Global Cooperative

Helping establish the new "global cooperative" movement of humankind.

Anglo-American-Israeli destabilisation of Iran

with one comment

Jun 24, 2009: A wide range of evidence reveals that the Anglo-American-Israeli alliance is working intensively to destabilise Iran, in the aftermath of the recent national election on June 12. These efforts to undermine the sovereignty of Iran have been steadily increasing over the past few years, with the express intention of forcing a “regime change” such that a puppet leader can be installed who is more inclined to do the bidding of the Western powers. A proven track record of significant meddling in the affairs of Iran by the Anglo-American-Israeli alliance goes back more than half a century, most obviously beginning with the manufactured coup of 1953 in which the democratically elected government of Iran was overthrown. Obama directly admitted US involvement in this coup when speaking in Cairo on June 4 [1], yet there is no admission relative to the current attempts by the USA and their allies to undermine the stability of Iran. It is a clever psychological smokescreen to admit to a long-past crime, while continuing to commit exactly the same crime right at this moment.

Hypocritical USA is no friend of democracy

Before investigating the many facts relating to the recent election in Iran, it is useful to pause for a moment and consider the nature of the USA in light of the supposed “concern” (hyped by the US government and media over the past two weeks) for a “democratic process” to take place in a far away Middle-Eastern country (that happens to have a lot of oil). Consider this commentary by Paul Craig Roberts, who worked as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration, relative to the past half century of history between the USA and Iran:

How much attention do elections in Japan, India, Argentina, or any other country, get from the U.S. media? How many Americans and American journalists even know who is in political office in other countries besides England, France, and Germany? Who can name the political leaders of Switzerland, Holland, Brazil, Japan, or even China?

Yet, many know of Iran’s President Ahmadinejad. The reason is obvious. He is daily demonized in the U.S. media.

The U.S. media’s demonization of Ahmadinejad itself demonstrates American ignorance. The President of Iran is not the ruler. He is not the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. He cannot set policies outside the boundaries set by Iran’s rulers, the ayatollahs who are not willing for the Iranian Revolution to be overturned by American money in some color-coded “revolution.”

Iranians have a bitter experience with the United States government. Their first democratic election, after emerging from occupied and colonized status in the 1950s, was overturned by the U.S. government. The U.S. government installed in place of the elected candidate a dictator who tortured and murdered dissidents who thought Iran should be an independent country and not ruled by an American puppet.

The U.S. “superpower” has never forgiven the Iranian Islamic ayatollahs for the Iranian Revolution in the late 1970s, which overthrew the U.S. puppet government and held hostage U.S. embassy personnel, regarded as “a den of spies,” while Iranian students pieced together shredded embassy documents that proved America’s complicity in the destruction of Iranian democracy. [2]

This bluntly honest indictment of the USA as a destroyer of real and true democracy comes as no surprise to anyone who has studied the past century or so of history with an open mind, given that for more than 110 years (since the invasion of the Philippines in 1898) the USA has brutally attacked innocent human beings in literally dozens of nations on Earth. Totalling all of the civilian deaths caused by the violent military aggressions of the USA over this period (either directly or by proxy, as in the case of the US installed Iranian puppet described above) gives an amount of between 15 and 20 million civilian deaths [3]. This total comes from verified historical records including Encyclopedias (and other scholarly books), government documents, and media reports. Wherever truly people-based movements have arisen in the world, the USA has consistently worked to smash them with brutal might, for the sake of constantly expanding the power of the Anglo-American Empire.

Corporate oligarchy rules the USA

Apart from the murderous history of US foreign policy, an honest look at the nature of the “regime” at home (in the USA itself) quickly reveals that there is nothing like a democratic process happening. In the past decade alone, two Presidential elections were stolen in plain sight. In December 2000, an illegal and un-Constitutional Supreme Court decision stopped the recount of votes that is the legal responsibility of each state, not of the federal government. This installed the puppet “command-in-chief” Bush for his first term, during which all manner of attacks on democracy took place, including the signing of the infamous “Patriot Act” that provided a “legal” basis for the indefinite incarceration of “enemy combatants” who have been tortured (due to government policy “legalising” such practice) and also denied the fundamental human right to a fair trial in court (to this day, now more than seven years later for many of them).

In November 2004, there was a mass of evidence that widespread irregularities in vote counting took place all over the country [4]. This was especially true in Ohio, which Bush had to win to be re-elected. It is clear that through all manner of manipulation of the data in Ohio [5], Bush was effectively handed the Presidency by the corporate oligarchy that controls the USA. So, two out of the past three Presidential elections in the USA were utterly undemocratic, yet this country presumes to preach to anyone at all about possible subversion of the “democractic process”!

Although the election of November 2008 in the USA may not have been as manipulated in terms of the raw data, the incredible propaganda and psychological techniques employed by Obama and the powerful forces supporting him were certainly obvious during his campaign. Frequent use of “belief” and “hope” and “change” by Obama in speeches, without him ever specifying exactly what he meant, allowed the audience to project their own understanding of these words onto him, such that Obama simply became a reflected image of how each one of us sees the world (thus, allowing him to be “something for everyone” as many people have said). However, since his election it has been made exceedingly clear by the many actions of Obama and the new administration that the “change” he is actually serving is not at all for the people. Rather, the “change” is to rapidly give even greater powers to the corporate oligarchy that made him President.

Without even examining the mountain of evidence proving that the USA is ever more quickly becoming a fascist and totalitarian nation (as is discussed in a vast number of articles on the Internet, including many articles on this website) one simply needs to ask: is it a democracy when a two-to-one majority of the people object to the financial “bailouts” [6], yet the Obama administration ignores this fact and approves the astonishing amount of an additional $12-13 trillion of government (and therefore, taxpayer) backed money to be given to the very corrupt financial powers who have brought about this current economic chaos? This is only one fact amongst a multitude that proves the USA no longer even vaguely resembles a true democracy. So, remember the hypocrisy of the USA while reading on about their meddling in Iran.

Anglo-American-Israeli intelligence operations in Iran from 2007 to present

Everything about the so-called “election fraud” can be quickly revealed as an operation that has been directly funded and supported by the Anglo-American-Israeli governments and their respective intelligence agencies (MI6, CIA, and Mossad). Only two years ago, several news articles appeared in the Western press describing the CIA efforts to destabilise Iran that were approved by the US government during May 2007 [7]. The orchestration of a “revolution” that would bring about “regime change” is the obvious intention of this destabilisation, done through every kind of media and psychological propoganda. ABC News in the USA aired an in-depth report on this very subject on May 24, 2007 [8]. In line with this evidence, a former Pakistani Army General, Mirza Aslam Beig, describes the documented proof of the CIA investing US$400 million to evoke a revolution:

In a phone interview with the Pashto Radio on Monday [June 15, 2009], General Beig said that there is undisputed intelligence proving the US interference in Iran.

“The documents prove that the CIA spent 400 million dollars inside Iran to prop up a colorful-hollow revolution following the election,” he added.

Pakistan’s former army chief of joint staff went on to say that the US wanted to disturb the situation in Iran and bring to power a pro-US government. [9]

Investigations by Seymour Hersh for an article in The New Yorker also revealed that this figure of US$400 million is indeed accurate, according to multiple sources within the government and military [10]. This is all straight from the “CIA playbook” that has been used numerous times throughout the past half century. Here is a good summary of the practice:

So here we go again – the old Langley one, two, three:

1. Groom an opposition candidate to run against the guy you hate, pay him well and line up your media to back him.

2. During the campaign, sell him as the savior of the bourgeois opposition who lost their money in the revolution. Use your own pollsters and media propaganda to convince his followers that they are going to win by a wide margin.

3. When your guy loses, scream “FRAUD!” It’s akin to yelling “FIRE!” in a crowded theatre, inflaming all those disappointed bourgeois counter-revolutionaries. Get them out on the street, setting fires, playing the victim, waving flags, ready-to-go placards, banners, women crying in front of CNN cameras and men yelling angrily into Christiana Amanpour’s microphone. Only this time, they’re ready to burn their own flag instead of the U.S. flag. I tell ya, it makes great TV for a western audience. (Incidentally, don’t take Christiana’s reports too seriously. The Amanpours, like many Iranian expats, led a privileged life under the Shah of Iran and lost their ill gotten wealth as a result of the Iranian revolution in ’79. Naturally, Christiana was very upset. Later, she married James Rubin, an arch-Zionist, and regained her status, good money and even some fame, this time as a CNN reporter in service to the empire.)

Mir Hussein Mousavi followed his script, declared to his followers that the election was invalid instead of graciously accepting defeat. CIA’s shill, Manuel Rosales, did exactly the same thing in Venezuela when he lost large to President Chavez in 2006. The opposition came out and banged their pots and pans, then went home to bed. When Ahmadinejad reached out to Mousavi and his followers, offering to give them a part in the new government, Mousavi rejected the offer. Folks, these are not exactly marks of a real statesman, ready to lead a nation. [11]

Who is Mir-Hussein Mousavi?

It is interesting to take a look at Mousavi’s background in light of the fact that he was the US-backed candidate in the recent election. A trusted friend of Mousavi during the 1980s (and perhaps still today) is one Manucher Ghorbanifar, an arms-dealer who had intimate involvement with the Iran-Contra affair and who is much liked by the neo-conservatives in the USA [12]. Then there is the fact that during the 1980s, Mousavi was known to be overseeing a terrorist campaign in Beirut:

He may yet turn out to be the avatar of Iranian democracy, but three decades ago Mir-Hossein Mousavi was waging a terrorist war on the United States that included bloody attacks on the U.S. embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Beirut.

Mousavi, prime minister for most of the 1980s, personally selected his point man for the Beirut terror campaign, Ali Akbar Mohtashemi-pur, and dispatched him to Damascus as Iran’s ambassador, according to former CIA and military officials.

Bob Baer agrees that Mousawi, who has been celebrated in the West for sparking street demonstrations against the Teheran regime since he lost the elections, was directing the overall 1980s terror campaign.

But Baer, a former CIA Middle East field officer whose exploits were dramatized in the George Clooney movie “Syriana,” places Mousavi even closer to the Beirut bombings.

“He dealt directly with Imad Mughniyah,” who ran the Beirut terrorist campaign and was “the man largely held responsible for both attacks,” Baer wrote in TIME over the weekend.

“When Mousavi was Prime Minister, he oversaw an office that ran operatives abroad, from Lebanon to Kuwait to Iraq,” Baer continued.

Baer added: “Mousavi was not only swept up into this delusion but also actively pursued it.” [13]

All of these facts paint an incredibly distinct vision of Mousavi than the idealised version of his personality that has been constantly hyped by the Western media in recent weeks. With his background in terror campaigns designed to cause political destabilisation, it is clear that Mousavi would indeed be very much liked by the CIA and the US government, who have long specialised in exactly this type of activity.

In an analysis of the presidential election one Muslim writer made the following comments:

Iran’s presidential elections held on June 12 in which the incumbent, President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, retained his post with a wide margin over his nearest rival Mir Hussain Mousavi has provided the Muslim hating West another opportunity to spout its anti-Islamic venom. Through its corporate-controlled media mouthpieces, they had already declared Mousavi the winner even before the people of Iran had had an opportunity to cast their vote. When the result turned out to be contrary to their perceived wisdom, it was immediately denounced as “rigged”. It seems even Mousavi had fallen for this propaganda because as soon as the polls closed, he told a press conference in Tehran that he had “won”. How he could make such a claim when no results had come in?

When the first results started to trickle in late on Friday June 12 and showed Ahmedinejad leading by a wide margin, the Western media, led by the BBC News World Service started to question their authenticity. Others followed suit. Soon there was a flood of accusations that there must have been massive rigging otherwise how could Ahmedinejad be ahead by such a wide margin. This was based on the Western media’s own wishful thinking of Mousavi’s victory.

Amid all the hype about rigging, some basic facts must be kept in mind. President Ahmedinejad may be unpopular in the West because of his outspoken views but he enjoys widespread support in Iran. His support base includes the rural population, the urban poor as well as the religious. This constitutes the overwhelming majority of Iran’s population. The urban educated middle class is a minority and is generally confined to the northern parts of Tehran. Their children go to university, drive expensive cars and frequent five-star hotels. It is this group that has largely coalesced around Mousavi.

In an article jointly authored by Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty and published in the Washington Post on June 15, 2009, the two writers revealed that Ahmedinejad’s 2 to 1 margin was actually confirmed by their own survey of public opinion conducted in Iran three weeks earlier. “While Western news reports from Tehran in the days leading up to the voting portrayed an Iranian public enthusiastic about Ahmadinejad’s principal opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi, our scientific sampling from across all 30 of Iran’s provinces showed Ahmadinejad well ahead.” [14]

So, we clearly have a situation where Mousavi – an elite-backed candidate who never had any real chance of winning the election – was directly supported by the Western powers and media, with the purpose of fomenting unrest through a stolen election “hoax” [15] after he inevitably lost. None of this is theory or conjecture. There is voluminous evidence detailing all of these facts, as shown by the many sources of information used for this article, which only scratches the surface of the documented proof relating to the Anglo-American-Israeli efforts to destabilise Iran.

Blatant Anglo-American-Israeli manipulation and lies

During the course of the events over the past two weeks the Western press has repeatedly resorted to blatant manipulation and lies, with the intention of convincing the world that the stolen election “hoax” is in fact real. For instance, consider the following evidence:

The BBC has again been caught engaging in mass public deception by using photographs of pro-Ahmadinejad rallies in Iran and claiming they represent anti-government protests in favor of Hossein Mousavi.

An image used by the L.A. Times on the front page of its website Tuesday showed Iranian President Ahmadinejad waving to a crowd of supporters at a public event.

In a story covering the election protests yesterday [June 17], the BBC News website used a closer shot of the same scene, but with Ahmadinejad cut out of the frame. The caption under the photograph read, ‘Supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi again defied a ban on protests’. [16]

In relation to the “twitter” phenomena, there is compelling evidence that both Israel and the US have been heavily involved in using this tool to foment unrest. Here is the result of one investigation into the constant stream of “tweets” about alleged voting fraud:

Were these legitimate Iranian people or the works of a propaganda machine? I became curious and decided to investigate the origins of the information. In doing so, I narrowed it down to a handful of people who have accounted for 30,000 Iran related tweets in the past few days. Each of them had some striking similarities –

1. They each created their twitter accounts on Saturday June 13th.
2. Each had extremely high number of Tweets since creating their profiles.
3. “IranElection” was each of their most popular keyword
4. With some very small exceptions, each were posting in ENGLISH.
5. Half of them had the exact same profile photo
6. Each had thousands of followers, with only a few friends. Most of their friends were EACH OTHER.

Why were these tweets in English? Why were all of these profiles OBSESSED with Iran? It became obvious that this was the work of a team of people with an interest in destabilizing Iran. The profiles are phonies and were created with the sole intention of destabilizing Iran and effecting public opinion as to the legitimacy of Iran’s election.

I narrowed the spammers down to three of the most persistent – @StopAhmadi @IranRiggedElect @Change_For_Iran

I decided to do a google search for 2 of the 3 – @StopAhmadi and @IranRiggedElect. The first page to come up was JPost (Jerusalem Post) which is a right wing newspaper pro-Israeli newspaper.

JPost actually ran a story about 3 people “who joined the social network mere hours ago have already amassed thousands of followers.” Why would a news organization post a story about 3 people who JUST JOINED TWITTER hours earlier? Is that newsworthy? Jpost was the first (and only to my knowledge) major news source that mentioned these 3 spammers.

The fact that JPost promoted these three Twitterers who went on the be the source of the IranElection Twitter bombardment is, unfortunately, evidence that this was an Israeli propaganda campaign against Iran. I must admit that I had my suspiscions. After all, Que Bono? (latin for “Who Benefits”). There’s no question that Israel perceives Iran as an enemy, more so than any other nation. Destabilizing the country would benefit them. [17]

Then there is confirmation directly from the US administration that they intervened to postpone scheduled maintenance of the Twitter service, so as to keep this barrage of Twitter messages going:

The Obama administration, while insisting it is not meddling in Iran, yesterday confirmed it had asked Twitter to remain open to help anti-government protesters.

The company had planned a temporary shutdown to overhaul its service in the middle of the night on Monday but the US state department put in a request to postpone this. [18]

If this is not enough direct confirmation of meddling and manipulation of the situation in Iran, then consider the following even more damning evidence of highly sophisticated use of mobile phone and website technology by the Western intelligence agencies:

Once again, Iran is an experimental field for innovative subversive methods. CIA is relying in 2009 on a new weapon: control of cell phones. Since the democratization of mobile phones, Anglo-Saxon secret services have increased their interception capability. While wired phones’ tapping requires the installation of branch circuits — and therefore local agents, tapping of mobile phones can be done remotely using the Echelon network.

In countries under their occupation — Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan — the Anglo-Saxons intercept all telephone communication, whether mobile or wired. The goal is not to obtain full transcripts of any given conversation, but to identify “social networks”. In other words, telephones are surveillance bugs which make it possible to know who anyone is in touch with.

Going one step further, Anglo-Saxons and Israeli secrets services developed psychological warfare methods based on an extensive use of mobile phones. In July 2008, after the exchange of prisoners and remains between Israel and Hezbollah, robots placed tens of thousands of calls to Lebanese mobile phones. A voice speaking in Arabic was warning against participating in any resistance activity and belittled Hezbollah. The Lebanese minister of telecommunications, Jibran Bassil, files a complaint to the UN against this blatant violation of the country’s sovereignty.

This method has now been used in Iran to bluff the population, to spread shocking news and to channel the resulting anger.

First, SMS were sent during the night of the counting of the votes, according to which the Guardian Council of the Constitution (equivalent to a constitutional court) had informed Mir-Hossein Mousavi of his victory. After that, the announcing of the official results — the re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with 64% of cast votes — seemed like a huge fraud. However, three days earlier, M. Mousavi and his friends were considering a massive victory of M. Ahmadinejad as certain and were trying to explain it by unbalanced campaigns.

Secondly, Iranian citizens were selected or volunteered on the Internet to chat on Facebook or to subscribe to Twitter feeds. They received information — true or false — (still via SMS) about the evolution of the political crisis and the ongoing demonstrations. These anonymous news posts were spreading news of gun fights and numerous deaths which to this day have not been confirmed.

Simultaneously, in a new type of effort, the CIA is mobilizing anti-Iranian militants in the United States and in the United Kingdom to increase the chaos. A Practical Guide to revolution in Iran was distributed to them, which contains a number of recommendations, including:

  • set Twitter accounts feeds to Tehran time zone;
  • centralize messages on the following Twitter accounts @stopAhmadi, #iranelection and #gr88 ;
  • official Iranian State websites should not be attacked. “Let the US military take care of it” [sic].

When applied, these recommendations make it impossible to authenticate any Twitter messages. It is impossible to know if they are being sent by witnesses of the demonstrations in Tehran or by CIA agents in Langley, and it is impossible to distinguish real from false ones. The goal is to create more and more confusion and to push Iranians to fight amongst themselves. [19]

Thus, all of this modern technology being touted in the Western press as a great positive for the people of Iran is actually being used subversively by Western intelligence agencies to undermine the stability of the country, as the above quoted article describes in detail. Also, note that the Twitter account @stopAhmadi that was discussed by another writer is once again mentioned, confirming that this account must indeed be controlled by the Western intelligence agencies.

“Manufacturing consent” for war with Iran

Apart from the obvious destabilisation that is being caused by the powerful Anglo-American-Israeli attack on the national sovereignty of Iran, there is an even darker motive behind all of this effort. That motive is to “manufacture consent” (to use Noam Chomsky’s well known term) for war. Through the demonisation of the legitimately elected government of Iran, the Western powers are using powerful psy-ops (“psychological operations”) techniques on their own citizens (as well as on the Iranian people who are sympathetic to the West), with the intention of reaching a popular consensus of support for military aggression. Exactly the same technique was used to demonise Iraq and Saddam Hussein prior to the invasion by Anglo-American forces in 2003, using “information” that is now conclusively known to be outright fabrications and lies (relative to the supposed “weapons of mass destruction”).

In the same article by Paul Craig Roberts that was quoted at the beginning of this analysis, we find the following insightful commentary:

Think about the Iranian election from a common sense standpoint. Neither myself nor the vast majority of readers are Iranian experts. But from a common sense standpoint, if your country was under constant threat of attack, even nuclear attack, from two countries with much more powerful military establishments, as is Iran from the U.S. and Israel, would you desert your country’s best defender and elect the preferred candidate of the U.S. and Israel?

Do you believe that the Iranian people would have voted to become an American puppet state?

As a person who has seen it all from inside the U.S. government, I believe that the purpose of the U.S. government’s manipulation of the American and puppet government media is to discredit the Iranian government by portraying the Iranian government as an oppressor of the Iranian people and a frustrater of the Iranian people’s will. This is how the U.S. government is setting up Iran for military attack.

With the help of Moussavi, the U.S. government is creating another “oppressed people,” like Iraqis under Saddam Hussein, who require American lives and money to liberate. [20]

A subsequent article by Paul Craig Roberts on the subject of the psy-ops in Iran makes some extremely relevant points:

President Obama called on the Iranian government to allow protesters to control the streets in Tehran. Would Obama or any US president allow protesters to control the streets in Washington, D.C.?

There was more objective evidence that George W. Bush stole his two elections than there is at this time of election theft in Iran. But there was no orchestrated media campaign to discredit the US government.

The Mousavi protests have set up Iran either for a US puppet government or for a military strike.

The US intervention and the orchestrated disinformation pumped out by the western media are so transparent that it is impossible to believe than any informed person or government is taken in. One cannot avoid the conclusion that the West wants the 1978 Iranian Revolution overthrown and intends to use deception or violence to achieve that goal. [21]

Another article further demonstrates the complete hypocrisy of the US power system in relation to the “newfound concern for the Iranian people”:

… there is one point I want to make about the vocal and dramatic expressions of solidarity with Iranians issuing from some quarters in the U.S.

Much of the same faction now claiming such concern for the welfare of The Iranian People are the same people who have long been advocating a military attack on Iran and the dropping of large numbers of bombs on their country – actions which would result in the slaughter of many of those very same Iranian People.

Imagine how many of the people protesting this week would be dead if any of these bombing advocates had their way – just as those who paraded around (and still parade around) under the banner of Liberating the Iraqi People caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of them, at least. Hopefully, one of the principal benefits of the turmoil in Iran is that it humanizes whoever the latest Enemy is. Advocating a so-called “attack on Iran” or “bombing Iran” in fact means slaughtering huge numbers of the very same people who are on the streets of Tehran inspiring so many – obliterating their homes and workplaces, destroying their communities, shattering the infrastructure of their society and their lives. The same is true every time we start mulling the prospect of attacking and bombing another country as though it’s some abstract decision in a video game.

Perhaps the scenes unfolding in Iran, our Enemy Du Jour, will make those dehumanization efforts – the linchpin of our militarism and state of perpetual war – more difficult in the future. [22]

These remarks do reveal a potentially positive outcome that really does need to be the result of the current propaganda campaign against the government of Iran. Such a result would be a perfect “back-fire” of the very manipulative strategy that is consistently used by the Western powers.


There is no question that Iran is under attack by the Anglo-American-Israeli alliance, which is intensively working to destabilise the country through every covert and overt means. All of the evidence cited here is only a fraction of the information about Western meddling in Iran that is readily available on the Internet. These many facts reveal a consistent motivation on the part of the Anglo-American-Israeli alliance, which is complete dominance of Iran. This is simply one aspect of the continuing march towards totalitarian control of the entire planet by this powerful group of nations.

Conscious understanding of the continuing push for global domination by this (or any) powerful alliance of nations must become universal amongst humankind, so that any plans for totalitarian control can be resisted. May the power of “everybody-all-at-once” immediately awaken such that humankind can demand peaceful and benign solutions to the global realities confronting us all. May it be so.




there is one point I want to make about the vocal and dramatic expressions of
solidarity with Iranians issuing from some quarters in the U.S.
Much of the same faction now claiming such concern for the welfare of The Iranian People are the same people
who have long been advocating a military attack on Iran and the dropping of large numbers of bombs on their
country — actions which would result in the slaughter of many of those very same Iranian People.

Written by Savvy108

June 24, 2009 at 10:47 pm

Posted in Old World Order

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Hey Savvy108,

    Thanks for the Iran-Election summary … I think my extremely limited knowledge of what went on there would not have developed further had your post not caught my attention.


    June 26, 2009 at 8:18 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: