Connect with us

Latest

Analysis

News

European states destroying themselves with servile US obedience

European states destroying themselves with servile US obedience

Shane Quinn

Published

on

3,323 Views

This century alone has borne witness to former Warsaw Pact members Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania not only joining the European Union, but also NATO – an imperial branch of the United States with aggressive, expansionist ideals. The Baltic States are situated on or nearby Russia’s border, and are currently home to hundreds of US and NATO troops stationed there as a “deterrence” against what is perceived as “increased Russian aggression”.

It is difficult to know whether to laugh or cry at the recklessness of such policies, as these nations’ leaders willingly endanger the safety of their own citizens. Not to mention throwing away any chance of sovereignty or independence by opening their borders to Western imperial power – welcoming American, British, German soldiers, and so on, and exposing their populations to neoliberal globalisation in the shape of the IMF.

What the Baltic leaders, and others, should be doing is engaging in constructive dialogue with Russia that would be of far greater benefit to the security and wellbeing of their people.

Instead it is one case after another of jumping aboard the gravy train as the money rolls in from the West, and into the hands of elite power while populations are cut adrift. Meanwhile, relations across the border continue sinking to dangerous lows as virulently anti-Russian messages are widely expressed.

It has reached a point in which Estonia’s Prime Minister, Juri Ratas, last month openly discussed the possibility of deploying US surface-to-air missiles in the country – directed at Russia. Ratas was enthusiastically mulling over the instalment of the Patriot missiles with US Vice President Mike Pence. The Estonian leader said the “USA is indispensable to ensuring the security of our immediate neighbourhood, aswell as all of Europe”.

Security for “all of Europe” from what one can only speculate in bewilderment. Security from the US would seem more appropriate judging by the superpower’s “indispensable” record in previous decades. Unfortunately for Ratas, Lithuania have already won the race for deployment of US Patriot missiles – with the “sophisticated missile defence system” having been erected there over a month ago.

Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite gave full backing to this clear breach of her country’s sovereignty, saying, “The speed of response to an airborne threat may be crucial. Therefore, it would be appropriate to have such weapons in the Baltic region”.

An “airborne threat” from where one can again but guess.  The insanity behind these actions shows no sign of abating. Increasing militarisation of this area is leading to a rising threat of collisions and other incidents that could escalate into something much more serious. In June for example, a US reconnaissance plane and a Russian fighter jet came within several feet of colliding over the Baltic Sea. What would the reaction have been if the aircraft had collided?

Naturally the incident was framed as an example of “Russian aggression”, with few querying why an American reconnaissance plane was operating thousands of miles from Washington, and so close to Russian territory.

Russia, and China for that matter, are acutely aware that US missile “defence” systems are in reality attack systems – a first strike weapon designed to establish strategic superiority and exemption from retaliation. What’s more, these aggressive actions are aimed at a country (Russia) that has been repeatedly invaded over the past two centuries – by Napoleon and Hitler to name two.

Judging by Western commentary, Russian President Vladimir Putin has no right to be concerned about such hostile operations. Instead the blame is put on “Russian incitement” when in reality the incitement is coming from elsewhere – a neutral observer could not help but notice the vast hypocrisy and deceitfulness at work here.

To gain some true perspective, John Mearsheimer, a professor at University of Chicago wrote that, “After all, the United States does not tolerate distant great powers deploying military forces anywhere in the Western hemisphere, much less on its borders.” Russia, if anything, have been remarkably tolerant in the face of ongoing provocations.

Mearsheimer noted, “The West had been moving into Russia’s backyard and threatening its core strategic interests, a point Putin made emphatically and repeatedly. Elites in the US and Europe have been blindsided by events only because they subscribe to a flawed view of international politics”. A very flawed view it seems, but not that such sensible arguments are ever relayed to the Western public by the corporate media.

One of the key reasons for NATO’s existence was outlined by its then Secretary-General Jaap De Hoop Scheffer in 2007, that “NATO troops have to guard pipelines that transport oil and gas that is directed for the West”. NATO is present to benefit elite Western power along with puppet leaders who, one can assume, are not left out in the cold [Ratas, Grybauskaite, etc].

Nor is the crisis limited to the Baltic states. Earlier this year four thousand US troops arrived in Poland, along with 250 tanks, the largest such deployment since the end of the Cold War. This has prompted outrage from Russia at such haphazard manoeuvres – which will lead to “US troops [being] permanently stationed along Russia’s western border for the first time”.

The Polish President Andrzej Duda was apparently unconcerned at yet another blow to his nation’s independence, welcoming the American soldiers by saying, “Today I am certain we will not be in danger”. Poland – another former Warsaw Pact member – joined NATO in 1999, before becoming part of the EU five years later.

Last month it was reported there are about 45,000 US and NATO troops throughout the European mainland – from Bulgaria in the south, northwards to Romania, through Slovakia and up to the Baltics. They are “staging war rehearsals for a Russian invasion”. In 1951, NATO’s then supreme commander General Dwight D. Eisenhower wrote that “this whole project [NATO] will have failed” if US soldiers had not been withdrawn from Europe within 10 years. It has long become clear why it has failed.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
2 Comments

2
Leave a Reply

avatar
10 Comment threads
16 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
14 Comment authors
AM HantskfirVicente de la FuenteBrian De PaoloVoltaire Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Tom Welsh
Guest
Tom Welsh

“It is difficult to know whether to laugh or cry at the recklessness of such policies, as these nations’ leaders willingly endanger the safety of their own citizens”. Why would the leaders care? They are gambling that there will be no outbreak of war – and, if there is, they will be safe. Whether in Florida, Hawaii, Argentina, New Zealand, or – if the worst comes to the worst – sharing the American leaders’ luxurious mineshafts. The real question is why the citizens of those countries tolerate such “leaders”, who absolutely do not care about the citizens’ interests. What has… Read more »

Tom Welsh
Guest
Tom Welsh

“Elites in the US and Europe have been blindsided by events only because they subscribe to a flawed view of international politics”.

Not so! They have not been “blindsided by events” at all. Everything is easy to understand as soon as you realize that they have no concern at all for their national interests, or for the interests of their citizens. They have got what they want, as individuals, and their countries can shrivel up and die for all they care.

Brian De Paolo
Guest
Brian De Paolo

If you put a missile defense (aggressive) system in your country….you become a target…its as simple as that….there is no reason for Russia to be aggressive..they own half the planet already just in there own territory…they don’t need the headaches of controlling other nations…

cortisol
Guest
cortisol

Some argue that missile defense is for defense only. This is not true. Think of it as a coin with two sides. The purpose of defending is to make attacking easier. If you increase defense, you are more likely to attack as you perceive it to be safer. So it is an offensive system, nothing less nothing more.

Anyway, conventional missile defense can’t touch the Iskanders or the new RS-26 (two stage faster, lighter, flatter, shorter version of Yars) missiles, which have been precisely created to counter it.

Brian De Paolo
Guest
Brian De Paolo

Agreed

Voltaire
Guest
Voltaire

The fabricated lie that Russia is a military threat to Europe forms part of deliberate and sordid US policy to divide and rule Europe…Even the US Joints Chiefr of Staff say that Russia does not pose a strategic threat to Europe… As a Western European, the sooner Poland and the the Baltics get over their infantile Russophobia and learn to behave like civilised people who have got over historical conflicts, the better… … In the meantime, the stream of propaganda and lies coming from the US is worthy of Goebbels and destroys any idea that the US is anything but… Read more »

thnkfryrslf
Guest
thnkfryrslf

All of America’s threats to sovereign nations start off with a lie.

Great Expectations
Guest
Great Expectations

It’s a bad habit they learned from the British elite in the late 19th Century.

thnkfryrslf
Guest
thnkfryrslf

And the British elite are still lying.

Great Expectations
Guest
Great Expectations

Indeed. And robbing and killing.

Nancyrcockerham
Guest
Nancyrcockerham

Google is paying 97$ per hour! work for few hours and have longer with friends & family!
On tuesday I got a Smart new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
:!ap112d:
➽➽
➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobs402CashShopDesigns/GetPay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!ap112l..,..

Great Expectations
Guest
Great Expectations

Agreed. When compared with Hungary’s intelligent and measured approach, the Baltics and Poland are a long way behind.

Voltaire
Guest
Voltaire

Agreed…

I recently visited Hungary and found them balanced and civilised….

Franz Kafka
Guest
Franz Kafka

“the sooner Poland and the the Baltics get over their infantile Russophobia and learn to behave like civilised peopl” You clearly do not know these scummy tribes. They are the Khazar Jews of Eastern Europe. They cannot be redeemed.

samo war
Guest
samo war

NATO is pssychopats mafia club ?

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Why is Serbia so important to the CIA? Links in a tangent way as no doubt the EU will roll over and support yet another regime change/colour revolution, war in poor Serbia.

BREAKING NEWS: OPERATION TARGET SERBIA, CIA WORKING WITH FASCIST MACEDONIA REGIME, SERBIA MUST FALL !!!

http://nrt24.ru/en/news/breaking-news-operation-target-serbia-cia-working-fascist-macedonia-regime-serbia-must-fall

Guy
Member
Guy

Am presently reading the book “The Lost Hegemon -Whom the Gods Would Destroy ” by F.William Engdahl and into the section on what transpired in the Yugoslavia war and destruction of this country .I never knew much about that part of geopolitics and I must say ,the author is very well informed with tons of links in the book .Very enlightening to say the least . I would highly recommend it to anyone wanting to learn more about the Middle East,Levant ,USSR and now Russia and neighboring states. As usual ,what we were told is not what happened . When… Read more »

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Thanks Guy and for recommending the book. They said the Kosovo War was to get Monica and the cigars out of the headlines, however, like you, I did not know much about the geopolitics of the time and wish to know more. I will look out for the book. Must admit, F. William Engdahl’s article on ‘Kiev and Right Sector Kristalnecht Odessa’, still stays with me. One of the best articles, with regards The Odessa Trade Union Massacres, on 2 May 2014, that I came and have come across. I have just gone to get a copy of the book,… Read more »

Great Expectations
Guest
Great Expectations

Interesting website. I haven’t come across this one before. Thanks.

Franz Kafka
Guest
Franz Kafka

The talmudo satanist jews hate Christians. The Christians they hate most are Orthodox.

kfir
Guest
kfir

Obama did his share to support the Nazi regime in Ukraine.

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Interesting timing, reading your comment, just after reading this article. He would do anything for his mentors Brzezinsky and Soros and didn’t the US also vote with Ukraine, in 2016 again to support the N*zi Party?

In 2014, Barack Obama voted against UN anti-Nazi resolution (Video)
Obama was protecting the only nazi regime in the world… http://theduran.com/in-2014-barack-obama-voted-against-un-anti-nazi-resolution-video/

Vera Gottlieb
Guest
Vera Gottlieb

Those brain-dead leaders are incapable, or unwilling, to realize that by now – if Russia really had wanted, it would have marched in long time ago. Kind of amusing that Lithuania is building a fence to keep Russia out. As I said…brain-dead.

Franz Kafka
Guest
Franz Kafka

Tribal lesbo-sister of “Fuck the EU Nuland” – “Fuck Europe and Russia” Dalia Grabuskikeass. LOL Perfect. Handmaiden of Satanyahu.

Vicente de la Fuente
Guest
Vicente de la Fuente

I have nothing to think at; I all ready know the amount of late motives about. All ways provoking, is a large amount of many spend about… Vfg

kfir
Guest
kfir

Russia is once again an enemy of convenience, DC , Wall Street, etc. always need an imaginary enemy to spread fear & panic among the stupid taxpayer who gladly empty their pockets “to be protected from the ENEMY” and those fat cats rake billions of $$$$s; when the CIA is supplying the missiles to NK is another “ENEMY” just as NATO gave Jet engines and Marine Diesel Engines to the Soviets to be our ENEMIES. Now NATO is nothing but, a vulgar mercenary force, Salvadorian soldiers (a tiny country on the pacific Ocean) get paid $163.00 per month to go… Read more »

Latest

Clinton-Yeltsin docs shine a light on why Deep State hates Putin (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 114.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

Bill Clinton and America ruled over Russia and Boris Yeltsin during the 1990s. Yeltsin showed little love for Russia and more interest in keeping power, and pleasing the oligarchs around him.

Then came Vladimir Putin, and everything changed.

Nearly 600 pages of memos and transcripts, documenting personal exchanges and telephone conversations between Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin, were made public by the Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, Arkansas.

Dating from January 1993 to December 1999, the documents provide a historical account of a time when US relations with Russia were at their best, as Russia was at its weakest.

On September 8, 1999, weeks after promoting the head of the Russia’s top intelligence agency to the post of prime minister, Russian President Boris Yeltsin took a phone call from U.S. President Bill Clinton.

The new prime minister was unknown, rising to the top of the Federal Security Service only a year earlier.

Yeltsin wanted to reassure Clinton that Vladimir Putin was a “solid man.”

Yeltsin told Clinton….

“I would like to tell you about him so you will know what kind of man he is.”

“I found out he is a solid man who is kept well abreast of various subjects under his purview. At the same time, he is thorough and strong, very sociable. And he can easily have good relations and contact with people who are his partners. I am sure you will find him to be a highly qualified partner.”

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the nearly 600 pages of transcripts documenting the calls and personal conversations between then U.S. President Bill Clinton and Russian President Boris Yeltsin, released last month. A strong Clinton and a very weak Yeltsin underscore a warm and friendly relationship between the U.S. and Russia.

Then Vladimir Putin came along and decided to lift Russia out of the abyss, and things changed.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel

Here are five must-read Clinton-Yeltsin exchanges from with the 600 pages released by the Clinton Library.

Via RT

Clinton sends ‘his people’ to get Yeltsin elected

Amid unceasing allegations of nefarious Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election, the Clinton-Yeltsin exchanges reveal how the US government threw its full weight behind Boris – in Russian parliamentary elections as well as for the 1996 reelection campaign, which he approached with 1-digit ratings.

For example, a transcript from 1993 details how Clinton offered to help Yeltsin in upcoming parliamentary elections by selectively using US foreign aid to shore up support for the Russian leader’s political allies.

“What is the prevailing attitude among the regional leaders? Can we do something through our aid package to send support out to the regions?” a concerned Clinton asked.

Yeltsin liked the idea, replying that “this kind of regional support would be very useful.” Clinton then promised to have “his people” follow up on the plan.

In another exchange, Yeltsin asks his US counterpart for a bit of financial help ahead of the 1996 presidential election: “Bill, for my election campaign, I urgently need for Russia a loan of $2.5 billion,” he said. Yeltsin added that he needed the money in order to pay pensions and government wages – obligations which, if left unfulfilled, would have likely led to his political ruin. Yeltsin also asks Clinton if he could “use his influence” to increase the size of an IMF loan to assist him during his re-election campaign.

Yeltsin questions NATO expansion

The future of NATO was still an open question in the years following the collapse of the Soviet Union, and conversations between Clinton and Yeltsin provide an illuminating backdrop to the current state of the curiously offensive ‘defensive alliance’ (spoiler alert: it expanded right up to Russia’s border).

In 1995, Yeltsin told Clinton that NATO expansion would lead to “humiliation” for Russia, noting that many Russians were fearful of the possibility that the alliance could encircle their country.

“It’s a new form of encirclement if the one surviving Cold War bloc expands right up to the borders of Russia. Many Russians have a sense of fear. What do you want to achieve with this if Russia is your partner? They ask. I ask it too: Why do you want to do this?” Yeltsin asked Clinton.

As the documents show, Yeltsin insisted that Russia had “no claims on other countries,” adding that it was “unacceptable” that the US was conducting naval drills near Crimea.

“It is as if we were training people in Cuba. How would you feel?” Yeltsin asked. The Russian leader then proposed a “gentleman’s agreement” that no former Soviet republics would join NATO.

Clinton refused the offer, saying: “I can’t make the specific commitment you are asking for. It would violate the whole spirit of NATO. I’ve always tried to build you up and never undermine you.”

NATO bombing of Yugoslavia turns Russia against the West

Although Clinton and Yeltsin enjoyed friendly relations, NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia tempered Moscow’s enthusiastic partnership with the West.

“Our people will certainly from now have a bad attitude with regard to America and with NATO,” the Russian president told Clinton in March 1999. “I remember how difficult it was for me to try and turn the heads of our people, the heads of the politicians towards the West, towards the United States, but I succeeded in doing that, and now to lose all that.”

Yeltsin urged Clinton to renounce the strikes, for the sake of “our relationship” and “peace in Europe.”

“It is not known who will come after us and it is not known what will be the road of future developments in strategic nuclear weapons,” Yeltsin reminded his US counterpart.

But Clinton wouldn’t cede ground.

“Milosevic is still a communist dictator and he would like to destroy the alliance that Russia has built up with the US and Europe and essentially destroy the whole movement of your region toward democracy and go back to ethnic alliances. We cannot allow him to dictate our future,” Clinton told Yeltsin.

Yeltsin asks US to ‘give Europe to Russia’

One exchange that has been making the rounds on Twitter appears to show Yeltsin requesting that Europe be “given” to Russia during a meeting in Istanbul in 1999. However, it’s not quite what it seems.

“I ask you one thing,” Yeltsin says, addressing Clinton. “Just give Europe to Russia. The US is not in Europe. Europe should be in the business of Europeans.”

However, the request is slightly less sinister than it sounds when put into context: The two leaders were discussing missile defense, and Yeltsin was arguing that Russia – not the US – would be a more suitable guarantor of Europe’s security.

“We have the power in Russia to protect all of Europe, including those with missiles,” Yeltsin told Clinton.

Clinton on Putin: ‘He’s very smart’

Perhaps one of the most interesting exchanges takes place when Yeltsin announces to Clinton his successor, Vladimir Putin.

In a conversation with Clinton from September 1999, Yeltsin describes Putin as “a solid man,” adding: “I am sure you will find him to be a highly qualified partner.”

A month later, Clinton asks Yeltsin who will win the Russian presidential election.

“Putin, of course. He will be the successor to Boris Yeltsin. He’s a democrat, and he knows the West.”

“He’s very smart,” Clinton remarks.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

New Satellite Images Reveal Aftermath Of Israeli Strikes On Syria; Putin Accepts Offer to Probe Downed Jet

The images reveal the extent of destruction in the port city of Latakia, as well as the aftermath of a prior strike on Damascus International Airport.

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


An Israeli satellite imaging company has released satellite photographs that reveal the extent of Monday night’s attack on multiple locations inside Syria.

ImageSat International released them as part of an intelligence report on a series of Israeli air strikes which lasted for over an hour and resulted in Syrian missile defense accidentally downing a Russian surveillance plane that had 15 personnel on board.

The images reveal the extent of destruction on one location struck early in attack in the port city of Latakia, as well as the aftermath of a prior strike on Damascus International Airport. On Tuesday Israel owned up to carrying out the attack in a rare admission.

Syrian official SANA news agency reported ten people injured in the attacks carried out of military targets near three major cities in Syria’s north.

The Times of Israel, which first reported the release of the new satellite images, underscores the rarity of Israeli strikes happening that far north and along the coast, dangerously near Russian positions:

The attack near Latakia was especially unusual because the port city is located near a Russian military base, the Khmeimim Air Force base. The base is home to Russian jet planes and an S-400 aerial defense system. According to Arab media reports, Israel has rarely struck that area since the Russians arrived there.

The Russian S-400 system was reportedly active during the attack, but it’s difficult to confirm or assess the extent to which Russian missiles responded during the strikes.

Three of the released satellite images show what’s described as an “ammunition warehouse” that appears to have been completely destroyed.

The IDF has stated their airstrikes targeted a Syrian army facility “from which weapons-manufacturing systems were supposed to be transferred to Iran and Hezbollah.” This statement came after the IDF expressed “sorrow” for the deaths of Russian airmen, but also said responsibility lies with the “Assad regime.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also phoned Russian President Vladimir Putin to express regret over the incident while offering to send his air force chief to Russia with a detailed report — something which Putin agreed to.

According to Russia’s RT News, “Major-General Amikam Norkin will arrive in Moscow on Thursday, and will present the situation report on the incident, including the findings of the IDF inquiry regarding the event and the pre-mission information the Israeli military was so reluctant to share in advance.”

Russia’s Defense Ministry condemned the “provocative actions by Israel as hostile” and said Russia reserves “the right to an adequate response” while Putin has described the downing of the Il-20 recon plane as likely the result of a “chain of tragic accidental circumstances” and downplayed the idea of a deliberate provocation, in contradiction of the initial statement issued by his own defense ministry.

Pro-government Syrians have reportedly expressed frustration this week that Russia hasn’t done more to respond militarily to Israeli aggression; however, it appears Putin may be sidestepping yet another trap as it’s looking increasingly likely that Israel’s aims are precisely geared toward provoking a response in order to allow its western allies to join a broader attack on Damascus that could result in regime change.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

“Transphobic” Swedish Professor May Lose Job After Noting Biological Differences Between Sexes

A university professor in Sweden is under investigation after he said that there are fundamental differences between men and women which are “biologically founded”

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


A university professor in Sweden is under investigation for “anti-feminism” and “transphobia” after he said that there are fundamental differences between men and women which are “biologically founded” and that genders cannot be regarded as “social constructs alone,” reports Academic Rights Watch.

For his transgression, Germund Hesslow – a professor of neuroscience at Lund University – who holds dual PhDs in philosophy and neurophysiology, may lose his job – telling RT that a “full investigation” has been ordered, and that there “have been discussions about trying to stop the lecture or get rid of me, or have someone else give the lecture or not give the lecture at all.”

“If you answer such a question you are under severe time pressure, you have to be extremely brief — and I used wording which I think was completely innocuous, and that apparently the student didn’t,” Hesslow said.

Hesslow was ordered to attend a meeting by Christer Larsson, chairman of the program board for medical education, after a female student complained that Hesslow had a “personal anti-feminist agenda.” He was asked to distance himself from two specific comments; that gay women have a “male sexual orientation” and that the sexual orientation of transsexuals is “a matter of definition.”

The student’s complaint reads in part (translated):

I have also heard from senior lecturers that Germund Hesslow at the last lecture expressed himself transfobically. In response to a question of transexuallism, he said something like “sex change is a fly”. Secondly, it is outrageous because there may be students during the lecture who are themselves exposed to transfobin, but also because it may affect how later students in their professional lives meet transgender people. Transpersonals already have a high level of overrepresentation in suicide statistics and there are already major shortcomings in the treatment of transgender in care, should not it be countered? How does this kind of statement coincide with the university’s equal treatment plan? What has this statement given for consequences? What has been done for this to not be repeated? –Academic Rights Watch

After being admonished, Hesslow refused to distance himself from his comments, saying that he had “done enough” already and didn’t have to explain and defend his choice of words.

At some point, one must ask for a sense of proportion among those involved. If it were to become acceptable for students to record lectures in order to find compromising formulations and then involve faculty staff with meetings and long letters, we should let go of the medical education altogether,” Hesslow said in a written reply to Larsson.

He also rejected the accusation that he had a political agenda – stating that his only agenda was to let scientific factnot new social conventions, dictate how he teaches his courses.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending