LA TIMES TELLS TRUTH ABOUT US NATO DESTRUCTION OF LIBYA
http://www.countercurrents.org/cramer040511.htm http://rt.com/op-edge/176376-libya-officially-failed-state/ http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/wow-that-was-fast-libyan-rebels-have-alread...
By: grindall61
Go here to see the original:
LA TIMES TELLS TRUTH ABOUT US NATO DESTRUCTION OF LIBYA - Video
CrossTalk: Reinventing NATO?
A military alliance in search of an identity: For over two decades NATO has had branding issues. To justify its existence, it absolutely needs an enemy. In the wake of the Ukraine crisis, Russia...
By: RT
See the article here:
LIVE - David Cameron statement to MPs on NATO Summit - Truthloader
Prime Minister David Cameron gives a statement to MPs in the House of Commons updating them with what was decided at the NATO Summit last week. Footage from Parbul Subscribe to our channel:...
By: Truthloader
View original post here:
LIVE - David Cameron statement to MPs on NATO Summit - Truthloader - Video
US-Ukraine Naval Exercises: Ukrainian and NATO warships perform Black Sea drills near Odesa
Ukraine and the United States have begun naval exercises on the Black Sea near the Ukrainian port of Odesa. The manoeuvres, given the official name #39;Sea Breeze #39; will be focused on international...
By: UKRAINE TODAY
More:
US-Ukraine Naval Exercises: Ukrainian and NATO warships perform Black Sea drills near Odesa - Video
BRUSSELS, Sept. 8 (UPI) -- NATO leaders are aiming to strengthen alliance capabilities amid Russian aggression in the Ukraine and growing threats elsewhere that threaten Europe.
First, leaders of the 28 member countries meeting in Wales last week resolved to maintain a continuous air, land, and sea presence in Eastern Europe -- including the Baltics -- on a rotational basis given Russian machinations in the region.
They also agreed to create a rapid response force.
"This spearhead will include several thousand land troops ready to deploy within a few days with air, sea and Special Forces support," said NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen.
The force plan includes a command-and-control presence, reception facilities and pre-positioned equipment.
"This is a demonstration of our solidarity and resolve," Fogh Rasmussen said. "In these turbulent times, NATO must be prepared to undertake the full range of missions and to defend allies against the full range of threats."
The demonstration of resolve comes amid months of tension in Europe over Russia's annexation of Ukraine's Crimea region and action by pro-Russian insurrectionists -- reportedly with active Russian involvement -- to take other parts of the Ukraine, which was once part of the Soviet empire. The belligerence from Russian President Vladimir Putin in response to European and American protests -- and actions such as sanctions against Russia -- has done nothing to dampen fears of a return to Cold War footing, not to mention fears for the future of territorial integrity in Baltic countries.
Canada, Germany, Portugal, Britain and others perform rotational air patrols in the region as a message to Moscow.
NATO leaders also agreed to put their money where their mouth is by reversing years of declining defense spending by member states.
NATO said the allies will focus their military budgets over the next 10 years to meet the "existing NATO guideline of spending 2 percent of gross domestic product on defense and with a view to meeting NATO capability priorities."
See original here:
NATO might be losing its focus as it tries to strengthen its roles with both the crisis in Ukraine and rise of the terrorist group ISIS in the Middle East, according to foreign policy analysts.
Luke Coffey and Frank Gaffney told FoxNews.com the military alliance is slowly forgetting its principle mission in protecting the defense of its member states.
Coffey is the Margaret Thatcher Fellow at the Heritage Foundation and Gaffney serves as the founder and president for the national security think tank, Center for Security Policy.
There is a growing call from critics that the organization doesnt have a role in fighting ISIS, now called Islamic State.
I think NATO needs to get back to some of its roots, back to the basics, said Coffey. ISIS, without a doubt, poses a threat to the members inside NATO, but I think as an alliance this is not a challenge NATO should take on.
He instead proposes the U.S. lead a coalition of the willing" that could include NATO members, but should not fall under their jurisdiction because as we saw in Libya in 2011, when you get 28 members around a table it slows down the process and with this fight against ISIS youre going to need quick and rapid decision-making .
