Home > Uncategorized > Libyan war updates/Stop NATO news: May 21, 2011

Libyan war updates/Stop NATO news: May 21, 2011


NATO’s Libyan Air War: Over 7,500 Flights, Nearly 3,000 Combat Missions

Libya: NATO Provokes Humanitarian Crisis By Bombing Tripoli Port

Canada Expends Hundreds Of Bombs, $300 Million On Libyan War

Russia: NATO Wages War For “Regime Change” In Libya

U.S.-NATO European Missile Shield Targets Russia, General Claims

Russia Tests Nuclear Missile Amid Missile Shield Row With U.S.

Russia: U.S. Missile System To Extend To Czech Republic, Bulgaria And Turkey

U.S. Assurances On Interceptor Missiles Ring Hollow: Russia

U.S. Uses Bulgarian Military Bases For Free

German Troops Kill, Wound Afghan Protesters

Central Asia Envoy: NATO Won’t Leave Afghanistan In 2014

Pakistan Stops NATO Convoys After 16 People Killed In Blast

“Tulip Revolution II” Moving Kyrgyzstan Into NATO Column?

U.S. Strengthens Military, Strategic Ties With Saudi Arabia

After North Africa And Somalia: French Warships Head To Indonesia

West’s Eastern Partnership Backs North African “Democratic Processes”


NATO’s Libyan Air War: Over 7,500 Flights, Nearly 3,000 Combat Missions


North Atlantic Treaty Organization
May 21, 2011

NATO and Libya
Allied Joint Force Command NAPLES, SHAPE, NATO HQ


Over the past 24 hours, NATO has conducted the following activities associated with Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR:

Air Operations

Since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT) a total of 7585 sorties, including 2926 strike sorties have been conducted.

Sorties conducted 20 May: 157

Strike sorties conducted 20 May: 58


A total of 21 ships under NATO command are actively patrolling the Central Mediterranean.

10 Vessels were hailed on 20 May to determine destination and cargo. 1 boarding (nodiversions) was conducted.

A total of 992 vessels have been hailed,47 boardings and 7diversions have been conducted since the beginning of arms embargo operations.


Libya: NATO Provokes Humanitarian Crisis By Bombing Tripoli Port


May 21, 2011

Libya accuses NATO of causing humanitarian crisis
By Jomana Karadsheh

Tripoli, Libya: Libya on Saturday accused NATO of causing a humanitarian crisis after airstrikes targeted the government-controlled port in Tripoli, saying the attacks have limited movement of supply ships in and out of the country.

The claim by Moammar Gadhafi’s government comes after NATO said it struck Libyan warships that had been targeting its ships….

NATO warplanes have been pounding military targets since March….

The NATO airstrikes against the Tripoli port as well as ports in Al-Khums and Sirte violated the U.N. resolution, said Amran al-Forjani, Libya’s chief coastguard commandant. He called the operation a “crazy attack.”


A Libyan official who led CNN personnel on a tour of the area Friday said the commercial port, not the nearby military port, was hit….

Six rockets struck in three strikes that hit five coast guard boats and one navy vessel in dock for maintenance, said Mohammed Ahmed Rashed, the port general manager.

The port remained operational, according to officials, but the strikes would impact the limited movement of supply ships.

Libyan officials said the port is the main food and fuel supply line, and they expect the strikes to deter freight ships from coming because of security concerns and to increase the insurance on ships and goods.



Canada Expends Hundreds Of Bombs, $300 Million On Libyan War


Jordan Press, Postmedia News
May 18, 2011  

Libyan mission could cost taxpayers hundreds of millions, retired colonel says

Ottawa: Dollar figures for the war in Libya will be made public soon, a Canadian Forces general said Wednesday, but the final cost may not be known for months to come.

One military expert says Canadian spending could easily amount to millions of dollars per day.

“I’d be surprised if it was anything less than $100 million (per month),” said retired Col. Michel Drapeau. “It needs to be asked: What are we getting for all that? It’s not an omnipotent pool of resources. Someone’s got to pay for that.”

Canada currently has 11 planes, one frigate and approximately 560 military personnel deployed for the Libyan mission, which began at the end of March.

Since that time, CF-18 fighter jets have conducted some 300 bombing missions….

The cost for a mission doesn’t just include munitions, fuel and salaries, Drapeau said.

There are also hidden expenses, he said, such as travel costs to send senior officials to conferences and a payment to Italy for hosting Canadian Forces.

“All of that should be counted, as it should, but in times of war, you throw away normal budgetary restraint.”

During a regular briefing on the NATO-led mission in Libya, Canadian Forces spokesman Brig.-Gen. Richard Blanchette wouldn’t say how much Canada has spent in Libya, nor would he say how many bombs Canadian planes have dropped.

Blanchette cited “operational security” as the reason why he couldn’t divulge the number of bombs dropped on Libyan targets, nor the number and cost of laser-guided bombs the department has ordered to shore up munition stocks.


On May 12, the U.S. military reported that it had spent about $750 million on the mission in Libya.



Russia: NATO Wages War For “Regime Change” In Libya


Voice of Russia
May 21, 2011

Moscow thinks NATO seeks regime change in Libya

Moscow believes that NATO seeks a regime change in Libya. This was stated by the Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich.

According to him, serious doubts arise regarding the true political goals of the coalition’s military campaign in the Jamahiriya.

In addition, the Russian Foreign Ministry statement says that the destruction of eight Libyan navy vessels by NATO aircraft the previous night does not comply with the UN Security Council resolution to protect the civilian population.


U.S.-NATO European Missile Shield Targets Russia, General Claims


Global Security Newswire
May 20, 2011

European Missile Shield Targets Russia, General Claims

-“If the U.S. deploys its missile defense components in Poland, Romania or other NATO countries, we will have little choice,” the anonymous source said. “We will have to deploy S-400s on the western boundaries of the Belarus-Russian Union.”

A Russian army analysis has concluded that the Obama administration’s planned European missile shield is targeted against Russia and not the Middle East as has been asserted by the United States, Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported on Friday (see GSN, May 16).

The army’s analysis shows the missile defense system would undermine the nuclear balance that has governed NATO-Russian strategic relations on the continent, Russian General Staff operations head Lt. Gen. Andrei Tretiak said.

The U.S. “phased adaptive approach” for European missile defense would over the next decade field increasingly advanced sea- and land-based missile interceptors around the continent as a declared hedge against potential missile strikes launched from the Middle East. The Obama plan is to be folded into a broader NATO initiative to link and augment individual member nations’ antimissile capabilities.

Moscow has long been critical of U.S. and NATO antimissile efforts, seeing in them an attempt to weaken the Russian nuclear deterrent.

“Our analysis has shown that the initial phases of the U.S. system do not pose a threat to Russian strategic nuclear weapons,” Tretiak said in remarks carried by Interfax. “This will change by the third and fourth phases, that is by 2015.”

Once completed, the missile shield would “directly threaten the Russian nuclear potential,” the general asserted.

According to the White House fact sheet on the planned system, the third phase of the plan around 2018 would see next-generation Standard Missile 3 Block 2A missiles deployed “to counter short-, medium-, and intermediate-range missile threats.”

The fourth phase would around 2020 see the SM-3 Block 2B interceptor fielded to “help better cope with medium- and intermediate-range missiles and the potential future ICBM threat to the United States,” according to the White House.

Tretiak said the number of interceptors Washington intends to deploy no later than 2015 would give it the ability to eliminate a significant quantity of Russia’s sea- and land-based missiles. Such a capability would jeopardize nuclear parity between the two one-time Cold War antagonists, he said.

The White House said its plan for 2015, in the second phase of the program, is to “deploy a more capable version of the SM-3 interceptor (Block 1B) in both sea- and land-based configurations, and more advanced sensors, to expand the defended area against short- and medium-range missile threats” (Deutsche Presse-Agentur/Monsters and Critics, May 20).

A diplomatic-military insider in Moscow told Interfax on Thursday that Russia could send its advanced S-400 antimissile system to Belarus to safeguard the two allies’ western borders if it perceives a threat from U.S. and NATO missile shield activities.

“If the U.S. deploys its missile defense components in Poland, Romania or other NATO countries, we will have little choice,” the anonymous source said. “We will have to deploy S-400s on the western boundaries of the Belarus-Russian Union.”

In November, Russia and the alliance agreed to jointly study areas for potential missile defense collaboration. A report on the matter had been expected in June but recent statements from Russian officials familiar with the expert-level discussions show that Moscow still has considerable concerns about NATO antimissile plans.

While the United States has proposed establishing two separate but coordinated operations that would exchange missile alert warning information, Moscow has advocated a sectoral approach that would see the continent divided into two realms of missile defense responsibility. Washington has shown little interest in that proposal, saying it would never leave any NATO state’s missile protection to Moscow to ensure.

“Since Belarus is Russia’s strategic ally, it would be appropriate to sell it weapons at market prices within the union’s framework,” the Moscow source said. “Therefore, we will look for ways to provide government support that would enable us to build not only a common air defense but also a missile defense and later a space defense system” (Interfax, May 19).



Russia Tests Nuclear Missile Amid Missile Shield Row With U.S.


Agence France-Presse
May 21, 2011

Russia tests nuclear missile amid row with US

Russia has conducted its second intercontinental ballistic missile test in less than a month as it stepped up its campaign against a US-backed interceptor system for Europe.

News reports said the Sineva missile was launched from a Russian submarine in the Barents Sea and later successfully hit its target on the opposite side of the country on the Kamchatka Peninsula.

“The launch was conducted from a submerged position,” defence ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov told Russian news agencies.

“The warheads hit the test range on schedule,” he added.

The Sineva submarine-launched missile is one of the most recent additions to Russia’s nuclear arsenal and was only fully tested for the first time in 2008.

Each missile carries up to 10 warheads and has a range of more than 11,000 kilometres.

It was the second submerged missile launch conducted by Russia since April 26.

Russia occasionally tests its heavy nuclear missiles as it upgrades outdated models with new features and capabilities.

But the tests are also often seen as a show of force that coincide with diplomatic tensions with the US.

Russia had scaled back its testing programme as it negotiated a new nuclear disarmament treaty with the United States that went into effect after nearly a decade of tortuous negotiations earlier this year.

Yet Moscow is currently furious with Washington for pushing ahead with plans to deploy a missile defence system for Europe – a shield that Russia fears could one day be transformed into an offensive weapon that targets its soil.

Russia has demanded an equal say in how the system works and also sought formal security safeguards from the United States confirming the shield’s peaceful long-term intent.

But both the United States and NATO have refused to let Russia have an equal say in the system’s construction and operation.

Moscow diplomats said Washington has also refused their safeguards request.

President Dmitry Medvedev warned earlier this week Washington’s failure to address Russia’s concerns could lead to a new Cold War and his comments were echoed overnight by the chief of the military’s general staff.

General Nikolai Makarov said the system could pose a direct challenge to Russia’s security once it becomes more powerful in 2015 and force Moscow to channel funds on new weapons development that could lead to “a mad arms race”.

“No one needs a new round of the arms race,” Makarov said.



Russian Information Agency Novosti
May 20, 2011

Russia tests Sineva SLBM

Moscow: Russia has successfully test-fired a Sineva submarine-launched ballistic missile in the Barents Sea, a Defense Ministry spokesman said on Friday.

The missile hit the designated target at the Kura test range in the Far East in time, Col. Igor Konashenkov said.

The RSM-54 Sineva (NATO codename SS-N-23 Skiff) is a third-generation liquid-propellant intercontinental ballistic missile that entered service with the Russian Navy in July 2007. It has a maximum range of over 10,000 km (6,214 miles) and can carry four to 10 nuclear warheads, depending on the modification.

The previous Sineva test launch was held in April.


Russia: U.S. Missile System To Extend To Czech Republic, Bulgaria And Turkey


Bloomberg News
May 20, 2011

Russia Says U.S. May Extend Missile Shield to Bulgaria, Turkey
By Ilya Arkhipov and Henry Meyer

Russia is concerned the U.S. may expand its planned missile shield in Poland and Romania to other eastern European countries and Turkey, a senior military official said.

“Russia is deeply concerned that after Poland and Romania, elements of U.S. missile defense will emerge in the Czech Republic, Turkey, Bulgaria and some other NATO members,” the deputy chief of Russia’s general staff, Valery Gerasimov, told foreign diplomats today in Moscow. “In the future, it may create risks for Russian strategic nuclear forces.”

A U.S. factsheet on its proposed missile shield, published May 3, mentions only Romania and Poland as sites where hardware would be based. The U.S. embassy in Moscow declined to comment.

Russian leaders complain the shield, which the U.S. says is needed to guard against threats from countries such as Iran, will blunt their nuclear deterrent. They have warned of a new arms race within the next decade unless the U.S. and its allies agree to cooperate with Russia on missile defense.

Russia may quit a nuclear arms treaty with the U.S. if it doesn’t get legally enforceable guarantees it won’t be targeted by the shield, President Dmitry Medvedev said May 18.


U.S. Assurances On Interceptor Missiles Ring Hollow: Russia


The Hindu
May 21, 2011

U.S. assurances on missile defence “ring hollow”: Russia
Vladimir Radyuhin

Russia has upped the ante in its standoff with the United States over missile defence in Europe warning of a “mad arms race” if Washington goes ahead with its plans.

Russia’s Chief of the General Staff Army General Nikolai Makarov said U.S. assurances that the proposed missile defence system in Europe does not threaten Russia “ring hollow” and Moscow would be forced to take countermeasures as early as 2015.

“In five or six years, a mad arms race could start. And the process could last indefinitely,” Army General Makarov told foreign military diplomats at a conference on the European missile defence in Moscow on Friday.

The statement followed Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s repeated warning that the world could be thrown back to the Cold War if NATO fails to cooperate with Russia on missile defence.

“If we fail to agree, Europe will slide back to the early 1980s,” Mr. Medvedev said at a judicial forum in St. Petersburg on Friday. “I don’t want to live in such a Europe.”

To avoid this scenario, Russia “must be a participant in building the missile defence system through all its stages, right from drawing up its architecture,” the General Staff chief said. “So far we have only heard the word ‘no’.”

Lieutenant General Andrei Tretyak, chief of operations at the Russian General Staff, said a new Russian Army analysis found that the U.S. shield, when fully deployed during the third and fourth stages of President Barack Obama’s “phased adaptive approach”, would “directly threaten the Russian nuclear potential.”

By 2012, when the U.S. would field more than 300 interceptor missiles in Europe it would “acquire a credible capability to destroy Russian land- and submarine-launched intercontinental ballistic missiles,” L-General Tretyak said, adding that this would upset the nuclear balance between the two countries.

Deputy chief of Russia’s general staff Colonel General Valery Gerasimov said that Russia was “deeply concerned” that after Poland and Romania, elements of U.S. missile defense will be deployed “in the Czech Republic, Turkey, Bulgaria and some other NATO members.”

Moscow has stepped up its rhetoric against the U.S. missile plans for Europe in the run-up to a G8 summit next week in France, on the sidelines of which the U.S. and Russian presidents will hold bilateral talks that will cover the missile defence problem.


U.S. Uses Bulgarian Military Bases For Free


Focus News Agency
May 13, 2011

U.S. does not have to pay rent for using military bases in Bulgaria, according to agreement

Sofia: The defense cooperation agreement the governments of Bulgaria and the U.S. signed in Sofia on 28 April 2006 and the National Assembly ratified later reads that the U.S. will not pay rent for using facilities, but will cover all expenses on using and maintaining them, Bulgarian Foreign Affairs Ministry says in relation with some statements made today about the joint use of Bulgarian-U.S. military facilities.



German Troops Kill, Wound Afghan Protesters


New York Times
May 20, 2011

Afghanistan: German Troops Fired on Protesters

The German Defense Ministry acknowledged Friday that its troops had fired on demonstrators during a violent protest in the northern Afghan city of Taliqan this week, wounding several civilians and possibly killing some.

The demonstrations erupted Wednesday after a joint American and Afghan night raid at a family compound just outside the city that left four people dead, two of them women.

NATO said the four were insurgents who tried to fire at its troops, but local officials insisted they were civilians.

When the protesters tried to attack a small German-run NATO base on the outskirts of the city, the ministry said, German troops fired warning shots in the air before shooting at the legs of the attackers.

Some protesters were hit in the torso and at least one was hit in the neck and head region, the statement said. At least 12 people were killed in the two days of protests. German authorities said they were investigating the shootings.


Central Asia Envoy: NATO Won’t Leave Afghanistan In 2014



Voice of Russia
May 21, 2011

NATO not to leave A’stan after transition

NATO and the countries participating in the operation in Afghanistan will not leave the country after 2014, when Afghan troops will have taken over the security responsibility.

NATO’s point man on Central Asia and Caucasus James Appaturai told Radio Deutsche Welle that the coalition forces would remain on the ground “until Afghans are ready to ensure security on their own.”


720 coalition soldiers died in Afghanistan last year. President Barack Obama earlier promised to start handing over control to Afghan security forces from the beginning of 2011 and complete the transition by the end of 2014.


Pakistan Stops NATO Convoys After 16 People Killed In Blast


Trend News Agency
May 21, 2011

Pakistan stops NATO supplies after 16 people killed in blast

Pakistani authorities Saturday suspended supplies to the foreign troops in neighboring Afghanistan hours after a blast at an NATO oil tanker killed 16 persons, officials said, Xinhua reported.

An official said that suspected militants attacked and torched NATO oil tankers in two separate incidents late Friday night at Landikotal, a main town in Khyber region and the borer point of Torkham.

When locals gathered around the tanker at Landikotal to acquire the leaked oil, the tanker blew up due to gas pressure, killing 16 persons there.

Pakistan suspended supplies to nearly 160,000 U.S.-led NATO troops after the incident, officials in the region said.

Witnesses said that hundreds of NATO supplies trucks were stranded on the main Pakistan-Afghan highway after the blockade.

Officials said that some 70 percent supplies for the NATO troops are transported through Pakistan.

Militants, fighting Pakistani forces, regularly target NATO supply trucks, also forcing the U.S. to sign alternate supply routes with Russia.


“Tulip Revolution II” Moving Kyrgyzstan Into NATO Column?



May 20, 2011

Otunbayeva on Defensive on NATO-Kyrgyzstan Cooperation
by Joshua Kucera

When Kyrgyzstan announced that NATO would be refurbishing border posts and arms depots in the Central Asian country, many observers (including this blog: http://www.eurasianet.org/node/63471) took it as a sign of President Roza Otunbayeva’s decision to move the country decisively toward the west and away from Russia.

But in an interview with state radio on May 16, transcribed and translated by BBC Monitoring, she took great pains to disabuse listeners of that notion. She highlights NATO’s cooperation with Russia, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan to portray Kyrgyzstan’s cooperation as nothing special. I’ll quote at length because the vehemence of her statement seems telling. The questioner asked a very bland question about the possibility of a NATO liaison office opening in Bishkek:

“NATO is a prestigious security organization of Europe and America. All people know about it. We have had relations with NATO f! or 20 years. It is not only us, but Russia and other CIS countries also have relations. Kyrgyz people too know about it. Major powers have been kicking us to and fro like a ball. We should not surrender. We are pursuing our own goals and we are a sovereign state too.

“We are pursuing our own policies and implementing them. As you know, there is a great deal of reports, particularly in the Russian media that we have got closer to NATO and away from them. We are a little nation compared to Russia. NATO’s cooperation with Russia is enormously broad. Russia has learnt about security issues from Europe and is using its experience. Russia is getting extensive help from them. But when it comes to us, they get jealous and express a view to us something along the lines ‘how do you get ahead and how can you hold talks with them [NATO]’. This casts a shadow over our independence. A number of our generals sing to Russia [as published] about ways things should be. I want to say that Appathurai is NATO’s representative for Central Asia. He pays a visit once ! or twice a year. Apart from Kyrgyzstan, he visited Tajikistan and Kazakhstan. It was his official visit and he came to us too.

“When I visited Brussels last March, I met NATO’s secretary general. Everyone meets him. [Kazakh President] Nazarbayev, [Uzbek President] Karimov and [Russian President] Medvedev meet him too. There is nothing wrong with it. We, as a country, meet, talk and cooperate. For example, NATO is doing a number of important projects for us. For example, when the Russian army shrank after the 1990s, when they were wondering what to do with all of them and those retired military servicemen aged between 50 and 55 and those military servicemen from Germany, NATO gave them enormous help. NATO helped to turn them into businesses and to find jobs for them. This occurrence has come to us too 20 years later. They want to help us too. We have also reduced the army. The army is now contract-based. We also have a great deal of unemployed people. All of them! do not know where to go after they reach 55 and leave the army. NATO is teaching all of them to do business. What is
 wrong with it? Second, weapons depots are in a very bad state of disrepair. NATO is saying that it can take care of them and repair them since we cannot do it ourselves for now. We held talks on that. Kyrgyzstan needs this too.”

[Passage omitted: some 40-50 Kyrgyz go on UN’s peace keeping missions abroad every year]

“NATO’s Central Asian mission has worked in Kazakhstan for three years. They agreed what would come after the three years before Otunbayeva. They work in every republic for three years. They have finished working in Kazakhstan. Now they will move to Kyrgyzstan. After Kyrgyzstan, they will go to Uzbekistan or Tajikistan. So it rotates like this. This naturally requires the Kyrgyz parliament’s approval. So, the rotation is not out of turn. There is no need for saying baseless words that Otunbayeva is again drawing closer to the West. We are cooperating as much as we can. We are bringing good things to Kyrgyzstan. We are far from saying that we would join NATO or become NATO’s slave here. I do not understand why we should support someone’s views and dance to their tune and then spread baseless words among people.”

So is she right that Kyrgyzstan’s cooperation with NATO is getting too much attention, or doth she protest too much? My guess is that it’s the latter, but she’s facing internal political pressure from people who aren’t comfortable with NATO cooperation. This is an issue that probably won’t go away soon.


U.S. Strengthens Military, Strategic Ties With Saudi Arabia



International Business Times
May 19, 2011

US and Saudi Arabia deepening military, strategic ties

Amidst the political upheavals in the Middle east and North Africa, the U.S. is expanding its military and defense relations with Saudi Arabia on a grand scale, according to media reports.

Among the elements of this arrangement is a secretive project to create an elite force that will safeguard Saudi’s vast oil wealth future nuclear energy power plants.


Washington is reportedly also in talks to senior Saudi officials about the formation of a sophisticated air and missile defense system that will exceed the comparable capabilities of its biggest regional enemy, Iran.

Indeed, the Saudis are seeking to spend $60-billion on dozens of new US-built F-15 combat aircraft that will guarantee military superiority over Tehran.



After North Africa And Somalia: French Warships Head To Indonesia


Xinhua News Agency
May 21, 2011

Three French warships to visit Indonesia 

JAKARTA: Three French navy warships will visit Tanjung Priok Port of Indonesia on May 24-28, Seputar Indonesia daily reported on Saturday.

The warships include Mistral, an amphibious assault ship, Georges-Leygues, a destroyer, and frigate Vendemiaire.

On May 25, there will be an exhibition of French defense equipment on Mistral opened for Indonesian military and public.

During their journey from France, the ships joined several short operations such as evacuation in Tunisia and piracy eradication off Somalia.


West’s Eastern Partnership Backs North African “Democratic Processes”


Trend News Agency
May 21, 2011

EU activates in Eastern Partnership politics
N. Kirtzkhalia

[The Eastern Partnership is the European Union’s program to “integrate” all non-Central Asian former Soviet republics except Russia: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine.]

Tbilisi: The Parliamentary Forum of Democratic Union held in Georgia has adopted a Tbilisi Declaration.

The declaration focuses on the need for the EU’s more active involvement in the Eastern Partnership politics, Georgian Parliamentary Speaker David Bakradze told journalists.

“The document also calls on the European Parliament and the European Commission to more actively involve in and support the processes ongoing in the region, particularly in Georgia, and assist more in the way of European integration,” Bakradze said.

The declaration includes a separate item on Georgia, which positively evaluated reforms in the country.

“The Forum one again reiterated its support for Georgia’s territorial integrity. The 2010-Forum adopted a special resolution which condemned the occupation of Georgia’s territory by Russia. The new resolution has been repeated the main points of the last resolution,” he added.

The Tbilisi declaration also included a separate paragraph on the North Africa.

“The declaration also recorded the support of all those democratic processes that began in North Africa,” Bakradze said.


Categories: Uncategorized
  1. paul
    May 21, 2011 at 8:03 pm

    We will see in June whether Russia and China have learned anything at all about how well appeasing the US/Nato works. It’s time for them to bring Iran into the SCO.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: