Tuesday, October 02, 2007

Why Marxists Cannot Support Islamic Fundamentalism – The Case of Hamas

By Communist League of Action - Morocco
Tuesday, 02 October 2007

In order to understand the causes behind the confrontations between Hamas and Fatah in Gaza, we need to study the politics that led to these confrontations. By posing things in this way things become clearer.

We believe that the political reasons for these confrontations are the struggle for "a fair repartition of the cake" between the "old" and the "new" - the interests of the masses count for nothing... We believe, like "most people on the left", that it is "a mere power struggle between two equally reactionary forces".

The victory of Hamas brings nothing to the Palestinian masses in terms of their living conditions or their liberation struggle. Comrade Yehuda Stern is right when he says: "the victory of Hamas in Gaza does not solve any of the fundamental problems of the Palestinian masses" and that "one would have to be a fool to consider Hamas as a revolutionary or even a consistently anti-imperialist organization."

Hamas has not led this war for the masses nor for national liberation. They have led it because "They, too, wish to become part of the capitalist system. They climb on the shoulders of the oppressed masses and try to take the lead in order to use their strength to achieve a ‘better compromise' with the imperialist oppressor. [Their aim...] is to be accepted as part of a viable ruling elite by the imperialist powers that dominate the world scene."

There is not one progressive atom to these policies of Hamas. The war between the reactionary forces to determine which amongst them will be the representative of the imperialists in the country is not a war in which we must take part. Revolutionaries do not need to support one camp against another. On the contrary, the policy of the Marxists is to denounce this war and call for class policies on the part of the mass organisations.

When reading a part of comrade Stern's article, we can only come to the conclusion that he demands support for Hamas since the masses "support" this organisation, and that we must be with them in their war against Fatah - because this war is "a decisive battle between imperialism and the Palestinian people" and because "the victory of Hamas has galvanized the Palestinian and Arab masses against imperialism and shaken the confidence of the Israeli workers in their oppressors."

However, after only a few lines we see in the same article by the same author that "Hamas does not have any real alternative to offer to capitalist exploitation". We also see that "Hamas is a populist movement" and above all "we should always keep firmly in mind that Hamas does not want to overthrow capitalism. They merely wish for banks and monopolies with Islamic names. If they follow the same path of making deals with the imperialist powers, which at a certain stage will be inevitable, its leadership will be exposed as just another group of bourgeois politicians, no better than Fatah, especially should they attempt to set up a regime in their image to assert their domination. This, in the long run, is the only possibility in Palestine, where the ruling class is extremely weak and lacks any popular base."

Furthermore that "we do not give the fundamentalists any political support" [our emphasis].

We even see that in the article it is stated that that Hamas' war is "a decisive battle between imperialism and the Palestinian people" and their victory is "a severe blow against imperialism" etc. If this were the case the comrade would have the right to demand political support for Hamas (= fundamentalists) and it would be a serious error not to... However, all this talk of "the decisive battle" and "severe blow" is wrong and the truth is that Hamas "merely wish for banks and monopolies with Islamic names." We must remember that "Hamas is a populist, reactionary movement, whose leadership not long ago had announced its willingness to negotiate with the USA and Britain," etc. In this case, we must not give "any political support".

From our point of view, we believe that:

Firstly, this war is not "between imperialism and the Palestinian people". It is between two camps of the same class for domination, as we have already explained.

Secondly, the victory of Hamas will not weaken the confidence of the Israeli masses in their oppressors. On the contrary, Hamas is a semi-fascist, anti-Semitic religious party. Its propaganda about exterminating the "infidel" Jews and its methods are the best arguments in the hands of the Israeli ruling class for maintaining the "sacred unity"...

Hamas does not have a lot of room for manoeuvre even if they come to an agreement with imperialism and "climb on the shoulders of the oppressed masses and try to take the lead in order to use their strength to achieve a ‘better compromise' with the imperialist oppressor".

Hamas in reality, as our comrade says, "has already signalled that it is willing to reach a compromise with the imperialists and their representatives in Palestine, i.e. the Fatah movement and President Mahmoud Abbas".

This could lead to desperation, where at least a small fraction of their rank and file could begin to launch suicide attacks against the Israeli masses. In this case, "This act [will create] more hatred between the Israeli masses and the Palestinian masses. By pushing the Israeli working class into the hands of the [ruling class] these terrorists are in reality the best friends of the [ruling class]. If they did not exist [the Israeli ruling class] would have to invent them. The logic behind this criminal act is to strengthen the right-wing, giving more legitimacy to the terror of the state." (see: Israel: Ashdod bombings: How reaction and individual terrorism feed off each other. Obviously, this will not "shake the confidence of the Israeli workers in their oppressors."

Thirdly, the "galvanisation" of the Arab masses against imperialism around forces such as Hamas is comparable to the "galvanisation" called for by Bin Laden and other fanatics...

Do the Palestinian masses support Hamas?

The last election gave Hamas a large victory (in parliamentary terms, although not in terms of votes) whereas Fatah and the other groups suffered an important defeat. The comrade is right when he explains this victory by saying: "This victory of Hamas would not have been possible without a massive turn of the Palestinian masses both in Gaza and the West Bank against Fatah and the leaders of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) and the Palestinian Authority (PA) after more than a decade of extreme corruption and collaboration with imperialism and the Israeli government against their own people."

Hamas has cynically exploited this situation by using demagogic, populist language which concentrates on the struggle against corruption and the continuation of the resistance. Its promises are not limited to this world, but extend even to the "next world"!!

This means that the vote for Hamas was not a vote for its reactionary, anti-Semitic project, nor for its attitude towards women, etc., but revenge against Fatah and a vote for a change in living conditions. This makes us more conscious of the relevance of the revolutionary Marxist alternative to save the masses from alienation.

The masses can sometimes support very reactionary movements ‑ when they find themselves at an impasse, in unbearable living conditions, in the absence of a revolutionary alternative, and when the leaders of the mass organisations behave like traitors. In such cases, and since nature abhors a vacuum, it is possible that a fascist party, or something similar, takes advantage of the situation and takes power.

In such cases we must endure temporary isolation. However, the situation in Palestine is different, and more favourable, as we have already explained - the masses in Palestine voted for a reactionary party, but for progressive reasons.


Hamas is a reactionary bourgeois party. We must unmask it and struggle against it. To do this, we must struggle for class independence. We must struggle for a united front of the mass organisations - the trade unions and left currents - on the basis of a militant programme against the barbarism caused by this confrontation, against the Israeli aggression, and for the improvement in the living conditions of the masses. These are only general ideas and we must develop such a programme concretely.

We raise all this despite the fact that we believe that it is premature to speak of an intervention in the mass movement in Palestine at this stage. We believe that we must concentrate our forces on making contact with the most advanced elements there and educate them in the spirit of Marxism, etc. But they must be educated as Marxist cadres who struggle for the independence of the working class.

Comradely Greetings,

Communist League of Action (Morocco)RENEGADE EYE


Jeff Richards said...

while I dont agree with the world view of this article, I DO agree that Hamas is a bourgeois party. In a recent article in that fine publication New Left Review (on Turkey), it mentions that the primary model for Hamas in palestine was Turkeys ruling party the AKP. Jihadist fundamentalism, like extremist nationalism can readily revert to economic liberalism (combined with social illiberalism- capitalism and democracy are not the same thing) in changed circumstances.

liberal white boy said...

Yes I'm sure that the average Palestinian is looking forward to an education in Marxism. Probably he or she has been toiling with the decision of whether Marxism would serve him better than Capitalism for some time. Either that or maybe they are just worried if their child can get to school safely without being spit on by a Jewish settler on the West Bank.

And why is the author so worried about Hamas fascism and terrorism and not Israeli fascism and terrorism? The stats are in from the Israeli human rights organization. In the last year since Hamas was elected (5767) 457 Palestians murdered to 10 Israelis.
92 Palestinian children to zero Israeli children.

If the author of this article and others so critical of Hamas had been subjected to the ethnic cleansing and hiddeous oppression that the Palestinians have for the last sixty years, he probably would have blown himself up forty years ago.

Hamas is little more than a mythically based resistance movement to Israeli occupation and oppression.

Frank Partisan said...

LWB: The article actually is a continuation of the article I posted on Israel. I'm sure one would be coming on Fatah.

The Palestinians should be thinking about what kind of leadership they have. Both factions lead to dead ends.

Only socialism can resolve the issues. How can water rights, territory, healthcare etc be negotiated, if the profit motive is involved?

With a socialist approach, the settler could be won to not spitting on the child, to embracing the child. Nationalism and Islamism can't solve the important problems.

(((Thought Criminal))) said...


I bet if Hamas had some armored personnel carriers they could totally resume their offensive operations against Israeli kids in ice cream parlors.

liberal white boy said...

Maybe you are right beamish, but I think America should test your idea. We should sell Hamas precision guided munitions just like we sell to the Israeli IDF terrorists. We know they are good at murdering children. If Hamas points those missles at ice cream parlors, you win. I'll concede that they are terrorists and the hell with them. If they direct those missles at the IDF war criminals that have been brutalizing them for the last 60 years then we will know they are freedom fighters, and you will owe me an apology. That sounds like a fair deal doesn't it? I bet if Israel knows that someone can actually fight back when brutalized they might be a little more receptive to the peace process.

(((Thought Criminal))) said...


Somehow I doubt that the Hamas organization, which has spent the better part of the last year using its kitbashed artillery rocket systems to shell Israeli civilian areas, would direct their weapons against military targets if supplied with bigger guns. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the Hamas charter which calls for the total annihilation of Israel and wanks off a bit about the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" could give a fuck about a "peace process."

The Commies always backed Fatah. You should too, I guess.

jams o donnell said...

"If Hamas points those missles at ice cream parlors, you win. I'll concede that they are terrorists and the hell with them."

And what about the suicide bombings committed by Hamas since the 1990s? You will know full well. Liberal White Boy, that Hamas suicide bombings were mainly targeted at civilians.

What about the 23 dead in the bombing of Jerusalem Bus 2 on 19 August 2003?

or the 17 killed in the bombing of Haifa bus 37 on 5 March 2003?

or the 19 Dead in bus bombing at Patt Junction Jeusalem June 18 2002?

That's just a few of the suicide bombings claimed by Hamas. Don't spout any crap about Israel being a mmilitarised society so all targets are legitimate.

enigma4ever said...

Your blog is so interesting...I need to add you to the blogroll.....thanks for coming to Watergate Summer...

liberal white boy said...

Okay Beamish I will admit it, I'm not a Communist. I lack the intellect and prerequisite level of human compassion to be a Communist. I am a greedy bastard. I was never a fan of Fatah or Yasser Arafat . Arafat always reminded me of that filthy savage Menachem Begin. I know as a Zionist you have no interest in the truth. Truth is your greatest enemy. You beamish are just like Israel. A lie built upon lie built upon a fraud.

David Broder said...

I was amazed at the SWP's "Marxism" event when Alex Callinicos rebutted my claim that Hezbollah is a bourgeois party.

You might have thought that he would at least use the paper-thin pseudo-Marxist "sociological composition" argument (i.e. that most of the Islamists' militias are poor).

But, no, he simply said "let's stop all this talk about bourgeois parties and popular fronts. This is about how to defeat Israel!"

The session title, by the way was "Hezbollah: a force for liberation in the Middle East?". The question mark was superfluous.

troutsky said...

both societies are so traumatized it is unlikely rational thinking or wise leaders will somehow manifest. Shake hands and become socialists is useless dreaming but a peace can be established with global political will.

Frank Partisan said...

David B: Thank you for posting. I'm glad your back blogging, and your new template looks great.

Jorge was in Minneapolis, and said nice things about you.

Troutsky: There are people amongst the Palestinians, who dislike their leadership. Atleast it's a start. It's too big a compromise, giving political support to nationalists or Islamists.

(((Thought Criminal))) said...


I lack the intellect and prerequisite level of human compassion to be a Communist.

Don't fret. You can still be a useful idiot.

steven rix said...

التـراجـع الإقـتـصـادي فـي الولايـات المـتحـدة الأمريـكـيـة و تـدميـره كـتدميـر الـقنـبـلـة الـدريـة

الـجريـدة MSM تـدَعــي بـأن كـل شــيء هــو عــلى مـا يـًــرام فـي الـولايـات الـمـتحـدة الأمريـكـيـة، بـأنـنـا لـسـنــا في إنـهــيــار أو تـراجــع إقـتصــادي. و لـكــن هـنــاك عـلامــات تـؤكـد لـنـا عكس ﻨ لـك.

فـي لاس فيغـاس هـنـاك من يـبـيــع سـيــارتـه (لإرتـفــاع سـعــر الـبـنـزيـن) و ĩخــرين من يـبيـعون حـتى مـنـازلهـم.

عـدد الـنـاس اللـﻨيـن يـعيـشـون في الشـارع مُــؤثـرجـدا : عـادة هـؤلاء يتـركزون فـي وسـط المـديـنـة ولـكـن مـنـد أسـابيـع نـلاحـظ أنـاس يـنـامـون في كـل أمـاكـن شـوارع الـمـديـنـة. أكـيـدا تـحسـن

الجـو- سـقـوط الـحـرارة مـن 45 درجـة إلى 20 درجـة – يـحُـث الـنـاس عـلى الخـروج مـن

أمـاكـن الـتـعـاون الإجتـمـاعي – و لكن أبـدا لـم أرى كـل هـﻨا الـفـقـر الواضــح فـي هـﻨه الـمـديـنـة.

لاس فـيـغـاس لـم تـعـد لاس فـيـغـاس، مـديـنـة الأثـريـاء و الٌـهـو الـفـاسـد.

هـﻨه الـقنـبـلـة الـﻨ ريـة هـي الـتـراجع الإقـتـصـادي، أيـن الـنـاس هـم لا شـيء بـدون عـمـل. يـمـكنكـم

الـهـلاك في نـيـفـادا بـد ون أي مـسـاعدة.

يـمـكـن إيــجـاد الـمــال للـﻨ هـاب إلى الـحرب فـي هـﻨا الـبلاد، و أبـدا كـفـايـة مـن الـمال للـمـسـاعـدة كـل الـفـقـراء.

الأزمـة الإقـتـصـاديـة هـي مٌـتعـمـدة : الإنـفـجـار الإقـتــصـادي للسـنـوات الـخـمـس الأواخـر

تأثــربـتـضـخــم لـم يًـلاحـظ أبـدا فـيـمـا قـبــل. ثـمــن الـمـنـازل ضُــرب فـي 4 :

مـنـزل مـبـني باللــوح غـيـر مـكمــول أو قـديــم و مًـحـطــم، قـيـمـتـه حـوالـي 200.000 دولار هـنــا، أو لا يـمـكن الـعـمــل بـأقــل مـن 18 دولار للـســاعـة لـتـسـديـد الـفـواتــر.

الـبـعـض لاحـظ إنـفـجـار إقـتصـادي و لـكـن الـكثـيــر مـنـا لاحـظـوا تـضـخـم.

ثـمـن الـعـقـاري صُـعـد بـسـرعـة خـارفقـة و نـتيـجتة عـلى ﻨ لك عـدم التـوازن الإقتـصـادي : لـشـراء منـزل فـي لاس فـيـغـاس، يـحـق لـكـم عـدم الإعلان عن الـرجـع و يـُمكـنـكم أيـضـا شـراء مـنزل بـدون بـطـاقـة الـهـويـة الأمـريـكيـة.

لـقـد تـمَ إخـتـراع طـلـب للـسـوق الـعـقـاري لتـغـيير الأسـعـار مـا بيـن الـعـرض و الـطـلـب،

والمـسـتـهـلك وحـده يـتحـمـل نتـائج هـﻨه الـعـمليـات : بـعـض إمـضـاء عـقـد الإكـتسـاب الـعـقـاري،

تـعـويـض الـسـلـفيـة يـتـضـاعـف أويـتضـاعف ثـلاث مـرات لـو لـم يـتـم قـراءة الـعـقـد بشـكـل جيـد مـن طـرف الـشـاري و هـﻨا مـا يـفـعـلـه 90 ٪ مـن الأمـريـكـييـن في كـل الأحـوال.

الأزمـة إراديـة و لـكـن مـن الـصـعب الـسـيـطـرة عـلى الـنـتائج

steven rix said...

Condie the biatch decided to endorse Fatah and turned Palestinians against Hamas so that Israel can claim more territories inside Palestine. Only neocons will swallow this shit. Does Marxism include the neocons?

steven rix said...

George Bush and the MSM press needed "islamic fundamentalists" to support his foreign policy against the Taleban, then for some reasons he got lost in Iraq.
To all these fuckers, the Taleban was installed thank to the Pakistanese, in case they forget about it and it is the US that installed the Taleban in Afghanistan after the coldwar.
Hamas has nothing to do with the Taleban. Hamas helps the poors in Palestine and this is how they constructed their political web.
The Hamas movement was born in the 70s (in Kuwait), and it was based on the muslim brotherhood's movement for the cause of Palestine only. This is why it has nothing to do with islamic fundamentalism. The movement got worse in the 90s after Israel tried to murder the family of some important figures of the Hamas, and the real founders of the Hamas (the palestinian Founding Fathers) won't apologize Israel for its murders.

Wake up guys.

Aaron A. said...

Yes, the "Islamic Fundamentalism" label is thrown around so those in the US do have trouble differentiating and understanding the role that nationalism and occupation plays upon an oppressed group of people.

Graeme said...

I agree with Troutsky. There is not likely to be any decent leadership from either side, especially the occupied one, for some time.

There is a peace process that most of the world supports however. that would mean Israel adhering to international law. If I remember correctly, Hamas has agreed to the '67 borders. Hezbollah has stated over and over again, they will accept any outcome approved by the Palestinians (as has Iran). So we are left with the US and Israel, as usual, stopping the peace process.(I don't buy the "lobby controls everything" argument either. the US does what it wants)

And we need to drop this nonsense about a "right to exist." No country has a right to exist. Only people do.

Frank Partisan said...

Politiques: I know there are differences amongst Islamists, essentially they are the same. It would be irresponsible to advise Palestinians to accept either Islamist or nationalist leadership.

Servant said...

Hello, strange bedfellows.

Thanks for posting this. It made me think. Momentarily.

It made me think I woke up inside an alternative reality worm hole speeding me off toward the rational Gamma quadrant.

Let's all seriously consider not considering seriously Zionist disinformation.

To understand Hamas you have to separate the means from the ends. Hamas defines the goal as the calling a spade a spade. Israel is an invading species, and Hamas vows not to call it a stinking rose. How could anyone with any integrity disagree with that position?

All the kibitzing about means is designed to muddy the water and to obscure that singularity of fact that Israel only exists in the minds of those who imagine it is real. The name of the region is Palestine. It doesn't matter how many of you opine or vote or blow your nose in your mother's skirt. It doesn't change the truth.

Frank Partisan said...

At Sonia's Blog, this blog and I, are called anti-Semitic by Beakerkin. According to him it is equal to the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion." I can't let that go unanswered.

Servant: I'll comment tonight.

steven rix said...

Hi Ren;
I'm headed to Texas within a few days, I got sick of Vegas.

MC Fanon said...

I have always disliked the enemy-of-my-enemy logic embraced by so many "leftists". Hamas certainly is no revolutionary group but it shocks me to an even greater degree when I see people rallying behind Ahmadinejad because "he opposes U.S. imperialism". Indeed, this is one of my few criticisms of President Chavez.

Anonymous said...

David M.--thinking that Ahmadinejad is some kind of bad guy, or a threat to be 'dealt' with is the imperialist meme.

Just like finding fault with Hamas--it kind of misses the greater point: your discourse is coming out of the bowls of the empire.

Who's fucking who--who are you?--and who is supposed to bear the onus of guilt are central. Depends on the narrative that you identify with.

Servant has the most sane thoughts on this issue on this post yet.

steven rix said...

Ren. eye: a friend of mine was interviewed by the iranian embassy on March 2007, but there was only a french version of the interview at this time, and now they finally translated the interview into english. It's called the american empire already collapsed

Frank Partisan said...

Servant: Israel has existed for atleast 60 years. Its claim to be a sancturary for Jewish people, is less viable all the time. I believe Israel has the right to exist, as a secular, socialist multinational state. I think Jews have a right to a state, but not based on Zionism. Israel exists and class warfare is the anecdote to Zionism, not Islamism or nationalism.

Dave: I have a long article for you to read about Venezuela. In the period around 2002 and past, defending Venezuela meant only fighting off the extreme right. Those clowns are isolated. Chavez's main problem is within his own government, who sabotage progressive measures. Chavez has to destroy the oligarchy which still controls the economy, dismantle the police and army to get rid of people with conflicting loyalties etc. In another words establish socialism, or end up like Allende. I don't support Chavez being friendly with Iran's leadership, and Trotskyists protested. A state can have state to state relations with any state. Colombia has good relations with Venezuela as well.

Slave Revolt: I'm interested in your response to my Venezuela remarks to Dave. This post was about Hamas, the previous was about Israel, and I hope to have one Fatah.

Politiques: Texas is too small for you. I will read your link. Good luck.

JDHURF said...

"Hamas is a reactionary bourgeois party. We must unmask it and struggle against it. To do this, we must struggle for class independence. We must struggle for a united front of the mass organisations - the trade unions and left currents - on the basis of a militant programme against the barbarism caused by this confrontation, against the Israeli aggression, and for the improvement in the living conditions of the masses. These are only general ideas and we must develop such a programme concretely.

We raise all this despite the fact that we believe that it is premature to speak of an intervention in the mass movement in Palestine at this stage. We believe that we must concentrate our forces on making contact with the most advanced elements there and educate them in the spirit of Marxism, etc. But they must be educated as Marxist cadres who struggle for the independence of the working class.

I couldn't agree with the above anymore.

I also agree with comrade Dave that one of the few serious criticisms I have of Chavez is his having virtually embraced Ahmadinejad and the reactionary mullahs. It does, however, seem clear to me that the relationship is based upon shared strategic political interests rather than ideological and social views; although, this remains in my view indefensible.

Frank Partisan said...

jdhurfI also agree with comrade Dave that one of the few serious criticisms I have of Chavez is his having virtually embraced Ahmadinejad and the reactionary mullahs. It does, however, seem clear to me that the relationship is based upon shared strategic political interests rather than ideological and social views; although, this remains in my view indefensible.

This was written by my Iranian comrades.

steven rix said...

Either you read against us or you don't read us. Between the lines, you just don't read yourself.

steven rix said...

Me: "Hey how are you doing?"
Him "I'm doing just fine, what about you?"
Me "I'm doing okay and I don't like you because you are a stupid American"
Him "Are you serious?"
Me "Do you want my fist in your face you fatso?"
Him "I'm sooo disappointed....."
Me "Then stop being dumb and stop voting for mass murderers!!!"
Him "What the fuck?"
Me ... I broke his nose.

Moral of the story: Uncle Sam should not only get his nose bloody, we should bury the motherfucker 30 ft under.

Avi said...

"I believe Israel has the right to exist, as a secular, socialist multinational state. I think Jews have a right to a state, but not based on Zionism."

The idea of a Jewish state is integral to Judaism. (I just did a post on this. Check it out) Judaism is incomplete without a independent state. By opposing the idea of a sovereign Jewish nation, you make yourself an enemy of the Jewish people (despite your ethnic or religious heritage). Israel as a multicultural pluralistic state has no right to exist and only does when it is firmly rooted in Jewish belief, practice and history.

Opposing Islamic jihad shouldn't be only a 'conservative' or a 'right-wing' issue. Every single person, liberal or conservative, who cares about human rights and freedom must stand up to Islam.

Frank Partisan said...

bar kochba: Thank you visiting my blog.

I will read your link.

I think Islamism is an enemy. The consequances of saying Islam is the enemy, are broad to say the least. It includes innocent people.

Mad Zionist said...

It is pure idiocy to consider implementing secular economic theories to resolve a religious conflict. The biggest mistake leftists make is when they believe that religion is an unfortunate by-product of economic injustice, and therefore religious conflicts can be resolved with economic solutions.

The reality: Hamas followers have a religious belief that they deserve to rule the land of Israel by conquest because God wants them to. Religious Zionists believe that the land of Israel is the eternal heritage of the Jewish people as commanded by God and that not one inch of territory can be compromised. This is the fact of the matter whether one likes it or not.

The solution for the conflict is having the two settle their non-negotiable theological differences in battle. When one side is unconditionally defeated, and unconditionally surrenders, there will be peace. Until then, there will be constant war. Peace-seekers need to accept the reality that decisiveness in battle is the only solution to this conflict.

I agree with LWB that the US should butt out. Their political influence has forced Israel to make ridiculous concessions as blackmail for accepting US money. End the money train and the Zionists can defeat the islamic enemy - self-serving approval of Uncle Sam be damned.

The defeated moslems would have no choice but to seek peace and accept their lot in a matter of weeks. Until then, the beat goes on and innocent people will continue to die senselessly on both sides.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

Anonymous said...

Ren, it seems delusional to believe that any state has 'the right to exist'--I follow Chomsky's thinking on this matter, as well as with understanding the rudiments of the Isreali/Palestinian issue.

Your ideas appear to be pretty insane.

To me it is absurd to see "Islam as a threat", etc., etc. This is like saying that 'Christianity is a threat", or that "the Hindu religion is a threat" etc.

I just think that most of what is engaged in the West on these issues is sheer delusion--not based in any catagories that approach even the minimum of ethical criterion, historical context, or philisophical reflection.

Perhaps it is best that I simply ignore the subject. Trying to elucidate with people suffering deep indoctrination (especially with folks in the US, 'left' or right) simply takes too much time. If I were forced to live and engaged with said people it might be worth the effort. Otherwise these discussions amount to crass sloganeering--regurgitating diseased beliefs that people find opprotune or politically expeident.

ortho said...

This post reeks of didactic arrogance. Dictating what "Marxists" (as if this were a homogeneous category) "can" and "cannot" do and speaking of "the masses" (yet, again, another homogeneous category) as if they need a "Marxist intellectual" to represent them, and their interests, are two reasons why "Marxism" will not become a revolutionary force in a 21st-century world dominated and networked by planetary capitalism.

The time for horizontally organized movements has passed. Make way for asymmetrical, vertically organized movements, in which networked multitudes, exploit the interconnectivity of planetary capitalism's infrastructure, to pursue common goals without arrogant, "charismatic" leaders who didactically dictate the tactics and strategies of revolutionary struggle. For examples of movements with these organizational characteristics, see, we are everywhere.

Frank Partisan said...

Slave Revolt: I didn't say Islam was a threat, I said Islamism.

I'll reply tonight to everything.

roman said...

Slave Revolt,

Trying to elucidate with people suffering deep indoctrination (especially with folks in the US, 'left' or right) simply takes too much time

Well, excuuuuse us for being mindless zombies too indoctrinated to know what's right or wrong. Your elucidation might make a difference, however, so don't throw in the towel yet.

steven rix said...

I didn't say Islam was a threat, I said Islamism.
Even in the more liberal arabic countries you'll always find islamists, they are all over the place, not only in Lebanon but you can also find them in Morrocco or Qatar. Look at what happened to Iraq: there was a western influential system over there under Saddam Hussein and now everything went down to the drain after the invasion where people are starting to do anything they want with islamic laws.
There is nothing we can do about that. The Q'ran was written in a way that people under occupation become islamists. There is a resurgence of islamism all over the world since the 21st century, and in many countries it has to do with the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. And you know what is funny? Many of these people are islamists but they refused to be called under this denomination. For me an islamist is not only somebody that has something to do with the wahabism or the muslim brotherhood, it is simply someone that does everything that the Q'ran ask them to do, it is a return to pure traditions, another way to differentiate their cultre from other civilizations, and since we are different, it makes it easier to go to war.
Blame it also on the globalization exchanges, many people have a lack of identifying themselves in a world that starts to become unicultural. Today the US has only the possibility of buying out these governments (Egypt, Pakistan) while more and more people are pushing for islamism through democratic voices.

PS: the Q'ran has never been a peaceful tool anyway, there are bad things and good things of course but a litteral interpretation is completely unsane.

There has been a new Fatwah lately during the Ramadan in Algeria in the salafist movements: the woman has to give her breasts to the friends of her husband so that they can suck on it. By this way, it is understood that giving the breast to the hosts would not allow them to have illicit relations.


liberal white boy said...

That is why I like you Mad Zionist. You always speak your truth. If all Zionists were like you I wouldn't like them, but I would respect them.

Anonymous said...

"There has been a new Fatwah lately during the Ramadan in Algeria in the salafist movements: the woman has to give her breasts to the friends of her husband so that they can suck on it."

Politiques, this is our difference: it seems to me that this is an entirely 'civlized' behavior. LOL!!!!

If this was standard practice here, I would be forced to choose my friends wisely, with aesthetic discretion. ;)

Anonymous said...

By the way, politiques, did you escape Las Vegas?

How are your parents? Hope your family in France are well.

steven rix said...

LOL LWB. These lucky bastards :)

I'm still in Vegas until Thursday or Friday then I'll be moving to Texas, we'll be closer to my wife's relatives.
My parents are doing fine, but they never wanted to visit me in the US and I've never been able to go back to France. A few years ago I was in deportation, because I married a woman, and I married her because she was pregnant of me. In french culture, especially under catholic education, when you knocked up someone, you HAVE to marry the person; so I did marry her but it never worked out. She was beating my ass everyday, then I left her, and she gave hell to the immigration services. Talk about freedom in this country... Since then I still have no work permit, no resident status, but I'm working, and I'm not a felon, and if they don't want to give me a work permit, then screw these bastards. It's been 7 years like that but I never gave up.

I won't regret Vegas, and I sure do miss Texas. I got laid off 2 weeks ago so it's time for me to move on.

steven rix said...

SR Check out this video on youtube:

It's my brother inlaw. You'll understand why I have to go back to Texas.

PS: the comment above was for SR

nanc said...

jeez, ren - it's the same old "lesser of two evils" scenario - when are people going to get it?

not every "christian" denomination embodies "christianity" as is the same with all faiths.

p. usa - what are you some kind of sissie pants? what kind of woman beats up on a man? what kind of man allows that?

so much for progressionism...

steven rix said...

HAHAHA nanc, I'm a very peaceful human being, I hate violence. I have to say that my 1st contact with the american civilization was beyond my expectations lol

I just uploaded another video on youtube:

I was at the Art Pub in Vegas and I only filmed a few minutes. The singer on the video is a good friend of mine and he was as drunk as I was. We wanted to record a song about 911 tragedy and we never had time *sigh* Priorities, priorities....

steven rix said...

not every "christian" denomination embodies "christianity" as is the same with all faiths.

I was born in France in a city that launched the 1st crusade in the Middle-East (Palestine) 1000 years ago. The name of the Bishop was Ademar de Monteil, and the city name is Le Puy-en-Velay, not very far from Clermont-Ferrand.

Frank Partisan said...

I'm not popular today, I'm getting heat left and right.

I've been over at the "Left in East Dakota" blog, arguing about Luis Posada.

Mad Zionist: Israel couldn't exist without US aid. It has all the weaponry it needs, but not the industrial base, to sustain a long war.

There is a side of me that says MZ is humane, reasonable, religious guy, who is unable to get in a theocratic war.

Ortho: I didn't make clear, that this post was part of an internal discussion of a Marxist group. I didn't want to deal with internal discussion on a blog. I don't like posts to be too long.

I'm just old fashioned about vertical organization, It saves from having to react to each occurance as if it's a new phenomenum. A disciplined group increases the influence of a small group.

