Monday, August 31, 2009

Don't TAZ Me, Bro

There are two encampments currently on the heath a mile or two south of the Thames, from which the Peasants' Revolt descended upon London in the 14th century. The first you come across, if you walk from an easterly direction, as I did, up Maze Hill past shirtless ice cream eating and stickers on lamposts advertising 'Canary Wharf Massage Beauties', is the Funfair (pic via). I have always liked funfairs, for being an exemplary combination of the futuristic and antiquated, for temporarily making Leigh Park in Eastleigh an exciting place, for being gloriously artificial - the only place, other than the seaside, where you can legally purchase Candyfloss without it being impounded. In the relentlessly hot, treeless and shadowless heath it looked a bit much today, but nonetheless two salient things about it were clear. First, the gigantic machines of cheap jouissance that towered in the heath's vast expanse, swinging screaming youth back and forth while bright lights flashed on and off; and second, the enormous carpark attached. The heath is very very big, but even then the amount of cars parked upon it on this bank holiday seemed huge, a maze of dust and turned-over grass keeping on it vehicles of varying degrees of flashness. The other, and more talked-about encampment, is the latest manifestation of the Camp for Climate Action, ensconced on the Lewisham end of the heath, so that the fair is barely visible.

The decision to park the camp in a reasonably central London location seems to be a sort of 'coming out' of the Camp, an attempt to connect with Londoners, to reach out beyond the converted, as much as it is a base for operations at City Airport and elsewhere - though one wonders how much more effective it might have been in a really dense area, like Victoria or Brockwell Park, where their presence would have led to major interactions - quite possibly uncomfortable - with the local area, something lost in the vast expanse of Blackheath. The camp is fenced off, with only one entrance. In something like the Kingsnorth or Heathrow actions this makes perfect sense, to protect the Picket from the Police, but here it seems an overreaction, a deterrent to the curious - though one should not of course underestimate the Met's propensity for random brutality. I visited the camp on Saturday with the I.T Girl, where we wandered for a bit, talked to friends who were there and greatly admired the 'CAPITALISM IS CRISIS' banner - cf her Flickr set - but today I went there on my own, with notebook in tow, to get a less convivial view of the whole affair. First of all - I do not, whatever tone I might take here, dismiss the Climate Camp. Far from being a consensual protest with which we can all agree, a mere shouting of 'global warming is bad!', every seminar and talk I saw here was clear, whatever the internal differences (and there are several), that what is needed is a total abandonment of all fossil (and nuclear) fuels, along with a total abandonment of the concept of economic growth. Most of them are quite honest about the fact that to do so would necessitate an economic system we could no longer call 'capitalism'.

Tactically too, they are a great deal cleverer than contemporaries - the contrast between the spectacularised nonsense of the 'G20 Meltdown' and the Climate Camp's organised, serious intervention in Bishopsgate was very telling on April 1. While there's a certain amount of protest-logic there, with all of its flaws, there has also been serious attempts at making links with organised labour - the involvement of many people here in the Vestas Wind Turbine Factory occupation (which appears to have its own tent) suggests that the seemingly unbridgeable gap I moaned about between the Visteon occupation and the City protests on April 1 is beginnning to close. So much is good here, and I have no intention of patronising it, although the inclusion of 'tall buildings' as the first of their ten reasons why they are camped here is not going to endear them to me. Still, of the talks I saw, some, as I expected, were very sensible indeed, while some had a hint of creepy Malthusianism - such is the Green movement and it was ever thus. What they all shared was the contention that this, this thousand-or-so people in a field just up the heath a bit from another more mechanised thousand-or-so people in a field, was, to use a phrase I would usually rather not, the change we want to see in the world. So to a large extent you can judge the camp on its own terms as what it clearly wants to be, particularly here where it is not notably picketing anything - a rather strictly delimited Temporary Autonomous Zone.

I tend to think that the, er, TAZ as a model of politics is every bit as flawed as the turn-up-protest-and-go-home, though rather more admirable. An old friend of mine who was camping announced the following on an internet site: 'Ever wondered what a functioning leaderless society would be like? Come down to the climate camp and find out, it's great!' I suspect lots of people there share this view. So, my opinions on this leaderless society. Well lots of this would be fairly cliched - it's a very earnest society, though friendly, overwhelmingly middle class, and with a liking for rural imagery and, at worst, sitting round in a circle with an acoustic guitar (though there were proper sound systems also). Another cliche in discussion of Climate Camp is to discuss the toilet arrangements in depth, but the aegis of the Socialist Lavatory League decrees that I do so. There are several kinds, boxes for one sort or another, with the additional option of peeing directly into a hay bale, all of which of course smell fairly unpleasant. These hay bales, however, mostly seem to be ornamental, are there to give the illusion of rurality to this little stretch of Zone 3.

