Lindaland
  Lindaland Central
  Reclaiming the Commons in S.F.!

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Reclaiming the Commons in S.F.!
Harpyr
Knowflake

Posts: 2255
From: land of the midnight sun
Registered: Dec 2002

posted June 02, 2004 01:21 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Harpyr     Edit/Delete Message
Reclaiming the Commons:

Forging a New Political Language
By Starhawk


The Commons are the universal heritage of people and all living things. They are everything needed to support healthy life on earth: air,
water, food, shelter, health care, energy sources and our genetic heritage. They are what is needed to sustain culture: our multicultural heritages, education, information and the means to disseminate it, essential human services, public spaces, the air waves, and political space. They are equally the land, its forests, the oceans, and all ecosystems.

From the Statement of Unity

Reclaim the Commons Mobilization

www.reclaimthecommons.net

Over the next ten days, June 3-9 in San Francisco, while the biotechnology industry meets in its annual convention, the streets of the city will be filled with marches, demonstrations and actions organized by the Reclaim the Commons Mobilization. The schedule of events is ambitious, even for the progressive Bay Area, a solid week of activities designed to highlight the corporate takeover of our economies, governments, and public life. But beyond the events and actions that are planned, the mobilization is an attempt to forge a new political language, that can help us focus not on any single issue or list of issues, but on the links and connections between them, a anguage to express what we want, not just what we don’t want.

What we don’t want is clear and overwhelming: the whole laundry list of exploitations, corporate takeovers and ‘isms’—racism, sexism, classism and all the others. We can easily become exhausted trying to keep up a decent level of protest on all those issues. Here in the Bay Area, a determined activist could go to two or three protests on most days. Add a few meetings into the mix, and you’d need to forego gainful employment, family life and all other meaningful human relationships just to stay abreast.



What we do want is less defined. We don’t have a consensus on the specific form of economics or the ten-year plan that we are pushing for. Nor should we. What we want is a shift in worldview, a move away from the model of reality that sees the universe as a giant machine, and toward an understanding of the world as organic, alive, dynamic and changing. That view doesn’t lead to monolithic solutions or imposed programs, but rather to experimentation and to a multiplicity of proposed solutions. It’s a dynamic view, that understands that any solution, any form, must continuously dissolve itself and reform if it is to remain alive and liberating.

Biotechnology is only one of the many ways in which corporate profiteering imposes on the commons, but it is perhaps especially offensive, as it privatizes the very building blocks of life itself. The patenting of life forms has allowed corporations to claim the rights to and profits on everything from traditional healing herbs and food plants to the genomes of indigenous cultures. Once released into the environment, altered genes cannot be recalled. While many negative effects have already been documented, the true scope of their impact is still unknown. We are being subjected to a massive, global scale, uncontrolled scientific experiment that could have potentially devastating consequences for our ability to sustain life. While biotech corporations claim to be feeding the poor, corporate driven research is directed at designing crops to be used with heavy doses of the herbicides produced by those same corporations. Biotech claims to heal the sick, and has produced some effective drugs for diseases—but corporations have also managed to skew research efforts away from investigating the environmental causes of cancer and ill health. The same corporations that produce the pesticides that give you cancer then claim your gratitude for profiting from the drugs that offer a cure.

Biotech, for all its high-tech gloss, represents the old mechanistic model of the universe, nineteenth century science. Its basic premise is that one gene equals one trait, and that they can be switched and matched from organism to organism as similar screws can be switched between large and small machines. The mechanistic model assumes that the universe is entirely knowable and controllable. One cause equals one effect—and unintended effects somehow do not count. It’s a very good model for isolating single causes and effects, but it does not help us understand complex sets of interrelationships.

The mechanistic model has brought us many advances. I’m not proposing to give up the electric light bulb or modern telecommunications. But widely applied over the earth, this model can also cause extreme damage, not least because of its tendency to not count unintended consequences or hold accountable those who create them. It makes us literally unable to see or comprehend the vast impact of our policies, or to notice when they are not working. So we douse our agricultural crops with 3300 times more pesticides than before World War II, and suffer a 20% greater loss to insect pests, plus uncountable cancers and related diseases, habitat loss, degradation of soil and streams and loss of many other species. Yet somehow we are unable to notice that this approach to agriculture is simply not working.

