22 22
quade

DB Cooper

Recommended Posts

Quote

If part time junior super secret agent Blevins was intellectually honest with himself he would admit KC was not Cooper just as Eric has with Sheridan.

Yeah. Well...let us all know when you intend to be just PLAIN HONEST with yourself and start proving those things (especially a military history) on Fred Hahneman. Maybe you should drop by my office in Yakima and stick your nose into that highboy drawer and start looking at the files we have on our KC investigation. Then I will turn you loose on the computer to see the online stuff. You will not only be busy for weeks, but you might get a realistic idea of how we did all that.  

I am not Eric Ulis. Neither am I Jo Weber. Or even Carl Laurin, the guy who tried to forge off a KGB identity card on people and tell everyone his suspect worked for them. And it wasn't even a GOOD forgery. (*laughs*)

Don't come to me as Mr Anonymous From Canada and try to tell me my business. Especially when you haven't proven a thing yet...NOT ONE THING...regarding associating Fred Hahneman with the Cooper hijacking. Who knows? Maybe he did do it?

But so far you have presented zip except for a vague reference in the FBI's wanted poster. Nothing else. Nada, negatory, not happening, and not today. B)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RobertMBlevins said:

Yeah. Well...let us all know when you intend to be just PLAIN HONEST with yourself and start proving those things (especially a military history) on Fred Hahneman. Maybe you should drop by my office in Yakima and stick your nose into that highboy drawer and start looking at the files we have on our KC investigation. Then I will turn you loose on the computer to see the online stuff. You will not only be busy for weeks, but you might get a realistic idea of how we did all that.  

I am not Eric Ulis. Neither am I Jo Weber. Or even Carl Laurin, the guy who tried to forge off a KGB identity card on people and tell everyone his suspect worked for them. And it wasn't even a GOOD forgery. (*laughs*)

Don't come to me as Mr Anonymous From Canada and try to tell me my business. Especially when you haven't proven a thing yet...NOT ONE THING...regarding associating Fred Hahneman with the Cooper hijacking. Who knows? Maybe he did do it?

But so far you have presented zip except for a vague reference in the FBI's wanted poster. Nothing else. Nada, negatory, not happening, and not today. B)

 

Exactly as I said,, attack the messenger,, Hahneman has nothing to do with KC not being Cooper, he is irrelevant.

The evidence shows KC is not Cooper. You have constructed a narrative to fit your own bias and to do that you ignore, reject and spin the evidence. Not the wanted poster, that is your attempt to discredit the evidence.

Kenneth Christiansen was not Cooper, nobody should waste their time or money on him..

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, FLYJACK said:

Exactly as I said,, attack the messenger,, Hahneman has nothing to do with KC not being Cooper, he is irrelevant.

The evidence shows KC is not Cooper. You have constructed a narrative to fit your own bias and to do that you ignore, reject and spin the evidence. Not the wanted poster, that is your attempt to discredit the evidence.

Kenneth Christiansen was not Cooper, nobody should waste their time or money on him..

I'm not 'attacking the messenger,'  but listening to your opinions regarding KC is a waste of my time. Not like you were involved in the investigation or something. Not like you have seen all the files, which are very extensive.

You are simply stating your opinion about it. I don't have a problem with that. But since you are actively involved with investigating A DIFFERENT SUSPECT...I have to chuckle at your comments sometimes. 

Look at it this way. Even if you thought KC was Cooper, you wouldn't say so. You are busy with another suspect in the case, so any opinion from you regarding KC is...well...a bit slanted. You certainly have an agenda going. 

I don't have a problem with that either. But neither do I have to take your opinion seriously. 

EDIT: When I mentioned back there about Carl Laurin and his amateurish attempt to prove Walter Reca once worked for the KGB...see pictures below. One of them shows a REAL KGB identity card. The other is a poorly-constructed fake. You can figure out which one is real. B) Why aren't you talking about this to Carl Laurin? Everyone has a right to investigate this person or that one for the Cooper case. But when you start creating fake documents and just making shit up to 'prove' your case...that's where I draw the line. In fact, I believe it is possible that Fred Hahneman was Cooper. I don't personally believe he was, but at least you haven't started faking stuff yet. You just haven't presented anything...so far. 

