Debunking 9/11 Myths

On the 5th anniversary of the 9/11 tragedy, I thought it would be fitting to review a book I purchased last month while in New York:

Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theorists can’t Stand up to the Facts (Amazon | Take2 | Official site)

Popular Mechanics published a very well researched cover story about the facts of 9/11 in their March 2005 issue. The response was so overwhelmingly positive that they expanded their team of investigators, broadened the scope of their investigation, and produced a full-length book. It is a must for anyone who has ever rolled their eyes at 9/11 conspiracy theories but has lacked the information to argue against them.

The format is the same as the original article: a myth is presented, and then the raw facts are allowed to speak for themselves. There is no speculation, no assumptions, only evidence. The authors go to the effort of contacting the sources of quotes and interviewing the people who were on the ground, and invariably discover that these people and their expert opinions or eyewitness statements have been mutilated almost beyond recognition to serve the purpose of supporting an insupportable theory.

The book includes a thorough referencing of sources, any and all of which are available to those who perpetuate these fantasies of government conspiracies, evil overlords and megalomaniac politicians. As the facts are so easily at hand, one can only assume that the conspiracy theorists are purposefully ignoring them.

For example, one of the quotes used to strongly support the idea that it was a missile that hit the Pentagon and not a commercial Boeing 757, is this from eyewitness Mike Walters:

I mean it was like a cruise missile with wings. It went right there and slammed right into the Pentagon.

The bit that conspiracy theorists leave out is what Mike said right before that:

I looked out my window and I saw this plane, this jet, an American Airlines jet, coming. And I thought, ‘This doesn’t add up, it’s really low.’

These are the kinds of tactics they use, and as this book shows they are all just as easily refuted. Do yourself a favour: buy the book, read it, and you will have a newfound awe for just how flimsy the support for these theories really is.

36 Responses to “Debunking 9/11 Myths”

  1. you know what? i think i WILL!

  2. I’m sorry, I seem to have come late to class. Since when do conspiracy theories require a factual basis?

  3. ledouche: fine! Go right ahead!

    kyknoord:since the conspiracy theorists started claiming to have a factual basis 🙂

  4. Maddox did a good summary of why the conspiracy theories aren’t true: if they were the gimps spreading the conspiracy would be dead. It’s way easier to kill a few losers than stage the whole 9/11 “truth”

  5. Yeah, i’ve linked to it previously. Maddox certainly does have a way of getting right down to the core of it – if the government didn’t blink at murdering thousands of people and the covering it up in one of the most successful conspiracies the world has ever seen, then why are they still letting your big mouth blab about it?

  6. You all seem to have bought the conspiracy theory that Osama Bin Laden is responsible for 9/11 attacks.

    Too bad the FBI doesn’t agree with you.

    Maybe you guys ought to give them a call with all your conclusive ‘evidence’.

  7. Bin Laden has been on that list since 1999, two years before Sept 11. The reason he is not listed for the 9/11 attacks is because you can only be listed for crimes where you have been charged by a prosecutor under indictment by a grand jury. This is a legal decision, because all defendants, even known terrorists, deserve a fair trial. A confession tape is not considered to be sufficient evidence to formally indict someone.

    Anyway, your argument is one of false dichotomy. Just because there isn’t sufficient hard evidence to indict Bin Laden doesn’t automatically manufacture evidence for a government consipiracy out of thin air.

    Oh, and please point out where in my post i said that the conspiracy theories were wrong because bin laden did it? I didn’t. The theories are wrong because they have no relation to fact, evidence, or reality. Each theory, including the one that bin laden and al queda are responsible, must be considered on its own merits and measured up against the facts. And every single one of the theories mentioned in this book come up short. End of story.

  8. 1) Therer is no hard evidence that Bin Laden was connected with 9/11 terror. You might consider whether that is why he hasn’t been indicted.

    2) Where did I say anything about a government conspiracy? Please point it out.

    3) I may have been mistaken in assuming you support the government’s story of Bin Laden’s alleged responsibility because the Popular Mechanics article is often cited by those who buy the official version of events.

    4) The biggest problem I have with the Popular Mechanics article is that it only addresses the least popular myths surrounding 9/11. There are many more widely held beliefs which they could have debunked- starting with Bin Laden did it.

  9. 1) read the third paragraph of my response again.

    2) my apologies, i assumed that if you did not ‘buy’ the ‘official version’ then you ‘bought’ the ‘government conspiracy’ version. If in fact their is a third option to which you subscibe, please elaborate.

    3) again, as per my third paragraph, i will accept the theories that have supporting evidence. None of the supposed ‘conspiracy’ or ‘alternate’ theories that i’ve heard so far can show supporting evidence, and that includes others that aren’t in the book

    4) the popular mechanics article addresses fewer myths than the book, which is much expanded in scope. And its scope is to address those things that are absolutely myths, in that they do not have so much as a single scrap of evidence to support them and seem to have arisen out of nowhere. The ‘Bin Laden did it’ theory at least has a confession from the man, which takes it outside of the scope of myth, and into the realm of plausible theory that requires additional evidence. There’s a big difference between those two things.

  10. 1) OK.

    2) The only third option is the coincidence theory, which AFAIK no one subscribes to. So, far from presenting a ‘false dichotomy’ you now agree there are basically two chices?

    3) You may be unaware of the work of researchers such as Dr Steven Jones and Gordon Ross who present several lines of evidence about the annihilation of the WTC buildings which are either ignored or inadequately explained by the ‘official’ story of 9/11. Much of the evidence that critics of that version of events is dismissed as being mere coincidences by its defenders, or explained away with various self-contradictory ad hoc theories to supplement the official one.

    4) You may be unaware of the many rebuttals to the Popular Mechanics article. At least we must take their arguments with a grain of salt, and not uncritcally take their pronouncements as the final word on the subject.

    5) The so-called ‘confession’ video is widely held to be a fake: comparing the appearance of the man in it to the real Bin Laden is like comparing Laurel to Hardy. Hint: the skinny one is Bin Laden, I don’t know who the fat man in the video is. Someone has gone to a lot of trouble to implicate Bin Laden. Who would and who could do such a thing?

    Some 9/11 Myths that need debunking are:

    *No sensible person believes a conspiracy theory about 9/11
    *The identities of the hijackers is known
    *The motive of 9/11 terrorists is known
    *Bin Laden and Al Quaeda are responsible
    *The Taliban in Afghanistan were involved
    *Saddam Hussein was involved
    *US had no idea of planes used as missiles before 9/11
    *The mechanics of the WTC destruction are known
    *Global collapse of WTC buildings inevitable once initiated
    *Destruction of WTC buildings thoroughly investigated
    *US Government would never lie to American people
    *No evidence of prior knowledge regarding 9/11 terror
    *Government agencies would prevent attack if they had prior knowledge
    *US Government would not consider using terror against American people
    *If anyone but Al Quaeda executed 9/11 attack, thousands needed
    *No large operation could possibly be kept secret

    There is a big difference between saying there is no evidence and saying there is evidence which I choose to ignore. It is the weakness of the government’s case that allows the proliferation of counter-theories. The published work of FEMA, NIST and the 9/11 Comission are full of holes and inconsistencies which the mass media is curiously uninterested in. If 9/11 is a turning point in our nation, a thorough understanding of it is required before we can take the appropriate course of action.


  11. 2) i think you are confusing the difference between there only being two current theories and there being two possible theories. There are many possible theories, which is why disproof of theory A is not proof of theory B (and hence false dichotomy). However, if there are only two currently popular theories, the likelihood that someone who does not believe Theory A believing Theory B is high.

    3) I hold several degrees in physics too, maybe i should also publish some papers on the 9/11 building collapse on a website that claims to be a ‘peer review journal’ and is in fact only reviewed by people who have already made up their minds as to the outcome, and where neither of the editors is qualified to be editing a structural engineering publication. Besides, Ross has such a massive error in calculation in his paper that if one of my students had presented me with it, i would have given them an instant F. Or did you not read Greening’s response?

    4) There are also many rebuttals to statements that astrology is bunk, that evolution is a fact and that we landed on the moon. Doesn’t make them true, factual, or trustworthy. And taking things with a grain of salt applies to your conspiracy theorists too, don’t forget. You may want to reconsider their theories with the same skepticism you apply to the Bin Laden theory. Unless you’re not being objective about the whole thing, of course.

    5) Astrology is also widely held to be true. ‘widely held’ does not mean ‘factually supported’. And again, how does this invalidate any of the points made in the book, or prove a government conspiracy? And since you have such a long list of myths that need debunking, why don’t you go write your own book? I promise to review it once it’s published.

    Until then, i actually have work to do. Cheers.

  12. 2) OK – I don’t have a theory of my own, but I do think there are ample reasons to doubt the official Conspiracy Theory.

    3) I’ve read Ross’s paper, Greening’s reply, and Ross’s second paper in reply to Greening. AFAIK Greening has not yet responded to Ross’s critique of his work. I wasn’t able to spot Ross’s massive error, nor where Greening pointed it out. I’ll have to review the papers more carefully. Do you happen to know where Greening’s paper was published?

    Are these the only two guys on the planet actually trying to explain the behavior of the WTC buildings in detail? FEMA, NIST and others are content to merely state that the forces were humungous and irresistable without quantifying the forces involved. You’d think the biggest engineering failure in history would attract some interest.

    If you ever decide to take a stab at doing an analysis of this issue, I’d be interested in seeing it.

    4) Yes, I agree that any theory about what really happened on 9/11 should be scrutinised carefully.

    5) Though Bin Laden really hasn’t got anything to do with the Popular mechanics article or book, he does find his way into discussions one way or another. I merely point out that the so-called Bin Laden confession is an obvious fake. If this is the best evidence of his involvement in 9/11, then we’ll have to keep the Official Conspiracy Theory in the Myth column I’m afraid.

    Thanks for the offer of a review, I’ll keep it in mind!

  13. gosh
    i just want to say – re the ‘plane’ and the pentagon. i’ve never seen any pics of any plane. if there are any. show me.

    also i haven’t seen any rational explanation for the twin towers coming down in such a controlled way – when apparently steel girders doesn’t melt at the temperature of aeroplane fuel fires – and then why the steel was all shipped off to china b4 you could count to 10 and then all the firemen who were at the scene of the crime – oops disaster – all had gaggin orders put on them to stop them talking.
    re mr laden – whether he did or not is hardly the point.
    the point is that it was a ‘pearl harbour’ set up –
    it was known about in advance – and was allowed to happen – and even the fact that the new lease holder of the twin towers ‘happened’ to somehow get some kind of insurance policy that just happened to pay him off whatever billion dollars etc in the process – hm
    strong wiffs of deep fried haddock if you ask me.
    any proof otherwise please do tell. i heard too many convincing ‘conspiracy stories’ rather than the other way round. i certainly didn’t see any convincing stories to show that it was sadam hussein, specially since he was under the pay of the CIA (like bin laden) since he was a teenager.

  14. lilo, i’m seriously starting to wonder about your previous comments about being willing to research and consider both sides of the argument. It’s starting to sound like you’re only listening to one side of any given argument, and it’s consistently the woo side. Seriously, read the book. Read the Popular Mechanics article if you can’t afford to buy the book. Or read some of the excellent websites maintained by people whose only agenda is to de-myth-tefy 9/11 such as

  15. piece of government sponsored shit

  16. i’m sorry, to what exactly are you referring? Please back up your statement with some supporting evidence.

  17. Be sure to check out the book “Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory” due out in March by Dr. David Ray Griffin.

  18. The problem with the Popular Mechanics article is that it was a “straw man” defence. They attacked items that are not really central to the debate.

    It does not really matter if it was real American Airlines aircraft or not, or if the Pentagon was hit by a commercial airliner or a cruise missile.

    The point is, who organised it, and why? There are many very pertinent questions that remain unanswered.

    How was it that the FBI et al could so quickly identify that “Bin Laden did it”.
    Where is the proof?
    Were the attackers already under surveillance?
    Were they already known to the intelligence agencies, but they were in fact on the payroll of one of them? Bin Laden himself was at one time a CIA asset. So was Saddam Hussein, but that’s another issue.
    How could they have found Mohammad Atta’s passport at ground zero? That’s a whopper of a lie if ever there was one.
    Several of the 19 identified “attackers” are alive and well and working for various airlines etc in the middle East. So, that was a BS too.
    Why were all of the Bin Laden family members allowed to leave the US when all aircraft were supposed to be grounded?
    What about the irregular trading in American Airlines and other stocks? That has not been properly investigated yet. Someone knew what was planned. Who?
    Why did the Republicans in Congress block proper investigation of 9/11?
    Why did the White House stonewall proper investigation of the Saudi connection?
    Why was the evidence at Ground Zero destroyed before a proper forensic investigation had taken place? Since the WTC towers and building 7 are the only steel-framed buildings that have ever been totally destroyed by fire, was it not important that they should have been studied in minute detail by mechanical engineers and civil engineers so that it could be determined why they failed so totally? The towers were, after all, designed to withstand the impact of a smaller aircraft, the Boeing 727.

    There are literally hundreds of questions relating to the behaviour and statements made by Bush, Cheyney, the FBI, the 9/11 commission and other parties that have not been properly investigated.

    The statement that was made within hours of the incidents occurring that it was the doing of Al Queda and instigated by Osama Bin Laden has never been backed up by any proof whatsoever. It has, however, been used as motivation for invading first Afganistan, and then later on, Iraq. The latter in spite of the fact that the CIA and other intelligence agencies unequivocally stated that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

    The various “conspiracy theories” (they are hypotheses, not theories, of course) concerning the aircraft, controlled implosions, etc are side issues and of little importance.

    The real question that has yet to be answered is, “Why was the 9/11 attack carried out?” Who stood to gain from it? And the silly answer that Al Queda attacked America because, “they hate our freedoms” just does not cut it. America is a lot less of a free place since 9/11 and the phony “War on Terrorism” is the reason why, not Al Queda. It really sucks to be a Muslim living in America or a Muslim trying to travel to America, even for well-known academics attending scientific conferences and the like. Hell, they even diverted an aircraft because a fellow by the name of Yusuf Islam was on board. Kat Stevens is a danger to the USA?

    I like what Michael Moore wrote about conspiracies. “I don’t believe in conspiracy theories unless they are true, or they involve dentists.”

    Once you find solid evidence to support a conspiracy hypothesis, it becomes conspiracy fact.

  19. Let me know when that solid evidence gets found, rather than that of the circumstantial and anecdotal variety.

    You say that the question “why was the 9/11 attack carried out” has not been answered, yet it has, time and again. It was carried out because of religion. That’s all. People fighting over whose imaginary friend is better. You ask who had to gain from it, and that shows that you misunderstand the nature of religion – it doesnt’ have to make sense. No one has to gain. It’s about hatred in the name of a big beard in the sky that doesn’t exist. When delusions become state-sanctioned and accepted by society at large, this is the kind of thing that happens.

    The question you should be asking is what the world would be like without religion. For one, the WTC would still be standing. It is precisely because these occurances in the name of a god undermine the supposed moral high ground of religion that some americans are incapable of accepting why it happened. The only conspiracy here is the one that keeps pretending the first amendment is worth anything in the USA today.

  20. shane houstein Says:

    do you think osama was given a fair trial for the things he is listed for? do you think he (or legal rep) walked into a court and said “yeah we did that”?!?!?!

    he can be WANTED for ANYTHING. Once they have sufficient evidence for ARREST (and a confession tape IS enough for that) then they can put him on the list!!!! THEN they arrest him, THEN he has a fair trial!!!!!

    all of you need to open your eyes! you are being spoon fed bullshit! you are all on your way to doom!

    you think George W. is being honest with you? he said Sadam had WMDs… REMEMBER?!?!?!

    open your eyes, and start connecting the dots. Think for yourselves!

  21. shane houstein Says:

    and here’s something else to think about: if Osama was arrested tomorrow… do you think the public would want him charged with crimes relating to 9/11?

    why do you think they would want that?



    do you think the FBI would want him charged with it?

    Why NOT?!


    That’s all we need to do, because knowledge is power!

    once enough of us know the truth, then we can take back our lives, and we will never have to live in fear of terrorisom again!!!

    At the moment, we are nothing but batteries plugged into the f-ing matrix.. they enslave us and brainwash us with lies, and the “real” world is quite different to the one they have created for us via their constant manipulation… and the “real” world is run by some seriously sick people!

    the top 1% have as much wealth as the bottom 95%.

    Now, that wouldn’t be such a problem, but in a deregulated markert wealth is power. The continuing push to deregulate every possible market space is creating a power imbalance, where the majority (the lower 95%) have very little say in what happens to them!

    This could be something as simple as having to be strip searched at the air port, or having your ID scanned when you enter a club… or as serious as being convinced that going to war against Iraq is a just cause.

    don’t you get it yet people?

    The bottom 95% don’t even have a choice in what they THINK anymore!

  22. hysterical! best laugh i’ve had all day. You do a remarkable impression of a raving lunatic.

  23. Shane Houstein Says:

    yeah, and you do a remarkable impersonation of a ignorant wanker!

    you have obviously not researched the matter yourself at all!

  24. good god, you mean that wasn’t satire? You actually… think that adding four exclamation points and putting things in allcaps will make people take you seriously?


  25. Shane Houstein Says:

    It is not my job to make you listen.

    Bush is dishonest about everything.

    If you believe the governments story 100%, then you are really f-ing stupid…. no offense… but it is true… it means you haven’t thought for yourself.

    I may be a loonatic, but there are many credible people out there (including physics professors) who believe that WC1, WC2 and WC7 were brought down by controlled demolition.

    I don’t want you to take me seriously… I want you to take yourself seriously, and stop regurgitating what Bush has told you.

    That’s all.

    Your just scared to take the Red-Pill… because you refuse to believe that you own government could be so cruel… well, you just keep believing what ever you have to to stay happy… and when world war 3 breaks out, don’t be surprised, because that’s where all of this is heading.

    Remember: a present there is no solid proof to connect Osama to the 9/11 attacks. It’s that simple.

    But Bush thinks that Osama did it, so away we go to war…..

    now you tell me something: can you tell me WHY we are currently fighting in Iraq?

  26. Shane Houstein Says:

    and something else… you have nothing intelligent to say, so you just revert to insults. It doesn’t matter if I wrote IN ALL CAPS… or used four exclamation marks!!!!!

    what matters is you are not thinking for yourself, and I’m trying to wake you up. I don’t want you to listen to me… I want you to look at the footage of building 7 collapsing and listen to YOUR OWN EYES….

    unless of course you are too stupid to do even that much!

  27. “listen to your own eyes”

    /me falls over laughing

    seriously, i have plenty of intelligent things to say. But your type does not listen to reason, intelligence, or any evidence that is contrary to the little world view you have created for yourself. You claim that i have not done research, and if by ‘research’ you mean what you have used to come to your conclusions – i.e. basing them on conjecture, arguments from incredulity, the lies of people with an agenda, and whatever dreck you find on the internet – then, no, i haven’t done ‘research’. I’ve merely read up on the subject, looked things up for myself, and listened to what people who know what they’re talking about have to say. Silly me.

    You need to understand that i resort to insults not because i do not have the resources to debate you, but because i believe that you are so far gone that nothing i have to say will help you. I will ridicule you because your position is ridiculous. Get a life, get a psychiatrist, get yourself on some medication.

    Also ‘we’ are not at war. I’m a south african. I have bigger things to worry about than why religious fundamentalists, both the xian and muslim kind, want to kill each other. I have my own government actively trying to kill its own people on its own soil. It’s only those who live in first world countries who have the luxury of making up bullshit conspiracy theories to pass the time and make themselves feel imporant and the bearer of ‘truth’.

    I have bigger things to care about than robbing you of your delusions, mate. Go back to masturbating over copies of Loose Change. Further communication from you will result in you becoming tomorrow’s Midweek Cuckoo, thereby subjecting you to ridicule from many more than just me.

  28. Shane Houstein Says:


    The whole official investigation into 9/11 has more holes in it than ANY conspiracy theory I have ever read.

    This is what I mean… you haven’t researched the topic at all.

    And if you dont’ have the time to make up conspiracy theories, then why take the time to debunk them?

    your a fool.

    take the red pill, and open your eyes:

  29. Shane Houstein Says:

    p.s. I don’t give a fuck what you think…. I’m only trying to open your eyes… so why don’t you go masturbate to more footage of George Bush telling lies!

    god dam you are a dickhead!

  30. Shane Houstein Says:

    this is my FINAL post:


    this whole page is based on the OPINION of yours that there IS evidence.

    you are wrong.

    so I suggest you delete this bullshit page, stop spreading the lies of bush!

    p.s. “get a life” “get on mediaction” are the oldest comebacks in the world. You’re so consistently un-original that you’ve already proven my point: you aren’t thinking for yourself.

    I don’t believe ALL the consiracy theories regarding 9/11… and at the same time I don’t believe George Bush 100%… I believe that the truth lies somewhere in the middle…

    if you believe any different, then you are brain-washed.

    good bye, you small-minded parasite. you are doing nothing except help the evil-doers get away with it!

  31. […] while back I reviewed a book by Popular Mechanics on Debunking 9/11 Myths. The book continues where an article in Popular Mechanics left off, debunking 20-something commonly […]

  32. residentRsole Says:

    When I watched Loose Change, I was initially very impressed. But, after a few hours, the emotions petered out and I decided to try to verify their claims. I am a computer scientist, not an civil engineer so I am at a disadvantage.

    I started with this link:

    I have to be honest, most of what the NIST wrote is beyond my understanding but I did learn a few things. I will have to do some more reading to digest it all.

    Regarding government conspiracies: they are too complicated to pull off. I think what really happens in real life is that so-called war profiteers and their connections in government benefit from this kind of tragedy. While they are not responsible for it, there is nothing stopping them from taking advantage of the situation.

    Terrible tragedies happen all the time. Many events on the scale of 9/11 happen in the third world quite often but nobody notices e.g. earthquakes, mudslides, hurricanes, genocides, disease epidemics, starvation, train-wrecks, gas leaks and explosions, etc. Thousands of people die in those each time. 9/11 is just one of those events. In the former soviet union, buildings constructed using cement mixed with salt collapsed with hundreds of people being killed or maimed.

    Besides the defense industry, many civilians tried to cash in on 9/11. I read somewhere that on the same day a man tried to register the phrase “Let’s Roll!” with the US Patent & Trademark Office. Did he cause 9/11 ? Of course not. Did he try to benefit from it ? Yes, he did. And don’t forget the hotels and motels that raised their prices on that day. Fallacy 101 tells us that association does not imply causation.

  33. Shane: don’t say i didn’t warn you…
    residentRsole: the makers of shockumentaries like Loose Change, much like most perpetuators of a conspiracy theory, are very good at what they do – making emotional arguments that involved cherry-picked information taken out of context, delivered with an aura of ‘truthiness’. They always seem very convincing, but in the cold light of fact, they are unsupportable. Unfortunately the vast majority of their audience will not bother to investigate any further, and indeed even when they do all findings that are contrary to their pre-established conclusion are deemed part of the ‘cover up’.

    I must agree with your point – claiming that because certain individuals and corporations have benefited or profited from 9/11, or that certain other events have been precipitated by the events of 9/11, does not in any way prove that they were the reason behind 9/11. The whole ‘ZOMG bush made up the whole osama connection so he had an excuse to invade afghanistan and iraq!!11!’ is speculation of the highest order. Sure, it’s entirely possible Bush leapt upon Osama’s connection to 9/11 as an excuse to go after a guy they’d been hunting for years for repeatedly killing americans and inciting the entire fundamentalist muslim world into an american-hating frenzy… so what? It doesn’t prove that Bush organized 9/11, that Osama didn’t finance it, that operatives of Al’Queda didn’t carry it out, or that Santa Clause is a real live person.

  34. residentRsole Says:

    Anybody remember that german guy who landed a small plane in Moscow’s Red Square after flying through Soviet airspace without being challenged ? It was during the eighties. I remember watching it on the news as a child. I thought that it was a trailer for a movie because I couldn’t believe what I was seeing. Anyway, the young pilot turned out to be a bit of a nutter. Several years later I heard that he had stabbed his girlfriend and end up in a nuthouse or something like that.
    If that can happen (the Red Square incident, that is), then it possible that two planes can be taken over terrorists and flown into two buildings without the USAF doing anything about it.
    As for another example of powerful entities standing by doing nothing: Mugabe’s motorcade was once stopped in London by two gay men who tried to arrest him. They pulled him out of his car while his bodyguards stood by, too surprised to do anything. Mugabe, we are told, was terrified and didn’t even try to free himself from two “moffies” (apologies to the gay community).

    Still think that conspiracy theories are the only way to explain how events such as 9/11 can happen ? The mighty and the powerful can be caught with their pants down.

  35. Are there any words more welcome than “This is my final post”? I don’t think so.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: