Debunked: The "Fat" Bin Laden Video. [Wrong aspect ratio]

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cube Radio

Member

This really is now entirely off topic, as you say, and I shall not post further on this thread unless I have something apposite to offer; however, the Bin Laden speaking in the video you refer to is Bin Laden E in the composite image above: I leave it to your judgement as to whether or not he can be reliably identified as the same man as Bin Ladens A-D.

Admin Edit by @Mick West : The image above is stretched horizontally, and seems to have have been chose to show Bin Laden in an unfamiliar pose. A viewing of the original video makes it quite clear that it is Bin Laden.



Which looks just like him:
20170922-125148-c1qtc.jpg


A likely error is displaying a 4:3 (12:9) video in 16:9, so a 12 wide video would become 16 wide. So an exact correction for that would be to reduce from 16 to 12, or to 75% of the displayed (and presumably stretched) size.

Here's that precise adjustment on image E:


Can't find the precise frame, but this is close enough:


There are also better quality stills that were released
upload_2017-9-22_12-50-42.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:

WeedWhacker

Senior Member

This really is now entirely off topic, as you say, and I shall not post further on this thread unless I have something apposite to offer; however, the Bin Laden speaking in the video you refer to is Bin Laden E in the composite image above: I leave it to your judgement as to whether or not he can be reliably identified as the same man as Bin Ladens A-D.

(A) and (E) are quite obviously NOT the same person.
 

NoParty

Senior Member.

This really is now entirely off topic, as you say, and I shall not post further on this thread unless I have something apposite to offer; however, the Bin Laden speaking in the video you refer to is Bin Laden E in the composite image above: I leave it to your judgement as to whether or not he can be reliably identified as the same man as Bin Ladens A-D.
I see no reason to doubt it. It's lesser VHS quality, but the voice, the mannerisms...any single lo-res still frame can be atypical...
but no, it's clearly bin Laden to those familiar with the man.


p.s. Trying to get a better image...it appears as if his eyes are closed in this frame,
which may contribute to his appearing a bit different (besides the age difference)

bin Laden - eyes closed.jpg
 
Last edited:

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
The following three pictures are all the same person.

Astonishing!! Really, I'm gobsmacked by that example. We humans are extraordinarily evolved to "recognize" faces and facial patterns, it's part of our social and related habits, since the visual senses tended to take precedence over and be more dominant than our smell senses (those senses not lost in many other species on this planet).

The way that photography and other technological methods can "alter" our perceptions shows just how limited we really are, in one sense (pun, see what I did there?)
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Astonishing!! Really, I'm gobsmacked by that example. We humans are extraordinarily evolved to "recognize" faces and facial patterns, it's part of our social and related habits, since the visual senses tended to take precedence over and be more dominant than our smell senses (those senses not lost in many other species on this planet).

The way that photography and other technological methods can "alter" our perceptions shows just how limited we really are, in one sense (pun, see what I did there?)

But we evolved to recognize people in person, generally meaning up close, in color, high definition, while they are moving, with binocular stereo vision, and often with several other cues. Blurry 2D images, with off-color, and unknown focal length, don't really fit this evolutionary model, and so can lead to confusion.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
But we evolved to recognize people in person, generally meaning up close, in color, high definition, while they are moving, with binocular stereo vision, and often with several other cues.

Yes, indeed. Still, the facial recognition "software" (laugh) that is in our meat brains, and developed over countless generations of descendants isn't "perfect". Hence, we (humans) can be so easily fooled by so-called "optical illusions", etc.

One of my (recent) favorites (involving color perception):


[The checker shadow illusion. The square A is exactly the same shade of grey as square B.]



This is a classic...(It's a GIF, not sure if it will work):
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
I maintain my view (in post 4) and really appreciate Trigger Hippy's samples
and Mick's adjustment of the aspect ratio. Watching the man--whose speech and
mannerisms are quite familiar to me--I never had any serious doubt it was bin Laden.
Neither did U.S. intelligence, nor Arabic translators who accused the U.S. of
mis-translating bin Laden's words. (The only real controversy in Dec. 2001,
was whether or not bin Laden's words in the scene were faithfully translated.)