GenuineKGBIDcard

And Carl Laurin's forged card:

recaKGBandLaurin2

Full article at WordPress on 'Laurin's Lunacy' is HERE. 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

This is maybe possible. But there are some people here and there who might object. The author, and the owner of the rights to the artwork, for example. Three people are involved in the book. I have the info on two of them and hope to have the third one soon. It is probably pointless. I could produce an exact copy with an even easier font to read, better paper, (same size, same book, just more pages) but I imagine some Cooperland folks would interfere. 

If I were to get involved with this book it would be first class or nothing. And no copyright violations. 

If Cooper folk want me to take such a project under my wing, I would like to hear serious support on it from those same people. It can be done quickly, but it is a lot of work and money is involved out of my own pocket. Plus I would have to make arrangements with the rights' owners. I'm sure I can do that, but I want to SEE SUPPORT if I take this project on. Otherwise I won't waste my time, effort, money, and simply be satisfied with the two copies of Ha Ha Ha I still own. 

I DO have a plan in mind that will benefit all three people involved in the original book, and they are looking at that plan as you read this. Two of them are, anyway. They are considering my request to know the name and current circumstances of the original author, and for rights to re-publish. (Okay...'current circumstances' means is he dead or alive for starters.)

 

Well I for one would be interested. I would hope others would look at it objectively and not interfere.

It seems at this point that the original book has become a collector's item. I'm guessing that the copies you have, wrapped and preserved, you would never actually read them or allow them to be read, as opening them and going through the pages would disturb their pristineness. I get that, but at that point they become worthless as an actual book.

I for one am not interested in having a collector copy. I'm curious about the content. So if a new paperback version were available, that one could read without worrying about it getting tattered, I'd be interested in that. I would guess that many others might be as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, RobertMBlevins said:

I'm not 'attacking the messenger,'  but listening to your opinions regarding KC is a waste of my time. Not like you were involved in the investigation or something. Not like you have seen all the files, which are very extensive.

You are simply stating your opinion about it. I don't have a problem with that. But since you are actively involved with investigating A DIFFERENT SUSPECT...I have to chuckle at your comments sometimes. 

Look at it this way. Even if you thought KC was Cooper, you wouldn't say so. You are busy with another suspect in the case, so any opinion from you regarding KC is...well...a bit slanted. You certainly have an agenda going. 

I don't have a problem with that either. But neither do I have to take your opinion seriously. 

You don't understand, it isn't my opinion.. Objectively the facts reject KC.

If the facts supported him I'd say so. They don't. It is that simple.

You will say anything to discredit the messenger.. by your own logic anything you say about any other suspect is invalid.

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

You don't understand, it isn't my opinion.. Objectively the facts reject KC.

If the facts supported him I'd say so. They don't. It is that simple.

You will say anything to discredit the messenger.. by your own logic anything you say about any other suspect is invalid.

Nobody's trying to discredit either you, or your suspect Fred Hahneman. The reason is simple. You haven't provided anything yet to discredit. (*smiles*) Your opinion on KC's guilt or innocence is pretty worthless, because you are actively working on another suspect and you have stated you believe he best meets the evidentiary criteria. 

But your opinion on KC is basically worthless. I will explain with a simple example. Lets say there are two burger joints on the same street, across from each other. The owner of one of them keeps trying to tell passersby that the other one has crappy food. That is kind of the position you are in. 

Dudeman 17 says: (regarding the Cooper book, HA HA HA)

Quote

 

'Well I for one would be interested. I would hope others would look at it objectively and not interfere.

It seems at this point that the original book has become a collector's item. I'm guessing that the copies you have, wrapped and preserved, you would never actually read them or allow them to be read, as opening them and going through the pages would disturb their pristineness. I get that, but at that point they become worthless as an actual book.

