Friday, May 18, 2007

The Parasite Plane 9/11 flight path oddities


Thursday, 17 August 2006
A review of the highly suspicious activity in the sky on 9-11. When does a series of coincidences stop being a series of coincidence and become damning evidence? When it's 9-11...
New altitude data obtained through Freedom of Information shows the meeting points I previously pointed out are also the EXACT points that the hijacked planes began their descent towards their targets.


Current theories about what happened in the air on 9/11 are based on a mixture of speculation and circumstances. Over the past five years, more information has slowly been released allowing a clearer picture to slowly be developed.
The government's story about suicide hijackers has had to face up to a lot of scepticism for a number of reasons.
Those reasons include:
  • Complex maneuvres supposedly performed by individuals who have been widely reported to be barely capbale of flying a small propellor plane. These jumbo hets were successfully navigated and crashed into their targets at low altitudes and speeds higher than safely possible for such large planes.
  • Evidence that appears to have been planted
  • Hijackers that frequently appeared in more than one place at the same time
  • The bizarre and illogical routes taken by the hijacked planes
Popoular alternative theories include:
  • The planes were guided into their targets using some sort of remote control or homing technology, possibly based on that used in UAVs like Global Hawk, or something simpler involving the autopilot.
  • Theories speculating that the real planes were somehow switched, either mid-flight or on the runway for prepared remote-controlled plane-bombs or "drones". This has taken a great deal of inspiration from "Operation Northwoods", an unused plan for fake terror against America, created by the Pentagon the 1960s.
  • The damage to the buildings was caused by other devices (e.g. UAV drones, bombs or missiles ) and the videos of the second hit were edited to cover this up. This is commonly referred to as the "no planes/tv fakery" theory.
Newly released documents obtained through Freedom of Information have provided more accurate images of the flight paths, altitude data and air traffic communcations for the 9/11 flights. These have been pieced together using graphics packages and the excellent Google Earth to provide a clearer picture of what happened
The following piece contains a speculation based on the remote control/homing theory (one of many possibilities). Anything speculative is in italics, everything else is fact and can be reviewed in the sources at the end of the article.
Summary
The following events took place and cannot be dismissed as coincidence or something engineered by the hijackers
1. Flight 11 became hijacked at the same point its radar target merged with another plane (unamed MD80)
2. Flight 11 and 175 met in the sky, flight 11 began its descent towards its target exactly at the point the paths crossed
3. Flight 175 and 93 came very close together in the sky. Flight 175 began its descent at the point their temporarily merged paths seperated
4. Flight 93 and another suspected hijacking from Logan (Delta 1989) passed each other very close in the sky. Flight 93 began its descent towards Shanksville at the point they passed in the sky.
The only logical conclusion is that another aircraft (hidden from air traffic controllers by its close proximity to the other planes) was passing from one plane to the next and was somehow involved in the operation.
The Parasite Plane

According to the official story, on the morning of September 11th 2001, Flight 11 was taking off on a transcontinental flight from Boston’s Logan airport to LAX.
So far the flight had been routine and normal and at 8:11:58 Flight 11 is rising from 28000 to 29000 ft. The air traffic controller issued a “merging target procedure”:

“American 11 your traffic is at uh two o’clock two zero miles southwest bound MD80 three one oh.”

Translated from ATC speak into English: there is a plane(McDonnell Douglas 80) at a similar altitude (31000ft) that is on a converging path with yours and the two spots on the radar will merge together. He alerts the pilot to make sure he is aware of this plane that will be coming very close to him in the sky.


At 8:13:29, possibly as a result of this merging traffic, the controller issues another order:

“American eleven turn twenty degrees right”

This is acknowledged by the Flight 11 pilot at 8:13:31:

“Twenty right American eleven”

What neither the pilot nor the controller realises is that there is another plane hiding above the MD80 so as to appear as a single spot on the radar. As the two planes merge together in the sky the intruder, like some sort of parasite “jumps” quickly from one plane to the other. Flight 11’s collision avoidance system (TCAS) does not pick up the intruder because its transponder is switched off.
Someone on the “parasite plane” presses a button. A radio controlled valve is opened and poison gas is released into the cockpit of Flight 11 causing the two pilots to collapse unconscious without time to raise the alarm. The plane, flying on autopilot continues in the direction it was going in after the turn, towards Albany New York.


Sixteen seconds later at 8:13:47 the controller issues another command:

“American eleven climb maintain flight level three five zero” (35000 ft)

At this point there is no further response from the pilot of AA11 so if we follow the official story, the invasion of the supposedly locked cockpit and control of the plane was seized during this sixteen second period without so much as a cough from the pilots.

A device has been planted in the cockpit allowing remote programming of the autopilot as well as direct remote control of the plane. On board Flight 11 a staged hijacking is taking place in the cabin. The operatives involved have been advised that the plane will land at JFK airport in New York City. On board our “parasite” plane they disable the transponder on flight eleven and starts making broadcasts in a Middle Eastern accent over the current ATC frequency. They then turn the plane South near Albany and start to direct it towards its target, the North tower of the World Trade Centre.
A large detour has been made away from the target. This has been very carefully timed to allow United Flight 175 to catch up as it has been delayed by 16 minutes.


During our 16 second hijacking period on Flight 11, Flight 175 is cleared for take-off at Logan:

“United one seventy five heavy runway niner cleared for takeoff..”

At 8:27 the controller orders Flight 175 to climb to 35000 ft:

“United one seventy five Boston center roger climb maintain flight level three five zero”

Interestingly, Flight 175 turns down this flight level and requests 31000 ft, coincidentally the same altitude that the hijacked Flight 11 is flying at this point in time.

“Up to three five zero we want to request three one zero if it’s smooth for United one seventy five”

The controller clarifies this request and grants it. Flight 175 then requests 31000ft as the final altitude for the flight.

“Three one zero United one seventy five we’d like to keep that as a final”

What happens next continues the series of interesting coincidences that take place in the sky that morning; Flight 175 comes very close to the hijacked Flight 11 in the sky near Stewart Airport.

ATC: “Roger do you have traffic look at uh your twelve to one o’clock at about uh ten miles south bound see if you can see and American seventy sixty seven out there please”

175: “Okay we’re looking negative contact United one seventy five.”

ATC: “Okay United one seventy five do you have him at your twelve o’clock now and five, ten miles.”

175: “Affirmative we have him uh he looks uh about ah twenty ah yeah about twenty nine, twenty eight thousand.”

ATC: “United one seventy five turn thirty degrees to the right I want to keep you away from this traffic.”


So we can conclude that Flight 11 and Flight 175 came within 5 miles of each other, possibly much closer as those planes would cover 5 miles in around 30 seconds. Now we also see a coincidence within a coincidence, flight 11 begins its descent at exactly the spot where the two flight tracks cross.

Once again our parasite plane jumps from one plane to another as they pass. Just before it does so, it triggers flight 11 to begin its perilous descent towards Manhattan. On the edge of the Newark ASR radar circle, the parasite plane begins the second stage of its mission, the mid-air hijack of United Airlines Flight 175.

United 175’s last transmission is at 8:42. At 8:51:42 the controller (supposedly distracted by Flight 11) notices that flight 175 is no longer on the radar. He asks United 175 to check his transponder and make sure the identifying code 1470 is entered.

“United one seventy five recycle your transponder and squawk code of one four seven zero.”

It turns out later that Flight 175 has changed its transponder code to one that is not recognised by the system and the radar software assumes that radar coverage is lost on that flight. He sees the flight “coasting” – the software estimates where the plane would be assuming it continued in the same direction and speed that it was going in.

Just while United 175 is making its last radio transmission, another plane, United Airlines Flight 93 is taking off from Newark. Once again its flight path merges with that of the now hijacked Flight 175 and the planes come within about 10 miles of each other over Allentown airport. Once again we have another double coincidence, right at this point Flight 175 deviates from its assigned altitude, goes up slightly and then begins a rapid, curving descent towards its target.

Our parasite plane initiates the same autopilot descent in Flight 175 as it did with Flight 11, then it slows down slightly and hops onto its next victim, Flight 93.

Flight 93’s last routine communication is at 9:27. Less than a minute later, we hear sounds that may be the start of a cockpit intrusion broadcast over the radio:

***(mayday)***(hey get out of here)***
***(get out of here)?***(get out of here)

Flight 93 begins to follow the same pattern as the other planes, changes of altitude, a sharp turn and a disabled transponder. As the plane is turning south and then east near Cleveland airport, another plane enters the picture.
Delta Flight 1989, another cross-country flight, had departed from Logan airport shortly after Flight 175. It was being watched carefully for signs that it might be another hijack and was very close in the sky to Flight 93.

A recording of some of some of the air traffic communications has been available on the internet for some time. Note the following directive:

Cleveland: Nineteen eighty-nine, I have traffic for you in your eleven o’clock, fifteen miles southbound forty-one climbing, looks like he’s turning east wide at three-six-zero.

Using Google Earth we can use this statement to get a fairly accurate picture of the relative positions and directions of these two planes. The two planes would once again have passed very close together in the sky. Just as the Delta Flight goes past, Flight 93 begins a smooth autopilot descent towards Shanksville. Because this is the same pattern that the other planes followed on their way to their targets, this raises another difficult question: what exactly where they going to attack here? Was Shanksville the target?

Once again, the autopilot descent of Flight 93 is initiated and the parasite plane hops from Flight 93 onto Delta 1989. Flight 93 has been carefully prepared as “The Flight That Fought Back” and is intended to crash in an unpopulated area. This flight will have almost as much effect in the drive to war as the 3000 casualties at the World Trade Centre.

Delta 1989 reversed course over Toledo and landed at Cleveland airport (commission report).

This is where our mystery aircraft leaves the scene. It now drops below radar coverage and heads towards a secret landing strip.

============================

Written by Frank Levi
Saturday, 17 June 2006
The Flight paths taken by the planes on 911 contain numerous coincidences and anomalies that cannot be explained simply by following the official story.
I intend to show this in a series of short pieces featuring old and new information, following the sequence of events as they happened that day. We'll start with Amercian Airlines Flight 11.
Flight 11 flight path
Flight 11 in relation to Otis and Griffiss

Click to see real size

Whether you are a follower of the official story or a sceptic, it is difficult to avoid speculation when it comes to what actually happened in the air that day. (All the eye witnesses are dead!)
Here are a few possibilities based on current thought:
  1. Real suicide hijackers crashed the planes.
  2. The planes were fitted with technology to allow them to be controlled remotely, either from the ground or from military planes flying nearby.
  3. Some sort of "homing" system was used.
  4. The planes were substituted at some stage in the journey for remote controlled "drone" planes. The real planes were destroyed or landed. This was done in such a way as to produce a continuous track on the ATC radar. This idea originates from the Pentagon and is described in the declassified document "Operation Northwoods".
  5. The original planes were destroyed or landed. No actual planes hit the buildings, the damage and explosions were created with explosives. The videos of planes hitting the building were faked and witnesses were strategically planted.
It is important when looking at any of these scenarios to take into account that there were military "wargames" with extensive air force involvement as well as live terrorist attack drills taking place in the air that day. (Details and references will be provided in a later installment).
But for the time being I will try and avoid speculation and focus on what we know.
If 911 was a military operation involving the US Air Force, a good place to look first is the relationship between flight paths and the location of nearby air force and air force national guard bases.
This image was created by using the Flight 11 path taken from the 911 Commission Report as an overlay on Google Earth:
Flight 11 flight path
Flight 11 in relation to the former Sawyer AFB

Click to see real size

You can see here:
  • The illogical route taken by Flight 11 away from its target
  • How neatly OTIS air national guard base lines up with the straight path Flight 11 took towards Albany (supposedly after being hijacked)
  • How the plane turns south directly over the mouth of the Mohawk river valley that leads down to the former Griffiss Air Base, home of NEADS
  • 3 points are in a straight line almost exactly 100 miles apart: Otis ANGB; the point Flight 11 turns North-West (official hijacking point); and the point the plane begins to turn South.
This could just be a total coincidence but it is worth noting:
A line joining Otis ANGB and the former Sawyer air base in Michigan lies perfectly over the NW part of the Flight 11 flight path.
The implications are that if someone wanted to involve military planes in this operation they could quite easily do it under the cover of the wargames and drills that were happening that day. This is by no means the only coincidence regarding the location of these bases as we will see in future installments.


====================

Written by Frank Levi
Tuesday, 30 May 2006
This is an old article from the original site where I began speculating that the planes may have been swapped in a similar way to that described in Operation Northwoods.
This is now somewhat out of date and has some misunderstandings about flight trackers and radar but has been preserved to show how these theories developed.
Operation 9-11: Rendezvous Points

Frank Levi, August 2003

Updated 13th Aug - New information on rendezvous points

Updated 14th Sept - Possible error about GPS tracking, some planes use this to link to the Flight Tracker but not all, mostly they use radar. If anyone has any more information please contact me.

Many people have speculated that the US government deliberately allowed the 9-11 attacks to happen to give them justification for the "War Against Terrorism". There is no moral difference between "allowing someone to be murdered" and murdering someone. And the former is much more likely to go wrong.

Is it possible that the US government and their allies may have actually carried out the attacks on 9-11 as a false flag operation?

Key questions:

  1. Would members of the US military and intelligence agencies attack their own people?
  2. How many people would have to be complicit in order to carry out such a huge operation?

Operation Northwoods is a document discovered through the Freedom of Information Act which proved conclusively that high ranking members of the US military have planned in the past to use fake terror attacks to justify war. This particular plan was to justify an invasion of Cuba by carrying out numerous acts of violence and trickery.

A full scanned copy of Operation Northwoods can be seen at:

http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-i.htm

The matter-of-fact way in which this memo is presented is quite shocking.

"We could blow up a ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba"

"We could develop a communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities or even in Washington".

For the purpose of this article we will be focusing on one particular section:

http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-10.htm

This section deals with a mock shoot-down of a passenger plane with the intention of blaming Cuba. The basic points follow:

  • A plane at Eglin Air Force base would be painted up to be an exact replica of a registered plane belonging to a "CIA proprietary organisation" in Miami.
  • This painted plane would be secretly swapped with the real aircraft and loaded with passengers using fake identities. The real craft would be converted into a remote controlled drone. During the flight, the real aircraft (drone) would rendezvous with the fake aircraft. The plane with the fake passengers on board would fly very low and land in the base.
  • Passengers and plane would then return to normal and the drone flight would continue on its way
  • As the plane flew over Cuba a fake distress message would be broadcast indicating an attack by a Cuban MIG fighter. This would be interrupted by the remote detonation of explosives on board the plane.

A few other points to note:

Was 9-11 a more complex version of Operation Northwoods? If so, what happened to the passengers?

Rendezvous and Land

Many articles about the hijackings have shown diagrams of the flight-paths followed by the four hijacked planes. These flight paths were not taken from recordings of Air Traffic Control radar as you might think, but from Flight-Tracking services, available to the public on the Internet.

If you connect to a Flight-Tracker you can actually watch a plane on its journey using radar information. Air traffic controllers use radar and the information sent from the plane's transponder, which shows altitude as well as the plane's identification. The hijackers turned off the planes' transponders which made it difficult for ATC to track them, but the flight tracking service continued to record the planes' locations.

If Operation 9-11 was based loosely on Operation Northwoods, what exactly did they do? It would make sense to rendezvous with a drone as close as possible to a military base to avoid the chances of someone seeing an unexplained blip on the radar. If the passenger planes were landed it would need to be at airports or bases close to the target so that the radar trace would appear to finish at the target.

Let's look at some images of the flights as picked up by a company called Flight Explorer. Here we see the overlaid tracks for Flight 11 and Flight 175.

Flight track for AA11 and UAL 175
Flight track for AA11 and UAL 175

Click to see real size

Our rendezvous point for both of these planes would seem to be fairly simple and can be seen even more clearly as an animation. Click on this link to see the animated flight paths.

You will notice immediately that the two planes almost meet each other at a point north of NYC. So what exactly is at this point?

Stewart International Airport which is also the location of Stewart Air National Guard Base and the 105th airlift wing. Home of some very large c-5a carrier planes.

Now look at a diagram of the airport itself:


Those two runways fairly closely match the paths taken by Flight 11 and 175 don't they?

So were the two planes really that close to this airport?

FAA worker says hijacked jeltiners almost collided before striking World Trade Center

"The terrorists, however, nearly had their plans dashed when the two planes almost collided outside the city, the employee said. "The two aircraft got too close to each other down by Stewart" International Airport in New Windsor, N.Y., the employee said."

How could this be done without an Air Traffic Controller noticing something funny?

From the same article:

"One air traffic controller - with the help of an assistant - monitored the flight patterns of the two jets that toppled the World Trade Center, the employee said. He directed American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 - both Boeing 767 jets that had Boston to Los Angeles routes, the employee said.
The same controller handled Egypt Air Flight 990 when it crashed off the coast of Massachusetts in 1999, the employee said."

For those who don't know, Flight 990 was full of Egyptian Military top brass and is suspected by some people of having been crashed using remote control. What a coincidence.

Landing?

We have a number of possibilities here. You may have noticed that the last blip for Flight 175 is a little out of place. Could the last blip in each flight path have been added on to show the planes apparently finishing at the world trade center?

If this is the case perhaps flight 11 could have landed at La Guardia airport (directly below the second last blip)

A simple possibility is that some sort of hijacking was actually taking place on the plane, the real pilots were still flying the plane and were told to land at La Guardia airport.

"Another controller at the Nashua center confirms these events, adding some of what the hijacker was saying. "One of the pilots keyed their mike so the conversation between the pilot and the person in the cockpit could be heard," a second controller says. "The person in the cockpit was speaking in English. He was saying something like, 'Don't do anything foolish. You're not going to get hurt.' ""

"This controller also says that someone in the cockpit may have said something about guiding the plane toward Kennedy or LaGuardia airport in New York. But the controller, who was not handling the plane himself, is unsure whether the pilot or hijacker was speaking. If the latter, it may have been a ruse to make the pilot believe the plane was being diverted to an airport, not to a murder-suicide mission at the World Trade Center."

(Christian Science Monitor, Sept 13th 2001)

Flight 175 is more interesting to analyse. Check out this link:

The Seattle Times. Understanding the conflict. Graphics & video.

"Less than 30 minutes into a journey that was to have taken six hours, Flight 175 took a sharp turn south into central New Jersey, near Trenton, an unusual diversion for a plane heading west, airline employees said. It then headed directly toward Manhattan. "

"Somewhere between Philadelphia and Newark — less than 90 miles from Manhattan — Flight 175 made its final radar contact, according to a statement released by United Airlines. About the same time, American Flight 11 struck the north tower of the World Trade Center, setting off a massive explosion."

Trenton is close to Brown Mills, the location of McGuire Air Force Base. You'll also notice if you look at the white time markings on the diagram above that Flight 175 also seems to be slowing down a great deal as it approaches Trenton. Which is what planes do when they land. Look at the last two blips before the plane supposedly turns towards NY. They are in a direct line towards Brown Mills

Alternatively, it may have landed at La Guardia with Flight 11. Perhaps they both assumed new transponder/radio identities as they approached the airport?

Flight 93 and Flight 77

Flight 93 was supposed to take-off from Newark airport at 8:00 but was delayed by 42 minutes.

In the image below you can see the original flight plan on the right with estimated arrival time set as 02:15 pm at San Francisco. You can see it flies very close to both Cleveland and Pittsburgh airports. Not long before the plane disappears from the radar, whoever was flying the plane filed an electronic change of flight-plan to DCA (Ronald Reagan International Airport) with an estimated arrival time of 10:28.



Why any "suicide hijacker" would ever dream of filing a change of flight plan is totally beyond comprehension. We'll come back to this later.

It looks like whoever was flying Flight 93 was trying to land. Around the time the flight plan was changed Flight 93 was heading towards the municipal airport in Johnstown at a low altitude. Was someone hoping to land here but changed flight plan to DCA because of difficulty contacting ATC (jammed radio?).

One thing is for certain - all the crashes were supposed to happen at around the same time. If Flight 93 had not been delayed by 42 minutes and had followed the same path, it would have arrived in Washington at 9:46. This is around the same time that Flight 77 supposedly crashed into the Pentagon

What happened to Flight 77?


Unlike all the other planes the radar track suddenly stops over Southern Ohio. Completely dead. Any other flight path diagrams you may have seen have the estimated path drawn in.

None of the other planes lost the flight tracking at an early stage in the journey. Why just on this plane? Was it shot down or remotely exploded? Did it land in the very small Portsmouth Airport or fly very low and land in one of the larger airports in the area? Was it really Flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon? Perhaps it had another destination which had to be abandoned because of the Flight 93 delay. If this plane had changed its path at this point and flown directly to Chicago (and the Sears Tower) it would have passed directly over Dayton and the Wright Patterson air base.

So what actually happened?

There are a number of possibilities:

  • The real planes rendezvoused with the military planes and the empty military planes were crashed into the buildings. If so, were the passengers just aliases with actors playing bereaved relatives? Were people offered money to disappear as part of the plan? Were they killed or imprisoned? It's difficult to believe that around two hundred fake passengers could be alive and complicit without someone blowing the whistle. They are more likely to be either innocent and dead or complicit and dead.
  • The real planes were modified to allow remote control, rendezvoused with military planes which would jam the radio and transponder signals whilst guiding the planes to their targets. A staged hijacking may have been happening, or the pilots may have been given bogus orders to fly to the rendezvous point because of an emergency.
  • Another possibility is that a staged hijacking was taking place on the planes but the planes were flown back to the airport (except flight 93). Meanwhile, the remote controlled drones would do their work.

Lets not forget the c-130 plane seen flying directly above flight 77 "as if to prevent two planes from appearing on radar while at the same time guiding the jet toward the Pentagon"

Was there an opportunity to modify or even substitute any of the planes? Read this witness report from Sept 10th:

http://bpdupdateonline.bizland.com/fall2001/id26.html

"On Monday, September 10 at about 1 pm, my husband and I flew into Newark, returning from a meeting of the CSWE Commission on Conferences and Faculty Development. We flew past the World Trade Center Towers on our way into Newark, and the plane's landing gear lowered. Suddenly, the landing gear and the plane lifted again, and we were told that we had been diverted to LaGuardia Airport, as there was a fire in Newark Airport. We flew past the Twin Towers again on our way to land at LaGuardia.

There was some confusion when we landed at LaGuardia, and over a period of three hours, we were led off the plane, back on the plane, and then off the plane again. This seemed strange at the time. In light of the events of September 11, we now wonder if the fire in Newark was in any way connected to the terrorist attack which would occur the next day."

Please send feedback, corrections, ridicule etc. to This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it

More to come soon...




5 Comments:

Blogger Seven Star Hand said...

Hello BatCave,

Great article...

Remember that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Consequently, if we fail to force these scoundrels to face the Truth and Justice necessary to end such evil, similar scenarios are guaranteed to occur again and again in the future.

The pivotal import of Yellow Cake, False Flags, & "Big Time" Evil

The combination of George Tenet's book, At the Center of the Storm, Eisner & Royce's The Italian Letter and the books and research of many others in recent years now provides enough of a foundation for everyone to finally discern that 9:11 was a "false flag" operation against both the American public and the Muslim world. Likewise, the uncanny synchronicity of Al Qaeda's videos and other activities perfectly timed to reinforce and support the Bush/Cheney administration's political needs coupled with the actions of the Bush admin actually serving to strengthen Al Qaeda's position, now makes perfect sense. The apparent mistakes and chaos that have characterized the Iraq war, the easily prevented resurgence of the Taliban, and permitting Bin Laden to escape Tora Bora to a safe haven in Pakistan all fit the same pattern. It's hard to maintain a state of continuous war if you allow your made-to-order enemies to be defeated too early. It is likewise hard to remain a "war president" if your wars end too soon!

The letterhead used to forge the "Yellowcake letter" that was then used to help "sell" the Iraq war was stolen in Rome on 1/1/2001, more than nine months before 9:11 and before Little W. became president. Consequently, the use of the "Yellow-Cake Lie" was obviously discussed and planned before then! The import of this fact is that the Niger embassy in Rome was burglarized, before Bush became president, to lay the groundwork for the web of deception used to sell the Iraq War, after 9:11. More importantly, it is highly unlikely that the Iraq war could ever have been sold to the American public, without something like 9:11 happening first. Any excuses of other uses for the stolen letterhead are laughable since the letterhead burglary would have been pointless, without 9:11. This evidences foreknowledge of those attacks, a full nine months before they occurred, among other things!

Read more...

1:43 PM  
Blogger batcave911 said...

Thanks Steven
After researching this for years i have concluded this (9-11) was absolutely planned.
There are so many questions and secrets and damning evidence that it is impossible to ignore.

6:19 PM  
Blogger chenlina said...

chenlina20160711
longchamp outlet
nike trainers
beats solo
louboutin pas cher
polo ralph lauren
coach outlet
ray ban outlet
coach outlet
coach outlet store online
tod's shoes
mont blanc fountain pens
adidas shoes
michael kors
polo ralph lauren outlet
christian louboutin outlet
cheap oakley sunglasses
coach outlet
louboutin shoes
fitflops sale clearance
lebron james shoes 13
cheap jordan shoes
kobe 11
jordan 8
michael kors handbags
toms outlet
designer handbags
nike factory outlet
true religion jeans
adidas shoes
ray ban sunglasses
michael kors purses
oakley sunglasses
cheap ray ban sunglasses
toms outlet
louis vuitton
fitflops shoes
coach factory outlet
louis vuitton
coach outlet
longchamp bags
as

7:53 PM  
Blogger soma taha said...

http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/packaging-furniture-companies-6.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/packaging-furniture-companies-3.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/packaging-furniture-companies-7.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/packaging-furniture-companies-5.html

6:56 AM  
Blogger soma taha said...

http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/packaging-furniture-companies-4.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/packaging-furniture-companies-2.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/packaging-furniture-companies.html

7:24 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home