The concept of the Commons arises out of a different world view, one more akin to the twenty-first century sciences of complexity and systems and chaos theories. It sees reality as a web of relationships, of complex, intertwined causes and effects, linked in multiple ways and cycles that may maintain or disrupt equilibriums. It acknowledges that reality contains mystery, huge areas that we don’t yet understand and can’t control, and that mystery asks from us reverence and humility: at the least, a long pause to observe before tinkering with what we do not fully understand.

What links the issues of biotech, racial justice, war, the environment, and police brutality? The Commons gives us a language to talk about the connections, how corporate control of scientific research, corporate ownership of our very genes, is linked to an agenda which must always keep some people oppressed so that others must profit, and must ultimately use force to maintain that repression. And it gives us a language and an imagery to talk about what we want: a world of rooted abundance, in which enterprises are part of a web of relationships that constitute community and are accountable to those communities, a world in which the integrity of all those commons that support life takes precedence over profit, a world of real democracy, where all people have a voice in the decisions that affect them, a world that cherishes creativity and nurtures intelligence and vision in all human beings.

When we say, Reclaiming the Commons,” people ask, “What is the Commons?” And in explaining what the Commons is, we create a new frame, one that assumes that there are and should be areas of life which have a value beyond their value as commodities. “Commons’ implies that community is a value, not just individual gain, Moreover, those commons we cherish are being eroded and taken from us, and we need to take them back. And we ally ourselves with the ‘commoners’, not the princes or kings, the emperors or empire builders, but the ordinary people upon whose backs the world is built, and whose rights any true democracy must safeguard. Air, water, seed,, a poem, a public space, a conversation, a healing herb, a tree, a flower, a healthy child—all of them are common as dirt, and yet beyond price, like healthy dirt, earth itself, the common ground that sustains our lives.

Reclaim the Commons Mobilization: Rough Schedule of Events
(for details, see <www.reclaimthecommons.net>

*June 3-5 Teach-in
*June 5 Form a contingent in the peace march called by ANSWER to oppose the occupation in Iraq.. Establish a temporary autonomous zone in Golden Gate Park.
*June 6 join the vigil against the occupation of Palestine, march by the Biotech Conference to the Really, Really Free Market, where everything is free. Finish up with a Food Fight outside the Biotech gala.
*June 7 Racial Justice Day, rally and march that links the torture in Abu Ghraib with the torture at home in the California Youth Authority. In the evening, the Biotech World Café, a process of dialogue.
*June 8 Day of direct actions to disrupt the Biotech Conference, in solidarity with sister actions against the G8 meeting in Georgia.
*June 9 Day of EcoActions, transforming asphalt streets into gardens, a Really, Really Free Clothing Market at the Gap.
www.starhawk.org <http://www.starhawk.org/>
Starhawk is an activist, organizer, and author of Webs of Power: Notes from the Global Uprising and eight other books on feminism, politics and earth-based spirituality. She teaches Earth Activist Trainings that combine permaculture design and activist skills, and works with the RANT trainer’s collective, www.rantcollective.org <http://www.rantcollective.org/> that offers training and support for mobilizations around global justice and peace issues.

IP: Logged

paras
Knowflake

Posts: 1660
From: the Heart of It All
Registered: May 2004

posted June 02, 2004 06:57 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for paras     Edit/Delete Message
Thank you for sharing, Harpyr! Keep posting things like that -- they make me feel like maybe there IS hope for us after all.

I was not even aware that Starhawk had a web presence, or that she was so active. My only experience of her was reading "Dreaming the Dark" years ago, but I can definitely say that book had a major impact on my thinking. To this day I am constantly aware of the dichotomy of "power-over" vs. "power-with" as she presented it. Needless to say, I have added a new bookmark to my browser. And if I lived closer to San Francisco, I would surely be there lending my support.

