andrewdotcoza

The State of Our Freedoms

March 7th, 2008 | by | old season

Mar
07

This afternoon, I dropped a friend off at the Cape Town airport.

After a pleasant drive, trouble free check-in, and a quick chat, I saw him to the security checkpoint, where I noticed the following sign.

This wasn’t a cardboard sign. Oh, no. It was a large, laminated plastic sign with an aluminium frame that was bolted to a steel stand. Let us take a closer look.

I apologise for the poor quality of the photography, but I had to work covertly. Who knows what these people would be capable of if they saw someone taking pictures of their sign?

Although I admit it grates me that the people in charge of airport security consider MS Paint an appropriate tool for graphic design, this image of the faceless policeman dragging the tearfully inappropriate man “Off to Jail!” in handcuffs is disturbing on a number of other levels too.

Saying inappropriate things is not a crime! It is a crime to threaten to blow up an aeroplane, or to threaten the security staff at the airport, but there is no threat implicit in making an “inappropriate remark” about, for example, the bomb warnings!

Just doing a very quick search of News24 produces the following cases of overreactions on the part of airport security:

Yesterday, in Port Elizabeth, a man that was frustrated by having to answer security questions at the British Airways counter was summarily arrested for saying that he had a bomb in his bag. As we all know, terrorists frequently admit to packing bombs in their luggage when asked at the check-in counter.

The same story ends with a reminder of the fact that the flying squad, dog unit and explosives squad were called out to the same airport last year after a man remarked that he had a nuclear bomb in is suitcase.

In November of last year, a businessman was arrested in Cape Town for telling the Comair ground staff that he had a few bombs in his luggage. The airline staff did not even bother to search his luggage – they just had him arrested and did nothing more.

In August of 2002, the Australian rugby team left a plastic bottle swaddled in paper behind the seat of an aircraft in Johannesburg. This lead to a police investigation because, “The police cannot laugh off anything as a joke, as a person never knows when it is not one.”

No. Actually, you do.

I don’t know why people make stupid jokes like this. Some of them are just asses. Some of them are slightly drunk. Some of them are nervous about flying and resort to badly thought out humour as a coping mechanism.

What I do know is that someone who announces to the baggage check staff that they have a bomb in their suitcase doesn’t have one and poses no threat whatsoever. If you are honest with yourself, you will admit that you know this too!

Someone who is planning to blow up a plane would keep their bomb secret until they were ready to use it. Even allowing for contrariness, there is no advantage in claiming that you have one beforehand. Someone planning to detonate something in the airport has every reason to put their money where their mouth is and produce their bomb immediately.

While I condemn the cowardice and criminality of terrorists – and all who would engage in senseless violence – out of hand, I cannot forgive the fact that our law enforcement has chosen the easy way of appearing to safe-guard our airline experiences at the cost of our fundamental constitutional rights to behave, on occasion, like idiots.

If you or I had to arrive at an airport and face an unreasonable search, we would be within our rights to complain and protest. However, we would be confronted by people who are primed to regard every single “inappropriate” comment as a crime. Faced with this situation, where one ill considered word could result in jail time, we cannot risk standing up for our rights. We don’t know who will be gauging the appropriateness of our comments. Neither airline check-in staff nor the MS Paint expert that made our sign are qualified to judge the legal nuances, or even the grammatical ones, of what we say. We are more than likely to be arrested and “proscuted” (No really. Read it again.) for saying something like, “You don’t understand your own stupid rules.”

This is the face of fascism. Right now, our fascists might be amateurs and confined to our airports, but our laws have created a situation in which, when we enter their domain, we are powerlessly subject to the whims of the power-hungry and the easily offended. It is no co-incidence that the inappropriate stick figure commits his crime in a cloudy thought bubble, reserved by more competent cartoonists for unspoken words. This sign, and this mentality, concerns itself with thought-crime rather than with real crime, and when these people go home at night, you can bet they will be partying like its 1984.

No Comments »

Chained to the what?

February 5th, 2008 | by | old season

Feb
05

I’ve taken a longer break than anticipated, mainly due to the fact that I was lazy, and was considering instituting a fixed routine of blogging every Tuesday evening. Tuesday’s aren’t especially good days, however, so I am still undecided.

Tuesdays might be better in general than any day on which you choose to take the ferry to Robben Island, where Nelson Mandela and many other luminaries of the revolution were incarcerated. IOL reports today that, as part of the “New Visitor Experience” programme, visitors would be shackled during the trip, to give them a better idea of what the prisoners felt like on the way over.

Wait… Just let me collect my wits…

Nope. No luck. Every time I read this, I expect that on some level I will see that it is not the most astoundingly bad idea I’ve heard this year. Unfortunately, it is, on a great many levels.

Firstly, would you want to set out on the ocean off The Cape of Storms in handcuffs? Handcuffed people have died in swimming pools, let alone the Atlantic Ocean!

Ms Shalo Mbatha, spokesperson for the Robben Island Museum, assures us that visitors will not be shackled directly to the boat, and that it will be done safely and only by choice. What, specifically, would the visitors be shackled to? A lifeboat? A 16 ton weight on the deck of the boat? How could it possibly be safe to set out to sea in handcuffs?

The boats themselves don’t have a great record either. In January, trips were cancelled because the boat had broken down. In the same week, two senior officials were suspended for “financial irregularities”. At the launch of the new, 26 Million Rand boat, 1 year late, on 31 January of this year, it was found to leak and had to be removed from the water for repairs. Granted, this is not an unusual occurrence for new vessels, but it still doesn’t inspire me to hog tie myself before going aboard a boat run by an organisation that ran at a loss of R25 Million during the 2006/2007 financial year!

On a more human level, however, we should be asking ourselves, as South Africans, what this New Visitor Experience could possibly lend to our nation. Are we discovering our history, or taking part in some bizarre passion play in our cargo-cult holocaust? Does a first-person re-enactment of the plight of Nelson Mandela amplify his undeniable greatness as a person, or does it just amplify in me a festering resentment of his oppressors and (if I happened to be black) of white people? Is this helping to build a nation, or are we symbolically chaining ourselves to the inequities of the past when we chain ourselves to the Robben Island ferry?

I feel a great solidarity with the victims of apartheid. In a recent reply to a comment, I lamented the use of the K-word on my fellow South Africans, because of the immediate and unjustified emotional pain that it inflicts. If you, however, choose to inflict the painful memory of apartheid on yourself unnecessarily, sympathy becomes far more difficult to motivate. It is far easier to sell people tickets that enable them to arrive on Robben Island in shackles that it is to sell them tickets that enable them to walk out of the Victor Verster Prison and embark on a path of reconciliation so profound and sincere that it formed the foundation of our modern, reborn nation.

No Comments »

Honorary Atheism anyone?

November 15th, 2007 | by | old season

Nov
15

Its been an amusing news day. IOL could not bring themselves to put “The K-word” in a headline so they lead an article with “Air force shooter suspect called ‘redundant’.” The article reveals that the shooter is alleged to have been called a “redundant kaffir*”, and is using this as part of his defence on murder charges. This will rightfully work far better than presenting the “I was called ‘redundant’” defence, so I think that IOL could have puckered up and given us a realistic headline.

The Afrikaans newspaper, Rapport, has fired one of their writers, Deon Maas, after he dared to express the opinion that Satanism was just another religion, and one which probably has the worst deal of the lot in terms of intolerance. Sadly, I cannot find the November 4 column in which he expressed these opinions so I would be grateful if someone could send me the link.

Pride of place, though, goes to the story of British PM, Gordon Brown, becoming an “Honorary Hindu”. IOL reports it here and to eliminate the possibility of some kind of cultural misunderstanding, the Hindustani Times reproduces the same story here.

I never considered the possibility that one could be an honorary member of a religion. If it is possible to be an honorary atheist, I am tempted to propose that we bestow this title on the Pope, complete with an “Atheist Name” such as Jeebuz McPointyhat.

Tempted, that is, because I honestly believe that the most beautiful gift that an atheist can give to a believer in any faith is haughty derision. Perhaps, if they receive enough of this, they will begin to question their religion. Perhaps The Honorable Gordon Brown could use a double share.

*: For this reason alone, I have a certain amount of sympathy for the accused.

No Comments »

Name Changes: Philip Kgosana

September 8th, 2007 | by | old season

Sep
08

A recurring theme of South African politics is the changing of names. Controversy rages around everything from the designations of our national sports teams to our cities. While many see these name changes as a destruction of South Africa’s heritage, and “white” heritage in particular, others expound the view that apartheid-era names are hurtful to the black majority of the country and that their removal is fundamental to the ongoing process of national reconciliation.

I take the unfashionable view that the name of something is largely irrelevant. I’ve been through a few name changes pertaining to places I live or visit, and the dust tends to settle after about 6 months. I do believe, however, that all South Africans have a natural right to strive for happiness. If a particular name is offensive to someone, and it commemorates something or someone that causes them pain, change it by all means. Heritage flows with the ebbs and tides of history. The true heritage that makes us who we are lives in our minds, our memories, and our stories that pass between generations.

That said, who would want to drive down a newly rechristened road, the name of which is meaningless to us? Confusion is inherent in the process of renaming landmarks, partially because many of us find it difficult to remember names that come from languages that we have not grown up speaking.

Cape Town is currently going through the process of changing the names of certain major routes through the city. I believe that one way to expedite this process, and indirectly expedite the process of nation building, is to tell the stories of the people whom the new names propose to commemorate. By familiarising ourselves with this heritage, we make it our own. It will no longer be “black history”, but rather South African history. This is the first in a series of posts that, I hope, will go some way to achieving this goal.

One proposal that is being discussed is the renaming of De Waal Drive to Philip Kgosana Drive.

In March, 1960, Philip Kgosana was a student at the University of Cape Town and the Western Cape Regional Secretary of the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC). At the time the apartheid government’s pass laws were in full force. Any black South African found outside their homes without their “dompas”, or pass book, would be arrested immediately.

The PAC and ANC had implemented anti-pass campaigns during the late 1950s and these had received massive popular support. During March of 1960, these campaigns were stepped up. The plan was for thousands of people to leave their homes without their pass books and march, en mass, to the nearest police station to present themselves for arrest. This would fill the law enforcement and prison system to capacity and make the country ungovernable.

On 21 March 1960, 6 000 protesters gathered in Langa in order to march to the police station. The local police made it known that they would consider this peaceful protest to be an attack on the police station and would answer it with force. Philip Kgosana convinced the crowd to disperse until later in the day. When the crowd re-assembled, the police charged them with batons. The crowd responded by throwing stones, at which the police opened fire. Five people were killed and many injured.

During the following week, violent protests rocked the townships and many pass offices were burned to the ground. Kgosana kept a low profile, except to meet with prominent white South African liberals and business people such as Patrick Duncan and Anton Rupert in an attempt to work with the white community to bring pressure to bear on the apartheid government.

On 30 March, all hell broke loose. Pretoria declared a State of Emergency, allowing police to break into homes, arresting people. Those who tried to run away were gunned down. In protest, 30 000 people from the township areas of Langa and Nyanga set out on foot to march on Cape Town. Kgosana, who was asleep in bed when the march started, quickly took control. The march headed peacefully down the N1 and onto De Waal Drive. Throughout, the marchers are described as being “peaceful, cheerful and unthreatening”. They obeyed Kgosana’s strict injunction against violence. Meanwhile, the South African Police were fortifying key points, such as Parliament, with machine gun nests.

It was on De Waal Drive that, in what must stand out as a beacon of hope in the bloodshed of 1960, Colonel Terry Terblanche of the South African Police decided to defy his orders openly and negotiate with Kgosana. Up to this point, a violent clash was looming, the like of which South Africa has never seen. With the police preparing for all-out war, these two men of peace negotiated a settlement. The marchers were to alter their route, avoiding Parliament, and head to the police headquarters at Caledon Square. There, Terblanche and the Minister of Justice agreed to arrange a meeting with Kgosana on condition that the marchers dispersed.

Once again, demonstrating his great statesmanship and the high esteem in which he was held by his people, this young student dispersed a crowd of 30 000. These people were victims of a brutal oppression and daily witnesses to acts of murder committed upon them by their own government.

Later, when he showed up for the meeting, Kgosana was arrested for his efforts.

It is sickening to consider what may have happened that day. If the police had opened fire on 30 000 protesters the violence of the pass-law protests would have, for the first time, burst free of the confines of the townships and happened in the centre of a major South African city. There can be no doubt that, with a spontaneous protest that large heading towards an unprepared Cape Town, the balance of power would have shifted away from the heavily militarised police force. Even if the protest had been quelled with violence, countless lives would have been lost, both black and white.

