Palmer Report - Not Definitive - In Fact or Law
by Diane V. McLoughlin, September 1st, 2011
Corrupt aims are sometimes best achieved (and many more times strived
for) behind closed doors, by committee. The United Nations' Secretary
General Ban Ki-moon - either willing accomplice, or due to intolerable
pressure by the Israel-U.S. axis - assigned a redundant second committee,
one less hung-up on the facts, to downplay both Israel's blockade of Gaza,
and also Israel's military slaughter of humanitarians, May, 2010, on the
Gaza-bound ship, the Mavi Marmara - one of six ships participating in the
first Gaza Freedom Flotilla.
That's how I read it: Trying to subvert the U.N. and human rights with the
frighteningly misguided aim of maintaining 'international stability.'
Gaza Freedom Flotilla: 'There were six ships, 663 people both old and
young - men and women from 37 different countries bearing 10,000 tons of
humanitarian aid. Three ships, one of them the Mavi Marmara, carried
peace activists and humanitarians while the others carried the donated
relief supplies.' [1]
Nine peace activists were murdered by Israeli commandos on the Mavi
Marmara - eight of whom were Turkish citizens, the ninth was American of
Turkish descent. Dozens more activists were wounded. Turkey demands
both that Israel apologize for these murders, and that Israel pay
compensation to the families of the deceased. Turkey further insists that
Israel abide by international law and immediately lift the illegal siege of
Gaza. Israel rejects all of Turkey's demands.
The world has waited in vain for sixty-three years for a just peace to be
brought to bear between Israel and the Palestinian people; a peace based
on justice and human rights.
Israel and Egypt implemented a full military blockade of the Gaza Strip as
of June, 2007. What transpired up to that point was this. Palestinian
elections had been held that were determined to be free and fair. Hamas
narrowly beat Fatah, the preferred, hopefully more pliant choice of the
West. The U.S. helped orchestrate an attempted military coup of Hamas
which Hamas defeated, routing Fatah supporters from Gaza in the process.
Hamas could not be beaten at the polls. It could not be overthrown. So
they locked up the entire population of Gaza and threw away the key.
Because, it's either that, or actually hammer out a fair deal and make peace.
And that is the one thing Israel refuses to do.
Rockets
Israel argues that the blockade of Gaza is strictly a matter of self-defense,
in order to try to prevent weapons from getting into the hands of Hamas.
Homemade rockets are fired from Gaza into Israeli territory, and
conversely, Israel routinely bombs Gaza with chemical weapons and store-
bought, if you will, big bombs.
In 2008 efforts were made to build trust between the two sides. That
summer, a ceasefire was honored by Hamas, with the deal being that the
blockade and other restrictions were to be gradually eased, moving peace
forward. Israel girded to destroy Gaza the entire time of the ceasefire.
God help me
Religion versus civil liberties: I feel the need to share at this juncture that
Hamas has a solid reputation for social services and seeing to the needs of
the less fortunate. That's what I have read. But I am reading disturbing
reports these days that Hamas is confusing the role of civil affairs with
defense of religious dogma, punishing people for not conforming to very
conservative social norms. This is a serious mistake. Religion should be
strictly a private matter of individual conscience. There are similar
problems in Israel, where gaining citizenship and other privileges can be
dependent upon how Jewish you prove yourself to be to the satisfaction of
religious committees.
The Gaza Blockade
Living conditions deteriorated in Gaza precipitously, since 2007. The day
after the attack on the Mavi Marmara, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton categorized Israel's military blockade of Gaza, as "unsustainable
and unacceptable." [2]
A year before, in August, 2009, Navi Pillay, chief of the United Nations
Human Rights Council, stated that the blockade of Gaza is illegal. Israel
brands the council 'anti-Israel'. [3a]
June 14, 2010 - the International Committee of the Red Cross:
'Israel's blockade of Gaza is a clear violation of international humanitarian
law'. [3b]
June 17, 2010 - Amnesty International: The blockade,
'[is in] clear violation of international law.' [3c]
September 2, 2011 - Center for Constitutional Rights, 'denounces the
conclusion by the Secretary-General’s Panel of Inquiry that the naval
blockade of Gaza is legal, a finding that is inconsistent with international
law...;' [3d]
2011 - Human Rights Watch, re the blockade of Gaza: 'an unlawful form of
collective punishment against residents of an occupied territory' [3e]
Gaza Freedom Flotilla - investigations and prevarications
On May 30, 2010, the Gaza Freedom Flotilla departed Turkish shores.
The IDF assault on the flotilla the next day in the pre dawn hours, against
unarmed humanitarians in international waters, may well prove to be the
last straw so far as Turkey is concerned.
It is a worrying development to the West that the thaw in diplomatic
relations between Israel and Turkey grows cold.
Ban Ki-moon's appointment of the second committee (the 'Palmer Panel')
was clearly an attempt to sweep aside the damning findings of the first
U.N.-appointed investigation (referred to as the 'Mission'); sugar-coating
the findings with enough sweet words that Turkey might swallow the hook
of compromised honor in exchange for privileged access to Western
power. The underestimation of Turkish character on this issue is stunning.
The Panel's job description was described by the competing Mission thus:
“[to] positively affect the relationship between Turkey and Israel, as well
as the overall situation in the Middle East” . (A. Mandate; para. 11.) [4]
The four-member panel was a stacked deck - hardly a good start. One
member represented Turkey. The Chairman was Geoffrey Palmer, former
Prime Minister of New Zealand (hence the name of the report.) A third
member represented the interests of Israel. And rounding out the field was
vice-Chairman, and former President of Columbia, Alvaro Uribe - a
staunch pro-Israel supporter who has been the recipient of numerous
Zionist organization awards. I don't know a thing about Palmer, but it was
up to him whether the panel was to end up in a tie, or whether to break it in
Israel's favor, putting the report on the wrong side of the law.
Ban's selling-out is spelled out by the Panel, quite clearly, here:
'149. The Secretary-General has discouraged new flotillas to Gaza for
exactly the reasons given here. In his personal diplomacy the Secretary-
General has been actively involved in discouraging any such efforts. He
has asked all concerned to use their influence in that regard. He has argued
that there exists the need to avoid incidents that may provoke further
destabilization of the regional climate and he has stressed the need for
caution and prudence. The Quartet 473 has made similar calls in its 21
June 2010 statement and other United Nations officials have stressed that
“such convoys are not helpful in resolving the basic economic problems of
Gaza” and that “they needlessly carry the potential for escalation.”
Preferable, I suppose, to permit 1.43 million people to quietly starve
behind Israel's militarized wall with our vaunted caution and prudence,
than destabilize the status quo in demanding their freedom. One need look
no further than the above paragraph for why it was that Greece utilized the
armed coast guard to forcibly prevent flotilla boats sailing from port to
Gaza, in 2011.
In short, the Panel's dog and pony show was an amateur attempt to distract
from the legitimate, comprehensive United Nations investigative report
(the Mission), which was completed and released September 27, 2010. [4]
Unlike the report of the international fact-finding Mission, the Palmer
commission had no investigatory powers whatsoever. They relied strictly
upon whatever Israel and Turkey brought forward for their consideration.
The Panel indicates in their introduction that they did not intend to judge
the legality of the situation, then proceeds to do just that further in.
The Panel:
'...findings and recommendations are therefore not intended to attribute any
legal responsibilities. Nevertheless, the Panel hopes that its report may
resolve the issues surrounding the incident and bring the matter to an end.'
(Summary; third paragraph, page 3.) [5]
'Turkey and Israel should resume full diplomatic relations, repairing their
relationship in the interests of stability in the Middle East and international
peace and security.' (Summary; Rapprochement; pg. 6.) [ibid]
As I say, there are not one, but two United Nations reports. Israel's crimes,
as regards both the on-going military siege of the 1.4 million Palestinian
people in Gaza, as well as the military assault against the inaugural 2010
Gaza Freedom Flotilla, are found to be just that - crimes - in the findings of
the full Mission report.
In contrast, the Palmer prevarication on Israel's obligations under law
with regard to human rights can only further erode the already sullied
reputation and hoped-for effectiveness of the United Nations for mediating
international disputes. (The West's jockeying for position over Libya's
wealth being another painful example.)
The Palmer Report comes to the wrong conclusions regarding the legality
of Israel's naval blockade of Gaza:
'104. We have made it clear that we consider that Israel was entitled to
impose the naval blockade. It follows that Israel was also entitled to
enforce it. The manner of its enforcement, however, raises serious issues
of concern.' (Pg. 51.) [ibid]
Image:
The Mavi Marmara
To illustrate the qualitative difference between United Nations report one,
'The Mission', and, United Nations report two, 'The Panel', here, gems
lifted from the Mission's 'Conclusions', which is not long and I highly
recommend it be accessed to read in its entirety. I only take issue with the
second-last point, which I will address following these highlights [4]:
'260. ...It must be remembered that might and strength are enhanced when
attended by a sense of justice and fair play. Peace and respect have to be
earned, not bludgeoned out of any opponent. An unfair victory has never
been known to bring lasting peace.
'261. The Mission has come to the firm conclusion that a humanitarian
crisis existed on the 31 May 2010 in Gaza. The preponderance of evidence
from impeccable sources is too overwhelming to come to a contrary
opinion. Any denial of this cannot be supported on any rational grounds.
One of the consequences flowing from this is that for this reason alone the
blockade is unlawful and cannot be sustained in law. This is so regardless
of the grounds on which one seeks to justify the legality of the blockade.
'262. Certain results flow from this conclusion. Principally, the action of
the Israel Defense Force in intercepting the Mavi Marmara on the high seas
in the circumstances and for the reasons given was clearly unlawful.
Specifically, the action cannot be justified in the circumstances even under
Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations.
'263. Israel seeks to justify the blockade on security grounds. The State of
Israel is entitled to peace and security like any other. The firing of rockets
and other munitions of war into Israeli territory from Gaza constitutes
serious violations of international law and of international humanitarian
law. But any action in response which constitutes collective punishment of
the civilian population in Gaza is not lawful in any circumstances.
'264. The conduct of the Israeli military and other personnel towards the
flotilla passengers was not only disproportionate to the occasion but
demonstrated levels of totally unnecessary and incredible violence. It
betrayed an unacceptable level of brutality. Such conduct cannot be
justified or condoned on security or any other grounds. It constituted a
grave violation of human rights law and international humanitarian law.
'265. The Mission considers that several violations and offences have been
committed. It is not satisfied that, in the time available, it has been able to
compile a comprehensive list of all offences. However, there is clear
evidence to support prosecutions of the following crimes within the terms
of article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention...;'
-- A list then follows of violations committed by the IDF, including willful
killing; willfully causing great suffering; denial of right to life; torture and
other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. And property theft.
Of the IDF commandos, the Mission reports:
'267. The perpetrators of the more serious crimes, being masked, cannot be
identified without the assistance of the Israeli authorities. They reacted in a
violent manner when they thought that anyone was attempting to identify
them. The Mission sincerely hopes that there will be cooperation from the
Government of Israel to assist in their identification with a view to
prosecuting the culpable and bringing closure to the situation.
'268. The Mission is aware that this is not the first time that the
Government of Israel has declined to cooperate with an inquiry into events
in which its military personnel were involved....;'
'275. The Mission is not alone in finding that a deplorable situation exists
in Gaza. It has been characterized as “unsustainable”. This is totally
intolerable and unacceptable in the twenty-first century. It is amazing that
anyone could characterize the condition of the people there as satisfying
the most basic standards....;'
Final paragraph: '278. The Mission sincerely hopes that no impediment
will be put in the way of those who suffered loss as a result of the unlawful
actions of the Israeli military to be compensated adequately and promptly.
It is hoped that there will be swift action by the Government of Israel. This
will go a long way to reversing the regrettable reputation which that
country has for impunity and intransigence in international affairs. It will
also assist those who genuinely sympathise with their situation to support
them without being stigmatized.' [4]
I take issue only with paragraph 277, wherein it is argued:
'277. A distinction must be made between activities taken to alleviate
crises and action to address the causes creating the crisis. The latter action
is characterized as political action and therefore inappropriate for groups
that wish to be classified as humanitarian. This point is made because of
the evidence that, while some of the passengers were solely interested in
delivering supplies to the people in Gaza, for others the main purpose was
raising awareness of the blockade with a view to its removal, as the only
way to solve the crisis. An examination should be made to clearly define
humanitarianism, as distinct from humanitarian action, so that there can be
an agreed form of intervention and jurisdiction when humanitarian crises
occur.' [ibid]
If the above argument were more fully explained perhaps I might come
around to appreciating the distinction between humanitarianism that is
good (providing relief) and humanitarianism that wishes to confront the
cause of the crisis (bad, apparently).
On the Palmer Report, The New York Times wrote that that committee had
determined, in spite of past United Nations findings to the contrary, that
Israel's blockade of Gaza was legal, but that the raid itself was 'flawed'.
[6]
The NY Times records Turkey's objections, which argued that,
'[the] conclusion oversteps the mandate of the four-member panel
appointed by the United Nations secretary general and is at odds with other
United Nations decisions'. [ibid]
But the Turkish member of the Panel said a lot more than that in his dissent
attached to the report. His dissent begins, 'I hereby register my
disagreement with the Chairmanship.' ('Statement of Mr. Sanberk'; last pg.
/105) [4]
On the panel's bias, Mr. Sanberk writes: '[The] Chairmanship and its
report fully associated itself with Israel and categorically dismissed the
views of the other, despite the fact that the legal arguments presented by
Turkey have been supported by the vast majority of the international
community. Common sense and conscience dictate that the blockade is
unlawful...Also the UN Human Rights Council concluded that the blockade
was unlawful. The Report of the Human Rights Council Fact Finding
Mission received widespread approval from the member states.' [ibid]
The Media and the Mavi Marmara
One notes that the media has done a fine job concentrating minds on the
fact that most of the dead came from Turkey, rarely reporting that one
activist was, in point of fact, an American citizen (or that there were
people on the ships from all points of the globe.) Otherwise, this singular
fact could have changed the tone of the entire story because, after all, the
mind of the average American citizen is completely soused with the myth
of American exceptionalism, inherently believes he is a member of the
democratic and free master race, and lives in fear for himself and his
fellow Americans of coming under assault, because they are hated for their
'freedoms'. But I digress.
The other issue that mainstream media was loath to disclose was that the
Gaza Freedom Flotilla was a large-scale international grassroots effort.
The best propaganda is not always what is reported or stated. Sometimes,
the most effective propaganda is choosing what to leave out.
To review, then, the purpose of the inaugural Gaza Freedom Flotilla was
to bring desperately-needed humanitarian supplies to Gaza, as well as to
shine a light on Israel's ongoing illegal blockade of the Gaza Ghetto. This
second motivator was crucial to understand, yet it was either missed
entirely or completely ignored in the Report, skewing its finds.
That heroic first effort, rather than discourage others because of the IDF-
inflicted carnage, has since inspired a series of humanitarian pilgrimages
by peace activists from around the world, both via land convoy, as well as
by ship. As noted earlier, Greece prevented ships that were planning to
depart for Gaza from leaving port this year, presumably after having come
under intense diplomatic pressure.
Gaza is being squeezed both by Egypt and Israel - by land, sea and air.
Time will tell if the will of Egypt's citizens will prevail, post-Tahrir
Square revolt, in opening Gaza to the world at the point of Egypt's Rafah
Crossing. Or, whether the real power behind the scenes, Egypt's military,
prevails instead and chooses to stay the course in continuing to cooperate
with Israel's Gaza siege.
Gaza
But exactly who is under siege, what are its effects, and why the need for
humanitarian intervention, anyway? Half of Gaza's 1.4 million citizens are
under eighteen years of age. Many in Gaza were violently displaced from
their homes and lands by Israel in 1948; most are refugees. Because of
years of, first occupation, then military siege of Gaza, the economy -
because it is impossible to ship out finished product or get raw materials
in - is a shambles.
Many families rely on direct food aid, particularly from the United
Nations, to survive.
Gaza's children suffer stunting - from 10% on average, up to 30% in
pockets of the population in northern Gaza, according to a Lancet report in
2009. Stunted physical growth and impaired mental development are both
caused by malnutrition. [7]
Israeli journalists can't get eyewitness reports out on the conditions in
Gaza because the Israeli government forbids Israeli journalists from going
into that crowded enclave to see the situation for themselves - dimming
prospects for pressure to build from within Israel to seek terms for peace.
It is nonsense to suggest that a benevolent Israel otherwise permits all
necessary human needs to pass. If this were so, then Israel wouldn't
prevent Gaza fishermen from getting out onto the water within Gaza's
maritime borders to fish. They are, as a routine, rammed, shot at, swamped
and detained. Boats, if they survive the attacks, are embargoed.
And this goes straight to the heart of the central argument made by the
Palmer committee that the maritime blockade is strictly to prevent weapons
from being brought in to Gaza, and thus legal. Because, if it were a
question of collective punishment by Israel against Gaza, as the destruction
of the fishing industry clearly is, then that would, even by the weak
standards of the committee, be viewed as an act of collective punishment, a
clear violation of international law. (Para. 77, pg. 42.) [5]
Palmer Panels' pro-Israel colors fly at full mast:
'...it is wrong to impugn the [naval] blockade’s legality based on another,
separate policy...This is not to deny or ignore the consequences of the land
crossings policy and the state of the humanitarian situation in Gaza. We
have reached the view that the naval blockade was proportionate in the
circumstances...we are unable to conclude that the combined effects of the
naval blockade and the crossings policy rendered the naval blockade
disproportionate...we can make the policy judgment that the procedures
applied by Israel in relation to land access to Gaza are unsustainable and
need to be changed. This we will discuss in Chapter 6.' (Paras. 78-79;
pgs. 43-44.) [ibid]
So the Palmer committee argues that the naval blockade and the land
blockade of Gaza are to be viewed strictly as separate when weighing the
harm to the people of Gaza. As Gaza has no major port anyway, they argue,
then large shipments of humanitarian supplies could not possibly get in by
that route. There is no discussion of the fact that Israel destroyed Gaza's
major port, as Richard Silverstein smartly observes. [8] The destroyed
port of Gaza could be, ought to be rebuilt.
The Palmer Report does make plain that the violence unleashed on the
Mavi Marmara was outrageous, with clear indications of summary
executions, even of the wounded. But because it views the naval blockade
of Gaza as legal, it does not find fault with Israel's thwarting the flotilla's
progress - a finding in direct opposition to the Mission's conclusions.
The Panel concludes to its satisfaction that the naval blockade of Gaza is a
legitimate security measure to prevent arms from entering Gaza.
I argue that the combined land, sea and air blockade of Gaza is a measure
to enable Israel to illegally secure its occupation of Palestinian land.
Wall art in Gaza: Key in hand, longing to go home.
(Photo by Alaa Ahmed; 2011)
The fact of the matter is that the oppressed have a right to resist. But
resistance comes in different forms. Israel uses the resistance to justify the
oppression and, the true aim, ethnic cleansing. Non-violent resistance is
becoming the means of choice in the occupied West Bank, viewed as key
to bringing into stark relief oppressor and oppressed. Unlike the West
Bank, however, Gaza has been put in a cage, surrounded by high walls, out
of sight and mind.
It's the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians that is the driving force behind
the conflict. Extremists controlling the fate of the region want the land, not
peace. If we go back to 2008-2009 Operation Cast Lead, we see that
Hamas abided by the ceasefire. Israel broke it and lied, only admitting it,
mutedly, when caught out.
A month and a half after the IDF attack of the freedom flotilla, I attended an
evening jointly put on by the Palestinian Canadian Congress, Independent
Jewish Voices, and the Ottawa-Palestine Solidarity Network, to hear
eyewitness testimony from a peace activist named Kevin Neish, and also
from Farooq Burney, of educational rights organization fakhoora.org. Both
were passengers on the Mavi Marmara when it was attacked.
They testified that any actions taken against IDF commandos was purely in
self-defense. Over a hundred people suffered bullet wounds, they thought
at the time. The Free Gaza movement subsequently put the number at
around fifty. The findings of the Palmer Report as well as the Mission,
corroborated much of the testimony shared that evening.
The Chairmanship of the Panel shamefully concluding that Israel's naval
blockade of Gaza is legal cannot be squared with the facts. It taints both the
Palmer Panel as well as the United Nations as a whole. Placing 1.43
million people in a cage to prevent them from going home is a crime of
biblical proportions.
Since the Panel report became public, Turkey has expelled Israel's
ambassador; cut military ties to that country; it plans to assist the families
of the victims to sue for justice; and Turkey intends to challenge Israel's
blockade of Gaza at the International Court of Justice.
The Panel's mission was to positively effect the relationship between
Israel and Turkey, as well as the over-all situation in the Middle East. I
hesitate to use the term 'epic fail' only because I am not entirely sure that it
is quite strong enough.
________________
If you liked this article
please consider donating. Donations are gratefully accepted.
Notes
[1] 'Bent Over - Canadian Victims of Israel's Attack on Mavi Marmara
Speak Out - Sort Of'; Diane V. McLoughlin; mcloughlinpost.com; July 16,
2010; http://www.mcloughlinpost.
com/CanadianVictimsofIsraelsAttackOnGazaFreedomFlotillaSpeakOut-
SortOf.html ;
[2] 'Clinton Urges Caution in Aftermath of Gaza Flotilla Raid'; David
Gollust from the State Department; Voice of America; June 1, 2010;
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/Clinton-Urges-Caution-in-
Aftermath-of-Gaza-Flotilla-Raid-95359634.html ;
[3a] 'UN Human Rights Chief: Israel's Blockade of Gaza Strip is Illegal';
Fox New/AP; August 14, 2009; http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,
2933,539363,00.html ;
[3b] 'BBC News - ICRC says Israel's Gaza blockade breaks law'; Imogen
Foulkes; BBC News Geneva; June 14, 2010; http://www.bbc.co.
uk/news/10306193 ;
[3c] 'Israel Gaza blockade must be completely lifted'; Amnesty
International; June 17, 2010; http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-
updates/israel-gaza-blockade-must-be-completely-lifted-2010-06-17 ;
[3d] 'CCR denounces UN report on Gaza flotilla'; Center for Constitutional
Rights; Sept. 2, 2011; http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/ccr-
denounces-un-report-gaza-flotilla ;
[3e] 2011 World Report - Israel/Occupied Territories - Human Rights
Watch; http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2011/israel-occupied-
palestinian-territories ;
[4] Mission: 'Report of the international fact-finding mission to investigate
violations of international law, including international
humanitarian and human rights law, resulting from the
Israeli attacks on the flotilla of ships carrying humanitarian
assistance'; September 27, 2010; http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.
NSF/5ba47a5c6cef541b802563e000493b8c/bffafa61f26ca7c0852577a800
4b405b?OpenDocument ;
[5] Palmer Report: 'Report of the Secretary General's Panel of Enquiry on
the 31st May 2010 Gaza Flotilla Incident'; July, 2011; http://graphics8.
nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/Palmer-Committee-Final-report.pdf ;
[6] 'Report finds Naval Blockade by Israel Legal but Faults Raid'; by Neil
MacFarquhar and Ethan Bronner; New York Times; September 1, 2011;
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/02/world/middleeast/02flotilla.html ;
[7] 'Gaza's stunted growth problem'; Marwa Farag; NYT; March 21, 2009;
http://topics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/21/gazas-stunted-growth-
problem/ ;
[8] 'Palmer Report Though Critical of Israel's Mavi Marmara Attack,
Hopelessly Muddled'; Richard Silverstein; Tikun Olam; September 1,
2011; http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2011/09/01/palmer-
report-though-critical-of-israels-mavi-marmara-attack-is-hopelessly-
muddled/ ;
Further reading:
'NY Times' Jerusalem property makes it protagonist in Palestine conflict';
Ali Abunimah; The Electronic Intifada; March 2, 2010;
http://electronicintifada.net/content/ny-times-jerusalem-property-makes-it-
protagonist-palestine-conflict/8705' ;
'Israel/West Bank: Separate and Unequal'; Human Rights Watch;
December 19, 2010; http://www.hrw.org/news/2010/12/18/israelwest-
bank-separate-and-unequal ;
'Palmer-Uribe Report - Another Attempt by Israel to Whitewash Murder';
Free Gaza Movement; Sept. 1, 2011; http://www.freegaza.
org/en/home/press-releases/1334-palmeruribe-report-another-attempt-by-
israel-to-whitewash-murder ;
Top of page
Home
Copyright 2011 Diane V. McLoughlin;
All Rights Reserved
