Skip to content

Say Thanks to Qwest!

Say Thanks to Qwest!

Website created by Richard Kastelein
Text by Chris Floyd and Richard Kastelein

It’s not often these days that we have occasion to laud corporate behavior, but the stance taken by the telecom Qwest in resisting the Bush Administration’s covert program to ensnare every single American citizen in a vast web of telephone surveillance deserves our thanks.

Every other telecom sold out the privacy of its customers – literally so, taking money to turn over their phone records to the National Security Agency – but Qwest alone insisted on having a court order before complying with Bush’s unprecedented and “indefensible” (as Newt Gingrich put it) invasion of Americans’ personal lives and business affairs.

Bush’s domestic spies refused to supply any formal legal justification whatsoever for their extraordinary request, beyond the implied “plenary powers” of the “Commander-in-Chief”: the novel – and equally indefensible — doctrine that the Administration had adopted as the basis of what is effectively a presidential dictatorship, beyond the reach of law.

It is, of course, a sad commentary on our times that Qwest should be praised so highly for merely obeying the law of the land. But this is what we’ve come to. Our leaders are lawless, and it is now up to every citizen - including corporate citizens - to embody and enact the laws and values of the Republic, on our own, until Constitutional government can be restored.

One simple act we can take is to support those who take a public stand for the law. You can say thanks to Qwest by posting a comment below (you don’t need to join, or leave an email or website to post - just scroll down and hit the comments link).

And pass this man an email as well:

Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer
David J. Heller
email: Corporate.Compliance@qwest.com

Click here to visit Qwest website

USA Today first broke the story, and now we all know: the National Security Agency has been collecting the private phone records of tens of millions of American citizens since 2001, gathering the tainted bounty of this sinister harvest into “the largest data base ever assembled in the world,” as one insider put it. Under the direction of General Michael V. Hayden — the military spymaster now nominated to head the CIA — the NSA carried out this massive “black op” against the American people in total secrecy, without the court orders clearly required to obtain this information. So how did Hayden and his creepy peepers into America’s privacy get hold of the phone records?

Simple: the major U.S. telecommunications corporations — all but one — turned them over to the government, for money — your money. That’s right: the Bush Administration used your tax dollars to pay the Big Telecoms to hand over your private phone records.

From USA Today:

…The sources said the NSA made clear that it was willing to pay for the cooperation. AT&T, which at the time was headed by C. Michael Armstrong, agreed to help the NSA.

So did BellSouth, headed by F. Duane Ackerman; SBC, headed by Ed Whitacre; and Verizon, headed by Ivan Seidenberg. With that, the NSA’s domestic program began in earnest.

If you are among the multitudes who signed up, in good faith, to BellSouth, AT&T or Verizon, expecting your privacy to be protected, as required by laws going back more than seven decades, the record of every phone call you have made in the last four-and-a-half years is now in the hands of a secret government program operating without any genuine oversight or restrictions against abuse. This includes the call records of every government or corporate whistleblower, every investigative journalist digging up government corruption, every political opponent of the Administration’s policies. Imagine how useful it would be for the Bush Administration to type in the name of, say, Seymour Hersh, and find out every government insider he’s talked to on the phone for the past four years?

Rarely has such a powerful, all-pervasive tool for repression been placed in the hands of a government; and rarely has there a been a government which has proven itself less trustworthy to hold such power without abusing it.

After the September 11 attacks in 2001, the Bush Administration decided to ignore the existing laws governing surveillance, in particular the special secret courts set up under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978. This urge to bypass FISA is not surprising; the secret courts – which had almost never refused a single request for surveillance of terrorst or espionage suspects – had been created in response to widespread government spying on citizens in for decades, a mania for illicit intrusion that reached its height under the disgraced president Richard Nixon.

Two of the greatest proponents of these assaults on civil liberties were high-ranking minions in the Nixon Administration: Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld. After Nixon’s ignominious departure, with Congress finally acting to restrain the manifold abuses of the national security system, Cheney and Rumsfeld – now Chief of Staff and Defense Secretary for Gerald Ford – buried investigations of a covert telecommunications spy program remarkably similar to the current NSA scheme under the butt-covering rubric of “executive privilege.” The original FISA restrictions were, in fact, aimed directly at serial abusers of power like Cheney and Rumsfeld. It is no wonder that they discarded these restrictions at the first opportunity once they had returned in glory to the White House.

