The Shotgun Blog
« The Role of the Legislature | Main | Iranian regime gets nervous »
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Even where al Qaeda is concerned, Communist propaganda can trip an analyst up
It's taken me a few days to get a functioning URL of Martin Wayne's Asia Times piece on East Turkestan; mea culpa for that. However, I have now had the chance to examine Wayne's assertion that Communist China (a) has confronted al Qaeda, (b) has largely handled al Qaeda, and (c) its performance in "Xinjiang" can be a model for the rest of the world. Wayne is not only wrong on all counts, his assumptions come from the tragic mistake of largely taking what he hears at face value. Those of us who know better can see the flaws in his construct with almost disturbing ease.
Wayne beings with a description of the Communist "raid" on a supposed "terrorist facility " in East Turkestan: "According to reports, 18 terrorists were killed and 17 were captured, along with 22 improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and material for thousands more. " Wayne seems to anticipate the arguments of skeptics like myself (and the Uyghur American Association), and innoculate himself from them with a throwaway line, but in the sentences that follow, he completely contradicts himself:
Chinese reportage on terrorism is notoriously problematic, at times imprecise or simply fabricated. For the skeptics, photos of a policeman killed in the raid were also released, showing emotional relatives amid a sea of People's Armed Police paying their final respects.
Not to be rude here, but a photo of a funeral is hardly an indication of that the deceased was killed in a raid of some kind, let alone the kind the Communists claim occurred. Now, that may sound like nitpicking, but one can understand my concern when added to the following stretch from Wayne:
In late December, al-Qaeda's No 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, called for action against "occupation" governments ruling over Muslims, including reference to the plight of Uighurs in western China. Yet despite this commitment of resources and rhetorical energy. . .
Commitment of resources and rhetorical energy? I took a look at the transcript of al-Zawahiri's December rant (via the Institute for Counter-Terrorism). The al Qaeda lieutenant spent over 8,100 words on Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Palestine, and Chechnya. How many words did al-Zawahiri dedicate to East Turkestan? Four. Contrary to Wayne's assertion, East Turkistan is, at most, a throwaway line to al Qaeda.
Of course, Wayne also notes that al Qaeda "reportedly trained more than 1,000 Uighurs . . . in camps in Afghanistan prior to September 11, 2001" (emphasis added). Of course, "reportedly" means as reported by the Communists themselves. To date, the United States military has captured or been handed less than two dozen Uighurs, and has cleared over half of them (United Press Int'l via Washington Times).
Wayne also slips up on the "riot" of Yining, and while he did get right al Qaeda's hopes for the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, he neglects to mention the numerous sources that make clear ETIM never actually made it to East Turkestan before it crashed and burned (though perhaps he is not aware of them).
Yet, it is in his discussion on Communist China's supposed political actions in the region where the deepest flaw in his theory is revealed (emphasis added):
The central government purged separatist sympathizers from local governments and attempted to remove political dissent from religious worship. At the same time, availability of Uighur-language education was broadened and Beijing sought to expand economic development in Xinjiang, which was viewed as the key to success. Uighurs in Xinjiang repeatedly explained in interviews that these changes made participation in the Chinese state more attractive, despite perceptions that economic opportunities primarily benefited ethnic Chinese.
This is a common pitfall whenever anyone investigates matters in Communist China, and Wayne falls right in. There is no excuse for assuming anyone interviewed in "Xinjiang" - Uighur, Han, or otherwise, is able to speak freely. Rather than accept at face value what he hears, he should be trying to dig for the truth outside of his or his subjects' Communist watchers. Otherwise, all he hears is Communist propaganda regurgitated.
Thus, it suddenly makes sense that Wayne is so willing to detach from reality when talking about how "China has created a path for young Uighurs - one achieved through participation in the system rather than fighting it" despite the reports of nearly every outside analyst and Uighur exiles like Rebiya Kadeer (fifth, second, eleventh, last, second, and fourth items) and, until he was imprisoned by Uzbekistan, Huseyincan Celil.
