Propagandist Magazine

Casual Hate Against Tarek Fatah

Jonathon Narvey — Sat, 25 May 2013 18:14:00 +0000

Photo Credit: Sam Michel

This probably isn't the worst thing Canadian pundit and author Tarek Fatah has seen written about him on his Facebook page. What motivates people to write venom-dripping screeds online that they would be ashamed to speak aloud in public? This isn't a call for censorship, by the way -- if people want to out themselves as hateful weirdos, then that is their right.

It all started with this post by Tarek on Facebook:

Why we were able to defeat the Nazis and overwhelm the once might USSR, but cannot defeat Islamism. My speech in 2011 to a Toronto audience. Two years later, and countless more dead, we still have no woken up from our slumber and continue to appease Islamists hoping they will be mollified by our cowardice. Ask Lee Rigby.

Tarek gets the usual replies: some applauding him, others throwing in red herrings for whatever reason. Then we have this from Chantelle Smith, presumably a total stranger who lives in the UK and who is ironically a fan of FB pages like I don't regret my past, I regret the time I've wasted with the wrong people:

"wish you would had died of cancer you ugly paki" to Canadian pundit and author Tarek Fatah?"

"or Indian or may be Canadian"

For those who may not be aware, Tarek is actually a cancer survivor.

That isn't trolling. It's just evil. On the off chance that Chantelle's Facebook account was hacked or simply a dummy account used as a proxy by one of Tarek's detractors, it's even more scurrilous -- but sadly, nothing Tarek isn't already used to.

Jonathon Narvey is the Editor of The Propagandist.

Categories:

Free Speech, Jonathon Narvey

Tags:

Tarek Fatah

Living in the House of War with Morons

Jonathon Narvey — Thu, 23 May 2013 20:15:00 +0000

She is a free spirit and who still wears flower dresses and home-made jewelry as she did in the 1960s, hailing from the beachside Kitsilano neighborhood of Vancouver which is populated largely by aging hippies like herself. The aroma of patchouli oil and weed is never far from here, on the busy Fourth Avenue shopping area where one can pick up scented soaps, organic coffee beans and vintage vinyl records. She is a lovely person, generous and forgiving to a fault, a wonderful mother to her children, a smiling optimist who believes in the goodness in people.

I think she's terrific, though I must admit that on the subject of jihad, she's ignorant as fuck.

Hold on a second. That's totally unfair, right? Not everyone can be an expert on geopolitics, terrorism and the one-sided clash of civilizations known as jihad. You arrogant prick!

Except that she'd just told me minutes before while we were catching up that she'd spent the last several months learning all about "the lands of Allah" -- saying the phrase with reverence. Not "the Middle East" or some some neutral term; nope. "The lands of Allah" was what she was on about that day.

I nodded and smiled. I just wanted to enjoy the afternoon.

Over a lunch of sushi, she asked my opinion on the lastest tragedy in Afghanistan she'd seen on the news that day -- I don't even remember what it was; Afghanistan and tragedy aren't exactly strangers. There had been deaths, though from IEDs or a battle or a drone strike, I cannot recall. The violence blends.

"Why are the Americans even over there killing innocent farmers who are shooting back with bows and arrows?" she asked.

I tilted my head like a curious pug. "Really? You don't know why the Americans went into Afghanistan? Or why we're there?"

"It doesn't make any sense to me," she said.

I didn't quite know where to start. "You know about 9/11, of course," I said. "You saw that on television. You know what happened there."

She nodded.

"And you've heard of Al Qaeda. You've heard of the Taliban." She nodded again, this time seeming a bit more unsure of herself.

"We should just leave them alone," she said. "War is not the answer. All this death and dying and for what? They're just defending themselves."

I thought about just leaving it at that. 'Agree to disagree'. How to get through to someone who was mouthing something she'd surely heard a hundred times while ensconced in her community-wide peace-and-love echo chamber. But then, she claimed to have been learning all about the "lands of Allah" -- what was it she was really learning?

"We're defending ourselves," I said.

She shook her head. "But we're over there now. We're attacking them."

"We're over there because they attacked us," I said. "It's not a simple thing and I can't speak for our overall strategy in Afghanistan... but these jihadists murdered 3,000 people on 9/11, and this carnage has been going on Mohammed's Muslim army was conquering the Arabian peninsula. The 'lands of Allah' you mentioned -- what happened to the indigenous people living there before all of those territories became the territory of Islam? The Jews, the Christians, Hindus, the Zoroastrians, and all the other tribes and groupings we don't even remember fully a thousand years later... you understand they didn't all just convert en masse peacefully, right?"

She shrugged. She seemed to be losing focus. She chewed her sushi while looking out the window.

"They aren't shooting at us with bows and arrows, by the way," I said. "The Taliban are armed by the Pakistanis. Islamist terrorists globally are rolling in cash and weapons thanks to the Saudis and Iranians. They're trying to create an empire run by theocrats who would stop your own daughter from going to school. They would murder people like you and me if they got the chance because we haven't submitted to Islam."

She frowned. "But how do you know this? Has anyone actually talked to them? I think your information is wrong."

"Of course people have talked to them," I said. "This stuff is in the news all the time now. There are interviews on YouTube. It's in books. There's history. Jihad isn't some new thing that Fox News made up."

She shrugged. "I think we're not on the same page," she said.

"I think we're not living on the same planet," I said, with undisguised condescension in my voice that I instantly regretted.

You don't win an argument by helping the other side realize you think they're kind of dumb.

We finished lunch and I paid the bill. I don't remember what we talked about afterwards; something about IKEA furniture, I think. Meanwhile, I kept going through the conversation in my mind, wondering what I could have said, or how I could have said it, to get through to her.

The more I thought about it, the more I felt guilty, like I'd just tried to convince a five-year old that the Easter bunny wasn't real. And then I felt more guilty at comparing her mental state to that of a child's. She's a grown woman. She has a mind. She's been educated. So what if she comes to different conclusions from me?

But then, there was that niggling idea that would not leave me -- she really doesn't know.

She'd spent months digging up data from who knows where about the lands of Allah without actually checking into the ideas that motivate the folks who are apt to actually shout "Allahu Akbar" while carrying out acts of halal violence against haram Infidels. She was in love with Islamic architecture and falafel and the warm personalities of nice Arab folks she'd run into here (and who isn't in love with such things?) -- without noticing that the places where these things come from are also seething swamps of illiteracy, violence, intolerance and xenophobia. Dar al Islam has problems, you see.

More than a decade after 9/11, the most spectactular horrors the jihadists visited upon the Western hemisphere... she hadn't bothered to check into why this was happening. To her mind, the Taliban were innocent farmers shooting arrows at American stealth bombers. Al Qaeda -- if it truly existed beyond the propaganda ministries of the West -- was fighting for freedom. The Prophet Mohammed was a great man of peace and tolerance (never mind that he married a six year old and personally beheaded all who opposed his fanatical murder spree). The Koran was a beautiful work of divine poetry, so let's pretend the passages exhorting Muslims to strike at the necks of non-Muslims just aren't in there.

It is disappointing that more people don't know these things. It ought to be embarassing, like living in 1944 and being generally aware that there's a war on somewhere far away, without knowing who's doing the fighting, or why. After literally tens out thousands of jihad attacks worldwide just since 9/11, "I'm not really that interested in politics" isn't an excuse. It's a declaration of voluntary ignorance.

Hippies, peaceniks and counter-cultural hipsters get a pass for that, presumably because they're not the ones running our society -- which is a cop-out. Hippies don't run the Ministry of Defense or Foreign Affairs... but they do vote. Their voices matter. The shameful, embarrassing ignorance that informs their voices matters.

It's not just those who have turned on, tuned in and dropped out who fall into this category. The whole world by now has seen the video of the man with bloody hands in a London street who murdered a soldier by chopping his head off (after first ramming him with their vehicle). As his accomplice stands near, he explains to someone holding a camera that he has done this because his Koran tells him this is what God wants. "We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you."

You'll be hard-pressed to find in any of the public statements by politicians or police that so much as mention the words "jihad", "Islam" or "Muslim". "Terrorism", yes. "Extremism", definitely. What sort of terrorism? What kind of extremism? Why is this happening? The Mayor of London tells us that "it is completely wrong to blame this killing on Islam." Why is that? How does he know this -- when the murderer tells us in a chillingly calm voice that it had everything to do with Islam?

