Hitler’s War Crimes vs.
Those of Churchill & the Americans
Hitler’s War Crimes vs.
Those of Churchill & the Americans
Paul Craig Roberts
When we want to demonize
someone the worst epithet we can think of is to call him a Nazi or compare the
person to Hitler, as Hillary Clinton did when she declared Russia’s President
Putin “the new Hitler.” This ingrained habit comes from the influence of the
massive anti-German World War II propaganda. Revisionist historians who have
actually dug up the buried evidence and examined it have made a case that
whatever the Nazi crimes, they were rivaled, if not exceeded, by those of
Churchill and the Americans.
Unz, a prolific reader with
a knack for tying things together reviews some of the true history in what
follows. To condition yourself for the coming shock, keep in mind that the same
Hitler that is said to have hated Jews and systematically gassed and burnt
them, had 150,000 half-and quarter-Jews serving in his armies, “mostly as
combat officers, and these included at least 15 half-Jewish generals and
admirals, with another dozen quarter Jews holding those same high ranks. The
most notable example was Field Marshal Erhard Milch, Hermann Goering’s powerful
second-in-command, who played such an important operational role in creating
the Luftwaffe. Milch certainly had a Jewish father, and according to some much
less substantiated claims, perhaps even a Jewish mother as well, while his
sister was married to an SS general.”
When truth-tellers rattle
our cages, we get upset over having our comfortable make-believe world
disturbed and shout invectives. Rather than condemn the messanger, the more
mature response would be to condemn those who lied to us and institutionalized
false history into our consciousness. Keep in mind that the few who tell you
the truth pay a high price for doing so; therefore, you should refrain from
adding your invective to the copious amount heaped on them by the
Establishment. Think about it. Which is your true friend, the one who tells you
the truth, or the one who controls the explanations you receive in order to
advance his own agenda?
I again state my admiration
of Ron Unz. He is Jewish. He is highly intelligent. He is a Harvard graduate.
He is an entrepreneur who made himself a multi-millionaire. He could have held
his fire and risen to the top of the establishment. Instead, he chose to tell
us the truth. Ron Unz is the person who should be President. Unlike Trump, Unz
would know how to staff a government that would put truth and morality back in
charge of our future.
Here is Ron Unz weighing for
us the historical evidence on who was the worst war criminal. The emphasis is
added:
For most present-day
Americans, the primary image associated with Hitler and his German regime is
the horrendous scale of the war-crimes that they supposedly committed during
the global conflict that they are alleged to have unleashed. But in one of his
lectures, Irving made the rather telling observation that the relative scale of
such World War II crimes and especially their evidentiary base might not
necessarily point in the direction of implicating the Germans.
Although Hollywood and those
in its thrall have endlessly cited the findings of the Nuremberg Tribunals as
the final word on Nazi barbarism, even a cursory examination of those
proceedings raises enormous skepticism. As time passed, historians gradually
acknowledged that some of the most shocking and lurid pieces of evidence used
to secure worldwide condemnation of the defendants—the human lampshades and
bars of soap, the shrunken heads—were entirely fraudulent. The Soviets were
determined to prosecute the Nazis for the Katyn Forest massacre of the captured
Polish officer corps even though the Western Allies were convinced that Stalin
had actually been responsible, a belief eventually confirmed by Gorbachev and
the newly-opened Soviet archives. If the Germans had actually done so
many horrible things, one wonders why the prosecution would have bothered
including such fabricated and false charges.
And over the decades,
considerable evidence has accumulated that the Gas Chambers and the Jewish
Holocaust—the central elements of today’s Nazi “Black Legend”—were just as
fictional as all those other items. The Germans were notoriously meticulous
record-keepers, embracing orderly bureaucracy like no other people, and nearly
all their archives were captured at the end of the war. Under these
circumstances, it seems rather odd that there are virtually no traces of the
plans or directives associated with the monstrous crimes that their leadership
supposedly ordered committed in such massively industrial fashion. Instead, the
entirety of the evidence seems to consist of a tiny quantity of rather doubtful
documentary material, the dubious interpretations of certain phrases, and
various German confessions, often obtained under brutal torture.
Given his crucial wartime
role in Military Intelligence, John Beaty [The Iron Curtain Over America]
was particularly harsh in his denunciation of the proceedings, and the numerous
top American generals who endorsed his book add considerably to the weight of
his verdict:
He was scathing toward the
Nuremberg Trials, which he described as a “major indelible blot” upon America
and “a travesty of justice.” According to him, the proceedings were dominated
by vengeful German Jews, many of whom engaged in falsification of testimony or
even had criminal backgrounds. As a result, this “foul fiasco” merely taught
Germans that “our government had no sense of justice.” Sen. Robert Taft, the
Republican leader of the immediate postwar era took a very similar position,
which later won him the praise of John F. Kennedy in Profiles in
Courage. The fact that the chief Soviet prosecutor at Nuremberg had played
the same role during the notorious Stalinist show trials of the late 1930s,
during which numerous Old Bolsheviks confessed to all sorts of absurd and
ridiculous things, hardly enhanced the credibility of the proceedings to many
outside observers.
By contrast, Irving notes
that if the Allies had instead been in the dock at Nuremberg, the evidence of
their guilt would have been absolutely overwhelming. After all, it was
Churchill who began the illegal terror-bombing of cities, a strategy
deliberately intended to provoke German retaliation and which eventually led to
the death of a million or more European civilians. Late in the war, military
reversals had even persuaded the British leader to order similarly illegal
poison gas attacks against German cities, along with the initiation of even
more horrific biological warfare involving anthrax bombs. Irving
located these signed directives in the British archives, although Churchill
was later persuaded to countermand them before they were carried out. By
contrast, German archival material demonstrates that Hitler had repeatedly
ruled out any first use of such illegal weapons under any circumstances, even
though Germany’s far deadlier arsenal might have turned the tide of the war in
its favor.
Although long forgotten
today, Freda Utley was a mid-century journalist of some prominence. Born an
Englishwoman, she had married a Jewish Communist and moved to Soviet Russia,
then fled to America after her husband fell in one of Stalin’s purges. Although
hardly sympathetic to the defeated Nazis, she strongly shared Beaty’s view of
the monstrous perversion of justice at Nuremberg and her first-hand account of
the months spent in Occupied Germany is eye-opening in its description of the
horrific suffering imposed upon the prostrate population even years after the
end of the war. Moreover:
Her book also gives
substantial coverage to the organized expulsions of ethnic Germans from
Silesia, the Sudatenland, East Prussia, and various other parts of Central and
Eastern Europe where they had peacefully lived for many centuries, with the
total number of such expellees generally estimated at 13 to 15 million.
Families were sometimes given as little as ten minutes to leave the homes in
which they had resided for a century or more, then forced to march off on foot,
sometimes for hundreds of miles, towards a distant land they had never seen,
with their only possessions being what they could carry in their own hands. In
some cases, any surviving menfolk were separated out and shipped off to
slave-labor camps, thereby producing an exodus consisting solely of women,
children, and the very elderly. All estimates were that at least a couple
million perished along the way, from hunger, illness, or exposure.
These days we endlessly read
painful discussions of the notorious “Trail of Tears” suffered by the Cherokees
in the distant past of the early 19th century, but this rather similar 20th
Century event was nearly a thousand-fold larger in size. Despite this huge
discrepancy in magnitude and far greater distance in time, I would guess that
the former event may command a thousand times the public awareness among
ordinary Americans. If so, this would demonstrate that overwhelming media
control can easily shift perceived reality by a factor of a million or more.
The population movement
certainly seems to have represented the largest ethnic-cleansing in the history
of the world, and if the Germany had ever done anything even remotely similar
during its years of European victories and conquests, the visually-gripping
scenes of such an enormous flood of desperate, trudging refugees would surely
have become a centerpiece of numerous World War II movies of the last seventy
years. But since nothing like that ever happened, Hollywood screenwriters lost
a tremendous opportunity.
I think perhaps the most
plausible explanation for the widespread promotion of a multitude of largely
fictional German war-crimes at Nuremberg was to the camouflage and obscure the
very real ones actually committed by the Allies.
Other related indicators may be found in the extreme tone of some of the
American publications of the period, even those produced well before our
country even entered the war. For example:
But as early as 1940, an
American Jew named Theodore Kaufman became so enraged at what he regarded as
Hitler’s mistreatment of German Jewry that he published a short book
evocatively entitled Germany Must Perish!, in which he explicitly
proposed the total extermination of the German people. And that book apparently
received favorable if perhaps not entirely serious discussion in many of our
most prestigious media outlets, including the New York Times, the Washington
Post, and Time Magazine.