- Luke Coffey
Gaffney sees NATO as being a pale shadow of itself as result of reduction in defense spending by the U.S. and its allies. [Before] we go into Iraq or Syria with NATO, I think we best should think about rebuilding NATOs capabilities to protect their own territory.
Only four of NATO's 28 member states, including the U.S., have met the pledge to meet or exceed 2 percent of their country's GDP on military spending.
NATO members are currently debating how to possibly boost their support for Ukraine's military to fight pro-Russian rebels.
Read more:
The case against the NSA metadata collection began yesterday
By: mikeroweRules12
View post:
The case against the NSA metadata collection began yesterday - Video
Tech industry organizations have written a letter to leaders in the U.S. Senate, to ask them to swiftly pass the USA Freedom Act, legislation that is expected to end the collection of bulk domestic phone data by the National Security Agency.
Disclosures about the U.S. governments surveillance programs since June 2013 have led to an erosion of public trust in the U.S. government and the U.S. technology sector, anti-software piracy group BSA, Computer and Communications Industry Association, Information Technology Industry Council, Reform Government Surveillance and the Software and Information Industry Association wrote to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Republican Leader in the Senate Mitch McConnell on Monday.
Reforms contained in the USA Freedom Act will send a clear signal to the international community and to the American people that government surveillance programs are narrowly tailored, transparent, and subject to oversight, the industry groups added.
In June last year, former NSA contractor Edward Snowden revealed that the NSA was collecting phone metadata of Americans from Verizon, the first of a series of revelations about U.S. surveillance in the country and abroad.
The U.S. House of Representatives passed in May an amended version of the USA Freedom Act that would limit the collection of phone data to certain specific selection terms. But an expanded definition of the specific selection terms that can be used by the NSA to collect data from phone companies was criticized by civil rights groups and the industry, as it would continue to allow the NSA to target a large number of phone records.
The bill introduced in the Senate in July by Senator Patrick Leahy, a Democrat from Vermont, and others aims to tighten the collection of data by the NSA by closing loopholes. In a letter to Leahy last week, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper expressed support for the bill.
The transparency measures and reform of surveillance proposed in the Freedom Act are expected to send positive signals abroad where U.S. tech companies fear losing business, the tech industry groups said, echoing a concern already expressed by a number of tech companies.
Cisco Systems CEO John Chambers, for example, wrote to U.S. President Barack Obama in May, asking for his intervention so that U.S. technology sales were not affected by a loss in trust.
As a result of the surveillance program revelations, U.S. technology companies have experienced negative economic implications in overseas markets, the tech groups wrote. In addition, other countries are considering proposals that would limit data flows between countries, which would have a negative impact on the efficiencies upon which the borderless Internet relies.
Congress returned from recess on Monday though there may be only a few days of legislative business ahead of campaigning for midterm elections.
Visit link:
Tech industry groups ask US Senate to 'swiftly pass' NSA curbs
Stick your tinfoil hats on for this one, but a Reddit user has posed an intriguing question -- "What if the Fappening leaks is the nude collection Snowden said gets passed around between workers of the NSA?"
Sounds ridiculous, sure, but hes referring to a claim Edward Snowden made in a seven hour long interview with the Guardian a couple of months ago. Snowden said, "You've got young enlisted guys, 18 to 22 years old. They've suddenly been thrust into a position of extraordinary responsibility where they now have access to all of your private records". According to Snowden, these people often "stumble across something that is completely unrelated to their work", such as photos of a person or persons in "a sexually compromising situation".
In the Showerthoughts subreddit, the user, Stoet, muses "That would explain why the leaks seem to be coming from anywhere: iCloud, Dropbox, etc. They [the NSA] have built in backdoors to those systems and more. And the targeted celebrities are all American, right?"
The leaked celebrity images, which include naked pictures of Jennifer Lawrence, Kate Upton, Rihanna, Kaley Cuoco and Mary Elizabeth Winstead, appear to have been collected over a period of time. Mary Elizabeth Winstead stated the photos of her in the collection were deleted some time ago, and its not too much of a stretch to think if NSA employees are indeed looking at naked photos, that compromising shots of celebrities would be a prized find, and something someone might want to hold on to...
