Research, editing : Gan Yung Chyan, KUCINTA SETIA
In America, there are 12 million people off work with this imaginary disorder. In the UK there are two million long covid sufferers signed off sick – unable to work.
The evidence shows that long covid is a combination of hypochondria and malingering.
It’s the beginning of the universal basic income – a critical part of the Great Reset now being trialled in Wales and Ireland.
There was never a global covid pandemic but now we have a global long covid pandemic.
So, why have they created this fake disease – “long covid”?
Firstly, Western governments have welcomed the growth in the number of alleged covid sufferers because it helps make people afraid of the rebranded flu – and accept the jabs which are dishonestly promoted as preventing it.
Secondly, the governments know that if a huge chunk of the workforce stayed at home the disruption and the cost will severely damage the economy.
Thirdly, and this is crucial, the false long covid disease is an excellent cover for the injuries caused by the covid jabs.
Fourthly, long covid is keeping NHS staff at home and causing NHS waiting lists to soar still higher – all part of the deliberate plan to wreck health care.
Fifthly, if people were not off sick with alleged long covid the unemployment figures would be much higher. and that would be another embarrassment for beleaguered Governments.
A list of the commonest side effects associated with the covid jabs just happens to be the same as the commonest symptoms associated with “long covid.”
Naturally, anyone who dares to look at the evidence – and question the long covid myth – is dismissed as a conspiracy theorist and banned from sharing their views.
As usual, there is no debate in the mainstream media where journalists are terrified of the truth and have to cover their eyes if a fact threatens their daily deceit.
Report by : Rhoda Wilson, The Expose / https://expose-news.com/2021/11/12/french-study-finds-that-the-only-long-covid-symptom-associated-with-lab-confirmed-infection-was-loss-of-smell/
In September 2021, the BBC reported, “guidance for UK health workers describes long covid as symptoms continuing for more than 12 weeks after an infection – severe or mild – which can’t be explained by another cause.”
The National Health Service (“NHS”) lists 14 symptoms of “long covid”. Sense of smell is mentioned in the second to last symptom on NHS’s list: “a high temperature, cough, headaches, sore throat, changes to sense of smell or taste.”
The World Economic Forum also published an article stating, “long covid symptoms include fatigue, breathlessness and ‘brain fog’” quoting a study by Imperial College London which estimated in June that two million adults in England may have long covid. Imperial’s figures were based on people who reported having had covid, “either suspected or confirmed by PCR test.”
However, a French study published on Monday found that participants who were laboratory confirmed as having had a covid infection only suffered persistent anosmia or loss of smell. And, that persistent physical symptoms 10 to 12 months after the covid pandemic first wave were associated more with the belief in having experienced covid infection than with having laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 (covi) infection.
The study consisted of 26,823 randomly selected adults aged 18-69 years with the aim to examine the associations of self-reported covid infection and covi serology, or antibody, test results with persistent physical symptoms (eg, fatigue, breathlessness, or impaired attention) in the general population during the covid pandemic.
Less than half of those with a positive serology test reported having experienced the disease. Conversely, among those who reported having had the disease, approximately half had a negative serology test result, consistent with some findings in clinical settings.
The study concluded that “persistent physical symptoms after Covid-19 infection should not be automatically ascribed to SARS-CoV-2; a complete medical evaluation may be needed to prevent erroneously attributing symptoms to the virus.”
Source:
Matta J, Wiernik E, Robineau O, et al. Association of Self-reported COVID-19 Infection and SARS-CoV-2 Serology Test Results With Persistent Physical Symptoms Among French Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic. JAMA Intern Med. Published online 8 November 2021. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.6454
News (4) to (10) / Reports by : ThreadsIrish, The Expose / https://expose-news.com/2022/10/22/wef-social-credit-digital-id-ubi/
News (4)
World Economic Forum pushing for social credit system involving Universal Basic Income and Digital Identity
“A Universal Basic Income (UBI) is where a government pays all individuals a set salary regardless of their means. It guarantees a certain amount of money from the state without any requirement to work”
In this article, I am not going to dig deep into the economic reasons for it as I am not qualified enough to discuss it from that viewpoint. I will, however, be looking at the countries implementing it and who the people behind the scenes pushing for it are.
