Reflections from news and commentary of the day
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Saturday, November 30, 2024
Friday, November 29, 2024
[Salon] A ceasefire not a victory - ArabDigest.org Guest Post
A ceasefire not a victory
Summary: the ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel has silenced the guns for now but claims of victory made by each side are wide of the mark.
Predictably both sides have said it is they who has come out the winner in the ceasefire which went into effect at 4:00 AM local time on Tuesday. Hezbollah called the deal a “victory from God (in a) righteous cause” and vowed to “keep their hands on the trigger (and) remain fully equipped to deal with the aspirations and assaults of the Israeli enemy.”
Hezbollah’s backer Iran also claimed a victory with Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi declaring that despite massive military assistance from America “after suffering heavy losses in southern Lebanon, (Netanyahu) was forced to beg for a ceasefire. Once again, Hezbollah has shattered the myth of Israel's invincibility."
Benjamin Netanyahu did not appear to be a leader begging for anything. Rather in a television address he listed what he called “great inroads into the seven fronts of the ‘War of Redemption.’”
Those fronts are Iran where “we destroyed major parts of Iran’s air defence system and missile-manufacturing capabilities, and we demolished a significant component of their nuclear program,” Gaza where in addition to killing its top leadership “we dismantled the Hamas battalions and killed close to 20,000 terrorists,” the Occupied West Bank where he claimed the IDF was “taking out terrorists, destroying terrorist infrastructure and operating in all of the terror strongholds,” Yemen where “we attacked the Houthis’ port of Hodeida forcibly, which the international coalition had not done,” Iraq with his claim that the IDF had “thwarted many drone attacks,” and finally his seventh front of Lebanon.
And here the prime minister was particularly exultant:
We have taken out the organisation’s top leadership, we have destroyed most of their rockets and missiles, we have killed thousands of terrorists and we demolished their underground terror infrastructure abutting our border, infrastructure they had been building for years.
We have attacked strategic targets throughout Lebanon and we have brought down dozens of terror hi-rises in Beirut’s Dahieh. The ground in Beirut is shaking.
No mention of course of the thousands of civilians killed, the thousands more wounded and the massive destruction of whole communities in the south of Lebanon.
People in Beirut returning to what remains of their homes after two months of Israeli bombardment
Somewhere between the claims of Hezbollah and the Iranians on one side and Netanyahu on the other lies the truth. Unquestionably Hezbollah has suffered huge losses and Iran has seen the key cog in its ‘Axis of Resistance’ grievously and deeply damaged. Hamas is a pale shadow of what it was before 7 October and Yemen’s Huthis will be weighing up the costs of continuing attacks in the Red Sea given the extent of the destruction visited on their axis comrades.
However Israel has paid a heavy price for Netanyahu’s great blunder in assuming before 7 October that he had effectively contained Hamas. The security for Israel that he had declared to have achieved has proved to be little more than a magician’s trick; the claim that by keeping Hamas in play there would be no two-state solution has been shown to be nothing more than a card shark’s sleight of hand.
In the run-up to the ceasefire Israel carried out some of its heaviest bombardments in Lebanon but it is worth noting that Hezbollah though much crippled unleashed one of its largest rocket attacks the day before the truce was announced. After more than a year of Netanyahu’s 'War of Redemption' the simple truth is that Israel is experiencing a level of insecurity that it hasn’t felt in decades. And who one wonders is the redemption for?
The promise to enable the roughly sixty thousand Israelis evacuated from their homes in the north has yet to be fulfilled with many displaced residents openly contemptuous of the deal. One told Reuters
What do I say? That it's very bad, real bad… they (the government) did nothing and our soldiers were wasted away for nothing. Bibi should pack himself out of the government quickly, even though I supported him. He needs to go home urgently.
Meanwhile President Biden’s envoy Amos Hochstein who is credited with negotiating the ceasefire was in his own flight of fancy. He suggested that a normalisation deal with Saudi Arabia could be just around the corner and could happen before the end of the Biden presidency. "I know I sound crazy, but then again people thought I sounded crazy when I said I thought I could get a deal in Lebanon," he said. "I read many articles [about] how I was in fantasy-land.”
Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman has stated very clearly that there will be no normalisation unless and until the question of Palestinian statehood is dealt with. And while in private he has expressed no sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians MbS has accepted that the Saudi people do care and he must acknowledge that. Furthermore he will have no interest in delivering such a large legacy gift to Joe Biden in the waning days of his presidency. Their personal animosity aside, the crown prince will want to save such a present, were he to give it, to the architect of the Abraham Accords and incoming president Donald Trump. To the victor goes the spoils.
MoA - To The Last Ukrainian
MoA - To The Last Ukrainian
The U.S. is willing to (proxy-)fight Russia down to the last Ukrainian.
White House presses Ukraine to lower draft age to meet manpower needs against Russia
Thursday, November 28, 2024
Wednesday, November 27, 2024
Tuesday, November 26, 2024
Monday, November 25, 2024
Sunday, November 24, 2024
Saturday, November 23, 2024
Friday, November 22, 2024
[Salon] MbS and his moneyman - ArabDigest.org Guest Post
MbS and his moneyman
Summary: Yasser al-Rumayyan is a key member of MbS’s inner circle whose job is overseeing major investments and topping up the royal family’s private bank accounts.
President-elect Trump made a high-profile return to Madison Square Garden last Saturday night for a UFC fight card, accompanied by an influential group that included Elon Musk, Kid Rock, RFK Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, House Speaker Mike Johnson, and UFC president Dana White. Seated next to him, however, was Yasser al-Rumayyan, the governor of Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) and while Musk and other attendees were enjoying the fights, Trump was filmed having a conversation with him.
Saudi sovereign wealth fund chief Yasser Al Rumayyan chatting with the President-elect during a United Fighting Championship event at Madison Square Garden last Saturday 16 November
Yasser al-Rumayyan holds multiple prominent roles in the Saudi regime, including chairing Saudi Aramco, the state-owned oil giant, and Maaden, the country's largest mining company. He also serves as chairman of the English Premier League's Newcastle United Football Club and LIV Golf. His meteoric rise to power is based entirely on his deep personal relationship with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman with whom he has worked closely since they first met in 2015 when MbS summoned al-Rumayyan to the Royal Court to run the newly established Decision Support Center. While al-Rumayyan had previously held some senior posts in banking, thus began a dizzying rise to the heights of power as one of MbS’s most trusted economic advisors.
Besides his loyalty and ability to manage the crown prince’s unpredictable schedule, what MbS likes most about al-Rumayyan is his extremely liberal lifestyle and complete disregard for Islam. Al-Rumayyan is the most westernised of MbS’s inner circle, he speaks good English and is even comfortable wearing shorts something highly unusual among Saudi men. This is because his mother was Syrian and his father a Saudi officer, so while he was growing up he and his brothers had full access to the US Sports Academy on the airbase in Riyadh where he could try out all the sports and fully immerse himself in US culture.
A very fit and muscular man, al-Rumayyan enjoys tennis, swimming, volleyball, basketball, running and squash. He like Trump is said to share a passion for golf which he took up playing in 2008. His other main hobbies are parties and socialising and he has reportedly had several high profile girlfriends although he is married.
Despite being Chairman of Saudi Aramco al-Rumayyan has no background or experience in the oil sector and minimal academic credentials. He holds only a certificate in accounting from King Faisal University and though he likes to describe himself as a graduate of the Harvard Business School’s General Management Program, the programme involves just seven weeks of study.
When it comes to business al-Rumayyan has a reputation as an abrasive manager whose nickname is “Yessir” and preferred title is “Your Excellency.” MbS likes his style and uses him as his financial trouble-shooter, such as when in September 2019 he stripped Khalid A. al-Falih of his duties as Saudi Aramco Chairman and appointed al-Rumayyan in his place to take charge of the company’s IPO float.
Although al-Rumayyan enjoys the spotlight and has a very high media profile he avoids unscripted occasions and rarely gives interviews. In 2022 he gave his first and last long interview in Saudi regime media in which he inadvertently spilled the beans on how the PIF is actually run.
In the interview he begins by explaining at length how all the PIF’s investment decisions are always made according to the highest standards and only after close scrutiny and majority decision by the board and all the relevant committees.
Then he completely contradicts everything he has just said by citing a specific example of an international investment decision in 2020 which the entire board opposed except himself and the PIF chairman MbS. The matter was referred to King Salman who overruled the board allowing the investment to go ahead.
“It is possible in disagreements for things to reach such a level and that's one of the qualities that isn't present anywhere else in the world” Al Rumayyan says in the interview, without irony.
He continues:
There are many examples available where His Highness, the Chairman, has a certain opinion, saying that we need to do this or avoid that. He has a particular vision or some information on a particular matter. Once we show him the evidence, he may change his mind. Sometimes it does not happen, but most of the time, he changes his mind because we showed him the evidence stating that this is a good investment decision or not and he will take the opinions of the people available from the board and executive management.
Al-Rumayyan then gives further information about how some of those investment decisions are made:
A mandate came from the prince that we want to invest in France... The next day, at 6am we were on a plane going to France, Turki (Alnowaiser, PIF Deputy Governor and Head of the International Investments Division), Yazid (al-Humaid, PIF Deputy Governor and the Head of MENA Investments) and me.
And on a separate occasion:
We were on a visit with His Highness, the Crown Prince, in China and then we came to Japan and I talked to the prince. I have this guy (Masayoshi Son) who I met before and I met him in Tokyo. I was sitting and talking. Apparently he (MbS) was wearing headphones, and he heard what we were saying. If you (Son) don't mind seeing him? He said, ‘Okay, great’. So he came and saw him, and the prince said, ‘okay, is 45 billion what you want? We'll invest it’. Why did the prince say this? Because of the vision.
Besides making big deals at the direction of MbS, al-Rumayyan’s other important function is funnelling large sums from the Saudi public purse into personal accounts belonging to MbS and his clan including his brothers, Turki, Khaled, Nayif, Bandar, and Rakan.
The Saudi public purse has three main sources of revenue: oil money; national savings in the form of US bonds and other investments; and borrowing on international markets. Revenue also comes from the proceeds of the confiscated assets from royal family members and wealthy businessmen, as well as from new taxes and rises in the cost of services and utilities. Al-Rumayyan’s job is to ensure large sums from all this is diverted into private accounts belonging to MbS and his clan and he was made Chairman of Aramco in order to keep everything under one umbrella and make this process more efficient.
Despite his centrality to MbS’s current financial architecture, al-Rumayyan is replaceable and just as the crown prince created him he could easily dispose of his moneyman should he fail to meet expectations. According to Vision 2030 the PIF is supposed to be worth nearly US$ 3 trillion in five years time but currently sits at less than US$ 1 trillion. So when 2030 actually arrives al-Rumayyan’s glittering career may come to a jarring halt, if indeed he lasts that long.
Thursday, November 21, 2024
[Salon] Israel’s War of Pacification - ArabDigest.org Guest Post
Israel’s War of Pacification
Summary: the Gaza war has shown with a brutal clarity the hypocrisy of the West and the contempt it has for the people of Palestine.
We thank our regular contributor Maged Mandour for today’s newsletter. Maged is a political analyst who also contributes to Middle East Eye and Open Democracy. He is a writer for Sada, the Carnegie Endowment online journal and the author of the recently published Egypt under El-Sisi (I.B.Tauris) which examines social and political developments since the coup of 2013. You can find Maged’s most recent AD podcast here.
Israel’s war on Gaza has been framed by major Western states and politicians as a war of self-defence, after the 7 October Hamas attack that saw 1,200 people killed (with a still unknown number by Israeli counter-fire) and 255 taken back to Gaza as hostages. The dead included 346 IDF soldiers and 66 Israeli security personnel. Almost two weeks after the Al-Aqsa Flood operation, 6 major Western powers, including the UK, Germany, US, Canada, and Italy issued a joint statement reaffirming their support for Israel’s “right to self-defence against terrorism.” It was language that fully endorsed the view that Israel's war was directed against Hamas, fitting neatly into the war on terror paradigm that has been a dominant narrative in international politics since the 9/11 attack.
The Israeli war aims in Gaza conform to that narrative with the stated aim of destroying Hamas and achieving the return of the hostages. The brutality of the war, and its genocidal nature, however, have made it very different from the war on terror invasions and operations from Iraq to Afghanistan. Indeed, Israel's tactics did not focus on precision strikes to eliminate Hamas operatives, nor did it focus on winning the hearts and minds of the Palestinians in Gaza with the grander aim of instilling a new regime to replace Hamas.
Rather it is aiming to inflict mass civilian casualties and to destroy the fabric of life in Gaza. In effect, it is a war of pacification against the Palestinians, not dissimilar from the wars waged by the French in Algeria in the 19th century or the wars which European settlers waged in North America against the native indigenous peoples. This is a war that aims to destroy the Palestinian National Movement, end the Palestinian will to resist, and pacify the native. The Palestinians are left with the stark choice of either being expelled, accepting Israeli apartheid and subjugation or being killed. It is a choice that many native people have faced, albeit mostly not in a century where adherence to the international rule based order has been touted for decades.
Israel's war of pacification against the Palestinians is similar to wars waged by the French in Algeria in the 19th century or European settlers waged in North America against indigenous peoples
There are numerous examples of IDF tactics that illustrate the logic of pacification. For example there is the Israeli policy of designating “kill zones” where anyone entering is killed indiscriminately and anyone killed is labelled a terrorist and added to the numbers of Hamas fighters liquidated by the IDF. This includes the killing of Palestinian civilians, mostly male, trying to return to their homes; it is a mass slaughter of the male population designed to break the will to resist.
AI has been introduced to power the killing of a large number of Palestinians. The IDF started using an AI program named “Lavender” for the purpose of ‘target generation.’ Lavender has produced 37,000 Palestinian targets, supposedly all members of Hamas and the Islamic Jihad. The AI targeting is treated as a human decision, despite the IDF knowing that the programme produces an error rate of approximately 10%. Even more horrifyingly the bombing of targets takes place when the suspect is at home, usually at night, surrounded by family members. In essence, the suspected member of Hamas is killed together with his family, which helps to explain the figure that 70% of the Palestinian dead are women and children. It is a pacification strategy that wipes out entire families if one of the family decides to take up arms against Israel.
The logic of pacification also extends to the use of starvation tactics by the IDF, with the continued blockade of food and aid to the besieged population of Gaza. The most recent example is the Israeli assault on Northern Gaza, with experts warning the UN Security Council that famine is imminent in the North, as Israel continues to block the flow of food and aid. This was accompanied by what Human Rights Watch has called “war crimes of forced transfer” in effect, ethnic cleansing of the population of the North another pacification tactic used to quell resistance.
Added to all these acts of violence are a number of blatant massacres deliberately targeting civilians. In May there was the flour massacre, where Israeli soldier killed 187 civilians as they were trying to get flour for themselves and their families. A second massacre occurred in November, following the same tactic, leading to the death of 70 Palestinians. All of these tactics are combined with the targeting of civilian infrastructure with the aim to kill as many Palestinians as possible by making the Gaza Strip unliveable. For example, in October a UN commission of inquiry accused Israel of committing war crimes in its deliberate policy of targeting and effectively destroying the healthcare system in Gaza. This has served to increase the number of civilian casualties and is causing immense suffering amongst the wounded, with reports emerging of amputation on children having to be carried out without anaesthesia. All are deliberate policies aimed at killing as many Palestinians as possible, instilling fear in the rest and breaking their will to resist.
The paradigm of a colonial war of pacification would help explain Israeli policy and is logically consistent with the Israeli apartheid ideology of Jewish supremacy and continued colonisation of Palestinian and Arab land. The latest example are the calls made by the far right Finance Minister and self-declared fascist and homophobe, Bezalel Smotrich, calling for the formal annexation of the West Bank.
However, this colonial war aimed at breaking the will of the native is deeply problematic for Western powers and the so-called “rule based international order”, which now appears to be another victim of Israel’s war of pacification. Such concern, however, is not shared amongst many people in the Middle East who are deeply aware that this rules based order never really applied to them and the Western powers ignore it at will when convenient. One only needs to recall the American invasion of Iraq and the Russian involvement in the Syrian civil war just to name a few cases where the rules were ignored. The Israeli war, however, is qualitatively different from any of these wars in that it is aimed at the destruction of a people, their national movement, the will to resist, even the core of what makes them Palestinian. It is for all intents and purposes an existential war on the Palestinians backed by the West. How this war proceeds and how it will change the Middle East is hard to predict. What is certain is that Palestinian resilience and resistance will not be defeated.
Members can leave comments about this newsletter on the Arab Digest website
Wednesday, November 20, 2024
[Salon] The Real Israel -
[Salon] The Real Israel - micheletkearney@gmail.com - Gmail
https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/the-real-israel?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=151920903&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=210kv&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
The Real Israel
[Salon] TO ACHIEVE MIDEAST PEACE, MIKE HUCKABEE IS THE WRONG CHOICE FOR U.S. AMBASSADOR TO ISRAEL - Guest Post by Allan Brownfeld
TO ACHIEVE MIDEAST PEACE, MIKE HUCKABEE IS THE WRONG CHOICE FOR U.S. AMBASSADOR TO ISRAEL BY ALLAN C. BROWNFELD——————————————————————————————————————————
During his first term as president, Donald Trump visited Saudi Arabia and entered into the Abraham Accords. In this historic agreement, Saudi Arabia and a number of Gulf states, including the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, agreed to recognize Israel—-but only if it proceeded to establish a Palestinian state. The so-called two-state solution has been U.S. policy for many years, under both Republican and Democratic administrations.
Recently, President-elect Trump announced his choice to be ambassador to Israel, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. Mr.Huckabee does not believe in the two state solution or in creating a Palestinian state. He openly declares that there is no such thing as a “Palestinian people.” He advocates Israeli annexation of the occupied West Bank, which he refers to, as does Israel’s extreme right wing, by the biblical terms “Judea and Samaria.”
Those who look forward to peace and to the creation of a Palestinian state are alarmed by Mr. Huckabee’s selection. The Jewish newspaper The Forward carried an article (Nov. 15, 2024) with the headline, “Mike Huckabee’s Old-School Christian Zionism is Bad News For Anyone Who Wants Middle East Peace.” The author is Tristan Stura, Reader in Human Geography at Queens University in Belfast, Northern Ireland.
He writes that, “Trump’s Abraham Accords and Huckabee’s pro-settlement ideology are not compatible designs for the Middle East…Huckabee is an old-school Christian Zionist, with the goal,of establishing full Israeli sovereignty over Gaza and the West Bank. The goal of the ideology Huckabee preaches is the removal of Palestinians from the biblically defined land of Israel to facilitate Christ’s return…under Huckabee’s ambassadorship, Israel will become markedly less likely to find a peaceful resolution to this brutal conflict.”
Stura points out that, “I refer to Huckabee’s beliefs as ‘old school’ because he follows a form of what is known as ‘dispensational premillennialism’—-a belief that ‘the Rapture will,come,’ sucking up all evangelicals to Heaven to watch Israel be invaded by the world’s armies, culminating in Armageddon and Christ’s return. Advancing this outcome is Huckabee’s four-year goal.”
Huckabee envisions a State of Israel that extends from the river to the sea—-from the Mediterranean Sea to the river Euphrates and down to the River Nile. Stura notes that, “For Huckabee, what happens next in the Middle East will not be about politics, it will be about a violent vision of religion, one in which violence, war and dismal fates for Palestinians and Jews alike are coordinated by God.”
Israel Ganz, head of a council representing Israeli settlers across the occupied West Bank, celebrated Donald Trump’s victory as an historic opportunity for the settlement movement. Prime Minister Netanyahu announced the appointment of Yechiel Leiter as Israel’s new ambassador to the U.S. He is himself a West Bank settler and is a strong proponent of the expansion of illegal West Bank settlements. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz declared: “By appointing a prominent settler activist as Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Netanyahu is signaling his belief that Trump will support the unilateral annexation of the West Bank and parts of the Gaza Strip.”
According to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, “Netanyahu’s appointment likely signals that he expects the incoming Trump administration to take a friendlier approach to Israeli West Bank settlements than President Joe Biden’s administration. Trump unveiled a peace plan in the final year of his first term that would have left Israel in control of vast swaths of the West Bank and Trump’s ambassador to Israel during his first term, David Friedman,was also a supporter of settlements. In 2020, Leiter, the new Israeli ambassador, sent a letter to American Christians. He hailed Trump’s presidency and encouraged U.S. support for settlements. He called the first Trump administration ‘the best three years in U.S.-Israel relations ever.’”
At the present time, Israel, using billions of dollars in U.S. weapons and aid, is engaged in a continuing war in Gaza and Lebanon. More than 43,000 people have already been killed, mostly the elderly, women and children. With the Abraham Accords in his first administration, Donald Trump opened a pathway to peace between Israel, Saudi Arabia, Morocco and the Gulf states. He must decide whether he wants to advance peace, or continuing conflict in the region. If he wants to advance peace, Mike Huckabee is the wrong choice to be U.S. ambassador.————————————————————————-
Allan C. Brownfeld is a nationally syndicated columnist and is editor of ISSUES, the quarterly journal of the American Council for Judaism.
Tuesday, November 19, 2024
[Salon] ‘That Means World War III’ -
‘That Means World War III’
Russian President Vladimir Putin attends a meeting at the Kremlin in Moscow.
Russian President Vladimir Putin meets with Yevgeny Balitsky (not pictured), the Kremlin-installed head of Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia region, in Moscow on Nov. 18.Vyacheslav Prokofyev/AFP via Getty Images
Russian President Vladimir Putin formally lowered Moscow’s nuclear threshold on Tuesday in response to U.S. President Joe Biden authorizing Ukraine to use long-range Army Tactical Missile Systems (known as ATACMS) to strike limited targets inside Russia. Putin first proposed such changes to the doctrine in September, when he warned NATO that the use of Western-supplied long-range weapons against Russia would mean that Moscow is at war with the military alliance.
The new doctrine says any attack against Moscow by a nonnuclear actor with the “participation or support of a nuclear power” will be seen as a “joint attack on the Russian Federation.” The policy also outlined that any aggression against the Kremlin by a member of a military bloc will be viewed as “an aggression by the entire bloc,” signaling a thinly veiled threat against NATO.
Moscow “reserves the right” to use nuclear weapons to respond to a conventional weapons attack that threatens Russia’s “sovereignty and territorial integrity,” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitri Peskov said on Tuesday. He affirmed that a Ukrainian attack using long-range U.S. missiles could trigger such a response, though the doctrine remains broad enough to allow Putin to avoid committing to nuclear engagement.
“Russia’s new nuclear doctrine means NATO missiles fired against our country could be deemed an attack by the bloc on Russia. Russia could retaliate with [weapons of mass destruction] against Kiev and key NATO facilities, wherever they’re located,” former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev posted on X. “That means World War III.”
Early Tuesday, Ukrainian troops fired six U.S.-made ATACMS missiles at a military facility in Russia’s Bryansk region, which borders Ukraine. According to Ukrainian defense official Andrii Kovalenko, the strike hit warehouses holding “artillery ammunition, including North Korean ammunition for their systems; guided aerial bombs; antiaircraft missiles; and ammunition for multiple-launch rocket systems.” Russian authorities said Moscow’s air defenses intercepted five of the missiles and damaged one more, reporting no casualties. Russia largely uses S-400 and the newer S-500 missile systems to counter ballistic missiles.
This was the first time that U.S.-supplied ATAMCS were used to hit targets inside Russia; previously, they have only been used to strike locations in Russian-occupied parts of Ukraine, including Crimea. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called their usage in the Bryansk region “a signal that they want escalation,” referring to the United States and its Western allies.
Washington first supplied Kyiv with a version of ATACMS in October 2023 that had the capability of hitting targets roughly 100 miles away; in April 2024, it began supplying longer-range versions with the ability to travel 190 miles with the restriction that they only be used to hit targets in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine. Biden was reportedly reluctant to expand their usage into Russia proper for fear of escalation. However, that changed when intelligence officials learned that North Korea had deployed thousands of troops to Russia to help retake the Kursk region. As the war hit its 1,000th day on Tuesday, analysts argue that Putin’s altered nuclear doctrine indicates his readiness to force the West to back down.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)