we see guerrilla warfare only from the point of view of combat actions. This view is erroneous and extremely dangerous. Combat actions are not the key to victory in guerrilla warfare but rather form part of one of the six basic efforts. There is no priority in any of the efforts, but rather they should progress in a parallel manner. The emphasis or exclusion of any of these efforts could bring about serious difficulties, and in the worst of cases, even failure. The history of revolutionary wars has shown this reality. APPENDIX The purpose of this appendix is to complement the guidelines and recommendations to the propagandist-guerrillas expressed under the topic of "Techniques of Persuasion in Talks and Speeches," to improve the ability to organize and express thoughts for those who wish to perfect their oratorical abilities. After all, oratory is one of the most valuable resources for exercising leadership. Oratory can be used, then, as an extraordinary political tool. 2. The Audience Oratory is simultaneous communication par excellence, i.e., the orator and his audience share the same time and space. Therefore, every speech should be a different experience at "that" moment or particular situation which the audience is experiencing and which influences them. So the audience must be considered as "a state of mind." Happiness, sadness, anger, fear, etc., are states of mind that we must consider to exist in our audience, and it is the atmosphere that affects the target public. The human being is made up of a mind and soul; he acts in accordance with his thoughts and sentiments and responds to stimuli of ideas and emotions. In that way there exist only two possible focuses in any plan, including speeches: the concrete, based on rational appeals, i.e., to thinking; and the idealized, with emotional appeals, i.e., to sentiment. For his part the orator, although he must be sensitive to the existing mass sentiment, he must at the same time keep his cold judgment to be able to lead and control effectively the feelings of an audience. When in the oratorical momentum the antithesis between heart and brain comes about, judgment should always prevail, characteristic of a leader. 3. Political Oratory Political oratory is one of the various forms of oratory, and it usually fulfills one of three objectives: to instruct, persuade, or move; and its method is reduced to urging (asking), ordering, questioning and responding. Oratory is a quality so tied to political leadership that it can be said that the history of political orators is the political history of humanity, an affirmation upheld by names such as Cicero, Demosthenes, Danton, Mirabeau, Robespierre, Clemenceau, Lenin, Trotsky, Mussolini, Hitler, Roosevelt, etc. 4. Qualities in a Speech In general terms, the most appreciated qualities of a speech, and specifically a political speech in the context of the psychological action of the armed struggle, are the following: � Be brief and concise A length of five minutes [line missing in Spanish text]...that of the orator who said: "If you want a two-hour speech, I'll start right now; if you want a two-minute one, let me think awhile." � Centered on the theme The speech should be structured by a set of organized ideas that converge on the theme. A good speech is expressed by concepts and not only with words. � Logic The ideas presented should be logical and easily acceptable. never challenge logic in the mind of the audience, since immediately the main thing is lost - credibility. As far as possible, it is recommended that all speeches be based on a syllogism, which the orator should adjust in his exposition. For example: "Those governing get rich and are thieves; the Sandinistas have enriched themselves governing; then, the Sandinistats are thieves." This could be the point of a speech on the administrative corruption of the regime. When an idea or a set of guiding ideas do not exist in a speech, confusion and dispersion easily arise. 5. Structure of a Speech Absolute improvisation does not exist in oratory. All orators have a "mental plan" that allows them to organize their ideas and concepts rapidly; with practice it is possible to come to do this in a few seconds, almost simultaneously with the expression of the word. The elements that make up a speech are given below, in a structure that we recommend always putting into practice, to those who wish to more and more improve their oratorical abilities: � Introduction or Preamble One enters into contact with the public, a personal introduction can be made or one of the movement to which we belong, the reason for our presence, etc. In these first seconds it is important to make an impact, attracting attention and provoking interest among the audience. For that purpose, there are resources such as beginning with a famous phrase or a previously prepared slogan, telling a dramatic or humorous story, etc. � Purpose or Enunciation The subject to be dealt with is defined, explained as a whole or by parts. � Appraisal or Argumentation Arguments are presented, EXACTLY IN THIS ORDER: First, the negative arguments, or against the thesis that is going to be upheld, and then the positive arguments, or favorable ones to our thesis, immediately adding proof or facts that sustain such arguments. � Recapitulation or Conclusion A short summary is made and the conclusions of the speech are spelled out. � Exhortation Action by the public is called for, i.e., they are asked in and almost energetic manner to do or not to do something. 