[News] Hamas Theyre not bad, theyre just drawn that way
Anti-Imperialist News
news at freedomarchives.org
Tue Oct 20 17:30:21 EDT 2009
Hamas Theyre not bad, theyre just drawn that way
http://palestinethinktank.com/2009/10/19/hamas-%E2%80%93-they%E2%80%99re-not-bad-they%E2%80%99re-just-drawn-that-way/
By
<http://palestinethinktank.com/author/mary-rizzo/>Mary
Rizzo Oct 19th, 2009 at 16:24
WRITTEN BY MARY RIZZO
In many parts of the West, certain political
parties or movements are treated as if they come
from the Moon or are alien to any body politic.
Their existence among the people is always
scrutinised as negative, transitory and something
created in a boardroom or a backroom, imposed
upon an unsophisticated public that is unable to
differentiate a true political programme from
empty and simplistic rhetoric. These parties or
movements are depicted as if they only address
the margins of society who are disenfranchised
from any normal democratic bodies, and thus,
are ramshackle bands that represent a minority
constituency. Given their oppositional nature to
pre-existing parties, they are outfitted with the
label that will serve to keep them isolated from
the structures that are already in operation. All
of this is to destroy the party or movement by
propaganda work rather than analysis of reality.
An entire mythology has been built around the
Palestinian resistance movement (which morphed
into a party) Hamas. This construct has actually
taken on more legitimacy as a factual
interpretation of Hamas than the facts
themselves. In most of the Western media, no
matter if it is on the right or the left, and in
some of the moderate media in Arab countries,
the very name of the party is coupled with terms
such as fundamentalist, radical or
terrorist. Clearly, this serves to create a
<http://palestinethinktank.com/2009/10/02/the-first-word-war-palestine-think-tank-and-tlaxcala-declare-war-against-disinformation/>fear
trigger that will remove the word from being
critically and honestly evaluated. The listener
will immediately identify Hamas with a negative
connotation and is removed from responsibility
for understanding that this is a manipulation of
reality. The listener is expected to accept the
claims that Hamas is anti-democratic and
fanatical. It is childs play to then convince
the listener that Hamas is Bad, that it is the
Enemy of all We represent (in our own eyes,
tolerance, democracy, Goodness itself). It is
possible to then extend that reading to the
belief that action must be taken against them,
that they are a
<http://palestinethinktank.com/2009/02/28/noa-the-hasbara-queen-and-islamphobe-prepares-for-battle/>cancer
that must be gotten rid of, as quoted by the
institutional peacenik,
<http://palestinethinktank.com/2009/02/28/noa-the-hasbara-queen-and-islamphobe-prepares-for-battle/>Noa.
How does one eradicate a cancer, once it has been
diagnosed? By extirpation or bombardment. With
cancer treatment, one bombards even the healthy
parts of the body with toxic agents, waiting to
see if after the battle there were enough healthy
parts remaining to allow the organism to continue
to exist. Once you have set into the minds of
millions of people the idea that destruction is
good, because the enemy is just so damaging and
evil if allowed to exist, the risk of bringing
the entire organism to its grave by weakening it
dramatically is taken as a viable risk to run.
This is a way to make them justify actions that
their own eyes dont see as therapeutic, but are pure horror and evil.
How did it work that the world was so fooled and
allowed Israel to destroy Gaza to get rid of
Hamas? It was quite simple, and its always the
same answer: Israel and its allies keep people
disinformed. Those who actually will go slightly
below the screaming headlines of the newspapers
might find out a few facts buried that that will
contradict the spin, but not that many people
will go that far, given that they are exposed to
something with an element of truth buried deep
within. If that were not problematic enough, even
the progressives have done meritorious services
to rendering Hamas untouchable. They might accept
them as a resistance movement but they wont
allow their personal ideological bias to see
Hamas as a progressive force for their own
peoples advancement. This may be out of
conviction, convenience or even lack of research
or a blindspot that does not allow variations on
the theme of the class struggle, where everything
is international and the same type of rules and
ideals should be considered applicable and
necessary for all, going so far in some cases to
import democracy under various more or less aggressive forms.
These people, many of whom are armed with good
intentions, have chewed, swallowed, and are
spitting back quite a few of the outright lies
and distortions that are part of the mythology
created by opponents of Hamas, created in Israel and the West, primarily.
What are the components of that mythology?
1) Hamas was created by the Israeli Mossad.
2) Hamas represents a marginal portion of the Palestinians.
3) Hamas turned democratic enough just to be able
to obtain some legitimacy to later take over and
turn the Palestinian Territories into an Islamic State.
4) Their victory in the polls was nothing more
than a protest vote against the corruption of Fatah.
5) Hamas is comprised of a bunch of illiterates
and their electors are sucked in by their own ignorance.
6) Hamas is a fundamentalist group and therefore
inflexible and incapable of any modification or
evolution. The oft cited Charter is used against
them to stress that they are simply a radical,
destructive group poised for Holy War.
7) Hamas does not seek any kind of compromise
with other Palestinian political parties or
factions, and are therefore the divisionary
element that prohibits of the unity of the people.
8 ) Hamas operates to indoctrinate their people
with hate propaganda in order to utilise them as cannon fodder.
9) Hamas is a terrorist group that exists only
thanks to financing by fundamentalist regimes.
That Hamas is merely a resistance movement has
been thoroughly disproved by the elections, but
this seems to be the safe place that activists
can cluster in order to allow themselves to be
able to tolerate Hamas, while wishing for their
quick demise. They are not viewed then as having
a true heritage as a political party that can be
compared to those of democratic nations of the
international community, and thus, analysis of
them can remain at an elementary level, lending
itself to hasty generalisations.
I ask my readers to kindly forgive all the
inverted quotation marks, but these words do
become ironic and empty of true meaning when they
are applied to the objects indicated by the spin
doctors, whose task it is to do the bidding of
the hegemonic powers. How can a minority of a
handful of nations that always pits itself
against the will of the remainder of the world
community in the UN be considered as the
international community? Its a boys club that
excludes practically everyone. How can a country
that puts in office the candidate who obtains the
lesser amount of votes be called a democracy?
It is when we start to question our own
foundations that we can detect that there is a
lot of convenience in presenting any opposition
as being an enemy and outside of paradigms that
we consider to be core to our expectations of how
to establish a just and equitable world.
Its time to debunk a few of these myths with facts.
1) Hamas was not created by Mossad. Although
Israel does like to claim credit for many things,
this one is not their doing. Political Islam in
Palestine has had a presence since the early 40s
in Mandate Palestine, and Hamas was born as part
of the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan), with many of
its early leaders formally affiliated. It was the
experience of refugeehood that turned Hamas into
a more autonomous element with a particular
nationalist basis to it, a natural result of the
urgent and real human situation of displacement
and loss of their cultural and national identity.
There were close relations of this group with the
Egyptian base, and the first offices of the
Ikhwan in Palestine were created in Gaza in 1945,
led by a member of one of the most important
families of the zone, Sheykh Zafer al Shawwa.
During the first Arab-Israeli war, Islamist
volunteers reinforced the ranks, coming primarily
from Jordan and Syria, and this support showed
the refugees that the Ikhwan had the courage to
defend itself, even during the Israeli War of
Independence. The growing number of refugees
gave a stronger identity and sense of purpose to
the Islamist movement in Palestine. Therefore, in
the civil society and in the population in
general, a motivation from any other source was
not required to be able to pledge: I promise to
be a good Muslim in defending Islam and the lost
land of Palestine. I promise to be a good example
for the community and for others. These were the
words spoken by those who swore their loyalty to
the Ikhwan in Palestine (source: Beverly Milton
Edwards, Islamic Politics in Palestine, p. 43).
The local Ikhwan had its own agenda, defending
its lost land. It didnt require fanaticism,
outside influence or even propaganda. The
refugees themselves were living proof of the
horrors of deportation and suffering. The
identification as part of an international
movement was concomitant with the recognition of
the particularity of the Palestinian experience.
The official foundation, dating 9 December 1987,
was only the culmination of an organisation in
the works for decades. Organised Islamic
resistance was further utilised when the
situation precipitated dramatically in 1967 and a
new generation was born as refugees. For this
generation, a return to Islam was considered as a
necessity for the moral and political future of a
people that was being literally destroyed. The
cause of the Nakba was seen by many as the result
of the distancing from a normal society, the
Palestinian one, in which the ethical, religious,
cultural and traditional values had been
devastated by the occupation, and the descent
into further degradation, poverty,
disenfranchisement and social instability was
seen not only as the result of the occupation, but part of its cause.
The international community would not come to
the rescue of these people, the rest of the Ummah
was not caught up in their national struggle,
largely because they were not directly involved
or were even prohibited from involvement. The
extreme pain and disgrace of losing ones land at
that time was a new element to the area, where
previous colonisation avoided expelling the
indigenous inhabitants, and throwing off the
usurpers was not complicated with the total loss
of roots and a base. The basis for the formal
dimension of Hamas was thus present for decades
prior to its official birth. In order to operate,
being under the thumb of the occupation, these
organised groups that existed had established
charities and benefit organisations for their
people. These institutions were tolerated by
Israel in the Occupied Territories. Israel
conceded some operating space through granting of
licenses. As General Yitzhak Sager said in an
interview to the International Herald Tribune in
1981, the Israeli government
gave money that
the military governor allocated to the mosques
[
] the sums were used both by the mosques and
the religious schools, with the purpose of
reinforcing a subject that would contrast that of
the Left that was in favour of the PLO. If there
was some motivation for Israel to be involved, it
was really as an act of divide and rule, a bit
of tolerance, a bit of economic support to the
various religious associations in order to see if
an opposition to the nationalists of the PLO
could develop. They really were only looking for
a way to see the weakening of the PLO, which was
gaining some support in the West, and they did
not found, provide major financing or in any way
influence a movement that they would in some way
infiltrate or control. That is pure mythology.
Why give Israel credit where none is due?
2) That Hamas represents only a marginal portion
of Palestinians is another myth to debunk. It is
indeed true that all Palestinians are not
refugees, and it is also true that virtually all
of the leaders of Hamas were born in exile or at
some point were subjected to the experience of
expulsion and loss of their homes and
possessions. This is a core Palestinian
experience, and it is true that even those (few)
Palestinians who were not uprooted can identify
with the loss of their cultural and national
identity, and all of them know that their
national aspirations and cohesion as a group have
been destroyed by Israel. Thus, even a movement
or party that has its own identity in the refugee
camps and in exile or in religious roots, is
recognised as an intrinsic, legitimate and
natural representative of Palestinians as a
whole. They even obtained the majority vote in
areas of the West Bank that were not considered
as Hamas strongholds, as well as obtaining votes from many Christian areas.
3) The myth that Hamas turned democratic enough
just to get its foot in the door as the first
step of forcing an Islamic State upon the
entirety of Palestine is a very widespread one,
especially in the progressive circles that do not
recognise the popularity of the movement or who
have an ideological prejudice against any
religious movement. There is much to be said in
favour of separation of church and state, but
this of course is something that cannot be
imposed from afar, and furthermore, there are
many levels of separation to take into
consideration. Those who subscribe to this
position of Hamas buying time before introducing
the Sharia tend to deny that a democracy has
certain characteristics, and it is not
necessarily a synonym of secularism. When the
word democracy is applied correctly, it has
certain characteristics, and Hamas meets these.
Hamas has popular consensus. It has an internal
structure that is autonomous and recognised as
legitimate by its constituency. It follows the
rules of elections, meeting the requirements for
participation. Once elected, it assumes its role
within the existing system, not having overthrown
or staged coups against established structures.
It is a political movement with several factions
(some of them armed, as is true of many parties
in areas under occupation, Fatah included) with a
history and an organisation. There is widespread
discussion among its constituencies, including
those who are political prisoners, prior to
making decisions, and the majority decides the
actions to be undertaken. If one thing must be
said about it to set it apart from parties that
Westerners are familiar with, highest level
leaders generally do not assume the governing
roles. This is understandable in a party where a
great quantity of the leaders are routinely
assassinated by Israel. That the current
political director, Khaled Meshaal, must live in
exile after having once been victim of an
attempted assassination says more about this
anomalous situation than a thousand words can.
4) That Hamass victory in the Legislative
Council election was nothing more than a protest
vote (another pet theory of the left) was
brilliantly illustrated as false by Paola Caridi
in her very good book (despite the sensationalist
subtitle) Hamas, What it is and what the Radical
Palestinian Movement Wants, published by
Feltrinelli and only available in Italian at this
time. I am translating a few paragraphs that deal with this question.
There is a precise political reason for which
the majority of Palestinians voted for Hamas. It
is a reason that concerns the decision made by
the Islamist movement formally on 23 January
2005. (translators note, a year prior to the
Legislative elections): a unilateral truce,
reached together with the Islamic Jihad (that had
instead broken it on several occasions), which
had turned words into facts: that there would be
the end of the season of terrorist attacks made
by Hamas inside Israel as indicated within the
confines of the 1949 armistice, the Israel within
the Green Line, in other words. The ending of
suicide attacks in Israeli cities, substantially
bringing an end to the Intifada as well as
(Hamass) participative choice is interpreted by
the Palestinian population as a precise political
proposal: an alternative to those who had
governed and controlled them, holding the
hegemony up to that moment. A proposal that poses
at the same time new de facto limits to Hamass
resistance strategy. The Islamist movement has
not been, therefore, chosen only as a protest
against the corruption, patronage and
inefficiency of Fatah, which as a party is often
confused with the PA. Corruption, patronage and
inefficiency that are related, at least from a
temporal point of view, with the failure of the
Oslo Accords and the facts on the ground realised by the Israelis.
The people of Hamas were considered people who
are serious, who did not enrich themselves at the
expense of the population, in fact, they
continued to live in normal neighbourhoods and in
the refugee camps. (Caridi, p. 171).
5) An extremely offensive smear, oft repeated, is
that Hamass followers and its leaders are a
<http://peacepalestine.wordpress.com/2005/10/17/jews-against-zionism-more-like-jews-against-the-palestinian-street>bunch
of illiterates or religious fanatics. Almost
all the leaders are (or were, given the number of
assassinations within their ranks, the past tense
is de rigueur) university graduates in fields
ranging from medicine and physics to
jurisprudence, economics and theology, is
testament itself that this smear is merely to
throw dirt on them and paint them as having read
only religious texts and therefore
under-developed when compared to other
movements. Education has always been one of the
pillars of Hamas and its charity work. The people
of Palestine dont need to be told this, it is a
reality for them, where in many cases without
this foundation, Palestinians would be left wanting in this area.
6) The inflexibility of Hamas is another myth,
especially yanked out when speaking of the 1988
Charter (Mithaq). Shiekh Hamed Bitauri,
religious authority of Nablus, president of the
Union of the Palestinian Ulemas, known for his
radical positions had no problem confirming that
the Charter is not the Quran. We can change it.
It is only the synthesis of the positions of the
Islamist movement in its relations with the other
factions, and its politics. Aziz Dweik, founder
of the Department of Geography of the University
of Nablus, later to become the spokesman of the
Palestinian Parliament after the 2006 elections,
and imprisoned in Israeli jails since the summer
of that year, went even further, declaring the
political and pragmatic necessity of distancing
from the Mithaq of 1988 to Khalid Amayreh,
Palestinian journalist that is sensitive to
Islamist positions, he said that Hamas would not
remain as a hostage to rhetorical slogans of the
past like those of the destruction of Israel.
(Khalid Amayreh, Hamas Debates the Future:
Palestines Islamic Resistance Movement Attempts
to Reconcile Ideological Purity and Political
Realism, in Conflicts Forum, Nov. 2007, p.4) (Caridi p. 90).
Haniyeh has mentioned on many occasions that the
Charter has been surpassed in its substance by
the other official documents, the most important
of which, the Electoral Programme of the Reform
and Change List (the list in which Hamas ran for
office). This programme is structured like a
document that goes far beyond the needs of a
political campaign, according to the leader of
Hamas, and it indicates the policy of the
movement. It was not written in the heat of the
revolution of the Intifada, and reflects the
evolution of the party. The changes present are
not ideological so much as ones of a strategic
and political nature. The positions have been
reiterated so many times in interviews and public
interventions, it seems incredible that the
complexity and maturity of Hamas should by now
not be apparent to everyone. It is clear that
they are still dedicated to the liberation of
Palestine, but they are attempting to achieve it
through reaffirmation of the rights of the
people, knowing full well that as a party, Hamas
is not equipped to overthrow the occupation in
any practical way or to destroy what they recognise as a reality.
Many of us who follow events in the Middle East
hope that they do not surrender to pragmatism so
far as to recognise Israel not only as a reality,
but as a Jewish State, however, we must watch
from the sidelines and evaluate facts. The people
of Palestine will be vigil about what rights are
being surrendered, if any, and many of us believe
that backs to the wall, they will not capitulate
and lose what they know is theirs for reasons of
political expediency. Hamas too is aware of this fact.
7) Hamas has been far less divisionary than its
principle counterpart, Fatah. The Gaza coup
that shocked and saddened the world was actually
a preventive measure to the thwart the planned
takeover by the Fatah forces faithful to Dahlan
(in collaboration with Israel). That Hamas was
the party that was awarded victory by its own
people has never been recognised by the
international community that nevertheless
pushed for elections and insisted that this was
the necessity for Palestinians, because this
would mean that the resistance had been granted
legitimacy and would become policy within the
governing body, the rejection of negotiations as
sub-alternates with Israel, which was Fatah
policy, had been officially sanctioned by the
populace and it would only be a matter of time
before the programme would become policy. So, any
steps by the Fatah Security Forces to overtake
Gaza would actually have been the coup. But in
the backwards way of viewing events, fuelled by
disinformation, the tragic bloodbath between
Palestinians prevented the real overthrow of
democracy that would have taken place had Dahlan
had the chance. Again and again, Hamas has sought
to work together with the opposition party, and
this is something they would not tolerate in the
vain hope that their economic advantage and
political nulla osta from the boys club would
allow them to command even in absence of the popular mandate to do so.
8 ) Its not necessary to use propaganda to show
to Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and
in exile, and even to many within Israel, the
ongoing destruction of the Palestinian
civilisation and people. Blockades, bombardments,
assassinations, war, checkpoint humiliations,
restrictions, separation of families,
imprisonment and further abuses are not isolated
incidents, but they are the daily bread and water
of Palestinian life. No one needs to invent a
rage over a phantasmagoric enemy. There is a real
one that is subjecting the people of all ages and
conditions to humiliation, deprivation and death.
Showing a man in a mouse costume to insist that
children are being indoctrinated in hate might go
down well with the uninformed masses, but a
glimpse into the reality makes Farfur look like
the sweetest kind of way for a child to
assimilate and tolerate that he or she is a
prisoner doomed for life to suffer in the most
atrocious way for being born as a lesser being in the oppressors eyes.
9) The worst smear against Hamas is the one to
keep them as the symbol of evil: that they are a
terrorist group, financed by rogue States in the
axis of evil. Bearing in mind that their
financing is abysmally inferior to the gigantic
economic and military aid package given to
Israel by America, Canada and many other nations
in the international community in an official
way, why should the claim of foreign financing be
considered as unacceptable when it is simply the
way the that Israel keeps afloat through billions
of dollars annually, up front, and heaven only
knows what other financing comes in through the
thousands of charities that are really little
more than fronts for mass immigration to Israel
to curtail Arab growth? If Zionism and its
charities are considered as legitimate and noble,
why are Islamic ones put on blacklists and the
donors treated as if they are financing
terrorism? There is a double standard here.
That Hamas has rejected terror operations against
civilians and did its best to do so in the
service of achieving a realistic improvement for
the life conditions of its people is an
authenticated fact, corroborated by none other
than the USA Congressional Research Service, a
Think Tank that basically presents its
conservative and Israel-friendly positions to the
Congress so that they become policy. In fact, in
the document coordinated by Jim Zanotti
<http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/R40101.pdf>http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/R40101.pdf
Israel and Hamas, Conflict in Gaza (2008-2009),
we see that the quoted reason for the onslaught
of Gaza to cleanse it of Hamas, the rockets
fired into Israeli territory, was nothing but an
excuse that the West drank down with gusto as if
it were cherry juice. The extremely rudimentary
rockets were recognised as NOT having been
launched by Hamas, and not only that, Hamas was
viewed as being able and willing to suppress the
attacks. It is significant that the first victims
of the Israeli attacks in Gaza were the regular
police forces who had just been trained, perhaps
also for this purpose. Zanotti writes:
For the first five months, the cease-fire held
relatively well. Some rockets were fired into
Israel, but most were attributed to non-Hamas
militant groups, and, progressively, Hamas
appeared increasingly able and willing to
suppress even these attacks. No Israeli deaths
were reported (although there were injuries and
property damage), and Israel refrained from retaliation.
Nevertheless, each party felt as though the other
was violating the terms of the unwritten
ceasefire. Hamas demandedunsuccessfullythat
Israel lift its economic blockade of Gaza, while
Israel demandedalso unsuccessfullya full end to
rocket fire and progress on the release of
Israeli corporal Gilad Shalit from Hamass captivity.
Israel cited the sporadic rocket fire as
justification for keeping the border crossings
and Gazas seaport closed to nearly everything
but basic humanitarian supplies. Hamas, other
Arab leaders, and some international and
non-governmental organizations involved in aiding
Gazan civilians complained that Israel was
reneging on its promises under the unwritten cease-fire agreement.
If that were not enough, the author, certainly
not sympathetic in any way to Hamas, makes
statements about the aftermath of the war where
even Israel admits that Hamas was not responsible for the rockets:
Since Israels unilateral ceasefire began on
January 18, 2009, there have been about 40
sporadic rocket launches into southern Israel,
far fewer than occurred on average per day just
before Operation Cast Lead. Moreover, Israeli
officials believe that smaller militant groups,
such as Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Al Aqsa
Martyrs Brigades, and not Hamas, have fired the
rockets, as they did during the cease-fire
(although it is possible that Hamas is enabling
or acquiescing to these attacks while preserving deniability).
So, Israel used the excuse of Hamas rocket
launches to justify the elimination of Hamas (by
means of destruction of the entirety of Gaza)
through what they call military operations but
the rest of humanity knows is war, while they
were aware that Hamas was neither the author nor
the facilitator of the rockets, any kind of
excuse they pull out of the magic hat to justify
their actions should fall on deaf ears.
Complaints about arms smuggling through the most
rudimentary of tunnels should stink to high
heaven when we see the Defense Budget
Appropriations for US-Israeli Missile Defense
Programs in that same Congressional Report. Iron
Dome, Davids Sling and other military aid
costing the American people billions of dollars
are described briefly. For every five ineffective
bottle rockets that are smuggled through a
tunnel, the USA is flying in full cargoes of arms
and cases of cash to be spent by Israel for their
military needs. The double standards here also
draw innocent blood in violation of international
law at the expense of your hard-earned money.
Again, from the Congressional report:
Israel may have used weapons platforms and
munitions purchased from the United States in its
military operations in Gaza, reportedly
including, among others, F-15 and F-16 aircraft,
Apache helicopters, and, according to Israeli
press reports, GBU-39 small diameter guided bombs
approved for sale by the 110th Congress following
notification in September 2008.
Additionally, all unilateral truces between
Israel and Hamas (called by Hamas, not by Israel)
were broken in every case by Israel. In many
cases, making incursions into the Occupied
Territories, which legally they are prohibited
from doing, as civilian populations under
occupation (even if the settlers have left,
Gaza is kept under siege by Israel) are required
to be protected by the occupier, not attacked.
Israel, using weapons and planes supplied for
them by the good graces of the people of the
United States, bombarded streets where their
targets (politicians and clerics that Israel
terms as militants if not worse) were located,
killing in an indiscriminate way anyone in the
range, children included. If thats not terrorism, the word has no meaning.
These are only a few of the myths in circulation.
They represent just a portion of the lies,
disinformation and hasbara that circulates about
one of the major Palestinian parties, born from
within, developing as all parties do, from below,
and legitimised by fair and legal elections.
Debunking these lies is a duty. One doesnt need
to agree to the entire programme of Hamas, but
one is obligated to recognise that they are
entirely different from the image that they have
been straightjacketed into. What Jessica Rabbit
said in the film, Who Framed Roger Rabbit could
very well apply to Hamas: Im not bad, they just draw me that way.
This article is part of the Palestine Think Tank
and Tlaxcala initiative The First Word War
against Disinformation. If you would like to
contribute your own original articles to this
initiative, send them to
<mailto:contact at palestinethinktank.com>contact at palestinethinktank.com
or to <mailto:tlaxcala at tlaxcala.es>tlaxcala at tlaxcala.es
visit <http://www.tlaxcala.es>www.tlaxcala.es and
<http://www.palestinethinktank.com>www.palestinethinktank.com
Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
415 863-9977
www.Freedomarchives.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20091020/d266ca4e/attachment.htm>
More information about the News
mailing list