George W. Bush gave his full authority to the NSA program, whose ostensible purpose is to “data-mine” blind phone numbers — with no names or content of the calls divulged — in search of connections between suspected terrorists. Hayden in turn delegated the responsibility to lower-echelon shift supervisors – as in the Watergate days – further diluting the already soup-thin oversight of the operation. For years, it has been carried out in total secrecy; there is simply no way of knowing how they have used – or abused – this massive database, or what other information, such as call content, they have obtained from the phone companies, or by other means.

The Bush Administration pointedly refrained from using any existing legal mechanism in requesting the call records, when it could have very easily done so and doubtless obtained all the information it sought for the data-mining program. In the absence of any other credible explanation – beyond bland assertions of “trust us, it’s all legal” – we are certainly justified in suspecting that the Administration had purposes for the program which lay outside the scope of FISA or any other law governing domestic surveillance.

But the major telecoms were evidently unconcerned about the lack of legality. Once the NSA dangled a bit of long green in their faces, they passed over the call records without a by your leave. Only Qwest – the often beleaguered telecom with a checkered past and an uncertain legal future hanging over its chief – refused to cooperate without the sensible expedient of a court order. After all, that was the law, and had been since the 1930s. There is no doubt that Qwest, given the appeals to patriotism and national security in the tumultuous days after 9/11, would have willingly complied – if the request had been made in a legal manner.

Qwest’s stand is even more remarkable given the heavy pressure applied by Bush team.

From USA Today:

…Trying to put pressure on Qwest, NSA representatives pointedly told Qwest that it was the lone holdout among the big telecommunications companies.

It also tried appealing to Qwest’s patriotic side: In one meeting, an NSA representative suggested that Qwest’s refusal to contribute to the database could compromise national security, one person recalled.

In addition, the agency suggested that Qwest’s foot-dragging might affect its ability to get future classified work with the government.

Like other big telecommunications companies, Qwest already had classified contracts and hoped to get more.

Aside from concerns over legality, morality and liberty, the very utility of the NSA program has also been called into question. The blunderbuss approach of harvesting millions upon millions of phone records to be churned by supercomputers seems wildly at odds with the kind of careful, precise human intelligence and investigative work required to pinpoint the deliberately scattered, deeply buried, small networks of actual terrorists out there. And the already massive extent of the program is evidently just the beginning.

From USA Today:

It’s the largest database ever assembled in the world,” said one person, who, like the others who agreed to talk about the NSA’s activities, declined to be identified by name or affiliation. The agency’s goal is “to create a database of every call ever made” within the nation’s borders, this person added.

…The usefulness of the NSA’s domestic phone-call database as a counterterrorism tool is unclear. Also unclear is whether the database has been used for other purposes.

“Other purposes” is the operative phrase here. Because “data-mining” for terrorists in giant phone record banks is like trying to find microscopic needles in an ever-growing haystack. It is, in a word, impossible, according to expert to Bruce Schneier from Wired Magazine.

This unrealistically accurate system will generate 1 billion false alarms for every real terrorist plot it uncovers. Every day of every year, the police will have to investigate 27 million potential plots in order to find the one real terrorist plot per month.

Raise that false-positive accuracy to an absurd 99.9999 percent and you’re still chasing 2,750 false alarms per day — but that will inevitably raise your false negatives, and you’re going to miss some of those 10 real plots.

This isn’t anything new. In statistics, it’s called the “base rate fallacy,” and it applies in other domains as well. For example, even highly accurate medical tests are useless as diagnostic tools if the incidence of the disease is rare in the general population.

Terrorist attacks are also rare, any “test” is going to result in an endless stream of false alarms. This is exactly the sort of thing we saw with the NSA’s eavesdropping program: the New York Times reported that the computers spat out thousands of tips per month.

Every one of them turned out to be a false alarm. And the cost was enormous — not just for the FBI agents running around chasing dead-end leads instead of doing things that might actually make us safer, but also the cost in civil liberties.

The fundamental freedoms that make our country the envy of the world are valuable, and not something that we should throw away lightly.

So again, we are left with the question: What is the NSA program really about? Who are they really spying on? Remember, we are dealing with an Administration that has already declared – in open court, in Congressional testimony, in internal memos, in executive orders and “presidential signing statements” – that the president has the “inherent authority” as Commander-in-Chief during “wartime” to ignore or reinterpret any law that might restrict his “plenary powers.” We have seen this pernicious doctrine in action for years: it underlies the use of torture throughout the global system of detention centers, secret prisons and the concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay that Bush has set up; it underlies Bush’s outrageous claim that he can apprehend anyone on earth and hold them indefinitely, without charges or trial, simply by declaring them, on his own authority, an “enemy combatant,” a “terrorist” or even a “suspected terrorist.”

(For example, the Bush Administration has declared in open court that the U.S. government would be justified in capturing and holding a “little old lady in Switzerland” if she unwittingly gave money to a charity used as a front by terrorists. Deputy Attorney General Brian Boyle made the assertion in a hearing on Dec. 1, 2004, adding the chilling words: “Someone’s intention is clearly not a factor that would disable detention.” This admittedly innocent little old lady would then be subjected to a military tribunal, which alone would decide “whether to believe her and release her” – or keep her locked up.)

So we are dealing with an Administration that openly admits that innocent people can be “legimately” swept up in its vast covert nets and subjected to indefinite imprisonment at the mercy of a military tribunal. And we are supposed to believe that these same officials, willing to go to such draconian lengths, are acting with scrupulous circumspection when handling the private phone records of millions of American citizens? We are supposed to believe they are using this gargantuan NSA program solely to ferret out a few terrorists?

From USA Today:

…With access to records of billions of domestic calls, the NSA has gained a secret window into the communications habits of millions of Americans.

Customers’ names, street addresses and other personal information are not being handed over as part of NSA’s domestic program, the sources said. But the phone numbers the NSA collects can easily be cross-checked with other databases to obtain that information.

The NSA phone-spy program, which we are now told is only the “tip of the iceberg”, is designed to identify social networks – of any kind. It is far too large to have been created solely to find a few terrorists. It beggars belief – and belies the evidence of the Administration’s behavior over the past five years – to assume that other “social networks” are not also being targeted by the program: Democrats and other political opponents, internal dissidents, activist groups, journalists…basically anyone who is against Bush and the way he is fighting his self-declared, never-ending “War on Terror.”

But the dictatorial powers being claimed under the aegis of this “War” are not new measures in response to an unprecedented emergency – they are old abuses long championed by the most powerful elements in the Bush Administration. These powers of surveillance, secrecy and repression of dissent were being systematically restored by the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld junta long before 9/11.

In the end, the NSA program is not about “national security” or fighting terrorists. It is just another front in a long-running war against the liberties of the American people: freedoms which are despised and feared by elites who believe that their power and privilege are the only genuine “national interests.”

Who knows? Tomorrow we may see Qwest in collusion with these elites on some other front. But right now, in this fight, they have been a champion of liberty and deserve our thanks. So go show them some love. But in the words of the late, great Johnny Cash: keep your eyes wide open all the time.

Dead Republic Blues: Bush Illegal Wiretapping Scheme Gets Darker and Dirtier

by Chris Floyd

(Last year, my colleague Rich Kastelein created a website where readers could thank Qwest for refusing to take part in the Bush Administration’s illegal surveillance of American citizens. Rich has now revised the site, and you can find breaking news on the case and related matters on the top left-hand side. Rich also created another website at the time, This is Wiretap, where you can find extensive background information on the entire affair, including news, analysis and video.)

The latest revelations in the Bush Administration’s long-unfolding, eve
r-growing illegal wiretapping scandal carry with them a multiple string. For not only do they bear upon Bush’s vast system of lawless espionage aimed at the American people, but they also underscore the perversion of the Justice Department into an armed enforcer of partisan thuggery and confirm that that the unprecedented authoritarian powers that Bush has seized have nothing to do with their ostensible justification, the 9/11 attacks, but were part of a pre-planned evisceration of the constitutional republic that began in the first days of his ill-gotten presidency.

What’s more, the revelations give strong indications that nothing about the domestic spying program will change under a Democratic administration – because the heart of the scheme was in fact created under
Bush’s predecessor, who bears the same last name as Bush’s likely successor.