News (5)
What Has Universal Basic Income (UBI) To Do with Covid, War & Tony Blair?
In March 2022, The Irish Times called it ‘A welcome step’: Ireland’s first basic income scheme on the way’ where artists will get €250 a week in a pilot scheme but many want to see it extended to all.
Five months later and it had increased to €325 with The Irish Times called it a ‘seismic leap forward’ where some 2,000 artists will be guaranteed that weekly wage amount.
In Ireland it is being promoted as “money for nothing” and “no questions asked”. It is the exact same when furlough money was being paid.
When in the history of time has there ever been a “free lunch” (I’ll get to that later on in the article).
Even one of Ireland’s most well-known economists who writes for The Irish Times thinks it’s a good idea. In an article in 2017 David McWilliams floated the idea on his own blog. This was the same guy who was a huge fan of furlough money in 2020.
McWilliams also was a Young Global Leader but has now graduated to become a member of the World Economic Forum (“WEF”).
Coincidentally, his own podcast on 2 March 2021 was titled ‘Building Back Better’. Where have we come across that before?
News (6)
UK Government considering merits of UBI
Just across the Irish Sea in the UK, a document was published on the UK Parliament website in June 2022 called ‘Potential merits of a universal basic income‘.
They are obviously taking the idea of UBI very seriously and moving it along rapidly. The links to the UK parliament and ex UK parliamentarians doesn’t end there however. That war-monger in chief and ex PM of the UK, Tony Blair, is also involved as this tweet shows from Tascha Labs.
Blair is a WEF member, has been financed by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for tens of millions and has been pushing a Digital ID for years.
It is this institute which will be involved in “public policy recommendations for universal basic income.”
We can now see how UBI jives with Central Bank Digital Currencies (“CBDC”). The dots are all being joined up.
Apparently “Brits support universal basic income by 20-point margin” according to a poll in the New Statesman carried out in July 2022.
Of course they do.
Wales though are a step ahead in the UBI stakes. In February, The Guardian reported:
“Young people leaving care will be offered £1600 a month for two years from the month after their 18th birthday. That works out at £19,200 per annum.”
A not insubstantial amount.
The country who is furthest down the track with UBI is Canada. Bill S-233 is: “An Act to develop a national framework for a guaranteed liveable basic income.” It says: “Every person should have access to a liveable basic income.”
You won’t be surprised to hear that the World Economic Forum are big fans of UBI. They have been pushing it since 2016.
So, there you have it. UBI is the panacea for everything – happiness, time with family, medical care, meals out. What more could you ask for. And apparently the trial in Finland was a huge success according to the WEF. Except it wasn’t.
According to Business Insider: “One of the world’s largest basic-income trials, a 2-year program in Finland, was a major flop. Critics did claim the test was flawed from the outset.”
That is often the case though when trail results don’t go the way you want them to.
UBI all sounds well and good. What’s not to like about an unconditional liveable income. It is always sold as eradicating poverty as well as being a social safety net.
Allegedly people will be able to spend more, save more and invest more.
Except it’s never unconditional. What we should be asking is “Cui Bono” or who stands to benefit? Simple answer is “The Elite.”
News (7)
Facebook founder supports free cash handouts
In 2017 Mark Zuckerberg publicly extolled the virtues of social safety net programs that give free money to citizens regardless of employment status, see CNBC’s report ‘Alaska gives residents free cash handouts – here’s what Mark Zuckerberg thinks everyone can learn from it’, 5 July 2017.
He also gave a commencement address at Harvard where he said: “We should explore ideas like universal basic income to give everyone a cushion to try new things.”
Except it won’t be used for “new things.”
Further reading: Mark Zuckerberg’s Commencement address at Harvard, The Harvard Gazette, 25 May 2017
Of course, the WEF backed WEF member Zuckerberg after his student address.
News (8)
Elon Musk supports UBI, saying "in the future, physical work will be a choice"
Zuckerberg is not the only one though. In 2021 Elon Musk said we need UBI because “in the future, physical work will be a choice.”
Sam Altman who co-founded OpenAI (Artificial Intelligence) with Musk agrees.
