Trump orders attack on Syria, asks for other countries to join him.

Renaissance said:
Last night when I heard the news I was shocked and outraged, and in an instant I was convinced that Trump had pretty much lost to the deep state in such a way that would have dramatic consequences for the world and the people of Syria.

After reading the details, I am no longer so sure. And the thing is, this uncertainty wasn't even something I even wanted to explore. How could an illegal strike against a sovereign nation, and in particular against a military who is actually fighting for the survival of it's people be in any way defensible? We don't live in an easily decipherable world, and the past has shown that Trump is not easily understood. Many of his critics think he's a idiot and is easily manipulated. While I once held that opinion, I've come to think he is much, much smarter than his opponents.
You may be right, and I hope you are, but the problem is, when you are trying to join a criminal gang, which is essentially what Trump did by becoming president, they will make you kill someone as an initiation. After that, they own you, and they will have you do it again and again. You can't get out. And I really don't think Trump is smarter and craftier than the neocons. Nothing in his character shows this.
 
Flashgordonv said:
Seems Trump has really lost it and gone to the dark side.

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201704071052382903-us-fires-missiles-syria/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

"Around 70 Tomahawk cruise missiles were launched on Thursday night at the military airfield in Ash Sha’irat 38 kilometers southeast of the city of Homs, NBC reported, citing US military officials.
US military ships in the Mediterranean launched the strike between 8 and 9 pm ET.

No immediate information on possible casualties was available. The strikes targeted aircraft and infrastructure, including the runway, but not people, US officials told NBC."

So, a couple of questions here.
1. How come Trump was so completely taken in by what was obviously garbage? Did he do a deal with the neocons?
2. Where are the Russian S300 missile defence units and why did they not intercept the attack?
3.What will Russia do about it.
4. Chinese leader is visiting with Trump today. How will tat go down?

These are certainly sobering times in which we live. Ironic that Trump, for all his non-intervention rhetoric, has gone much further than Obama ever did in Syria.
According to southfront, Russia didn't deploy S-300 to counter this . Probably they are careful not to start WWIII in the first instance itself. Once War starts, it's all madness and common sense is out of the door.

I went to fitness center hour before the attack. CNN , NBC and other MSM are discussing about the attack , Tillerson is recommending Trump for attack etc. Russians say This attack needs lot of planning before attacking. May be Russians know before they were informed by US?. It is interesting to see all these NATO countries that wants a piece in Syria speaking out about their wishlist.
 
Mr. Premise said:
Renaissance said:
Last night when I heard the news I was shocked and outraged, and in an instant I was convinced that Trump had pretty much lost to the deep state in such a way that would have dramatic consequences for the world and the people of Syria.

After reading the details, I am no longer so sure. And the thing is, this uncertainty wasn't even something I even wanted to explore. How could an illegal strike against a sovereign nation, and in particular against a military who is actually fighting for the survival of it's people be in any way defensible? We don't live in an easily decipherable world, and the past has shown that Trump is not easily understood. Many of his critics think he's a idiot and is easily manipulated. While I once held that opinion, I've come to think he is much, much smarter than his opponents.
You may be right, and I hope you are, but the problem is, when you are trying to join a criminal gang, which is essentially what Trump did by becoming president, they will make you kill someone as an initiation. After that, they own you, and they will have you do it again and again. You can't get out. And I really don't think Trump is smarter and craftier than the neocons. Nothing in his character shows this.
To expand on this a bit, if Trump balks at the next "request" all they would have to do is have the media release the information that the chemical attack was not done by the Syrian government. Then, the story would be, Trump is impulsive, he doesn't have the temperament to be President, and the attack was illegal, he didn't get congressional authorization, it's an abuse of power, etc. And then one of the ongoing investigations into him would leak something big. If he were really smart, he would have announced that any military retaliation would wait on an independent investigation of the chemical attack. That would have bought him some time.
 
bjorn said:
Good, looks like things haven't chance much, just like their crappy patriot missile system.

59 tomahawks, only 23 hit their target. 50% seems about right.

That's actually both hilarious and sad. How can a 50% on-target rate possibly be described as "precision strikes"?

