Truth News Australia

Subscribe to TNRA
Subscribe to TNRA

Latest LIVE show

Hereward Fenton

August 9, 2014
Our guest today in the 2nd hour is Craig Isherwood, secretary of the Citizens Electoral Council. Craig and the CEC have been lobbying intensively for changes… Get the podcast »

Listen Live or Call In !

Recent News & Podcasts

Shock bracelets? Now they’ve really gone too far…

23 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Here is a story so bizarre and so ridiculous that it sounds like either a hoax or a monty python script: a "shock bracelet" which combines RFID tracking with electro-shock weapon technology all in one handy package now being assessed by the United States Department of Homeland Security for use in passenger aircraft.

 

The new device is patented by Lamperd Less Lethal, a company which specialises in "less lethal weapons". They made a promotional video for their crazy invention a few years ago which received little attention.

 

Now however things have changed.

 

A senior official from the Department of Homeland Security has expressed interest in the device, and this was covered in a recent Fox News story which we present below:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cBSRLrJbGg

 

The fact that the man interviewed plays down the "electro-shock" aspect of this device does not give me much comfort. Clearly the reporter is rather disturbed, as she fumbles for words during the interview.

 

Stories like this go a long way towards validating the worst case scenariois of where America is headed, and historically, where America goes, Australia soon follows.

 

CNN reporter criticizes TSA, finds self on terror watch list

19 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

David Edwards and Nick Juliano
Published: Wednesday July 16, 2008

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/...terror_watch_0716.html

 

The post-9/11 airline watch list that is supposed to keep terrorists off of airplanes has swelled to more than 1 million names, including at least one investigative reporter who had been critical of the Transportation Security Agency, which maintains the watch list.

 

CNN's Drew Griffin reported on the bloating of the watch list, which an ACLU count pegged at 1,001,308 names Wednesday afternoon. Griffin's is one of those names, he says.

 

"Coincidentally, this all began in May, shortly after I began a series of investigative reports critical of the TSA. Eleven flights now since May 19. On different airlines, my name pops up forcing me to go to the counter, show my identification, sometimes the agent has to make a call before I get my ticket," Griffin reported. "What does the TSA say? Nothing, at least nothing on camera. Over the phone a public affairs worker told me again I'm not on the watch list, and don't even think that someone in the TSA or anyone else is trying to get even."

 

The TSA, which is a part of the Department of Homeland Security, said Griffin's name wasn't even on the watch list, and the agency blamed the airlines for the delays the reporter experienced. The airlines, on the other hand, said they were simply following a list provided by TSA.

 

While it wouldn't be much of a stretch for plenty of people to believe the TSA would exercise its revenge via watch-list meddling, an agency spokesman insists that just isn't the case.

 

"So if there's any thought or shadow of a thought that TSA somehow put you on a watch list because of your reporting," spokesman Christopher White said, "it is absolutely fabricated."

 

This video is from CNN's American Morning, broadcast July 16, 2008.

  
Download video


Cynthia McKinney Green Party Presidential candidate acceptance speech

17 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Cynthia McKinney Green Party Presidential candidate speaks at the Convention By Craig Seeman
View in HD  Download 720p HD Version  Visit Craig Seeman's ExposureRoom Videos Page
Cynthia McKinney & Rosa Clemente Press Conference after Green Party Presidential, Vice Presidential By Craig Seeman
View in HD  Download 720p HD Version  Visit Craig Seeman's ExposureRoom Videos Page

McKinney wins Green Party nomination

14 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Cynthia McKinney has won the presidential nomination of the Green Party of the United States.

 

This excellent video is from 2007 when Cynthia began her association with the Greens.

 

Her passion, intelligence and heroism is unparalleled in contemporary politics.

 

During this speech Cynthia reaffirms her commitment to truth and justice on many issues, including the assassination of Martin Luther King Jnr, co-intel subversion of the civil rights movement, the September 11th atacks and the Iraq War.