Any single still frame can be incredibly deceptive...+ poor lighting + consumer level VHS camera & tape,
+ a widening of the image, and yes, bin Laden is hard to recognize from that single distorted frame.

"Remember, the camera adds 10 pounds!" -- Osama bin Laden






p.s. And yes WW, that checkerboard is one of my fav optical illusions...here's another great one:

GreenSwirlIllusion.jpg
 

Cube Radio

Member
For clarity, the video this thread is referring to, originally cited by NoParty, is this one http://www.npr.org/news/specials/response/investigation/011213.binladen.tape.html and there is no reason why NoParty should limit analysis to the one still I represented as Osama E in the composite image upthread; questions as to its authenticity are supported by the observation that Osama E (sometimes called 'fatty Osama') is seen to be right-handed when according to the FBI the real Osama was left-handed http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wanted_terrorists/usama-bin-laden ; that the person seen with fatty Osama in the video is wearing a large gold ring, forbidden by Islam http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=1912&CATE=97 ; it is alleged that the content of their conversation, for example referring to 'iron structures' is questionable http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a121301murkyvideo#a121301murkyvideo ; additionally it is a fact that the CIA did fake videos of Osama to misrepresent him http://blog.washingtonpost.com/spy-talk/2010/05/cia_group_had_wacky_ideas_to_d.html and the source of the video itself should be called into question, as exactly how or when it was obtained as a 'lucky find' in a house in Jalalabad has never been explained http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism-july-dec01-video_12-13a/
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
For clarity, the video this thread is referring to, originally cited by NoParty, is this one http://www.npr.org/news/specials/response/investigation/011213.binladen.tape.html and there is no reason why NoParty should limit analysis to the one still I represented as Osama E in the composite image upthread; questions as to its authenticity are supported by the observation that Osama E (sometimes called 'fatty Osama') is seen to be right-handed when according to the FBI the real Osama was left-handed http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wanted_terrorists/usama-bin-laden ; that the person seen with fatty Osama in the video is wearing a large gold ring, forbidden by Islam http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=1912&CATE=97 ; it is alleged that the content of their conversation, for example referring to 'iron structures' is questionable http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a121301murkyvideo#a121301murkyvideo ; additionally it is a fact that the CIA did fake videos of Osama to misrepresent him http://blog.washingtonpost.com/spy-talk/2010/05/cia_group_had_wacky_ideas_to_d.html and the source of the video itself should be called into question, as exactly how or when it was obtained as a 'lucky find' in a house in Jalalabad has never been explained http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism-july-dec01-video_12-13a/


OKAY...back to more serious matters. What you have provided is (might be) worthy of examination, and will require some time and effort.

But, correct if I'm mistaken, a topic that merits discussion is worth the effort, if it has any validity. Too many topics within a particular thread "topic" simply require their own specific context and related discussion.
 

Gary Cook

Active Member
OKAY...back to more serious matters. What you have provided is (might be) worthy of examination, and will require some time and effort.
i would say it is inclusive so unfair to say it was him like the western media promote but also unfair to claim it wasnt him for sure.
 
Last edited:

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
i would say it is inclusive so unfair to say it was him like the western media promote but also unfair to claim it was him for sure.

I edited with some additional thoughts on the basics of discussion protocols.

(Sidebar): This is a print forum. Has been my experience that we (well, I) cannot always properly express my 'meaning' or 'intent' in the form that we are constrained by. (Compared to how we, as humans, normally communicate one-on-one).