Whats your theory on the source of the leaks?
Photo Credit: murielbuzz/Shutterstock
Read more:
Denver, Colorado (PRWEB) September 09, 2014
Attorney for the IRP6, Gwendolyn Solomon, is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to consider reviewing the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in the IRP6 case. U.S. Supreme Court records show that a petition for writ of certiorari was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court on August 23, 2014 and placed on the docket on August 27, 2014. (U.S. Supreme Court, Docket No. 14-229, 8/27/14, RE: David A. Banks, Kendrick Barnes, Demetrius Harper, Clinton A. Stewart, Gary L. Walker, David A. Zirpolo vs. United States).
The IRP6 case concerns a Colorado-based company (IRP Solutions Corporation) that developed the Case Investigative Life Cycle (CILC) criminal investigations software for federal, state, and local law enforcement. The IRP6 (Kendrick Barnes, Gary L Walker, Demetrius K. Harper, Clinton A Stewart, David A Zirpolo and David A Banks) were convicted in 2011 after being accused of mail and wire fraud. (D. Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA).
Court documents show that the IRP6 case was previously submitted to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals based on Fifth Amendment Prohibition of Compulsory Testimony, Sixth Amendment Right to Present a Defense and Speedy Trial Act Violation. That appeal was denied in August 2014. (IRP 6 Case - Appellate Case: 11-1492, Document: 01019289332, 8/4/14). Records also show that A Just Cause previously filed a lawsuit against Court Reporter Darlene Martinez for a missing transcript related to the Fifth Amendment violation argument. Court records show that the IRP6 made repeated requests for the transcript from court proceedings of October 11, 2011, arguing that a sidebar discussion was missing. (D. Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA).
We put together a solid argument for appeal, but I am troubled at what I have observed throughout these proceedings at how there can be evidence of innocence, yet men sit in jail, says Attorney Gwendolyn Solomon, Appellant Attorney for the IRP6. The next obvious step was the U.S. Supreme Court, adds Solomon.
Regardless of decisions by lower courts, filing the petition for writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court on behalf of the IRP6 is a great opportunity, says Solomon. I was truly amazed when I got the letter showing that it had been filed and that it passed the first step of getting on the docket, exclaims Solomon. It is my ultimate goal that this case is reviewed by the Justices and the IRP6 can get back to their families, Solomon concludes. (U.S. Supreme Court, Docket No. 14-229, 8/27/14, RE: David A. Banks, Kendrick Barnes, Demetrius Harper, Clinton A. Stewart, Gary L. Walker, David A. Zirpolo vs. United States)
While working on this case there are so many things that I have observed and argued in lower court filings to include judicial abuse of authority and power. Im now petitioning the highest court to review arguments showing how the lower court was not impartial, but exhibited judicial bias in favor of the government, argues Solomon. Court filings show that appellants have argued that exculpatory evidence was disallowed, not only documents but expert witnesses to allow the defendants to properly defend their case. Court transcripts show that the Judge didnt assist in enforcement of subpoenas, but reprimanded the defendants for being unable to get service on their witnesses, added Solomon (D. Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA) . As for the Fifth Amendment violation argument, I have serious questions on what the court records show regarding how a court reporter can withhold court records of legal proceedings and the court not enforce a persons fundamental right to those court records. This is the type of action that warrants a review by the Supreme Court because of the potential conflict it poses with federal law, asserts Solomon.
A Just Cause is very pleased at the ongoing interest that Attorney Solomon has shown in the IRP6 case, says Sam Thurman, A Just Cause. Ms. Solomon has been working this case pro bono for over two years, and you have to respect that type of dedication. She was on board already when Mark Geragos joined the team and continued to do most of the research and legwork afterwards. The defendants and AJC have since parted ways with Mr. Geragos, adds Thurman. That situation is one in which we have recently filed a complaint on behalf of AJC and the families with the California Bar Association under Rule 3-500 Communication and 3-110 - Failing to Act Competently (California Bar Association Complaint Ref #14-25162). The complaint shows that the families paid Mr. Geragos over $100,000 in retainer fees, but they do not feel that the case was adequately represented, adds Thurman. The fact that Solomon has continued to progress with this case in light of the recent complaint that we had to file is a testament to her willingness to see this case through to the end, says Thurman.
At first I was very excited to work with Mark Geragos, says Solomon. He is a veteran with over 30 years experience and I graduated from law school only 7 years ago. It was my desire to advance my skills and knowledge of the legal system, adds Solomon. I became concerned as certain events occurred that ultimately led to Mr. Geragos dismissal and subsequent complaint. I acknowledge that there was a riff between he and I at one point but that doesnt concern me as much as how he treated the IRP6 and their families. I support the families and A Just Cause in their complaint against Mr. Geragos, which cites that he didnt exercise professional courtesy in this relationship. I was lead counsel, but as the complaint states, he didnt communicate well with the client or me. On several occasions he refused to follow my suggestions and wouldnt return calls or timely emails. Lack of communication and disrespect for me as a professional attorney are key to the California Bar complaint, and I believe that the dismissal of the IRP6 civil case for the transcript can be attributed to Geragos that lack of communication and failing to act competently; as the complaint cites, Solomon asserts (California Bar Association Complaint Ref #14-25162). You dont yell at your clients during a conference call and hang up on them; I was shocked, explains Solomon.
Referring to the filing of the complaint with the California Bar Association, David Banks comments, Mr. Geragos comment to us that You can chase your constitutional rights, but you are going to spend your time in jail was uncalled for and showed lack of professional consideration for us as his clients. In our opinion the complaint with the California Bar is the right thing to do and we are glad that Attorney Solomon didnt let his actions deter her from filing the petition with the Supreme Court, added Banks.
Read more:
The U.S. Department of Justice is current prosecuting Ross Ulbricht for being the apparent mastermind of the illegal narcotics website Silk Road, which was run for years on a hidden website. In defending the prosecution, the U.S. Attorneys Office recently filed a very interesting brief explaining how investigators found the computer server that was hosting the Silk Road (SR) server. Although the brief is about the Fourth Amendment, it has very interesting implications for the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the federal computer hacking statute.
The brief explains how the FBI found the SR server:
The Internet protocol (IP) address of the SR Server (the Subject IP Address) was leaking from the site due to an apparent misconfiguration of the user login interface by the site administrator i.e., Ulbricht. FBI agents noticed the leak upon reviewing the data sent back by the Silk Road website when they logged on or attempted to log on as users of the site. A close examination of the headers in this data revealed a certain IP address not associated with the Tor network (the Subject IP Address as the source of some of the data). FBI personnel entered the Subject IP Address directly into an ordinary (non-Tor) web browser, and it brought up a screen associated with the Silk Road login interface, confirming that the IP address belonged to the SR Server.
The FBIs declaration explains that the investigating agent entered miscellaneous information into the login prompt of the Silk Road server and received an error message. A forensic analysis of the error message found that it contained an IP address not associated with Tor. That IP address was the address of the Silk Road server.
The DOJ brief argues that there was nothing unconstitutional or otherwise unlawful about obtaining the inadvertently leaked IP address from the Silk Road server:
There was nothing unconstitutional or otherwise unlawful in the FBIs detection of that leak. The Silk Road website, including its user login interface, was fully accessible to the public, and the FBI was entitled to access it as well. See United States v. Meregildo, 883 F. Supp. 2d 523, 525 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (noting that web content accessible to the public is not protected by the Fourth Amendment and can be viewed by law enforcement agents without a warrant). The FBI was equally entitled to review the headers of the communications the Silk Road website sent back when the FBI interacted with the user login interface, which is how the Subject IP Address was found.
It does not matter that Ulbricht intended to conceal the IP address of the SR Server from public view. He failed to do so competently, and as a result the IP address was transmitted to another party which turned out to be the FBI who could lawfully take notice of it. See United States v. Borowy, 595 F.3d 1045, 1048 (9th Cir. 2010) (finding that defendant had no legitimate privacy interest in child pornography files posted on peer-sharing website, notwithstanding that defendant had made ineffectual effort to use site feature that would have prevented his files from being shared); United States v. Post , __ F. Supp. 2d __, 2014 WL 345992, at *2-*3 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 30, 2014) (finding that defendant had no legitimate privacy interest in metadata used to identify him that was embedded in file he had posted on Tor website, notwithstanding that he did not realize he was releasing that information and he intended to remain anonymous).