6. Some Literary Resources Although there exist typically oratorical devices of diction, in truth, oratory has taken from other literary genres a large number of devices, several of which often, in an unconscious manner, we use in our daily expressions and even in our speeches. Below we enunciate many of their literary devices in frequent use in oratory, recommending to those interested moderate use of them, since an orator who over-uses the literary device loses authenticity and sounds untrue. The devices that are used the most in oratory are those obtained through the repetition of words in particular periods of the speech, such as: Anaphora, or repetition of a word at the beginning of each sentence, e.g., "Freedom for the poor, freedom for the rich, freedom for all." In the reiteration, repetition is of a complete sentence (slogan) insistently through the speech, e.g., "With God and patriotism we will overcome Communism because...: Conversion is the repetition at the end of every phrase, e.g.: "Sandinismo tries to be about everyone, dominate everyone, command everyone, and as an absolute tyranny, do away with everyone." In the emphasis, repetition is used at the beginning and at the end of the clause, e.g., "Who brought the Russian-Cuban intervention? The Sandinistas. And who is engaged in arms trafficking with the neighboring countries? The Sandinistas. And who is proclaiming to be in favor of nonintervention? The Sandinistas." Reduplication, when the phrase begins with the same word that ends the previous one. For example: "We struggle for democracy, democracy and social justice." The concatenation is a chain made up of duplications. For example: "Communism transmits the deception of the child to the young man, of the young man to the adult, and of the adult to the old man." In the antithesis or word play, the same words are used with a different meaning to give an ingenious effect: e.g., "The greatest wealth of every human being is his own freedom, because slaves will always be poor but we poor can have the wealth of our freedom." Similar cadences, through the use of verbs of the same tense and person, or nouns of the same number and case. For example: "Those of us who are struggling we will be marching because he who perseveres achieves, and he who gives up remains." Use of synonyms, repetition of words with a similar meaning. For example: "We demand a Nicaragua for all, without exceptions, without omissions." Among the figures of speech most used in oratory are: Comparison or simile, which sets the relationship of similarity between two or more beings or things. For example: "Because we love Christ, we love his bishops and pastors," and "Free as a bird." Antithesis, or the counterposition of words, ideas, or phrases of an opposite meaning. For example: "They promised freedom and gave slavery; that they would distribute the wealth and they have distributed poverty; that they would bring peace, and they have brought about war." Among the logic figures are the following: Concession, which is a skillful way to concede something to the adversary in order to better emphasize the inappropriate aspects, through the use of expressions such as: but, however, although, nevertheless, in spite of the fact that, etc. For example: "The mayor here has been honest, but he is not the one controlling all the money of the nation." It is an effective form of rebuttal when the opinion of the audience is not entirely ours. Permission, in which one apparently accedes to something, when in reality it is rejected. For example: "Do not protest, but sabotage them." "Talk quietly, but tell it to everyone." Prolepsis is an anticipated refutation. For example: "Some will think that they are only promises; they will say, others said the same thing, but no. We are different, we are Christians, we consider God a witness to our words." Preterition is an artifice, pretending discretion when something is said with total clarity and indiscretion. For example: "If I were not obligated to keep military secrets, I would tell all of you of the large amount of armaments that we have so that you would feel even more confidence that our victory is assured." Communication is a way to ask and give the answer to the same question. For example: "If they show disrespect for the ministers of God, will they respect us, simple citizens? Never." Rhetorical questions are a way in which one shows perplexity or inability to say something, only as an oratorical recourse. For example: "I am only a peasant and can tell you little. I know little and I will not be able to explain to you the complicated things of politics. Therefore, I talk to you with my heart, with my simple peasant's heart, as we all are." Litotes is a form of meaning a lot by saying little. For example: "The nine commanders have stolen little, just the whole country." Irony consists of getting across exactly the opposite of what one is saying. For example: "The divine mobs that threaten and kill, they are indeed Christians." Amplification is presenting an idea from several angles. For example: "Political votes are the power of the people in a democracy. And economic votes are their power in the economy. Buying or not buying something, the majorities decide what should be produced. For something to be produced or to disappear. That is part of economic democracy." The most usual plaintive figures of speech are: Deprecation or entreaty to obtain something. For example: "Lord, free us from the yoke. Give us freedom." Imprecation or threat, expressing a sentiment in view of the unjust or hopeless. For example: "Let there be a Homeland for all or let there be a Homeland for no one." Conmination, similar to the previous one, presents a bad wish for the rest. For example, "Let them drown in the abyss of their own corruption." The apostrophe consists of addressing oneself towards something supernatural or inanimate as if it were a living being. For example: "Mountains of Nicaragua, make the seed of freedom grow." Interrogation consists of asking a question of oneself, to give greater emphasis to what is expressed. It is different from communication, since it gives the answer and is of a logical and not a plaintive nature. For example: "If they have already injured the members of my family, my friends, my peasant brothers, do I have any path other than brandishing a weapon?" Reticence consists of leaving a thought incomplete, intentionally, so that mentally the audience completes it. For example, "They promised political pluralism and gave totalitarianism. They promised political pluralism and gave totalitarianism. They promised social justice, and they have increased poverty. They offered freedom of thought, and they have given censorship. Now, what they promise the world are free elections..." ================================= This completes the text of the CIA's manual and you are encouraged to upload other materials similar to this. .

[ndv]

Talking to the Media

Avoiding the Pitfalls: A Guide for Anarchists




• How To

Anarchists have appeared in the corporate media a lot this year, from the first breathless reports on resistance to the rise of the far right to recent appearances in the fashion pages. But not all visibility is good visibility. The Trump regime is looking to popularize an image of anarchists and other activists as a major threat to public order in order to legitimize further crackdowns; fascist organizations have worked hard to capitalize on a media profile of “antifa” as violent and mysterious in order to draw more people into their ranks. Corporate media outlets like the Wall Street Journal are notorious for catering to the reactionary politics of their owners, while even the most sympathetic media coverage can be useful to law enforcement agencies seeking information to use against activists.

Anarchists and others have long been critical of the function of the media itself. Yet it’s not always possible to avoid press coverage; in the information age, it’s spin or be spun. When we act effectively in pursuit of social change, media outlets will seek to represent us to the general public—and unless we can disrupt their narratives, most people will see us through their eyes.

Corporate media is not a neutral space in which we can present ideas the way we can in direct conversation with our coworkers and neighbors. It is a strategic terrain on which the authorities position themselves to legitimate the use of force. To step in front of the cameras is to enter a hostile territory controlled by a class that is determined to use our images against us. If we enable media outlets to depict us as violent, alien, or extreme—no matter how strong the arguments we make in favor of our tactics or ideas—the ultimate result will be that the authorities are emboldened to step up their attacks on us.

When we engage with the media, we must not imagine that they will promote our ideas; we have to accomplish that on our own through our own channels. (At best, we can use media appearances to direct people to those channels, like the organization that insisted on only answering interviews in front of a banner displaying their website.) Rather, we are engaging in a subtle war of position in which we seek to prevent the authorities from alienating others from us and to undermine the narratives that legitimize their violence. We must always balance the possible gains to be made in legitimacy and visibility against the risks of making ourselves a higher profile target.

We should never forget the example of the SHAC campaign, which sought to shut down an animal testing company. At first, the campaign made great headway, gaining momentum as the media publicized the effects of their organizing—yet ultimately, law enforcement was able to use this menacing image to orchestrate a crackdown that sent many people to prison for years. We offer the following suggestions in hopes of helping you navigate your interactions with the media


Before Talking with the Media:

• Consider whether there is another person or group better positioned to make public statements on a subject. Consult others who may be affected by what you say to get their feedback before participating in an interview.

• Consider how you will be viewed by the reporters, the editors, and their audience. Are you the best person to convey this information?

• Consider the risks to activists currently facing criminal charges or others who might face them in the future. Even the most innocuous statements can be manipulated to smear and discredit activists, especially those already facing criminal charges. Everything said in a press interview can be used:

(1) in criminal prosecutions

(2) to indict the person being interviewed or anyone else implicated in the public statements

(3) to subpoena the person being interviewed to testify for the prosecution and against his or her comrades and fellow activists.

• Establish clearly defined goals in advance. What specific gain do you stand to accomplish by appearing in this media outlet? How will you accomplish it? For example, if you are attempting to draw additional participants to an upcoming demonstration, it may make sense to obtain coverage in a paper read by people who may join you, but it probably will not make sense to appear in a paper read chiefly by reactionaries who wish to see such protests suppressed.

• Compose your talking points and practice presenting them concisely. Reporters will often ask leading or hostile questions in order to trap you into providing the material they need to tell a predetermined story. If you have limited experience with the media, speak to those who have more experience.

• Identify the agenda of the outlet you will be speaking to. What do they hope to accomplish? What are the basic terms of the discourse that they utilize? How can you disrupt the narratives that they are propagating?

• What leverage do you have on this reporter? What leverage do you have on the venue in which the story will appear? If you have no basis for trust, be very cautious.

When you speak with reporters, make agreements in advance about how they will identify you and what information they will publish. Emphasize that you do not represent a political constituency and are not acting as a “leader for the movement.” If you use a pseudonym, be careful to ensure that no one will be able to work out your legal identity; law enforcement officers have compelled journalists to reveal the “true identities” of media spokespersons as a way of endangering and discrediting them.

•


Advice to Activists from a Sympathetic Reporter

This originally appeared in the fourth issue of Rolling Thunder as part of “Report from the Press Box: MSM Confidential.” If some of it contradicts the above advice, take it with a grain of salt.

• Be direct at all times. The person with the tape recorder considers you suspect. He believes you have fallen victim to an intellectual trap of your own making: an inability to appreciate nuance or identify with your enemy. As he sees it, his job on this unfortunate assignment is to present your information without getting suckered into mainlining lefty propaganda into the information bloodstream. He will ask you many, many questions (Who is funding this organization? Isn’t it true that you are all college graduates? Did you ever consider taking your grievances to the Community Police Board? Can I see your membership lists?); you should answer them in full, where appropriate. It’s more important to be upfront if your enterprise is loosely coordinated than to present yourself as a stable coalition or single entity when that’s not the case. No one likes to be interrogated, but it’s better for you if he feels that you’ve held nothing back from him.

• If you challenge her, don’t back her into a corner. Journalists don’t like to be reminded that we don’t know everything in the world. (You might think that the beginning of journalism is a recognition of that basic fact, but there you have it.) As a result, spewing jargon or citing obscure texts will make her feel ignorant, exposed, and angry. She will portray you as aloof elitists playacting at something important. If she draws an improper conclusion during your conversation, it’s far better to clarify what you’ve said than to jump down her throat. If she continues to misrepresent you, call her office after the story is published, and warn her editor that there’s a fabulist on staff. (Remember that word—“fabulist,” that is to say, liar. Those three syllables make editors break out in a cold sweat.)

• Don’t insult his intelligence. It’s not that this reporter isn’t intelligent. Rare is the reporter who doesn’t exhibit at least basic intelligence, since his job depends on either inquiry or diligence. Flattery will get you nowhere, since he doesn’t like to be bullshitted. But politeness and attentiveness are appreciated in what is very often an exhausting job for little pay. If you treat him with respect and openness, he may even reconsider his condescension. Don’t bet on it, but stranger things have happened.

• Be extremely concrete. She wants facts. You want things to change. During your interview, explain in detail what you intend to do, how, and why. If this involves illegal activity, describe the motivations for your actions very clearly. Don’t expect all this raw information to make it into the story. But the more you give her, the more she will have to fill up her column inches or her word count or her airtime—and all of that will come from your side. Remember, you are giving her access. The IMF or the local police precinct will not. That is an advantage to you.

• Remain accessible. I have never written a story for which I had no further questions to ask when I sat down in front of my keyboard. The reporter you’re dealing with will probably want to ask some follow-up questions. If you’re not around to answer them, he is going to make inferences and assumptions about what you’re about. If you complain to his editors, he’ll be able to argue, credibly, that you weren’t answering your phone or your email, and he had a deadline to meet, so what else could he do. He will win that argument. Don’t let him.

• Have extremely low expectations. Remember, you are a carnival freak for Homo Journalisticus. Her inclination is to print only as much of your story as is necessary for her to get back to the office and put in for a more interesting assignment. This is as true—if not more so—for young reporters than older ones: the young reporter is clocking time until a better job or a better bureau opens up, and your penny-ante revolutionary antics are the tick of her clock. Following the above instructions will get your message out inasmuch as that is possible through this medium. You may, of course, choose to supplement your efforts in the mainstream press with your own account on a website or elsewhere, but that’s your domain and not mine.

• Find out who his editor is. This is cunning, and it pays off. Ask him what desk he’s on (Metro? General assignment? National?), who he works for, how long he’s been there, and how he finds it. Take notes. He’ll interpret this as a sign of your diligence as a press liaison, and, at best, a polite recognition of his importance. In reality, this is a tool to use for your advantage. If you are dissatisfied with his coverage, contact his editor and itemize your grievances. Some caveats: do not rant, and be prepared to be specific about errors of fact or sloppiness. It is in this area that the editor on the other end of the phone or e-mail will be prepared to act—either by running corrections, assigning another reporter to cover you and putting him on a leash, or by actively punishing your malicious interlocutor. If you try to correct interpretation, the editor will consider you a crank and stick up for the reporter.

•
safely.




The camera is a weapon of the state.

[ndv]

[ndv]

CIA-Book-of-Dirty-Tricks.pdf

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

 

 

 

 

 

[Mercer]

Edited October 13, 2023 by Mercer

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

This page is near impossible to scroll all the way.

 

Edited October 18, 2023 by Mercer

[Mercer]

[ndv]

Isn't this the above ^^ video the guy is talking about in reference to US taking out the last remaining counties our banks do not have a grip on?   

 

Not sure where Brazil falls in the list but the US still has Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, and a few others.  I think it's seven counties in total.  North Korea in one as well.  I mean all they can do amd have down right now is sections since US doesn't own their green backs. 

[Mercer]

@ndv it was more complicated than just a banking thing. Basically these "people" running the U.S. Government took a look at the blank check to destroy muslim countries that 911 afforded them, and decided who they didn't like based on how difficult it was to politically manipulate them, and who our allies in the region like Israeli/Saudi etc. disliked.

 

I think Libya did have some heavy economic overtones as they were planning on releasing a gold backed currency for Africa. A money sound enough to eliminate the need for European currency. Kahdafi was made an example of, paraded around with a knife shoved up his ass until he died, for anyone else who dared to help free Africa from Colonial pressures from the type described below:

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 19, 2023 by Mercer

[Mercer]

[ndv]

6 hours ago, Mercer said:

@ndv it was more complicated than just a banking thing. Basically these "people" running the U.S. Government took a look at the blank check to destroy muslim countries that 911 afforded them, and decided who they didn't like based on how difficult it was to politically manipulate them, and who our allies in the region like Israeli/Saudi etc. disliked.

 

I think Libya did have some heavy economic overtones as they were planning on releasing a gold backed currency for Africa. A money sound enough to eliminate the need for European currency. Kahdafi was made an example of, paraded around with a knife shoved up his ass until he died, for anyone else who dared to help free Africa from Colonial pressures from the type described below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It seems like any country that wants to establish themselves outside of the grip of the global monetary system is gonna have problems.  So with crypto a new alternative currency, the established are trying the same tactics for control the crypto, yeah?  But isn't one of the biggest problems for them, is that crypto isn't backed by gold.  Pretty much no body owns crypto amd its simply backed by use opposed to a tangible stack.

[Mercer]

 

 

People subscribe to the common conspiracy theory that Israel, AKA "The Jews" run our government, when in fact, the opposite is true. Almost every significant action Israel undertakes is either with the blessing of, or by the direct order of the United States Government, including the reason this nation exists in the first place.

 

That's why they receive the exact same lack of accountability from international law that prevents U.S. officials from ever being charged with obvious war crimes. Fact is, fossil fuel is the still the lifeblood of our military. There's no EV jet fighters, tanks, warships, transport, or anything else needed to destroy other countries availiable realistically. The creation of a ride or die nation in the center of that region, completely reliant on us in every way is essential for any scenario where shit hits the fan and we mobilize at our potential full scale again.

 

It's important to note, every Israeli citizen may not be perfect, like any other individual human being on the planet, they're not directly accountable for all of their government's actions. Although the end result (for now) is disproportionate, and on the surface one sided, they're just as much the potential victims of this "conspiracy theory" I've just laid out when the inevitable backlash happens. 

 

My gut reaction will probably always side with guerrilla fighters, against oppressive regimes just out of my lesser of two evils logic. With that said, make no mistake here, if anyone needs to be held accountable by United States citizens, we should probably start with the people we vote for here. They supposedly swore an oath to have our best interests at heart, not the interests of mega corporations, and arms dealers. 

[ndv]

6 hours ago, Mercer said:

we should probably start with the people we vote for here. They supposedly swore an oath to have our best interests at heart, not the interests of mega corporations, and arms dealers.

 

I support this^^ as I believe it's called treason.  

[Mercer]

[KILZ FILLZ]

On 10/19/2023 at 7:48 PM, Mercer said:

Was once at a shitty college bar where toilet had someone shitting, both urinals had people pissing, SINK HAD SOMEONE PISSING…. So I pissed in the wall mounted trash can 

[Mercer]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunduz_hospital_airstrike

[Mercer]

The perfect woman doesn't exi....

 

 

[Mercer]

[ndv]

That's spicy!

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]