I for one am not interested in having a collector copy. I'm curious about the content. So if a new paperback version were available, that one could read without worrying about it getting tattered, I'd be interested in that. I would guess that many others might be as well.'

 

 

Robert says: I am working on it. I have read most of the book. I don't look at them solely as collector items. Just part of my larger collection of books on the Cooper case. Some are better than others. Ha Ha Ha is one of the better ones. But unless I see active interest from enough people who read this thread, or who are involved in the Cooper case, I'm not planning on putting up the money and the effort to republish the thing. Last time I wanted to publish someone's book on the side, someone who had something to do with discussions on Cooper, (Sheridan Peterson) I got burned. So this time there is either supporting comments...so I can be assured it is okay to move forward...or people can wait for a Goodwill copy to pop up at Amazon. After the fiasco with Snownman, you can't expect me to just jump on this idea. 

Folks in Cooperland claimed there was no copyright. Also that Sheridan didn't mind having his book stolen. Both of those things are not true. From the US Copyright Office:

SheridanCopyrightRecord.jpg.b57a9b24b61c4653d53d9d22313430e0.jpg

One of many angry emails I received from Sheridan while his book was being stolen:

 

SheridanMail1.1.jpg

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ParrotheadVol said:

So then, by your own logic, your own opinion on other suspects is worthless as well.

My opinion alone? Worthless. Absolutely. And no one should listen to it. 

My pointing out when people like Carl Laurin are outright forging documents and lying in order to forward a suspect? And if I present hard evidence on that? NOT worthless. 

In other matters, I am not fooling around much longer with this Ha Ha Ha issue. Yea or Nay? Support or no? I want to hear some opinions on whether to pursue this idea of republishing.

Christmas is coming. I have a lot of stuff going right now, including another book non-Cooper that is ready to go. 

What say you guys? My patience is wearing thin and I am thinking maybe it isn't worth my time or spending all the money it will take to do it. Upload fees, image work, Ingram catalog entry, ISBN, it starts adding up. 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RobertMBlevins said:

Nobody's trying to discredit either you, or your suspect Fred Hahneman. The reason is simple. You haven't provided anything yet to discredit. (*smiles*) Your opinion on KC's guilt or innocence is pretty worthless, because you are actively working on another suspect and you have stated you believe he best meets the evidentiary criteria. 

But your opinion on KC is basically worthless. I will explain with a simple example. Lets say there are two burger joints on the same street, across from each other. The owner of one of them keeps trying to tell passersby that the other one has crappy food. That is kind of the position you are in. 

 

That is a terrible example..

I don't own a suspect.. neither do you.

You created a narrative for KC that doesn't do what you claim. KC doesn't match the evidence and there is no evidence to suggest he was Cooper. Essentially the same problem Eric had with Sheridan... 

by an objective measure of the evidence KC was not Cooper.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've said the same thing regarding your opinion on KC more than a dozen times now. And you are investigating your OWN Cooper suspect. So no...I really don't care what you think regarding his guilt or innocence. But you do have a right to your opinion and you have given it. 

That was a very good example of your current position. The allegory of the two hamburger joints across the street from each other. I thought it made perfect sense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RobertMBlevins said:

You've said the same thing regarding your opinion on KC more than a dozen times now. And you are investigating your OWN Cooper suspect. So no...I really don't care what you think regarding his guilt or innocence. But you do have a right to your opinion and you have given it. 

That was a very good example of your current position. The allegory of the two hamburger joints across the street from each other. I thought it made perfect sense. 

That is problem, it is a poor example. It only makes sense to you because it fulfills your confirmation bias.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FLYJACK said:

That is problem, it is a poor example. It only makes sense to you because it fulfills your confirmation bias.

It makes sense because it is REALITY. When two different people are working on two different suspects on the same famous criminal case, one or both of them are going to pull out all the stops in efforts to discredit the other. In this case it is mostly you because I don't know enough about old Fred to give a serious opinion on his guilt or innocence. You haven't given people anything except a Latino reference on a wanted poster. 

You ARE a member of the Vortex, right? You know perfectly well this is the way things are. I have no opinion on the guilt or innocence of Fred Hahneman. Not yet. Mainly because like everyone else I am waiting to see what case you finally present against him. I don't think you are lying or anything like that. You just haven't presented anything so far. 

And by the way...I am definitely NOT Eric Ulis. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, RobertMBlevins said:

My opinion alone? Worthless. Absolutely. And no one should listen to it. 

My pointing out when people like Carl Laurin are outright forging documents and lying in order to forward a suspect? And if I present hard evidence on that? NOT worthless. 

And I pointed out the evidence as well,,, 

KC is not Latin/Mexican in features and characteristics or a swarthy/olive complexion,, KC does not have a full head of wavy/curly/marceled hair,, KC does not resemble the more accurate sketch B..  Cooper had thin lips with a protruding lower lip.. He continued to work for the airline.. because he wasn't Cooper.

If you list all the Cooper facts,, KC is a very poor match.. and is rejected by many.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RobertMBlevins said:

It makes sense because it is REALITY. When two different people are working on two different suspects on the same famous criminal case, one or both of them are going to pull out all the stops in efforts to discredit the other. In this case it is mostly you because I don't know enough about old Fred to give a serious opinion on his guilt or innocence. You haven't given people anything except a Latino reference on a wanted poster. 

You ARE a member of the Vortex, right? You know perfectly well this is the way things are. I have no opinion on the guilt or innocence of Fred Hahneman. Not yet. Mainly because like everyone else I am waiting to see what case you finally present against him. I don't think you are lying or anything like that. You just haven't presented anything so far. 

And by the way...I am definitely NOT Eric Ulis. B)

That is isn't true,, I have given out more than the info on a wanted poster you just weren't paying attention and ignored it as it suits your KC denial. You keep repeating that lie..  if you keep lying about that what else are you lying about and why do you need to lie?

And you still conflate a suspect with the advocate.. Advocates are irrelevant.. Look at the evidence, a suspect has to fit the evidence and objectively KC does not... my opinion doesn't reject KC, the evidence does. There are suspects I don't reject because there is not enough evidence to make a determination. There are probably thousands of people out there that could be a Cooper suspect that we are unaware of. 

There is enough known about KC to reject him. 

You aren't Ulis, he admitted his mistake based on an objective analysis of the facts.

You need to do the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are beginning to sound like a phonograph record with a really bad skip going. (*chuckles*)

YOU reject KC. Others do not. Like the many fans of AB of Seattle or the Blast book, for example. Which continues to move well in wholesale coming up on eleven years now since it's release. Trust me, I have no intention of letting those people down by making a statement I wouldn't mean anyway. You are wasting your time. Give it up. Concentrate on Hahneman, who so far you can't even place in the western half of the USA the week of the hijacking. Not that you couldn't. You just haven't done it yet. And why should I listen to some anonymous guy from Canada on this issue. As far as anyone knows, you could be just some really smart junior college kid. You are an unknown quantity without a history. Which means I don't have to accept you as some expert on Kenny Christiansen. You just don't like competition, and you are pissed I started naming the witnesses against Kenny, as well as the situation with a known FBI agent. It threatens your work on Hahneman. Quit worrying about me and start working on Hahneman. You haven't presented much of anything yet. Here's what Agent Fred Gutt at the Seattle FBI once said about Christiansen:

Quote

"Some in this office believe he's a good suspect. Others believe there are better suspects...."

And that was BEFORE they got the full files and report on KC. 

For everyone else...I now know who wrote Ha Ha Ha. That's because the person holding the copyright finally contacted me. I was completely surprised when I heard who actually did the book. 

No...it wasn't the REAL D.B. Cooper. But then you knew that all along. 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

You are beginning to sound like a phonograph record with a really bad skip going. (*chuckles*)

YOU reject KC. Others do not. Like the many fans of AB of Seattle or the Blast book, for example. Which continues to move well in wholesale coming up on eleven years now since it's release. Trust me, I have no intention of letting those people down by making a statement I wouldn't mean anyway. You are wasting your time. Give it up. Concentrate on Hahneman, who so far you can't even place in the western half of the USA the week of the hijacking. Not that you couldn't. You just haven't done it yet. And why should I listen to some anonymous guy from Canada on this issue. As far as anyone knows, you could be just some really smart junior college kid. You are an unknown quantity without a history. Which means I don't have to accept you as some expert on Kenny Christiansen. You just don't like competition, and you are pissed I started naming the witnesses against Kenny, as well as the situation with a known FBI agent. It threatens your work on Hahneman. Quit worrying about me and start working on Hahneman. You haven't presented much of anything yet. Here's what Agent Fred Gutt at the Seattle FBI once said about Christiansen:

And that was BEFORE they got the full files and report on KC. 

For everyone else...I now know who wrote Ha Ha Ha. That's because the person holding the copyright finally contacted me. I was completely surprised when I heard who actually did the book. 

No...it wasn't the REAL D.B. Cooper. But then you knew that all along. 

Lunacy and delusional.

I didn't care about Sheridan as he was obviously not Cooper until Ulis stole my work claimed it was his and then called me a liar and troll. So, I pointed out the evidence.

I never ever cared about KC as the evidence clearly rejects him,, until Blevins started making false claims and lying. So, I point out the evidence.

KC is not a threat to anything or anybody... He is not Cooper, not because I think so but because the evidence shows it. 

Attacking me personally with lies and false claims doesn't change the evidence.

KC is insignificant. Reca level insignificance.

I would have never mentioned KC if you hadn't lied.. I don't like liars.

 

Unlike Blevins my agenda is the truth.

 

 

Edited by FLYJACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

'Unlike Blevins my agenda is the truth.'

Well, I don't know about anyone else but I wouldn't mind hearing some. You've gone on for days on end making blanket pronouncements on everything and everybody in the Cooper case. 

However you still haven't presented even a smidgen of evidence linking your favorite Cooper wannabe to the hijacking. You got angry when I started bringing up certain realities for which I thought people deserved an answer. For example, how is it they convicted him of air piracy and he spent the next dozen years in Federal prison...and yet the Feds keep chasing Cooper, spending millions along the way...without even hammering on him in the Visiting Room a few times a month? Or continuing to question his family, friends, co-workers, and the witnesses until they get a break that links him to the Cooper case? You just sort of ignore all that, or hint at (*conspiracy!*) The last refuge when you can't explain things on a factual, realistic level. 

Hey...Hahneman COULD be Cooper. No kidding. But you haven't really made that a convincing possibility yet. 

But brother, you sure have a lot to say regarding other suspects. B)

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, RobertMBlevins said:

YOU reject KC. Others do not. Like the many fans of AB of Seattle or the Blast book, for example. Which continues to move well in wholesale coming up on eleven years now since it's release.

Well, when they read a book that has things in it that are not true, such as Kenny dropping cash for a new house, it's understandable that they would believe Kenny could be Cooper. But, among those that have a high level of familiarity with the case, you find very few that consider Kenny to be a viable suspect. You and Greycop. That's about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RobertMBlevins said:

Well, I don't know about anyone else but I wouldn't mind hearing some. You've gone on for days on end making blanket pronouncements on everything and everybody in the Cooper case. 

However you still haven't presented even a smidgen of evidence linking your favorite Cooper wannabe to the hijacking. You got angry when I started bringing up certain realities for which I thought people deserved an answer. For example, how is it they convicted him of air piracy and he spent the next dozen years in Federal prison...and yet the Feds keep chasing Cooper, spending millions along the way...without even hammering on him in the Visiting Room a few times a month? Or continuing to question his family, friends, co-workers, and the witnesses until they get a break that links him to the Cooper case? You just sort of ignore all that, or hint at (*conspiracy!*) The last refuge when you can't explain things on a factual, realistic level. 

Hey...Hahneman COULD be Cooper. No kidding. But you haven't really made that a convincing possibility yet. 

But brother, you sure have a lot to say regarding other suspects. B)

 

Wrong Blevins you weren't claiming realities, you were making distortions and lies.

That pisses me off, I hate liars. I don't care about KC, he wasn't Cooper.

You are just projecting.. Hahneman is irrelevant.

You are the one ignoring the evidence regarding KC.. 

 

Maybe you should actually read the files. But then you'd realize KC doesn't fit the evidence.

 

KC should be tossed into the dustbin...

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, first...there is a Prime Directive with me here regarding opinions on the guilt or innocence of Kenny Christiansen. 

  • Anyone investigating another suspect or who spends years discussing the case? Those peoples' opinions are slanted and not to be taken seriously. The reason is because everyone knows that if the case were solved, the discussion people would have nothing much left to discuss, and their Cooperland world would collapse into a black hole. (*laughs) 
     
  • Anyone investigating ANOTHER suspect, well..their opinions are also moot to me, although they do have a right to express that opinion. But it is the same problem. 
     

I suppose a final Prime Directive is that you haven't seen what we submitted to the Seattle FBI, and to the HQ in DC. No, I am not going to try and sit here and tell you we know 100% for certain KC was Cooper. However, we did have quite a bit of evidence to present. So we did. 

Really now. You should give up your useless efforts to convince me to do this or that to justify your existence and your opinions. I'm not going to do it anyway. You are wasting your time, and we certainly do not agree regarding KC. That is for sure. 

You will be better served by showing everyone what you DO have on Fred Hahneman and stop making excuses about it. If you aren't ready to drop the whole book on everyone, you should at least reveal a chapter or two. I mean...beyond just saying this or that. Or claiming this or that about him without showing any evidence. It will help your case tremendously. 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RobertMBlevins said:

You will be better served by showing everyone what you DO have on Fred Hahneman and stop making excuses about it. If you aren't ready to drop the whole book on everyone, you should at least reveal a chapter or two. I mean...beyond just saying this or that. Or claiming this or that about him without showing any evidence. It will help your case tremendously. 

I don't need help with my case..  because I am not selling a suspect to others.

Do you understand that, I don't need to explain anything to anybody.

 

You are projecting your own motivations, you need to sell KC because he isn't Cooper.. 

and you failed.. KC does match the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a good video, but with comments turned off I'm not surprised Nicholas only has SIX subscribers and less than 20 views to the video. WTH? No one's going to pick on Tom Kaye for his diatom presentation. And if there is no feedback allowed, most people won't bother viewing it. 

If you guys have another convention next year...stop leaving every single detail to Eric and demand your rights. You have RIGHTS. What rights? You spent money on gas, or plane fare, or $130 hotel rooms, got dressed up and accepted Eric's invitation. 

And Eric promised you a movie guy was showing up. So far I haven't heard a thing about all that. 

Get your OWN guy to shoot the whole event, and then spend a couple of weeks editing it into a comprehensive and informative video on the event. 

That's how you get more people to show up and buy tickets the NEXT time. I can't believe you guys wasted that opportunity for the 50th anniversary presentation....:shockedcat:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

I don't need help with my case..  because I am not selling a suspect to others.

Do you understand that, I don't need to explain anything to anybody.

 

You are projecting your own motivations, you need to sell KC because he isn't Cooper.. 

and you failed.. KC does match the evidence.

I'm not selling anything. I turn down interviews. I refused money from History Channel and Comcast Sports Net. I said no to a crappy movie script and that caused me to lose a few thousand bucks a year. No big deal. I don't need money that bad. The book on KC is in wholesale...so nothing I say publicly will affect sales one way or another. Wholesale buyers don't read internet posts about books. They look at the Ingram catalog and make their decisions from that. 

It is what it is. You don't like what it is. Welcome to the Reality Hotel. 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

22 22