Previous Post
Next Post

“Jurors convicted an anti-government activist on firearms charges after authorities said he sought out high-powered weaponry for a coming “second American revolution,” reports. “William Krisstofer Wolf of Montana was found guilty of possession of a machine gun and failing to register a firearm after buying an illegal sawed-off shotgun for $720 from an undercover FBI agent nicknamed ‘Dirty’ in a truck stop parking lot.” It was a set-up. Fair enough, you might say. Under oath, Wolf . . .

acknowledged that he wanted to acquire a flamethrower and spoke of targeting judges, elected officials and law enforcement in an anticipated conflict between the United States and its citizens.

“Once this goes down, once the war starts, I will do everything I can to end the war quickly,” Wolf testified. He added that he hoped for but did not expect a peaceful resolution.

Read that carefully. Did Wolf have active plans to target specific judges, elected officials and law enforcement? Or did he say that come the revolution, these would be the type of people he’d target? Given that Wolf wasn’t charged with making terroristic threats, I’m thinking it’s the latter. So . . . Dirty tricks? Entrapment? That depends entirely on what the words “sought out” mean in the following excerpt.

Government witnesses including an undercover agent testified that Wolf sought out a weapon that he knew to be illegal and appeared ready to use it when he was arrested in March.

During what was his second meeting with Wolf, the undercover agent said he was surprised to hear the defendant talk openly of building or attaining a flamethrower capable of defeating police body armor and an armored vehicle that recently had been purchased by the Bozeman Police Department.

Contrary to defense assertions that Wolf “talked a lot” but showed no intention to act on his extreme beliefs, the agent said Wolf appeared ready to act.

Federal Defender Mark Werner argued that the undercover agent and a paid FBI informant who encouraged Wolf to buy the Russian-made shotgun entrapped his client. The bureau said it paid the informant $9,000.

Werner said after Thursday’s verdict that he will consider an appeal.

“Would he have done that without Dirty’s persuasion? I don’t think so,” Werner said. “That guy was playing him like a piano from the get-go.”

No doubt. But here’s the critical question: did the feds make initial contact? If so, why? Simple answer: Wolf’s anti-government activism – his free speech – made him a target.

On his webcast, The Montana Republic, Wolf railed against federal immigration policies and the administration of President Barack Obama and advocated for direct action to restore a Constitution-based government.

He compared shooting police officers to “shooting gophers” and proposed citizen arrests of judges by militia-like “safety committees,” according to authorities and excerpts from the show played for jurors during a three-day trial.

During his final broadcast, in November 2014, Wolf said it was “time to stop talking for me … it is time for me to start putting my money where my mouth is.”

His final webcast! Sounds . . . ominous. I’m sure Wolf’s words of wisdom weren’t music to the ears of the jurors, who convicted Wolf on the weapons charges. And nothing else. Because the feds had nothing else. Which is why they arranged a firearms-related sting to take Wolf down.

Bottom line: the feds used gun charges to silence a critic. A man with “dangerous ideas.”

Again, you might say fair enough. I say this story reveals the reason gun control advocates want to take away your guns. They don’t like the way you think. They don’t like the way you talk. They can’t arrest you for that, but with a little creativity, they can arrest you on gun charges (heads-up New York and Connecticut) and throw you in prison for a very long time. And silence you that way.

Back in the day, Democrats canvassing for support knocked on houses with foreign cars parked in the driveway. These days they’re ready to send the police to knock on doors of gun owners, to thwart those who would thwart their statist ambitions. And no, I don’t want to buy a machine gun.

[h/t JA]

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Kriss, as he was called among friends usually, directly spoke multiple times about the need to kill judges, law enforcement, and so forth. There are public records of this. He is a dangerous man, and personally, having met him multiple times, I’m rather glad he won’t be out and about in public for a while.

      • The same could have been said for McVeigh prior to using his truck bomb, couldn’t it? I would rather he had been stopped at that point, as well.

        • So you’re a big fan of a pre-crime department are you? If they had evidence of a specific plan or action in furtherance of that plan, they would have charged him with that. Otherwise, it’s a bust on trumped-up NFA charges which have no constitutional standing to begin with.

        • The same could be for anybody who doesn’t support uncle barky in the white house huh? That whole pre-crime thing is a slippery slope. If you don’t think that we have politicians and judges so against the constitution that they should be arrested for acts against it then YOU need to open those peepers. Acts against the very set of documents that originally gave our country any legitimacy should be a hanging offence… Do I need to be sent away to your reeducation for that? Our founding fathers had such great plans for this country but I guess they didn’t expect the powers of stupidity to be so strong. This is a sad day

        • I would say that they indeed expected the powers of stupidity to be this strong. I’m going to say, since even they considered what they were doing an ‘experiment’, that this country has exceeded their expectations by lasting this long. Is it still what they envisioned? Not by a long shot, but we can still right this ship and make her great again. That alone should make them (and all of us) proud. Oh, and spur us on to action as well.

      • He asked around often enough for illegal weapons that the FBI finally did something about it. It wasn’t exactly a secret that he would have very quickly gone on to kill people had the weapon in question been bought from someone other than an informant.

        He had, just prior to all of this, signed his house and properties over to other people. He wasn’t expecting to live long.

        As one of the people who tried to talk him out of such a reckless, violent course of action, I have zero sympathy for him and once again I’m glad he was stopped prior to committing murder.

        • Again… What hard evidence do you have of such a plot? Don’t get me started on “illegal weapons”, there is no such animal. Talk is cheap, and protected by the 1st amendment. If they had something that rose to a level not covered by 1st amendment protections, they would have charged him with that. He might not be a nice man, but using the NFA to bust people who have committed no actual crime is basically a way to hunt down people whose politics you don’t agree with.

        • So you’re saying that the only thing that kept him from killing people was a sawed-off shotgun (which he could have made himself with a $20 hacksaw), and a flamethrower (which is legal to buy in MT)?


          I’m throwing the bullshit flag.

        • Hmmm, I don’t know PK. Be concerned about a guy that might have been ready to murder a bunch of people; Or be concerned about a government agency that has a proven track record of instigating the burning deaths of almost a hundred men,women and children. Of retaliating against a man and his family, (when he refused to be a government snitch), that ended up with his son being killed after being shot in the back and his wife killed while holding a baby while she was shot in the head. Of an agency that illegally sold thousands of weapons to the Mexican Cartels that was used to murder hundreds of mexican citizens and an american govt. agent? With a proven track record of fabricating evidence to try to charge individuals with “illegal” weapon charges.

          Yeah PK, you, as a probable government employee, if not the paid confidential Informant that set up this individual for the government, probably can’t comprehend how the we, as citizens, (Not subjects) can be more concerned about government abuse,tyranny and outright murder, than some individual that MIGHT have been planning going on a killing spree. .

        • ThomasR, I suggest you take a look at his very own words as admitted in evidence to the court. The documents are publicly available here:

          As for who I am, no one but an associate of Kriss’s. I tried, repeatedly, to dissuade him from this path. As recently as last Thanksgiving, we shared a meal and he again expressed his plans, and for the last time I tried in vain to talk him out of it. He was well aware of the possible outcomes of his actions, and this was the very best of those outcomes – he expected to die.

        • The BATF- A government agency with proven track record of violating federal law, fabricating evidence and outright murder.

          Some lone individual that MIGHT have committed murder.

          So tell me PK. Which of these two entities would you say our Founding fathers would have said was a greater danger to us, as a free people?

        • ThomasR, without a doubt the ATF is FAR more dangerous than one man planning multiple murders, and the Founders would have considered the same almost for certain.

          That said, if you don’t believe what the court documents have as far as Kriss’s statements go, then I suggest you search online for “The Montana Republic” and listen to his words for yourself. He was outspoken against the government and local agencies in particular, which is fine of course. He was advocating murder, which is toeing the line for sure. He then went to break federal laws against the advice of myself and everyone else present, and every time he asked about obtaining post-86 MGs to further his goals we all tried to dissuade him from doing so! Is it any wonder the one person who helped him turned out to be in the FBI’s pocket?

          It’s a frustrating situation overall.

        • Let me get this straight… He was planning to murder numerous government officials, and get killed in the process, but he couldn’t do that with legally acquired weaponry. He needed a flamethrower and a sawed-off shotgun to pull off his plan.

          Do I have that right?

        • In a nutshell, yes. He came unhinged a while back and hadn’t been thinking rationally for quite a while, applying logic to his thinking doesn’t really work.

        • There you go PK. We’re in agreement. This particular individual may or may mot have been a danger to others, but the government, which is a confirmed danger to our liberties, (The BATF, The Patriot Act, NDAA) uses these type of individuals, including the “The War on Drugs” and “The War on Terror”, to attack our liberties and freedoms.

          The Founding Fathers warned us that it is in the government using the excuse to protect us from the “others” that they say threatens our safety, to allow them to take our freedoms away. This is the true danger to us as a people, not some lone extremist or muslim terrorist.

        • If the FBI had not got involved this man would never have been convicted of a darn thing. The FBI prodded him into buying this sawed off shotgun. If that was the type of weapon he desired, a SIMPLE SAWED OFF SHOTGUN, why didn’t he just buy a LEGAL shotgun and modify it himself in the privacy of his home? NO they wanted him TO SHUT UP!!!
          And since the First amendment protects his right to say what he wants the only recourse for government was to FIND a charge against him and throw him in JAIL FOR IT!!!

      • There’s no such thing as a “victimless crime”. Criminals are victims of their own stupidity and/or ego.

        This isn’t some vague “fuck the gubmint” act, the man was clearly looking to arrest and/or kill people purely because of their chosen profession. I don’t buy the concept of entrapment as long as the person “entrapped” isn’t mentally deficient. The man made the choice to do what he did. No one put a gun to his head and forced him to make that choice as far as we know, and verifiable events are the only ones that matter as far as law is concerned.

        • Gee… Why didn’t they convict him of THAT then? Could it be because his comments are being taken out of context and are covered by 1st amendment protections of political speech?

        • Does nobody find it curious that with all the access available for “illegal” weapons, this guy only stumbled upon a government sham? There are others like him out there, and surely someone would/could have put him onto a reliable source for what he wanted. Amazing. Of all the gin joints in all the world….

          Don’t believe in coincidences where government is involved.

  2. Sorry, but I don’t buy the argument. At the end of the day, no matter how much they cajole, if you don’t show up for the transaction, they can’t arrest/convict you of anything. Entrapment is a bogus defense. Unless they coerce you into entering into the transaction, YOU are responsible if you agree to commit a crime. As a black man I see the entrapment defense used all the time as an excuse when some idiot breaks the law. I just don’t buy it. Whatever one thinks of the NFA and/or Hughes amendment, if one doesn’t try to buy a post-86 gun off some shady dude, they’ll have a tough job prosecuting you.

    • A pre ’86 full auto is still illegal under the NFA unless federally registered prior to taking possession of said full auto firearm. Pre 86 is the only way to legally purchase a full auto, as the tack on ‘law’ of 86 didn’t change anything, but only froze the number of legal full autos at the that time present number, thus insuring that all the pre 86 guns would be in demand and fetch much higher prices, as they do today. That’s what happens when laws provide artificial scarcity.
      Since a sawn off shotgun does not fall into this category, but is instead a short barreled shotgun, and only requires a 5 dollar fee, instead of 200(even though it does still require the federal registration), its different than a “machine gun”, and that is just another example of the media having not the slightest idea of what they are talking about most of the time. Even many(perhaps most) gun owners are subject to the magazine/clip and bullet/cartridge delusions.

    • Actually, the fact that the NFA is used to create crimes where none existed is the problem. As I said elsewhere, it’s basically used by the feds as a way to crack down on dissidents that they don’t want speaking. How many otherwise law abiding people got stomped on because the shotgun they bought is an inch too short?

      • Everyone knows that when you take off that crucial inch of barrel, the shotgun becomes a terrible weapon of destruction, because … um … lower muzzle energy? … poor shot patterning? … FYTW. Oh, yeah, that last one.

        • The general theory about controlling SBR/shotguns seems to be anchored in the prohibition era. Gangsters hid short guns under overcoats so the gangster would have huge firepower, but no one would be able to see them coming (because the long guns were now short, and hidden under the overcoat). Speculating from the idea the if gangsters could not conceal the more powerful guns, they would not carry them to use against their rivals; less cirme. Or, maybe if the gangsters had to carry the guns in the open, someone would notice and call the cops; problem solved. Same with suppressors. If no one heard the shot, no one could know a crime had been committed, allowing the shooter to get away easily. Hearing a shot, the reasoning went, would alert bystanders who would notice where the shot came from and notify the cops; problem solved. Whether either constraint on gun owners actually lowered crime has yet to be proven. All that could be reasonably concluded is maybe the number of crimes committed with these prohibited weapons went down, maybe.

          But no government ever willingly gives-up a measure designed to control the populace (except maybe Maryland, recently?)

        • Sam, that made sense when gun technology was not nearly as advanced as it is today. Modern “pistols” can have just the same firepower as a prohibition era SBR with a far smaller form factor. (I’m looking at you “pistol” MP5K.) The idea that a short barreled shotgun gives you any sort of firepower advantage is laughable. You’re carrying, maybe 5 rounds in that firearm. I’ll take my far smaller G21 or Judge, and on top of that add the far faster reloads.

          Quite frankly, the only things that have a logical reason to be on the NFA are machine-guns and explosive destructive devices.

        • I’m not saying that they should, I’m just saying that those are the only two categories that could seriously be argued to be more dangerous.

    • That’s all “common sense”…but the problem is it’s not what the law says. The law relating to entrapment states the individual must be predesposed to commit said crime. If the goverment cajoles, coerces, or entices you to commit a crime, that you would not have otherwise committed – that is entrapment.

      That is a major issue with our goverment today, the law is not subject to whatever you “feel” it ought to be. Until it is changed by the legislature (not the administration, not the courts, and not public opinion) laws are to stand as written. We have become a lawless nation by ignoring that principal.

      Some are saying the subect of the story was broadcasting his desire to buy a shorty shotgun. If so, probably not entrapment. But just showing up to do the deal does not remove entrapment as a legitimate defense.

      And something about this whole story stinks. Who has to search for a sawed off shotgun, and pay $720 for one, when you can buy a hacksaw for $25?

      • So PK provided a link above which stated that the FBI procured a legal standard Saiga. SBR’d it and converted it to full auto. Then shot a video of said full auto SBR’s Saiga to the guy.

        Still not entrapment?

        I’m not an NFA expert but I don’t think it provides any kind of LEO carve out for manufacturing fully automatic shotguns?

    • And a non-crime is a non-crime, since the constitution does not enumerate authority for the government to infringe upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms – and in fact, explicitly prohibits the government from infringing upon that right.

    • Nice to see someone who realizes that “entrapment” as a legal premise is not what people usually think it is. If a cop walks up to you and legally “sells” you a stolen shotgun without you having any way to know that it is stolen and then arrests you for possessing stolen property- THAT’S entrapment.

      • Nice theory. You are talking about the same government who converted Fast And Furious into a tool for justifying draconian gun control. The same government who coerced gun dealers to make known straw sales, then claimed all the guns used by drug cartels came through 20 known gun dealers.

    • Anybody who buys a KSG, Saiga, FN, (list goes on and on.) 720 bucks is chump change for a high end shotgun. The difference is this yahoo wanted one with a chopped barrel for some stupid reason.

        • The article said “sawed off” not “full auto.” Am I missing something? Either way, whatever. If you cant handle the problem with a semi auto Mossy 930SPX with a standard length barrel you probably should stay at home.

        • So you are saying he bought a full auto sawed off shotgun?

          Did you read the article or actually know anything about guns?

        • Alright, this article doesn’t say a word about the shotgun having been F/A. Here, it most certainly does say F/A in the court documents:

          #22, top of page 11 of the PDF.

          I’m local to all this, and assumed the article would have linked the documents. My mistake, take a read at his very own words.

    • Maybe the lesson should be, why are these guns illegal to begin with? As far as the Constitution reads, I should be able to buy whatever I want from whomever I want.


  3. “Anti-government activist.” God, the name alone just screams that the author is a statist. Who honestly believes in government as the be-all, end-all and can never be questioned, or heaven forbid, reduced?

  4. This guy’s story is exactly what the gun grabber’s dream about to prove their accusations that we POTG are all potential anti-government terrorists plotting rebellion and murder. All he accomplished was to get himself majorly burned by the Feds. If this guy can get convicted in Montana…take a lesson.

    • Yeah. Lessons are. Keep mouth shut about violent plans. Don’t buy firearms that are deemed illegal from shady characters.

      It’s life, not a kindergarten playground.

  5. People who worship the State — government is their God — have no use for people who fail to embrace their philosophy. And if you oppose the notion of an Almighty Government and its necessity for utopia, they want you silenced, imprisoned, and/or dead.

    Never underestimate the zeal and commitment of a dyed-in-the-wool statist. Millions of people have paid for that mistake with their lives.

  6. the prime directive for organism is to survive at all costs, by whatever means. your government in action.

    and not, they are not as dumb as we would like to think. they took a very indirect route to their objective.

    • You mean the unrepentant marxist terrorist “I did not do enough” that was willing to murder 25 million Americans after their marxist revolutionary over throw of the American republic?

      Because he was the front line “useful idiot” that was the obvious boogie man while the real marxist/communist revolution happened in our universities. Now he is with his fellow “comrades” in the cess pool of staist indoctrination that is our current academia.

  7. Any time anyone wants to sell you anything that requires a tax stamp, but says “don’t worry about it” or “who will know”, automatically suspect them of being a Fed. In fact, I’d tell them to their face that I wouldn’t buy anything like that from them because it would be illegal, and I wouldn’t want the ATF to use a rubberstamp judge to put me in a Federally-licensed rape facility for 10 years. I’d further advise them to either turn the weapon in, or to destroy it immediately. And I’d hope it was a Fed, so that they’d be PO’d at not being able to burn me.

  8. Our own Declaration of Independences says that it is the Right and the Duty of the People to Alter or Abolish their government if it no longer supports and defends their Inalienable Rights.

    If the People have the Right and the Duty, then it could be inferred from that they have the RIGHT TO THE MEANS to Alter or Abolish that oppressive government.

    That means military-grade weapons, folks.

    So for arguments sake, if the People have the Right to the Means to Alter or Abolish their government, how is it that their government has any say in what type of weapons they may own?
    If the People have the Right to the Means to alter or abolish their government, then how is the government ever granted the Power to impede the People’s Right to those Weapons?

    Our 2nd Amendment IS A BAN on the Government’s Power to Impede the People’s Right to such weapons.

    True, that the Constitutional Militia is supposed to suppress Insurrections, but what if our Government itself no longer obeys the Constitution?

    Who is supposed to keep the government compliant to the Constitution?

    If the People don’t have the Right and the Duty to Alter or Abolish a tyrannical government, then
    they are no longer citizens but subjects or slaves of the government and we no longer
    have a Republic but a Statist society.

    So which is it Republic or Statist?

    • The Declaration of Independence is a great document. However, it does not carry the force of law. It is not a legal document you may reference as legal justification for revolution.

      If you raise arms in insurrection, the Constitution is the governing document, and it will provide direction how the U.S. responds. Part of that could be invoking the Second Amendment to defend against your insurrection.

      • The declaration was not a legal document when it was published. There was no legal support for insurrection in English law, no legal support for any sort of revolution. The declaration stated the universal truths that are just as much truth today. But the concept of citing a legal document as the legal authority for overthrowing the legal authority is a bit interesting.

      • The constitution was NOT a document to put limits on the rights of the people.
        The constitution was a document to establish a federal government and to grant it
        certain defined and limited number of powers.
        That’s all.

        Rights are NOT granted by the government because it wasn’t given the power to grant andy rights.

        The Declaration was a document that stated certain Principles, Rights, and Powers the People have the Supersedes any Powers granted to the federal government.

        Government derives its Powers from the People.

        The People are the ultimate arbiters of what is Law, NOT THE GOVERNMENT.
        Government’s existence is derived by the Consent of the People.
        If the People decide that their government is not abiding by the Constitution, it is THEIR
        prerogative to Tear Up the Constitution and Start ALL OVER AGAIN.
        And the government doesn’t get to say squat.

        No matter what form of government the people chose, they are ultimately responsible for their government and
        responsible for their government’s actions no matter how vile the actions were.

        That’s why the Allies held the German People responsible for the actions of their government after WWII.

        If the People sit back and let the government do what it wants to do, they may be held responsible and suffer the consequences for the actions of the government by their inactivity.

        • I don’t disagree, philosophically. Universal principles do exist. I’m just saying that there’s no sense pointing to the Declaration when we all pretty much agree on those principles and that’s the extent of its utility.

          Just as the victors write the history, they also bring the indictments. You’d have to win first before all the speeches and lofty writings gain practical import retroactively.

          I, for one, expect this country to divide in our lifetimes. It’s become ungovernable in itself and the gap between wealth generators and wealth leeches is growing unsustainable. I think it will be peaceful, though, along the lines of Slovakia and the Czech Republic; and not violent like Yugoslavia.

        • An active citizenry? Politically astuet? Vigilant towards individual rights? Your’re describing some other place and time.

  9. This is not the poster boy you’re looking for.

    Ever notice how it’s always shady guys (typically with records) with revolutionary zeal and loose talk, mixed in with illegal saes off shotguns and machine guns, who get “entrapped?” Curious, that.

    Whether every exact element of the crime can be proven in this case, I don’t know, but this guy sounds like he’s up to no good. Had he made better life decisions, he wouldn’t be wrapped up in this mess.

    Skulking around truck stops with strange men, chit chatting about revolution, jacking around with illegal guns. Good grief. Inherently illegal? I don’t know, but definitely ill advised.

  10. Ignoring the entrapment aspects and so on, how dumb is this guy? If he thinks there’s a war coming, why not just buy a regular shotgun and a hacksaw, and wait until hostilities break out before chopping the barrel?

    Also, anybody who wants to sell you a chopped, full-auto Saiga-12 for $700 is a cop. That’s just common sense.

  11. No, this is not why the Democrats want to steal our guns. It’s just the excuse. The Dims want to take our guns because they hate us. Period.

  12. Moral of the story? If you just have to have a machine gun, buy a 1919 Browning and convert it to hand-crank. If you just have to have a 9mm subgun, then buy a 9mm AR15 and add slidfire. Want a squad automatic? RPK or Ares AR15 belt-fed upper with slide fire. Any one of the above is completely class 1 compliant. Anybody offers you anything different, turn them down.

    When push and shove finally collide you’ll be amazed at what shows up being used on our side, but until then no good can come of buying class 3 from people you haven’t known your entire life. And even then however paranoid you are, it’s not enough.

    • I explained in excruciating detail the NFA process, showed him prices on SubGuns and Sturm, even on GunBroker, explained how it would clear as it had for me so many times with NFA items so long as he could own any firearm at all, and how it was expensive but not illegal. He didn’t care, didn’t want to wait, and so choose a foolish path.

      Alternative to pre-86 MGs, your advice is spot on. I love bumpfire style stocks, they work great for a poor man’s SAW.

  13. “And something about this whole story stinks. Who has to search for a sawed off shotgun, and pay $720 for one, when you can buy a hacksaw for $25?”

    That’s what jumped out at me. And why saw it off until you’re ready to use it? A cutting wheel for a table saw costs all of $35 and can slice your barrel to the length you want in under a minute.


  14. ummm if you break laws you should know geting prosecuted is possible. Even people who know nothing about guns have a clue that buying a sawed off shotgun or machine gun (or a TV or a watch) at a truck stop might not be legal.

    I don’t judge anyone that thinks differently but I’m going to wait on a more deserving (strictly my judgement) “victim” of the system to support.

    • Ever bought off Craigslist or arms list? Some people want to meet in weird locations they think are safe. I personally try to meet in front of a police station or with backup.

  15. Uh yeah I don’t see a “side” to take. I don’t like either one. SEE: Southpark election-a turd and a douchebag…but ya’ got yer clicks RF!

  16. This guy deserved what he got. And everyone like him deserves the same. They didn’t “silence a critic”. They arrested someone stupid enough to try to obtain illegal weapons and shoot his mouth off about wanting to hurt and kill others. He played a stupid game and won a stupid prize.

    Bottom line: maybe not do things that are illegal, and/or try to obtain illegal weapons. What we think about this guy is irrelevant. “Oh, he was just running his mouth.” I bet some people in the past thought this about someone who said they wanted to kill everyone at the place they worked, until the guy came in the door one day with a gun. Making death threats is illegal.

  17. hmmm…..’The court document states that Wolf was told that his “supplier” was a Class III dealer and had converted the firearm from semi-automatic to full-automatic.’

    • Interesting. Does anybody actually demand to see documentation that an FFL actually holds the proper certifications for NFA weapons?

  18. DhruvaMy apartment has DG set with 2-3 KV support per flat. If one has independent house or no such support by the apartment, then there are Inverters – these days they support even ACs. So, if power cuts are keeping you from returning, feel free to pack up and come home. Btw, there are other problems in India that may have no such easy solutions. Thanks for dropping by and comments.Good Luck!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here