 

She documents here how the power elites behind the political process went about to destroy her career in the Democratic Party.

 

With her nomination by the Greens it looks like a new chapter is opening for Cynthia, for America and for the world.

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2508693105235438933

 

By JEFFRY SCOTT
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 07/12/08

http://www.ajc.com/...mckinney_green_nomination.html

 

CHICAGO — Former Georgia congresswoman Cynthia McKinney reassumed the national political stage Saturday, winning the presidential nomination of the Green Party of the United States at the party's national convention here.

 

Amid chants of "Paint The White House Green" and signs proclaiming, "Truth. McKinney 2008," McKinney revved up a crowd of about 350 Green Party delegates from 38 states who elected her on the first ballot.

 

"I am asking you to vote your conscience, vote your dreams, vote your future, vote Green," McKinney told the convention in a 30 minute speech following an address by her running mate, hip hop artist and political activist Rosa Clemente.

 

She was joined by her father, former Georgia representative Billy McKinney; her mother Leola, and her son Coy, on the stage in the elegant Michigan Avenue hall where the Chicago Symphony Orchestra performs,

 

McKinney, 53, was the odds-on favorite to win the nomination, coming into the convention with a 10-1 delegate lead over her closest rival, Jesse Johnson of West Virginia.

 

Since last fall, McKinney has campaigned in 30 states on the slogan "Power To The People" and a platform that calls for single-payer universal health care, the immediate withdrawal of American forces from Iraq and Afghanistan, the creation of a Department of Peace, and reparations for African-Americans.

 

In her address, Clemente, 36, vowed that she and McKinney would fight all "-isms and ideologies that divide us." Clemente jokingly threw down a challenge to the nation's sitting vice president: "Dick Cheney, bring it on."

 

In her unlikely re-emergence on the national political stage as the presidential nominee of the Green Party, which she joined in 2007 after leaving the Democratic Party where she had served six terms representing DeKalb County's 4th Congressional district, McKinney faces a stiff – extremely long-shot – run at the presidency.

 

She as much conceded winning the presidency was not her goal in her speech Saturday. She said the thrust of her campaign would be to get 5 percent of the vote in November, effectively establishing the Greens as a third party that would not have to fight state-by-state to get on the ballot every four years.

 

"We are in this to build a movement," said McKinney to roars from the crowd. "A vote for the Green Party is a vote for the movement that will turn this country right-side-up again."

 

In Georgia, because the party failed to qualify under state laws, McKinney and Clemente will not be on the ballot in November. Green Party leaders expect she will be on the ballot in 36 states, where ballot qualification rules vary.

 

David Cobb, who ran for president on the Green Party ticket in 2004 – and pulled in just 0.1 percent of the vote – said Saturday that one of the appeals of McKinney' as a candidate is her name recognition.

 

"Before she has even won the nomination, she has pulled new members into the party," said Cobb, who introduced McKinney at the convention, praising her work in Congress and for having introduced articles of impeachment against President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and Secretary of State Condolezza Rice. He estimated Green Party membership is about 500,000.

 

McKinney is the second former member of Congress from Georgia mounting a presidential run this year. Former 7th District Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) is running for president on the Libertarian Party ticket.

 

A lighten-rod political figure, McKinney was defeated in 2006 by the 4th District's present congressman, U.S. Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), after a much-publicized run-in with a U.S. Capitol police officer and her accusations that the Bush administration covered up information about the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

 

That incendiary quality seemed to endear McKinney to Green delegates who, throughout the convention, inveighed against the "crimes" of the Bush administration and the distortions of the news by "corporate media" – which, except for the cable network C-SPAN, have given little coverage to the convention.

 

"Don't expect me to keep a count of the major flip flops of the other candidates between now and November, I'm sure there will be plenty," McKinney told the crowd. "They are in this flip flop because they have to appear to share our values — while they serve somebody else."

 

 

Movie Review - “The Reflecting Pool” by Nathan lee

13 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

I post this article not because it has any merit, but rather to illustrate the depths of depravity to which the hack writers employed by major media organisations will sink in order to stifle dissent and discredit the voices of reason and justice.

 

This article borders on defamation.

 


 

Trade Secrets
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/11/movies/11refl.html?_r=1&ref=movies&oref=slogin

 

By NATHAN LEE
Published: July 11, 2008

 

The problem with “The Reflecting Pool,” an investigative drama that mucks around with 9/11 conspiracy theories, is not that its ideas are silly. Strictly from an imaginative point of view, there is something unnerving about the weirdly elegant way the towers fell. And not just the north and south buildings but also the adjacent 7 World Trade Center, a smaller edifice, suffering much less damage, that collapsed in an identical manner but received far less coverage from — what’s the phrase I’m looking for? — oh yes: a complicit, propaganda-foisting media/industrial complex in the pocket of the Bush administration and the Jews and the oil industry!

 

Er, to continue. The problem, which dwarfs whatever you might feel about the topic, is in the drama, or utter lack thereof. Written and directed by Jarek Kupsc, the movie has the tone, rhythm and structure of a set of numbered, handwritten notes derived from 9/11 conspiracy Web sites, photocopied at Kinko’s and distributed at an anarchist bookshop.

 

This pamphlet narrative follows the efforts of Alex Prokop (Mr. Kupsc again), an investigative journalist for a lefty magazine about to “go corporate,” and Paul Cooper (Joseph Culp), a 9/11 obsessive whose daughter died in the attack, to unearth the truth in the face of suppressed information, disturbing ambiguities and, when needling the powers that be, their own amateurism.

 

9/11 families remains lawsuit dismissed

12 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

SBS: Tuesday, 8 July, 2008
http://news.sbs.com.au/..._lawsuit_dismissed_551219

 

A US judge has dismissed a case brought by families of victims of the September 11 attacks who said the city denied proper burials by sending debris containing possible human remains to a garbage dump.

 

The lawsuit, filed in 2005 by a group called WTC Families for a Proper Burial, sought to have the estimated 1.2 million to 1.8 million tonnes of rubble originally from the World Trade Centre site transferred out of the Fresh Kills landfill located on New York's borough of Staten Island.

 

The families said the city should move the residue that had been finely sifted multiple times to a more suitable location and have a cemetery created.

 

US District Judge Alvin Hellerstein, saying the city's decisions about where to offload the debris "were difficult and complicated", found the city had "acted responsibly" in bringing about a "swift and efficient recovery from the terrorists' attack".

 

"Plaintiffs have no property right in an undifferentiated, unidentifiable mass of dirt that may or may not contain the remains of plaintiffs' loved ones," he said.

 

There are no New York laws that require burying the debris in a different location, he said, "however worthy the citizen and however honourable the deceased".

 

About 1,100 out of the 2,749 people killed at the World Trade Centre site perished without leaving a trace. Full bodies were recovered for only 292 victims and partial remains for 1,357, sometimes only a fragment of a bone, the ruling noted.

 

Almost immediately after the attacks, all visible human remains were removed from the debris, bagged and taken to collecting points.

 

Victims' families argued that debris surrounding some remains would have contained other bone fragments and remains.

 

The president of the WTC Families, Diane Horning, lost her son, Matthew Horning, in the attacks. His wallet and a piece of his occipital bone were recovered from debris at Fresh Kills.

Hellerstein concluding his ruling by suggesting a "beautiful nature preserve" and memorial at the garbage site and said the families of victims "have suffered a wrong for which there can be no remedy".

 

"No matter the authority and power of this court, it cannot bring back the loved ones lost, and it cannot bring peace to the plaintiffs or surcease to society's collective grief around the events of September 11, 2001."

 

Source: AAP  

 

TNRA 10 July 2008

July 10, 2008, part 1 of 1.
Download mp3 » click here

11 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 7

Categories: [ ]

correction: It was claimed on the show that the gardasil vaccine contains "live virus". According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration gardasil is a "recombinant" vaccine and contains no live virus.

Another long show this week - there is so much to talk about these days!

Today we have a special guest, John Bursill, who heads up www.truthaction.org.au, an 9/11 truth activist organisation currently making strong headway with the NSW Greens, making the case for a new investigation of the events of 11 September 2001.

John gives us a breakdown of his involvement in the 9/11 truth movement, and we get into an animated discussion of the recent BBC production: The Conspiracy Files: The Third Tower.

For more information about Truth Action Australia you may contact John Bursill directly by email or phone him on +61 414 878499.

In the second half of the show we are joined by the redoubtable Dan Collins, with whom we discuss a number of news topics on the Australian front.

Links for today's show:

Simplify Garnaut report findings: ACT Oppn
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/08/2297165.htm
The ACT Opposition says Labor governments must simplify the Garnaut report's findings so the public can more easily digest its conclusions.

Porn block trial complete
http://m.news.com.au/ITTopStories/fi211676.htm
THE federal government has completed a trial of blocking pornography and other online content deemed inappropriate for children at the internet service provider level.

The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 - The Third Tower
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/7330169.stm

The Conspiracy Files delves into the final mystery of 9/11: a third tower at the World Trade Centre, which along with the Twin Towers, also collapsed that day. But this skyscraper was never hit by a plane.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4576154575407650292

Teen arrested for 'blasphemous T-shirt'
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23919553-2,00.html
A GOLD Coast teenager who wore a T-shirt by English extreme metal band Cradle of Filth that reads 'Jesus is a c**t' has been charged with offensive behaviour.

Solicitor charged after intervening in drug search at pub
http://www.smh.com.au/...drug-search-at-pub/2008/07/06/1215282652761.html
A SOLICITOR and civil liberties campaigner was arrested, handcuffed and allegedly had his rib broken by police after offering legal assistance to a man being searched in public.

MP blocked from shopping centre demands change
http://www.smh.com.au/...demands-change/2008/07/06/1215282652779.html
GARY GRAY was on the hustings last year when he was confronted by a serious hurdle to democracy in the 21st century. He was denied entry to a shopping centre.

Cancer vaccine linked to illness in women
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23974632-2,00.html?from=public_rss
THE new cervical cancer jab is believed to be behind a huge jump in the number of women and girls suffering bad reactions to vaccinations .

Warm regards to all listeners from the TNRA team!


Josh & Hereward

Seymour Hersh On Covert Operations In Iran

10 July 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92025860

Listen online

In this candid interview Seymour Hersh discusses false flag operations in Iran and the erosion of democracy in the US.

The interview is exceptional in its engagement with the fascist shift now well advanced in the United States.

Highly recommended.

From NPR:

"Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh believes that the United States may be closer to armed conflict with Iran than previously imagined. He writes about Congress' funding of covert military operations in the upcoming issue of The New Yorker.

A regular contributor to The New Yorker, Hersh exposed the Abu Ghraib prison scandal in a series of articles published in the magazine early in 2005.

During the Vietnam War, Hersh was the first to report on the My Lai massacre. He has been the recipient of the Pulitzer Prize, five George Polk Awards, two National Magazine Awards, and a dozen other prizes. He is also the author of eight books, including Chain of Command about Abu Ghraib."

Page 88 of 106 pages ‹ First  < 86 87 88 89 90 >  Last ›

Listen Live

Recent Comments

Wayne Hall, one more thing:

There are no “hordes of Joshes”, enforcing “the dogma that chemtrails are contrails” as you wrote.

There is one hobby pilot who may be as passionate defending reason and sanity as conspiracy believers are when they defend their ‘elite knowledge’. Why should that be unlikely?

And if there is more than one, all coming to the same conclusions, can it be that they may just have a point? Are you in fact seeing them as centrally controlled and “unleashed”?

By the way, a dogma is something that is not discussed. So by refusing to discuss the issue it is you who makes it so.

By Josh on 2012 08 01 - 04:52:46
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

This is getting sort of exhausting ...

Wayne Hall,

where is your evidence that what people are seeing in the sky are not “normal” aircraft emissions?

Again, you are just assuming this and you seem to be deaf for any argument contradicting this assumption.

You can discuss politics all day, but the issue at the core is that scientists are talking propositions, whereas you claim that there are actual ongoing deliberate (and visible) spraying/geo-engineering activities.

But there is just no evidence of that.

All those long copy/paste posts from you did not contribute the least bit of relevant evidence of trails being anything else than contrails. So please no more of that.

The one valuable source that you recommended was this one:
http://contrailscience.com/how-to-debunk-chemtrails/

I wonder if you have actually browsed through the plethora of knowledge available there ...

By Josh on 2012 08 01 - 04:26:05
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Does the EU truly believe that aviation emissions are major factors in climate change or does it simply see an opportunity to raise much needed taxes under the guise of “saving the planet”? Probably a bit of both… but who really knows?

What I know is this: The ecological lobby were given more leeway and anthropogenic climate change sceptics stigmatized more vigorously in the media during the phase where the priority was to generate political support for emissions trading. When the job appeared more or less to have been done, the sceptics were unleashed again and allowed to wreck the Copenhagen summit.

In the meantime numerous sceptics, not only politicians such as George W. Bush but also super-“scientific” sceptics such as Lomborg, have become advocates of geoengineering.

David Keith has made his career out of advocacy of geoengineering, while at the same time saying that he “hopes” such solutions do not have to be implemented. He says he wants geoengineering proposals to get the message through to climate change sceptics that if “the mad scientists” are making such insane proposals, anthropogenic climate change must be a problem.

There is nothing new about any of this. Some of the key scientists involved in the Manhattan Project persuaded themselves that nuclear weapons would serve a useful purpose because they would make war so terrible that it would be impossible.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 07 31 - 18:35:24
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

e European Union has introduced a scheme to include aviation (and so aircraft emissions) in its emissions trading scheme, supposedly for the purpose of reducing them on account of their damaging environmental effect (they are said to contribute significantly to global warming). Geoengineers on the contrary “propose to” use aircraft emissions to “mitigate” global warming, e.g through “solar radiation management”.

The above illustrates my contention that the issue has been, perhaps irretrievably, politicised by both sides.

Does the EU truly believe that aviation emissions are major factors in climate change or does it simply see an opportunity to raise much needed taxes under the guise of “saving the planet”? Probably a bit of both… but who really knows?

Is AGW a myth? Probably not, but also probably not as much of a factor that some with other agendas would like to paint.

I doubt we will ever know the truth.

My enquiry about the stratosphere, as you seem to have picked up, relates to the altitudes aircraft fly. That is generally within the troposphere although I believe I have breached the tropopause quite a few times, though nowhere near the 30 miles that Gates proposes to drop sulphur.

I believe David Keith’s position on the sort of Geo-engineering he proposes is that it should not go ahead. Please correct me if I am in error there.

By Mike Glynn on 2012 07 31 - 17:43:54
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

The situation is this: when it is admitted that there is a proposal actually to proceed with a geoengineering operation, e.g. recently with Bill Gates and his stratospheric balloon, significant opposition emerges.

When discussion is limited by the “chemtrails are contrails” assumption, so that the conclusion is that what people are seeing in the sky are “normal” aircraft emissions (i.e. not geoengineering or some other scheme of deliberate pollution), significant opposition does not emerge because debunkers, buttressed by official definitions of reality, retain the upper hand.

In the Bill Gates case the proposal is for SRM to be carried in the stratosphere but if you look at “What in the World are they Spraying”                                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0khstYDLA                  between minute 7 and minute 7.30 you will see that David Keith is advocating spraying from aircraft (i.e. in the troposphere). 
                                            You say, Mike, that you cannot answer the question of whether you would like to see opposition to spraying from aircraft, if it were occurring. Consider the reality:

The European Union has introduced a scheme to include aviation (and so aircraft emissions) in its emissions trading scheme, supposedly for the purpose of reducing them on account of their damaging environmental effect (they are said to contribute significantly to global warming). Geoengineers on the contrary “propose to” use aircraft emissions to “mitigate” global warming, e.g through “solar radiation management”.

Whatever aircraft emissions do, whether they exacerbate or mitigate global warming, carbon credits are now being made available in Europe to enable them to do it. 

Is anthropogenic global warming a myth? People such as George W. Bush, who said that he thought it was, now support geoengineering proposals.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 07 31 - 16:51:31
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Skywatcher, can you please clarify, expand upon or explain your statement:

“this is not a WWII Bomber”



THIS IS NOT A WWII BOMBER
- sorry - i meant to post this link with that reference…this is not a WWII bomber..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7TQ5VWdphM&feature=player_embedded

NOR IS THIS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiYdFKC0SBA&feature=player_embedded

and youd have to be stupid or blind or both to ( or deliberately deceitful - cheers wayne ) think ( or say ) they are normal contrails.

i posted a handful of links earlier too that went straight to moderation on the basis of possible spam.. that shows other previous government admissions of chem spraying..

the fact that they are doing it is not contentious, we need not ask IF they are spraying, of more concern is WHAT and WHY?

to claim that this website goes beyond the spin, when all we get from you is the same spin..  meh..

 

By Skywatcher on 2012 07 31 - 16:45:21
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Wayne, I think public opposition would stop it. I also think scientific opposition would stop it as well, due to the large amount of unknowns involved.

I also think it is not happening, at least on any appreciable scale, at this time.

My position on climate change is that the entire issue… including the science, has been heavily politicised and hence very little coming from either side can be trusted to be free of bias or self-interest. The jury is still out as far as I am concerned. Therefore the I cannot answer the question of whether I would like to see opposition.

I would not like to see opposition to normal airliners plying their trade obviously, but I since I fly them, notwithstanding the fact that I regard the notion of commercial airliners willingly participating in any form of geo-engineering as absurd and easily disproved, I acknowledge that have a self interest in that issue.

Off the top of my head.. ( I can’t be bothered to look up the references) isn’t SRM supposed to be carried out high in the stratosphere?

By Mike Glynn on 2012 07 31 - 15:59:04
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Skywatcher, can you please clarify, expand upon or explain your statement:

“this is not a WWII Bomber”

If it’s not a WWII Bomber, what is it, in your opinion?

By Hereward Fenton on 2012 07 31 - 15:38:05
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Skywatcher there is another possibility to your theory of blindness or stupidity, and that is deliberate deceitfulness, for reasons that have to do with narrow self-interest of some kind (corruption) or with psychological factors that may be best left for a specialist to analyse. In either case, continuing the contrail versus chemtrail argument is not going to achieve anything but a monotonous and repetitive “dialogue of the deaf”.

Mike Glynn, if “solar radiation management” is in fact not being implemented, do you think that public opposition to it will prevent it from being implemented? Would you LIKE to see public opposition to it prevent it from being implemented?

By Wayne Hall on 2012 07 31 - 13:24:40
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Skywatcher - have you read the article?  yep

Have you watched the video which shows WWII Bombers creating massive contrails? - this is not a WWII Bomber

Your post suggests to me that either A) you have not reviewed the information, or B) you refuse to acknowledge it.  Youre response suggest to me you are either A) blind or B) stupid, or C) both

I have looked at your evidence, and it is consistent with the information contained in this article. It proves nothing, other than what we already know about aircraft contrails. Youre no qualified to say that it proves nothing

Why is it that you can’t (or won’t) consider my evidence? youre evidence, upon consideration, proves nothing - and im sick of watching planes spraying over where i live constantly.

By Skywatcher on 2012 07 31 - 12:46:01
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Categories