Surely any such similar book
published in Hitler’s Germany that advocated the extermination of all Jews or
Slavs would have been a centerpiece at Nuremberg, and any newspaper reviewers
who had treated it favorably would probably have stood in the dock for “crimes
against humanity.”
Meanwhile, the terrible
nature of the Pacific War fought in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor is suggested
by a 1944 issue of Life magazine that carried the photo of a young American
woman with the skull of a Japanese soldier her boyfriend had sent her as a war
souvenir. If any Nazi magazines ever featured similar images, I doubt the
Allies would have had any need to fabricate ridiculous stories of human
lampshades or soap.
And remarkably enough, that
grotesque scene actually provides a reasonably accurate indication of the
savage atrocities that were regularly committed during the brutal fighting of
the Pacific Theater. These unpleasant facts were fully set forth in War
Without Mercy, an award-winning 1986 volume by eminent American historian
John W. Dower that received glowing accolades by leading scholars and public
intellectuals.
The unfortunate truth is
that Americans typically massacred Japanese who sought to surrender or who had
even already been taken as prisoners, with the result that only a small
slice—during some years merely a tiny sliver—of Japanese troops defeated in
battle ever survived. The traditional excuse publicly offered for the virtual
absence of any Japanese POWs was that their Bushido code made surrender
unthinkable, yet when the Soviets defeated Japanese armies in 1945, they had no
difficulty capturing over a million prisoners. Indeed, since interrogating
prisoners was important for intelligence purposes, late in the war U.S.
commanders began offering rewards such as ice cream to their troops for
bringing some surrendering Japanese in alive rather than killing them in the
field.
American GIs also regularly
committed remarkably savage atrocities. Dead or wounded Japanese frequently had
their gold teeth knocked out and taken as war-booty, and their ears were often
cut-off and kept as souvenirs, as was also sometimes the case with their
skulls. Meanwhile, Dower notes the absence of any evidence suggesting similar
behavior on the other side. The American media generally portrayed the Japanese
as vermin fit for eradication, and numerous public statements by high-ranking
American military leaders explicitly claimed that the bulk of the entire
Japanese population would probably need to be exterminated in order to bring
the war to a successful conclusion. Comparing such thoroughly-documented facts
with the rather tenuous accusations usually leveled against Nazi political or
military leaders is quite revealing.
During the late 1980s evidence of other deep wartime secrets suddenly came to
light.
While visiting France during
1986 in preparation for an unrelated book, a Canadian writer named James Bacque
stumbled upon clues suggesting that one of the most terrible secrets of
post-war Germany had long remained completely hidden, and he soon embarked upon
extensive research into the subject, finally publishing Other Losses in
1989. Based upon very considerable evidence, including government records,
personal interviews, and recorded eyewitness testimony, he argued that after
the end of the war, the Americans had starved to death as many as a million
German POWs, seemingly as a deliberate act of policy, a war crime that would
surely rank among the greatest in history.
For decades, Western
propagandists had relentlessly barraged the Soviets with claims that they were
keeping back a million or more “missing” German POWs as slave-laborers in their
Gulag, while the Soviets had endlessly denied these accusations. According to
Bacque, the Soviets had been telling the truth all along, and the missing
soldiers had been among the enormous numbers who had fled westward near the end
of the war, seeking what they assumed would be far better treatment at the
hands of the advancing Anglo-American armies. But instead, they were denied all
normal legal protections, and confined under horrible conditions where they
rapidly perished of hunger, illness, and exposure.
Without attempting to
summarize Bacque’s extensive accumulation of supporting material, a few of his
factual elements are worth mentioning. At the close of hostilities, the
American government employed circuitous legal reasoning to argue that the many
millions of German troops that they had captured should not be considered
“prisoners of war” and therefore were not covered by the provisions of the
Geneva Convention. Soon afterward, attempts by the International Red Cross to
provide food shipments to the enormous Allied prison camps were repeatedly
rejected, and notices were posted throughout the nearby German towns and
villages that any civilian who attempted to smuggle food to the desperate POWs
might be shot on sight. These undeniable historical facts do seem to suggest
certain dark possibilities.
Although initially released
by an obscure publisher, Bacque’s book soon became a sensation and an
international best-seller. He paints Gen. Dwight Eisenhower as the central
culprit behind the tragedy, noting the far lower POW losses in areas outside
his control, and suggests that as a highly ambitious “political general” of
German-American ancestry, he may have been under intense pressure to
demonstrate his “harshness” toward the defeated Wehrmacht foe.
Furthermore, once the Cold
War ended and the Soviet Archives were open to scholars, their contents seem to
have strongly validated Bacque’s thesis. He notes that although the archives do
contain explicit evidence of such long-denied atrocities as Stalin’s Katyn
Forest massacre of Poland’s officer corps, they show absolutely no signs of any
million missing German POWs, who instead had very likely ended their lives in
the starvation and illness of Eisenhower’s death camps. Bacque points out that the
German government has issued severe legal threats against anyone seeking to
investigate the likely sites of the mass graves that might hold the remains of
those long-dead POWs, and in an updated edition, he also mentions Germany’s
enactment of harsh new laws meting out heavy prison sentences to anyone who
merely questions the official narrative of World War II.
Bacque’s discussion of the
new evidence of the Kremlin archives constitutes a relatively small portion of
his 1997 sequel, Crimes and Mercies, which centered around an even
more explosive analysis, and also became an international best-seller.
As described above,
first-hand observers of post-war Germany in 1947 and 1948 such as Gollanz and
Utley, had directly reported on the horrific conditions they discovered, and
stated that for years official food rations for the entire population had been
comparable to that of the inmates of Nazi concentration camps and sometimes far
lower, leading to the widespread malnutrition and illness they witnessed all
around them. They also noted the destruction of most of Germany’s pre-war
housing stock and the severe overcrowding produced by the influx of so many
millions of pitiful ethnic German refugees expelled from other parts of Central
and Eastern Europe. But these visitors lacked any access to solid population
statistics, and could only speculate upon the enormous human death toll that
hunger and illness had already inflicted, and which would surely continue if
policies were not quickly changed.
Years of archival research
by Bacque attempt to answer this question, and the conclusion he provides is
certainly not a pleasant one. Both the Allied military government and the later
German civilian authorities seem to have made a concerted effort to hide or
obscure the true scale of the calamity visited upon German civilians during the
years 1945-1950, and the official mortality statistics found in government
reports are simply too fantastical to possibly be correct, although they became
the basis for the subsequent histories of that period. Bacque notes that these
figures suggest that the death rate during the terrible conditions of 1947,
long remembered as the “Hunger Year” (Hungerjahr) and vividly described in
Gollancz’s account, was actually lower than that of the prosperous Germany of
the late 1960s. Furthermore, private reports by American officials, mortality
rates from individual localities, and other strong evidence demonstrate that
these long-accepted aggregate numbers were essentially fictional.
Instead, Bacque attempts to
provide more realistic estimates based upon an examination of the population
totals of the various German censuses together with the recorded influx of the
huge number of German refugees. Based upon this simple analysis, he makes a
reasonably strong case that the excess German deaths during that period
amounted to at least around 10 million, and possibly many millions more.
Furthermore, he provides substantial evidence that the starvation was either
deliberate or at least enormously worsened by American government resistance to
overseas food relief efforts. Perhaps these numbers should not be so totally
surprising given that the official Morgenthau Plan had envisioned the
elimination of around 20 million Germans, and as Bacque demonstrates, top
American leaders quietly agreed to continue that policy in practice even while
they renounced it in theory.
Assuming these numbers are
even remotely correct, the implications are quite remarkable. The toll of the
human catastrophe experienced in post-war Germany would certainly rank among
the greatest in modern peacetime history, far exceeding the deaths that
occurred during the Ukrainian Famine of the early 1930s and possibly even
approaching the wholly unintentional losses during Mao’s Great Leap Forward of
1959-61. Furthermore, the post-war German losses would vastly outrank either of
these other unfortunate events in percentage terms and this would remain true
even if the Bacque’s estimates are considerably reduced. Yet I doubt if even a
small fraction of one percent of Americans are today aware of this enormous
human calamity. Presumably memories are much stronger in Germany
itself, but given the growing legal crackdown on discordant views in that
unfortunate country, I suspect that anyone who discusses the topic too
energetically risks immediate imprisonment.
To a considerable extent,
this historical ignorance has been heavily fostered by our governments, often
using underhanded or even nefarious means. Just like in the old decaying USSR,
much of the current political legitimacy of today’s American government and its
various European vassal-states is founded upon a particular narrative history
of World War II, and challenging that narrative might produce dire political
consequences. Bacque credibly relates some of the apparent efforts to dissuade
any major newspaper or magazine from running articles discussing the startling
findings of his first book, thereby imposing a “blackout” aimed at absolutely
minimizing any media coverage. Such measures seem to have been quite effective,
since until eight or nine years ago, I’m not sure I had ever heard a word of
these shocking ideas, and I have certainly never seen them seriously discussed
in any of the numerous newspapers or magazines that I have carefully read over
the last three decades.
Even illegal means were
employed to hinder the efforts of this solitary, determined scholar. At times,
Bacque’s phone-lines were tapped, his mail intercepted, and his research
materials surreptitiously copied, while his access to some official archives was
blocked. Some of the elderly eyewitnesses who personally corroborated his
analysis received threatening notes and had their property vandalized.
In his Foreword to this 1997
book, De Zayas, the eminent international human rights attorney, praised
Bacque’s ground-breaking research, and hoped that it would soon lead to a major
scholarly debate aimed at reassessing the true facts of these historical events
that had taken place a half-century earlier. But in his update to the 2007
edition, he expressed some outrage that no such discussion ever occurred,
and instead the German government merely passed a series of harsh laws
mandating prison sentences for anyone who substantially disputed the settled
narrative of World War II and its immediate aftermath, perhaps by overly
focusing on the suffering of German civilians.
Although both of Bacque’s
books became international best-sellers, the near-complete absence of any
secondary media coverage ensured that they never entered public awareness with
anything more than a pinprick. Another important factor is the tremendously
disproportionate reach of print and electronic media. A best-seller may be read
by many tens of thousands of people, but a successful film might reach tens of
millions, and so long as Hollywood churns out endless movies denouncing
Germany’s atrocities but not a single one on the other side, the true facts of
that history are hardly likely to gain much traction. I strongly suspect that
far more people today believe in the real-life existence of Batman and
Spiderman than are even aware of the Bacque Hypothesis.
Many of the elements presented above were drawn from my previous articles
published over the last year or so, but I believe there is some value in
providing this same material in unified form rather than only separately, even
if the total length necessarily becomes quite considerable.
World War II dominates our
twentieth century landscape like a colossus, and still casts huge shadows
across our modern world. That global conflict has probably been the subject of
far more sustained coverage, whether in print or electronic media, than any
other event in human history. So if we encounter a small handful of highly
anomalous items that seem to directly contradict such an ocean of enormously
detailed and long-accepted information, there is a natural tendency to dismiss
these few outliers as implausible or even delusional. But once the total number
of such discordant seemingly yet well-documented elements becomes sufficiently
large, we must take them more seriously, and perhaps eventually concede that
most of them are probably correct. As was suggested in a quote widely if
doubtfully attributed to Stalin, “Quantity has a quality all of its own.”
I am hardly the first
individual to gradually become aware of this sweeping and cohesive
counter-narrative of the Second World War, and a few months ago I happened to
read Germany’s War, published in 2014 by amateur historian John
Wear. Drawing from sources that substantially overlap with the ones I have
discussed, his conclusions are reasonably similar to my own, but presented in a
book length form that includes some 1,200 exact source references. So those
interested in a much more detailed exposition of these same issues can read it
and decide for themselves.
When intellectual freedom is
under attack, challenging an officially enshrined mythology may become legally
perilous. I have seen claims that thousands of individuals who hold heterodox
opinions about various aspects of the history of World War II are today
imprisoned across Europe on the basis of those beliefs. If so, that total is
probably far higher than the number of ideological dissidents who had suffered
a similar fate in the decaying Soviet Bloc countries of the 1980s.
World War II ended nearly three generations ago, and few of its adult survivors
still walk the earth. From one perspective the true facts of that conflict and
whether or not they actually contradict our traditional beliefs might appear
rather irrelevant. Tearing down the statues of some long-dead historical
figures and replacing them with the statues of others hardly seems of much
practical value.
But if we gradually conclude
that the story that all of us have been told during our entire lifetimes is
substantially false and perhaps largely inverted, the implications for our
understanding of the world are enormous. Most of the surprising material
presented here is hardly hidden or kept under lock-and-key. Nearly all the
books are easily available at Amazon or even freely readable on the Internet,
many of the authors have received critical and scholarly acclaim, and in some
cases their works have sold in the millions. Yet this important material has
been almost entirely ignored or dismissed by the popular media that shapes the
common beliefs of our society. So we must necessarily begin to wonder what
other massive falsehoods may have been similarly promoted by that media,
perhaps involving incidents of the recent past or even the present day. And
those latter events do have enormous practical significance. As I pointed out
several years ago in my original American Pravda article:
Aside from the evidence of
our own senses, almost everything we know about the past or the news of today
comes from bits of ink on paper or colored pixels on a screen, and fortunately
over the last decade or two the growth of the Internet has vastly widened the
range of information available to us in that latter category. Even if the
overwhelming majority of the unorthodox claims provided by such non-traditional
web-based sources is incorrect, at least there now exists the possibility of
extracting vital nuggets of truth from vast mountains of falsehood.
We must also recognize that
many of the fundamental ideas that dominate our present-day world were founded
upon a particular understanding of that wartime history, and if there seems
good reason to believe that narrative is substantially false, perhaps we should
begin questioning the framework of beliefs erected upon it.
George Orwell fought in the
Spanish Civil War during the 1930s and discovered that the true facts in Spain
were radically different from what he had been led to believe by the British
media of his day. In 1948 these past experiences together with the rapidly
congealing “official history” of the Second World War may have been uppermost
in his mind when he published his classic novel 1984, which
famously declared that “Who controls the past controls the future; who controls
the present controls the past.”
Indeed, as I noted last year
this observation has never been more true than when we consider some of the
historical assumptions that govern the politics of today’s world, and the
likelihood that they are entirely misleading:
Back in those late Cold War
days, the death toll of innocent civilians from the Bolshevik Revolution and
the first two decades of the Soviet Regime was generally reckoned at running
well into the tens of millions when we include the casualties of the Russian
Civil War, the government-induced famines, the Gulag, and the executions. I’ve heard
that these numbers have been substantially revised downwards to perhaps as
little as twenty million or so, but no matter. Although determined Soviet
apologists may dispute such very large figures, they have always been part of
the standard narrative history taught within the West.
Meanwhile, all historians
know perfectly well that the Bolshevik leaders were overwhelmingly Jewish, with
three of the five revolutionaries Lenin named as his plausible successors
coming from that background. Although only around 4% of Russia’s population was
Jewish, a few years ago Vladimir Putin stated that Jews constituted
perhaps 80-85% of the early Soviet government, an estimate fully consistent
with the contemporaneous claims of Winston Churchill, Times of London
correspondent Robert Wilton, and the officers of American Military
Intelligence. Recent books by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Yuri Slezkine,
and others have all painted a very similar picture. And prior to World War II,
Jews remained enormously over-represented in the Communist leadership, especially
dominating the Gulag administration and the top ranks of the dreaded NKVD.
Both of these simple facts
have been widely accepted in America throughout my entire lifetime. But combine
them together with the relatively tiny size of worldwide Jewry, around 16
million prior to World War II, and the inescapable conclusion is that
in per capita terms Jews were the greatest mass-murderers of the twentieth
century, holding that unfortunate distinction by an enormous margin and with no
other nationality coming even remotely close. And yet, by the astonishing
alchemy of Hollywood, the greatest killers of the last one hundred years have
somehow been transmuted into being seen as the greatest victims, a
transformation so seemingly implausible that future generations will surely be
left gasping in awe.
Today’s American Neocons are
just as heavily Jewish as were the Bolsheviks of a hundred years ago, and they
have greatly benefited from the political immunity provided by this totally
bizarre inversion of historical reality. Partly as a consequence of their
media-fabricated victimhood status, they have managed to seize control over
much of our political system, especially our foreign policy, and have spent the
last few years doing their utmost to foment an absolutely insane war with
nuclear-armed Russia. If they do manage to achieve that unfortunate goal, they
will surely outdo the very impressive human body-count racked up by their
ethnic ancestors, perhaps even by an order-of-magnitude or more.
Related Reading:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.