In short, the FBIs location of the SR Server was lawful, and nothing about the way it was accomplished taints any evidence subsequently recovered in the Governments investigation.
I wonder: Does DOJs position that there is nothing . . . unlawful about this procedure mean that DOJ concedes that it would not violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. 1030, the federal computer hacking statute?
The FBIs location of the SR server brings to mind the prosecution of my former client Andrew Auernheimer, aka weev, who readers may recall was criminally prosecuted for his role in visiting website addresses on an AT&T server that AT&T had thought and hoped would not be found by the public. Auernheimers co-conspirator found that AT&T had posted e-mail addresses on its server at IP addresses that the public was not expected to find.
Here is the original post:
Volokh Conspiracy: Does obtaining leaked data from a misconfigured website violate the CFAA?
Ep 1 : DayZ - The Second Amendment
Today I will be discussing the right to bear arms in Dayz.
By: GeorgeAgainstTheMachine
See more here:
Posted: Tuesday, September 9, 2014 6:00 am
Nolan is for Second Amendment rights
Stewart Mills III is trying to scare gun owners. Weve seen this trick before. Dont buy into it.
Ive been seeing some really angry mail pieces recently, accusing Rep. Nolan of not standing up for our Second Amendment rights.
An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.
To become a new online only subscriber, and have your payment automatically charged every four weeks, please choose this option. By doing so, you will first proceed to a registration form. Upon completion of the registration form you will then continue by completing the subscription form. For assistance please call (218) 262-1011. Thank you.
Please note - If you have already registered during a previous visit to this web site go to directly to the login button at the top right and then proceed to the subscription form.
To become a new online only subscriber, and have your payment automatically charged every four weeks, please choose this option. By doing so, you will first proceed to a registration form. Upon completion of the registration form you will then continue by completing the subscription form. For assistance please call (218) 262-1011. Thank you.
Please note - If you have already registered during a previous visit to this web site go to directly to the login button at the top right and then proceed to the subscription form.
To become a new print and online subscriber, please choose this option. By doing so, you will first proceed to a registration form. Upon completion of the registration form you will then continue by completing the subscription form. For assistance please call (218) 262-1011. Thank you.
Read more:
The Idaho Second Amendment Alliance is urging members on itsFacebook pageto attend several upcoming city council meetings in Emmett, Fruitland, Lewiston and Mountain Home, as part of what it calls the "Preemption Project." The post said city councils and mayors are expected to overturn ordinances that are "outdated and out of compliance with Idaho's preemption law"a law that prohibits cities from regulating firearms.
The post continues, listing cities and counties that have overturned ordinances or where "full support is expected," which include Meridian, Gem County and Twin Falls County. The organization is also chipping away at others, like Star and Nampa, but it recently had its sights set on another city: Coeur d'Alene.
When the Coeur d'Alene City Council refused to overturn laws prohibiting firearms at parades and public assemblies, the Idaho Second Amendment Alliance threatened to sue, according to KTVB. A report from the Coeur d'Alene Press said the organization lacks the legal standing to file suit on its own, but members are working with an attorney to build a case.
The organization is celebrating a recent victory in Twin Falls County, where commissioners unanimously voted to overturn their firearms ordinanceallowing guns to be carried into county parks.
Originally posted here:
Coeur d'Alene Stands by Gun Ban, But It May Get Sued for Doing So
The Alex Jones Show(VIDEO Commercial Free) Monday September 8 2014: Lew Rockwell
Russians Practice Nuking America -- Date: 09/08/2014 -- --SUBSCRIBE TO PRISONPLANET.TV-- http://www.prisonplanet.tv/ -Today - Alex breaks down recent attacks on the First Amendment and the...
By: Ron Gibson
Read more:
The Alex Jones Show(VIDEO Commercial Free) Monday September 8 2014: Lew Rockwell - Video
Senators opened a historic debate Monday on whether to alter the First Amendment to give Congress the power to squelch free speech in the form of campaign spending, setting up a showdown vote later this week on the first alterations to the founding document in decades.
Democrats say the debate is a referendum on democracy and keeping the wealthy from distorting the system. Republicans counter its a debate about fundamental freedom of speech that all Americans should have.
For Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the Nevada Democrat driving the debate, its chiefly about two people Charles and David Koch, the billionaire brothers who pour tens of millions of dollars into conservative and libertarian causes.
They are trying to buy America, at every level of government, Mr. Reid said.
Democrats are trying to undo several Supreme Court decisions that have ruled that spending money on issue ads is covered by free speech guarantees that neither Congress nor the states can ban.
Their legislation would give Congress or state legislatures the power to set reasonable limits on how much money political candidates could raise and spend in seeking election and power to prohibit outside groups from spending any money at all on ads.
That would apply particularly to corporations, whom Democrats say are increasingly being granted rights that should be reserved to individuals.
Their proposed amendment would specifically carve out an exemption for the corporations that own the press, which would be allowed to use its reporting to influence elections.
Republicans said Democrats were trying to silence political opponents rather than debate their ideas and accused Mr. Reid of forcing the issue to the floor in order to rally his political base ahead of Novembers elections.
This proposed amendment would be the biggest threat to free speech that Congress would have enacted since the Alien and Sedition Acts back in 1798, said Sen. Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican.
Read the original post:
Senate debates limiting campaign cash by altering First Amendment
Several Senate Republicans joined Democrats on Monday to advance a constitutional amendment that would give Congress and the states greater power to regulate campaign finance.
But the bipartisanship ends there.
Many of the Republicans only voted for the bill to foul up Democrats pre-election messaging schedule, freezing precious Senate floor time for a measure that ultimately has no chance of securing the two-thirds support necessary in both the House and Senate to amend the Constitution.
The legislation needed 60 votes to advance and Democrats took a cynical view of the 79-18 tally. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said the GOPs tactic was simply to stall because it would eat up limited floor time that Democrats are eyeing for votes aimed at encouraging gender pay equity and raising the minimum wage.
(McConnell for POLITICO Magazine: The Democrats' assault on free speech)
They know were getting out of here fairly shortly and they want to prevent discussion on other very important issues, said Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). I would love to be proven wrong. But if the end of this week, we end up getting 67 votes, you can tell me I was too cynical.
But campaign finance is not a debate that Senate Republicans are shying away from and their argument is being led by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who penned an op-ed for POLITICO on Monday that portrayed Democrats as fixated on repealing the free speech protections the First Amendment guarantees to all Americans.
Not surprisingly, a proposal as bad as the one Senate Democrats are pushing wont even come close to garnering the votes it would need to pass. But to many Democrats, thats just the point. They want this proposal to fail because they think that somehow would help them on Election Day, McConnell wrote.
Democrats see electoral benefits in their proposal, pointing to Democratic-commissioned polls in battleground states that show bipartisan majorities in support of limiting big donors influence in politics and in opposition to Super PACs. Party leaders and aides believe their campaign finance proposal is popular and places the GOP on the wrong side of public opinion so some Democratic aides said they were happy for the debate to consume the Senate this week and still plan to hold votes on raising the minimum wage and pay equity before breaking for campaign season.
Theyre volunteering to defend the Koch brothers and a campaign finance system voters hate, said one Senate aide.
Read this article:
The how to make money with bitcoins bitcoin report
http://bitcoins-millionaire.com/vipaccess What is bitcoin How to make money with bitcoin. You might be already aware of this NEW digital currency known as BITCOIN, you might have heard it from...
By: conrad atherton
Read this article:
The what is bitcoin bitcoin training course
http://bitcoins-millionaire.com/vipaccess What is bitcoin How to make money with bitcoin. You might be already aware of this NEW digital currency known as BITCOIN, you might have heard it from...
By: conrad atherton
See more here:
How to be a Bitcoin Hater
Written guide: http://bitcoinmagazine.com/16027/bitcoin-hater/ As usual, some of this was inspired by Andreas Antonopoulos. This speech particularly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq8yOMl8IUs...
By: BraveTheWorld
Read more: