Avid Editor's Insights

THIS DAY April 4

Posted by Shiva on April 4, 2009

Mob Goes on Holy Rampage
April 4 2009: Shouraniya, Egypt. Dozens of Muslim villagers have attacked the homes of members of the minority Baha’i religion in southern Egypt, hurling firebombs an denouncing them as “enemies of God,” human rights groups said Thursday.
The attacks began Saturday after a prominent Egyptian media commentator denounced a Baha’i activist in a television appearance as an “apostate” and called for her to be killed.
The Baha’i religion was founded in the 1860s by a Persian nobleman, Baha’u’llah, whom the faithful regard as the most recent in a line of prophets that included Buddha, Abraham, Jesus and Muhammad. Muslims reject the faith because they believe Muhammad was God’s final prophet, and Baha’is have been persecuted in the Middle East.In Egypt, where the majority of the country’s nearly 80 million people are Sunni Muslim, the Baha’i faith is not recognized as an official religion. The head of Al-Azhar, Egypt’s dominant religious authority, has also declared it a “sacrilegious dogma.”
After five days of violence, calm returned Wednesday to the village of Shouraniya, located about 215 miles south of Cairo. No one was injured in the attacks. The village’s 15 Baha’i residents were forced to leave, and police have prevented them from returning, rights groups said.
Egypt’s Interior Ministry confirmed the attacks and said police have made arrests. But it denied that police stopped the Baha’i residents from returning to their village.
“This is just an incident, and we are investigating,” ministry spokesman Gen. Hamdi Abdel-Karim said. He declined to provide more details.
During the violence, the attackers shouted “No God but Allah” and “Baha’is are enemies of Allah” as they hurled stones through windows, a group of six Egyptian human rights organizations said in a joint statement. On Tuesday, assailants also threw fire bombs, damaging five homes, they said.Abdel-Sameia el-Sayyed, one of the Baha’i villagers, said a mob looted his house and destroyed his possessions. He said he fled the village Tuesday with his wife and five children.
“I have lived there for 45 years — all my life — and I had to leave it for the sake of my children’s safety,” he told The Associated Press.
The Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights and the other rights groups called on authorities to investigate claims that police were reluctant to stop the violence.
The rights groups also accused the media commentator, Gamal Abdel-Rahim, of inciting the violence. Abdel-Rahim praised the Shouraniya assailants in a commentary published Tuesday in the state-run Al-Gomhouria newspaper.
BBC Chickens Out Again

April 4 2009: London, Britain.,The BBC has been accused of appeasement of radical Islam by the artist behind one of the infamous cartoons of Mohammed.
Kurt Westergaard claims the corporation’s decision not to air a recent interview with him came because they are petrified of upsetting Muslims extremists. Westergaard was one of the 12 cartoonists commissioned by the Danish Jyllands-Posten newspaper in 2005 to produce caricatures of the Muslim prophet.
Islamic tradition says no image of him should be produced or shown.
Muslims were particularly incensed by Westergaard’s cartoon, which portrayed Mohammed with a bomb in his turban and was seen as extending the caricature of Muslims as terrorists. The images sparked protests and outrage across the globe.

Mr Westergaard, 73, gave his first-ever English interview to BBC journalist Malcolm Brabant four weeks ago.
It had been expected to go out on BBC World, the BBC News channel, across radio services and on its website. But the corporation has kept the report under wraps amid claims it is frightened that it will ‘inflame’ Muslims around the world.
Mr Westergaard told the Daily Mail last night: ‘I am disappointed on behalf of the freedom of speech. Every time you are afraid I think you make a step backwards. That is depressing me.’
He compared the BBC’s behaviour with the way countries tried to appease Hitler before the Second World War and added: ‘If you have an appeasement policy towards the radical Muslims then you are on a very wrong way and you have to start marching backwards.’
A BBC spokesman said last night: ‘No decision has been made yet. As and when one is, it will be based, as always, on editorial merit.’.

‘Please stop’

April 4 2009: Matta, Pakistan. This is the chilling moment a 17-year-old Pakistani girl is punished in a horrific flogging by Taliban militants for being seen with a man who is not her husband.
Mobile phone footage shows the girl begging for mercy as she receives 37 lashes at the hands of her brother while two others hold her down.‘Please stop it,’ she begs but the men completely disregard her desperate pleas and pathetic attempts to defend herself.
Taliban spokesman Muslim Khan claimed responsibility for the flogging in today’s Guardian, which obtained footage of the shocking act.
He said it was the Taliban’s right to thrash women and that the girl was being punished for coming out of her house with another man who was not her husband.
But some claim the commander ordered the flogging to get revenge after the girl refused to accept a marriage proposal.

This is England. Not Pakistan.

A mother was barred from a parents’ evening at her child’s school because she was wearing a veil.
The mother-of-one arrived at the function wearing a full veil which covers every part of the body except the eyes.
But she was turned away by on health, safety and security grounds after the headteacher said visitors’ faces should be visible at all times.
The woman, who is a former pupil of the school, is furious with her treatment and says her religion should not affect her access to the Catholic school.
The latest incident happened at Our Lady and St John Catholic Art College, in Blackburn, Lancs,
The mother-of-one from Blackburn said: ‘I don’t like going to the school anymore because I leave crying. I can understand that people should be identified but I am just a normal person, trying to lead a normal life. Why should how I dress make a difference?’She said: ‘In September 2007, when I attended a parents’ evening I got told not to go into the hall because I was wearing a veil. I explained I was willing to take the veil off in front of female teachers but not the male teachers.’
The school already had a policy which ruled that hoodies and crash helmets need to be removed before access is granted to the school but after the incident in 2007 this was amended to include full-face veils.
The 34-year-old woman added: ‘This week at parents’ evening I signed myself in and saw two teachers in the library as I was not allowed in the main hall. Then I was asked by a member of staff whether I was aware of the school’s policy on identification?’
But the woman, who lives in the town, says the policy was not in force when she enrolled her son, nor was it included in the school prospectus.
‘My son enjoys going to the school and has settled in and I am now in a strange situation where I can’t see how he is progressing or even go to drop him off inside.
‘If I had been told this was their intended policy then maybe I would not have considered sending my son to the school in the first place.

On this day Main Events

Arabs attack Jews in Jerusalem

April 4 1920: One of the el-Husseinis, Haj Amin, who emerged as the leading figure in Palestinian politics during the mandate period, first began to organize small groups of suicide groups, fedayeen (“one who sacrifices himself”), to terrorize Jews in 1919 in the hope of duplicating the success of Kemal in Turkey and drive the Jews out of Palestine, just as the Turkish nationalists were driving the Greeks from Turkey.
The first large Arab riots took place in Jerusalem in the intermediary days of Passover, April 1920. The Jewish community had anticipated the Arab reaction to the Allies’ convention, and was ready to meet it. Jewish affairs in Palestine were then being administered from Jerusalem by the Vaad Hatzirim (Council of Delegates), appointed by the World Zionist Organization (WZO) (which became the Jewish Agency in 1929 ).
The Vaad Hatzirim charged Ze’ev (Vladimir) Jabotinsky with the task of organizing Jewish self-defense. Jabotinsky was one of the founders of the Jewish battalions, which had served in the British Army during the First World War and had participated in the conquest of Palestine from the Turks.
Acting under the auspices of the Vaad Hatzirim, Jabotinsky lead the Haganah (self-defense) organization in Jerusalem, which succeeded in repelling the Arab attack. Six Jews were killed and some 200 injured in Jerusalem in the course of the 1920 riots. Had it not been for the preliminary organization of Jewish defense, the number of victims would have undoubtedly been much greater.
After the riots, the British arrested both Arabs and Jews. Among those arrested was Jabotinsky, together with 19 of his associates, on a charge of illegal possession of weapons. Jabotinsky was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment with hard labor and deportation from the country after completion of his sentence. When the sentence became known, the Vaad Hatzirim made plans for widespread protests, including mass demonstrations and a national fast. Meanwhile, however, the mandate for Palestine had been assigned to Great Britain, and the jubilation of the Yishuv outweighed the desire to protest against the harsh sentence imposed on Jabotinsky and his comrades.
With the arrival in Jerusalem of the first High Commissioner, Sir Herbert Samuel, British military government was superseded by a civilian administration. As a gesture toward the civilian population, the High Commissioner proclaimed a general amnesty for both Jews and Arabs who had been involved in the April 1920 riots. Jabotinsky and his comrades were released from prison to an enthusiastic welcome by the Yishuv, but Jabotinsky insisted that the sentence passed against them be revoked entirely, arguing that the defender should not be placed on trial with the aggressor. After months of struggle, the British War Office finally revoked the sentences.
In 1921, Haj Amin el-Husseini began to organize larger scale fedayeen to terrorize Jews. Colonel Richard Meinertzhagen, former head of British military intelligence in Cairo, and later Chief Political Officer for Palestine and Syria, wrote in his diary that British officials “incline towards the exclusion of Zionism in Palestine.” In fact, the British encouraged the Arabs to attack the Jews.
According to Meinertzhagen, Col. Waters Taylor, financial adviser to the Military Administration in Palestine 1919-23, met with Haj Amin a few days before Easter, in 1920, and told him “he had a great opportunity at Easter to show the world…that Zionism was unpopular not only with the Palestine Administration but in Whitehall and if disturbances of sufficient violence occurred in Jerusalem at Easter, both General Bols [Chief Administrator in Palestine, 1919-20] and General Allenby [Commander of Egyptian Force, 1917-19, then High Commissioner of Egypt] would advocate the abandonment of the Jewish Home. Waters-Taylor explained that freedom could only be attained through violence.”
Haj Amin took the Colonel’s advice and instigated a riot. The British withdrew their troops and the Jewish police from Jerusalem, and the Arab mob attacked Jews and looted their shops. Due to Haj Amin’s overt role in instigating the pogrom, the British arrested him.
Yet, despite the arrest, Haj Amin escaped to Jordan, but he was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment in absentia. A year later, however, British Arabists convinced High Commissioner Herbert Samuel to pardon Haj Amin and to appoint him Mufti.
Samuel met with Haj Amin on April 11, 1921, and was assured “that the influences of his family and himself would be devoted to tranquility.” Three weeks later, however, riots in Jaffa and Petah Tikvah, instigated by the Mufti, left 43 Jews dead.
Following these riots England established the Haycraft Commission to evaluate the cause of these riots. The appendix of the report reads, “The fundamental cause of the Jaffa riots and the subsequent acts of violence was a feeling among the Arabs of discontent with, and hostility to, the Jews, due to political and economic causes, and connected with Jewish immigration, and with their conception of Zionist policy as derived from Jewish exponents . . . the Arab majority, who were generally the aggressors, inflicted most of the casualties.”
Following these riots, Haj Amin consolidated his power and took control of all Muslim religious funds in Palestine. He used his authority to gain control over the mosques, the schools and the courts. No Arab could reach an influential position without being loyal to the Mufti. As the “Palestinian” spokesman, Haj Amin wrote to Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill in 1921, demanding that restrictions be placed on Jewish immigration and that Palestine be reunited with Syria and Transjordan. Churchill issued the White Paper of 1922, which tried to allay Arab fears about the Balfour Declaration. The White Paper acknowledged the need for Jewish immigaration to enable the Jewish community to grow, but placed the familiar limit of the country’s absorptive capacity on immigration. Although not pleased with Churchill’s diplomatic Paper, the Zionists accepted it; the Arabs, however, rejected it.
The Arabs found rioting to be a very effective political tool because the British attitude toward violence against Jews, and their response to the riots, encouraged more outbreaks of violence. In each riot, the British would make little or no effort to prevent the Arabs from attacking the Jews. After each incident, a commission of inquiry would try to establish the cause of the riot. The conclusions were always the same: the Arabs were afraid of being displaced by Jewish immigrants. To stop the disturbances, the commissions routinely recommended that restrictions be made on Jewish immigration.
Thus, the Arabs came to recognize that they could always stop Jewish immigration by staging a riot.

After 86 years the west has still not recognized the fact, that the arabs are still using violence as a means to further their goals
Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto former Pakistani President, hanged in Pakistan at 51

April 4, 1979 a military coup led by General Zia unseated President Bhutto. Bhutto was charged with corruption and sentenced to death. Despite pleas from many world leaders, the new Pakistani government hung Bhutto on April 4
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was the head of the Pakistan Peoples’ Party (PPP) in 1971. In the general election of 1970, Bhutto won 88 seats in West Pakistan as opposed to Mujib’s 162 seats out of 169. As per the legislation Mujib was supposed to form the government of Pakistan. According to some Pakistani high officials sources, at first president Yahya was more inclined to hand power over to Mujib.
But Bhutto opposed Yahya’s decision. Bhutto represented the influential Panjabi civil and military bureaucrats and the feudal lords. Pakistani military-feudal axis vehemently opposed the transference of power. They were afraid that Mujib’s democratic policies may adversely affect the existing feudal system of West Pakistan and curb the power of the top civil and military bureaucrats.
So their representative Bhutto invited Yahya in the notorious Larkana meeting and together two shrewd jackals conspired to repress the Bangalees with military means and retain the political power in the hands of the West Pakistanis.
This theory is plausible because such a brilliant idea is more likely to emanate from the arch machiavellian: Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Yahya is more given to kill his fellow countrymen to show off his military prowess than formulate a brilliant idea to sort all the problems together: destroy Bangladesh; keep the power in the hands of Bhutto and him; make Niazi and the army the scapegoat of the war in order to divert the attention of the Pakistani people
.General Tikka Khan was briefed not only by General Yahya Khan but also by Mr. Bhutto then riding the crest of a popularity wave as the new savior of Islam. Gen Tikka in turn briefed his Army Senior Commanders and picked up a staff who would understand why a Muslim Massacre by a Muslim Army, Hindu slaughter, why all intellectuals were to be killed in cold blood, why all young Bengali Muslim girls were to be raped, not to satisfy lust but as a religious duty to produce a new generation of blue-blooded true Muslims.
Tajuddin Ahmed was right to think that Bhutto was the deux ex machina behind the political conspiracy leading to the devastation of Bangladesh: “…..Bhutto is responsible for the unprecedented brutality unleashed nationwide.
Bhutto manipulated the military monsters (Yahya, Tikka) to secure his power and maintain his vested interest in politics. All through his political career he thrived on conspiracy and intrigues. As often the fate of such treacherous politicians is to end up in the hands of the partners in crime, Bhutto was justified to be hanged by his own Frankenstein: General Ziaul Huq

The Rape of 71: The Dark Phase of History

…..We have collected numerous evidences on the rape, molestation and torture of Bangalee women by the Pakistani army. Rauful Hossain Suja, the son of martyr Akbar Hossain of Pahartali, Chittagong, went to the FOY’S LAKE KILLING ZONE to look for his father’s dead body.
They found dead bodies of approximately 10,000 Bangalees, most of them were brutally slaughtered. In their desperate search for their father’s dead boy, they found dead bodies of 84 pregnant women whose abdomens were slashed open. This type of brutality took place almost every where in Bangladesh. Raped women were also locked up naked in various military camps so as to deny them termination of their anguish through suicide.
As per our statistics on the abortion centers and hospitals around the country, less than 10% of the total raped women visited those centers. In most cases the abortions were done locally and efforts were taken to keep those incidents secret due to social situation. The doctors and specialists, like Dr Anwarul Azim, involved in the hospitals and abortion centers agreed to this statistical information.
In reality the raped women who became pregnant after September and less than three months pregnant in early 1972, they did not go the abortion centers and hospitals at all. In our account, the number of women of this category was at least 88,200. Moreover, in those three months, raped 162,000 women and 131,000 Hindu refugee women simply disappeared, assimilated into the vast population, without any report at all.
Dr MA Hassan

Today’s Islamic Trivia Special

Genocide, Military Operations & Islamization under Special Autonomy in West Papua
Revd Socratez Sofyan Yoman

President of the Fellowship of Baptist Churches of West PapuaWest Papua, March 2007Special Autonomy Law No. 21 Year 2001 was meant to be a wise, respectable and just solution to the issue of West Papua’s political status and was expected to bring peace to the people of West Papua and the people of Indonesia.

The international communities such as United States of America, European Union, Australia, Pacific Nations, African and Asian nations strongly support this policy.The Special Autonomy Law No. 21 Year 2001 was not born without reasons or history. Special Autonomy was born as an offer and a decree from the Indonesian government who realized that there was a demand for self-determination from the people of West Papua who demanded that their right to sovereignty, which was historically granted on 1st December 1961, be returned.

The people of West Papua also condemned the illegality of the Act of Free Choice in 1969 which was conducted undemocratically and unjustly in West Papua.The status of the Special Autonomy Law No 21/2001 has given the West Papuans a good opportunity to manage a special governmental system that could revitalize and protect the basic rights of the indigenous West Papuans.

However, the questions are:
1. Has Special Autonomy stopped the tears and blood of the indigenous West Papuans which still continuously drop and flow on the land of West Papua because of the torture and the cruelty of the Indonesians for 43 years?
2. Does Special Autonomy really guarantee the protection of the basic rights and the survival of the West Papuans in the future?
3. Does Special Autonomy give proper space and opportunity for the indigenous West Papuans in the field of education, health and economy?
4. Could Special Autonomy control the flood of migrants from outside West Papua who migrate to West Papua every week? There are three Royal Line passenger ships each with a 5,000 passenger capacity which bring 15,000 people to West Papua every week. (This figure does not include those who travel to West Papua by air every day.)
5. Has Special Autonomy ended the military and the police mobile brigade (Brimob) operations in West Papua?Special Autonomy has become a new problem and has brought suffering and has created more cruel oppression. The answer is a resounding NO

Certainly a new problem cannot solve existing problems!

Any guarantee [in the Special Autonomy Law] of security, safety and the future survival of the indigenous West Papuans is threatened by a systematic genocide of the West Papuan people. The future of the indigenous West Papuans now seems even darker.

The Indonesian police and military’s violence, oppression, terror, and intimidation that has been carried out against the indigenous West Papuans has become the dominant [Indonesian policy] and has been successful on the Melanesian land of West Papua, whereas Special Autonomy has failed.
In Special Autonomy there was a hope of improving the people’s standards of living in the fields of health, economy, and education; however, Special Autonomy has become an even more complex problem.

People have not enjoyed “being special” but are experiencing more suffering which increases continuously.Basically, the indigenous West Papuans have realized that Special Autonomy will neither protect nor improve the lives of the indigenous West Papuans. The truth is that Special Autonomy simply gives the Indonesians more of a chance to use more cruel and inhuman policies to oppress the indigenous West Papuans through its military and police forces.

Based on this realization, nearly 100% of the indigenous West Papuans refused Special Autonomy five years ago.
The indigenous West Papuans have had a long, dark and bitter experience living under Indonesian rule for over 43 years

Special Autonomy is therefore identical to:
1. Military and mobile brigade police systematic operations against Papuans.
2. Massive Islamization process through uncontrolled migration process via sea and air.This is very obvious when the balance of the population between indigenous West Papuans and the Moslem migrants in the towns of Sorong, Merauke, Nabire, Timika, Jayapura, and Keroom (Arso) is compared from before and after Special Autonomy.

The population of these towns is now 30% indigenous West Papuans and 70% Moslem migrants.
Having realized and having observed the human tragedy in West Papua and the dark future of the indigenous West Papuans due to violence and the threat of the Indonesian military operations as well as the process of Islamization in West Papua
The international community needs to put pressure on the Indonesian government to withdraw all organic and non-organic troops from West Papua because their presence now outnumbers the indigenous West Papuans.

The international community needs to put pressure on the Indonesian government to stop the extension of new provinces and regencies in West Papua. The extension of new provinces and regencies in West Papua is a new effective strategy to systematically carry out the military operations and the Islamization process in West Papua. This strategy must now be investigated and measured.

This is also a new version of the old transmigration strategy to kill and wipe out the indigenous West Papuans..

On This Day Since 9/11

April 4, 2008: Iraq, Hilla. Two Jihadi bombings leave seven local cops dead.
April 4, 2008: Afghanistan, Lashkar Gah. Four Afghans are murdered by a suicide bomber.

April 4, 2008: Somalia, Mogadishu. Islamists kill five local soldiers with a planted bomb.

April 4, 2008: Hamrin, Iraq. A suicide bomber detonates at a funeral, killing at least nine mourners.
April 4, 2008:Kupwara, India. Two policemen are kidnapped and brutally tortured to death by the al-Badr Mujahideen.April 4, 2007: Biskra, Algeria. An al-Qaeda attack leaves three Algerian soldiers dead and seven more injured.

April 4, 2007: Narathiwat, Thailand. Islamic radicals open up with automatic weapons on two men leaving a tea shop.

April 4, 2007: Kirkuk, Iraq. Freedom fighters murder eleven power plant workers April 4, 2007: Hilla, Iraq. Two people are beheaded and a prostitute is stabbed to death by religious fundamentalists.
April 4, 2007: Tral, India. A woman succumbs to injuries following a Mujahideen attack.April 4, 2006: Tral, India. A policeman is abducted and killed by Islamic radicals.

April 4, 2006: Baghdad, Iraq. Two children are killed when Islamic terrorists bomb their home. Their mother and brother are injured.

April 4, 2006: Baghdad, Iraq. Ten people are blown apart by a Sunni car bomb in a Shiite neighborhood. Nearly thirty others are injured. April 4, 2006: Baramulla, India. Militant Muslims kill a party activist and injure two women with automatic weapons.April 4, 2005: Boumerdes, Algeria. Islamic fundamentalists stage an ambush on a police convoy, massacring five officers.April 4, 2004: Karachi, Pakistan. Terrorists attack a Pakistani police station, force five captured officers to chant from the Qur’an, then execute them.

April 4, 2004: Mahmudiyah, Iraq. Shooting ambush kills Iraqi police chief and his driver.

April 4, 2004: Baghdad, Iraq. A mob of Shiite radicals storm through a neighborhood, killing nine coalition soldiers sent to protect citizens from violent attack. Twenty-four others are injured.April 4, 2003: Karachi, Pakistan. A doctor is gunned down in a sectarian attack.
April 4, 2003:
Hadithah Dam, Iraq. In a particularly heinous attack, two female car bombers drive up to a U.S. checkpoint, scream for help, then kill the three soldiers rushing to their assistance. Two others are injured.April 4, 2002: Lopra, India. A public works employee is murdered outside his residence.

April 4, 2002: Ambon, Indonesia. An Islamist throws a bomb into a Christian center, killing five and injuring fifty-seven other innocents.

April 4, 2002: Baramulla, India. In a brutal attack, Tehreek-e-Jehad-e-Islami members enter the house of a civilian and shoot him to death, along with his wife, daughter and another girl.

On This Day in Before 9/11

April 4, 2000: In Algeria, the Salafist Group for Call and Combat killed two shoppers and injured seven in a Ain Mrane market. I’m sure Allah was pleased.April 4, 1988: A bomb was discovered shortly before it was to explode inside the U.S. pavilion at the Cairo International Fair. Egyptian security services ordered a media blackout of the incident so nothing else is known.April 4, 1985: Black_September claimed credit for a rocket attack against a Jordanian airliner as it prepared to take off from the Athens Airport. Fortunately, the rocket failed to explode, leaving only a small hole in the fuselage. April 4, 1979: In Australia, a hijacker wielding a bomb demanded to go to Moscow. For good measure, he held a knife to a woman’s throat. She was critically wounded when police overpowered the terrorist as he made his way inside a Pan American jet at Sydney’s Mascot Airport.
Police said the hijacker, identified as an Italian Dimiscus Sperantzo, later died from his wounds. He carried bombs on his body and held the knife in his hand in an attempt to gain passage to the Soviet Union via Singapore and Rome. An anti-hijack squad rescued the woman after her abductor snatched her from the customs hall of the airport terminal and forced her aboard the 747 jumbo jet bound for Los Angeles.

April 4, 1979: Islamic terrorists in West Germany set off a bomb prematurely that exploded in the airmail distribution facility in Lufthansa Airlines’ Frankfurt hub. Ten postal workers were injured. The bomb was placed in a mailbag bound for Israel.April 4, 1973: Several people who were alleged to be of Armenian origin threw tear-gas grenades into the Turkish consulate general and the Turkish airlines office in Paris. There were no injuries. Let’s call it too little, too late.
April 4, 1973: El Al security successfully defended their aircraft from attack, but the Italian government released to two Palestinian hijackers and deported them to Lebanon.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: