LOL the article mentions nick fuentes, whose name i’ve seen, but don’t know much about, so i looked him up. my favorite:
He has described himself as the “straightest guy” and attempted to defend himself as an incel by claiming that “the only really straight heterosexual position is to be an asexual incel”, as “having sex with women is gay … What’s gayer than being like, ‘I need cuddles. I need kisses … I need to spend time with a woman.’”[30][31][32]
it’s weird how infrequently i say “no way someone’s that fucking dumb” these days. because i always end up being wrong. i wouldn’t be shocked in the slightest if i learned he refuses to sit on a public shitter for fear that he’s potentially touching asses with a gay man
As someone who grew up in the South and moved to an educated coastal city, I’d just like to take this moment to say I fucking told you! None of you assholes believed me, you thought I was exaggerating! No, they are literally so goddamn stupid their very sentience is in question.
It’s cult-like conditioning perhaps? You can’t control people like mindless drones if they care about others. So yeah, I get why some types of orgs would prefer asexual incels, and why they’d try to make it seem like some desirable, or “alpha” position. What a bunch of losers
i’d guess he’s been deprived of it his entire life, so he inwardly turned it into a “bad” thing to make it make sense to himself. he’ll say EEEeEeEEeWWwwWwW when he sees a couple holding hands while actually wishing someone would even touch him
Ok, this looks like it could be a hack but in the comments they mention he was caught with trans porn on his phone… And I reached the limit of my curiosity.
Also, worth adding, a literal neo-nazi. Also, was part of the InfoWars meeting with Kanye when he said that we shouldn’t be dissing on Hitler all the time.
So yeah, he’s a piece of shit. And that’s the nicest thing you can say about him.
Yeah. For sure. Us citizens had enormous power together, but they don’t exercise it. (I was also referencing “citizens united” ruling, that made bribery legal)
The problem with the Israeli attacks i gaza is not the attacks themselves. Israel should have the right to defend themselves on all sides.
The problem is, that in Palestine they are using this as an excuse to kill as many civilians as they can get away with. This is genocide. They are more or less regulating the population of Palestine, and arguing that they in reality are fighting Hamas. The civilians are unfortunate accidents (that more or less keep on happening day in and day out)
When there are literally thousands of serial killers and the school was declared closed but filled with children to protect the serial killers it is justified at this point because to negotiate with terrorists itself promotes these tragedies. A school gets flattened so a dozen others might live. The greater good.
Whenever I’m curious about how people got in the frame of mind to support the Nazis, I just have to see those kinds of comments to remember how. Some people haven’t evolved past that dehumanization apparently.
So if the only way to save your children was to pull a lever to have the trolley hit another child who happens to also be throwing rocks at yours you’d not pull it? You’d watch your children get run over to save the life of a hostile child? How believable you sound.
I mean, they are even referenced as throwing stones (a… gasp hostile act) in your fellow terrorist warcrime supporter’s links, but you continue to believe what you want.
But if you’re referring to Hamas, I don’t support them either; as I clearly said I don’t support the killing of innocent people. Even if that is in response to the murder of innocent people.
Hamas suck, As does the Israeli government and anybody that supports their actions over the last 9/10 months and even longer than that to be honest.
See, you’re doing it again. No, Hamas doesn’t just ‘suck’. It’s this false equivalence BS that has my ire. Hamas… are. literal. terrorists. and that is not in dispute by anyone worth listening to. Hamas as a strategy kill, rape, torture, and take hostage anyone they can get their evil fucking hands on. Israel wants to just exist but have been putting up with the afforementioned terrorism for 80 years. So they got a little Nietzschian. Israel is sick of it. I would be too if I was in their shoes.
That’s the difference. They have a right to exist and I support that unequivocally. Are they perfect? Of course not. Would they be as hostile to Palestinians as they are had Terrorism Incorporated not made every minute of the last 80 years constant jeopardy? Um probably not. Is this a genocide? Not yet, but it could be if team Hamas doesn’t smarten up and say ‘hey now maybe peaceful solutions are a good idea’. Until then, Fuck Hamas and their putting civilians lives in jeopardy with their stubbornness.
If and when they surrender and release the hostages Israel continues this assault then yeah. They the baddies. Right now they are just getting their hands dirtier than you, sitting comfortably in your a/c sipping a latte somewhere else, would prefer protecting themselves.
So you don’t see how Israelis settlers make life unlivable for Palestinians? Or that Israel has taken more and more territory over the last 8 decades?
You seem to only want to shit on the terrorists Hamas and find issue with my choice of words, and not address any critique of Israel at all. That get my ire, the fact that people will focus on Hamas.
Edit: I will sit down and commiserate with you on the shit show from both sides for the last 80 years, but those issues should have been dealt with in the past and are not a justification for the present.
Who decides when we the statute of limitations is up on past transgressions of Israel?
Same people that decide that for the past transgressions of Terrorism Incorporated. Both sides need to stop, sit down and come to an agreement somehow. The only other way for peace is one Hamas sympathizers will NOT like.
As for ‘the next wave of Hamas conscripts’. That is inevitable. 80 ish years ago Israel did nothing but come into existance due to a UN mandate and all the nations around them declared war. Nothing Israel can do or not do will prevent Hamas and the like from growing except ceasing to exist and that is the genocide Hamas et al sympathizers are actually supporting.
Israel has been the one to turn down any ceasefire agreements put forward by Hamas, even the ones with the return of all hostages. So that seems like Israel doesn’t want a resolution and is dead set on the, impossible, task of wiping out Hamas. Which is something that isn’t likely, as killing my whole family might make me join Hamas.
Let me ask you this. Is the Palestinian people have tried peaceful measures to get Israel to stop taking land and killing people, and they’ve tried political means. What choice other than violence is left.
Wasn’t it JFK that said something like “people who make a peaceful resolution impossible will make a violent resolution inevitable”.
Israel is a sovereign nation. According to international law, they are held responsible for their actions. The same law does not apply to independent rebel groups, putting the responsibility on Iran.
If Israel can declare itself a sovereign nation on another peoples land there is no reason rebel groups cannot call themselves legitimate rulers. Anyone can call themselves anything.
There are criteria. It’s not simply self declared.
International law defines sovereign states as having a permanent population, defined territory, a government not under another, and the capacity to interact with other states.
The Houthis are a Zaydi Shiite movement that has been fighting Yemen’s Sunni-majority government since 2004. They reside in Yemen, so they have no land, and they are governed by Yemen. Therefore they are a faction, not a nation.
I was referring to your requirements for being a state. Even in your explanation you state that they have no land, therefore no mailing address, so thats why they are not a nation.
Ownership of land with agreed-upon borders defines a country. A nation needs to govern its land, but does not necessarily have permanent agreed-upon borders. That’s why Palestine is a nation, but not a country, for example.
You’re heavily projecting. I’m not defending Israel, nor do I support what they’ve done to Palestinians. I’m sharing cited factual information about the legal difference between a group, nation, and country. My opinion didn’t even enter the conversation until you incorrectly assumed what it was.
I agree that both settlements were wrong. Now that there’s an established system to define nations and countries, I think it’s important to be informed on how it works.
For example, the “favor” Netanyahu does by telling Palestinians to evacuate couldn’t be more corrupt. Since Palestine is a nation, but not a country with defined borders, full evacuation of settled land is no longer under their control and can legally be taken by Israel.
The same is not true for Ukraine, for example. Since it is a country, if all Ukrainians evacuate an area due to Russian invasion, it becomes a Russian occupation of Ukraine, not Russian land.
Most of their money and support is coming through Lebanon. And the Moussad is injecting massive ammounts of graft into the Lebanese government in order to destabilize it.
People have been warning from day 1 about the possibility of a regional escalation.
Apparently you cannot spend months acting in a way that neighboors who already don’t like you find morally reprehensible without some of those neighbors inserting themselves into the conflict.
The real question is how long can Iran avoid getting dragged into that. And if Iran gets involved directly, will we be able to contain this to a regional war, or will this small decades old conflict between parties whose total population is only about 12 million become the trigger for world war 3.
God I hope so. I had a dream once that the entirety of the land between the black sea and the gulf of aden was glassed smooth, and finally the world was at peace.
They wanted Joe to not run again in the first place, and for the DNC to nominate someone else.
Don’t get me wrong, biden’s administration has done amazing work. We are just so focused on the stupid horse race that we’re not actually picking a leader.
The main difference between Joe Biden and Donald Trump is then Biden isn’t a raging narcissist. He has surrounded himself with competent people who are quietly doing a great job of running the government.
They wanted Joe to not run again in the first place, and for the DNC to nominate someone else
Nope.
We wanted fair and open primaries were progressive leaning states didn’t have their delegates stolen and every state gets a chance to vote before it’s over rather than 4-5 states handpicked by the DNC because they vote moderate.
That increases turnout in the general.
What happened was undemocratic and depresses turnout helping Republicans
The main difference between Joe Biden and Donald Trump is then Biden isn’t a raging narcissist
If Biden wasn’t a narcissist he’d put the safety of the country over his own ambition to stay in the White House after it took 36 years to get the big chair.
Yeah, I didn’t point it out earlier, but you were already changing goalposts in the prior response.
President is not just signing bills, but also leading Democrats, and negotiates with Republicans to get bills passed. How do you think the bill to help Ukraine passed in April? Johnson just had a change of heart out of nowhere
This is why trump accomplished very little legislatively, he basically doesn’t know about making compromises.
Because he maybe did bad in the first debate (because apparently looking more energetic is more important than actually making sense), but his administration does an excellent governing job.
We already know how he is governing, what his foreign policy is.
(farming) …executive order directing agencies across the government to promote competition and take on monopolies.
(pot) … executive order directing the Department of Health and Human Services to conduct a review of all available cannabis science
(AI) … executive order starts the clock for more than a dozen federal agencies to figure out what the gold standard for “safe, secure and trustworthy” AI handling should be for their own operations
And that’s just the little stuff you didn’t notice – not the big stuff like the SAVE Plan for student debt (also an executive order) or caregiver support.
I guess that is besides the point, which seems to be redefining everything Biden has done as ineligible. I’m guessing you’d say Regan gets no credit for ending the Berlin Wall since HE didn’t tear it down.
Your three examples of Biden accomplishing something…
Is three times he told federal agencies to “look into” things?
No examples of him actually doing anything?
That’s the best you can find?
Quick edit:
Can we skip ahead to where you say no president has power to do anything?
Then I point out how that undermines Biden’s entire campaign and means the only thing that’s important is picking a popular and charismatic candidate and Biden is both historically unpopular and while charismatic for an 81 year old that’s not a very high standard?
Those weren’t MY points. It was just proof you do not choose to read. You said:
Not just legislation that he signed, three things that we got because Biden has the big desk and not literally anyone else with a D by their name.
The reply was the politico piece, and you claimed nothing on it counted. I checked. You were wrong. I posted 3 you missed and added two more (with links) which you ALSO ignored.
I didn’t bother with obvious stuff like defending Ukraine, strengthening alliances that had faltered, or surging the economy (especially since I think most economic stuff is a lagging indicator if under any Presidential control at all). If you weren’t going to read the politico article, why waste my time? I only waste my time now so the trolling becomes obvious to all.
Lmao this is what you came up with? Most of these aren’t “progressive” especially when 4-5 are pushing more military or escalating trade wars. Plus are you really trying to say this is a major win
Biden scraps Trump’s paint scheme for Air Force One
Plus producing more oil than ever is on there as well. Like that’s not a win that’s completely counter to helping climate change.
That’s some dumb thinking. You can’t just shut down oil production without first developing alternatives, you would tank the entire economy when you were recovering from a recession caused by the pandemic.
You need to first invest in developing infrastructure, make sure the majority will start using alternative fuel and then you reduce production.
Counting that as a win is crazy, that was the point of my response.
This coupled with the tariffs on importing cheap EVs are both clearly not wins for fighting climate change.
And before anyone feels the need to comment like they do on anything critical of Biden, yes trump would be worse. But less bad isn’t going to stop the sea levels from rising.
The whole campaign to replace him feels very astroturfed and is based on the first debate ignoring everything else.
I wouldn’t say it’s astroturfed when people like Adam Schiff are calling on Biden to step aside. I also wouldn’t say it’s just about the debate as Biden has met with people in congress to try and persuade them that he’s the guy and they’ve come away less than impressed after those meetings.
That’s how astroturfing works though. You create false narrative like everyone thinks that until people join through a bandwagon effect.
I was watching the debate and my takeaway was it was a horrible debate, moderators did a horrible job, trump was energetic but was just rambling (especially in the 2nd half), and completely ignored questions asked. Biden was anemic, made some blunders, but at least made sense.
By your definition pretty much everything could be described as astroturfing. I also don’t think it’s accurate to describe this as a “false narrative” either, you’re into “don’t believe your lying eyes” territory.
Not everything, astroturfing is creating a fake grassroot movement. This was purely manufactured by media (including left leaning ones) whose owners fear Biden pro middle class policies. They know that Biden doesn’t have anything to lose when implementing them like for example tax increases for people making $400,000+. Other, younger candidates are more likely to be more mendable.
I think you’re gaslighting a little. Why try and tell people their impression of Biden’s debate performance and NATO press conference isn’t genuine and instead is “purely manufactured by media”?
I know what I saw and was surprised by the media coverage, because that was not my impression. I even remember early polls for example one showing that actually he got a good response among Spanish voters.
It also shows this was manufactured as the media completely ignored (very anticipated, as it supposed to unmask “democratic pedophiles”) Epstein files.
I watched the whole debate. It was very painful to watch. Biden barely could finish sentences and trump lied everytime he opened his mouth. Then they started going off about golfing scores. It completely sucked.
Progressives have not abandoned Biden because Biden has basically promised them whatever the fuck they want for the next administration so long as they stand behind him. Even AOC is saying she’s with Biden.
I’m not even mad. I would consider taking that gamble as well. But the Biden administration knows that if the progressive wing of the party truly leaves them they are fucked
Right…just like he promised Elizabeth Warren a cabinet spot if she dropped out of the 2020 primary and backed him instead of Bernie.
I couldn’t disagree with your last sentiment more. If there’s one last bastion of bipartisan compromise in this country, it’s to work together to keep progressive leftists out of office at all costs, because they are the only true threat to the massive amount of capital that’s been stolen by the ruling class over the past 40 years.
If you are a progressive democrat in the house you sure as shit are going to try to get the president to owe your bloc. That’s politics man. Can’t say I love it but it at least makes sense
Yeah I’m not arguing that, you’re right. I just don’t think they’re effectively using their leverage.
That said, their hands are tied for now, because if any of them said anything at all about Biden stepping down before it actually happens, the entire narrative would shift to “progressives undermine Dem chances, it’s all their fault.” Establishment dems are so eager to learn the wrong lessons in these situations…conveniently allowing them to never have to evolve their politics.
Bernie was going to be the presidential nominee. Cabinet positions got offered for other progressives to back Biden instead of him once they dropped out, thus securing Biden the win.
Biden stomped Liz in Maine and Massachusetts. Also beat Bernie by a decent amount.Then beat Bernie by a lot in Michigan and Wisconsin. Two critical swing states. That was the moment people realized Biden had the wider appeal and better shot.
I don’t want him or Harris, but I’d still vote “for” him even if he were in hospice simply because he’s not the fascist candidate who wants to completely dismantle democracy.
I want to vote for the guy who has the FULL AND UNEQUIVOCAL SUPPORT OF THE LARGEST PRIVATE PRISON CORPORATION IN THE WORLD WHO MAKES MONEY BY IMPRISONING PEOPLE LIKE ME!
“The agency claims authority to regulate everything from a power lawnmower’s design,” he wrote, “to the level of ‘contact between trainers and whales at SeaWorld.’”
I fail to see anything wrong with either thing like… is he just mad it is not the people who sell lawn mowers should decide what’s safe?? Please please please don’t tell me Americans are going to dip to this new level of cognitive dissonance
The fuck is wrong with this guy. I mean, apart from the brain worm. Is this just adult-form affluenza?
He’s got a sort of radical honesty, but the stuff he’s being honest about are all things that should disqualify him from public life. Like, it’s refreshing that you didn’t lie about your brain worm or nonconsensual groping, but you also don’t seem to be at all embarrassed or ashamed of them and you should be.
In her dispatch on the event, Jane notes that Trump didn’t even bother to show up and instead spoke to attendees via telephone about his planned tax cuts for businesses.
I 10,000% guarantee this would not be enacted by a Trump presidency. Worst, if some for of it was put forward it would have specific conditions limiting which country of origin this would apply to (surprise surprise: white ones).
Please don’t get lured by the broken clock phenomenon…
The only thing that I can appreciate about Trump is that growing up, I could not fathom how people were swayed into supporting that regime. I thought there’s no way that type of propaganda can work on that many people. Well unfortunately I can now.
I don’t think so. People communicate more freely than ever, and have access to history more than they ever have. There isn’t a problem that will come up that will suddenly make me want to assist in genocide.
What made you think so? My impression is that they communicate more freely in Jules Verne’s books than now. That’s about the Web and not even my environment.
and have access to history more than they ever have.
And the fact that it doesn’t help should hint you.
There isn’t a problem that will come up that will suddenly make me want to assist in genocide.
“Suddenly” is moving the goalposts. Of course you’ll be prepared.
My support improves the probability of others’ support less than an NT person’s support. It can even be counterproductive. Can’t believe this is such a hard concept to explain.
Yeah, those antisocial loners are never useful for anything. Certainly not stuff like suicide bombing or mass shooting. Those are done by people who are the life of the party.
Certainly not stuff like suicide bombing or mass shooting. Those are done by people who are the life of the party.
Nazi ideology had a pretty collectivist cult of sacrifice, strength, loyalty etc, so why not.
Other than that - motives for suicide bombings and mass shootings are usually directed against groups presenting themselves as any Nazis do when they have power.
And such groups are deeply hostile to individual actions like a suicide bombing. Maybe for a few assassinations or as an excuse for some action - yes, but not as a system.
I think I know more about fascism than you, having been really interested in the subject in the past.
“Terrorism” as commonly used (suicide attacks etc) is, in fact, asymmetric warfare. And in emotion it’s an individual going against a mass. It’s the opposite of fascism.
“Terrorism” as Stalin’s repressions, or jailing random people for words, or police not touching violent groups harassing someone, etc - yes, these are normal for fascism.
I think this has been a long and monotonous exchange, so one question - what are you expecting to gain from this conversation? And another - could we please cut there?
But please do tell me Mussolini, who came up with the term ‘fascism,’ was not a fascist or that his tactics weren’t terrorism. That should be fun.
As for what I am expecting to gain from this conversation? Just correcting your false and/or silly claims for other people’s benefit since I am assuming you are the sort of person who never admits when they’re wrong, especially based on your silly “I know better than you” comment at the outset.
You didn’t look at a single link, did you? That’s the only way you couldn’t see that you were wrong. The first link even had ‘terrorism’ in the URL.
How about rather than insult me (I have flagged you again), you explain to me why either Mussolini didn’t use terrorism or why Mussolini was not a fascist?
Links prove that you ignored what I said about the word “terrorism” being the only thing uniting suicidal bombings and fascist violence, and these two parts being clearly divisible.
Can you please go to Facebook with that conflict attitude and your opinion that this tone makes you smarter?
“Terrorism” as commonly used (suicide attacks etc) is, in fact, asymmetric warfare. And in emotion it’s an individual going against a mass. It’s the opposite of fascism.
“Terrorism” as Stalin’s repressions, or jailing random people for words, or police not touching violent groups harassing someone, etc - yes, these are normal for fascism.
The links, which you clearly are refusing to read, so I’m not sure why you’re telling me what’s in them, show that asymmetric warfare in the form of terrorism was exactly what brought Mussolini to power.
Again, I know that you will never say you were incorrect (I doubt you ever do), this is for the benefit of others.
Flagged again for incivility. If you wish to explain how Mussolini did not use asymmetric warfare in the form of terrorism in order to rise to power as a fascist leader rather than continuing to insult me, please do so.
Because, again, this is the “fucking quote” from you:
“Terrorism” as commonly used (suicide attacks etc) is, in fact, asymmetric warfare. And in emotion it’s an individual going against a mass. It’s the opposite of fascism.
That is what Mussolini did before he rose to power. As the links discuss.
“Terrorism” as Stalin’s repressions, or jailing random people for words, or police not touching violent groups harassing someone, etc - yes, these are normal for fascism.
None of which Mussolini could do before he rose to power, hence the asymmetric warfare.
So, feel free to keep insulting me, but you’re still incorrect.
Mussolini used asymmetric warfare in the form of terrorism to rise to power.
Mussolini was a fascist.
Those are simple facts whether you like them or not.
Those are simple facts whether you like them or not.
This is only your opinion whether you like it or not, and I don’t care since it seems to be like talking to a wall.
Since you deliberately ignore that the difference between symmetric and asymmetric warfare in my division of “terrorism” is not in having governmental power, but in linear logic versus suicidal logic, or optimization versus unpredictability, but that’d be too deep.
By the way, in natural languages no sequence of words has a clearly defined meaning, so when you argue, you don’t press as if an argument could be “won” or “lost”, you ask for specifics and try to find your own error first, or try to explain yourself more clearly, as I did before calling you names. If you act otherwise, then any intelligent human can assess you well from that alone.
I’ll address the other thing:
Flagged again for incivility.
I hope you realize you can’t police anyone here.
You may consider this whatever you want, but 1) technically one can see removed comments, 2) you’ve read them all and can’t change that, 3) this isn’t worth anything to me personally as a social action.
I don’t care about any of your three points. At all. I also didn’t ignore anything since I specifically used the word ‘asymmetric’ multiple times including the comment you just replied to. So basically you’re telling a really stupid lie. I don’t know why you’re telling such a stupid lie, but…
Stooge. The rich laugh while you blame other poor people for your plight. When will these morons realize race and religion are just tools of the powerful to control others and distract from their crimes.
…wait. Am I in an echo chamber? I’ve been saying this for years. Am I upvoting you because you’re right? Or just because it’s what I already agree with?
Is the fact that I’m self aware of the problem enough to notice a real echo chamber? Or am I still vunerable to not being able to tell reality from talking points?
This switch from reddit is weird. I’m used to being the one to make that point. Usually after someone says something stupid.
am I still vunerable to not being able to tell reality from talking points?
You’re absolutely still vulnerable, and the fact you sometimes notice you’re in an echo chamber means that when you don’t spot it you’re more likely to think you’re not in one, even if you are. It’s an interesting dilemma; if you’re not aware then you risk falling into any echo chamber, but the more aware you are of a trap like this normally, the more you risk being sucked in due tp misplaced confidence when you miss the signs.
Stay alert, keep questioning why you agree with others and welcome to Lemmy!
I am strong, powerful, manly man, so therefore any weakness/failure cannot be because of my failings, but a sign of how powerful the Jews/globalists/antifa/comintern/etc are
It’s not a complex ideology, but it’s an easy panacea - like conspiracies- for the hard reality that is modern existence
It’s not a complex ideology, but it’s an easy panacea - like conspiracies- for the hard reality that is modern existence.
Damn but that’s some high grade poignancy early in the morning.
But it isn’t a panacea. They’re just told by the hate oil salesman it is, but they’ll choke on it same as they would have with snake oil, just taking the rest of progress with them. There has to be a way to hijack the methodology and change the message.
You’re right that it’s ineffective, but the messaging and emotional hooks are powerful. “The left” at its core challenges the ego. It sees society, culture, economics, politics, etc and says “Do better”, or if we’re being pleasant “We can do better, let’s build it”
“The right” tells your id what it wants to hear. Everything is as it ought to be, you don’t need to improve yourself, this is the best place to be, failures are because of ‘our enemies’.
“You’re fine, it’s their fault” is a very easy pill to swallow, and the mental gymnastics start quietly
Easy, they are told so, sometimes from behind a pulpit. The sheeple aren’t trusting their own eyes, they are trusting their neighbors to crowd-think the correct answer.
And then on the other side, you have things like Hillary Clinton’s email scandals - like when she colluded with agents of a foreign government, told the Supreme Court to fuck off rather than deliver her emails (I have decided that you will need to wait for a week while I delete all the ones I don’t want you to see first…), illegally conspired with the DNC to do things like give her the questions in advance of a debate (but not give those to Bernie Sanders), and so on. When Trump says that the Democrats are corrupt - he ain’t lying!!! He just left out the part where he would be 100x worse.
People didn’t vote for him, they voted against her. But anyway, unlike any Democrat except Bernie, he did stand up to her by running for office. Anyway, voting for Trump was people rolling the dice to see what happened, as in better a random outcome than her.
The Powers That Be decided to use Trump bc he was convenient, and for sheeple who follow authority rather than individualistic logical thinking (especially the less educated ones, bc voting properly requires a rather enormous investment of time, energy, and attention to build up - over a decade of research for sure), it makes sense to them that if everyone around them is saying the same thing, then it can’t be wrong!? (Cognitive dissonance, so they ignore what they see with their very own eyes.)
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.