Thus, one is no longer surprised when Wayne refers to "Zawahiri's call to arms in late December," when in fact, the al Qaeda lieutenant's complete verbage on East Turkestan was hardly a whisper. Also, Wayne's insistence that Communist China's "primary concern is still internal security" is also understandable - no Communist source would dare tell him about the regime's ties to al Qaeda, the Iranian mullahcracy, and Saddam Hussein.
Wayne's credits cite his "extensive field work in Xinjiang." Unfortunately, his column makes clear the "extensive field work" was almost certainly done in cooperation with the Communist regime. Tragically, if my assumption is correct, he probably ended his "field work" as unaware of the truth as he was when he began.
Cross-posted to the China e-Lobby
Posted by D.J. McGuire on February 27, 2007 in International Affairs | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200d8351cf36669e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Even where al Qaeda is concerned, Communist propaganda can trip an analyst up:
Comments
I do not disagree that neither Russia nor China are doing anything to assist the West (quiet the opposite) in the war against Islamism. What concerns me here is the idea of the enemy being limited to al Qaeda.
In a recent poll of Muslims in Britain 37% of Muslims between 16 to 24 would rather live under Sharia than British Common Law, 36% believe Muslims should be killed if they convert to a different religion, 13% admire al-Qaeda and similar terror groups, and 74% believe women should be made to wear veils. These are all British citizens, born, raised and educated in Britain. Anyone still unable to see the problem is wilfully blind, which remains the case of the authorities.
The US is not doing any better although they do not yet have the same number of home-grown jihadists as Europe. Just a few examples will confirm this. Sulejman Talovic entered a shopping centre in Salt Lake City managing to murder 5 and wound 4 unsuspecting infidels before being killed by an off-duty police officer. Yet both the media and law enforcement agencies made light of the fact that he was Muslim and insisted this was not linked to Islam or terrorism. Derrick Shareef, another Muslim male was arrested for plotting to carry out a similar attack at a shopping centre in Illinois just prior to Christmas. He stated that he wanted to murder Jews specifically and Americans in particular for Allah. "I swear by Allah man, I'm down for it too. I'm down for the cause. I'm down to live for the cause and die for the cause, man" were his exact words. Yet the US Federal Prosecutor insisted that Shareef was acting on his own and that he had no outside inspiration for his decision to commit mass murder for Allah. Go figure why the refusal to state the truth.
I am not attempting to defend China or Russia, but unless we get our own house in order I fail to see what is accomplished by the finger pointing.
Posted by: Alain | 2007-02-27 4:02:11 PM
Someday. Something will have to be done. I submit, that some day it will be necessary to resort to drastic measures. By that I mean, the leaders invoke marshal law, and in the interests of national security, deport every man, woman and child who is muslim to the middle east.
I recall seeing a newspaper picture a couple years ago of a City of Edmonton Police officer, with a sawed off shotgun in his hand. A pit bull had run wild, and was attacking people in an Edmonton neighbourhood. The dog was vicious, and out of control. When the police arrived, the dog attacked one of the officers. Unfortunately for the dog, its rage strength, and viciousness were not enough. The police officer discharged his shotgun. It's seemingly unstoppable viciousness was met with appropriate force. Problem solved.
Posted by: DCM | 2007-02-27 4:34:38 PM
I would humbly sumbit that Britain's problem is largely derived from the heavy Pakistani contingent among its Muslim population (Pakistan went through a decade of state-sponsored Wahhabism, and its military - especially the ISI - is heavily Wahhabized). We Americans have been lucky, but with Wahhabist Saudi Arabia having fingerprints on the overwhelming majority of mosques, our luck may run out soon.
Still, my point was that the Uighurs of East Turkestan are hardly the terrorists Wayne makes them out to be - of any stripe. In fact, Uighurs have shown themselves to be one of the most pro-Western Muslim groups on Earth.
Posted by: D.J. McGuire | 2007-02-28 7:15:21 AM
Alain,
They do not state the truth because it is uncomfortable. Much easier for them to sleep at night, when they have addressed the issue and left out the islamofacist rhetoric. Means they will not be targets themselves -- or so they must think.
Yes, it is very much an uncomforable truth.
It is easier to accept the responsibility people have to address polution than it is for people to admit that islamofacism is a threat to all of our freedoms and liberties.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-02-28 1:12:56 PM
Alain,
They do not state the truth because it is uncomfortable. Much easier for them to sleep at night, when they have addressed the issue and left out the islamofacist rhetoric. Means they will not be targets themselves -- or so they must think.
Yes, it is very much an uncomfortable truth.
It is easier to accept the responsibility people have to address polution than it is for people to admit that islamofacism is a threat to all of our freedoms and liberties.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-02-28 1:13:32 PM
Lady right you are. I cannot overlook that this kind of wilful denial of facts and truth by those same authorities who are supposed to be responsible for our safety and security makes them as much a security threat as the jihadists. They must be held accountable for this, for political correctness is no excuse.
Posted by: Alain | 2007-02-28 4:10:55 PM
Why do you have to be such a racist, bigoted a-hole to be a conservative?
I haven't been here in awhile, however I see the rambo and ramboettes are out in full force. Why are you people going to understand there is no such thing as islamofacism? It's the boogey man that you have all made up to continue your racist aggression and pillaging. Of course there are Muslims/Brown People that want to kill westerners.... WHAT HAVE THE WEST BEEN DOING to them FOR at least 100 years?
Why does the west have to interfere in all the affairs of the rest of the world, all the time? Why does Israel not a signatory of the NPT and Iran is, yet it is Iran being scrutinized for a LEGAL nuclear program and Israel is left alone about it's ILLEGAL program. Why does Israel mention UN sanctions when trying to impose it's will on Lebanon, yet Israel has disregarded dozens if not hundreds of UN resolutions against it's actions?
Surely you aren't all complete hypocrites are you?
Posted by: Dale | 2007-02-28 6:25:05 PM
Dale,
"Why does Israel not a signatory of the NPT and Iran is, yet it is Iran being scrutinized for a LEGAL nuclear program and Israel is left alone about it's ILLEGAL program. "
If they are not a signatory then how can their program be illegal?
Also, I would scrutinize my gun less neighbour more carefully if he were threatening to wipe out another neighbour whereas I would not be so fast to scrutinize my other neighbour minding his own business but owns a gun.
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 6:53:30 PM
Oh, I guess you are all hung up on the 'wipe Israel off the map' lie. Guess what. He never said that. He said 'wipe the zionist regime from the pages of history' and he was quoting the late ayatolah. Let me ask you this.... Is the Soviet REGIME still around? How about the South African apartheid regime? Gone? Are all the PEOPLE of Russia and South Africa gone? NO! That is what is meant. There is no desire to wipe out Jews. NONE. It is the regime and philosophy of zionism. The zionist regime needs to go, and there needs to be at least a 2 state solution, or at best, a single country with two peoples. But Racist Zionism won't allow that. Think about it.
And the Israel nuclear program is illegal in the sense that they won't allow inspections and won't abide by world opinion. Maybe illegal is too strong a word, but immoral and hypocritical fit the bill.
And before some right winger says that "Iran is sitting on a sea of oil, they don't need nuclear power' you need to understand that Iran has no refining capacity, and are a net importer of gasoline, and REFINED oil products. Besides, the Iranian oil infrastructure is built and designed to serve the west, not their own people.
Also, Canada is awash in a sea of oil as well, why do we need nuclear power?
Posted by: Dale | 2007-02-28 7:00:36 PM
About the wipe off the map LIE...
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/print.asp?ID=5866
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12790.htm
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2007/260107offthemap.htm
just google it.
Most right wingers won't even bother, because then their macho/rambo circle-jerk might have to come to an end.
Really, really think about this people.. you too Ezra... do you really want to start a world war because you want to appear to be a tough guy? Isn't the bandwagon getting a little old? The whole mob mentality? Smarten up people. Before it is too late.
Posted by: Dale | 2007-02-28 7:06:52 PM
Dale,
"And the Israel nuclear program is illegal in the sense that they won't allow inspections and won't abide by world opinion. Maybe illegal is too strong a word, but immoral and hypocritical fit the bill. "
Whereas Iran is a signatory to the NPT and since the N means NON and the P means proliferation, I guess that means that development is de facto illegal.
"And before some right winger says that "Iran is sitting on a sea of oil, they don't need nuclear power' you need to understand that Iran has no refining capacity, and are a net importer of gasoline, and REFINED oil products. Besides, the Iranian oil infrastructure is built and designed to serve the west, not their own people."
I wouldn't dream of saying it. I sympathize with their plight because I need a AK-47 to go hunting.
"Oh, I guess you are all hung up on the 'wipe Israel off the map' lie. Guess what. He never said that. He said 'wipe the zionist regime from the pages of history' and he was quoting the late ayatolah. Let me ask you this.... Is the Soviet REGIME still around? How about the South African apartheid regime? Gone? Are all the PEOPLE of Russia and South Africa gone? NO! That is what is meant. There is no desire to wipe out Jews. "
I'm so happy you have ESP and can read his mind in spite of all their hostile language AND actions. Phew, I feel better now. Thanks.
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 7:06:54 PM
Dale,
"Most right wingers won't even bother, because then their macho/rambo circle-jerk might have to come to an end. "
Cool, the left thinks we have lots of orgasms.
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 7:08:58 PM
I guess that means that development is de facto illegal.
...
You obviously don't know what the agreement means or is. It means they can't proliferate nuclear WEAPONS but they have every right to produce nuclear POWER. Which is what they say they are doing. Do you know that the ayatollah has issued a fatwa that IRAN is not ALLOWED to produce nuclear weapons for any purpose as it is against islam? Don't hear much about that in the western rags, such as this one.
Posted by: Dale | 2007-02-28 7:14:48 PM
I'm so happy you have ESP and can read his mind in spite of all their hostile language AND actions
...
No I didn't read his mind. I read the proper translations, that weren't twisted by zionist wing nuts like MEMRI and the US neo-cons.
And if you want to talk about hostile actions and language, look at the Knesset.
Posted by: Dale | 2007-02-28 7:17:35 PM
Dale,
"Do you know that the ayatollah has issued a fatwa that IRAN is not ALLOWED to produce nuclear weapons for any purpose as it is against islam? "
Great. I feel better now because we everyone knows that an Ayatollah is an honorable and truthful person.
But wait, wasn't there an imam who issued a fatwa last year saying that the use of nuclear weapons was approved for the jihad?
Does anyone know which has greater mystical powers?
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 7:19:38 PM
Dale,
"No I didn't read his mind. I read the proper translations, that weren't twisted by zionist wing nuts like MEMRI and the US neo-cons."
So, tell me. If you don't speak the persian language, just how do you know you read the proper translations?
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 7:22:06 PM
Does anyone know which has greater mystical powers?
.....
The ayatollah is like the pope to shia muslims. What he says, goes. And iman is like a priest.
Just google it, and check for yourselves. Iranian president never threated to wipe Israel off the map. Not once, not never. But it sure is efficent to keep talking it up. This is all about controlling the middle east and it's resources. Me, personally, I believe it should be up to the people that live there.
Posted by: Dale | 2007-02-28 7:30:01 PM
Dale,
"The ayatollah is like the pope to shia muslims. What he says, goes. And iman is like a priest."
And we know how well all Catholics listen to the pope, don't we? And priests = imans is just begging for a slew of jokes. Do you really want to go there?
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 7:33:04 PM
You see..... Can't even stick to the point and have to go off on a tangent. Yes, MILLIONS of people listen to the popes every word... You obviously aren't one of em, and neither am I.
Why are you people so gun-happy? Do you really, really care if Iran doesn't like Israel, and most of the civilized world is pissed off at Israel (see UN resolutions too numerous to mention), and that Exxon and Mobil can't have access to the CHEAP oil, rather they have to fork over some of their billions in profits for projects other than in the middle east? You see, there still is a helluva lot of oil in the world, it's just that the easily extracted and cheap oil is in the middle east. Thus, more profits for the big oil companies. It's not about energy security at all, it is about profit security.
Posted by: Dale | 2007-02-28 7:40:25 PM
Dale,
"Do you really, really care if Iran doesn't like Israel, and most of the civilized world is pissed off at Israel ..."
Do you really, really care if Israel doesn't like Iran, and most of the civilized world is pissed off at Iran ..."
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 7:43:57 PM
Hey Dale,
How goes your persian language lessons? Are you able to verify the authenticity of the translations yet?
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 7:45:53 PM
Do you really, really care if Israel doesn't like Iran, and most of the civilized world is pissed off at Iran ...
..
yes I do, because with all the rhetoric and lies, ww3 is around the corner. And believe me, the world is pissed at Iran because they know that the neo-cons and Israel want this war, and Iranian rhetoric is just going to facilitate it.
Posted by: Dale | 2007-02-28 8:26:28 PM
Hey Einstein.. It's Farsi, not persian...
So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in farsi:
"Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."
That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word "Regime", pronounced just like the English word with an extra "eh" sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase "rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods" (regime occupying Jerusalem).
So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want "wiped from the map"? The answer is: nothing. That's because the word "map" was never used. The Persian word for map, "nagsheh", is not contained anywhere in his original farsi quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase "wipe out" ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran's President threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", despite never having uttered the words "map", "wipe out" or even "Israel".
THE PROOF:
The full quote translated directly to English:
"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".
Word by word translation:
Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/print.asp?ID=5866
Posted by: Dale | 2007-02-28 8:28:15 PM
Sorry to extend this but-
The pope-priest-iman etc. analogy doesn't work. Islam is missing FREE WILL.
Posted by: lwestin | 2007-02-28 8:31:45 PM
The pope-priest-iman etc. analogy doesn't work. Islam is missing FREE WILL.
...
we are talking about positions or ranks in the 'clergy' or 'whatever the equivalent is in islam'. Nobody is arguing about islam the religion I don't think. And one other question for the wingers.... Why is it so, so relevant that the Arabs 'recognize' Israel before we will give them the time of day.... Does China recognize Taiwan?
Posted by: Dale | 2007-02-28 8:36:08 PM
Dale,
Wonderful. Thanks. Please now translate the part where they never said they were "enriching uranian" but instead were "exploring inner space" or something like that.
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 8:37:04 PM
Dale,
"The pope-priest-iman etc. analogy doesn't work. Islam is missing FREE WILL. "
That's what we're afraid of.
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 8:38:33 PM
They DID say they were enriching uranium. They aren't hiding anything. Why, that is what you do when you want nuclear power now isn't it. They are FULLY IN THEIR RIGHT to enrich uranium. Why, they signed the NPT, which says exactly that.
Again, check your facts. Don't just listen to right wing war mongers, think about it if it was your family or friends that were on the other end of the gun barrel, as it may well be sometime if these wingnut neocon/zionists get their way.
Posted by: Dale | 2007-02-28 8:39:45 PM
"Again, check your facts. Don't just listen to right wing war mongers, think about it if it was your family or friends that were on the other end of the gun barrel, as it may well be sometime if these wingnut neocon/zionists get their way."
Yes, I often wonder what it would be like to be in a London or Madrid Subway, World Trade Tower A and B, or the Bali nightclub just before I buy it. Dang those evil neocon/zionists.
I often wonder why we complain about some countries meddling in the affairs of other countries yet don't ask why Iran meddles in the dispute between the Palis and the Israelis.
I often wonder what those innocent people felt moments before dieing because Hezbollah randomly fired Iranian rockets on civilians in Israel.
...
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 8:45:38 PM
Dale,
They DID say they were enriching uranium. They aren't hiding anything. "
Then it should make it easy to inspect and if necessary target for destruction. Thx for the tip.
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 8:49:12 PM
Dale,
"Why is it so, so relevant that the Arabs 'recognize' Israel before we will give them the time of day.... Does China recognize Taiwan?"
Because quite simply, China wants Taiwan under its thumb. It does not desire the whole sale slaughter of their brothers and sisters.
The Arabs, on the other hand, want the destruction of the Jews.
I'm sorry you don't understand the difference between conquest and genocide.
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 9:01:10 PM
Dale
"The full quote translated directly to English:"
Now that you are completely fluent in English/Farsi translations, you can start translating many of our texts/novels into Farsi. I understand that there is a shortage in this area. Think of the money you'll make.
You can start with "How to make friends and influence people"
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-02-28 9:20:31 PM
Dale is a prime example what the problem to which I referred at the start. Perhaps these people need to return to Islamic countries where they can enjoy the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion according to Islamism.
Posted by: Alain | 2007-03-01 10:33:15 AM
Many of your "facts" and "fact-checks" are wrong or misleading, and your assumption of Wayne's fieldwork is similarly incorrect.
Sorry for some inconvenient truths...
Posted by: anon | 2007-03-01 10:57:44 AM
Whose facts and fact-checks anon and what inconvenient truths?
Posted by: Alain | 2007-03-01 6:10:58 PM
Dale,
The recognition of the right to exist is not on the table, for discussion, according to The State of Israel, the same as you right to be considered a person is not a pretext for discussion in this forum.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-03-02 9:22:05 AM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=5Bsgnjfgvi8
http://youtube.com/watch?v=GYR9E8IsJ2w
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ys9ba6p62hg
If you watch the aforementioned documentary, you will see one of the individuals who is preaching in the following.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=kfdEa9CfALo
Behind the preacher aka imam, is the flag of the Caliphat, the ultimate symbol of islamofacism.
And this indidual also preached against the infidel kuffars. And who are the kuffars?
You have to see the documentary, but it includes all who are not obeservant muslims.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-03-02 10:31:10 AM
The fellow in the last video is the same one in the first video, who said that the "summit of islam is jihad".
Posted by: Lady | 2007-03-02 10:41:37 AM
And what is Jihad?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=wgd3yWAz82g&mode=related&search=
In the aforementioned video, you can see EXACTLY what islamofacism IS!
Posted by: Lady | 2007-03-02 10:50:54 AM
For more information, watch the series on youtube.com of Obsession Radical Islam's war against the west.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-03-02 10:57:25 AM
THIS IS ISLAMOFACISM!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=X5CpDqBNOtM&mode=related&search=
Posted by: Lady | 2007-03-02 11:04:37 AM
You are falsely accusing Wayne of working with the Chinese regime, an odd accusation to make against someone in the US DEFENSE ESTABLISHMENT. And this is simply untrue.
LYING about someone who you don't know because you hate China is horrible. Your hatred of China is spilling over, and I can't imagine it is legal to slander people, let alone those working for the US MILITARY to fight al Qaeda!!!
Way to support the troops, DJ.
Posted by: A. | 2007-03-03 7:59:58 AM
Dale: "regime occupying Jerusalem", is the phrase you used. That means the Jews...only a completely blind lefty cannot see that the Muzzies just want the Jews out of Jerusalem, so their half baked claims on it can be realized.
Posted by: MarkAlta | 2007-03-03 10:50:05 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.