It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Date of Final Departure to be Revealed.

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketgirl
 


Hi Rocketgirl,

It seems we have misunderstood each other, maybe I made a mistake to share this information. I am in contact with ET's on a regular basis and have been shown many things since childhood about the majority of what comes here, they have been explained to me in detail as to what purpose they serve. I am sorry for sharing information if it has offended anyone. That was never my intention.

Best Wishes!
Jen

[edit on 23-3-2009 by Jennifer07]




posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Infinite Paradox
You see, both sides get something out of exchanges such as this. If this were not true then threads such as these would last one page and then disappear into obscurity.


Not entirely true. I personally get nothing out of it. I do it because UFOlogy needs to remove people like the Op. This type of person is the very reason why UFOlogy is laughed at today. I don't do it for myself.


Those that point out the obvious and go on and on about how terrible the OP is for playing such a game should also take pause and realize the ego boost they get out of continuing to state the obvious.


It's the hope of many that if we keep pointing out the obvious that the Mods might actually do something about it. This doesn't always work but you can't blame us for our tenacity. It has nothing to do with ego. It's about rebutting the constant drivel coming from the OP. It's about denying ignorance.


What repeated rationalizations do you use to keep such threads going for 4 pages and where do those come from?


Who... the Op or us? Ask the Op why they keep trying to dupe the believers on the forum and why they attention seek. That's the big question that plagues this forum on a daily basis.


Do you truly feel slighted by people pretending to be hybrids or are you just playing a part as well?


Personally the Op harms no one except themself and those that allow themselves to be harmed, but on a grander scale, they harm the UFOlogical movement in general. It's this type of person and behavior many detest.


I certainly don't expect anyone to answer such inquires honestly in public because it would ruin the ego charades playing out...


Please don't speak of ego's, your narrative appears to come from a self appointed lofty height... In essence, your claim is that you are above all of this. That's why your pointing it out. Your ego appears to be the largest of all. You have your honest answer.


I've played both roles and can firmly say that the observer point is by far the most satisfying.


Oops! You just crossed the line from being an observer didn't you! Doh! I guess this is a "do as I say and not as I do" post huh.

[FAIL]

IRM



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 06:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Infinite Paradox
 



You see, both sides get something out of exchanges such as this.


As others have already said, there is little to gain from threads such as this in the way of new knowledge. All we will read here are the concocted, confused and tediously repetitive re-hashes of other threads on ATS and entrenched concepts about UFOs. Nothing new ever comes from them.


If this were not true then threads such as these would last one page and then disappear into obscurity.


So what is the alternative to replying? Have ATS full to the brim with one page threads? I reply to some of these types of thread (not all, as if I did, I’d never get any work done) because they are, in my opinion, blatantly hoaxing.

And that conflicts with my own conception of what this forum, and more importantly the whole ETH, is about. Should I ignore my own nature? How true to myself would that make me?

InfaRedMan is correct when he states that ufology is rife not only with the deluded, but hoaxers seeking either internet or public fame, or a following of some kind. That fact cannot be denied.
And if we just sit back and continue to let them post their spurious claims without critical reply, then specious threads such as this will only proliferate.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to wade through rubbish before I find a gem.


Those that point out the obvious and go on and on about how terrible the OP is for playing such a game should also take pause and realize the ego boost they get out of continuing to state the obvious.


A little confused here; are you saying the thread’s author gets an ego boost, or the skeptic? The first I agree with, but it will not stop me.

The second, if that is what you meant, I completely disagree with. It does not make me feel good to point out that in my opinion zeta66 is hoaxing, nor do I see it as a duty to point it out. Rather his opinion and approach disagrees with mine, therefore I will stand my ground and defend my viewpoint. Once again I ask; if I didn’t, what sort of a person would I be?


There's nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying we each could learn a lot from self observation in regards to our reactions towards certain things. What repeated rationalizations do you use to keep such threads going for 4 pages and where do those come from?


I came to this forum knowing who I am and what I believed in. I still know who I am, but have found that my views on certain subjects have been altered by accounts and testimony I have read on ATS. To have ignored that which has managed to make me rethink my world-view would be arrogant and stupidly inward looking.

No one who holds a belief in extraterrestrial life (and the possibility of it having visited our planet) cannot honestly discount the possibility that one such visitor may well at some point choose to post on the world’s biggest UFO related conspiracy web site.

Logically, it could well happen (the likely hood is another matter).

But in all sincerity, it is reasonably evident that that holy grail of communications will not include a lame attempt at association with a film. Why would an alien species need to include their “departure date” in such an ineffective method of communication that will only be seen by a fraction of the world’s populace and only in the major languages? Will this film be translated into Nheengatu, or Iheivbe, or Zarmaci, or are the Zeta Reticullans just based in the West?

This thread is based on a flawed, insular, innocent concept of aliens. I don’t feel slighted by it; I just know it isn’t based on truth.

I hope I have proven that skeptics can be open and honest. We don’t all stand around tutting and frowning at the monitor, shaking our heads in disgust, our typing fingers just itching to reply.
And as I have said, I have not replied to every thread like this, therefore I have been, and continue to be, an observer. And I quite agree; the reactions and replies to these threads are predictable to the nth degree.

And the reason I continue to post on these threads? Posts, such as yours, that just need to be addressed.

Simple.


[edit on 23-3-2009 by Beamish]



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 11:58 AM
link   
This may well rank as one of the most ridiculous threads ever on ATS.
Must been a slow thread day for us all to post in it. That includes me.



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by cindymars
 


I agree, I got sucked in, too.

I use some of these types of threads as entertainment, but I also try to sift through and pick out any useful tidbits. Unfortunately for us, most of these are just dead ends.

But it's still worth it to me, the sifting, because every once in a while there is a gem!



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by blujay
 


Agreed bluejay!

You know I am open to the possibilities but.....this one, sorry Zeta66!

You would have been better with the other thread you started.



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jennifer07
I am in contact with ET's on a regular basis and have been shown many things since childhood about the majority of what comes here, they have been explained to me in detail as to what purpose they serve. I am sorry for sharing information if it has offended anyone. That was never my intention.


First, I do not doubt that there are those of us who have had contact.

Second, I am not offended, and will keep an open mind.

Third, I was wondering if the ET's know about my book, and the solution to the pickle we are in here that I propose. It's linked in my sig, and I surely would appreciate it if any who are truly discussing things with ET's bring an awareness to them of what I have written and proposed...

Fourth, to all those who insist that there is nothing to see here, move along, move along... There is good reason to be skeptical, but if we knee-jerk our skepticism, we can do ourselves a good deal of disservice.

While I don't necessarily believe any of this, I cannot fully discount it either. I am willing to maintain a view which allows both possibilities. As I said earlier, we are on a planet with ET's, genetic bloodlines that are disparate, and interterrestrials. Given this, we cannot assume necessarily that this is bunk. What we must look for is consistency and validation.

Failing consistency suggests it is bunk, but failing validation merely leaves us as yet unsure.



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by zeta66
 




well are you a alien?? I hope the movie call The Road which I found out and it seem that you have to come back because of Nucular war or disaster that happen in our earth time..


what will happen in the future will I get the tech stuff from ET?? write back.



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 02:20 PM
link   
Blah.

I think I know the OP from a different website. At least I've seen it before. Anyway, not to detract from something overlooked, but this supposed movie called The Road is actually based off of a Cormac McCarthy novel of the same title that was released a couple of years back.

See, they had such a good success with No Country for Old Men (also McCarthy) that they thought they could capitalize further.

That said, regardless of how you think the world will end, and whether or not there will be folks walking down roads in the aftermath, this book is incredibly descriptive, heartfelt, and chilling.

A must read. PM me to talk further.

www.imdb.com...



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Jennifer07
 


Hello Jennifer,
I think I was a little bit harsh with my words. There is nothing wrong with passing alone information from an outside source such as aliens. However, some of the information you have received seems to be kind of off and should be checked over.

You are a messenger who is willing to deliver messengers from the heavens. This is a good thing. I found another one of your threads, after scanning it, it looks like it will be a good read. I saved it for later because it's really long and my attention span is really short.

One more thing, if you haven't already, you should check your messages. There's something there I think you should read.

Love and Light,
Paris



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


Amaterasu, I realize your post was no directed at me, but I feel compelled to reply to it nevertheless.


Fourth, to all those who insist that there is nothing to see here, move along, move along... There is good reason to be skeptical, but if we knee-jerk our skepticism, we can do ourselves a good deal of disservice.


Why do the skeptics always get the bum’s rush? I find it highly insulting, as if we are the pariahs of ATS. To me, it’s as if the so-called “believers” can’t wait to get rid of anything or anyone that will in anyway spoil their fun.

What is so wrong with having a contrary or alternative opinion? Having one does not mean that the skeptic is necessarily a “disbeliever” rather they are able to observe without any predisposition.

And as you say, in a subjective way, a knee-jerk reaction may be doing us a disservice in rejecting threads like this.

But surely your reactive attitude towards skeptics is the self same thing?

How do you know you won’t gain knowledge from a skeptic?

Or is it that you don’t want to hear anything that doesn’t fit in with your own beliefs?

zeta66 has said on this thread that he is a hybrid.

On a different thread he hints at another movie tie in to his “zetan” fantasies:


We will be leaving via the witch, the surrounding area will be protected, and the date I will disclose soon. Stay tuned!


www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is an obvious, glaring reference to a new Disney production “Race to Witch Mountain”, a film that involves UFOs and aliens as its central theme.

I would wager that in his rush to connect this movie into his story, he has failed to realize that it is a remake of a remake of an even earlier film, which in itself was based on a 1968 novel:

en.wikipedia.org...

Then, in this thread;

www.abovetopsecret.com...

he seems a little unsure as to exactly what he is;


Anyway, I may be an alien in a human form as I was abducted at an early age. I do not look like a zeta, I look like a human, so I must be a human.


Tell me, in all honesty, does that read as the stone cold surety of an individual who knows categorically that they have had contact with, and became part of, an alien species, or is it the ramblings of a media-inspired hoaxer?

I indicated the flaws in his insistence that the film “The Road” contains a “departure date”. And like a pro he ignored every single one.

Why?

Not because I was wrong (because I am not), but because he wrote this thread for the believers, not the skeptics. He said so himself. This is an ongoing theme on threads such as this; appeal to the faithful and ignore the doubters. That way you get the attention you desire.

You say you are looking for consistency and validation for your beliefs. Do you not realize that that attitude should include different and balancing viewpoints, as if it doesn’t you’ll be open up to all manner of fraudulent information?

Your statement:


Failing consistency suggests it is bunk, but failing validation merely leaves us as yet unsure.


Consistent with what? Your understanding of the phenomena? That might not be necessary if you had an open, and critical mind.

And as zeta66 will never be able to corroborate his story, as it is fake, will this thread leave you with a bitter taste in your mouth or will you still be unsure?



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beamish
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


Amaterasu, I realize your post was no directed at me, but I feel compelled to reply to it nevertheless.


Fourth, to all those who insist that there is nothing to see here, move along, move along... There is good reason to be skeptical, but if we knee-jerk our skepticism, we can do ourselves a good deal of disservice.


Why do the skeptics always get the bum’s rush? I find it highly insulting, as if we are the pariahs of ATS. To me, it’s as if the so-called “believers” can’t wait to get rid of anything or anyone that will in anyway spoil their fun.


I hope you did not get that from what *I* said... *I* said, "There is good reason to be skeptical." I also went on to point out that knee-jerk skepticism was a poor choice. Rather than evaluate the content someone offers, in terms of plausibility, consistency, probability, possibility, and so forth, I see many that seemingly read a few lines and immediately call BS. There is no true skepticism involved. It is more akin to denial.


What is so wrong with having a contrary or alternative opinion? Having one does not mean that the skeptic is necessarily a “disbeliever” rather they are able to observe without any predisposition.


That is optimal. But again, I said nothing negative towards skepticism - REAL skepticism. I have issue only with the knee-jerk variety.


And as you say, in a subjective way, a knee-jerk reaction may be doing us a disservice in rejecting threads like this.


[nod] It can.


But surely your reactive attitude towards skeptics is the self same thing?


Not MY reactive attitude. I appreciate a true skeptic very much. As I said.


How do you know you won’t gain knowledge from a skeptic?


I figure I just might - IF they are a true one. Those who off-hand declare BS with no real point as to WHY they have dismissed it...I'm guessing little is there to learn.


Or is it that you don’t want to hear anything that doesn’t fit in with your own beliefs?


I couldn't care less what I hear. I evaluate it based on what previous data I have collected and assign probabilities.


zeta66 has said ...

Tell me, in all honesty, does that read as the stone cold surety of an individual who knows categorically that they have had contact with, and became part of, an alien species, or is it the ramblings of a media-inspired hoaxer?


I am unsure of zeta's reasons to be here, and suspect (give a fair probability to) a marketing gimmick, but I was responding to jennifer, who I suspect (give a fair probability of) is one who has had contact. The key difference here is that I give SOME probabitity to zeta being what he says, and SOME probability to jennifer not being what she says.

Many, on the other hand, slap 100% probability in one direction or another. And to me, a true skeptic keeps their probabilities such that, failing concrete evidence either way, they encompass all possibilities.


You say you are looking for consistency and validation for your beliefs. Do you not realize that that attitude should include different and balancing viewpoints, as if it doesn’t you’ll be open up to all manner of fraudulent information?


No... I said that these are things we ALL should look for in the evidence in evaluating the claims of others.


Your statement:


Failing consistency suggests it is bunk, but failing validation merely leaves us as yet unsure.


Consistent with what? Your understanding of the phenomena? That might not be necessary if you had an open, and critical mind.


Consistency within the data itself. Do they say one thing here, and another, contradictory thing there, for example.


And as zeta66 will never be able to corroborate his story, as it is fake, will this thread leave you with a bitter taste in your mouth or will you still be unsure?


See, if *I* were to say the above, *I* would phrase it like this:

And as zeta66 will most likely never be able to corroborate his story, as it is most likely fake, ...

Which is a sign of a true skeptic. A knee-jerk skeptic puts it in an absolute frame.

As for this thread... Meh. Again, you are taking my words to jennifer and redirecting them to the OP.

[edit on 3/24/2009 by Amaterasu]



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu
As for this thread... Meh. Again, you are taking my words to jennifer and redirecting them to the OP.


Which is a tactic employed by the Knee Jerk variety on many occasions... misdirection



Good post



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beamish
Amaterasu, I realize your post was no directed at me, but I feel compelled to reply to it nevertheless.


WHY?

Why did you feel 'compelled' to respond to something not directed at you? I always wondered about that... this compelling need some have to respond... and then with something that has no bearing on the thread...




Why do the skeptics always get the bum’s rush? I find it highly insulting, as if we are the pariahs of ATS.


Well not ALL skeptics... I find ones like ArMaP, Phage and JRA work very hard to present their side of the case...

The skeptics who fit your description are usually those that 'swarm' a thread just to naysay it without doing anything but naysaying it... which is afterall only their opinion.

You don't think it destroys threads when the same person comes in to every thread and makes 'informed' comments like... 'its only rocks' several hundred times? Or attack an OP story which may or may not have any value... but certainly has people interested enough to get several flags and many pages.

Well here is the rub... when posts in a thread by 'career' skeptics outnumber the posts by 'believers' or just plain interested parties... people with good stuff to present for discussion begin to say "What's the point?"

Skeptics of the later type feel it their 'duty' to save people from the crazies... and thus feel compelled to post... yet these type rarely (if ever) follow any link to any supporting evidence... and hide behind the 'burden of proof' excuse...




How do you know you won’t gain knowledge from a skeptic?


I have gained much information from the good type of skeptic... but zero of value from the 'its just rocks' crowd...



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 04:25 PM
link   
So back on topic...

When these Zeta ships leave... can someone PLEASE get us some good picture?

And use a tri-pod with auto focus lens Thanks



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 06:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


zeta66 claims that he is either an abductee, or a hybrid. He claims that one upcoming film holds the date for their/his species’ departure from planet earth, and that they are going complete this departure from “the witch”, which is another film reference.

A contrary argument was supplied, with links and quotes to back it up.

Some may believe that Hollywood is being employed to spread information about alien contact; others hold the opinion that film and television dramas are somehow real; and the rest just sit back and enjoy the products of intelligent script writers and directors who are following the money that comes from popular media trends. Each has their own opinion.

According to the OP, the date of this departure is secret, but will be after the release of “The Road” and before the “apocalypse” that is to befall us all. That’s pretty specific, isn’t it?

Yet, when it was pointed out that there is nothing in The Road that even suggests alien contact is involved in the story, no direct response, or more importantly no rebuttal, was forth coming. He is inconsistent in his posts with the supposed facts of his hybridization, and when the glaring flaws were pointed out, he back-tracks and flounders.

I’ll say it again; that is not the behaviour of someone who is utterly sure, confident and comfortable with the facts. That is not the behaviour of someone who apparently taught the Zetans to speak English. It is the behaviour of someone who is unsure of their testimony. It is the reaction of someone who has encountered unexpected opposition to their little bit of whimsy, and who was unprepared for such responses both rationally and possibly academically (and that is not a slur on the OP at all). And that is all in my opinion.

Instant dismissal of claims such as the ones on this thread are completely understandable given that the subject matter is rife with hoaxers, the disassociated, and those who instantly profess, and declare openly, a deep understanding of the subject after reading a few books without having any understanding at all. They are mistaking enthusiasm for knowledge.

This thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

bucks the trend. It is well presented, plausible, given, and in comparison to, the data we have from previous abduction accounts. And I would not be at all surprised if the thread dies a death after a few pages.

Why?

Because it doesn’t have a tabloid heading and isn’t sensational. A vast proportion of ATS just wants to “read a story”, and there are many posts that say just that. And because of this, stories are being supplied. Not accounts or reports, but stories.


Rather than evaluate the content someone offers, in terms of plausibility, consistency, probability, possibility, and so forth, I see many that seemingly read a few lines and immediately call BS. There is no true skepticism involved. It is more akin to denial.

How would plausibility in zeta66’s story be defined and in comparison to what? He’s inconsistent.

Probability? Measured against what?

Where is the bench mark that allows us to consider that he could be telling the truth? (and if he is, then I will eat a bag of sand).

Denial? Some skeptical thinkers may well have an agenda to protect. Not me. To believe that everything is known is not only incredibly foolhardy, but unbelievably arrogant and narrow minded, too. I detest Richard Dawkins’ philosophies, but if they prove to be correct and immutable, then how can anyone not change their opinions or beliefs accordingly?

I said:


Or is it that you don’t want to hear anything that doesn’t fit in with your own beliefs?


and you replied


I couldn't care less what I hear. I evaluate it based on what previous data I have collected and assign probabilities.


So you evaluate new information by comparison to the data that you trust. Sorry, but isn’t that exactly the same thing? And isn’t that a loophole that can be easily exploited by hoaxers? Drop in a few familiar phrases and scenarios, maybe an emotion or two, and there’s your “plausible” account.

I said:


Consistent with what? Your understanding of the phenomena? That might not be necessary if you had an open, and critical mind.


which in retrospect may have been a little harsh. Apologies.

You replied:


Consistency within the data itself. Do they say one thing here, and another, contradictory thing there, for example.
“And as zeta66 will never be able to corroborate his story, as it is fake, will this thread leave you with a bitter taste in your mouth or will you still be unsure?”


It has already been pointed out that he is inconsistent. I am being consistent in believing and standing by my opinion that zeta66 is a hoaxer.

You may see my, and other posts, as being knee-jerk reactions. That is probably a fair assessment.

But consider this and maybe contemplate on why I had that reaction to it; if this thread contains real information on the existence of alien life on this planet, their interaction and interbreeding with us, then this is the disclosure we have all been waiting for. And disclosure will not have come about by the courage of whistleblowers and credible professional testimony, released Government files or a piece of “smoking gun” footage, amateur investigators and concerned researchers.

Disclosure is a date hidden in a film unrelated to the subject, with an allusion to a Disney film. But maybe we shouldn’t worry, as the messenger of this most momentous event in human history says:


BTW, say I am a hoaxer, there are no aliens and nothing happens at the meeting place. We will still have a good time. We will be camping out on miles and miles of US citizen public lands, eating hot-dogs around fires and drinking a few beers.


Welcome, Mankind, to the Universe.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 07:05 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 



Why did you feel 'compelled' to respond to something not directed at you? I always wondered about that... this compelling need some have to respond... and then with something that has no bearing on the thread...


Why do you feel compelled to post a response to mine? You have an opinion about this thread, as do I, that’s why!

And “no bearing on the thread”?

What?

Sorry, but are we talking about the same thread here? Please explain.

I made ten references to zeta66’s claims in my response to Amaterasu. Ten.

How is that having no bearing? Perhaps you just have a compelling need to bash a skeptic…


Well not ALL skeptics... I find ones like ArMaP, Phage and JRA work very hard to present their side of the case… The skeptics who fit your description are usually those that 'swarm' a thread just to naysay it without doing anything but naysaying it... which is afterall only their opinion..


My description?

So supplying links (which I did) and quotes (which I did) and logical argument (ditto) isn’t a fair presentation of an opinion? Have you actually read every response to this thread?

I completely agree that hit and run posts that attack with no explanation are a waste. But if you have an opinion that you are willing to argue time and again, then how is that “destroying” a thread?

Surely if this, or any, thread has merits that will shield it from any criticism, then it will survive and prosper, no?

And if this thread has them, then please point them out as they seem to have escaped me.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
So back on topic...

When these Zeta ships leave... can someone PLEASE get us some good picture?
And use a tri-pod with auto focus lens Thanks


I'd swear there was an air of skepticism to your post Zorgon! It almost reads as someone who is also crying out for a bit of evidence!

IRM



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:47 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beamish
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


zeta66 claims ...

Instant dismissal of claims such as the ones on this thread are completely understandable given that the subject matter is rife with hoaxers, the disassociated, and those who instantly profess, and declare openly, a deep understanding of the subject after reading a few books without having any understanding at all. They are mistaking enthusiasm for knowledge.


I agree that assigning a probability to the OP claims being true at a very low percentage is a good thing. I never said otherwise. But why are we back on zeta (again!!!) when you were addressing a post I made to jennifer?


How would plausibility in zeta66’s story be defined and in comparison to what? He’s inconsistent.


There's zeta again.


and you replied


I couldn't care less what I hear. I evaluate it based on what previous data I have collected and assign probabilities.


So you evaluate new information by comparison to the data that you trust. Sorry, but isn’t that exactly the same thing? And isn’t that a loophole that can be easily exploited by hoaxers? Drop in a few familiar phrases and scenarios, maybe an emotion or two, and there’s your “plausible” account.


There is a big difference between assigning probabilities (leaving an open mind) and flat out declaring "bunk." Again, I would phrase things in terms of likelihood, not as absolutes.


I said:

(essentially more about zeta)


I think we're mostly in agreement, and I am unsure why you had to take up the diatribe against me. My only peeve is in those who say, "This is BS!" They don't know for absolute sure... They should say, "There's a 98% chance that this is BS..." Or some such.

Things *I* thought were pure BS have turned out to be true.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join