The new data has emerged from the case of Joseph Nacchio, the former CEO of the telecommunications giant, Qwest. Nacchio was prosecuted by the Justice Department and convicted of insider trading — after he turned down a request from the National Security Agency to give the Bush Administration unrestricted access to the telephone records of Qwest customers without a warrant. According to recently unsealed filings in Nacchio’s appeal of the conviction, the Bush Administration first pressured him to sign up with the warrantless surveillance program in February 2001 – seven months before the 9/11 attacks that “changed everything” and ushered in a new era of acquiescence to draconian measures.

After this refusal, Nacchio — who at the time was chairman of the government’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee, holding top security clearances to work on secret projects — was cut out of lucrative deals to privatize the NSA’s non-secret technology, as the NYT reports. When these blows against Qwest — which was already suffering from falling share prices — failed to bring Nacchio to heel, the Justice Department then launched its insider trading case against him, pointing to stock sales he had made back in 2001 before a poor financial report.

Nacchio’s defense was that the stock sale was a portfolio diversification that had nothing to do with the company’s performance — precisely because he believed government assurances at the time that Qwest would indeed be part of the NSA privatization. Thus he was anticipating a rise in share prices that year, not a fall, and so his sale was not a dump job before bad financial news reached the public. (The kind of thing that once got George W. Bush into hot water – until he was cleared by his father’s Securities and Exchange Commission, whose chief was a longtime Bush family retainer and whose general counsel became Dubya’s own lawyer two years later.)

However, at his trial Nacchio was forbidden from bringing up these dealings with the NSA in his defense by the judge, Edward Nottingham — a longtime political partisan appointed to the bench by Bush’s father, as Scott Horton notes. (Nottingham, by the way, has been under investigation by the FBI for possible misuse of his federal computer, after rancorous divorce proceedings revealed that he had spent thousands of dollars at a Denver strip club and subscribed to a porn-laden adult dating service that he perused in his judicial chambers. When questioned about the $3,000 he laid out during a single trip to the strip joint, the judge testified that he was too drunk to remember just how he spent the money.)

Scott Horton has a good précis of the Nacchio case thus far and some of its deeper implications:

Let’s put this in sharper focus. Nacchio discovered that the NSA was engaged in a project to gather warrantless surveillance data on millions of Americans. He took advice of counsel. His lawyers told him, correctly, that this was illegal. They probably also warned him that if Qwest participated in the program, it would be committing a felony. So Nacchio said, no, sorry, I can’t work with you on this. But I can help if you want to change the law. And the reaction of the NSA? It was, apparently, to cut Qwest out of a series of contract awards by way of retaliation. (If that charge sticks, it would probably be yet another felony.) And the second reaction? To try to build a criminal case against Nacchio as a means of retaliation against him. (And if that charge sticks, it would probably be yet a third felony–on the part of the Government officials who did it). We are seeing the Government engaging in a sweeping pattern of criminal dealings, and ultimately, one of the biggest crimes of all, abusing the criminal justice process to strike out at an individual who refused to play their crooked game. Oh, and by the way: who was heading the NSA when all of this transpired? Michael Hayden, the man who now runs the CIA, and is busily dismantling the CIA Inspector General’s office because it has apparently raised questions about potentially criminal conduct on his watch there, too.


See how neatly it all ties together. Hayden was the NSA honcho who pushed the illegal surveillance on Qwest and other telecoms. (Who, unlike Nacchio, willingly did their “patriotic” duty to break the law — and for their service gladly pocketed those fat privatization contracts that Qwest was denied.) Now Hayden is even more powerful, and obviously willing to kill the career of anyone who threatens to air the Administration’s dirty laundry.

Meanwhile, his boss — Mike McConnell, the Director of National Intelligence, overseeing 16 organs in the security apparat — was hip-deep in NSA contracts, including the privatization deals, in his pre-DNI role as senior vice-president at Booz Allen Hamilton, one of the many “private security firms” who have made billions in the golden revolving door between hugger-mugger government service and “top secret” private pork.

And it is McConnell who has been spearheading the Administration’s effort to retroactively “immunize” the telecom giants from prosecution for their well-paid role in the lawless surveillance scheme. Leading Democrats have already signed up to this astonishing barbarism, which, as Glenn Greenwald notes in a blistering analysis, is yet another indication that the rule of law is a dead letter for the mandarins of the American Establishment.

But aside from the sheer chutzpah of the move, there is really nothing surprising about it. Not only are Democrats deeply in thrall to telecom money and thus eager to please their paymasters; they’ve already effectively immunized George W. Bush and his minions for their perpetration of the illegal wiretapping – a crime which the Administration has openly, even proudly embraced. The ex post facto exoneration of the telecoms is part of a larger renewal of one of the most shameless pieces of legislative hackery passed by the new Congress (and that’s saying something): the retroactive authorization of Bush’s warrantless surveillance program. To be sure, the upcoming renewal of these tyrannical powers will be hedged in with a few toothless “safeguards” – but is there anyone (outside the Washington Post editorial board) who is stupid enough to believe that the Bush Administration will feel bound by any restrictions that Congress tries to place on the arbitrary will of the “Unitary Executive”?

Nor is there much hope for any real change should a Democrat win the White House in 2008 – especially not the current front-runner, whose nomination seems all-but-certain now. For there was one nugget in the Nacchio papers that has not received much attention. As Wired magazine reports, his appeal quoted from a lawsuit filed against the telecom Verizon for turning over its call records to the NSA. The suit alleged:

…that AT&T began building a spying facility for the NSA just days after President Bush was inaugurated….The project was described in the ATT sales division documents as calling for the construction of a facility to store and retain data gathered by the NSA from its domestic and foreign intelligence operations but was to be in actuality a duplicate ATT Network Operations Center for the use and possession of the NSA that would give the NSA direct, unlimited, unrestricted and unfettered access to all call information and internet and digital traffic on ATT’s long distance network…

The NSA program was initially conceived at least one year prior to 2001 but had been called off; it was reinstated within 11 days of the entry into office of defendant George W. Bush.


Read that last paragraph again: the NSA program to gain “direct, unlimited, unrestricted and unfettered access to all call information and internet and digital traffic” was conceived “at least one year prior to 2001″ – by the Clinton Administration. If this is what the Clintons wanted to do in 1999 or 2000, why wouldn’t they want to do it in 2009 – especially when it’s already been done for them, by Bush, and approved by Congress?

The illegal spying scandal broke into the open almost two years ago. It was clear then that it was a make-or-break issue, a last chance for the American republic. As I wrote at the time: “Now the choice for the American Establishment is clear, and inescapable: do you hold for the Republic, or for autocracy?”

Two years later, the answer is equally clear. As with every other criminal racket perpetrated by the Bush Administration – from the monstrous war of aggression in Iraq to the adoption of torture as an official instrument of national policy to the practice of state murder in “targeted assassinations” to the lawless capture and indefinite detention of American citizens without charge and on and on – the Establishment has held for autocracy. They would rather be the well-paid slaves of a two-bit tyrant than honest citizens of a genuine republic. As long as they can keep their choice spot at the trough, they will gulp down the foulest swill that Bush, or his autocratic successor, can serve.

When I wrote the 2005 piece quoted above, this grim outcome – although very likely – was not yet clear. But I think the conclusion of the piece still stands, albeit with the conditional nature of its first sentence removed.

The next few weeks will show us if there is still some hope of restoring the Republic through the old institutions, or if we will have to follow the course laid out by Bob Dylan some 40 years ago: “Strike another match, go start anew.” Who knows? Maybe we can make a better republic next time: one not born of blood, greed and fury — those all-too-common elements of human organization — but made from a new compound of mercy, justice, communion and liberty. Still imperfect, of course, still corrupt — because that’s our intractable human nature — but with our worst instincts restrained by enlightened, ever-evolving law, and the predatory ambitions of the rich and powerful reined by elaborate checks and balances.

UPDATE: Ray McGovern has more at Robert Parry’s indispensable Consortiumnews.com: NSA Spying: What Did Pelosi Know?

 

 
Qwest's Refusal of N.S.A. Query Is Explained

...The telecommunications company Qwest turned down requests by the National Security Agency for private telephone records because it concluded that doing so would violate federal privacy laws, a lawyer for the telephone company's former chief executive said today.New York Times - March 12, 2006


Google Breaking News

Quick Comment


Grassroots
Banners

(HTML code here)






Recent Comments:

  • J.J.S.: Dear Qwest Thank you for not selling out to the Bush Push.
  • Mr. Robert Hill: == TUESDAY September 26, 2006 RE: CALL CENTER in Portland, Oregon Hey, hey, thank you Qwest, for...
  • Gregory Markowski: Dear Qwest, Thank you for your patriotism in defending the values which can make this country...
  • NavnDansk: Thank you Qwest. Very rare indeed for someone to stand up to these nazis.
  • Tyler: I pledge alligiance to the United States of America.. AS IT WAS DESIGNED. Not I pledge alligiance to the...

  • Blogroll




    Contact thankyouqwest.org

    thankyouqwest.org in Mainstream Media

    JACKI SCHECHNER, CNN INTERNET REPORTER: Wolf, a liberal blogger and his web master started the site thankyouqwest.org on Friday. They have had some 15,000 visitors since then. And 250 people going online to say thanks to Qwest. Even some people thinking about switching service are now going to stay to show their loyalty. We reached out to Qwest to find out if this was having any impact on their service. And they say they refuse to comment on this or any matter they say is relating to national security.

    Online reactions. At www.thankyouqwest.org, visitors applaud Qwest for not turning over phone records and say they're dropping carriers that did. The site is an offshoot of Empire Burlesque, a blog created by Chris Floyd, an American-born author in Oxford, England, and Canadian Richard Kastelein, who runs the website in the Netherlands. Floyd, a frequent Bush administration critic, is author of Empire Burlesque: The Secret History of the Bush Regime. The thankyouqwest.org site is getting about 6,000 or more unique visits a day, according to its founders. It was created Thursday.

    Website urges people to sign on with carrier. A pair of Europeans say they wanted to show their appreciation for the telecom's standing up to the NSA's call for data.

    Qwest's reported refusal to give its customer calling records to the National Security Agency is winning the Denver-based phone company big fans online. At least 15,000 people have visited thankyouqwest.org since two bloggers in Europe launched the website Thursday, said co-creator Richard Kaste lein. Most of the 269 comments posted as of Monday evening praised Qwest. "Thank you Qwest for behaving like a real American company!" exclaimed one visitor. The site links to dozens of other blogs also following the story.

    "Thank you Qwest! It's nice to see someone following principle over profits," wrote a user named Terra at ThankyouQwest.org, a Web site hastily erected by the purveyors of the left-wing blog Empire Burlesque. "When will you have cell service in Ohio?"

    "Thank you Qwest," wrote one commenter who was not really with the program at ThankyouQwest.com. "What will your next advertising campaign be — 'Qwest: Telecom provider to the terrorists'? Well done."






    One blogger even created a Web site, www.thankyouqwest.org, praising the company for its decision not to cooperate with the government's surveillance plan.


    Bloggers also have expressed their support, and Richard Kastelein, a Web designer based in the Netherlands, created thankyouqwest.org, which commends the company as the only holdout and declares: "Qwest customers are safe."

    Kastelein said he started the site "because it's about time someone stood up. Qwest has had a lot of bad press during the past few years and its fair share of problems. But they certainly deserve kudos for not buckling under to the heavy-handed tactics of the Bush administration."

    Kastelein's praise and reference to "bad press" capture the two faces of Qwest: the defender - of privacy - and the defendant - in securities litigation.




    "By Thursday afternoon, a Web site had gone up called thankyouqwest.org, which encouraged visitors to contact the company's chief ethics officer to express their appreciation for so-called "NSA-free" phone service."

    This new web site thanks Qwest for not turning over its customers’ phone records to the NSA.

    At least 250 phone customers posted messages to the hastily put together Web site ThankyouQwest.org. in the last five days. Chris Floyd, who created the Web site, also encourages readers to send a congratulations e-mail to David J. Heller, Qwest's chief ethics and compliance officer according to the site.

    Lastly, I'm having a real hard time understanding the celebration/worship of Qwest. They're the one big telecom that didn't hand over their phone records, instead asking for a subpoena, which of course, wasn't offered. So people are falling all over themselves to thank or reward Qwest for standing up for customers.

    And sure, Nacchio has a checkered past, but what’s a little insider trading when you’ve just stood up to the NSA and protected the privacy of millions of Americans? That’s heroism, and I say that with my tongue only slightly in cheek.

    Links

    Mainpage
  • Register
  • Login