Read more: Elon Musk says we need universal basic income because ‘in the future, physical work will be a choice’, Business Insider, 20 August 2021
One industry insider told CNBC that Altman:
“Envisions a world wherein he and his AI-CEO peers become so immensely powerful that they run every non-AI company (employing people) out of business and every American worker to unemployment. So powerful that a percentage of OpenAI’s (and its peers’) income could bankroll UBI for every citizen of America.”
Other very high profile entrepreneurs who have endorsed UBI are Pierre Omidyar (eBay founder), Andrew Ng, Bill Gross and Ray Kurzweil.
News (9)
UBI is a future product of western Socialism, beware
What Bill Gross had to say about socialism was particularly interesting and worrying, that we would have to “get used to it” with UBI.
I should have mentioned that Zuckerberg, Altman, Omidyar, Ng and Gross are all WEF members as are some of their respective companies, as is Kurzweil’s business partner of Singularity University, Peter Diamandis.
Go Figure…
A common thread seems to be appearing from all the UBI proponents. AI will eliminate jobs and people will need UBI to survive. If that sounds like the agenda being pushed by the WEF and the Fourth Industrial Revolution, that’s because it is. This is what they said in 2017: read ‘Why we should all have a basic income’
News (10)
WEF : UBI is the answer to the inequalities exposed by the pandemic
Never ones to miss an opportunity, in April 2020 the WEF published an article ‘UBI is the answer to the inequalities exposed by COVID-19’. This was only a month after lockdowns started happening. Yet again they seemed to know what was going to take place.
Roll on 6 months and the WEF published an article called ‘Don’t fear AI. It will lead to long-term job growth‘.
At the same time, they published a report called ‘The Future of Jobs’. They claimed 85 million jobs will be eliminated by 2025 but 97 million will be created.
UBI would seem to be the perfect solution from the WEF perspective. They would much rather have people sitting at home, drinking beer, watching Netflix (just like in the Covid lockdowns).
If we look back to the last 2.5 years, small businesses and entrepreneurs have been targeted during Covid lockdowns. Many lost their jobs.
Also, with the Ukraine/Russia conflict we are now seeing energy costs going through the roof. Naturally this will be passed on to consumers so we will also see the price of food increasing.
Many people are struggling to make ends meet and put food on the table. This is where UBI comes in. In all likelihood many people will be crying out for it and will do whatever it takes to receive it.
It’s the Hegelian dialectic. Problem Reaction Solution.
After the lockdowns and the plandemic hoax, business have and will continue to be destroyed through the climate/war hoax. They do not want people earning their own money or employing other people. They want everyone reliant on a Universal Basic Income at the behest of the globalist government.
With rising energy prices and food prices about to jump to exorbitant levels what better time to bring in the UBI “free lunch” except there is no such thing as a “free lunch.”
So how would this work in reality. For the last 2 years we have seen vaccines and vaccine passports being used in order to gain access to pubs, restaurants etc. The exact same could be used for UBI.
If you did not take your vaccine and booster then your UBI could be withheld. Your UBI will tie into your Digital ID which in turn will be connected to your social credit score. Your social credit score allows you to participate in society.
Your civil liberties and rights will be tied into your social credit score. If you criticise the government, you won’t receive your UBI which will be in the form of a digital currency. Your bank account could be shut down by the press of a button.
This probably all sounds very far-fetched but you don’t have to look far to see that the closing down of bank accounts and people being arrested has already happened when truckers protested in Canada.
The future is not looking rosy unless people begin to understand the bigger picture being played out.
News (11) to (12) / Source : The Expose / https://expose-news.com/2022/10/23/the-man-who-invented-climate-change-and-influenced-schwabs-great-reset-agenda/
News (11)
The man who invented "climate change" and influenced Schwab's Great Reset Agenda
According to such Great Reset luminaries as Bill Gates, Prince Charles, Michael Bloomberg, Mark Carney and Klaus Schwab, humanity is expected to solve the dual threat of covid and global warming in one revolutionary sweeping reform.
We plebeians have been told that all we have to do to restart the economy is rewire everything about our behaviour, value, finance, and ethics to decarbonise civilization under a new world regime of central bankers and new green digital currencies as outlined by the Green Horizon Summit held on 9-10 November 2020.
The Summit was hosted by the City of London Corporation, in collaboration with the Green Finance Institute, and supported by the World Economic Forum (“WEF”): “It’s time to reset the relationship between finance and the real economy. It’s time for public and private finance to get behind the transition to a sustainable and resilient future for all.”
It was at this event that keynote speaker Mark Carney announced that the total net zero transition represents “the greatest commercial opportunity of our time”:
“Climate change, the crisis that involves the entire world and from which no one will be able to self-isolate … 126 governments have now committed to net zero including three global giants – China, Japan and South Korea, in the last few weeks … Given the wholesale shift in economic and social drivers of values since Covid … Businesses of all stripes increasingly recognise the changing consumer preferences and new climate policies are creating the greatest commercial opportunity of our time … Our objective for COP26 is to build the framework so that every financial decision can take climate change into account.”
There is a destructive plan to transform the global financial system under the guise of “climate change” and we should be concerned about the “green” financial swindle that is underway. It is not just a financial swindle but one of the largest natural land resource grabs in the history of our planet, read more HERE.
In a 2019 article, Paul Gallagher described Carney as the most influential central banker in the world. He has held the most senior positions in global central banking in the shortest period of time and is probably more responsible than any other figure – except possibly his billionaire partner Michael Bloomberg – for the current rampage of environmentalist assaults on modern industrial society.
Canadian eco-fascist Mark Carney, formerly Governor Bank of England, is on WEF’s Board of Trustees and is UN Special Envoy for Climate Action and Finance. He seems to have a lot in common with the Canadian eco-fascist Maurice Strong – “inventor of climate change” – who was a co-founder of WEF and the architect of Agenda 21, which led to its ugly sister Agenda 2030.
News (12)
Maurice Strong the Godfather of “climate change”
On his death in 2015 The Telegraph hailed Maurice Strong as the man who invented climate change, “to this day, global climate policy is still shaped by the agenda of Maurice Strong, a Canadian multimillionaire.” But to those who have looked behind the veil of corporate media propaganda, he’s known as the Godfather of climate change – Godfather , as in crime boss.
Amongst others, Strong was Secretary General of the first United Nations Conference on the Environment and Population in 1972, President of the Rockefeller Foundation, head of the World Bank, head of the United Nations Environmental Program, a member of the Foundation Board of the World Economic Forum and a committed socialist and globalist.
He was also one of Klaus Schwab’s mentors. Schwab’s other mentor was Henry Kissinger. Kissinger recruited Schwab through the “International seminar,” a CIA-funded program at Harvard University, and introduced him to Ken Galbraith. Galbraith was a Canadian-American economist, diplomat, public policy maker, and Harvard intellectual. Kissinger and Galbraith were the real driving force and helped Schwab create the World Economic Forum.
On Strong’s death in 2015, Schwab delivered the following remarks:
“[Strong] was my mentor since the creation of the Forum: a great friend; an indispensable advisor; and, for many years, a member of our Foundation Board. Without him, the Forum would not have achieved its present significance.”
The video clip below, taken from CBC’s 2004 documentary ‘Life and Times’, highlights the dizzying speed with which Strong rose to power, as well as his many “elite” associations. In the YouTube description section, Matthew D. Jarvie wrote:
“Despite having little education and almost no credentials, Strong was quickly risen through the ranks of power after being vetted by globalist kingpin David Rockefeller in the mid-40s, at the United Nations headquarters in New York City, after Strong landed a job there with the help of people who had connections to the UN.
“This clip takes a look at one of the world’s leading figures behind the New World Order agenda, and someone near the very top of the global warming/global tax/one world government swindle … While the documentary casts an unabashedly favourable and glowing light on Strong, those who have done the research and have studied Strong’s background and associations understand that this simply isn’t the case.”
In 1947, Maurice Strong took his first job as a clerk at the United Nations in New York. There, he befriended David Rockefeller, who helped to advance Strong and provided him with a network of influential contacts. In 1966, Strong became head of the Canadian International Development Agency (“CIDA”).
In 1971, while still heading up the Canadian International Development Agency, Maurice Strong became a founding member of the 1001 Nature Trust, which was an elite international organisation created by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands and Prince Philip Mountbatten. The 1001 Trust worked in tandem with Prince Bernhard’s other secretive club known as the “Bilderberg Group” which he founded in 1954 and was designed to fund the emerging new ecology movement. All 1001 members paid $10 000 for their membership which was pooled to fund the World Wildlife Fund and other green organisations.
Strong was the most active and influential member of the Brundtland Commission, a panel which the UN General Assembly established in 1983 to promote “sustainable development.” He helped produce the Commission’s 1987 report, ‘Our Common Future’, which, as a result of Strong’s influence, placed a heavy emphasis on the dangers of anthropogenic climate change – climate change caused by humans – and the virtues of socialist redistributionism. In the words of a report in the American Thinker, the Brundtland report:
- was a call for social and economic egalitarianism within a simple Marxist dialectical framework;
- [claimed that] the antagonism between capitalist and proletarian worker mirrored the antagonism between industrialised and developing nations;
- identified [the First World] as the primary culprit behind Third-World underdevelopment [and] environmental degradation;
- [argued that] more money to the developing world from rich Western nations [was] the solution; and
- would become so influential that Western governments would try reversing the effects of the Industrial Revolution in their own countries through restrictions on CO2 emissions and increasing dependence on unreliable biofuels and green technologies.
In 1988, Strong convinced the United Nations Environment Program (“UNEP”) and the World Meteorological Organisation (“WMO”) to agree to the formation of an “intergovernmental mechanism” to monitor anthropogenic global warming and suggest policy recommendations for the UN and Western governments. This organisation was the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (“IPCC”).
Through the IPCC and other UN bodies, enormous sums of money were transferred from the West to third-world countries. In 2010, the Green Climate Fund (“GCF”) was established. Its purpose was to further the UN goal of socialist redistribution in the name of sustainable development.
In 1990 a Canadian reporter, Daniel Wood, interviewed Strong. Strong’s remarks included:
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialised civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Fox News’ Glenn Beck highlighted this comment in 2010 during Part 1 of a series titled ‘Exposing Crime Inc.’
As summarised by the Geller Report, Strong then took to his website to address the issue and wrote:
“A particularly dishonest statement … citing a fictional account which was clearly stated to be an extreme scenario of what might happen by the year 2030 if we failed to act.”
In an interview, the Guardian asked Strong about Glenn Beck dedicating a show to attack him. Strong responded:
“You know what? I haven’t actually seen that show. But we wouldn’t be having this conversation if he hadn’t attacked me. I’m never going to be immune from criticism.”
In 1993, Strong was one of the key organisers and the Chairman of the UN’s 1992 Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro. One of the major outcomes of the Summit was the Agenda 21 document, of which Strong was one of the authors.
American Policy Centre also noted that Agenda 21 was summed up in supporting documents this way:
“Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society; unlike anything the world has ever experienced. It requires a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals, and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.”
As reported in 2019 by The Times of India, the specific issue of climate alarm originated as part of the Club of Rome of 1968 and its 1973 ‘Limits of Growth’ report.
Fourteen years ago, in the video below, Matthew D. Jarvie highlighted the connection between the environmental movement and those who are striving to bring about a new system of control to the world. Jarvie began by naming notable members of the Club of Rome. The first member he named was – Maurice Strong.
Sources and resources:
- Maurice Strong, Discover the Networks
- Maurice Strong and the Roots of the Great Reset Agenda, Matthew Ehret, 25 November 2020
- Matthew Ehret: How the Unthinkable Became Thinkable, The Exposé, 1 March 2022
- Meet Maurice Strong: Globalist, Oligarch, “Environmentalist”, The Corbett Report, 31 January 2016
- The Rhodes Scholars Guiding Biden’s Presidency, Matthew Ehret, 26 March 2022
- The transition from using Covid to using Climate Change as the justification for implementing the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the “digital transformation” of the economy and society is well underway, The Exposé, 19 October 2021
News (13) to (15) / Reporter : Luo Tingting / Editor: Wen Hui / https://www.ntdtv.com/gb/2022/10/23/a103557914.html
News (13)
Analysis: The 20th National Congress ended with an exclamation point, China's future is very scary
Image : On 23 October 2022, members of the Standing Committee of the New Politburo of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China appeared. (Lintao Zhang/Getty Images)
The 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China was accused of ending with an exclamation point. Not only was former General Secretary Hu Jintao forced to leave the venue at the closing ceremony, but the new Politburo Standing Committee members were even more unexpected. Experts commented that in the future, laymen will rule China, which is very terrifying. The 20th National Congress is a turning point for the CCP to die.
News (14)
Hu Jintao is unwilling to leave? He attracts attention
On 22 October 2022, the seven-day 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China concluded. But at the closing ceremony, the scene that attracted the most attention from the outside world was that in front of all Chinese and foreign journalists, former General Secretary Hu Jintao was forcibly taken away from the venue halfway through.
A video released by Agence France-Presse showed that Hu Jintao seemed unwilling to leave, and the staff tried to take him away several times but refused. Hu Jintao once stretched out his hand to get the document in front of Xi Jinping, and Xi also immediately stretched out his hand to suppress the file, while the staff held down Hu Jintao's hand to stop him.
The two sides were deadlocked for a while. Li Zhanshu and Wang Huning, who were sitting on Hu Jintao's left, were also paying attention to the move. Li Zhanshu even wanted to get up to assist but Wang Huning directly grabbed the hem of his suit and pulled him back to his seat. It's like saying, "Don't interfere."
Image : On 22 October 2022, Hu Jintao was forcibly taken away from the closing venue of the 20th National Congress by the staff. (Lintao Zhang/Getty Images)
In the end, Hu Jintao was helped off by two staff members. When he left, he said something to Xi Jinping and patted Li Keqiang on the shoulder.
China's domestic media did not report the incident, and the party media Xinhua News Agency responded on the official English Twitter account on the 22nd that Hu Jintao left the stadium because of "physical discomfort" but Xinhua's statement did not appear on its Chinese website and social media platforms.
On the same day, information about Hu Jintao was censored on the mainland Internet. Most Chinese people did not know it, and some netizens asked implicitly, "What happened to Brother Hu (Hu Jintao)?"
The BBC report questioned, if Hu Jintao was taken away because he was not in good health, why did this happen suddenly? Why in front of the camera? Is it an emergency?
The report pointed out that the Communist Party usually does not show private discussions and disputes in public. If this is a deliberate arrangement, it means that this is different from the usual practice.
News (13)
Four confidants of Xi Jinping become permanent experts: Laymen rule China
In addition to Hu Jintao being "taken away", the list of the new Politburo Standing Committee members of the 20th National Congress also surprised the outside world. At 12 noon on October 23, the new Politburo Standing Committee members of the Communist Party of China met with reporters, including Xi Jinping, Li Qiang, Zhao Leji, Wang Huning, Cai Qi, Ding Xuexiang, and Li Xi.
Li Qiang, Cai Qi, Ding Xuexiang, and Li Xi are all under Xi Jinping, showing that the Xi faction is in full power. Wang Yang and Hu Chunhua, who were once considered popular candidates for the premier, were both out, signaling that the regimental faction was "destroyed".
Wang Yang, who is only 67 years old, has not reached the retirement age. Even if he does not take over as prime minister, he should remain on the Standing Committee, but he has not entered the list of the new Central Committee members, indicating that he will retire early after the 20th National Congress.
Vice Premier Hu Chunhua not only failed to become a permanent member, but also failed to be re-elected as a member of the Politburo, which is equivalent to being demoted. In the live program of NTDTV's "Interpretation of Famous Experts and Authoritative Authorities", senior media person and director of the Taipei branch of Sankei Shimbun Akio Yaita said, "This means that Hu Chunhua can no longer serve as vice premier. Xi Jinping has eliminated all threats and found a group of laymen. Ruling the country, after the 20th National Congress, where China will go is very scary.”
Xi Jinping was successfully re-elected as he wished, and the "two establishments" were also incorporated into the CCP constitution at the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, showing that Xi Jinping's power has been further consolidated.
Wei Jingsheng, a well-known Chinese human rights activist, said on NTDTV's "Elite Forum" program that the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China was a turning point in the CCP's demise.
No comments:
Post a Comment