But then, when you don't care about "collateral damage", it's perfectly okay. :/
 
Mr. Premise said:
Mr. Premise said:
Renaissance said:
Last night when I heard the news I was shocked and outraged, and in an instant I was convinced that Trump had pretty much lost to the deep state in such a way that would have dramatic consequences for the world and the people of Syria.

After reading the details, I am no longer so sure. And the thing is, this uncertainty wasn't even something I even wanted to explore. How could an illegal strike against a sovereign nation, and in particular against a military who is actually fighting for the survival of it's people be in any way defensible? We don't live in an easily decipherable world, and the past has shown that Trump is not easily understood. Many of his critics think he's a idiot and is easily manipulated. While I once held that opinion, I've come to think he is much, much smarter than his opponents.
You may be right, and I hope you are, but the problem is, when you are trying to join a criminal gang, which is essentially what Trump did by becoming president, they will make you kill someone as an initiation. After that, they own you, and they will have you do it again and again. You can't get out. And I really don't think Trump is smarter and craftier than the neocons. Nothing in his character shows this.
To expand on this a bit, if Trump balks at the next "request" all they would have to do is have the media release the information that the chemical attack was not done by the Syrian government. Then, the story would be, Trump is impulsive, he doesn't have the temperament to be President, and the attack was illegal, he didn't get congressional authorization, it's an abuse of power, etc. And then one of the ongoing investigations into him would leak something big. If he were really smart, he would have announced that any military retaliation would wait on an independent investigation of the chemical attack. That would have bought him some time.

Possibly, but then all of the neocons and neolibs cheerleading him on in this are going to have egg on their faces as well. Is this something they're willing to risk? Trying to remember the last time the MSM went back and admitted with headlines that something they had previously wholeheartedly endorsed was indeed a false flag attack...again, with headlines, not on page 27 of the NYT. Has this ever happened?
 
Mr. Premise said:
bjorn said:
[quote author= Mr. Premise]It will help him with his popularity. Killing brown people always does.

Just shows how fake Liberals are. They are social justice warriors at home and 'anti racist'. But killing brown people oversees is a okay. There is litterally no antiwar movement anymore in the US. Liberals are not antiwar at all.
No, the people who react positively to this are definitely not the social justice types. The social justice types hates these attacks. What people who don't live in the US don't know is that the social justice types are a tiny minority. It's more the average "low information voter" as well as the authoritarian follower types that respond well to this. You add these two groups together and you get to about 60% of the population.
[/quote]

I think that if they really hated those kind of attacks they wouldn't have supported Obama or Killary. But yeah, that's a crazy amount of people who love wars. I suppose the social justice type is just the most vocal one.


I just read that:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-07/putin-responds-syria-strikes-cripple-us-russia-relations-deploys-cruise-missile-frig

[...]Additionally, according to Tass, in response to the strikes, the Russian frigate Admiral Grigorovich armed with Kalibr cruise missiles will be deployed to the Tartus naval base in Syria. The Russian Black Sea Fleet’s frigate The Admiral Grigorovich, currently on a routine voyage, will enter the Mediterranean later on Friday, a military-diplomatic source in Moscow told TASS, adding that the ship would make a stop at the logistics base in Syria’s port of Tartus.[...]

Armed with Kalibr cruise missiles, that's the supersonic 3M-54 Klub already mentioned.

I don't really have a clue what is going on right now, because there isn't anything much that can be said about it as of yet I think.

But if the US wants to outbluff Russia in Syria by making them retreat as to prevent WW3. I hope that Russia will be capable of sinking their full fleet down into the Mediterranean.


I think you ought to understand that if the Radical Islam wins in Syria. Secular Islam throughout the region starts to die even further and than it can spread to other countries that practice a form of secular Islam, until there are none left. To me there seems to be an agenda to turn the whole mideast into a savage hellhole and bring it also under the influence of Soedia Arabia.

If they destroy secular Islam. Holocaust 2.0 isn't that far off. Because than the extreme right can say, there are no moderates within Islam, just look at their home countries. (Well in fact the west covertly destroyed secular Islam)

Putin is fighting with secular Islam against the extremists, and by doing so he may prevent Holocaust 2.0. Which makes a risky WW3 worth it. It sounds extreme, but I think there is really a lot at stake here. ISIS needs to be defeated. OSIT.
 
bjorn said:
Mr. Premise said:
bjorn said:
[quote author= Mr. Premise]It will help him with his popularity. Killing brown people always does.

Just shows how fake Liberals are. They are social justice warriors at home and 'anti racist'. But killing brown people oversees is a okay. There is litterally no antiwar movement anymore in the US. Liberals are not antiwar at all.
No, the people who react positively to this are definitely not the social justice types. The social justice types hates these attacks. What people who don't live in the US don't know is that the social justice types are a tiny minority. It's more the average "low information voter" as well as the authoritarian follower types that respond well to this. You add these two groups together and you get to about 60% of the population.

I think that if they really hated those kind of attacks they wouldn't have supported Obama or Killary. But yeah, that's a crazy amount of people who love wars. I suppose the social justice type is just the most vocal one.


[/quote]
Well, the vast majority of the Social Justice Warriors I know, and I know quite a few, hated Hillary. And were very disappointed in Obama because of the wars. Most were Sanders supporters and Jill Stein supporters. The ones in general who did support Hillary either did it in spite of the warmongering, in other words as the lesser of two evils, or they just assumed (correctly as it turns out, unfortunately) that the deep state is going to have its wars no matter who is in office, so might as well vote on domestic policy. I argued strongly with the latter types about that but they have a point.

And if you think of it, Millennials were very young when 911 happened, so all they have known their entire lives has been these types of wars. It becomes part of the background. It's a tragedy, but it is what it is.

Because of the 60% being either Authoritarian Followers of Low Information types, there won't be a strong peace movement. That's why they got rid of the draft after the Vietnam War and why the Pentagon got way more sophisticated in its domestic propaganda operations since then.

Unfortunately, I can't see us getting rid of the neocons and the imperial war machine without an utter defeat in a real war, and that would be awful.
 
Joe said:
Laura said:
I agree. Donald caved a lot faster than we expected.

Maybe he did but then again, as Pierre says, maybe it was to appease the warhawks who have been demanding action on Syria. Of course, they're unlikely to be convinced by it without some further action, but Trump has now set a precedent for his admin of taking unilateral action without consulting Congress, and it's not the traditional kind of US action where they obliterate a country over a period of months. Of course, this is not possible in Syria with Russian involvement and defenses, whether the hawks in the USA like it or not.

Israel seems to be slithering under the radar during all this. Stirring the pot and watching it boil?
Putin Rebukes Netanyahu over ‘groundless’ accusations on suspected chemical incident in Syria
https://www.rt.com/news/383714-putin-slams-groundless-accusations-over-syria-chemical-incident/
Russian President Vladimir Putin told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a telephone conversation that it was unacceptable to make “groundless” accusations concerning the alleged chemical weapons incident that took place in Syria earlier this week.

During the phone call initiated by the Israeli side on Thursday, Putin and Netanyahu stressed the importance of boosting international efforts to tackle terrorism, the Kremlin said in a statement.
Both sides “expressed readiness to expand [cooperation] in the interest of assuring stability and security in the Middle East and, first of all, in Syria,” it said.

In particular, Putin “pointed out that it was unacceptable to make groundless accusations against anyone without conducting a detailed and unbiased investigation.”[something I found suspicious, that blame was readily made on the Syrian government]

Following the reports of the alleged attack on Tuesday, Netanyahu said that “there’s no, none, no excuse whatsoever for the deliberate attacks on civilians and on children, especially, with cruel and outlawed chemical weapons.”[we're to believe Bibi cares about Syrian civilians and children? Ha!]

The Israeli PM also urged the “international community to fulfill its obligation from 2013 to fully and finally remove these horrible weapons from Syria.”

[....]

Earlier on Thursday, Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman told the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper that he was sure Syrian government forces were behind the “chemical weapons attack” in Idlib.

“The two murderous chemical weapons attacks on civilians in the Idlib region in Syria and on the local hospital were carried out by direct and premeditated order of Syrian President Bashar Assad, with Syrian planes. I say this with 100 percent certainty,” Lieberman said.

The defense minister criticized the ‘international community’ for having “zero” reaction to the incident, stressing that “the world needs to take responsibility and, instead of just talking, needs to do something.”

When asked if Russia was somehow involved in the chemical weapons attack, Liberman replied “we don’t know.”

How's that for lighting a fire under Trump's chair?
Interestingly enough, this story is mostly carried by news sites such as Haaertz, Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Jerusalem Post, and Cleaveland Jewish News...

Below is a SOTT comment quoted from Sott article from this past December, to remind us who Israel's new defense minister is:
https://www.sott.net/article/318636-Armageddon-anyone-Netanyahu-under-fire-after-proposing-psychopath-Avigdor-Lieberman-head-defense-of-Israel

Comment: Israel's "basic values" and "moral compass" were non-existent to begin with. But the probable appointment of Lieberman is just one of the final nails in the coffin for the country which is hell-bent on more carnage and ethnic cleansing - and surely on the road to self-destruction as a result.

And once again, the talking heads of MSM are spinning the story without fact checking or asking for proof of Syrian's guilt.
Start of "Armageddon"? Israel's all in! and setting up the rest of the pieces on the board.
 
Joe said:
Laura said:
I agree. Donald caved a lot faster than we expected.

Maybe he did but then again, as Pierre says, maybe it was to appease the warhawks who have been demanding action on Syria. Of course, they're unlikely to be convinced by it without some further action, but Trump has now set a precedent for his admin of taking unilateral action without consulting Congress, and it's not the traditional kind of US action where they obliterate a country over a period of months. Of course, this is not possible in Syria with Russian involvement and defenses, whether the hawks in the USA like it or not.

I tend to the idea Pierre brought up as well. Since that is the most hopeful idea so far, it would be nice. Could also be just wishful thinking of course.

After this recent escalation, a thought came to my mind that a Trump - Putin alliance (or say a strategy of them in the backround) has maybe really occurred for a while now and since the way they do it (Putin and co. would certainly know how to establish such a contact with their spy knowedge) can't be proofed and or/blamed on Trump or Russia, thus the deep state tried to blame russia through another channel, namely: "russian hacking/interference in the election".

Maybe just maybe there is a real core to that allegation (namely that Putin influences Trump and co) but Putin and Co. managed to set it up in a way that can't be proofed. Maybe that also explains why the establishment is so stupendously focused on "proofing russian interference".

On the other hand, Putin and Co. could also simply have fueled that paranoia of those Elites (while nothing of the sort actually happens), so that they have more room to play, by distraction.

It could all also just be like Putin and Co. have stated on numerous occasions oficcially and the empire is just getting more crazy and paranoid by the day and we try to find strategic reason where there is none.
 
[quote author= Pashalis]It could all also just be like Putin and Co. have stated on numerous occasions oficcially and the empire is just getting more crazy and paranoid by the day and we try to find strategic reason where there is none.[/quote]

Perhaps so, typical response for a psychopath who is waging a losing battle? In that regard this attack may just be seen as a sign of weakness. They lashed out, and this is all they where capable of, or daring to do.

Maybe the US wanted to proof to the rest of the world that the Empire is still relevant and dares to attack Syrian targets upfront even when Russia is looking. Kind of showing who is still boss?


Though, I feel literally sick. I did not expect this at all, not from Trump. The little hope I felt these past 3 months died and it hurts. But it was to be expected I suppose...
 
Pierre said:
I think this US operation in Syria might be a concerted bluff by Putin and Trump. Several data suggest so:
- the weak attack conducted by the US: 59 Tomahawks that are precision missiles of a limited size (about 3000 pounds)
- the target (Shayrat Syrian Air Force base) which is not an highly strategic Syrian target
- the number of casualties (6 according to the MSM) which suggests a limited strike and possible forewarning (see the witness testimony above reporting prior evacuation of the base, and the fact that the US signalled Russia about the coming strike)
- the weak Russian retaliation: Russia only reaction so far is to cancel the airspace coordination agreement. Also, Russia has its own military area in this base, as a consequence the base is probably defended by S-X00 systems which Russia did not use to neutralize the incoming subsonic Tomahawks.

It's too early to draw conclusions. If the military activities escalate, Trump might have indeed caved in, if it stops here, it might be indeed a clever bluff. All the more clever that until now, the US conducted bombing of civilian facilities, without being provoked and without presidential orders. In this sense, Trump might have attempted to set a precedent where US operations are now retaliatory, ordered by the President and targeting military assets.

That would also suggest a behind-the-scene coordination between Putin and Trump which would be quite an encouraging thing.

If this US operation marks the beginning of WWIII you can consider the above as the worst analysis ever :O

I was initially very worried last night after hearing about this. After reading a bit more, especially this excellent SOTT article https://www.sott.net/article/347454-Killary-crawls-out-of-her-hole-calls-for-US-to-take-out-Assads-airfields-Trump-obliges-bombs-Syrian-airbase-with-50-Tomahawks, I'm leaning more toward the following thoughts (also posted as a comment on the article):

Missiles that didn't strike (23 of 59 is less than 40%) raises important questions. For instance, one might ask if Russia actually did activate some of its missile defense capabilities to lessen the blow, or if this was an intentional mishit, as this whole thing reeks of a 'dog and pony show' warning shot scenario, rather than a cold-blooded war strike (after all it looks like Russia was warned and then warned Syria; it was a weak hit). Additionally, Russia now gets to retract their memorandum of understanding, perhaps allowing them greater maneuverability in this conflict. And some of the key players in the region (usual suspects like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, etc.) get to rear their ugly heads (true faces) in praise of this ridiculous reactionary aggressive response (instead of a calmer, more rational investigation). Meanwhile, Russia has yet another opportunity to call this what it is, illegal actions likely driven by internal mechanisms in Washington, where Trump was backed into a corner. And on that front, Trump is now getting praise from the warhawks and some breathing room. The Russians are playing their part, and playing along it seems, for the most part. Probably Gorsuch nomination to the Supreme Court continues past the Senate now in a twisted quid pro quo since Trump played along? The plot thickens... There certainly does seem to be a bit of theater in all of this.
 
Further another speculative thought came to my mind. Maybe there is a bigger strategy behind it all, that mainly comes from Putin and Co.
Since they know that the establishment is so focused on "Assad being removed" as a good thing and pretty much everbody knows that, maybe they have another plan running. Assuming further that Assad really cares for his country and the people, a scenario like the following could play out:

"Lets further pretend that Assad must stay, and in the meantime establish some other good candidates that can replace him and who will stay on the same rational and human course for the country. Then outfox the US establishment and actually let Assad step down in some way, while he himself knows that this is the plan and takes the (unjustified) blame on his shoulders, for the sake of his country. With Assad gone, while other candidates emerge that follow his model and are maybe more appeasable for the peoples in that brauder region (heredity and religion wise for example: Assad is an alevit, which is a minority in his own country and in the region (including turkey) an alevit on top is not viewed to be representative and appeasable to the masses, as far as I understand)."

Basically they would give the establishment what they want (take them by their words) and thus show the world that there is no need for futher intervention, since the "evil"Assad is gone. That could explain why Trump and co. now also seem to go into the direction of "removing Assad". It would also kill two birds with one stone: 1: Assad removed and therefore taking the establishment by their word of ceasing the intervirence in the country 2: Appeasing the masses in that region by another candidate (with other backround, religion etc.) that can stabilise the brouder region.
 
From the latest Session,

Q: (L) Okay, there is something I want to ask. You made the remark last session about 40 days between then and Trump's inauguration, including that we should expect shocking things or stuff that would give us chills up our spine. Rock and roll, and so forth... A number of people have complained that there was nothing so dramatically shocking.

(Galatea) Yeah, you guys are all talk and no show! [laughter]

(L) Well, I find that to be a little bit naive because there were some extremely shocking things. For me, the most shocking thing was for the intelligence services to come right out and DIRECTLY, in PUBLIC, frontally attack a president-elect before his inauguration with that dodgy dossier about the Russian hotel. I mean, those things are like evidence of something very deep and very ugly that is now emerging into plain view: the evil that has stayed in the shadows doesn’t fear exposure anymore. THAT gave me chills! It's like there is open warfare in the halls of the psychopaths and they don’t care who sees it or knows it because they are convinced that the programming of the public is complete.

A: Yes. Implications are serious and dramatic beyond what is immediately apparent. From our perspective, the import is indeed chilling. Watch how it all plays out. The irresistible force has met the immovable object. Who is more clever?

From how it appears so far, Trump lost a battle of intelligence to the deep state and it will be very difficult to recover from it now that he has his hands dirty.
 
mkrnhr said:
From the latest Session,

Q: (L) Okay, there is something I want to ask. You made the remark last session about 40 days between then and Trump's inauguration, including that we should expect shocking things or stuff that would give us chills up our spine. Rock and roll, and so forth... A number of people have complained that there was nothing so dramatically shocking.

(Galatea) Yeah, you guys are all talk and no show! [laughter]

(L) Well, I find that to be a little bit naive because there were some extremely shocking things. For me, the most shocking thing was for the intelligence services to come right out and DIRECTLY, in PUBLIC, frontally attack a president-elect before his inauguration with that dodgy dossier about the Russian hotel. I mean, those things are like evidence of something very deep and very ugly that is now emerging into plain view: the evil that has stayed in the shadows doesn’t fear exposure anymore. THAT gave me chills! It's like there is open warfare in the halls of the psychopaths and they don’t care who sees it or knows it because they are convinced that the programming of the public is complete.

A: Yes. Implications are serious and dramatic beyond what is immediately apparent. From our perspective, the import is indeed chilling. Watch how it all plays out. The irresistible force has met the immovable object. Who is more clever?

From how it appears so far, Trump lost a battle of intelligence to the deep state and it will be very difficult to recover from it now that he has his hands dirty.

That's how I see it.

About an hour ago I spoke with a conservative acquaintance. Said he is ticked about the bombings because Assad wasn't behind the gassings - it was ISIS hidden stores of gas that got bombed. He thinks Assad was set-up to make the US and Russia go to war. He pointed out that Killary, Democratic Senators Schumer and Pelosi, along with the Deep State, were cheering this kind of thing on. Feels betrayed by Trump. I was shocked as I thought a conservative would love bombings. When I asked him where he got his information regarding Assad not being the guilty party, he said he read Scott Adam's blog and the conservative site Free Republic! Seems a lot of Freepers are unhappy with the events. :huh:

On a weather-related note, 2 tornados touched down in the Washington DC area. http://www.nbcwashington.com/weather/stories/Strong-Storms-Could-Move-in-for-Thursday-Morning-Rush-418418493.html Thought that was pretty symbolic.
 
NormaRegula said:
mkrnhr said:
From the latest Session,

Q: (L) Okay, there is something I want to ask. You made the remark last session about 40 days between then and Trump's inauguration, including that we should expect shocking things or stuff that would give us chills up our spine. Rock and roll, and so forth... A number of people have complained that there was nothing so dramatically shocking.

(Galatea) Yeah, you guys are all talk and no show! [laughter]

(L) Well, I find that to be a little bit naive because there were some extremely shocking things. For me, the most shocking thing was for the intelligence services to come right out and DIRECTLY, in PUBLIC, frontally attack a president-elect before his inauguration with that dodgy dossier about the Russian hotel. I mean, those things are like evidence of something very deep and very ugly that is now emerging into plain view: the evil that has stayed in the shadows doesn’t fear exposure anymore. THAT gave me chills! It's like there is open warfare in the halls of the psychopaths and they don’t care who sees it or knows it because they are convinced that the programming of the public is complete.

A: Yes. Implications are serious and dramatic beyond what is immediately apparent. From our perspective, the import is indeed chilling. Watch how it all plays out. The irresistible force has met the immovable object. Who is more clever?

From how it appears so far, Trump lost a battle of intelligence to the deep state and it will be very difficult to recover from it now that he has his hands dirty.

That's how I see it.

About an hour ago I spoke with a conservative acquaintance. Said he is ticked about the bombings because Assad wasn't behind the gassings - it was ISIS hidden stores of gas that got bombed. He thinks Assad was set-up to make the US and Russia go to war. He pointed out that Killary, Democratic Senators Schumer and Pelosi, along with the Deep State, were cheering this kind of thing on. Feels betrayed by Trump. I was shocked as I thought a conservative would love bombings. When I asked him where he got his information regarding Assad not being the guilty party, he said he read Scott Adam's blog and the conservative site Free Republic! Seems a lot of Freepers are unhappy with the events. :huh:

On a weather-related note, 2 tornados touched down in the Washington DC area. http://www.nbcwashington.com/weather/stories/Strong-Storms-Could-Move-in-for-Thursday-Morning-Rush-418418493.html Thought that was pretty symbolic.

Speaking of "conservatives" and "Trump supporters" I thought I might check what Alex Jones and Co. have to say now. Here is Jones latest rant (haven't watched it yet):

_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBAdoFIIueU
 
Back
Top Bottom