5112개의 게시물을 찾았습니다.
Here some impressions from last night's mass protests - almost sucessfully finalizing yesterday's "Day of Revolution" - on Cairo's Tahrir Square:
Some more pics about yesterday's "events" in Egypt you can see here:
☞ Egyptian anti-government protests (Guardian, 1.26)
☞ Pictures: 'Day of anger' (al-Jazeera, 1.26)
☞ Protests in Egypt (Tagesspiegel, 1.26)
Related report:
☞ Cairo protesters in violent clashes with police (Guardian, 1.26)
Jan. 25, in Egypt:
"DAY OF REVOLUTION"
Yesterday's Guardian (UK) reported the following:
Egypt's authoritarian government is bracing itself for one of the biggest opposition demonstrations in recent years tomorrow, as thousands of protesters prepare to take to the streets demanding political reform...
An unlikely alliance of youth activists, political Islamists, industrial workers and hardcore football fans have pledged to join a nationwide "Day of Revolution (against torture, corruption, poverty and unemployment)" on a national holiday to celebrate the achievements of the police force...
Tomorrow's events were initiated by two dissident movements, both based online. One is dedicated to the memory of Khaled Said, an Alexandrian man beaten to death by police last year, while the other, "6 April", is a youth group named after the date of an uprising two years ago in the Nile delta town of El-Mahalla El-Kubra, in which three people were killed by police...
Today's reality on the Egyptian streets
At noon (local time/8pm KST) Reuters reported:
Hundreds of anti-government protesters are marching in the Egyptian capital chanting against President Hosni Mubarak and calling for an end to poverty. The demonstrators are singing the national anthem, carrying banners denouncing Mubarak and saying Egyptian elections are fraudulent. The protesters are heavily outnumbered by back-clad riot police, as security forces deployed in a massive operation across Cairo ahead of the first Tunisia-inspired rally in Egypt. No violence was immediately reported.
About one hour later J. Shenker, reporting for The Guardian, wrote the following:
Remarkable scenes in Cairo as thousands and thousands are marching with apparent freedom on the streets after years of seeing every anti-government protest immediately shut down by police. Riot troops are following close behind but seem uncertain as to what to do - three major demonstrations are now ongoing in different parts of the Egyptian capital, all of whom have broken through police cordons, but there seems to be little coordination between protest leaders about what to do next.
I'm downtown outside the offices of the government newspapers where hundreds are chanting 'Mubarak, your plane is waiting' and appealing for passers-by to join them, many of whom are taking up the offer.
Ahmed Ashraf, a 26 year old bank analyst, told me this was his first protest, and that he had been inspired by events in Tunisia. "We are the ones controlling the streets today, not the regime," he said. "I feel so free - things can't stay the same after this."
A half hour later Al-Masry al-Youm (Egypt intependend news organisation) reported the following:
After a short period of non-interference, Egyptian police have started to crack down on several protests in downtown Cairo.
On the Kasr al-Aini street, security forces cordoned off around 400 activists and started to beat those who tried to break in siege.
To the north, eyewitnesses said that the police have beaten several demonstrators who gathered in front of Cairo’s judicial complex.
And once again J. Shenker, just few minutes later:
Reports spreading of protesters attacking the council of ministers building downtown, while several thousands are marching towards Mubarak's presidential palace in Heliopolis. In Dar El Salaam, a densely-populated neighbourhood in southern Cairo, demonstrators claim they have taken over the police station...
Related (updated) reports:
☞ Egypt protesters clash with police (al-Jazeera)
☞ Live updates: Opposition groups protest... (al-Ahram)
PS: Two days ago an activist, involved in the preparation of today's "Revolution Day" vowed: ""It will be the start of something big!!"
TUNISIAN PEOPLE'S REVOLUTION
Latest news:
Since today's afternoon (local time) police is attacking (incl. tear gas) anti-gov't protesters in the capital Tunis, after hundreds of demonstrators gathered outside the prime minister's office to pressure the interim 'national unity' government to step down.
Protesters had begun gathering at gov't buildings since last night, in contravention of a curfew. When they surged through a police picket, tensions spiked and the police fired tear gas to clear the crowd.
Angry resisting protesters threw stones and smashed police vehicles during the clash.
Reuters also reported that several windows of the finance ministry building had been broken.
Before the skirmish, protesters said the situation outside the buildings was "very, very tense as they spent the night outside... They were told by security forces to leave the area, and tension mounted for some time", al-Jazeera reported in the morning from the site of the protest.
The protesters announced: "We'll continue our sit-in struggle for as long as it takes, until we topple the government!"
More tension is expected in the capital, as members of the national unity government cabinet, which includes members from both the RCD (ousted President Zine El Abedine Ben Ali's party) and the opposition, are expected to hold a meeting at the government buildings being surrounded by the protesters.
"Thousands, we've been told, will gather ... in this area to prevent the government of national unity, particularly the ministers... [from] starting their business," al-Jazeera correspondent reported before the clashes.
Since Y'day morning more than thousand activists, but also "ordinary" people (many are from Sidi Bouzid, a bleak city in central Tunisia where the so-called "Jasmine revolution" over poverty, corruption and political repression was sparked a five weeks ago) who had been driven to the capital in a "Freedom Caravan" surrounded the PM's building in central Tunis.
For more (updated) news please check out LabourStart!
A call for (int'l) solidarity:
For more info please check out:
☞ Rage Against the Machine Supports Guitar-makers Strike (Clash, 1.12)
☞ 콜트콜텍 + 문화행동
Related article:
Since the start of the year, North Korea has been mounting a kind of peace offensive. But despite Pyongyang's (ongoing) "charm offensive", A. Lankov (one of the most prestigious experts on N. Korea) is very pessimistic about a coming inter-Korean "peace process" in 2011, as you can learn from his following article (published in Asia Times, 1.11):
Push could soon turn to shove
2010 was a hard and dangerous year in Korea. Alas, 2011 might become even worse.
At first glance, this statement might appear excessively pessimistic. After all, in the last weeks the tensions on the Korean Peninsula were decreasing, North Korea suggested negotiations, and South Korea also said that talks might be a good idea.
However, the appearances are misleading. If one has a better look at the recent crisis, as well as at the current mood in Seoul and Pyongyang, there is little ground for optimism. It seems that both
North Korean strategic calculations and South Korean assumptions about ways to handle its uneasy neighbor will bring the crisis back - and with a vengeance.
What we have seen throughout the last year was another exercise in the habitual North Korean brinkmanship – yet another attempt to apply tactics which have been used many times and usually with great success.
When North Korean strategists want to squeeze some aid or political concessions from other side, they follow a simple but efficient routine. First, Pyongyang manufactures a crisis, and does everything to drive tensions high. The missiles are launched, islands are shelled or nukes are tested, while the usual verbal bellicosity of the North Korean media reaches almost comical heights. Sooner or later both the "target audience" and international community begin to feel uneasy, and when this point is reached Pyongyang suggests negotiations. Its neighbors and adversaries alike feel relief and start talks, which usually end with Pyongyang getting what it wants - in exchange for restoring the status quo.
In the past, this tactic has worked well (for example, this is how in 2007 North Koreans managed to push the George W Bush administration to switch to a soft line and resume aid). However, this time things are different. So far, North Korea is not getting what it wants.
But what does the North want to achieve with this seemingly dangerous (but actually very calculated) military/political theater? As usually is the case with Pyongyang's foreign policy, it is about money. In 2008 South Korea and United States dramatically reduced the amount of unilateral and unconditional aid to the North.
It had to turn to China instead. China obliged, and it seems that the North Korean economy - while still very poor by current East Asian standards - is in better shape than at any time since the early 1990s (albeit this modest recovery seems to be, first and foremost, brought about by domestic transformation rather than by Chinese aid). However, this made North Korean leaders excessively dependent on China, whom they do not like and whom they do not trust (this seems to be a mutual feeling).
So, they want the US and South Korean aid back. First, it will increase the size of the entire aid pie, controlled and distributed by the regime. Second, it will provide Pyongyang with ample opportunities to distance itself from dangerous China, and acquire a number of sponsors whose contradictions can be used to North Korea's advantage. The North Korean diplomats are very good at this game, which they learned in the 1960s when they exploited the Sino-Soviet schism with remarkable success.
The North decided that this was a time to exercise pressure on both Seoul and Washington (actually, this is what it has been doing since 2008). It is not often noticed that North Korea actually conducts two separate, if related, blackmail programs - one aimed at the US and another aimed at South Korea. The ways of exercising pressure should be different, because the concerns of these two countries are dissimilar.
In the case of South Korea, the North decided to take advantage of Seoul's dependence on the international markets. Foreign investors and trade partners of South Korean firms are not going to be amused by the newspaper headlines which talk a war "which is going to erupt on the Korean Peninsula".
These tensions are likely to have a negative impact on the South Korean economy, making the South Korean voter worse off. On top of that, the average South Korean voter does not usually care too much about North Korea, but still expects its government to be capable at handling the North, in order to avoid major confrontations. Therefore, the North Korean leadership expects that sooner or later South Korean voters will penalize an excessively stubborn government by supporting the opposition.
To the US, the North's selling point is its ability to proliferate. Since for the Americans the major (almost only) reason they care about North Korea is its potential for nuclear and missile proliferation, the North Korean regime demonstrated to Washington that even without aid and in spite of the international sanctions, North Korean engineers and scientists managed to make considerable progress in areas of military significance.
In mid-November, just before the shelling of Yeonpyeong Island, a group of American nuclear scientists led by Dr Siegfried Hecker from Stanford, was shown a state-of-the-art uranium-enrichment facility whose scale and sophistication exceeded what the US experts believed to be possible. This is a major step towards a full-scale military uranium program, which is, incidentally, more difficult to control than the old plutonium program.
Now, after a few months of tension building, the North Koreans decided to test the ground and check whether the adversaries (and potential donors) are ready to give in. Frankly, Pyongyang's decision seems to be surprising, since the answer is obvious: neither Washington nor Seoul is ready to make concessions.
Why didn't the old tactics succeed this time? In short, because the attitudes in both Washington and Seoul changed in recent years.
Talking about the US side, the main reason why Washington was in past willing to give concessions and unilateral aid, was the once widespread (albeit unfounded and na๏ve) belief that this was a way to facilitate the denuclearization of North Korea. It was assumed that Pyongyang could be persuaded/bribed/pressed into surrendering its nuclear program. This belief evaporated in 2008, after the second nuclear test.
American policymakers have finally realized that North Korea is not going to surrender its nukes under any circumstances. North Korean leaders are ready to talk about arms control, not about disarmament. In other words, North Korean leaders hope to get paid (generously) for freezing their nuclear program while still keeping the existent nuclear devices. The US is not ready to discuss this yet.
With South Korea, the situation is more complicated. The Lee Myung-bak government was in favor of a hard line from the very beginning. After the Cheonan sinking and Yeonpyeong shelling, the South Korean public, usually cautious when it comes to matters of peace and war, switched to support of the hard line.
In a poll in late November, some 80% of participants said they were in favor of a massive military retaliation in the case of the next North Korean attack (and a considerable minority even said that they did not mind a war). This unusual bellicosity of the public, reinforced by the even harder position of the military, puts additional pressure on the government.
Paradoxically, the events (or rather non-events) of early December contributed towards Seoul's shift to a hard line. Then, soon after the Yeonpyeong shelling of November 23, the South Korean military staged large drills in the disputed waters near the North Korean coast. Before the exercises, the North Koreans threatened a mighty counterstrike, but when Seoul decided to go ahead on December 20, nothing happened.
North Korea's decision not to execute its threats was seen as a sign of weakness. A triumphant South Korean official said in a private conversation: "They are with their tail between their legs now. This is what we should have done from the very beginning."
Therefore, the dominant view in Seoul now is that if North Korean leaders know that their new strikes will be met with a mighty response, Pyongyang will not dare to stage another attack. So, Seoul politicians believe that harshness is the best option, since North Korean leaders will surely duck a fight.
This seems to be an illusion - and, perhaps, a dangerous one. Like it or not, there is no valid reason why Pyongyang strategists should be afraid of a Southern counterstrike. It is true that North Korea does not want a full-scale war, but due to the peculiarities of its political system North Korea can sustain a minor military confrontation far more easily than its southern counterpart - or, to be more precise, in the case of such a confrontation the domestic consequences for the North Korean government will be far less serious.
Needless to say, even if a South Korean counterstrike kills many hundreds of North Korean soldiers or sailors, the leaders will not feel too sorry of them (and children of the leaders do not serve in the North Korean military). The loss of a few pieces of rusty military equipment of 1960s vintage will not upset them too much, either.
It is sometimes stated that an efficient counterstrike will at least lead to a loss of face for the North Korean leadership, and that fear of such humiliation could serve as a deterrent against future attacks. Unfortunately this seems to be wishful thinking as well. The North Korean government is in full control of the media, so such a defeat will remain unknown to almost everyone outside the military elite.
If this is the case, why did the North avoid a fight in December, after so many threats and bellicose statements? Because there is no reason why it should agree to fight at the time and place chosen by its adversaries, when these adversaries were ready to strike back. It makes much more sense to wait for a while and then deliver a sudden and powerful strike when the North Korean political leadership decides that the time is ripe.
It seems that we are not going to wait for long. Recent events leave little doubt that the North Korean charm offensive will be ignored by Seoul (and, perhaps, by Washington as well, even though signals are slightly mixed). The first sign of this position became visible on January 6 when the US and South Korea rejected North Korea's call for unconditional talks with South Korea as "insincere" and repeated their usual set of demands, which are, alas, clearly unacceptable for the North Koreans.
The North Korean leaders will probably do what they did before in similar situations: they will stage a provocation or two in order to increase pressure on the stubborn Americans and South Koreans, in hope that sooner or later they will give in. After all, contrary to what Seoul wants to believe, the associated political risks for the North Korean elite are small and rewards in case of eventual success are significant.
This coming round of military/diplomatic might be more dangerous than usual, largely because of Seoul's newly acquired belief in the power of counterstrikes. Now it seems likely that in case of another North Korean strike the South will retaliate mightily. This counterstrike is likely to trigger a counter-counterstrike, and there is even a probability (albeit very minor) that such an exchange will escalate into a real war or at least some intense fighting.
Far more likely, though, is that the situation will remain under control. In this case, the excessive reaction by the South Koreans is likely to amplify the message their North Korean adversaries want to deliver.
North Korean strategists want to damage the South Korean economy as well as create domestic tension, which will eventually turn the South Korean public against the current South Korean government and its North Korean policy. However, if such an exchange of fire happens we can be certain that the international media will not be merely writing about a "war that is about to start in Korea" but rather will declare that a "war started in Korea". The impact of such reports on the world markets and, eventually, on the South Korean economy is easy to predict.
The South Korean government should not be misled by the current bellicose mood of the voters. This mood is not likely survive a major confrontation, and once the situation becomes really tough, the same people who now cry for revenge are likely to start blaming the government for its inability to maintain a stable and secure situation on the peninsula.
Alas, not much can be done now. The North is likely to follow the usual line of a professional (and usually successful) blackmailer: since pressure has not worked, even greater pressure should be applied. The South, confident in the power of deterrence, is likely to over-react, thus further aggravating the situation and increasing the scale of the next crisis.
Well, it seems that the year 2011 will not be especially tranquil in Korea. And the subsequent few years might be even worse.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/MA12Dg02.html
Related articles:
☞ Seoul to push for Pyongyang's apology (K. Times, 1.21)
☞ North Korea set on third nuclear test (A. Times, 1.21)
Last Saturday's (1.15) Statement by the Communist Workers' Party of Tunisia (full text version):
For freedom, democracy and social justice
Tunisia has lived since December 17, 2010, the day when the current popular revolt against unemployment, exclusion, poverty, cost of living, the shameless exploitation, corruption, injustice and tyranny began. These popular protests started in the city of Sidi Bouzid and have since extended to all parts of the country. Poverty and tyranny, endured in the city, are a general phenomenon that affects all the Tunisian people. The rage and indignation is the same throughout the country. The police and dictatorial regime of President Ben Ali attempted to crush the people’s uprising using misinformation, deception, lies and the brutal repression of the police who fired on the people, killing unarmed demonstrators. This was done with the intention of suppressing the protests quickly and preventing their spread to the rest of the country. These methods failed. Instead they have fueled protests that have extended their range, and drove the demonstrators to turn what began as simple social demands to political demands on the issue of freedom and power. Even when Ben Ali delivered his speech on the twelfth day of the revolt to promise that he would allow elections, nobody believed him and the masses responded that the protests would continue.The placards and slogans put forward by the masses in revolt, from south to north, are clear evidence of the long process of political awareness which has taken place in the minds of Tunisians over the last twenty years of the reign of Ben Ali.
Slogans such as: “Work is a right, band of thieves,” “Hands off the country corrupt band,” Work, freedom, dignity, ” Liberty, freedom and non-life presidency “,” Down with the party of thieves, down with the torturers of the people “,” Ben Ali loose, the people do not let it go “… Finally, the masses have realized that they are being ruled but not represented and that the system represents “a band of thieves”, a handful of families who have plundered the resources of the country, sold its resources and its people to foreign capital, which deprives people of their liberty and their rights, using the brute force of the state apparatus, which has been transformed into a “state of families,” to humiliate, subdue and intimidate the people and discourage them from fighting . Tunisia has been turned into a national prison in which torture and repression was used to terrorise the people. The people demand change in the belief that the aspirations to freedom, democracy and social justice can not be achieved under Ben Ali. The masses involved in the struggle, in the intifada, no longer want dictatorship, and have embarked on a new process in Tunisia.Tunisia needs a new democratic government which represents the national and popular will of the people and represents its own interests. And a system of this type cannot emerge from the current system and its institutions or its constitution and its laws, but only on its ruins by a constituent assembly elected by the people in conditions of freedom and transparency, after ending the tyranny.
The task of a People’s Council is to draft a new constitution that lays the foundations of democratic republic, with its institutions and its laws. The popular protests are still ongoing. No one can predict either their duration or their development. Tunisia has entered a new phase in its history characterized by the rise of its people and their desire to recover their freedom, rights and dignity.This raises the responsibilities of the opposition, especially its most radical wing, to find new policy solutions that place as an immediate priority the requirements of the Tunisian people for a program providing a plan for overall change in Tunisia.The opposition, consisting of all the forces involved in the intifada, has been invited to close ranks for Democratic Change and to form an alternative to tyranny and dictatorship.
The Communist Workers' Party renews its invitation to convene a national assembly of the Tunisian opposition in order to confront the issue as quickly as possible.Also renewed has been an invitation to come together to coordinate at national and local level support for the popular movements, and to work towards a set of concrete demands so that the movement does not run out of steam. Among these demands the most immediate are:
1. An immediate end to the dictatorship’s campaign of repression against the people.
2. The release of all prisoners.
3. The arrest and prosecution of all those responsible for repression, the plunder of property, and murder.
4. The repeal of all restrictions on civil liberties, free expression, organization and assembly.
The adoption of immediate economic measures to alleviate unemployment and poverty. We demand income security, health care and the immediate recognition of trade unions.
The Communist Workers’ Party will remain, as it has always been, on the side of the workers, the poor and all those at the forefront of a new order in Tunisia.
http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=7544
One week ago ICC(*) published the following "breaking news":
The S. Korean ruling class tears aside the veil of its “democracy”
We have just received news from Korea that eight militants of the “Socialist Workers’ League of Korea” (Sanoryun) have been arrested and charged under South Korea’s infamous “National Security Law”.1 They are due to be sentenced on 27th January.
There can be no doubt that this is a political trial, and a travesty of what the ruling class likes to call its “justice”. Three facts bear witness to this:
• First, the fact that South Korea’s own courts have twice thrown out the police charges against those arrested.
• Second, the fact that the militants are charged with “forming a group benefiting the enemy” (ie North Korea), despite the fact that Oh Se-Cheol and Nam Goong Won, amongst others, were signatories of the October 2006 “Internationalist Declaration from Korea against the threat of war” which denounced North Korea’s nuclear tests and declared in particular that: “the capitalist North Korean state (...) has absolutely nothing to do with the working class or communism, and is nothing but a most extreme and grotesque version of decadent capitalism's general tendency towards militaristic barbarism”.
• Third, Oh Se-Cheol’s speech leaves no doubt that he opposes all forms of capitalism, including North Korean state capitalism.
These militants are accused of nothing other than the thought crime of being socialists. In other words, they stand accused of urging workers to defend themselves, their families, and their living conditions, and of exposing openly the real nature of capitalism. The sentences required by the prosecution are only one more example of the repression meted out by the South Korea ruling class against those who dare to stand in its way. This brutal repression has already targeted the young mothers of the “baby strollers’ brigade” who took their children to the 2008 Candlelight demonstrations and later faced legal and police harassment;4 it has targeted the Ssangyong workers who were beaten up by the riot police who invaded their occupied factory.
Faced with the prospect of heavy jail sentences, the arrested militants have conducted themselves in court with exemplary dignity, and have used the opportunity to expose clearly the political nature of this trial. We reproduce below a translation of Oh Se-Cheol’s last speech before the tribunal.
Military tensions in the region are on the rise, following the provocative shelling of Yeonpyeong Island in November last year and the killing of civilians by the North Korean regime’s canon, answered by the despatch of an American nuclear aircraft carrier to the region to conduct joint military exercises with the South Korean armed forces. In this situation, the statement that humanity today faces a choice between socialism and barbarism rings truer than ever.
The propaganda of the US and its allies likes to portray North Korea as a “gangster state”, whose ruling clique lives in luxury thanks to the ruthless repression of its starving population. This is certainly true. But the repression meted out by the South Korean government to mothers, children, struggling workers, and now socialist militants shows clearly enough that, in the final analysis, every national bourgeoisie rules by fear and brute force.
Faced with this situation we declare our complete solidarity with the arrested militants, notwithstanding the political disagreements we may have with them. Their struggle is our struggle. We address our heartfelt sympathy and solidarity to their families and comrades.
http://en.internationalism.org/node/4172
* "International 'Communist' Current"
Related contribution (2008.8.31):
http://blog.jinbo.net/CINA/1600
TUNISIAN PEOPLE'S REVOLUTION
1. Today's news:
The announcement of a new 'unity government' by Mohamed Ghannouchi, the Tunisian "prime minister", has been met with massive anger by thousands of protesters, who say too many members (incl. the new "PM") of ousted President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali's party remain in power.
The "PM" announced that the former defence, foreign, interior and finance ministers will keep their key posts in the new government formed after the public uprising led to the flight of President Ben Ali.
Today's mass protests in Tunis and several other cities forced (until now) three new ministers to resign.
The General Union of Tunisian Workers (UGTT), which played a key role in protests against the North African state's ousted president, refused to recognise the new government.
Today in the morning at an extraordinary meeting UGTT has decided "not to recognise the new government," Ifa Nasr, union spokesman, said a short while ago.
In Tunis, riot police fired tear gas and clashed with protesters during a rally against the new government in the centre of the capital.
For more updated news please check out LabourStart and the Al-Jazeera Special "Uprising in Tunisia"!
2. "For freedom, democracy and social justice!", statement by the Tunisian Communist Workers' Party (PCOT), Jan. 15:
In its statement issued in Tunis PCOT renewed its invitation to the opposition to convene a national assembly backed up by renewed coordination, at national and local level, of support for specific and concrete demands so that the movement does not run out of steam.
“The popular protests are still ongoing, no one can predict either their length nor development. Tunisia entered a new phase in its history characterised by the rise of the people and their desire to regain freedom, rights and dignity.”
This raises the responsibilities of the opposition, especially its most radical wing, to find new policy solutions for a program providing a plan for overall change in Tunisia said the party.
Listing the most important and immediate issues as the release of all prisoners; bringing to account those responsible for repression, plunder of property and the killing of citizens, the repeal of all security restrictions and the restoration of freedoms and legality, frteedom of expression, organization and assembly the party called for immediate measures ‘for the world of work: income security, health and immediate recognition of trade union rights and the independent organisation of the unemployed and the precariously employed.
“The Workers’ Communist Party will remain, as it has always been, on the side of workers, deprived and poor, first in line for a new order in Tunisia, for freedom, democracy and social justice.”
2011, Jan. 14: A first great victory(*) for the...
TUNISIAN PEOPLE'S REVOLUTION
For the first time in the modern Arab history a popular uprising toppled a dictatorship!!
Massive street protests - incl. almost daily fierce street battles resisting the bloody state terror(more than 80 protesters were killed by the "security forces") - over unemployment, mass poverty, corruption and political oppression forced (ex)President Ben Ali to flee the country Friday night after 23 years of iron-fisted rule.
Here just a few impression from Tunis, last Friday afternoon:
* An activist of the Tunisian Communist Workers' Party said y'dy: "We, the people of Tunisia, won a battle! But the war against exploitation and oppression isn't over! The revolution must continue until we'll achieve a liberated society!!"
For more updated info please check out LabourStart!
최근 덧글 목록