Kgosana managed to flee the country and seek exile in Lesotho, and later Tanzania. Apartheid stood for another 34 years, with the protests of 1960 being put down violently by the army, navy and police. The pass-laws remained in force until 1986. There are some who, perhaps reasonably, see Kgosana as someone who snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. At a recent University of the Western Cape discussion of the event, it was asked how a crowd of 30 000 people could have failed to overthrow the government(1).

Looking at this story from a different perspective, it must be seen that Kgosana placed human life above political ends. Many protesters would have been killed, but there would have been enough angry people left alive to retaliate, on a massive scale, against the white population of Cape Town. I have had personal discussions with well respected, successful white South Africans who remember Philip Kgosana as the man who saved their lives in 1960. Perhaps I speak as a white man rather than as a South African when I say this, but I have no tolerance for anybody who complains that De Waal Drive is going to be named after “some black guy”. To these people I say: Lean the history that you claim to love so well, and then tell me that the name of Philip Kgosana is not part of your heritage.

I make no pretence at serious academic writing with this piece. I have researched the facts as thoroughly as possible in about an hour. Many of my sources contradicted each other and I have tried to produce a version of the facts that seems reasonable and matches the majority of the articles that I have read. My references are given haphazardly and corrections are welcome. It is with sorrow that I notice that the history of South Africa’s struggle is so poorly documented. There is no Wikipedia entry for Philip Kgosana, and his date of birth seems buried in the mists of time, and perhaps the Internet. Let us change this.

1: http://www.uwc.ac.za/arts/english/beyond/stories4.html

Other reading:
http://www.sundaytimes.co.za/heritage/CPToverview.asp
http://www.africapetours.com/Township%20history.htm
http://www.capetown.at/heritage/history/apart_res_1960_art.htm
http://www.gandhi-manibhavan.org/activities/essay_worldcivil.htm
http://disa.nu.ac.za/journals/jourctexpand.htm

Those interested should be able to verify my version of events, or come up with their own, using these links as a starting point.

1 Comment »

Crime Prevention Tips

August 11th, 2007 | by | old season

Aug
11

Some months ago I republished a Message From Station Commissioner (sic) that appeared in the Table View Police newsletter that is circulated in my area. The newest edition of this publication has subsequently arrived. Once again, it contains some bizarre passages.

Snr. Supt. L. E. Nolan assures us:

“Recently, everyone at the station, including administrative personnel, has had their shoulders to the wheel, trying to reduce the levels of crime in our area by conducting crime free weeks.”

Contrast this with an extract from his previous message:

“…all police initiated crimes showed an increase, meaning that the police members worked more than they should have worked!”

I am comforted by the apparent progress. I think.

The rest of the newsletter contains crime prevention advice that reads like the manifesto of a very confused group of fascists. Their credo:

“A suspicious vehicle/person is a vehicle/person that acts in a manner, which may seem to be unusual or strange.” (sic)

Encouraging, don’t you think, to those of us who have unusual habits? I can’t wait for some old toppie from the heard-think group to run me in for wearing a Star Fleet uniform, or listening to unusual music. The last think I need is for Jack Bauer to come round my house to conduct a Crime Free Week. It gets worse, though. Under the heading, “Persons”:

“A suspicious person can be any person that you feel acts in a strange manner. The problem with suspicious persons is that there are no distinguishing features. Hijackers come in any form or shape. Colour, race, sex or age, are not distinguishing features.

“The best way to identify a suspicious person is to see all unknown persons as being suspicious.” (sic)

It disturbs me greatly that the South African Police Service espouses such an Orwellian principle. There is not much scope for freedom of expression here, and much less for freedom of movement.

The litany continues under the heading of “Who are these hijackers?”:

“To date, the overwhelming proportion of all the hijackers, have been men, and occasionally women. [...]

“These people are sometimes well dressed, but not always. They may wear a jacket or jersey under which they may conceal weapons, mostly handguns and knives, but occasionally AK47 assault rifles.

“The hijackers operate from motorcars, although they have been known to attack on foot. The cars they use vary, but are normally high performance vehicles, sometimes with tinted windows.”

In summary, the hijackers could be anyone who does not belong to the implicit and mysterious third gender. They walk among us, but we cannot recognise them because they are just so darned generic. You may see me walking down the street and never know that I am hiding an AK47 under my jersey*.

Notice the emotive language as the article continues. The italics are present in the original:

“[Immediately after an attack...] They will speed off, driving perhaps nervously and recklessly, but often with an air of bravado as if enjoying or flaunting publicly their total disregard for the law and the innocent person they have just attacked. They might ignore red traffic lights, jump stop streets and weave in and out through traffic, especially on motorways. This renders them highly visible to the public and this is where private citizens can play a vital role in assisting these people’s arrest.” (sic)

One hopes that speeding down the highway would make these criminals highly visible to the police too.

I confess to being exceedingly uncomfortable with the tone of these messages. This generic, ever-present enemy smacks of the Rooi Gevaar, nicely sanded down and repainted a different colour**. The faceless enemy, the suspicion and even the emotive mention of the AK47, a symbol of fear to most South Africans, almost seems calculated to heighten our anxiety. Clip a self-righteous little rant about “total disregard for the law” and innocent victims onto the end and you have something that exactly fits the mould of a speech by P. W. Botha.

Freedom, for me, means something different. It means being able to go to new places without being regarded with suspicion. It means embracing the spirit of nation-building, to which this paranoia is an anathema. It means regarding people as human beings by default and not as criminals. Goodness knows, we have enough to fear from crime in South Africa already without the police making it worse.

*: A standard AK is 870mm in length. The jersey I am wearing at the moment measures 690mm from the tip of my left shoulder to the edge of the seam on my upper right thigh. I would have great difficulty concealing an AK under my jersey, even if it were a one dimensional stick. The idea becomes preposterous when you start to add useful stuff like a magazine, a grip and width.

**: Consider the likelihood of a black person being reported as “suspicious” in a white neighbourhood. Now consider the likelihood of a white person being reported as “suspicious” in a black neighbourhood. I’m not saying that this has anything to do with the matter in hand, but rather asking that you consider it.

No Comments »

Building better murderers

July 4th, 2007 | by | old season

Jul
04

South Africa’s crime statistics for the 2006/2007 criminal year* were released yesterday. The press has been going wild**.

Although there has been a small increase in crime between the last reporting period and this one, overall numbers are significantly down on 2001/2002, by between 10% and 35%, depending on the crime.

Notable among the released data, or at least the published news reports, is the fact that incidents of murder have increased by 3.54% (oh noes!), while incidents of attempted murder have decreased by 2.09% (awsum!). I believe, however, that there is a deeper and sinister message in these figures, which I shall now expose.

Murder and attempted murder are pretty much the same thing. In the first instance, the murder shows some degree of competence. In the second, he or she has failed in their goal. Grouping these crimes together, we see a 0.58% increase in “murderous attacks”.

Things become more disturbing of you use these figures to calculate the efficiency of our murderers, specifically the proportion of them who succeeded. The figure was 47.43% in 2005/2006, and it has increased to 48.83% in 2006/2007.

Furthermore, if you plot the efficiency of murderers over all available reporting periods, you find that there is a disturbing upward trend.

The efficiency of our murderers has increased by a fraction over 30% since 2002/2003.

What is happening here? Well, I believe that a medical metaphor is most appropriate. When you are ill and take antibiotics, your body becomes better at fighting what we doctors*** call “germs”. Because germs mutate quickly, some of them will be more resistant to the antibiotic than others. As you get better, the proportion of resistant germs in your body will increase. These usually all get killed anyway, but you will sometimes require a different antibiotic to get rid of the very resistant ones.

If criminals are like germs, then South African law-enforcement policies are currently breeding better murderers. This is a bad thing, although it might also mean that our average intelligence is increasing, which is something of a silver lining.

I believe that these figures clearly indicate that it is time for our law-enforcement agencies to mix things up a little. They should try new approaches, without compromising their existing methods, to try and eradicate this new breed of super-murderer. Failure to do so could, sooner or later, result in a murdering pandemic, a reign of terror in which all law-abiding citizens are at the mercy of a new wave of master-criminals. Act now! Also, remember that it is important to finish your course.

*: Financial year, criminal year – potato, po-tah-toe.

**: In this story, IOL or SAPA got the figures wrong. I’ll be using my own calculations for the rest of this post, which happen to match those of the SAPS.

***: Not really.

No Comments »

Police Initiated Crime

March 15th, 2007 | by | old season

Mar
15

Far be it from me to poke fun at the South African Police Service and its members. Indeed, I have usually found them to an extraordinarily helpful and attentive group of people and I have great appreciation for the work that they do.

That said, there are some things that I do not understand.

Each month, I receive a Table View Police newsletter in my post box. The most recent is Volume 75 of March 2007. The message from the Station Commissioner is included here. I have highlighted a particular passage.

Sweet tap-dancing Jesus! What are we to make of this?

I shall endeavor to obtain a clarification from Senior Superintendent Nolan, and publish it here.

No Comments »

This is my thing with the death penalty

January 15th, 2007 | by | old season

Jan
15

A friend recently asked my why I am hung up* on blogging about the death penalty. Today, on the day that Saddam Hussein’s co-accused were executed, I thought I would publish my well considered answer.

As an atheist, I cannot fall back on eternal life, or even eternal torment. I don’t get to have another round through re-incarnation either. When everything is stripped away from me, I at least have life. When life is taken from me, I have nothing.

Life, translated into time, is our greatest and perhaps our only resource. Every human life is a potential, from which we hope that circumstances draw good things rather than bad. Irrespective of what they have done before, every human being has the potential to do good things, beneficial things, with the time remaining to them. This is the only thing that gives us value as human beings.

That is why taking a life, under any conceivable circumstances, is the ultimate barbarism. That is why it is wrong, and that is why I cannot condone the execution of any prisoner by a so-called civilised government. If your government is killing people, it is not civilised.

I cannot say that there are no circumstances under which I would take a life. I recognise that it is sometimes necessary, and sometimes feels like the best thing to do. I give no guarantee that I can live by my own altruism – indeed, my very human nature assures that I cannot.

Being opposed to the death penalty is not about limiting what we do when we have no control over our rage or our desire to live. It is about taking advantage of the times when we do have control to speak out against the clinical and brutal practice of government sanctioned killing.

Today, when they hanged Barzan Ibrahim, half brother of Saddam Hussein, they broke his head right off. Lots of people won’t want to think about this, just like people were outraged when the full video of Saddam Hussein’s execution was leaked on the Internet. Go and watch it. If you support the death penalty, go and embrace the barbarism of taking someone’s life. Don’t hide behind justice or the “rule of law”. Just watch a human life, with all of its potential, being snuffed out.

Now tell me how you feel.

*: Thank you, thank you. I’m here all week.

In case you were wondering, Andrew is not a vegetarian and is pro-choice when it comes to abortion. These choices sit quite comfortably in the same box as his opposition to the death penalty.

No Comments »

Letter to the President of South Africa

December 29th, 2006 | by | old season

Dec
29

Dear Mr President

As a proud South African citizen, I urgently appeal to you to intervene in an attempt to stop the execution of the former leader of Iraq, Mr Saddam Hussein.

Our New Republic has been founded on the principle of reconciliation and forgiveness, and the idea that every single human being has a right to life irrespective of their crimes. Although I realise that I don’t speak for all South Africans in this matter, I am personally very comfortable and justifiably proud to live in a nation that has abolished the death penalty.

I am not legally qualified to question Mr Hussein’s conviction on charges of crimes against Humanity. As a South African, however, I feel that I am qualified to question the ethical aspects of any execution. Perhaps, Mr President, it is precisely because we are South Africans, striving towards a peaceful future from a troubled past and present, that we realise that every human life has value, has potential, and can contribute to the betterment of humanity despite any past mistakes.

If our nation were able to prevent the loss of this life, it would give me immeasurable satisfaction because it would be an act that is based on the values that I believe are critical to the success of our own country.

If I am too late, then let my request still stand as a symbol of forgiveness and reconciliation in our own South Africa and the world at large. I am sure that you would mourn Mr Hussein with me, not for his criminality but for his humanity.

Sincere Regards

Andrew Freeborn

Indications are that Saddam Hussein, former leader of Iraq, will be executed by hanging tomorrow. This letter was sent to the director of communications at the Presidency (sandra@po.gov.za), and to President Mbeki’s Personal Secretary (alan@po.gov.za). If you oppose the death penalty, or doubt the impartiality of Mr Hussein’s conviction, please consider adding your voice to this appeal.

No Comments »