Criticizing Hamas, and a look at what is likely to replace it if Israel succeeds

by: johnalive

Sat Jan 03, 2009 at 13:53


(Here is yet another reason to question the "commonsense" narratives about Israel having no alternatives, so that it must resort to trying to destroy its enemies.  Hasn't worked in the past.  And will only get worse in the future.  Sound familiar? - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)

Gabreile Marranci writes in an otherwise problematical 'pox-on-both-houses" post about Hamas:

Unfortunately, many Muslims live with a myth of Hamas as the 'freedom fighter' but are simultaneously ignorant of Hamas as capable of being power-money hungry, abusing human rights, exerting excessive control over private life, and even oppressing innocent Palestinians. Many Muslims see  Hamas as a unitary, monolithic paladin of Palestinian rights. It is not.

Having noted that however, it's a good idea to get a closer look at what will replace Hamas if Israel succeeds in destroying it. Many commenters at Open Left have asserted that over the course of Palestinian history each leadership movement that Israel undermines is replaced by something worse.

The new rising movement in Gaza is the Salafi-Wahhabists. In the Haraatz article quoted below from June 2008, their numbers in Gaza are currently estimated to be about 40,000 to 50,000. Many Salafis may be extremely religious though law-abiding and peaceful, but out of this group is forming a violent movement that admires Al-Qaeda, seeks to imitate it and make an alliance. Enemy-formation propaganda on the part of Israel tells us Hamas is the worst of the worst as far as religious fanaticism, but a closer look at the Salafi extremists and their militant organization Army of Islam shows them to be far worse.

johnalive :: Criticizing Hamas, and a look at what is likely to replace it if Israel succeeds
The salafis do not watch television at home. Their wives have to cover themselves from head to foot. They may not hang large pictures or display statues in their homes, and they pray frequently. Hamas knows they represent an alternative to its monopoly over religion in the Gaza Strip, which has led to great tension between the salafis and Hamas over control of the mosques.

Violent brawls have broken out over attempts by Hamas to throw salafis out of the mosques where they have managed to take control. Another problem for Hamas is the salafis' avoidance of politics, which makes Hamas look like a gang of power-hungry politicians, especially in light of its mistakes over the past year: the violent takeover, torture and corruption.

But a more tangible threat for the rulers of Gaza is from other groups loosely linked to the sect, which are known collectively as A-salafiyeh al-Jihadiyeh. These extreme groups identify with salafi religious principles but dispute the principle of remaining aloof from political, military and diplomatic involvement.

The best-known of these groups are the Army of Islam and the Army of the Nation. Their ideology recalls the teachings of Al-Qaida, and they flaunt their connections with the latter. While the Army of Islam is clan-based and mainly connected to the Durmush family, the Army of the Nation is gathering numbers largely from people cast out by Hamas and Islamic Jihad because of their extremism.

The Haraatz article has asserted a distinction without a difference between the Army of Islam and the Army of the Nation; they are the same movement. Army of Islam (AOI) is the kind of group that is most dangerous for both Muslims and non-Muslims alike. They are warlike in their stance toward non-Muslims and inclined to pursue a vision of worldwide Islamic revolution and domination. Among Muslims, they are most likely to practice takfiri violence, the idea that those who don't believe precisely as they do are not real Muslims - or worse, heretics, hypocrites and "corruptors of the true religion" - deserving of violent affliction and death (shoot the moderates first is the universal motto of extremist movements - no exception here).

Army of Islam is the type of movement whose fanatical extremism over issues like female modesty creates a hot-house climate for honor-related violence, and that is apparently what started happening in Gaza about two years ago. What follows is a long clip from an article about violence against women in Gaza that appeared in The Australian in spring 2007. It should be noted that the article inaccurately implies sharia law condones honor-related violence (it does not), but hyper-extremists with a history of religious violence do. (Lawrence Wright in The Looming Tower describes one of the three utopian goals indoctrinated into trainees in bin Laden's Afghan camps was "Purification of the ranks of Islam from the elements of depravity.") Disturbingly, this article also reports that  Army of Islam had infiltrated Hamas' executive force. Some of the references are dated, but it gives you a sense of the savagery of this group:

The dead woman was Dalal al-Behtete, a young woman from a struggling family in central Gaza. Seven other women have met the same violent and lonely fate across Gaza during a 10-day stretch this month. According to their assassins, their deaths gave them honour that their conduct in life had not. All the women had been accused of immoral behaviour. Some had been labelled prostitutes; others were branded for fraternising with men outside their immediate families.

So-called honour killings have been carried out here in the past, but even in this ramshackle, anarchistic and fractured society, women have never before been hunted down so blatantly.

Gaza, more so than anywhere else in the Palestinian territories, has been a feudal battleground of countless agendas, historical enmity, ideology and greed. Historically, clans and tribes have ruled the roost here, with factionalised militant ideologies running a close second. But the balance appears to have shifted during the past six months. Strict observance of Sunni Islam seems to have encouraged a fundamentalist trend that is making a play for influence, through the rigid enforcement of radical Islamic law espoused by the global jihad network that follows the bin Laden world view.

Sharia law appears to have drifted into Gaza, alarming Muslim and militant groups alike and sharply rattling the neighbour across the security barrier, Israel.

Change had begun in Gaza long before its women began to fall. Late last year, several internet cafes and music stores were bombed. In February, six pharmacies in the southern town of Rafah were also attacked because they persisted in selling Viagra to youths. In the past year, the name of a new group, first heard of after the capture of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit last June, persistently has been linked to the unrest.

It calls itself the Army of Islam and consists of self-styled morality warriors who claim links to al-Qa'ida. Hamas, the most powerful of the militant groups and a joint partner in the new unity government, steadfastly denies that al-Qa'ida has established an organised presence in Gaza. If it is true that al-Qa'ida has done so, it cripples Hamas's claims to be fighting for a Palestinian state alone and not being standard bearers of the global jihads.
....

With the rising power of the so-called Army of Islam, (justice) seems unlikely. Dalal and three other women murdered during the 10-day stretch - Ibtisam Mohammed Abu Genas, Samira Tohami Debeki and Amany Khamis al-Hussary - were victims of killers who claimed the ideological backing of the fledgling group, even if the murders stemmed from bids for family honour.

The deaths pose a significant issue for the new unity government on many fronts, especially Hamas. No one in the uneasy Fatah-Hamas alliance wants to be seen to be linked to extremism, especially of the Salafi-Islamic kind.

Israel has long feared that Gaza will be turned into a platform for al-Qa'ida and the consortium of international jihadis that have emerged in its likeness. Creeping sharia law at the border is a worst-case scenario for the Jewish state; it fears it will lead to imported and intensified jihadism.

For Hamas, the links appear to be just as troubling. Saha says she recognised her tormentors as being members of the Hamas executive force.

Soon after Inquirer's visit to Dalal's grieving family, our translator receives a phone call from a cousin confessing to the murder. In a menacing tone, the man says he too is an executive force member and warns us not to publish the dead woman's story.

Closing the door on Hamas will open the door to something much worse. Hamas has expressed an interest in - and shown a willingness to - adhere to ceasefires. Progressives in America should advocate that our government pressure Israel to make a new ceasefire deal and restart peace negotiations, with both Hamas and Fatah included in the talks.


Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Al Qaeda has weighed in against Hamas too, probably in support of its own nascent Gaza movement (4.00 / 3)
From Fox News, September 9, 2007;

An al-Qaida commander who escaped from a U.S. prison in Afghanistan appeared in a new videotape Sunday criticizing Hamas and other Islamic groups that he said prioritized nationalism and electoral politics over jihad, or holy war.

Hamas is focused on the creation of an independent Palestinian state rather than al-Qaida's vision of a worldwide Muslim community ruled by Islamic law. Like al-Qaida, the Palestinian movement advocates violence to achieve its goal, but has also participated in elections alongside the moderate Palestinian Fatah group.

"We caution some of the Islamic groups, among them Hamas, which are risking the bloods of their sons ... to cleanse and purify their jihad of contemporary jihadi pollutants," said Abu Yahia al-Libi in the 90-minute videotape.

"Patriotism, nationalism, shared unity, the supreme interest and other slogans ... none of these have any space in the religion of Allah the Glorious and the Great," he said, criticizing groups such as Hamas for "abandoning jihad and jumping into the ballot boxes."

The authenticity of the videotape could not be verified, but it was released on a Web site commonly used by Islamic militants and carried the logo of Al-Sahab, al-Qaida's media arm.



The "terrorist" meme has been central to Israeli propaganda at least since 9/11. (4.00 / 3)
This documentary, Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land was produced a few years ago. Noam Chomsky, Robert Fisk, Arik Ackerman, founder of Rabbis for Human Rights, and many others fill in the blanks. Hamas is really only Israel's latest red herring for why it will not negotiate peace, the cover for its continuing colonization of the Palestinian territories.

Part I:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Part II:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...


Not to mention that (0.00 / 0)
The attempt to destroy Hamas is making it stronger.

So yes, Israel's blockade-bombardment of Gaza will lead to a leadership worse than Hamas: a stronger Hamas.  


IF We're Lucky, That Is (4.00 / 3)
According to this diary.  And this isn't the first I've heard of this, either.

The worst would be to have different sectarian factions all competing to see who could be the most violent and intransigent.

And there would, inevitably, be some hardline Israelis who would welcome this outcome, as it would ensure even further cycles of violence, as far as the eye could see, or the mind imagine.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Dig deeper, much deeper.. (0.00 / 0)
Quit pushing the Israeli bullshit..

Who exactly IS Hamas and Hizb'allah??  They are Israel's own step-children, created after Israel raped and pillaged their weaker neighbors.
And out of the ashes and rubble rose the children who remembered that vicious brutality - and vowed to never tolerate being oppressed again. They now are the equivalent to Americas Special Forces -who successfully protect their lands.  Hamas rightfully won those elections and so too did the citizens of Lebananon want Hizb'allah to become a part of their government as a strong defense force, since Lebanons leaders were too weak to ward off Israel's incursions in 2006.  Take either force away and Israel will reign over the region like Cheney and Rumsfeld on steriods.

Because an American made and funded bloated and armed Israeli monster DEMANDS obedience  every Arab should bend over in submission??  That's Rice's opinion, and most of the proIsraeli gang here in America.

If you believe that, you're either a Republican or a member of the DLC wing of the Democratic party - all of whom believe money, white supremacy and power should rule above all else.

If I were there I would protect my home and lands just as vehemently as the Palestinians - and so would most of the gang here at OpenLeft.  
Because 'Change' is worth fighting for.



Nationalism is not the same thing as terrorism, and an adversary is not the same thing as an enemy.


Should Israel still exist? (0.00 / 0)
I was born in a part of my country taken over by violence before I was born.  If I were to move because someone else claimed my land, where would I move to?

At what point is conquered land just land?  At what point does Israel have a right to exist, simply because they do and have existed?

McCain on the minimum wage


Israel's Right To Exist Is There For The Taking (4.00 / 3)
Ever since 2002, the Arab League has had a proposal on the table, recognizing Israel's right to exist in return for negotiating an acceptable peace.

But Israel prefers to keep fighting, pretending it has to, based on positions that the Arab world no longer holds.

I'm not saying it won't be painful. I'm not saying it won't be difficult.  I'm simply saying that the possibility is there for the taking, and so it is utterly dishonest to pretend it is not.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
"Right" of Return is the Issue (0.00 / 0)
The Palestinians have never agreed to giving up the "right of return".

This will block any peace agreement.

McCain on the minimum wage


[ Parent ]
Hamas - not so good (0.00 / 0)
I am opposed to suicide bombers and to targeting of civilians with rockets.  If you support people who do, please tell me why the following attack was such a good idea for their cause:

From Wikiopedia:

The Passover massacre (also known as the Netanya bombing) was a suicide bombing carried out by a Palestinian militant in the Park Hotel at Netanya, Israel on March 27, 2002. The attack killed 30 Israeli civilians and triggered Operation Defensive Shield.
The attack occurred on the night of March 27, when the traditional Jewish holiday of Passover was celebrated. The Park Hotel in Netanya held a large Passover dinner for its 250 guests, especially elderly Jews who didn't have family and relatives, in the ground-floor dining room. A Palestinian suicide bomber passed a security guard at the hotel's entrance, walked through the lobby passing the reception desk and entered the hotel's dining room where he detonated an explosive device he carried in a suitcase. Twenty-eight people were immediately killed, and about 140 were injured, of whom 20 were seriously injured. Two of the injured later died from their wounds. Some of the victims were Holocaust survivors.


McCain on the minimum wage

What Makes You Think This Is In ANY Way Responsive Or Relevant (0.00 / 0)
to the point being made here?

Quite the opposite. The point being made here is that this sort of knee-jerk, strawman argumentation is leading you and others like you right into the jaws of hell.

Worse still, it's taking everyone else along with you.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Where's the other side of the story? (0.00 / 0)

So all Christians are terrorists too then, because some have  bombed Planned Parenthood offices??

I suggest you broaden your reading material - and try to find the opposing views. From several angles.

Because right now, it's obvious you've no idea of what nationalism really mean, yet.

 

Nationalism is not the same thing as terrorism, and an adversary is not the same thing as an enemy.


[ Parent ]
If Hamas and Israel were in opposite positions ... (0.00 / 0)
Do you think that Hamas would let Israel shoot rockets into their cities?

Do you honestly thinks Hamas would refrain from removing all Jews from Israel, with many deaths?

McCain on the minimum wage


Do You Honestly Think (0.00 / 0)
this comment is remotely relevent to this diary?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Yes. (0.00 / 0)
It is very relevant and places some context on the larger discussion of Middle-East peace.

McCain on the minimum wage

[ Parent ]
Bullshit! (0.00 / 0)
This is just a very tired knee-jerk response to something we're not even discussing here.

It's indicative of someone with zero interest in moving forward--or letting anyone else move forward, either.  

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
But Paul ... (0.00 / 0)
If Hamas and Israel were in opposite positions do you think that Hamas would let Israel shoot rockets into their cities?
Do you honestly thinks Hamas would refrain from removing all Jews from Israel, with many deaths?

You do not argue that my point is wrong.  Only that it is made at the wrong time and place.  So I guess you probably think that the comment I made is correct, only that it is inconvenient to know a fundamental truth about the people you are siding with.



McCain on the minimum wage


[ Parent ]
Sure (0.00 / 0)
It's an excellent point in a pointless argument.

Somehow, you seem to think that I am defending Hamas.  Well, you can argue forever about how terrible Hamas is, because no one here is arguing that they're not.

But you got Hamas, which is so much worse than the PLO, because you spent all your time arguing about how terrible the PLO was, and none of your time thinking about how someone worse might come along, if Israel kept on doing what it was doing.

In short: stupid people can win stupid arguments with themselves while the world goes to hell.  And no intelligent person is going to be the least bit impressed with it.

This is true of people on both sides of the conflict.  So you can be very proud of the fact that you're just as clever as a stupid Palestinian.

Go tell your mommy, so she can give you a cookie.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
You're too childish .. (0.00 / 0)
Not one Arab has EVER invaded Israel.  And Israel has a  massive arsenal with accompanying air power  -paid for by YOU.

While Hamas and Hizb'allah have inacurate homemade rockets fired from their shoulders on sandaled feet. Mosquitos compared to bunker busters.

Go back to your boarding school.

 

Nationalism is not the same thing as terrorism, and an adversary is not the same thing as an enemy.


[ Parent ]
But (0.00 / 0)
You did not disagree with what I said (and only tried to reply with insults).  

That leads me to believe that you think I an correct in what I said.  Only you don't like to hear it.

McCain on the minimum wage


[ Parent ]
Not one... (4.00 / 2)
Except for 1948 and 1973.  And all those suicide bombers.  But other than that, not one.

[ Parent ]
recommended... (4.00 / 1)
for keeping the conversation historically accurate.

[ Parent ]
Yes. (0.00 / 0)
It is very relevant to this whole discussion about Israel and Hamas!

McCain on the minimum wage

But That's Not The Subject (0.00 / 0)
and, not incidentally, you're not replying at the right place, either.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Another Possibility (0.00 / 0)
Isn't it also possible that Israel might allow for Abbas to set up a government in Gaza?

McCain on the minimum wage

Great post. So what is Israel's objective here? (4.00 / 1)
"War is politics by other means." -- Clausewitz

This post is hitting a sizable nail on the head here. Namely, what is the real point of this Gaza Massacre (Lebanon II)? Will destroying Hamas bring the Israeli apparatchiks the "success" they claim to want?

If the point is to encourage negotiations, then this is a terrible failure, since there won't be anyone to negotiate with, will there? If the point is to destroy Hamas, then this can at best only partially succeed. They can blow down every building in Gaza, but it won't change the minds of those who live there. I seriously doubt this point is lost on the flag officers of the IDF. They all know the aerial bombardments of Dresden and Hamburg didn't really change anyone's minds. They also know the same thing from the Levant two years ago. Yet they still cling to the same tactical repertoire, so there must be a reason for it.

If the point is to simply score political points in the run-up to the February elections, there is some evidence to suggest this will be at least partially successful. It's just too bad all the people being blown up have to be used as political corpses in an election they are not allowed to participate in. It's also too bad the liberal-social democratic coalition is so completely powerless in Israel, but that is also part of the point in all this ultra-violence, isn't it?

After the humiliation the IDF received in Lebanon in '06, you'd think perhaps the Israeli leadership might reconsider their priorities. But you'd be wrong, it seems.

So what's the real goal here? It's certainly none of the stated ones, since you can't get there from here. So it must be something or other things that aren't stated.

Military success is also dependent on political success within theater. But there's no political program here. Just killing, whether by arms or merely deadly embargoes. So there really isn't a political objective is there?

I think it's becoming apparent that the real policy is not one of pursuing peace in any real sense at all. It's about ethnic cleansing and eventually genocide, if need be. In other words, if Hamas is sufficiently degraded that it can be replaced by Salafi-Wahhabiists, the Likudniks would consider that "success," since it will provide them with an even better "foe" to destroy next time. The point being that as long as their chosen enemies become increasingly "evil," they are then "justified" in taking ever more extreme actions. And when you have a PR machine that completely ignores all this, then you can trot out the old "self-defense" saw as often as needed to justify fanatical actions.

As odd as this may sound to some, there is a logic of warfare. If we follow the logic of the IDF actions, this will lead us to their actual policy goals. If we listen to the spin and sheer bullshit coming from Tel Aviv and DC, we will not understand it. It's just bullshit to cover up their real goals.

First they decided to destroy Fatah. Now they are destroying Hamas. Next they will destroy whomever else comes along. They will never accede to negotiations, because that's not the point. They don't want peace. They don't want to coexist. They merely need to maintain the appearance of civility in between massacres.

If they did, they would temper their behaviors accordingly.

Lastly, the Likudniks don't feel any need to moderate their behavior for one simple reason: all of the US leadership are slavishly devoted to the eliminationist agenda of Barak, Livni and Netanyahu. As long as the US offers them carte blanche to do whatever they want, without any thought of consequences, the status quo will continue to be very bloody indeed.

Here's a quote from Col. Pat Lang (USA retired) on his blog yesterday (he knows of what he speaks and he's no DFH) :

Condoleeza Rice came out of the West Wing this morning to announce that no cease fire at Gaza would be "acceptable" to the US unless it results in a basic change in the situation with regard to Hamas' firing into Israel.

Say what?  "Acceptable" to whom?  The US?  Does that mean that we are a party to the war?  Yes.  That is what it means.  pl

http://turcopolier.typepad.com...



When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.

-- Frederic Bastiat, "The Law", 1850


I Would Just Add (0.00 / 0)
that I think, for the most part, that there isn't any purpose or plan.  That would assume a level of cognition that's simply not happening any more, sadly enough.  And that's the real problem.

They are simply doing what they did before, only doing it more furiously, because it didn't work last time, or the ten thousand times before that, so they figure they just weren't doing it hard enough.  The only alternative would be that they are wrong and would have to think of something else to do.  But that would mean they would have to think.  And that, of course, is off the table.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Respectfully, there has to be a purpose or a plan (0.00 / 0)
Whatever that may be.

The IDF is one of the best military institutions in the world. They are highly trained, ostensibly extremely intelligent and usually more than competent.

While I confess that I don't really know much about Israeli military doctrine, they certainly have one. They also have to have a larger, ongoing strategic discussion within their ranks, just as every other major military in the world has theirs.

Perhaps I should do some better research on this and come back with at least better questions.

Democracies and even major non-democracies, publish their strategic doctrine (on some level), so as to avoid misunderstandings with other actors. I haven't seen one for Israel, though I've been reading US Strategic Doctrine for many years and NATO doctrine is basically US doctrine with caveats--the reason it's published is to avoid creating crises through misunderstandings; it's better if other actors know what you have in mind. My point is that a sophisticated military doesn't take a crap without a strategy for it and that involves a lot of internal policy discussions about goals and the means to achieve those goals.

This is why I made some of the assumptions I made.

I suppose it really is possible no one in Tel Aviv learned a damn thing from Lebanon. It's also possible what they did learn was the wrong lesson.

But it's also possible the real strategic goal was something other than what's being discussed, which would make it very difficult to assess the relative success or failure of their strategy in that case, or any other case, such as Gaza.

It's easy to assume that pilots and soldiers are all a bunch of automatons, but after Lebanon, where pilots started refusing to bomb civilian targets, it takes more to motivate people than simply issuing orders. Those carrying out those orders need to have some idea that, "we're not just doing this more furiously this time." No, the generals have to be able to tell the grunts something worthy of their sacrifices. I'm sure for some "git some" is good enough, but not for all of them.

I wish I could tie all this up with a tidy policy statement that explains everything, but at this point I have more questions than answers. These questions also extend most pointedly at our own "leadership" who all seem completely taken with slavish devotion to a policy regime that is only good at spilling the blood of people powerless to shape their own fates.

When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.

-- Frederic Bastiat, "The Law", 1850


[ Parent ]
Believing That You Have A Plan (0.00 / 0)
is not the same thing as actually having a plan that guides your actions.

I'm just saying that I think, at a fundamental level, Israel just acts out of emotion.  It has plans, doctrines, whatever, that rationalize what it does.  But they don't match up with the actual results (quite obviously right away in the case of Lebanon 2006, for example).  They don't match up with where the dynamic of the entire region is headed. They are, at bottom, all an elaborate fantasy.

The smarter you are, the better you can deceive yourself.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Then why haven't they done it already? (0.00 / 0)
Emocrat said:

I think it's becoming apparent that the real policy is not one of pursuing peace in any real sense at all. It's about ethnic cleansing and eventually genocide, if need be.

There are close to 1.5 million people living in Gaza.  Do you seriously think that the goal of the Israelis is to remove or kill them all?

Let's pretend that the Israelis are actually as evil as you think they are.  Then why haven't they done it already?  What's stopped them?  Maybe because that isn't what they want to do?  Maybe all they want is just to be left alone?

I'm not saying "Israel, right or wrong".  They've done plenty of things that I disagree with, especially continuing to build settlements.  But I do believe they have the right to defend themselves, especially from a terrorist government that refuses to recognize their right to exist.  And I do believe that they have that right to exist.


[ Parent ]





Donate to Open Left




blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
USER MENU

QUICK HITS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search