The killer told us in his own words, as so many jihadists have done before. The Boston bombers, Osama bin Laden, the countless Islamic fanatics before them tell anyone who will listen why they do what they do. They murder us indiscriminately, then claim the status of victims and martyrs after we try to defend ourselves by targeting actual terrorists with pinpoint strikes.

The ignorance that is still infuriatingly common from London to New York and Vancouver facilitates this evil. Let's stop being so dumb.

Jonathon Narvey is the Editor of The Propagandist.

Categories:

Counter-Jihad Propaganda, Jonathon Narvey

Tags:

UK terrorism, London Muslim killer, Islam is bad

UK Man Beheads Soldier in London Street. Scared Yet?

Jonathon Narvey — Wed, 22 May 2013 21:14:00 +0000

A man cuts off a British soldier's head in the middle of a busy South London street while chanting "Allahu Akbar". With blood covering his hands, he says, "We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you...Your people will never be safe."

Does this concern you?

Obviously you're a racist Islamophobe. Crawl back under your rock, bigot.

"I get what he's saying," said one witness. "Our governments have been bombing a lot of innocent people lately. I don't think it's intentional, but it happens. The governments seem to have all the money they want to spend on war while cutting back on everything else that matters. I kept thinking, wow, this guy who used a machete and a butcher's knife to cut off a person's head really knows his stuff."

Categories:

Counter-Jihad Propaganda, Jonathon Narvey

Tags:

jihad terrorism, islamophobia

Unrelenting Horrors

Jonathon Narvey — Tue, 21 May 2013 16:46:00 +0000

In the course of editorializing on political shenanigans and human rights violations around the world, I write about a lot of horrible things. It's typically futile to try to categorize atrocities from "least evil" to "most evil"; once you get past a certain threshold of horror, the emotional response shuts down out of self-preservation, so an observer can avoid falling into a debilitating pit of nauseated despair.

The latest horror in Afghanistan -- the mullah who mutilated and raped his eight-year old bride to death on their wedding night, falls into this abysmal niche.

That this is actually a common, accepted thing, anywhere in the world -- that's the most evil thing.

Meanwhile, Afghanistan's lawmakers can't bring themselves to enact legislation to prevent the rape, brutalization and murder of young girls. No, that would be against Islam. Note that upgrading the Law on Elimination of Violence Against Women from (unenforced) Presidential Decree to actual legislation was not merely opposed by bearded old men essentially indistinguishable from the Taliban -- women also opposed it.

I feel sick.

Categories:

Human Rights Propaganda, Jonathon Narvey

Tags:

Afghanistan child brides

American Diplomacy All About Speaking Softly

Jonathon Narvey — Sun, 19 May 2013 22:51:18 +0000

Photo Credi: Mo Riza

American President Theodore Roosevelt's foreign policy defined the "speak softly, and carry a big stick" approach. Our modern variant is simply to "speak softly." Whether it's Obama bowing down to a Saudi autocrat whose country exports and funds terror against Americans, US diplomats giving Iranians an umpteenth deadline, playing phone tag with the Iranians, or -- in the latest example -- bantering about hockey with the Russians while Vladimir Putin doubles down on his Syria protectorate, this approach is not exactly delivering good results.

Mr. Kerry’s tactics have political risks at home, where many lawmakers have called for the administration to act far more forcefully on Syria. Senator John Barrasso, the Wyoming Republican who is chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, criticized Mr. Kerry’s “hat-in-hand” trip to Moscow. “Asking Russia to support U.S. interests in Syria is like asking the fox to guard the henhouse,” the statement said.

Categories:

American Propaganda, Jonathon Narvey

Tags:

speak soft and carry a big stick, American diplomacy

First the Saturday People. Now the Sunday People

Jonathon Narvey — Fri, 17 May 2013 16:48:00 +0000

Photo Credit: Brian Auer

Christians are disapearing from the Middle East. No, disappearing is too passive a word. They are running away; those that can, anyway; those that haven't already been murdered by the latest frenzy of Koran-inspired persecution.

We've seen this story before.

The Arab-Israeli conflict (or peace process) boils at a simmer, with history-averse pundits continuing to blame the never-ending conflict for everything from drops in seaside tourism to lethal attacks by Muslims against Muslims. From a bigger standpoint, that conflict is all but over; the Jews of the Middle East were persecuted, attacked and ultimately expelled from all of the various Islamic republics decades ago. In a grand span of territory where Jews once lived from the tip of the Atlantic Ocean in Libya to the mountains of Central Asia, virtually the only ones left are in the New Jersey-sized state of Israel. Whether they realize it or not, the rapidly-Islamized Middle East already got what it wanted in the last century through a final spasm of genocidal persecution: a Judenrein Middle East.

Some Jews escaped the mobs and the fires; many didn't.

Basically, the genocidal side won.

The modern state of Israel is a strong, thriving democracy and a testament to the human spirit; but in another sense, it's a sad footnote.

It's happening again -- mostly ignored, just like last time. From The Mass Exodus of Christians from the Muslim World in the Algemeiner:

In 2003, Iraq’s Christian population was at least one million. Today fewer than 400,000 remain—the result of an anti-Christian campaign that began with the U.S. occupation of Iraq, when countless Christian churches were bombed and countless Christians killed, including by crucifixion and beheading.

The 2010 Baghdad church attack, which saw nearly 60 Christian worshippers slaughtered, is the tip of a decade-long iceberg.

Now as the U.S. supports the jihad on secular president Assad, the same pattern has come to Syria: entire regions and towns where Christians lived centuries before Islam came into being have now been emptied, as the opposition targets Christians for kidnapping, plundering, and beheadings, all in compliance with mosque calls that it’s a “sacred duty” to drive Christians away.

In October 2012 the last Christian in the city of Homs—which had a Christian population of some 80,000 before jihadis came—was murdered. One teenage Syrian girl said: “We left because they were trying to kill us… because we were Christians…. Those who were our neighbors turned against us. At the end, when we ran away, we went through balconies. We did not even dare go out on the street in front of our house.”

In Egypt, some 100,000 Christian Copts have fled their homeland soon after the “Arab Spring.” In September 2012, the Sinai’s small Christian community was attacked and evicted by al-Qaeda linked Muslims, Reuters reported.

Read it all.

When the time comes that the Christians are expelled from the Middle East (except for Israel, naturally), a new round of bloodletting will begin. As we've seen with the Ahmadis in Pakistan and Bangladesh, or the Sunni-Shiite atrocities in Iraq, Muslims are not averse to persecuting or killing other Muslims.

When the Sunday people follow the Saturday people, the ones doing the killing will still have plenty of targets to keep them busy.

Jonathon Narvey is the Editor of The Propagandist.

Categories:

Jonathon Narvey, Z Word, Zionist Propaganda

Tags:

Christian persecution in the Middle East

Venezuela's Economy is Truly in the Toilet

Jonathon Narvey — Fri, 17 May 2013 00:54:00 +0000

Photo Credit: GorillaSushi

Soviet citizens lining up in the freezing winter for their ration of ~~sandpaper~~ toilet paper was a real-life (if banal) living criticism of Communism. Say what you would about those Capitalist imperialist pigs in America; at least they could wipe their asses without getting a handout from the state.

Venezuela's regime has long seen Bolivarian-style socialism as the remedy to their country's troubles (notwithstanding unfavorable economic comparisons with virtually every other country i the Western hemisphere). Now that the era of toilet paper lineups has arrived in Caracas, perhaps Venezuelans can take solace that the era of Latin American Perestroika might not be far behind?

Categories:

Corporate Propaganda, Jonathon Narvey

Tags:

Venezuela economy, Communist toilet paper shortage

Before Star Trek Into Darkness. A Look Back at the Future's History

Patrick Ross — Thu, 16 May 2013 05:06:53 +0000

The time that Star Trek fans old and new have spent the last four years in baited breath waiting for is nearly upon us: Star Trek Into Darkness – the sequel to JJ Abrams’ 2009 pseudo-reboot of the classic franchise – is nearly in theatres. And with the imminent arrival of the film, one word is foremost on the lips of Trek fans: Kahn.

Abrams has kept a pretty tight lid on all the intimate details of just who his villain is: merely that he (whoever he is) is a top Starfleet operative gone rogue. But much of the imagery in the film’s trailers is quite familiar to older Trek fans. The stasis pods shown in one short clip from some of the trailers has left many convinced that Kahn is the villain of the new film.

The clip is reminiscent of a scene from a classic episode of the original Star Trek series entitled “Space Seed.” It originally aired February 16, 1967. It was the 24^th episode of Star Trek.

It’s one of the hallmark episodes of the entire franchise, spawning not one but seemingly two feature films (the first one being the second Star Trek film, The Wrath of Kahn.) It also happens to be the episode that puts to rest a widespread myth about the future envisioned by Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry.

That particular myth happens to be that Roddenberry’s vision of the future was an optimistic one: that humanity could overcome demons like war and poverty and embrace a future that embodies every utopian dream of nearly any progressive thinker in history – replete with an apparent absence of capitalism. Depending on whose version of Star Trek you may happen to prefer, Starfleet officers don’t get paid for their labours. Instead, they benefit from their work in the form of self-betterment. Or at least so they frequently say.

(This is actually an element of the Star Trek mythos that faded over time. With the arrival of the Deep Space Nine series came the fleshing out of the relentlessly capitalist spacefaring Ferengi who weren’t impaired in their dealings with Starfleet officers by a lack of funds on their part.)

But those who think that Roddenberry held an optimistic view of humanity’s future have managed to overlook the historical discussions between Kirk, Spock and the other characters during “Space Seed.” More specifically, the so-called Eugenics Wars.

This is where Kahn Noonien Singh becomes important. In the year 1992, as written by Roddenberry in 1967, Kahn was to seize control of Asia and the Middle East. Kahn was merely the first of a number of Augments – genetically-engineered humans selectively bred to produce superior specimens – to seize power. In 1993, at least 40 more Augment supermen followed in countries around the world.

Kahn’s triumph was fleeting. By 1996, non-Augmented humans finally rose up and overthrew Kahn and his contemporaries – enabled by in-fighting and aggressive rivalries among them. The cost was as many as 37 million lives. It was toward the end of this conflict that Kahn and his remaining followers fled the planet aboard the SS Botany Bay. James T Kirk and the Enterprise later encounter this ship in the 23^rd century, upon which Kahn attempts to seize control of the Enterprise.

But long before this could happen, the Augments would again find themselves at the centre of a global conflict: a third world war, which lasted 27 years, featured the use of nuclear weapons and killed 600 million more. Soldiers fighting in the irradiated nightmarescape of that war were often controlled with narcotics.

Foremost among the military leaders of the Third World War was Colonel Stephen Green. The actions of his faction of eco-terrorists resulted in the deaths of 37 million people during the war. After the war’s end, he ordered euthanasia of radiation-sickened humans resulting in the demise of hundreds of thousands more. His prevailing fascination was with purity.

That would also be the prevailing fascination of John Frederick Paxton, who in 2155 – just five years after the formation of a united Earth government in 2150 – as the leader of a faction calling itself Terra Prime sought to expel all extra terrestrials from Earth and the Terran solar system. Paxton’s ultimate target was Starfleet itself, created following first contact with the Vulcan species in 2063. He seized control of a space=based weapon orbiting Mars, and threatened to destroy Starfleet Command.

He was eventually defeated by Captain Jonathon Archer of the Enterprise NX-01. But his xenophobic agenda would actually push Earth and Vulcan closer together, leading to the formation of the United Federation of Planets.

As all of this takes place before the 2233 deviation from the original Star Trek canon depicted in Abrams’ 2009 Star Trek film, pickier Trek fans may or may not expect most of this history to have remained intact. Then again, considering Star Trek’s numerous continuity problems – for example, an episode of Voyager wherein the ship is transported back in time to the mid 1990s and forced to recover some futuristic technology from a ruthless and unscrupulous computer developer – whether or not Abrams has considered himself committed to any of this remains to be seen.

What does not remain to be seen is that the future of humanity as Roddenberry saw it and as it actually unfolded were very different things. Roddenberry’s vision of 1992 had humanity squarely under the thumb of Kahn Noonien Singh and his compatriots. In 1992 as it actually unfolded humanity was just beginning to adjust to a world without the Soviet Union.

Will humanity ever manage to achieve the utopian bliss that is the ultimate hallmark of Gene Roddenberry’s vision? Optimists and pessimists will certainly disagree about whether or not we’re making any progress toward such a future. But there’s one thing on which none could disagree: human history as it’s unfolded so far has been a far sight better than how Roddenberry imagined it. We can only hope that it will continue to be so, unless we can find it in ourselves to make it so.

Patrick Ross is a Contributing Writer for The Propagandist.

Categories:

Film Reviews, Patrick Ross

Tags:

Star Trek Into Darkness

Cops Intimidate Jews for Talking About Islamic Violence Against Jews

Jonathon Narvey — Wed, 15 May 2013 02:39:00 +0000

No, this didn't happen in the Islamic Republic of Iran, or the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, or the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, or any of the other fine "-stans" around the world. It happened in a supposedly secular, democratic West where free-born Canadians generally don't have to give a thought to the repression and persecution that goes on in those other culturally-interesting parts of the world.

In the land of the True North Strong and Free, Toronto to be exact (like New York, without all the stuff, for those who have never been) police went into a synagogue to monitor a talk by Pamela Geller, famous for her views, such as that people (not just in the West, but all people, Muslims included) should be free from intimidation by religious fascists. She also talks about the fact that jihadists really do want to kill Jews (though pretty much everyone else is next in line) and that the jihad threat is obviously inspired by Koranic verses and the murderous example of Mohammed and bloody Islamic conquests throughout history.

The cops weren't there to take notes about how to spot people who might want to murder the people in the synagogue; they weren't there for community outreach. No, instead, they seemed to be awfully concerned that these folks might say something disparaging and hurtful about the countless jihadists who would love to slit every one of the attendees' throats. Odd, that.

Here's what she said:

That any of Pamela's views are at all controversial in North America more than a decade after 9/11 attests to the criminally negligent attitude of a good number of our friends in politics, the media, the education system and -- perhaps most embarrassingly for those who frequently find themselves on the pointy end of the jihadists spear -- groups like the Toronto Board of Rabbis, who appear to have had any kind of common-sense survival instinct spliced from their DNA.

Naturally, the police did not hear anything they might deem as "hate speech" at the event. No one complained. No one protested. But it is doubtful that police came to the synagogue with any intent to lay charges, then or later. They probably knew that no one there was breaking the law (though the cops, just by being there to intimidate the speaker and attendees for no good reason, probably came close to it.). Instead, they came to send a message: "We're watching you."'

Perhaps it would be a better use of their time for these police to visit a mosque on any Friday. Incitement to violence is a crime.. and as the courageous Torontonian Tarek Fatah has noted, it happens every week in Canada:

02:17 TAREK FATAH: Do you want me to believe that? Do you believe that? I mean. Please. (Inaudible) twelve years of this nonsense that every mosque’s imam comes up after every act of terror or arrest and says: “Oh! This is nothing to do with anyone.” Why doesn’t that imam say that on this Friday I’m gonna give a sermon saying that any aspect of armed jihad has to be renounced because it is not applicable in the twenty-first century, it is applicable in the twelfth century.

02:44 JERRY AGAR: That sermon not being given?

02:46 TAREK FATAH: Are you kidding me? Are you? You go every Friday. The imam stands up and prays to Allah for the defeat of Christians and Jews and the victory of Muslims and the establishment of an Islamic empire over this planet.

03:01 JERRY AGAR: In Canada?

03:02 TAREK FATAH: In Canada. In all mosques around, everywhere.

Learn more about this travesty, thanks to Blazing Cat Fur and Eye on a Crazy Planet -- blogs with funny names that tell the straight truth.

Tags:

Canada speech Pamela Geller

USA and Canada Respond to United Nations Buffoonery

Jonathon Narvey — Tue, 14 May 2013 04:02:32 +0000

Photo Credit: Alan English

Even by the abysmally high standard of buffoonery on display daily at the United Nations, making Iran President of the Conference on Disarmament was beyond the pale. As UN Watch put it yesterday:

“This is like putting Jack the Ripper in charge of a women’s shelter,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, the Geneva based non-governmental organization, which announced it will hold protest events outside the UN hall, featuring Iranian dissidents.

Unusually, the USA did take action, by stating it "will not be represented at the ambassadorial level during any meeting presided over by Iran". The Canadian government did the same, boycotting the committee for its five weeks' duration.

And while we're dealing with the rot at the United Nations, please take a moment to help fire Richard Falk now.

Cheers.

Categories:

Jonathon Narvey, World Politics

Tags:

Iran President of the Conference on Disarmament, USA United Nations, Canadian diplomacy