Again, thanks!!!

IP: Logged

pidaua
Knowflake

Posts: 7314
From: Schweinfurt to Grafenwoehr all within 6 months LOL
Registered: May 2002

posted June 02, 2004 01:50 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for pidaua     Edit/Delete Message
It is a sad thing to see someone so ill-informed about biotechnolgy, as is evident by the lack of documentation citing case studies or valid examples, try to blame biotechnology for all the ills of the world.

It is just another excuse to jump on the anarchist, anti-scientific bandwagon. I am sure Starhawk would have led the fight against Pastuer's rabies vaccine or Salks polio vaccine.

It is biotechnology that led to the discovery of the genes that cause Breast Cancer and autism, to name a couple. Biotechnology costs Billions each year in research, most of which results in fruitless studies, so patenting ideas, creations or uses of new devices is a way to protect your innovations.

Oh yeah, and it is a blatent lie to state that anyone can patent an herbal remedy, plant or the use thereof that has already been commonly used. Then again, I don't think starhawk has visted the United States Patent Office to check out the facts. Once a chemical - say Ginseng- has been known for a specific use, you cannot patent it. You can however patent a convulted formulation - which doesn't protect you from other people using Ginseng in the same manner.

Biotechnology has saved many diabetics, it has helped grow tissue necessary in skin graphs, it allows people to live longer. It is not as simple as just taking one gene out of one organism and transferring it into another. The author is skipping about 100 steps along with the fact that there is a rejection rate - but then the author doesn't HAVE to have facts, just a pen to write down the lies for suceptible people to believe.

One gene equals one trait? Yeah, that is spoken like a true Molecular Biology retard. Genes are so amazing in their ability to code for various things. Let's not forget the ability to "cross over" and share traits or mutation rates.

And why do people go into Biotech? Money? Some do, some go into it to make life easier for other. Some do it to make the environment better or save lives - I wonder what all the cause headed protesters add to the quality of life for their fellow men and women?

IP: Logged

paras
Knowflake

Posts: 1660
From: the Heart of It All
Registered: May 2004

posted June 02, 2004 02:05 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for paras     Edit/Delete Message
sigh. thanks, j.

IP: Logged

Harpyr
Knowflake

Posts: 2255
From: land of the midnight sun
Registered: Dec 2002

posted June 02, 2004 05:58 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Harpyr     Edit/Delete Message
I have heard of a specific instance wherein transnational corporations have been patenting dozens of neem-based pharmaceuticals. The neem tree is from India and is called the "curer of all ailments" in Sanskrit and has been used over millenia for many medicinal and agricultural purposes. The United States has proposed that the corporations' patents be enforced internationally which could result in Indians being sued for using their own traditional remedies.
You stick up for these corporations as if they have the well-being of humanity at it's core interest. They only thing they care about is profit. That's a fact and unless there are people out there challenging them, they will attempt to profit off the very building blocks of life whereever they can, no matter the cost to the rest of the world.
You dangerously oversimplify the matter.

quote:
Let's not forget the ability to "cross over" and share traits or mutation rates
This is one of the major reasons that we are out protesting against biotech plants. What if the 'terminator' genes which cause a plant to not produce any seed were to cross over and mutate other plants? This could cause some potentially catastrophic results that destroy entire ecosystems. I also heard of a bacteria that was engineered to clean poisoned water but what it ended up doing was killing off all living things it came into contact with. It was nearly released into the greater environment and if it had it could have destroyed all life on earth potentially.

Listen pidaua, I know Star personally and I can attest to the fact that she is anything but anti-science. She is in fact one of the most well read, intelligent people I know. I would appreciate it if you refrained from calling her a moron, seeing as how you know very little, if anything about her.

------------------
Thomas Jefferson to George Logan, 1816: "I hope we shall... crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country."

"According to Business Week, the average CEO [Chief Executive Officer] made 42 times the average blue-collar worker's pay in 1980, 85 times in 1990 and a staggering 531 times in 2000."
-- AFL-CIO "Executive Paywatch"

"Of course, I have as much power as the President has."
-- Bill Gates, in "The Truth, The Whole Truth, and Nothing But The Truth", Wired, November 2000

IP: Logged

Harpyr
Knowflake

Posts: 2255
From: land of the midnight sun
Registered: Dec 2002

posted June 02, 2004 08:13 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Harpyr     Edit/Delete Message
you're welcome, paras.

Starhawk does post essays somewhat regularly about her recent activities. There's archives at her site and if you're interested in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, she's traveled there a number of times in the past few years and her writings of it are quite interesting and human.

Dreaming in the Dark is a great book. If you liked that one then you should check out Truth or Dare. It's fantastic.


------------------------------------
"Sometimes the law defends plunder and participates in it. Sometimes the law places the whole apparatus of judges, police, prisons and gendarmes at the service of the plunderers, and treats the victim -- when he defends himself -- as a criminal."
-- Frederic Bastiat, "The Law"

IP: Logged

Harpyr
Knowflake

Posts: 2255
From: land of the midnight sun
Registered: Dec 2002

posted June 02, 2004 08:31 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Harpyr     Edit/Delete Message
quote:
I wonder what all the cause headed protesters add to the quality of life for their fellow men and women?

pidaua, this just proves my point that you know virtually nothing about Starhawk and many other 'cause-head' protesters. They do alot of things for humanity. Some of the most important work too. Designing and modeling the kind of world they- we want to live in. A world of sustainability, cooperation and healthy lifestyles- not just for people but for the other creatures of this incredible, irreplaceable planet.

This work ranges from growing organic produce, teaching permaculture design courses, teaching non-violence techniques to Palestinians and folks from many other walks of life, modeling consensus process, helping build affordable housing for poor communites, setting up co-ops for affordable, sustainably harvested food to be sold, the list could go on. Perhaps if you stopped stereotyping people like me or Starhawk into roles that make it easier to discount anything we say you would know of these things, pidaua.


----------------------
"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country ... corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war."
-- Abraham Lincoln, letter to Col. William F. Elkins, Nov 21, 1864.

"Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral"
-- Paulo Freire.

IP: Logged

pidaua
Knowflake

Posts: 7314
From: Schweinfurt to Grafenwoehr all within 6 months LOL
Registered: May 2002

posted June 03, 2004 12:37 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for pidaua     Edit/Delete Message
First off Harpyr, the US does not have jurisdiction over the International use of patents. Each country has their own laws. I know this because my company files patents all the time and our current patent for the use of citric acid against larvae is not covered anywhere but in the US and EU. Therefore, no matter what we tried.

Here is the actual website concerning patents filed for NEEM oil.
http://pat ft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=neem&FIELD1=&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=ptxt

If you log onto that and do a complete reading you will see that you are wrong in your assumptions. Even if a corporation TRIED to stop the use of a known, it would not happen. If for some reason they discovered the use, like we did for citric acid, then they can patent the "use" not the chemical. In our case we also found that citric acid kills the virus that causes FMD (foot and mouth diseas) but we could not patent the use. Do you know why? Because legally the substance had been in use for a long time by rural farmer and picked up the scientific industry. That meant since it had been in common use, NO ONE could patent it.

Like using sugar to sweeten your coffee. No one owns the patent on the use of sugar, it is expired. Companies only get a certain about of time to use that patent and recoop their money. Our citric acid patent expired in 2011, that means anyone can start marketing the product for that use. NOW, if a little farmer had extra citric acid,that he used to treat his the alkalinity of their pond, on his calf hutches, we would not sue him. Just like if the country of China wanted to market our product for their use, we could do NOTHING.

Companies CAN patent specific formulations but not the strict use. I would ask you to do some research and look up the process of filing for a patent. It is labor intensive and requires a gross amount of research to ensure you do not file on something that has already been invented.

As for your cross over with terminator genes. You are applying a total exaggeration of an incident to the entire earth. What a doomsday concept? Yes, we do have problems in science and I am not all the keen on certian inventions. Growing potential insulin producing corn next to another field can cause problems, which is why precautions are taken to ensure the safety of the other plants. That doesn't mean things don't happen and people SHOULD be held accountable, as was the case in Nebraska and Iowa. For the record, there are many of us that are not in support of the gross genetic manipulation of plants and animals. There is something to be said though for the insertion of genes / genetic material that may cause certain organisms to produce material in a more rapid manner. That aids in the ability to provide necessary drugs to people that need them.

Please send me the reference on the bacteria used in the water. I would implore you and people like Starhawk to start producing FACTS not just references to stories heard by this person or that. I have already proved you wrong about the application / patent process especially regarding the International community.

As far as stereotyping people, you too are guilty of the same thing, as is your beloved starhawk. The protest is against ALL biotech, you are not discriminating between one over the other. You all lump science and corporations into a "greedy money hungry Earth hating" group. As though we are all sitting here waiting to destroy the planet. What in the hell was so scientific about what Starhawk wrote? There was absolutely no facts related in her article. Just a bunch of mumbo jumbo thoughts and opinions not based on anything tangible.

I have decided to stop posting to your threads about the earth and anything scientific. It is obvious that you do not base your arguments on hard facts or back them up with any scientific evidence. It has become an exercize in futility to try to present the facts to you and people like starhawk.

And as far as your message. If you all preached what you actually did versus how evil everyone else is, then maybe your true message would get across. When your arguments are presented only as an attack on the scientific community and all the advances Biotech has offered, then how does one find out the good your...organization / group does?

IP: Logged

Aphrodite
Knowflake

Posts: 4992
From:
Registered: Feb 2002

posted June 03, 2004 01:05 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Aphrodite     Edit/Delete Message
I am going to be at one of the Biotech conferences next week. Happy to be attending and eager to learn new things from scientists and the industry.

IP: Logged

pidaua
Knowflake

Posts: 7314
From: Schweinfurt to Grafenwoehr all within 6 months LOL
Registered: May 2002

posted June 03, 2004 01:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for pidaua     Edit/Delete Message
Oh Man...Aphrodite..I totally envy you!!! Have fun!!

Here are some interesting facts about GMO's and biotechnology: http://ohioline.osu.edu/gmo/faq.html

I especially like the following quote:

Q. It doesn’t seem like all scientists agree that GMOs are safe. Why don’t we just wait until everyone agrees that there’s no risk to human health?

A. Actually, scientists have come to a consensus that there’s nothing inherently risky about splicing genes from one organism into another. For example, GMOs have been used for years to produce an enzyme required for processing cheese, and no one has called that dangerous. More recently, a genetically engineered rice that could eliminate vitamin A deficiencies in some populations has been met with widespread acclaim.

It’s true that there is some disagreement about some classes of GMOs and their specific uses: Will certain GMOs cause an allergic reaction in some people? Will a GMO crop designed to kill pests have a detrimental effect on beneficial insects? These issues have been studied, and, in fact, at least one GMO (Pioneer Hi-Bred soybeans with a Brazil-nut protein added) has been abandoned because of an allergic-reaction threat. But not all scientists everywhere agree that all GMOs have been studied enough.

Still, most new technologies are greeted in this manner. Either society as a whole or the scientific community weighs the risks against the benefits. Many technologies involve dangers to health (electricity, automobiles and airplanes, for example), but we’ve adopted them anyway because the benefits outweigh the risks. Perhaps the same disagreement was discussed in prehistoric times when fire came under human control: Surely someone said, “The children may burn their hands, so fire cannot be a good thing.”


Although some scientists have expressed concern about GMOs, an expert committee established by the Food and Drug Administration concluded that the safety of a food depends upon its properties, not the process used to produce it. With this definition, the safety of GMO foods must be—and is—considered on a case-by-case basis. But the goal should be decision by consensus, not by unanimity. Waiting until “everyone” agrees is tantamount to eliminating the possibility of marketing any GMO.

More specifically - let's look at the old "Fish gene into a plant"

Q. I’ve heard the argument that genetic engineering is just an extension of traditional breeding. But how can you breed a fish and a strawberry? You can’t. Why isn’t this type of “cross-breeding” seen as possibly dangerous to human health?

A. First, it is usually inaccurate to talk about a “fish gene” or a “strawberry gene.” Many genes, which are merely blueprints for producing specific proteins, are shared among many organisms.

So, while you cannot “breed” a fish with a strawberry, you could theoretically take a gene from a fish—or something else—and introduce it into a strawberry cell, which can subsequently be regenerated into a whole strawberry plant, which will contain an extra gene and an extra protein. (By the way, fish genes have not been introduced into strawberries.)

In traditional breeding, many genes are transferred between related species, without clear control over just which genes are being transferred and which are not. Genetic engineering is far more precise, which is, in fact, one of its greatest benefits. It allows, for example, a single gene from a cold-hardy plant to be introduced into a strawberry to help increase its tolerance to cold weather. Another example: Genetic engineering has allowed the gene responsible for making human insulin to be inserted into a certain type of bacteria. That bacteria now makes human insulin, a product that has been used by people with diabetes for years with no adverse effects. This type of “cross-breeding” between humans and bacteria obviously would be impossible without genetic engineering.

There is a natural precedent for this type of “cut and paste” operation: The bacterium Agrobacterium tumefaciens performs this type of gene transfer in nature, and is in fact one of the tools molecular breeders use to move genes around.

It’s true that genetic engineering could be used to produce dangerous products. But the same statement can be made about virtually any technology. Scientists generally agree that products from each type of genetic engineering should be reviewed carefully before they are implemented.

IP: Logged

pidaua
Knowflake

Posts: 7314
From: Schweinfurt to Grafenwoehr all within 6 months LOL
Registered: May 2002

posted June 03, 2004 02:15 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for pidaua     Edit/Delete Message
Harpyr,

I don't see where I called Starhawk a moron. In fact you are the only one that used the word until I just did. In any case, I do know about Starhawk and I sure as heck did see any science in her background:

Beginning as an organizer in her high school during the days of the Vietnam War, Starhawk has been active in social change movements for over thirty years. She has organized, trained protestors, and been on the front lines of antinuclear actions at Diablo Canyon, Livermore Weapons Lab, Vandenberg Air Force Base, and the Nevada Test Site, among others. She traveled to Nicaragua with Witness for Peace in 1984 and made two trips to El Salvador to give ongoing support for sustainability programs. She continues to be a witness for peace on the front lines of the Palestine/Israel war, working with Palestinian and Israeli peace activists, as well as teaching nonviolence workshops in the region. She is now active in the revived American peace movement. Starhawk works on countless environmental and land use issues, and is a founder and active member of the Cazadero Hills Land Use Council in western Sonoma County. Her focus for the last several years has been the global justice movement, training participants and taking part in many of the major actions, including those in Seattle, Washington DC, Quebec City, Genoa, and New York City, and doing direct action trainings for groups all over the US, Canada, Mexico, Europe, and South America. Together with Penny Livingston-Stark, she also coteaches intensive seminars that combine permaculture design, political organizing and activism, and earth-based spirituality. Known as EAT, Earth Activist Training, this seminar is now held both in Europe and in the US. (EAT page will open in a new browser window).

Starhawk is a cofounder of Reclaiming, a highly influential branch of modern Pagan religion, and she continues to work closely with the Reclaiming community. Reclaiming is a network of people who combine activism with earth-based spirituality and healing, and offers classes, intensives, public rituals, and training in the Goddess tradition and magical activism across the US, Canada, and Europe. Starhawk writes a regular column for the Reclaiming Quarterly. She is also a columnist on the web for beliefnet.com and for znet.
Starhawk lives part-time San Francisco, in a collective house with her partner and friends, and part-time in a little hut in the woods in western Sonoma County, where she practices permaculture in her extensive gardens and writes.

I don't discount her expertise in pagan studies, goddess worship or permaculture. But I don't think she has a grasp on molecular biological techniques, as is evident by her articles.

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright © 2007

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a