So the speakers sit on them, although it would no doubt have been far easier just to get a stack of plastic chairs. This fetish for the pre-industrial recurs too in the rhetoric of some speakers - David Fleming made the extraordinary claim that communities created their own institutions before 'the late 18th century' (and we all know what happened then), as if the Church was somehow a more egalitarian institution than, say, the trade unions. There is a frequent argument that 'technofixes' are irrelevant compared to the urgent need for 'lifestyle changes' (presumably solar panels and wind turbines are not technology). How to convince people that these fundamental changes in (awful word) lifestyle are necessary? A speaker who helped put together the 'Green New Deal' paper with Caroline Lucas et al argues that their approach 'appeals to those who wouldn't necessarily go to climate camp', talking in terms of job creation or community control, rather than the joys of veganism or compost toilets - let alone the talk of 'final battles' we hear from some - yet their interest in technology and the outside world is not shared by all here. Either way, too much hangs on whether you want a new society to look like Climate Camp - and, for all its virtues, I don't. A bridge from the funfair to the camp must be built, but it seems as difficult as ever.


Blogger it said...

Good post, although the idea of an organic funfair (locally-sourced candy-floss?) is the stuff of nightmares.

Did you notice the London loves sober campers sign? (keep it dry before six!). I'm not sure what this was for, other than to vaguely patronise.

9:04 am  
Anonymous FttL said...

Hold up a second, "total abandonment of the concept of economic growth"? Are you sure? A zero-growth world is one in which all existing inequalities remain exactly the same; you'd have to, at the very least, say no overall economic growth and massive redistribution of wealth.

But the issue is a diversion. The real problem here is the pressing need to detach economic growth from growth in carbon emissions.

10:22 am  
Blogger Savonarola said...

I suppose an interesting question would be whether the campers themselves want the world to look like Climate Camp. That is, whether the temporary or zonal character defines the experiment. This is not a problem as such, since there's surely lessons, both practical and moral, to be gained from the delimited experience of an alternative which can't necessarily be generalised, and is not in its present shapean alternative.

The thought-experiment of what London would look like if run on the principles of climate camp - if the latter went from a TAZ to a PAW (permanent alternative world) - is sobering (think no sewage system for a start, and, if decisions by consensus were the rule, no transport system, which kind of depends on the old Weberian iron cage of bureaucracy).

If instead one thinks of this "zone" as a way of simulating in miniature certain mindsets and practices that might play a part in building an alternative (rather than as a microcosm that would reflect or prefigure some planetary future), then I suppose the interesting question is what broader projects these political energies and "lifestyle" transformations could play into - the problem of the (sustainable) transmission-belt between camp and funfair, as you nicely put it.

Here what is striking, symptomatic is the unimaginable character of reform. Granted, capitalism is unreformable (in the sense of transformable into its "good" sustainable variant), but there's something frightening about the idea that 61 million people pissing on hay is somehow easier to think about than expanding public transport and minimizing car use, that lifestyle changes that as collective experiences would be catastrophic (and more or less depend on the - by no means farfetched - possibility of catastrophe, when what is today enjoyable as utopia is tomorrow imposed as grim necessity) are easier to fathom than actual shifts in social relations. So it's perhaps no longer a question of the end of capitalism being unimaginable, à la Jameson. We can imagine that end, but we can't imagine anything after it except something that simply isn't a social system, but only a magical convergence of lifestyles and good will, happily inured to Hobbesian horizons or Weberian imperatives.

10:26 am  
Anonymous FttL said...

"... leaderless society...."

...and it's not leaderless. Who arranged the fences? Who organised the tents? Who drew up the rota of speakers? There is a leadership - with its own political priorities at work here.

But once it's buried by claims of "leaderlessness" and the deliberate exclusion of democracy in favour of consensus, it's very hard to hold that leadership accountable.

10:27 am  
Blogger Dominic said...

If, in the next couple of decades, someone succeeds in developing a working fusion reactor, then the energy problem will essentially just go away.

I get the impression that some of the climate campers wouldn't welcome this outcome. I appreciate that they're trying to think about making the alternative scenario (fusion power never really works, or turns out to be horrendously risky in unforeseen ways) liveable for at least a remnant of the human population. But it all looks a bit like the last half hour of Threads to me - the living might very well envy the dead.

10:46 am  
Blogger owen hatherley said...

Indeed, though there is a lot less talking in the last half-hour of Threads. I think a proportion of the camp would prefer the aforementioned bales of piss to, say, a massively expanded public transport system, but that certainly wasn't the only view - there is a tension between the permaculture/small-is-beautiful wing and the more Faustian green-new-deal approach, and although that argument was clearly being had there, the compulsory consensus seemed to brush it under the table somewhat. What both sides shared was a certain self-congratulation and the belief that the Camp itself was a viable model for society, which obviously I find deeply unnerving.

Re: 'leaderlessness' - don't assume I'm doing anything more than quoting there. Re: growth - I tend to think they use this term as a way of talking about capitalism without scaring the horses, but all rhetoric of sustainability has the implicit suggestion that there is something about the present distribution of wealth (and, as it were, development) that we should want to sustain.

10:53 am  
Blogger Dominic said...

It bears repeating:

"If I had to give my opinion on technology, whose relation to the contemporary demands of philosophy is fairly scant, it would be rather to regret that it is still so mediocre, so timid. So many useful instruments do not exist, or only exist in heavy and inconvenient forms! So many major adventures get nowhere or are of the 'life-is-too-slow' type. Just look at planetary exploration, energy through thermonuclear fusion, flying machines for everyone, three-dimensional images...We must indeed say: 'Gentlemen Technicians, one more effort if you are truly working towards the planetary reign of technology!'

(Badiou, Manifesto for Philosophy)

"Flying machines for everyone, three-dimensional images..." - I'm surprised he didn't mention lightsabers. I've always wanted one of those, although the risk of accidentally slicing one's own limbs off seems quite alarmingly high. (I've always suspected George Lucas of nurturing a bit of an amputation fetish).

How does the Climate Camp set-up compare to Tent State University?

12:38 pm  
Blogger owen hatherley said...

...that Badiou quote is magnificent. Towards a Promethean Post-Carbon Communism!

(not been to Tent State, though I think Mark K-P has spoken there. I don't suspect it considers itself quite so much a model for society, regardless, though it's also rather less publicly active...)

7:49 pm  
Blogger owen hatherley said..., Dominic, tell me some more about Nuclear Fusion. How would it avoid the same problem as Fission, i.e its inevitable tie-up with the military-industrial complex? And given that (apparently) the most likely time it could be viably developed is about 2050, what do we do until then? (these aren't rhetorical questions - I genuinely don't know what I think about nuclear power, unlike nuclear weapons, which are so obviously insane I'm always amazed that seemingly sentient people defend them)

9:23 pm  
Blogger Dominic said...

Fusion has significantly fewer problems with waste, and fewer problems with accidentally irradiating large tracts of countryside. The raw materials for it are a lot more plentiful than uranium. Those are, I think, the major problems with fission. It's unlikely to magically solve all our problems in my lifetime, but it could significantly improve matters in my children's.

10:11 pm  
Blogger Savonarola said...

One of the crucial questions here is that the climate change will likely exacerbate brutalising inequalities in security and well-being, with poor nations for reasons geographical but mainly man-made suffering the brunt, so that even if we manage to air-condition a 5 degrees hotter NATO-zone, and manage to power garnatuan Thamesbarriers of the future, the likes of Bangladesh, Nicaragua, Tuvalu (as well as New Orleans, Florida, etc.) will be irreversibly devastated, fission or no fission. The apocalypse will of course be combined and uneven, to borrow an expression from Socialism and/or Barbarism, but there's no doubt that capitalist powers and elites will try to deny, violently if needs be, the combined part, in varying forms of resource wars, apartheid, etc. - in a familiar pattern of outsourcing and externalising catastrophe like so much toxic waste. This is precisely why those arguments which try to make environmental issues into the catalysts for thinking "beyond ideology" are so ideological and why those who think that species-survival is the "primary contradiction" and class struggle the "secondary" one should realise that the two are inextricable.

11:04 pm  
Blogger Simon said...

FttL writes "...and it's not leaderless. Who arranged the fences? Who organised the tents? Who drew up the rota of speakers? There is a leadership - with its own political priorities at work here." you ask:

Fences? - Defence group!
Tents? - Structures subgroup of the Site group!
Rota of speakers? - Workshops group!

media group, process group, police liasion group, legal ...etc, etc.

Anyone can join any of these working groups (apart from the land group whose sole job is to select the site each year, which works with a set of requirements drawn up by camp as a whole), all advertised on the Camp's website and all operating autonomously, co-ordinating activities and getting agreement on major decisions at the Camp's montly national gatherings - or at the camp itself during the last week. And, yep, hard to believe, but there really are no 'leaders'. Why is it so inconceviable that something like Climate Camp could get itself together without leaders? Sure, there are people who bottom-line particular tasks, who do shitloads more work than others, who take on critical responsibilities, get listened to on the basis of previous experience & wisdom and so on - I know because I'm in one the above working groups and have been to a enough of the Camp's monthly national gatherings to know how the thing works. Sure, there are people who carry charismatic authority, both latent and overtly manifest, But there's nothing like any kind of leader, manager or boss I've ever encountered and I can't see how anyone wanting to get into a dreaded "leadership role" would last 5 minutes in the CC process. I'm also unsure why consensus has to equal the "exclusion of democracy" - unless you are delimiting the latter to the flawless and transparent system we've come to know and love over several millenia, known as 'voting'?

Great opening piece, Owen and the rest of the thread is most welcome.

11:49 pm  
Anonymous FttL said...

"But there's nothing like any kind of leader, manager or boss I've ever encountered and I can't see how anyone wanting to get into a dreaded "leadership role" would last 5 minutes in the CC process."

Quite clearly all the groups you mention had leadership roles (even if only confined to their particular tasks). I'm also assuming there were arguments within those groups, with different people taking different sides, and arguing their case - in other words, acting to provide a form of leadership to the rest of the group: "this is my case, I think it is right to make it". (Please note I don't mean "leadership" in the sense of a "boss" or formal or even charismatic authority, I mean "leadership" in the sense of carrying an argument).

And, yes, by democracy I do mean "voting", preferably as part of an ongoing dialogue between all the participants. It's a more equitable and transparent (and, partly as a result, more efficient) system than consensus. I've been through too many consensus processes in which several weeks of non-consensus and general flapping are suddenly and mysteriously resolved into a particular course of action. I don't think it's appropriate in most political circumstances because it can attempt to deny and hide the necessary process of leadership - either decisions don't get made or, when they do, the process becomes suddenly highly opaque and mysterious. It can easily become inegalitarian and anti-democratic.

I don't deny that it works well for some situations (small, closely-aligned bands, like groups of friends, or affinity groups) but it's deeply problematical as a means to make decisions on a larger scale.

10:34 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Apologies to post a comment un related to this thread, but this is only way I could find to pass on something I noticed in a previous older post

Looking at the great pics of the Castle Market, I noticed a detail you might find of interest.

The typeface used for the signage is Headline Bold. Now sold as a digital fount by Monotype, it was originally cut and produced by the Sheffield foundry (to use the word foundry in the sense of a company that makes metal type) Stephenson Blake.

The letterforms themselves are a revival of an early nineteenth century grotesque. These letterforms were popular with modernist typographers in the 1950s and 60s, gradually falling out of favour for neo-grotesque typefaces such as Univers and Helvetica.

I cannot think of a more appropriate choice of fount to be used in the context of this signage.

Peter Burgess

11:56 am  
Blogger socialism and/or barbarism said...

I wrote a response that was way long for comments. Plus I couldn't add pictures of Burning Man Thunderdome fights here. So:

6:34 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So the hacienda must be built owen? So get the working group sorted.

The way the camp has been using the media is absolutely stunning and says a lot more about it than veganism and compost toilets. Their own and the media more generally. In fact they used the media to make this space open up.

I have to say that as an observer at a remove I have been blown away by it.

Mentioning veganism and compost toilets as a reason for not liking what the camp looks like seems lame to me. Even prudish. If you're going to gather 1000 people in London and reduce carbon emmissions in London at the same time then camping is a good solution and compost toilets are a better solution that dragging along a lorryload of portaloos full of chemicals or shitting into binbags.

They have left the entire British media seeming flatfooted and old fashioned. What would happen if there were 10,000 of them in a permanent encompment in the metropolis and they had space for a permanent funfair? A permanent big bilke powered sound system or three? Digital projectors? an ongoing dialogic relationship to the rest of the city? What would it look like? Far far stranger things have happened. If a permant autonomous zone appeared I'd up sticks from a neighbouring country and go help co-create it rather than critique it.

Militant Modernists go to camps and train.

10:05 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh - and the haybales as a bit of country kitch to sneer at. Have you ever been on a campsite if it rains and rains? Hay is what you use to make necessary heavily trod walkways walkable and not legbreaking slippery obstacle courses in such bleak circumstances. That's why you'll usually find them stashed at the entrances to improvised campsites.

10:12 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh and while I'm at it: @Savonarola

Financial Markets operate through 'complex global microstructures' which are also essentially what holds the camp and its media strategy together. The camp is a form of media which is what I think is most exciting about it. CGM's have the potential to supplant Weberian types of efficiency in a decentralised way. They're what hold global financial markets together so I bet you a tenner one could be improvised quite rapidly that could run the public transport system in london. If there was some kind of rough consensus that is. It's consensus that's the real problem.

Google 'Knorr Cetina' for some good peer reviewed essays about CGMs by a sociologist if you're interested.

10:26 pm  
Blogger owen hatherley said...

Anon - honestly, I appreciate and agree with many of your comments, but please - I was not sneering at or even particularly critiquing the camp. I thought it very impressive, as I think is obvious from the post. My problems with it are to do with the way it makes virtues of such necessities as compost toilets and hay bales, abstracts from them a model for a society. You may disagree that it does that at all, but certainly that is the impression I got from my two visits.

...the media tactics were very smart. The tactics with relation to the people that are most out of their rhetorical reach - those driving their cars to the funfair - were what I was critiquing.

10:56 pm  
Blogger Alex said...

But what are they training you *for*, Anon? My guess is host organism for somebody's tedious media career.

1:22 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

well my guess is that they're training people for serious mass direct action against coal fired power stations where people are willing to risk arrest en masse- the coral reefs and a lot besides are going the way of the dodo - haven't you heard? I don't think the 10:10 crap is going to stop that. Representational democracy is on its last legs and they're also training each other in a politics that has a hope of replacing it. Who is the someone? My notion is that the type of communication they used is in opposition to the existence of media careers. Anyway I'm from west of your isle and I cant help but be dismayed at the bloggerati in London/Uk and their espousal of radicalism divorced from commitment. It's not perfect but it's malleable. Wait for perfection and you're as the arch druid says, a 'capitalist realist'. Movements are messy and gauche but they do change things. Being too cool for school does not cut it imo. If you don't have some kind of skin in the game, no matter how debordian your rhetoric, you're basically a bystander.

7:36 pm  
Blogger owen hatherley said...

Person who did not participate accuses people who did participate* of non-participation. Can you see why this might be just a bit annoying?

* (as well as myself, most of the other commenters on this post are either directly politically active or regular attendees at demos and other actions)

8:10 pm  
Anonymous FttL said...

....and their espousal of radicalism divorced from commitment... If you don't have some kind of skin in the game, no matter how debordian your rhetoric, you're basically a bystander.

Fuck me that is irritating, given that me, Owen and other commenters above all attended the sodding camp; and, in my own case, have been involved with radical politics for over a decade, now (from Reclaim the Streets in the late nineties, through to Stop the War, etc etc etc). I think Owen somewhat likewise, and no doubt others above have similar backgrounds.

So, less, please, of the "skin the game" wannabe bullshit: for my own part, I think the Climate Camp is reaching the limits of its usefulness as a tactic: once it was in London, and not directly confronting anything, it needed to be decisively larger than previous years to show it was reaching more people.

That doesn't mean it wasn't useful in the past, nor that this year wasn't, in itself, a good event, but it does mean the Camp (and the rest of the anti-climate change movement) needs to think about where it goes from here. The Vestas occupation (and the politics around it) indicated, to me, a more promising route forward.

11:12 am  
Blogger Alex said...

I'm gonna post in response to this at some point. By the way, where it goes from here is round my neck of the woods to shut down a certain power station. Simple.

The hosting in London was a bit of a forced hand by financial events and the G20 shitstorm. Read the minutes of the meetings - there almost was not a Climate Camp at all this year.

4:50 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


I wasn't there but i did participate. Kind of like colonialism in reverse. That's why I didn't notice the haybales and latrines and did notice the futurism I suppose.

2:42 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh and I'm a wannabe? wannabe what? I have kids, worry about their future more than aesthetics, have been involved in organising similar events and have far far too much underpaid work I don't want to do to do. I am probably a lot like the people who went to nthe funfair in their cheap cars. we have broadband these days you know. BT broadband at that, even on the western isle of mists and shadows and we watch the intellectuals in the empire like hawks.

3:07 am  
Blogger owen hatherley said...

we watch the intellectuals in the empire like hawks


3:24 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"We wait. We are bored. (He throws up his hand.) No, don't protest, we are bored to death, there's no denying it. Good. A diversion comes along and what do we do? We let it go to waste... In an instant all will vanish and we'll be alone once more, in the midst of nothingness!"

3:25 am  
Blogger owen hatherley said...

do let me know when you're done with irrelevant dick-waving.

3:27 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

well we DO watch them like hawks.
it's a statement of fact.
it's pretty quiet here.
i'm not trying to be badass.
you think i got here by accident?
anyway - back to the ranch.

3:27 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i'm done now. go neirigh an bothair leat a chara.

3:28 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Focail abhain eile owen a chairde.

bain mise agus mo chairde fein a lan taitneamh as an caint beaganin seo. Go raibh mile mile maith agat a garsun. Lean araigh leis na leabhri maith agus na focail deas alainn. Bainamid a lan taithneamh as iad. Taimid ablata iad a fhail ar an internet.

3:35 am  
Blogger owen hatherley said...

You know, I only got the last word of that. Shame really, as you had some good points before you decided on scant evidence that we were all dilettantes and poseurs and preferred to tell us how hard you are instead.

12:38 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

well I'm not hard. here's a translation since you haven't blanked me as a troll

'myself and my friend enjoyed this post and conversation. Thanks very much for it. Keep up the beautiful writing. We have enjoyed it for quite a while. Isn't the internet wonderful'.

I just simply thought the tone of your article, and the idea of travelling to the camp with a notebook, mistaking practicalities for aesthetics was worth pointing out. And I do absolutely agree with your point about joining pleasure with activism. For what it's worth it brought this to mind
I really think actually that a presentation on 'militant modernism' would be a great thing to see at climate camp type things. These people need to think big and be informed by history - and I suppoise - being a longtime lurker at your site - I was disappointed that you didn't see that and spent your energy on something - at the end of the day - that I felt was a caricature.

12:18 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


I don't agree with your point that the lack of direct confrontation is a bad thing. I think it's quite remarkable for people to spend such a long time together thinking and discussing a longer term project. It's more important imo than thinking confrontation is the only thing that makes meaning. My own experience of a similar event a few years ago was that a two week camp - talking - educating - building relationships and clarifying differences - confrontoing very little but the weather - lead to a huge - thoughtful - informed - coherent upsurge in activism. People learn very quickly these days from screens. They have to - that's neoliberalism. In the flesh I reckon the generation below me - I suppose you guys - well owen at least (saw the booklaunch) - would be a scary prospect if y'all leveraged the time to gather - think beyond individual positions - and act. Sad to say - and I wish it wasn't so - but London, NYC, Paris - the old imperial centres is where it's going to happen - else it's not going to happen at all. We watch you guys and that's what I'm trying to get across and we're waiting. Hopefully not for 'Godot'.

12:32 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

восстановление зрения
зеленый лазер

1:35 pm  
Blogger DiSCo said...

Thank you for sharing a nice article.

5:15 pm  
Anonymous negocios rentables said...

Hello, i would like to read more about this interesting topic. I think that this post has very useful information.

4:59 pm  
Blogger ekle paylas said...

nice blog Thanks for sharing. voicesohbet was really very nice.
sesli chat siteleri sesli sohbet
sesli sohbet siteleri sesli chat
seslichat seslisohbet
sesli siteleri chat siteleri
sohbet siteleri sesli siteler
voice sohbet sesli sohbet siteleri
sesli sohbet seslisohbet
sohbet siteleri sesli chat siteleri
seslichat sesli chat
herkesburda herkes burda
sohbetmerkezi sohbetmerkezi

2:09 am  
Blogger Hair Transplant in turkey said...

Thanks for the information. I really enjoyed, I would like get more
information about this,because is very beautiful, thanks for sharing
saç dökülmesini ne önler

10:38 am  
Blogger Japanese Used Cars said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

11:49 am  
Blogger Op Dr Ali Mezdeği said...

Thanks for the information. I really enjoyed, I would like get more
information about this,because is very beautiful, thanks for sharing. Web Tasarım

2:05 pm  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home