Ballots, Bullets And Suicide Bombers

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Jonah Mc @ 01/07/2009 1:06:25 PM

    Drew - of course, ideology was also part of it; I just wanted to point out that Palestinian logic & arguments were quite different when they thought they had military might on their side.

    Iconoblaster - THEIR country? See, what people don't know is that there was no such thing as a Palestinian identity or a Palestinian nation before Israel came along. Jews and Arabs both lived in the territory....but it's not as if there ever was some pre-existing Palestinian people with a state, and suddenly the Jews returned to abritrarily rob them and squat on it. The notion of Palestinian identity is as recent and artificial a construct as Israel (or the rest of the Middle East, for that matter).

    Technically, many of these Arabs are they're the exact same people. The notion of being Jordanian, for instance, didn't even exist until the Brits decided to artificially and arbitrarily draw up some borders in the sand in the very recent past (twentieth century), but the people who lived there were just travelling Arab nomads with no national union or common banner. These are same Arabs as, say, the Palestinians or the Iraqis. The national differences were all artificially drawn, most of these countries were pulled out of a British *** (for example, to reward a powerful British ally, sherif Hussein of Hejaz, one of his sons was given Jordan and the other Iraq, neither of which existed as such before then). Why do you think the geographic lines in the middle east are mostly so straight and pretty, so geometrical? So if this is true for people like the Jordanians, the Palestinians didn't even begin to form such unifying notions until even after them! They were always there, mingled together with the Jews of the land, but neither of them ever had a sole government or fully legitimate national claim to the land....they were just the tribes and peoples living under the British occupied territories. So stop painting a portrait of how the "Palestinian people" had this land that belonged to them and they were suddenly occupied out of nowhere. There was no such thing as the Palestinian people and there was never a Palestinian state, in the same way that an Israeli state is also an artifice. Bottom line: the Palestinians should have accepted the split UN resolution...hell, they would have had the very things they're clamoring for now! Instead, we've gotten wanton bloodshed and extremism on *both* sides.

    • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 01/07/2009 1:35:07 PM

      "The notion of being Jordanian, for instance, didn't even exist until the Brits decided to artificially and arbitrarily draw up some borders in the sand in the very recent past (twentieth century)"

      We're good for that.

  • Posted By: Trooper101st @ 01/07/2009 1:03:13 PM

    Looks like Dubya's strategy blew up in his face. The arabs will NEVER acknowledge Israel's right to exist, and Hamas was elected and that speaks volumns. Iraq will blow up again, and Iran will have played thier hand masterfully. Good going Dub, you DESTABILIZED the whole region. There will be a wider war, one where thousands will die. I would be very careful about wat armaments we send to Maliki's army. He could turn them on the Kurds, who have been our best ally in Iraq. Wat a mess.

  • Posted By: FATJOEY @ 01/07/2009 7:23:18 AM

    funny,when you totally bring an enemy too its knees FIANLLY,maybe things will change for the better?a defeated people can still turn out like JAPAN!

    • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 01/07/2009 9:10:57 AM

      And that took, what, 4 years? How long have you been in Iraq?

      • Posted By: FATJOEY @ 01/07/2009 9:31:16 AM

        I'M TALKING ABOUT THE JEWS AND THE PALS MORON

        • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 01/07/2009 12:23:09 PM

          The Jews and Palestinians are Japanese? Or are you stating that 60 years is less than 4 years?

          Please be more clear.

  • Posted By: Jonah Mc @ 01/07/2009 11:56:53 AM

    Drew - it isn't simply that the Palestinians rejected the UN resolution, which included a divided Jeruslaem, because of a primitive ideology. They rejected it largely because they thought they had the upper hand when they really didn't.

    The Palestinian people are by and large victims of their own leadership and the now-conveniently outraged Arab states. After the 1948 UN partition (not 1967, that was the 6 day war, Drew) , the Palestinians decided to go the whole hog because they felt potently backed by the armies of Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, etc. Now these are the days of Pan Arabism, so the other nations were ostensibly going to liberate the lands for their Palestinian brothers. Instead, the Middle Eastern powers kept the lands gained for themselves, territories that under the UN partition should have been for the Palestinians. So, when the moment of truth came, the Arab nations betrayed the very Palestinians they supposedly sought to defend: Jordan gobbled up the West Bank (and half of Jersualem), Syria selfishly kept the Golan Heights, Egypt took ownership of the Gaza Strip, etc. And yet, their calls for help of the poor, wretched refugees never ceased when the rhetoric made it convenient. Again, as I mentioned in a previous post, even the Arab states don't give a toss about the Palestinians, especially after the way the Palestinians nearly destroyed Jordan from the inside.

    • Posted By: Iconoblaster @ 01/07/2009 12:18:13 PM

      The Palestinians rejected the UN proposal because it was a "compromise" under which they were to be obliged to surrender half of THEIR country to foreign immigrants, whose stated intention was to establish a specifically religious state that would exclude or discriminate against most of the indigenous people (and indeed, had already begun doing so through racist practices of exclusion of Arabs from lands it obtained). From the Arab perspective, this was clear enough, and it would be clear to anyone subjected to similar indignities: the Palestinians were asked to "compromise" with an armed burglar who had broken into their home by giving half of the house to him. Who would agree to such a thing?

      • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 01/07/2009 12:22:01 PM

        And look how well that's worked out for them.

  • Posted By: DrewCAENG @ 01/07/2009 12:08:58 PM

    Thanks Jonah well said. (I actually did mean to type 1948) I think you know your history my friend, but dont you think that ideology may have something do to with it as well? Calling for the destruction of Isreal in my opinion is a primitive ideology that prevents any kind or modern day negotiation, and it is clear from Hamas tactics and from what has happened so far that Gaza civilian deaths actually helps their cause, Kind of like how 9/11 "helped" Bush gain support for invading Iraq. Regardless of how terrible that sounds.

  • Posted By: Iconoblaster @ 01/07/2009 12:07:16 PM

    "If anything happens, then the world will know that Syria has committed another crime," said Hariri. On just such certainty, the success of false flag operations must depend. If it is anticipated, publically, that only Syria can be to blame for some prospective crime or clandestine act, this is motivation for anyone who wants to discredit Syria to see that crime or clandestine act committed. This is especially true in factional politics where almost every important political figure has several, perhaps dozens, of enemies who might want them dead, (not to mention "friends" who might be willing to make such a 'sacrifice' to further their own ambitions in some way). Syria was AN obvious suspect for the murder of Rafik Hariri, but not the only one... I was suspicious of the absolute certainty of some of those immediately and loudly blaming Syria back then (in part because diminishing Syria in any way served other interests of those levelling the blame... American Neocons, Lebanese opposition factions, Israeli Likudniks and other right wing partisans). Mr. Hariri the younger, perhaps, should be more cautious about naming his prospective murderer in public, lest some different and unnamed miscreant exploit the opportunity to commit a crime for which someone else will be blamed.

  • Posted By: Jonah Mc @ 01/07/2009 11:51:12 AM

    Factsearcher - are you seriously suggesting Jordanian rule of Palestinians? Why would you even think of that as a viable alternative after the disastrous consequences that took place last time? Don't you remember? It will never happen and was far from the "tolerable" situation you describe.

    Jordan let the Palestinians in, granting them citizenship, hospitality, and comforts. The consequence, of course, was the horrendously bloody Jordanian civil war - the Palestinians had set up a de facto state-within-a-state that threatened to topple the monarchy, and indeed, take over Jordan like a virus. So they were expelled by the sword. The consequences were horrendous. See, even the Arab states don't want the Palestinians anywhere near them because they've seen what a destructive effect it has....they don't give a shít, except when it's time to give rousing speeches.

  • Posted By: DrewCAENG @ 01/07/2009 11:47:12 AM

    In 1967 the UN proposed dividing Palestine into two states of eqaul resources one Arab, one jewish and Jerusalem as an international city or independent. The Jews accepted this idea the Arabs rejected it. Why? Because their primitive ideology wont allow them to live with people of other religions. They cant even get along themselves, hence why no other states took any Palestinians in. Pathetic

  • Posted By: sieg6529 @ 01/07/2009 10:53:44 AM

    This is why the USA should just stay far away from middle eastern conflicts. The parties involved with 9/11 should have been pursued as the criminals they were/are, rather than stoking the fires of the middle east with war.

  • Posted By: factsearcher @ 01/07/2009 10:42:28 AM

    Let's review what we know hasn't worked and cannot work:

    *Israeli control. Neither side wishes to continue the situation that began in 1967, when the Israel Defense Forces intervenedwith a population that is religiously, culturally, economically, and politically different and hostile.
    *A Palestinian state. The 1993 Oslo Accords began this process but a toxic brew of anarchy, ideological extremism, antisemitism, jihadism, and warlordism led to complete Palestinian failure.
    *A binational state: Given the two populations' mutual antipathy, the prospect of a combined Israel-Palestine (what Muammar al-Qaddafi calls "Israstine") is as absurd as it seems.

    Excluding these three prospects leaves only one practical approach, that which worked tolerably well in the period 1948-67:

    *****Shared Jordanian-Egyptian rule: Amman rules the West Bank and Cairo runs Gaza.*****

    The Jordanian government, which enthusiastically annexed the West Bank in 1950 and abandoned its claims only under duress in 1988, shows signs of wanting to return.
    Despairing of self-rule, some Palestinians welcome the Jordanian option. An unnamed senior PA official told Diker and Inbari that that a form of federation or confederation with Jordan offers "the only reasonable, stable, long-term solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict." Hanna Seniora opined that "The current weakened prospects for a two-state solution forces us to revisit the possibility of a confederation with Jordan." The New York Times'''' Hassan M. Fattah quotes a Palestinian in Jordan: "Everything has been ruined for us -- we''''ve been fighting for 60 years and nothing is left. It would be better if Jordan ran things in Palestine, if King Abdullah could take control of the West Bank."

    First, Egyptians overwhelmingly want a strong tie to Gaza; Hamas concurs; and Israeli leaders sometimes agree.
    Secondly, Gaza is arguably more a part of Egypt than of "Palestine." During most of the Islamic period, it was either controlled by Cairo or part of Egypt administratively. Gazan colloquial Arabic is identical to what Egyptians living in Sinai speak. Economically, Gaza has most connections to Egypt. Hamas itself derives from the Muslim Brethren, an Egyptian organization. Is it time to think of Gazans as Egyptians

  • Posted By: jirvin @ 01/07/2009 9:40:59 AM

    The Facts about Israel???s War on Gaza
    January 1, 2009

    It is crucial that one has her/his facts straight about Israel???s war on Gaza. What events brought about this dreadful situation? What needs to be done to make it stop? These questions will be answered in the content of this article, using concrete facts from a variety of news sources.

    Let???s first investigate the recent cease-fire between Israel and Hamas. The cease-fire began in June 2008. The terms were as follows:

    1. Israel would drastically reduce its military blockade of Gaza.
    2. Israel would halt all military incursions into Gaza.
    3. Hamas would halt all rocket attacks into Israel.

    From the outset of the cease-fire, Israel did little to ease its military blockade. As a result, Gazans continued to suffer from a lack of food, fuel, financial aid, electricity, clean water, medical supplies, and more. This has been, inarguably, an attack on innocent Palestinian civilians.

    ??? Gaza faces a humanitarian "catastrophe" if Israel continues to prevent aid reaching the territory by blocking crossing points, the head of the main UN aid agency for the Palestinians said on Friday??? Israel had restricted goods into Gaza despite the truce, which calls on militants to halt rocket attacks in return for Israel easing its embargo on the territory??? Israel also held up deliveries of European Union-funded fuel for the power plant, which generates about a third of the electricity consumed by Gazans... Ailments associated with insufficient food were surfacing among the impoverished coastal strip's 1.5 million population, including growing malnutrition.
    --Haaretz Israel News, Nov. 21, 2008 [1]

    ??? A former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, has told the BBC she was taken aback by the "terrible" conditions in Gaza on a recent visit. Mrs Robinson said it was "almost unbelievable" that the world did not care about what she called "a shocking violation of so many human rights"??? Israel tightened a blockade on Gaza after Hamas took control there in 2007??? "Their whole civilisation has been destroyed, I'm not exaggerating," said Mrs Robinson???Israel says the blockade, under which it has allowed little more than basic humanitarian aid into Gaza, is needed to isolate the militant group and stop it and other militants from firing rockets into Israel. Israel came to a truce with Palestinian groups in June this year, but Mrs Robinson said this had had little effect on people's lives and "just brought a bitter taste in the mouth".
    --BBC News, Nov. 4, 2008 [2]

  • Posted By: jirvin @ 01/07/2009 9:40:06 AM


    ??? International aid agencies, including the International Committee of the Red Cross, have said virtually no medical supplies were reaching Gaza.
    --Haaretz Israel News, Nov. 9, 2008 [14]

    ??? The UN has no more food to distribute in the Gaza Strip, the head of relief efforts in the area has warned. John Ging said handouts for 750,000 Gazans would have to be suspended until Saturday at the earliest, and called Gaza's economic situation "a disaster". Israel earlier denied entry to a convoy carrying humanitarian supplies??? The United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) distributes emergency aid to about half of Gaza's 1.5m population. "We have run out [of food aid] this evening," said Mr Ging, UNRWA's senior official in Gaza. "Unless the crossing points open... we won't be able to get that food into Gaza," he told Reuters news agency??? Also on Thursday, Israel refused permission for a group of senior European diplomats to visit the coastal enclave. It has also prevented journalists, including those from the BBC, from entering the territory.
    --BBC News, Nov. 13, 2008 [4]

    ??? Since June 2007, Israel has allowed little more than basic humanitarian aid to enter the Gaza Strip. Many there hoped that policy would change, five months ago, when Hamas and Israel agreed to a truce. But while there were some increases in the amount of aid allowed in, Israel's strict restrictions on the movement of goods and people into and out of Gaza largely remained??? Serious fuel shortages have led to widespread power cuts across Gaza City. That, in turn, has caused problems in pumping water to homes, and sewage to treatment plants. Israel is preventing many aid workers, and all journalists from entering Gaza too??? "I never thought we would see days like this," says Monther Shublak, head of Gaza's water authority. "The water system was severely stretched even before this crisis, but now, things are much worse. For the last four days, around 40% of people in Gaza City have had no access to running water in their homes at all."??? "But we are putting all of our resources into sewage pumping. The health consequences of that system totally failing are too worrying to think about, but it could happen unless things change."
    --BBC News, Nov. 20, 2008 [5]

  • Posted By: jirvin @ 01/07/2009 9:37:04 AM

    The Israeli government maintained that the blockade was a necessary measure in order to stop rocket attacks. However, Hamas had ceased launching rockets into Israel during the cease-fire and even arrested those of militant groups who did fire a handful of rockets.

    ??? Hamas arrested three Palestinians who fired rockets into Israel from the Gaza Strip on Thursday, in the first such detentions since the Islamist group and Israel agreed a truce last month, a militant faction said. The Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades??? said Hamas men pursued two of its members after the attack into the Jabaliya refugee camp. No one was hurt after two rockets hit southern Israel??? The ceasefire deal calls on Hamas to prevent cross-border rocket fire and attacks from the Gaza Strip and for Israel to halt its raids and ease an economic blockade??? Israel tightened restrictions on the passage of people and goods to and from the impoverished territory after Hamas seized control of it a year ago. United Nations officials said Gaza's goods crossings were still shut rather often despite the agreement. "There is not enough fuel, not enough food, there is not enough of anything," John Ging, an official with the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) that aids refugees, said in Gaza.
    --Globe and Mail Canadian News, July 10, 2008 [21]

    Despite the intense blockade against Gazan civilians, the cease-fire held until November 4, 2008. On that date, the Israeli military made an incursion into Gaza and killed six Palestinians. The Israeli government sought to justify these actions, saying that they suspected these Palestinians of plotting to kidnap Israeli soldiers. Palestinian fighters responded to the attack by launching rockets into Israel. Thus began the unraveling of the cease-fire.

    ??? At least six Hamas militants have been killed after Israel's first incursion into the Gaza Strip since June's truce. Israel said its troops had uncovered a tunnel along central Gaza's frontier which had been dug by militants intending to abduct Israeli soldiers. Clashes ensued when troops were sent to thwart the threat, Israel said. One militant died, Palestinian reports say. A subsequent Israeli air strike on Hamas positions in southern Gaza killed at least five fighters, medics said. An Israeli army spokeswoman said the air strike targeted militants who had fired mortars at Israeli forces... Tuesday evening's fighting broke out after Israeli tanks and a bulldozer moved 250m into the central part of the coastal enclave, backed by military aircraft, says the BBC's Aleem Maqbool in Ramallah. Residents of central Gaza's el-Bureij refugee camp said a missile fired from an unmanned Israeli drone flying over the area injured another three Hamas gunmen. A truce between the two sides had held since it was declared on 19 June. Israel said the raid was not a violation of the ceasefire, but rather a legitimate step to remove an immediate threat.
    --BBC News, Nov. 5, 2008 [7]

  • Posted By: FATJOEY @ 01/07/2009 9:29:16 AM

    hamas isn't there to govern,they're there to ATTACK ISREAL!

  • Posted By: Eric the sceptic @ 01/07/2009 9:06:56 AM

    Informative, detailed, and insightful glimpse into tomorrow's probable headlines. Thank you for posting this primer on the perils and possibilities of democracy inside Lebanon, Iran, Israel, and Gaza.

  • Posted By: Eric the sceptic @ 01/07/2009 9:05:17 AM

    Informative, insightful, and detailed primer on the confusing politics inside Lebanon, Gaza, Israel, and Iran. Thanks for sharing!

  • Posted By: SinCityScott @ 01/07/2009 1:23:31 AM

    Israel is without question the most amazing, the most admirable country the world has ever seen. Despite its only being a little more than fifty years old, despite a population of just over five million, despite having to be at war footing for almost its entire life, despite having absorbed more immigrants in relation to its population that any country in history, its accomplishments in almost any area of human activity are unsurpassed.

    Have a look at the partial list of accomplishments that follows and be proud to be a fellow-Jew or even more if you have made any contribution at all ??? even if only by contributing financially to organizations that support Israel, such as FLAME. And consider what Israel could have accomplished and could still accomplish if its enemies would not single-mindedly wish to destroy it and if Israel could apply all of its genius to peaceful pursuits.
    You can find this amazing PARTIAL LIST! at http://www.factsandlogic.org/outstanding_accomp.html

    • Posted By: FATJOEY @ 01/07/2009 7:26:02 AM

      jews are civilized,if only the arabs would be?

  • Posted By: Jonah Mc @ 01/06/2009 10:24:08 PM

    Part of the problem we Americans have is that we're the shadowy mirror image of our Islamic enemies (though most us don't realize it because of our collective insularity and fanatic dogmas). They want to impose their culture on others through violence, and so do we. The US has tried to artificially impose democracy on cultures that have no business being democracies. Their value system and world view are so radically different from ours, yet we are so arrogant as to believe we can simply make them "democratic" when such systems haven't grown organically within their own societies.

    So the results are disastrous. And what happens when we don't like the result of the democracies we've imposed? Why, that's when we decry and attack them because they've democratically elected our enemies (whoops!). Much as Hamas's acts of violence are deplorable to you & me, Palestinians love them because Hamas provides medical care through hospitals, schools, food, covers their every need. Plus, Hamas provides their own brand of brainwashing Kool Aid, just like the kind of patriotic garbage about "our troops" and "freedom isn't free" that we sip at home, just at the other end of the spectrum.

    Look at Saddam - yes, an all round bad guy and we kept complaining about how he gassed those poor Kurds. Well, during the enlightened Clinton years, we provided Turkey with the support and 80% of the weaponry to slaughter Kurds and burn down 3,500 villages. Where was the American outcry then? Nowhere, because we're conveniently selective. Let's face it, the US is completely amoral. The country's actions are a function of perceived self-interest: whether it has to do with propping up Somoza, Duvalier, Pinochet, or Stroessner, etc, there is more innocent blood on US hands than you could ever wash off. There are many examples: murderous pecadillos in Sudan, attacking soft targets (civilians) in Nicaragua, etc. And on and on. We're as blasé about being violent & unfair as anyone else, and nothing like the bastion of enlightenment we pretend to be.

    The concept of inherent American goodness is ingrained from an early age and thus understandably lapped up by the masses. But even examples of benevolence primarily serve national self-interest: for instance, the Marshall Plan was because we could not allow a weakened Germany to sit next to the Iron Curtain, and much of foreign aid is because creating free-ridership and other benefits is necessary for the hegemon's stability, even though there is a cost to be paid.

    Are we any better than any of these other cultures? Of course not, but hey, at least we've got shopping malls, Carl's Jr. burgers, access to masturbatory internet material, and Dr. House on the telly! We're as nonchalant about bloodshed as they are and guilty of the same kind of black-and-white extremism, we just have shiny, pretty things that mask our true nature and help prop up misguided notions of our own n

    • Posted By: FATJOEY @ 01/07/2009 7:21:20 AM

      yeah but sometimes like JAPAN its in their best FUTURE interests,muslims are just too stupid to understand that

  • Posted By: gmacarol @ 01/06/2009 10:05:25 PM

    Actually, you are wrong. For example, there was a thriving multi-million dollar greenhouse propagation business. Several wealthy Israelis gave millions to the palestinians to maintain and use the greenhouses-they were destroyed by the spoiloed brat Palestiniians. And that's what they are brats who enjoy death and destruction as they havefor the last 2500 years.

    • Posted By: Greg the Third @ 01/07/2009 1:01:39 AM

      It may be too late for Palestinians to accept aid from Israel due to all of the conflicts over such a long time. Doing so would be a move towards peace and would say something, but there has not really been a serious offer to rebuild after these incursions. If Israel can't find the humanity within itself to make the offer on human grounds, then Israel should make the offer at least for tactical reasons since if it gets rejected it looks Hamas and Hizboallah look bad. To take the strategic intelligence theme further, it looks like Hamas and Hizboallah are playing this PR game well and it looks like Israel has yet to take the field. Since we know that Hizboallah and extremist have won favor by aiding the poor in need, does it not make sense to counter a successful operation with a better one or at least compete with it? Israel can offer the air through its own shadowy proxies and use them as a means of gaining influence. I am sure the British Empire of old as masters of "divide and conquer" would have used such tactics effectively. Hizboallah does not even hide thefact that humanitarian relief gains influence even when it is having dramatic consequences in Lebanon.

    • Posted By: sanctuaryvb @ 01/06/2009 10:12:00 PM

      A 'greenhouse' is hardly to be considered a 'wonderful infrastructure' Give me a break.

  • Posted By: SinCityScott @ 01/07/2009 12:30:26 AM

    Once again "sanctuaryvb"; my best and most sincere guess as to why you feel that the Israeli people have no right to attempt to stop the thousands of missiles fired into it's cities by Hamas...and the reason you don't even believe Israel has a right the tiny piece of land they call their homeland and the reason you attempt to pretend in broad daylight that Palestinians are "displaced" (show me Palestine on the map?!) is that you're a racist. Plain and simple. The rest of your diatribe is a dimwitted sales-job. Australia for example was a prison continent for the worst prisoners of the British crown.
    There doesn't need to be an "argument" as you say for Israel to allowed to exist- you racist. It's like asking why any country should be allowed to exist, because it already does. What country would you choose next to murder its inhabitants and exile those that created, built it, governed it and nourished it into one of the worlds smallest but greatest Democracies? C'mon Jew-hater, it's your choice- pick one. You won't, because it's only a Jewish nation the inspires your rage and thinly veiled, racist ideals.
    This conversation is so putrid it's unheard of to examine whether a country filled w/ cities, churches, temples, shopping centers, restaurants, hospitals, Universities and myriad people living together in peace should allowed to exist and yet here's "sanctuaryvb" espousing just that.
    Don't attempt some twisted logic to rationalize your hate. Hell America was founded at the Boston Tea Party where a bunch of 'terrorists' murdered, stole and burned boats full of British Tea to begin a revolution...You're right on one count "Americans" are not indigenous to our land, and the only true Americans (although Canadians may argue) are the American Indians, the rest of us are 'mutts' or immigrants.
    Using a half-baked sales pitch built upon slick illogical bridges to nowhere to sell your brand of genocide says an awful lot about the sickness of your psyche.
    Israel is btw an awesome country: amidst millions of miles of hateful fundamentalism, tyranny, despotism, dictatorships lies a tiny sliver of a country that fought to become a Democracy that keeps its people safe and free and anyone including Americans, Arabs etc...may live there if they are law-biding citizens.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse