| Submit your comments on this article | |||
| Africa: East | |||
| Wahhabism in Somaliland | |||
| 2003-12-13 | |||
On November 21, 2003, Somali journalist Bashir Goth wrote an extensive article detailing how Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi Islam has corrupted the Islam of his native Somalia. The following are excerpts from Goth's article, which appeared in the Addis Tribune: Recently, I came across news reports on the activities of a group of clerics calling themselves 'the Authority for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice' trying to impose draconian moral codes on Somaliland citizens
I cannot sit back and watch these people humiliate our women, destroy our beautiful culture, hijack our religion, and denigrate the reputation of our country worldwide...
For these fanatics, the breast of the countryside mother who suckles her baby while selling milk in the streets of Hargeisa is a sin, not motherhood as many of our ordinary souls would see it. It is this obsession with sex, this concept of viewing women only as an object of sex, created for man's libido relief, that turned women's body into a thing of shame
If we let them have their way, these prophets of 'purity' would soon be on a mission to destroy what has remained of our culture. The melodious voices of
of our women singers we will be history. The cassettes of their songs will be burned in the streets. Just remember Taliban. They want to edit, re-write and censor the treasures of Somali oral literature. Future generations will not be able to enjoy our beautiful folk dancesâ€Å
It is time to tell these sick men that the bare breast of the woman suckling her child is not about pornography, but about motherhood. The girls and boys sitting next to each other in class are not indulging in a sex orgy, you demented paranoiacs, but enjoying a healthy educational environment. The girl walking in the street without a headcover and wearing a big smile is not about flirting; it is about beauty of life. The woman holding a lively conversation with a male friend in a coffee house or a shopping mall is not about illicit affairs; it is about a much-needed human relationship and a healthy exchange of intellectual ideas. The woman wearing the traditional diric and hagoog and regally strolling in the street is not about indecency but about culture. The nightingale voices of our female singers are not about eroticism, you philistines, but about art, music and enjoyment of one of God's marvelous gifts
" It is time we have to speak out. If we don't do it today, we won't be able to do it tomorrow. Because there will be no tomorrow as our country descends into 7th century Arabia.
| |||
| Posted by:Fred Pruitt |
| #25 It may be a bit late to come back the next day. Sorry. But if .com is still around, I can be more specific about the reasons for pause and planning before execution of his scheme. We do have to share this world with the rest of its inhabitants, and the time for such high-handed appropriations is past. We could do it, certainly, but that doesn't mean we should--until the groundwork is laid. Stabilizing Iraq has to be the top priority now. Iraqi oil can be used to squeeze profits for the Saudis, Iranians, and other hostile states like Venezuela. The Russians won't like it, either, which is just fine. When the Shias of Iraq start to enjoy the benefits of self-government, pressures will build in other Shia populations around the region. This is the wedge with which we can break Islamism. In time, we may use force against the Wahabbis, but only for the benfit of the local population. With the Iraq precedent in place, a secular republic could be established in the eastern provinces. The world will not permit America simply to take and keep the oil. We would raise too great a counterforce, if we took your direct approach. I don't mean an Arab army would march into Washington. I mean that universal hostility would further undermine our own Republic. To avoid this fate, we must be patient and cunning. These traits are not natural for Americans, but the current Administration seems to possess them, and it will almost certainly have five years to proceed. This won't be easy. But your notion would spell ruin for everyone. |
| Posted by: Alan Sullivan 2003-12-14 2:19:15 PM |
| #24 Not going to happen, and here's why: it's one of the few things the US could do that would INSTANTLY unite Europe, Russia, China and much of the 3rd world against us." Your point? Europe is entirely dependant on Mid East Oil (far more than the US). Russia is entirely dependant on US investment, and China is dependant on Wal-Mart. The way things are going, it is entirely possible that SA will implode before we need to do anything. I believe we need to deal with a pre-nuclear Iran as a first priority. |
| Posted by: john 2003-12-13 7:33:46 PM |
| #23 OK, as long as I can use German pills PLUS a hammer. Although I wouldn't bank on the Shiites. Far more effective to have Al Qaeda have its way with finishing off the House of Saud and then "rescue" the country. With Shiite help if need be. If the 3rd World had a clear moment of thinking they'd realize that the Arabs have killed millions by using oil as a weapon. The 1st world survived the oil shock with economic trouble and rising unemployment. But few studies are published about what the oil embargo of 1973 and the following OPEC blackmailing did to the emerging economies of Africa and elsewhere. I challenge anyone to prove to me that this didn't cost millions of African lives (hunger and diseases). Funny enough, they prefer it to blame on the West. The whole plan of .com isn't that far fetched anyway. I bet that the Pentagon has this worked out already. Sadly it will probably only happen when Al Qaeda manages to strike us with WMD. When this happens, you bet that ALL roads will lead to Riyad. Until then the PC part of the world will prefer to leave the oil in the hands of debauched fanatic terrorist financing Wahhabis than let the "greedy" US get its hands on it. Not even for the sake of all mankind. |
| Posted by: True German Ally 2003-12-13 7:21:24 PM |
| #22 "Not going to happen, and here's why: it's one of the few things the US could do that would INSTANTLY unite Europe, Russia, China and much of the 3rd world against us." Ah. And they're not now. *snicker* Why so skeered? You're in the Army of Steve! A complicated subterfuge to almost get to the same place, but not really. Sigh. Okay, keep 'em coming! Rip, shred, tear, spindle, fold, and mutilate! ;-) |
| Posted by: .com 2003-12-13 6:57:24 PM |
| #21 Love the commentary, and love the fact that .com has the stones to argue something that would be an instant conversation-stopper at 99% of the cocktail parties I'm required to attend at the university. But it ain't going to happen. I say that as someone who is intrigued by the idea. Put the oilfields of the "New East Arabia Democratic Trust" under practical US control with an international (NOT U.N.) board formed by the coalition of the willing. Make sure the annual report is proper. Pump the oil. Put liens on all the House of Saud money everyone we can find it -- might not work but it will encumber the French and Swiss. Eastern Arabian citizens who can live with this idea get 50 years to build a democratic, stable society, after which they can petition the international board for a transition to independence (say over another 10 - 20 years). In 70 years we might not NEED oil. Not going to happen, and here's why: it's one of the few things the US could do that would INSTANTLY unite Europe, Russia, China and much of the 3rd world against us. The reason is simple -- unlike us Rantburgers, they won't take the two minutes it takes to think this through. C'mon, they're leftists, they don't think all that much, they just recite. The political dimension would be staggering. Even if Americans (who by and large rightly consider themselves the "good guys" in any fight) would forgive GWB for a lightning seizure of eastern Arabia, most of the rest of the 1st world never would. The French would be insane, not that we'd notice. Russia could be provoked into making nuclear threats (all they have left given what the Chechers have shown us about their army) and that wouldn't be good. We wouldn't get 5 votes in the UN, not even Micronesia's. Great idea in theory, but we can't do it ourselves. We have to let the oppressed Shi'a citizens of eastern Arabia raise their social consciousness to the point where they rebel. When they do, THANK GOODNESS the US will just happen to be in the neighborhood with air cover, a naval strike force, special ops guys all over the place and a brigade of Marines. We're there to cool off the situation, of course. Then we could have an international commission (NOT the UN) take, oh, 5 years or so to decide that the eastern Arabians have a point and ought to have their own democratic, secular, Western-oriented state with mutual defense treaties with the US and UK. Eventually. And in the meantime an international trust would keep an eye on things. .com, buddy, there's more than one way to skin a cat. You be the chief Stevestradamus takes point. I love it when a plan comes together. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2003-12-13 6:02:24 PM |
| #20 The Saudis are a weird mix of arrogance and paranoia. Surprise is the key. If there was any obvious pre-existing plans for sabotage, I'd know about them because I know 50 engr's who travel the facilities - and that's fresh within the last 7 months since I left and came to Thailand. But I DO have a little surprise for you, if interested... There ARE some facilities of dimension and function that 99% of the world is unaware of. The Saudis have been spending amazing amounts on "defense": "Saudi Arabia has lavished a staggering $386 billion on weapons and other defence and security sectors over the past 22 years to become one of the biggest arms spenders in the world in budget terms, according to official figures. The figure accounted for more than 33 per cent of the Gulf Kingdom's total expenditure between 1981 and 2003 and as high as 10 per cent of the gross domestic product in some years, showed the figures by the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency (SAMA). Despite a steady plunge in crude export revenues during that period because of slackening prices and production by the world's dominant oil power, defence spending has not been affected and continued to put strong pressure on the budget. Between 1981 and 2003, the country's cumulative budget allocations for defence and security totalled around 1.45 trillion Saudi riyals ($386 billion), accounting for as high as 33.5 per cent of the cumulative expenditure of 4.32 trillion riyals ($1.15 trillion), according to the annual report by SAMA, the Kingdom's Central Bank." Story Link If you looked at the Saudi military you would wonder where the money was going - all they seem to manage is to buzz Aramco in F-15's and Tornados and irritate people. Well, it's going into the construction of some amazing underground shelters, that's where. And surprise would be the key to these, as well. Saddam wasn't the only one to look to this approach. The scale would blow you away. But the fact is, they are defensive, not staging areas, inhabitants could easily be pinned down and kept in them, and the arms storage is not the paramount consideration: food, water, and fuel are. The locations are certainly well known to the US gov't. Any within the take-away zone would be a no-brainer bunker-buster (direct occupied space hit or entry-sealing) away from disaster, if they failed to comply with orders to vacate. These sites are for holding out aginst their own, in my opinion, not professional troops. Just FYI and entertainment. If any others who've been to the Magic Kingdom can expand or correct this, please do. 8-) |
| Posted by: .com 2003-12-13 3:23:14 PM |
| #19 .com, a very interesting idea with only one slight problem that I see. What if the Sods determine to do their oil rigs what Saddam tried to do to his? Namely rig them with explosives and set them to command detonate? Also 40km is a long strip of land to guard, I suppose tho we can just use minefields hehehe ;) |
| Posted by: Valentine 2003-12-13 3:02:23 PM |
| #18 Frank - excellent points. The only issue I would have is the surprise lost, which would prolly lead to resistance of some level and some lost lives. And you know there would be the booby-trapping / sabotage of the facilities that they would undertake, too. No poorer loser than a zealot, whether ex-smoker, ex-wife, or ex-Royal. They have lost control of the jihadi juggernaut - they don't have close control over or accounting of the funding, as has been pointed out here in RB, so they are probably only vaguely aware of operational aspects - probably hear about it when someone comes to gloat - and ask for more. I love your take on the casus belli: They have, indeed, already earned their retirement from the world stage - in spades. I would like, afterwards, to go after their bank accounts and turn that over in a slow and regulated trickle to the new Beduin Saudis who are sans-oil. Hey, the UN would love to admin another program, right? Heh, just kidding, Fuck the UN. Let Save The Children run it, they'd do a 10x better job! ;-> |
| Posted by: .com 2003-12-13 2:51:50 PM |
| #17 AP - Thx for your take and your kind words. I have a couple of immediate responses (heh, you knew I would!) to chew on - and more targets for anyone who wants to take a shot: 1) Strong Leader - I don't think we've had a President with the stones to do this for a long time - and doubt seriously we will get another (2008 & beyond) for a similar length of time. Dubya is the guy and he and his admin have already taken the hits for Iraq. How much more enmity is available to pile on? Not much that I can see - it's already well into screech mode, IMO, regards the international groups (ISM, ANSWER, et al), Muslim groups (CAIR, etc.), and the UN where France could buy Eastern Ooogabooga's vote when it suited them in some quid pro quo arrangement. Domestically, it's the same, only it's become sedition, not dissent, IMO. Gauging Donk candidate popularity based upon who really really hates Bush the most, a press that will go silent rather than tell any good news, and the NaziMedia crowd urging people to support insurgency to kill more American troops - well, that pretty much tops it out assuming the Indy mouths don't have the stones to go themselves and become John Walker Lindh's in Iraq. We're at peak now - and Dubya is intact and forgin ahead with policy and leadership that will someday be marveled upon. He's doing the vision thing with real elan, IMHO. 2) Casus Belli - The missing 80 pages will be the bombshell - augmented by what has been learned since - that sum will be presented as our casus belli. I suggest that this be presented after the deed is done, else surprise is lost which means lives lost -- and public opinion takes months to gel, even when the case is solid. I am taking the "It's easier to get forgiveness than permission." approach to maintain surprise and assuming he has the goods on the Saudis to make the case. If he didn't, I don't believe he would've withheld them, so I believe the case actually already exists in detail. Surprise is a key - to prevent sabotage - easily done, as we have seen in Kuwait and Iraq. The world really needs this oil, so it must not be lost to the markets for long. If the price suddenly drops because we have made OPEC instantly obsolete, who besides Russia and, perhaps Norway, outside of OPEC will complain? Consider what that would mean to Germany and France, scrambling to meet their EU obligations as well as their domestic socialist program obligations... A sudden drop of, say, $10/bbl would go a loooong way toward improving their economic health, as it would ours. Think they'd still scream for our blood? If we denied them access to the allied price, yes. If they and everyone else got the same benefit? Interesting equation, no? 3) Timing - Sooner rather than later, please, before the funding includes something truly nasty. Please invoke the doctrine of pre-emptive action. Please save a few hundred or thousand Americans. Please. This is inevitable. Even if we acted today, if the plan and the cash were already in the pipeline and in the hands of one of those rare true believers, it might still happen anyway. I believe domestically, this would make an impact. Only the truly challenged can't see themselves or a loved one in the shoes of the WTC, Pentagon, or air passenger victims' shoes. I would truly like to see this bashed around and some agreed-upon points kept track of - for I believe this, like the death of the UN, will be one of the actual final options that must be considered. Will we do it before we get hit hard and ugly? Certainly not if we dither about. Who knows who reads Rantburg? Maybe a friend of a friend of a friend will pass along some of our take and discussion... Why not, eh? It could happen. ;-) |
| Posted by: .com 2003-12-13 2:40:54 PM |
| #16 AP, .com, et al: may I propose a solution? GWB should publicly declare that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Soddis(fact) , and that insufficient effort and resources have been put to reforming and curbing the Wahhabi infiltration (another fact). Should there be another attack by Saudi citizens or their mercenaries, we will remove the source of their funding (oil) and occupy the oil fields for the benefit of the non-terrorist world. The flurry of royal spittle and turban spinning alone would make the effort worthwhile, and retaliatory attacks would make the occupation a fait accompli....ah, well, I can dream |
| Posted by: Frank G 2003-12-13 2:39:16 PM |
| #15 .com---I appreciate the time and thought that you have put into the issues of the Saudis and Wahhabis. The idea that I have been harping on the last few weeks has been to cut off the money of Saudi and Iran and the rest will follow. They obviously have no intentions of changing. I do not think that internal reform will work in these countries. They are too polarized. There is no "loyal opposition." Anyone that steps up to criticize or point out a different paradigm will be, well, murdered. It is the ultimate folly to fund your own destruction. So the main question really is how to do this. We may have a coalition of the willing, but we will not have too many "big players." So we may have to go it alone. That will take strong, decisive leadership, a clear set of stated strategic goals and "well-reasoned" reasons for doing so, and that will take a unified American public backing the leadership. I think that you have a possible solution, but it is a question of will, timing, and planning. This has to be as carefully planned as a moonshot, where failure is not an option. Maybe to get the ball rolling, a full disclosure by the US government of the activities of the Saudi Royal family aiding and abetting terrorists is the first order of business. We have to build an open-and-shut case on this one. Open the shades and bring in the light of day. I am sure that some of our own past leaders and noteables will fall. But that will be a healthy thing for us, too. Again, .com, your time and thoughtful comments are much appreciated. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2003-12-13 1:54:19 PM |
| #14 The oil will still be there And there you have it. I would differ in that the handwringing would go on for a year not 90 days. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2003-12-13 1:44:21 PM |
| #13 Alan - Wait - you're being a tease! Name one or two of your show-stoppers. I think you misunderstand me. You see, I am deadly serious about taking these fields and NOT giving them back to ANYBODY. Everyone - I am now utterly and completely reverting to that frame of mind that existed when Teddy Roosevelt was Prez. Regards international "relations" and "law", the real issues at stake here, I've seen nothing of significance or substance since then that I would agree substantially contributes to peace, security, or the pursuit of happiness for Americans. In fact, most of the changes are merely chains, self and otherwise imposed by failed experiments with the League of Nations and the UN. Time to jettison those things which don't work and all of their baggage. Oilfields? Take them. Pump em. Keep em. Wrap your mind around that, allow the automatic PC reaction to subside, and let the consequences and ramifications reveal themselves to you. I've been at this point and thinking this thought for some time. What do you see when you go there? Honestly. I don't give two hoots about the comfort zone of Shi'a or Sunni or Salafist or Wahhabist. Or any other religion, for that matter. A person's religion is a personal matter. Period. No special status or place in society. It has no place on the world stage. It belongs in the individual's heart and should be protected utterly when it harms no one else and isn't imposed on anyone else. Wear headscarves or floppy hats or doilies or Hyde Park Ranger handkershiefs. Whatever. The Mooslims will be free to stand on one leg at 3:57 AM, facing any direction that floats their boats, and howl at the moon if it puts peace in their hearts. The oil is gone. They can fund nothing external or intrusive regards anyone else's differing belief system. No apology, no recall, no UN, no nothing. With no rancor in my heart, I could then say: Have a nice day, Islam. Knock yourselves out. Same to all other belief systems: enjoy your God and your families and your services and your hopes and your dreams - right up to the point where you tread upon any these rights of another, that's not allowed. Clearer? Fire away. Everybody. Fire away. This can only make sense if all of the issues bubble up and get popped in their turn. So go for it. |
| Posted by: .com 2003-12-13 12:38:09 PM |
| #12 That article has been reprinted somewhere in the last week. Frontpage, or Opinion Journal, both of which I read regularly. I can't recall which, offhand. It's certainly an eloquent outcry from a local culture trampled by Saudi imperialism. And BTW, that's the only pure form of imperialism in the world today. It's time we started calling it by the proper name. I agree with most of what .com says; but it would be a grave mistake to take and hold the oilfields, even in escrow, for more reasons that I care to enumerate right now. It would make far more sense to wait a couple of years for political development, particularly in Shia Iraq. If that goes well, as I think it may, an independent, democratic Shia state could be established in eastern Arabia, after the Coalition boots the House of Saud out. |
| Posted by: Alan Sullivan 2003-12-13 11:51:31 AM |
| #11 "I figure if we talk about it enough times and everyone hammers it smooth" Yes camels. Had a Thanksgiving dinner party and we had a lively debate on the porch. Cigars and Irish Whiskey. The dems of the group were clueless and when pressed on the topic of the war thought that the best thing to do OVER THERE was to nuke them. Nuke them? Nuke who? Being a student of Rantburg U. And my cohort being a well read individual (The two self employed guys) Had a great time. |
| Posted by: Lucky 2003-12-13 11:41:47 AM |
| #10 Lucky - are your referring to their camels? There's a funny thing about humans. First time you go to the edge of the cliff, your knees get weak and your stomach goes flip... The 20th time, you dangle your legs over and have lunch. Habituation. I figure if we talk about it enough times and everyone hammers it smooth and we knock off the rough edges on each pass that soon enough it's pretty clean, makes hard sense, and the ramifications are not only manageable, they're hugely advantageous. I don't doubt this outcome at all, if everyone will take a swing. |
| Posted by: .com 2003-12-13 11:19:35 AM |
| #9 Well said, OP! I think just deciding to and following through are what will speak best. Let 'em screech and scream and squirm for 90 days while the pipelines dry up. Oil and Terror, each has its own. The oil will still be there - just waiting for someone to man the pumps, tap the guages, and turn on the tap. The terrorists will vaporize and hit their pre-planned escape routes. We'll hunt them down at our leisure. Without cash, it will be a myriad of tempests in |
| Posted by: .com 2003-12-13 11:09:38 AM |
| #8 What a great read. Right on Dot. That whole sexual repressive, paranoid, toothy smil'n, blink'n batted eyelashes,"punctilious manners"... Great if your a sword carrying goat herder. But major player, no. It must end. After that the Mullahcracy. Or vice vs? |
| Posted by: Lucky 2003-12-13 11:07:53 AM |
| #7 Maybe it's time for the Dummycheats and PC crowd to be left behind, too. When something gets totally worn out, you throw it away. When something doesn't fit, you throw it away. When something doesn't work, you throw it away or do something else. A large segment of our society sees the Dummycheat/PC philosophy as being a total failure. It's time to walk away, and move on to what works - which, in most cases, was what we had 75-100 years ago, before the grand Dummycheat "experiment" in social engineering. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2003-12-13 10:54:48 AM |
| #6 Great ideas.com.To bad we can't get the Dummycheats and the rest of the pc crowd to agree. |
| Posted by: raptor 2003-12-13 8:08:53 AM |
| #5 JFM - Who else would be as holy and righteous and self-assured? (Heh, heh) And utterly ruthless and heartless enough to hold it together? And practiced enough in duplicity and nepotism and despotism to keep all those parts oiled? And vicious enough to hold the rest of mankind down? Nope - none but an Arab could pull that off! Oh maybe the odd Turk could manage it for awhile... but for perfection, there's only one "society" I know of churning out the "right" kind of people for such a job! ;-> |
| Posted by: .com 2003-12-13 4:05:57 AM |
| #4 Good idea! It would be fun to hear everyone's idea of the fallout - which no one seems to want to follow thru on, damnit! Suggested examples: Besides cutting off jihadi murder... it will also offer an immediate major boost to our economy (and our true allies' economies, as well, as we will share the bennies with the Good Guys who've borne the burdens and carried water with us), destroy that artificial capitalist blasphemy called OPEC, and put old hard-currency hack Putin at our feet. You wanna see $20/bbl oil ever again? Well no more nuke tech sales, ya hear, boy? I'm sure we will, with our immediately invigorated economic engine and sudden disappearance of Federal deficits, be able and feel magnanimous as hell with anyone who's not an asshat (Sorry Bob, you're toast!), and straighten out some seriously twisted shit. Drill a lot of wells, plow a lot of fields, sew a lot of GM disease and drought resistant grain, pass out a lot of AIDS drugs cuz we can afford for the Gov't to help underwrite some of the dev costs borne by the few -- while generic knockoffs are cranked out by our supposed freeloader friends... and much much more... IMO, much of what ails the US is actually external and artificial, such as OPEC - and intellectual property rights theft (from drugs to electronics to defense tech to rock 'n roll) - and playing by WTO rules while most others cheat - and having the lynchpin currency that others artificially peg their currencies to with absurd exchange rates - and a raft of other economic burdens. Politically, as well, we suffer in spite of our largesse and goodwill from that "bite the hand that feeds you" mentality (Egypt, et al), the travesty of the UN, their dithering on important issues (Rwanda, etc) and, instead, focused on restraining us and playing silly diplomatic pseudo-power and vain-glory games in the rear-view mirror of history. Pfeh. I can't help but wonder just how many ways this would positively affect the world from our POV. On the negative side, as someone pointed out in a thread yesterday, is it possible for [insert country of choice here] to hate us more? Will it matter? Do we care? Time to allow ourselves to get as mean and as hardcore as we need to in order to survive. If we do, we will prosper. It is already our nature to be generous - even to the tools and fools. We are not Rome, nor shall we ever be - the twits can save that red herring just like they can keep the 'Nam quagmire false analogy. Let's rock 'n roll and follow our instincts. No more apologizing for our success. Just some thoughts that flow from the idea... |
| Posted by: .com 2003-12-13 3:59:11 AM |
| #3 .com Am I the only one who thinks the Caliph would be an Arabian? |
| Posted by: JFM 2003-12-13 3:34:56 AM |
| #2 I agree with you .com. Use the oil revenues for third world development. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2003-12-13 2:40:19 AM |
| #1 Somalia is not exactly a model of anything except, perhaps, chaos. Yet relative to the vast vast majority in Islam, Bashir Goth must be almost unique: a brave and intelligent man who has grasped the crux of the biscuit. What will come of this? Probably a secret fatwa and hefty price on his head paid for by the Saudis. This is very late and, though eloquently reasoned and bravely shouted from his local rooftop, likely to have little effect. Money talks louder to most. The Wahhabis, unless defanged by having their source of income removed*, will drag all of the Muslims down with them into the abyss of the Caliphate Doom. * Just a 40km strip along Saudi Arabia's Eastern coast provides 98% of their income. Take it away from them, and the Terror Shit Stops. Take it away forever. It's an ugly serendipity that this largesse fell to one of the most depraved and craven people in history: The House of Saud - who made their deal with the Devil, the Wahhabis, to control it. They didn't create it, they took it from others. Now take it from them. Forever. |
| Posted by: .com 2003-12-13 2:12:53 AM |