I thought Foucault was a maoist favorite.

Politiques USA: Your Algeria remark has our attention.

My post is about political support. should Palestinians follow Islamists politically?

Slave Revolt: Insane? You're sounding like Beakerkin.

I don't really know what Chomsky has to do with this discussion.

I disagree with him, and in fact repulsed by his characterizing the Russian revolution as having nothing to do with socialism.

Roman: I get heat also from the left.

steven rix said...

Your Algeria remark has our attention. Go to this blog:
It's the story of a marroccan woman that desacralizes the Q'ran and everyday people from all over the world spend their time insulting her. Well the blog is in french but you should be able to translate it on google.

Should Palestinians follow Islamists politically? I often spend time on palestinian blogs and these islamists (muslims) or pro-arab christians (maronites) seem very peaceful to me. Europe and the US screwed it up when they decided to suspend palestinian aid and since then it is Iran that is in charge of the Palestinian image. All these movements have a very positive image to me on the paper only, because there is no country whatsoever that is able to take care of a humanitarian problem without geopolitical goals, whether it is the Middle-East or the western nations. So my answer cannot be that spontaneous, I know what the West is able to do, I don't know what the East is not capable of not doing. The Hamas was founded to take care of a political problem (Israel) and their views are close to the natural frontier of Israel from 1967 with a retrocession of Jerusalem and Hebron. Politically I always heard that peace could be achieved with the natural frontier from 1967 and the golam heights retrocession to Syria but Palestine and Israel are situated in the oil corridor, and it makes thing now extremely complicated between the West (Israel) and the East (Iran) at a political level. The West is trying to consolidate its hegemony in securing oilfields in the Middle-East, and the East wants to go with China. It's all about the money and hegemony. If the West was about to lose its market shares in the Middle-East it would result in demographical riots and democratic unstability.
Things may change drastically though since Qatar decided to minimize the financial risk of its portfolio in dollars and the Middle-East could follow up creating a global crisis. For me it is a sign that the US lost tremendously its hegemony, and the market is now shared with different actors such as Europe and China.

I wish someone could come up with the idea of creating new alternatives of energy and the problem would be solved right away :)

steven rix said...

Islamists know how to use marxism - since it creates a revolution (proletariat) but then afterwards they still need the proletariat to justify their political views. So from a philosophical point of view, there is nothing good in the pursuit of happiness, but capitalism does also the same thing the other way around.
I've been trying to look for a perfect society and there isn't.

steven rix said...

We are just doomed.

steven rix said...

It comes from Thierry Meyssan's blog (the french leftist)
The Empire and its lies
by Fidel Castro Ruz*

On the 6th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, the Cuban television has broadcast a Venezuelan documentary about Thierry Meyssan’s work. During the following debate, a message from President Fidel Castro was read to the audience. As Hugo Chavez had done the year before, he points the incoherencies of the Bushians’ story around the events. Furthermore, explaining how a U.S. lobby had attempted to assassinate Ronald Reagan, he explains how such crimes and lies are rife within the Empire. Fidel Castro Ruz is the fifth current head of state to take this stand.

Read further @
to understand the assassinations attempts in the US and the 911 tragedy. It's kind of incoherent though because the thesis of 911 (far right Pentagon members) would contradict the facts about Ronald Reagan. Maybe it's just another conspiracy theory again, but the testimony of Fidel Casto on how he perceives the US government is examplary because the situation of the mark image of the US does not differ that much in other parts of the world other than Cuba (Yurop, Middle-East, Russia, China ...etc).

David Broder said...

Hezbollah and Hizb-ut-Tahrir (backed by Respect) held a demonstration in London on Sunday, which wasn't much fun.

Particularly when they called Peter Tatchell a "paedophile" and "child killer".

Frank Partisan said...

Slave Revolt: Just kidding about the Beakerkin remark. I was unsure if you appreciate my humor.

David B: Peter Tatchell is an authentic human rights activist, who put his life on the line.

If RESPECT was at the demo, SWP must have been there.

thr said...

But who on the Left is truly 'supporting' Islamic fundamentalism? This smells like a rightist strawman.
Also, when do you think it would be strategically useful to support a nationalist uprising? What about Vietnam, or Algeria?

Anonymous said...

Ren, no offense taken bro. People should be encouraged to substantially disagree on core issues--the sine qua non of any movement toward democracy. Contexts do matter, however.

But the major point that I would make is that judging any extremism coming from Hamas has to be done in the context of the relentless, decades-long occupation.

Just like I don't agree with Al Sadar's theology--but I am allied in that I hope they resist and thwart the planned-for occupation of Iraq.

We have enough fanaticism coming from the people running the show in the US to focus on. This is not to say that one cannot reject elements of any religion's theology--but harping on it, when your nation is occupying and oppressing different cultures, this seems smarmy and disingenous.

More, am a left-liberatarian, but I don't recall Chomsky saying what you said he did. It seems obvious that leftism was defeated with authoritarian rule that allowed a new prviledged elite to develop in the Soviet Union. The workers were expected to slave while party elites enjoyed perks. That is not very 'socialist' in my book.

Anonymous said...

Ren, why is it such a hassel to use your blog system.

OW's is far more easy.

Just asking.

I always have to put the code letters in twice.

Mad Zionist said...

Ren, I've been called a lot of things by leftwingers before, but sane has never been one of them. Careful, you may have your "comrade card" revoked if you keep this up.
You know, in all seriousness, I still don't understand why the leftists hate the Jewish settlers. They are oppressed and persecuted by the State of Israel, far more than any Arabs, while also being attacked daily by the moslems surrounding them. Meanwhile, all they want is to be left to live a peaceful communal life with their friends and family.

They should be the heroes of the left, not the pariahs. It so parallels the historical demonization of the Jews, yet nobody who has fallen into the trap seems to be able to see it.

Frank Partisan said...

Happy Revolutionary: Thank you for visiting my blog. I will visit yours tonight.

I think recommending Hamas as leadership for Palestinians, is irresponsible. That has nothing to do with their election victory reversed. They have a case on that issue, that doesn't mean they are a good alternative. Palestinians voted against Fatah's corruption, not for Islamism.

Anyone on the left support Islamism? SWP (UK) comes close.

I support national liberation as a democratic demand. I don't support the Maoist and other Stalinist's concept of two stage revolution, or as mao calls it "New Democracy." National revolution must be accompanied by socialist revolution, or it ends up with new bosses. The whole state apparatus of the old order needs to be destroyed. Like with Israel and Palestine, how could water rights be negotiated without socialism?

Slave Revolt: You brought up a common blogger problem.

Stalin represented a conservative power take in USSR. He played only a minor role in the Russian Revolution. Zinoviev and Kamenov actually opposed the Russian Revolution. They created a political bureaucracy that was priviledged. The term "state capitalist" doesn't apply, because if it was state capitalist, the first thing the capitalists would do, is assassinate Stalin.

I can see supporting Hamas on this or that issue. I don't think you should support their leadership

I don't support the nationalist Fatah group. It would be a good place, to recruit and train real socialists. The same applies to working class Zionist groups.

Mad Zionist: I feel a disconnect, when I read in your blog, advocating executions of Israeli leaders. If I wrote that I'd be lynched.

Most Israelis are secular for the most part.

I wish you'd find another cause, other than a Biblical based warfare.

Mad Zionist said...

Ren, why would calling for the execution of a wicked tyrant who's ethnically cleansed his own people get you lynched? Further more, why do you suggest I yearn for biblical war? I desire peace at all costs, and that means I am willing to advocate total war where necessary to achieve it.

Also, why did you change the subject to my blog rather than responding to the points I've made on topic at your own blog. Have you no rebuttals to my points? Did I stump you, or leave you questioning your own arguments? Seriously, I am curious why you diverted instead of engaged.

Regarding your off topic comments, you misunderstand my motivation for war. I wish to crush movements who seek to kill or enslave people that don't believe as they say. This isn't blood lust, it is the desire to end the bloodshed of the innocent by completely defeating the thugs who are persecuting them.

Hope that cleared things up for you.

Frank Partisan said...

Mad Zionist: When I hear the term "The Left," I run for cover. If you talk about "The Right," you could be talking about Giuliani, McCain, Pinochet, Luis Posada, etc. If your talking about the left, it could include certain Zionists, Green Party members, anarchists, Weatherman etc. That leaves me to only be able to talk about the Trotskyist left.

My vision for Israel is different than yours. Mine includes European Jews realizing Zionism can't keep them safe, as Islamists and nationalists can't help Palestinians.

I think my position, just by the comments, are outside conventional left thought.

I hope other leftists will answer. My position is unconventional.

steven rix said...

Regarding your off topic comments, you misunderstand my motivation for war. I wish to crush movements who seek to kill or enslave people that don't believe as they say. This isn't blood lust, it is the desire to end the bloodshed of the innocent by completely defeating the thugs who are persecuting them.
And you think it would make you better than the rest of them? Can't your existence be justified for other purposes?

Mad Zionist said...

And you think it would make you better than the rest of them?

Huh? Is this a joke? Protecting the innocent by defeating the thugs who wish to kill them is somehow just a moral equivalence to you? I feel bad for you if you're being serious.

Can't your existence be justified for other purposes?

Drunken babble? Sleep deprivation? Heroin? Insanity? All of the above? Come on...these comments deserve no respect or thoughtful responses.

steven rix said...

These are question marks since you are stimulating an interrogation in my mind. I honestly have to tell you that you made me think, which is good. Nevertheless we don't share the same philosophy: you rationalize your opinion in plagiarizing irrationality for the rest of them, that is not a noble cause in my opinion. People fight for other causes, and you want to fight so that you can have peace. That does not make you innocent, you can't protect if you don't respect a certain degree of criteria or laws or ethics or morals, it is just a subterfuge to alleviate your guilt trip.
Again you can't generalize categorically in just one simple sentence "Protecting the innocent by defeating the thugs who wish to kill them" it is impossible at a philosophical level to reason this way, obviously you have lots of learning to do when it comes to rationalize your thought, and yes it us pure madness or denial, either way, it is not good for the mind, that is for sure. You may mean no harm by stipulating this way, you are a mad zionist after all :-) I understand we are on a blog that deals with uncommon thought, but you can't defeat the islamist myth in thinking this way: the sons of Allah always revenge their fathers because nobody should be humiliated in front of Allah. It seems like we are in an endless war on both sides.

- who is innocent?
- who are the thugs?
- under which authority can you lay down your thoughts? T
- and what is truth?

Philosophy is just a trade of ideas, but you have to go very deep and in details in your thoughts before categorizing the humanity in 1 sentence.

steven rix said...

Ren, why is it such a hassle to use your blog system...
I always have to put the code letters in twice.
By Slave Revolt
Same here, but it's the best way to fight against spams.

Mad Zionist said...

PU, I'm thinking maybe LSD is in play. Your inane psychodelic musings do not blur the obvious for those of us with fully functioning minds. People like yourself, who excuse criminal behavior while blaming the victims equally for the crime, are the cause of more innocent blood being shed than any other influence.

steven rix said...

Tsk tsk you are putting words in my mouth MZ.

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

The word verification code has a time limit (I don't know how long) before it expires. If you take a long time composing a post in the comment window before submitting, you may have to submit again with the new code.

Anonymous said...

That's the only plausible thing I've ever heard you say, Princess Beamish.

Graeme said...

This is only somewhat relevant, but i wrote this awhile back when discussing Palestinian identity.the evidence suggests that the Arabs are in the right, and the Jews are in the wrong. Of course, so were the first settlers in America, and I still live there, so I am not suggesting that Israel should be disbanded or anything like that:

The first Israelis were Europeans, that had no connection to the land. As far as historical connection, the book "The Bible Unearthed" by Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman destroys the myth of ancient Israel as described in the Old Testament. There is zero archaeological evidence for the Exodus (the leader Moses: complete nonsense), David and Soloman's united rule or Joshua's conquest of Canaan.

Michael Neumann sums up their claims (i have no link, I am typing it straight from the book. I haven't read all of The bible unearthed yet, but I have finished Neumann's the case against Israel) Regarding the borders of ancient Israel as outlined in the book of Joshua:

"They find [Finkelstein and Silberman] that the "great" Jewish Kingdoms existed in something like their fabled extent for a tiny fraction of the period traditionally alleged [835-800 B.C.E.]. Even then their borders never came close to the "greater Israel" of contemporary Jewish fundamentalism. The rest of the time, Judah and Israel are thought to have been, for the most part, very primitive entities, devoid of literate culture of substantial administrative structure, extending to only a small, landlocked part of what is now called Palestine. The great structures of the Biblical era are, all of them, attributed to Canaanite cultures. Moreover, the inhabitants of Biblical Israel and Judah seem to have been, for most of the time and for most part, practitioners of Canaanite religions rather than Judaism, or of various syncretic cults. These "Israelites" were not, that is, "Jewish" in one important sense of the term. The authors refer to the Biblical Kingdom at its greatest extent as "a multiethnic society." The idea such a past could validate a Jewish historical claim to Palestine is simply ludicrous, even if it could be shown- which it can't- that today's Jews are in some legal sense, heirs to the ancient Israeli kingdoms."

So the historical claim is nonsense- that leaves us with a simple take over. Much the same way the US was formed (except the Israelis weren't as brutal as the early Americans).

For the record, I think the best solution is one state solution with equal rights for all. I, however, think that the most practical is a two state solution based on the internationally recognized borders of 1967. I believe Hamas has even agreed to this, so once again the US and Israel are blocking any real peace.

steven rix said...

Too many people think that their religion is also their culture and this is how they go down intellectually. With these people it seems like there was nothing in this world before religion.

Does anyone know anything about the assyrian tablets? It was written before the Bible (although the 1st Bible was in Aramaic) and Assyria was not very far from Palestine back then (around 4500 BC) and it was the common language from all these people living over there. The Bible even said that back then there was only 1 language.

Mad Zionist said...

Graeme, it's amazing how people driven by a prejudice will believe anything they read that supports their preconceived notions. You have fallen into the trap.

Having personally walked through Hazakias Caves in Israel, the fort which was built to protect the first temple from the Assyrians in the 8th century BCE, I can assure you that the first kingdom of Judea was a fact not a myth.

Of course, you and others will continue to believe whatever propaganda you can find to fit neatly into your bias. Your motive is clear: validate the arabs because it will better advance your political perspective if the Jews are to blame for injustice while the moslems are portrayed as the victims.

Enjoy the illusion, Arafat certainly did while he denied the historical existence of the first and second Temples, and make sure to stay well insulated in your little bubble so as not to get confused by all the contradictory evidence.

Just be sure to take something strong to sleep at night; you'll need it.

Anonymous said...

I hear the bleating of a wounded lamb yet again...

Do you have supporting evidence MZ, as provided by Graeme, or shall we just take your word for it?

Anonymous said...


You've uncovered an interesting facet to this argument by drawing attention to the authenticity of the biblical texts as historical documents. The old testament is a composite that synthesises various mythological stories from the ancient near-east such as Assyria, Akkad, Babylon, Sumer, Canaan etc.

For instance, the tale of Noah appears in the Babylonian version of the Epic of Gilgamesh when the titular hero meets Una Apishtu (the biblical Noah) who recalls the tale of the flood.

Similarly, the Enuma Elish recants the creation myth whilst the Ancient Sumerians provided the franework for the Adam/Eve saga which involves the Water deity Enki creating man in his own image from clay and blood.

The old testament/Talmud is an inauthentic document and certainly not the word of god.

Research it for yourselves, or avoid the truth and delude yourselves.

LeftyHenry said...

See I disagree. I think that as anti-imperialists, we must support all resistance to imperialism no matter weither its on our terms or not. If US imperialism is defeated in Iraq and if Israeli imperialism is defeated in Palestine, it will be a victory for the people, it'll mean no longer are they dominated, they have self-determination which often paves the road for socialism. What's most important though is that a defeat of the US in Iraq is a defeat for imperialism, it is kicking US imperialism out of a region which is desperately needs control of. If the US gains control of oil in Iraq, it'll have leverage over Venezuela and try to keep it under its boot.

I do think there are critiscisms to be made of religious national bourgeoisie forces like in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Lebanon and Palestine, serious problems at that regarding woman and homosexuality for example, but it is US imperialism that is the primary enemy of the masses, and by not supporting the right to rebel of the Iraqi people we end up just supporting imperialism.

btw I'm back. check out my new blog


Still working out the kinks.

Frank Partisan said...

Lefty Henry: It's great you're back blogging. I will link to your new blog, and look at it later.

It's more complicated than anti-imperialism. Should the Palestinians be led by Islamists and bourgeoise nationalists. I think socialists could join Fatah, to recruit people away. It's time to build class struggle leadership in Israel and Palestine.

CeticFire closed his blog, he told me it was for a security reason.

ortho said...

I must agree with Ren's statement, "It's more complicated than anti-imperialism." Imperialism is only one head of the exploitative hydra that we must slay. The other heads include, but are not limited to, all systems of domination and discrimination, patriarchy, racism, and religious fundamentalism of all creeds, and all trade agreements, institutions, and governments that promote an exploitative planetary capitalism.

The multitude who participate in the direct action of civil disobedience, support the people's movement, advocate resistance and promote alternatives to planetary capitalism, and organized and mobilized by a philosophy rooted in decentralization and autonomy shall slay the exploitative hydra.

Anonymous said...

Jeff Richards wrote:

"while I dont agree with the world view of this article, I DO agree that Hamas is a bourgeois party."

Yeah, that's what the problem with Hamas is.

LeftyHenry said...

thanks Ren, i linked back. I'm still setting everything up. New Blogger format is easy, I just need to get the hang of it : )

No doubt that the Palestinians shouldn't be led by National Bougeois forces like Hezbollah, but we can't be dogmatic comrade I mean, struggle won't always be waged on our terms. We always gotta support struggle while realizing that revolution is the only solution. The reason is that if the Palestinians throw off the Israeli oppressors, their struggle will be made much easier.

its a shame CelticFire did that, but I'm glad you're still blogging strong and consistant.

Anonymous said...


dinoibo said...

Really trustworthy blog. Please keep updating with great posts like this one. I have booked marked your site and am about to email it to a few friends of mine that I know would enjoy reading
Sesli sohbet Sesli chat
Seslisohbet Seslichat
Sesli sohbet siteleri Sesli chat siteleri
Sesli Chat
Sohbet Sesli siteler
Sohbet siteleri Chat siteleri
Sohbet merkezi chat merkezi
Sesli merkezi sesli Sohbet merkezi
Sesli chat merkezi Sohbetmerkezi
Sesli Sohbet Sesli Chat
SesliSohbet Sesli chat siteleri
Sesli sohbet siteleri SesliChat
Sesli Sesli siteler
Seslimuhabbet sesli muhabbet
sesli sohbet sesli chat siteleri
sesli sohbet siteleri sesli chat
seslisohbet seslichat
seslikent sesli kent
sesli sohbet sesli sohbet siteleri
sesli chat sesli chat siteleri
seslisohbet seslichat