Savvy?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
It seems quite clear that:

A) The aspect ratio in the "Fatty Osama" image is wrong
B) It is Osama Bin Laden in the video, and the images
 
Last edited:

NoParty

Senior Member.
For clarity, the video this thread is referring to, originally cited by NoParty, is this one http://www.npr.org/news/specials/response/investigation/011213.binladen.tape.html and there is no reason why NoParty should limit analysis to the one still I represented as Osama E in the composite image upthread; questions as to its authenticity are supported by the observation that Osama E (sometimes called 'fatty Osama') is seen to be right-handed when according to the FBI the real Osama was left-handed http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wanted_terrorists/usama-bin-laden ; that the person seen with fatty Osama in the video is wearing a large gold ring, forbidden by Islam http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=1912&CATE=97 ; it is alleged that the content of their conversation, for example referring to 'iron structures' is questionable http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a121301murkyvideo#a121301murkyvideo ; additionally it is a fact that the CIA did fake videos of Osama to misrepresent him http://blog.washingtonpost.com/spy-talk/2010/05/cia_group_had_wacky_ideas_to_d.html and the source of the video itself should be called into question, as exactly how or when it was obtained as a 'lucky find' in a house in Jalalabad has never been explained http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism-july-dec01-video_12-13a/
Honestly, I really don't think there's much question that it's bin Laden...so this will probably be my last post on it.

On my way out the door, I'll quickly address what I think is your strongest point (if it were true...it clearly is not).

"...additionally it is a fact that the CIA did fake videos of Osama to misrepresent him..."
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/spy-talk/2010/05/cia_group_had_wacky_ideas_to_d.html

A quick read of the story almost entirely contradicts your implications:

A) You describe it as a "fact"...but in the Washington Post--8.5 years after the fact--the story is said to not be confirmed.

B) You cite "fake videos"...plural, as if it was a trend...only one (unconfirmed) bin Laden video is mentioned.

C) If it did happen, it was obviously thrown together cheap and quick, with no genuine intent to distribute
it or fool anyone, since skilled actors were not used, just "darker-skinned employees." :eek:
(whether they spoke any Arabic or not, is not clear)

D) Lastly, this sentence put the entire silly notion to bed:
"While I can't confirm these accounts, if these ideas were ever floated by anyone at any time, they clearly didn't go anywhere."
 

Gary Cook

Active Member
It seems quite clear that:

A) The aspect ratio in the "Fatty Osama" image is wrong
B) It is Osama Bin Laden in the video, and the images

What was the aspect ratio in the video? Everything else looks in proportion. It doesnt have a distorted'ly wide turban for example.

Our other videos submittal as evidence? Or do we have to stick with the stills in this particular claim? Literally just asking.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
Literally just asking

It is a good thing to "ask" questions. This is the basis of proper inquiry (or, 'enquiry',,,I try to include all alternate spellings of the English language, when I think of them!!). Hence, this site's existence, and intent.

(I hope this is obvious?)
 
Last edited:

Pete Tar

Senior Member.


Simply, the shadow on the bridge of the nose shortens it to our eyes instead of seeing it go all the way to the top of the eyebrows as we do from the front, plus the closed eyes change our visual cue of their position making them a little lower and hence adding to the shorter sense of the nose.

I know this is a bit ignorant, but what information is in the video itself? Is it more direct evidence of responsibility than other video's we have of him? In other words, why the need to discredit this one?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
What was the aspect ratio in the video? Everything else looks in proportion. It doesnt have a distorted'ly wide turban for example.

Look at the actual video. Watch the whole thing. This video is not distorted, it's the correct ratio. The single image E is what is distorted.
 

Gary Cook

Active Member
I edited with some additional thoughts on the basics of discussion protocols.

(Sidebar): This is a print forum. Has been my experience that we (well, I) cannot always properly express my 'meaning' or 'intent' in the form that we are constrained by. (Compared to how we, as humans, normally communicate one-on-one).

Savvy?

My reply had a typo I just corrected. It didnt make sense when you would of read it sorry. And you dont have to answer to me my friend. I am just another member like yourself. If its anybody's house here its Micks. He is owner/admin from what I understand. good guy too. Very science. =)
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
How did you determine the adjustment - was it just an approximation?
The other stills from the video seem to support that the aspect was slightly squashed.

Just ballparked it. A likely error is displaying a 4:3 (12:9) video in 16:9, so a 12 wide video would become 16 wide. So an exact correction for that would be to reduce from 16 to 12, or to 75% of the original size.

Here's that precise adjustment:


Can't find the precise frame, but this is close enough:
 
Last edited:

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
My reply had a typo I just corrected. It didnt make sense when you would of read it sorry. And you dont have to answer to me my friend. I am just another member like yourself. If its anybody's house here its Micks. He is owner/admin from what I understand. good guy too. Very science. =)

I agree. Veering off-topic, but still I agree.

There is a difference in Human interaction between what we do "online" or in an "email", and what we do face-to-face.

This is a very, very important distinction to always keep in mind.

The advent of "e-mail" and other forms of Internet interactions are very recent, within just our (mostly) generation (although there are youngsters being born all the time who will grow-up with this "new reality". Think about it, please!)
 

Gary Cook

Active Member
Honestly, I really don't think there's much question that it's bin Laden...so this will probably be my last post on it.

On my way out the door, I'll quickly address what I think is your strongest point (if it were true...it clearly is not).

"...additionally it is a fact that the CIA did fake videos of Osama to misrepresent him..."
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/spy-talk/2010/05/cia_group_had_wacky_ideas_to_d.html

A quick read of the story almost entirely contradicts your implications:

A) You describe it as a "fact"...but in the Washington Post--8.5 years after the fact--the story is said to not be confirmed.

B) You cite "fake videos"...plural, as if it was a trend...only one (unconfirmed) bin Laden video is mentioned.

C) If it did happen, it was obviously thrown together cheap and quick, with no genuine intent to distribute
it or fool anyone, since skilled actors were not used, just "darker-skinned employees." :eek:
(whether they spoke any Arabic or not, is not clear)

D) Lastly, this sentence put the entire silly notion to bed:
"While I can't confirm these accounts, if these ideas were ever floated by anyone at any time, they clearly didn't go anywhere."

I dont see why you should be allowed to call peoples ideas silly.
There could be a million such videos. All claims of fakery debunked. But that doesnt mean no fake videos were made or that the motivation wasnt there or that the modus operandi wasnt.
 

Gary Cook

Active Member
Look at the actual video. Watch the whole thing. This video is not distorted, it's the correct ratio. The single image E is what is distorted.

Isnt that more an opinion than evidence?

I dont doubt the claim ( the conspiracy theory) may be based on fake evidence but I would like to know for sure either way.

To be fair you seem correct. It wouldnt take much to stretch a frame and thats what it would look like.

Although I wouldn't want somebody to use this against me later on some other forum saying I believe the whole conspiracy theory about him basically doing 9/11.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I have edited the OP to include shots from the actual video, and the aspect ratio correction.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Isnt that more an opinion than evidence?

I dont doubt the claim ( the conspiracy theory) may be based on fake evidence but I would like to know for sure either way.

To be fair you seem correct. It wouldnt take much to stretch a frame and thats what it would look like.

No, it is actual evidence. The original video is clearly 4:3 format. The image E is clearly stretched by exactly the ratio of displaying a 4:3 image at 16:9. The full video shows someone who looks, acts, and speaks exactly like OBL, and nobody who actually is familiar with him has disputed this. The entire "Fatty Bin Laden" thing is either a hoax, or a mistake.
 

Cube Radio

Member
The Washington Post article does not state that the reports of a fake Bin Laden video were unconfirmed, as the context of the quote: 'A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, declined to confirm the accounts, or deny them" does not put anything "to bed"; the other questions remain unanswered, including the question of the source as a 'lucky find', and the video should naturally be viewed with skepticism by anyone who remembers (among other things) such efforts as the "babies in incubators" propoganda used to promote the first Iraq war to the US public http://www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
The Washington Post article...

I will "jump in" and agree here that a newspaper such as "The Washington Post" has far more credibility than, for example, its competitor in the market, the "Washington Times" (The latter being a rather right-wing biased "rag")**. Since I used to live in the Washington, DC region, I tend to be somewhat familiar.....

ETA (**)...the "Washington Times" newspaper is owned by this man: Sun Myong Moon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Times

'Nuff said.......

 
Last edited:

deirdre

Senior Member.
I dont see why you should be allowed to call peoples ideas silly.
There could be a million such videos. All claims of fakery debunked. But that doesnt mean no fake videos were made or that the motivation wasnt there or that the modus operandi wasnt.
with that logic, there could be an unsampled area of the moon that actually IS made of cheese too. right?

No party is speaking of the specific article the box guy sourced.
 

Svartbjørn

Senior Member.
declined to confirm the accounts, or deny them" does not put anything "to bed

It does depending on how you look at it Cube.. If he denies it, then he's lying, if he confirms it then its a cover up for a larger conspiracy.

On the flip side: If he denies it, hey.. it didnt happen, if he confirms it.. oh hey look at that, more BS from the government what a surprise.

It all literally depends on how you view the world, by neither confirming nor denying.. it leaves the possibility open for it to happen but there's an equal chance that it didnt. Take what you will from it,but it puts it to bed for which ever side of the coin you sit on.. at least until actual evidence shows up that puts it one way or the other.
 

Cube Radio

Member
If something is neither confirmed nor denied then you are free to speculate what that means, but I take it merely as nothing conclusive: it is a banal truth that whatever interpretation you choose you are a conspiracy theorist and all forum members here can be so described; I would say the provenance of the video is most important and most questionable, for as is often pointed out in debates like this even the FBI has stated it could not find a sufficient evidence to link OBL to the 9/11 attacks, including authenticating this video http://www.projectcensored.org/16-no-hard-evidence-connecting-bin-laden-to-9-11/
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
If something is neither confirmed nor denied then you are free to speculate what that means, but I take it merely as nothing conclusive: it is a banal truth that whatever interpretation you choose you are a conspiracy theorist and all forum members here can be so described; I would say the provenance of the video is most important and most questionable, for as is often pointed out in debates like this even the FBI has stated it could not find a sufficient evidence to link OBL to the 9/11 attacks, including authenticating this video http://www.projectcensored.org/16-no-hard-evidence-connecting-bin-laden-to-9-11/

But do you think this guy (the same guy as E in your OP) is OBL, or not?
 

Cube Radio

Member
I'm prepared to accept he's the same person as A-D, but then I didn't actually claim he wasn't: as I say, even the FBI is similarly non-committal, which is good enough for me to suggest there may be some doubt; my original question that led NoParty to invoke this unauthenticated, fortuitous and highly fortuitously-timed discovery was whether or not the hijackers aboard the planes that crashed into the towers could possibly have expected both of those massive structures to crush themselves to the ground as a consequence of their actions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Rory Debunked: UK undertaker's claim that Covid vaccine is responsible for spike in deaths Coronavirus COVID-19 0
Marc Powell Debunked: 9/11 truth experts are knowledgeable professionals and their judgments are to be trusted 9/11 195
Marc Powell Debunked: Explosions preparatory to demolition of the WTC North Tower are visible as Flight 175 crashes into the South Tower 9/11 7
Mick West Debunked: Pfizer Developing a Twice-Per-Day COVID Pill, Taken Alongside Vaccines Coronavirus COVID-19 0
Marc Powell Debunked: Demolition “squib” is visible at top of WTC North Tower before Flight 11 crash 9/11 34
Marc Powell Debunked: Construction worker Philip Morelli experienced an explosion in the sub-basement of the North Tower 9/11 0
Marc Powell Debunked: ABC News correspondent George Stephanopoulos reported an explosion in the subway 9/11 1
Marc Powell Debunked: Debris from twin towers was projected upward by explosives 9/11 13
Marc Powell Debunked: Government officials revealed having foreknowledge of Building 7’s collapse 9/11 58
Marc Powell Debunked: NIST computer simulation of Building 7 collapse is inaccurate 9/11 22
Marc Powell Debunked: FEMA reported finding evidence that steel had melted. 9/11 47
Marc Powell Debunked: VP Dick Cheney ordered a standdown of jet fighters on 9/11 9/11 16
Oystein Debunked: Claim that Bobby McIlvaine's injuries ("lacerations") are best explained as result of glass shards and debris from bombs 9/11 22
Marc Powell Debunked: World Trade Center should not have collapsed due to 9/11 fires 9/11 3
Marc Powell Debunked: Firefighter reports of secondary explosions 9/11 3
Marc Powell Debunked: Steel was hurled hundreds of feet by explosives 9/11 4
Marc Powell Debunked: Demolition Explosion Before Collapse of South Tower 9/11 8
Marc Powell Debunked: Explosion in South Tower Lobby 9/11 7
Marc Powell Debunked: Mysterious Explosion Before the Flight 11 Crash 9/11 48
J.d.K Debunked: Marx: "The classes and the races too weak to master the new conditions must give way... They must perish in the revolutionary Holocaust" Quotes Debunked 0
dimebag2 Poll : Which DOD Navy video do you consider debunked ? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 74
Mick West Debunked: Diving Triangle UFO Photos from Reddit [Fake] UFOs and Aliens 37
Theferäl [Debunked] Object Seen From Airplane Above Canberra: 04 Apr 2012 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 5
TEEJ Debunked: Claim that Joe Biden's hand passes through microphone during White House press gaggle, 16th March 2021 Election 2020 8
bird_up Debunked: "Interdimensional being" caught on CCTV in Neza, Mexico Ghosts, Monsters, and the Paranormal 6
M Debunked: Atmospheric pressure on Mars is 9 PSI, not 0.09 PSI as claimed by NASA Science and Pseudoscience 75
Patrick Gonzalez Debunked: missing cable on Perseverance landing footage proves it is fake. General Discussion 3
TEEJ Debunked: Biden's Oval Office "Coming Apart at the Seams" [It's a Door] Election 2020 19
derrick06 Debunked: UFO over California Highway (TMZ) UFOs and Aliens 1
P Debunked: 7 Alleged photos of aliens UFOs and Aliens 9
Mick West Debunked: Biden signing "Blank" Executive Orders Election 2020 5
Mick West Debunked: Biden in "Fake" Oval Office Election 2020 27
P Debunked: UN hidden camera: the first UFO contact happened [Deep Fake] UFOs and Aliens 3
Mick West Debunked: 94% of Fulton County Ballots Manually Adjudicated [It's a Process all Batches go Through] Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: "Missile Strike" caused Nashville Explosion General Discussion 3
Mick West Debunked: Nashville Explosion was "Across the Street" from the RV General Discussion 0
Mick West Debunked: "Error rate of 68.5% Allowable is .0008%" [Neither is True] Election 2020 4
Mick West Debunked: Claim that the Electoral College Count On Jan 6 will Change the Election Election 2020 136
Rory Debunked: Einstein wrote "blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth" Quotes Debunked 12
Mick West Debunked: Navid Keshavarz-Nia's Claims of "A Sudden Rise in Slope" as Election Fraud Evidence Election 2020 5
Mick West Debunked: Trump's Claim of "1,126,940 votes created out of thin air" in PA Election 2020 9
Mick West Debunked: Crowder's "Fraud Week" Title Graphic (and Why it Matters) Election 2020 1
JFDee Debunked: Democratic senators complained about 'vote switching' by Dominion voting machines in 2019 Election 2020 2
Mendel Debunked: The Democrats are trying to take away freedom of religion Election 2020 6
H Debunked: Dr. Shiva's Scatterplot Analysis of Michigan Precincts Election 2020 43
Mick West Debunked: Suspicious "Biden Only" Ballots in Georgia Election 2020 3
Mick West Debunked: "Nancy Pelosi's long time Chief of Staff is a key executive at Dominion Voting" Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: Wisconsin Turnout 89% Impossible High [Actually 72%] Election 2020 1
Mick West Debunked: Video of Poll Worker "Filling In" Ballots. Election 2020 3
Mick West Debunked: Pentagon has Evidence of "Off-World Vehicles Not Made on this Earth" UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 14
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top