[ The problem isn’t new; it’s the bordered logic of global
apartheid itself. Borders are not fixed lines demarcating territory:
they are elastic and can be enforced anywhere. Workers are declared
illegal, but the surplus value they create is not.]
[[link removed]]

THERE IS NO “MIGRANT CRISIS”  
[[link removed]]


 

Harsha Walia
November 16, 2022
Boston Review
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ The problem isn’t new; it’s the bordered logic of global
apartheid itself. Borders are not fixed lines demarcating territory:
they are elastic and can be enforced anywhere. Workers are declared
illegal, but the surplus value they create is not. _

Image: Quim Gil,

 

I grew up on the short story “Toba Tek Singh,” an Urdu satire on
the Partition. While the story’s protagonist is a Sikh man, for whom
the story is named, the character that stuck with me most was an
unnamed man in a mental health facility in Lahore. Refusing to take
part in the partitioning of patients between India and Pakistan, he
climbed onto a tree and proclaimed, “I do not want to live in either
India or Pakistan. I am going to make my home here in this tree.”

The heart of border-craft is the mass production and social
organization of difference.

The Partition—the scars of which reverberate today in brahiminical
Hindutva fascism, the genocidal Indian occupation of Kashmir, mass
protests of debt-ridden farmers, and counterinsurgency in
Panjab—displaced at least 15 million people and killed at least one
million across the newly drawn borders. My grandfather’s own family
was displaced from their village, after which he started working the
passenger and cargo trains that transported up to 5,000 refugees a
day. He later recounted stories of torture, kidnappings, burnings,
rapes, and massacres. In the afterlife of this carnage, I found the
seemingly mad man on the tree marvelously rebellious and utterly
lucid.

To be a modern nation-state in a state-centric world presupposes the
necessity of a secured border. Radhika Mongia argues
[[link removed]],
“Today all states embody a historically produced colonial dimension,
with the citizen/migrant distinction as one of the primary axes of
such differentiation.” Borders maintain hoarded concentrations of
wealth accrued from colonial domination while ensuring mobility for
some and containment for most—a system of global apartheid
determining who can live where and under what conditions. The Indian
Border Security Force is the world’s largest border security force,
Europe’s Mediterranean border is the world’s deadliest border, and
Australia jails detainees for an average of 689 days
[[link removed]] in
its matrix of offshore immigration detention centers. As Toni
Morrison described
[[link removed]] in her prophetic
1997 work, “Home,” “The contemporary world’s work has become
policing, halting, forming policy regarding, and trying to administer
the movement of people. Nationhood—the very definition of
citizenship—is constantly being demarcated and redemarcated in
response to exiles, refugees, Gastarbeiter, immigrants, migrations,
the displaced, the fleeing, and the besieged.”

We are witnesses to the horrific impacts of this categorization and
control of people. Suffocation in the back of cargo trucks in Texas
and Arizona, dehydration in blistering heat in the Horn of Africa’s
eastern corridor, unmarked graves in the Sonoran and Sahara deserts,
deadly pushbacks of migrant caravans in Melilla and Croatia, and wet
cemeteries throughout the Mediterranean are the deathscapes of
borders’ victims.

As the (always racialized) body count grows, language such as
“border crisis” becomes a pretext for more border securitization,
including repressive practices of interdiction and the criminalization
of smuggling. Migrants and refugees become the cause of an imagined
crisis at the border, despite the fact that approximately 95 percent
[[link removed]] of
displaced people remain internally displaced or in refugee camps. In
fact, mass displacement and immobility represent the outcome of the
actual displacement crises of capitalism, conquest, and climate
change. The catastrophic effects of climate disasters, which
displace one person every two seconds
[[link removed]],
are a primary source of escalating border militarization in our era.
While ruling elites fail to mitigate climate change, “climate
security” is the latest screed of eco-apartheid proponents
[[link removed]].
“Borders are the environment’s greatest ally; it is through them
that we will save the planet,” declares
[[link removed]] the
party of French far-right politician Marine Le Pen. Meanwhile, the
Australian Defense Forces have announced military patrols to intercept
climate migrants, and the United States has created Homeland Security
Task Force Southeast to enforce marine interdiction and deportation
after climate disasters in the Caribbean.

In addition to the nascent scapegoat of the “climate migrant,” the
border merges a range of other constructed threats. There is _the
illegal_ (bear in mind: Crees, Chippewas, and Yaquis
[[link removed]] launched
political battles for Indigenous tribal recognition after being
considered illegal immigrants); _the terrorist_ (never forget: 779
Muslim men and boys
[[link removed]] were
imprisoned and tortured at Guantánamo Bay); _the
criminal_ (remember: Clinton’s 1996 immigration laws
[[link removed]] dramatically
widened the net for detention and deportation for those with
convictions); _the bogus refugee _(recall: most refugees from
Vietnam were welcomed during the Cold War
[[link removed]],
while most Haitians fleeing U.S. destabilization were deemed bogus and
faced detention and deportation); _the swarm_ (Trump
[[link removed]] infamously
propagandized: “Working-class Americans are left to pay the price
for mass illegal immigration: reduced jobs, lower wages, overburdened
schools, hospitals that are so crowded you can’t get in, increased
crime, and a depleted social safety net”); _the
undeserving_ (Obama peddled
[[link removed]]:
“Felons, not families. Criminals, not children. Gang members, not a
mom who’s working hard to provide for her kids”); _the
diseased _(still counting: 1.7 million
[[link removed]] Title
42 expulsions from the U.S. during the pandemic); _the
foreigner_ (compare to
[[link removed]]:
“We’re talking about Europeans [Ukranians] leaving in cars that
look like ours to save their lives”).

The mass production and social organization of difference is at the
heart of border-craft. Bordering regimes, as Wendy Brown
[[link removed]] asserts,
“do not simply respond to existing nationalism or racism. Rather,
they activate and mobilize them.” Borders control through selective
inclusions and expulsions, making and maintaining the “good versus
bad” migrant, as well as the colonial, racial, gendered, sexualized,
ableist, and class-based hierarchies among legal citizens. Today, as
white nationalist, anti-trans, and xenophobic fascism swells, the
border has become a central site of struggle.

_all around, and creeping_
_self righteous, let’s say it, fascism,_
_how else to say, border_

—Dionne Brand, from “Inventory”

Borders are not fixed lines demarcating territory. They are elastic;
bordering regimes can be enforced anywhere. Subjected to surveillance
and disciplinary mechanisms within the nation-state, undocumented
migrants endure the omnipresent threat of immigration enforcement,
dangerous and low-wage work, and barriers to accessing public
services. The production and policing of the border becomes a
quotidian workplace ritual as law enforcement, doctors, teachers,
landlords, and social workers regularly report migrants to border
agencies.

Borders can thus follow people indefinitely. Moreover, as employers
and elite leaders intend, the making of “illegal workers” acts as
a firewall (or border) blocking solidarity between workers. In Saudi
Arabia, for instance, simmering working-class dissent over rising
unemployment and shrinking state programs is being redirected into
xenophobic propaganda, which calls for the Saudization of the
workforce and immigration enforcement. In 2017 the Saudi monarchy
arrested a staggering 2.1 million
[[link removed]] migrants,
mostly from Yemen and Ethiopia.

Borders are not fixed lines demarcating territory: they are elastic
and can be enforced anywhere.

Bordering regimes are also increasingly layered with controls far
beyond nation-states’ territorial limits. The United States,
Australia, and Europe subordinate Central America, Oceania, Africa,
and the Middle East by compelling countries in these regions to accept
border checkpoints, drone surveillance, offshore detention, and
migration prevention and interception campaigns as conditions of trade
and aid agreements. Nauru, formally under Australian administration
and United Nations trusteeship until 1968 and devastated through
centuries of resource colonialism, is now Australia’s dumping ground
for refugees. When Australia started offshoring refugee detention
there over twenty years ago, its increased aid to Nauru represented
a third
[[link removed]] of
the country’s GDP. Nauru, Libya, Mali, Mexico, Niger, Papua New
Guinea, Rwanda, Turkey, and Sudan are becoming the new frontiers of
border militarization. Similarly, Croatia, Ukraine, and Moldova—in
joining or aspiring to join the EU—must participate in EU border
management missions and partnerships.

 

This essay is featured in _Imagining Global Futures_.

Preorder a Copy Today
[[link removed]]

 

The outsourcing of border controls for migration management globalizes
border violence and maintains a colonial present. For example, a
century-long line of dirty coups and trade agreements has created
displacement and migration from Mexico and Central America to the
United States. Today U.S. initiatives that outsource border violence
to these countries help to extend the nineteenth-century Monroe
Doctrine, which established the United States’ imperialist claim on
Mexico as well as South and Central America. Initiated by President
Bush and expanded under Presidents Obama and Biden, the
multibillion-dollar U.S.-Mexico Mérida Initiative provides funding
for a battery of police and migration checkpoints from southern
Chiapas to the U.S. border. Mérida and its counterpart, the Central
American Regional Security Initiative, paramilitarize the entire
landscape through the triad of the war on drugs, the war on Indigenous
lands, and the war on migrants. The United States also funds
immigration enforcement in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and
Mexico. Shortly after the United States launched the
Mexico-Guatemala-Belize Border Region Program, Homeland Security
officials
[[link removed].] declared
that “the Guatemalan border with Chiapas is now our southern
border.” Writing on the U.S. empire of borders, Todd Miller remarks
[[link removed]], “Close
your eyes and point to any landmass on a world map, and your finger
will probably find a country that is building up its borders in some
way with Washington’s assistance.”

Europe also outsources border controls
[[link removed]] to many
African countries in the Sahel region, maintaining colonialism’s
civilizational myth. The Khartoum Process, Valletta Summit, Migration
Partnership Framework, African Peace Facility program, and EU
Emergency Trust Fund for Africa all promise EU development and aid in
exchange for reducing African migration into Europe. The EU also
directly funds anti-migrant surveillance, military equipment,
detention centers, border enforcement trainings, and troops in
Tunisia, Niger, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Rwanda, and Sudan. As former
Italian Interior Minister Marco Minniti put it
[[link removed]],
“Securing Libya’s southern border
[[link removed]] means
securing Europe’s southern border.” The massive scale of ongoing
imperialist European land grabbing, resource extraction, and military
expansion on the African continent exists alongside the enforced
expansion of border enforcement within Africa to serve Fortress
Europe. A coalition
[[link removed]] of
African civil society organizations describe these murderous practices
as “hunting policies for migrants that grow everywhere on the
African continent with the support of the European institutions under
the guise of the fight against ‘irregular’ migration.”

But border enforcement is not only the terror of outright exclusion
and expulsion. In the mid-1800s, militias at the U.S.-Mexico border,
made up of slaveowners, patrolled the border to keep Black people
within the nation-state and to prevent them from escaping to Mexico.
As Robyn Maynard stresses
[[link removed]], the
“devaluation of Black life and labour under slavery” underwrites
“Jim-Crow style” exploitative labor migration into the United
States and Canada. After its formal inception in 1924 until World War
II, the U.S. Border Patrol was overseen by the Department of Labor.
Borders are not intended to exclude or deport all people but to create
conditions of _deportability_
[[link removed]],
which produces immense precarity for labor. The border captures
workers’ labor power for employers to exploit. Workers are kept
compliant through threats of termination and deportation. According to
one U.S. study from 2012, 52 percent
[[link removed]] of
companies undergoing union drives threaten to call immigration
authorities. In 2019 ICE raided the Peco and Koch processing plants in
Mississippi shortly after a high-profile unionization drive and
detained 680 workers. Workers are declared illegal, but the surplus
value they create is not.

Workers are declared illegal, but the surplus value they create is
not.

Even state-sanctioned, temporary migrant workers are central to state
formation, citizenship regulation, labor segmentation, and segregated
social ordering. In Gulf Cooperation Council countries, migrant
workers represent a whopping 66 percent
[[link removed]] of
the total labor force. Capitalism requires the constant segmentation
of labor, and the border offers it a “spatial fix
[[link removed]]”
by bifurcating the global labor force. Adam Hanieh remarks
[[link removed]],
“We need to situate migration as an internal feature of how
capitalism actually functions at the global scale—a movement of
people that is relentlessly generated by the movement of capital, and
which, in turn, is constitutive of the concrete forms of capitalism
itself.” Around the world contemporary Bracero programs represent an
extreme neoliberalization of both immigration and labor policies.
Withholding full immigration status and tying visa status to an
employer creates pools of cheapened, indentured laborers. These
legal-but-deportable workers are often spatially and socially
segregated: housed in separate labor camps, unprotected by national
labor laws or unions, refused access to public services, and unable to
bring their families with them.

Labor migration shapes the state to manage citizenship and sustains
capital’s ability to coerce labor. The designation of “foreign
workers” creates a material and ideological differentiation that
further affixes race to citizenship. “Foreign workers” is
essentially a euphemism for “Third World” workers, and jobs that
cannot be outsourced to the periphery—such as farm work and domestic
work—are thus insourced through migrant work. Even where migrant
workers enter the same national labor market as citizens, or work for
the same corporate employer transnationally, the border enforces wage
differentiation based on race, citizenship, and gender. Insourced
labor (from labor migration programs) and outsourced labor (in free
trade zones) thus represent two sides of the same coin: deliberately
deflated labor and political power.

Finally, borders rely on and reproduce the idea of a homogeneous body
politic, emphasizing difference not only from those migrants deemed
deviant and undesirable but _also_ from those alienated and
minoritized citizens who are essentially stateless within the
nation-state. From the sweatshop floor and the refugee camp to the
reservation and the gated community, borders are the scaffolding for
ordering regimes that simultaneously manufacture and discipline
surplus populations while parasitically extracting land, labor, and
life itself. Classifications such as “migrant” or “refugee” do
not represent social groups as much as they symbolize state-regulated
relations of difference and state-manufactured conditions of
vulnerability. While the rich from wealthy states enjoy borderless
mobility—as global investors, bankers, expats, or hipster
tourists—racialized poor people are subjected to discursive and
material criminalization and illegalization.

Borders are simultaneously monetized and militarized. Racial
capitalism and racial citizenship rely on the dispossession and
immobility of migrants to maintain state power and capitalist
extractions. Like the carceral construct of criminality, illegality is
invented and policed as a race-making and property-protecting regime.
And—like policing, prisons, and private property—borders destroy
communal social organization by operating through the logic of
dispossession, capture, containment, and immobility. As Angela Davis
and Gina Dent write [[link removed]],
“We continue to find that the prison is itself a border.”

Borders thus shape and are shaped by social relations. The border
reproduces a global colonial racial social order that fortifies the
rich against the rest, deflates labor power, treats sacred land as a
possession, and provides the ideological basis for all repressive
immigration enforcement. “Border crises,” then, are not merely
domestic issues to be managed through tweaking immigration policies.
They reflect a crisis of globalized asymmetries of capital and
power—inscribed by race, caste, class, gender, sexuality, ability,
and citizenship—that create migration and constrict mobility. The
border is a tool of imperial management, labor segmentation, and
social ordering that is both domestic and global. For example, it
operates unambiguously in the deployment of the U.S. Border Patrol
Tactical Units not only at the border, but in Iraq and Guatemala where
they train local forces, and in Portland where they repress Black
uprisings.

Far from a victim, the liberal nation-state has aborted the dream of
genuine liberation through its territorial grounding for capital.

In _BlackLife: Post-BLM and the Struggle for Freedom_ (2019),
Rinaldo Walcott and Idil Abdillahi emphasize that the politics of
migration is embedded in anti-Black racial logics. “Movements that
we now call migration are founded in anti-blackness, taking their
logic from transatlantic slavery,” they write. The sustained capture
and punishment of Black mobility, the racialization of Muslim people
dating back to the Reconquista, the genocidal corralling of Indigenous
peoples onto reservations, the violent transformation of noncapitalist
land stewardship into the regime of private property, the
dispossession and proletarianization of millions into caste-oppressed
indentured labor, and the deliberate cleaving and creation of
“post-colonial” nation-states are all constitutive of the global
policing of migration today. Declaring the migration crisis as a new
crisis for Western countries is offensive: it conveniently erases the
violence of capitalism, colonialism, genocide, slavery, and
indentureship—the interlocking unfreedoms that create the conditions
that make the border possible. The liberal nation-state is not a
victim; it has aborted the dream of genuine decolonization and
liberation by providing a territorial and jurisdictional grounding for
capital and becoming the most legible form of coercive state power.

_This is the year that those_
_who swim the border’s undertow_
_and shiver in boxcars_
_are greeted with trumpets and drums_

—Martín Espada, from “Imagine the Angels of Bread”

If borders of nation-states are designed to cement structural
inequities through porous segmentation and ordering, can they ever
become an anti-colonial architecture? Just as police and prisons will
never serve the interests of survivors of racial, gendered, or
transphobic violence, borders are not a method of safety or
self-determination. As Adom Getachew suggests in _Worldmaking after
Empire_ (2019), we can look to Black nationalist struggles against
colonialism: they did not envision decolonization as the globalization
of the nation-state into the capitalist economy and international
hierarchy but rather proposed to reconstruct the world through
internationalism and redistribution. We might follow their lead when
considering how our modes of worldmaking and homemaking could be
organized differently. William C. Anderson offers
[[link removed]] a
meditation in this regard: “We are fighting for an existence where
there are no states to deport, dispossess, murder, detain, imprison,
pollute, and police us on behalf of the ruling elite of the world.”

While liberals who argue for more humane immigration policies
presuppose a “natural” border, Nicholas De Genova suggests
[[link removed]],
“If there were no borders, there would be no migration—only
mobility.” In other words, while open borders might mean freer
movement across nations in a world otherwise still configured under
the status quo, to abolish the border would mean emancipating
ourselves from all the unfreedoms it upholds. Migrante International
[[link removed]], a global network of
Filipinx people in over two dozen countries, advocates against the
“plunder of economies, destruction of the environment and wars of
aggression that cause widespread poverty and injustice” in the
Philippines, and also for “migrants’ rights and dignity against
all forms of discrimination, exploitation and abuse in the workplace
and in the community.” Abolishing borders can secure these
propositions: the freedom to stay, meaning that no one is forcibly
displaced from their homes and lands, and the freedom to move with
safety and dignity. A world without borders is necessary if we are
serious about ending the ravages of imperialism, the violent
extraction of capitalism, and the oppressive racial social
organization of our world. Following Eduardo Galeano’s invocation,
“The world was born yearning to be a home for everyone,” a world
without borders is a world where everyone can find, make, and belong
at home.

While a world without borders certainly requires us to stretch our
futurist imaginations, it is also already here in present-day,
practical politics. Movements that call for the abolition of border
enforcement agencies, border controls, deportations, and the
criminalization of migration offer prefigurative visions of the
future, as do those that advance granting immigration status, labor
protections, and universal public services for all. The Manifesto of
the Sans-Papiers movement in France states: “We demand papers so
that we no longer suffer the humiliation of controls based on our
skin, detentions, deportations, the break-up of our families, the
constant fear.” And in Australia RISE: Refugees, Survivors and
Ex-Detainees
[[link removed]] demands
housing, healthcare, language services, education, work rights, legal
aid, and freedom of movement for all asylum seekers. While these and
other movements may demand that the state offer material relief, these
struggles ultimately aim to render the border obsolete.

The everyday unsanctioned movement of people—defying borders and
risking death—is itself a form of worldmaking.

Radical articulations such as “No human being is illegal,” “No
borders on stolen land,” and “We didn’t cross the border, the
border crossed us” refuse the rights-based, liberal platitudes of
innocence, desirability, and assimilation and challenge the legitimacy
of the border itself as an institution of governance. Many movements
also highlight how migration is an embodied expression of decolonial
reparations and redistribution, thus revealing a convergence of
migrant and global justice movements (against the arms trade, vaccine
apartheid, unfair trade agreements, debt, climate change, and so
on). Les Gilets Noirs
[[link removed]],
a collective of mostly African undocumented migrants in France, assert
their presence as an accounting for the exploitation that is a
precondition for Europe. They boldly pronounce: “We are the freedom
to move, to settle down to act. We will take it as our right.” In
Canada the proclamation “No One Is Illegal, Canada is Illegal
[[link removed]]”
highlights the hypocrisy of the settler-colonial state positioning
itself as an arbiter of immigration. The Red Nation
[[link removed]] compellingly
articulates “We have an Indigenous-centered perspective of migrant
justice and organizing that rejects the settler state’s notions of
citizenship and instead creates solidarity between Indigenous people
and undocumented migrants. . . . We demand the abolition of all
borders from Palestine to Turtle Island.”

On Indigenous Wet’suwet’en land, elders and matriarchs exercise
alternative conceptions of governance rooted in their laws. Everyone
entering their lands is asked: What is your intention? How will your
visit benefit the community? Are you here on behalf of industry or the
government? These questions are fundamentally about consent and an
explicit counterforce to the logics of carceral, colonial, and
capitalist states. They remind us that our responsibilities to one
another and all living beings are actively negotiated and can and must
be de-propertied, de-carceral, demilitarized, and decolonial. A
liberatory, no-borders politics destabilizes the machinery of the
colonial-capitalist state itself.

“No borders” is also a clarion call for the established left,
specifically the environmental movement and major labor unions. State
formation, class relations, extractivism, and social hierarchies are
generated through each other. The conditioning of environmental
movements and class struggles through citizenship reinforces the logic
of scarcity upon which austerity and carceral governance depends,
maintains the international division of labor and a lowered wage floor
upon which capitalism relies, and aligns with far-right racism and
ruling-class extractavist ideology. More specifically, environmental
movements advocating for conservation, biocarbon sequestration,
biofuel production, and alternative energies are often complicit in
greenwashed colonialism. Even more progressive proposals such as the
Green New Deal have become trapped in imperialist imaginaries of rich
countries as white sanctuaries and gated communities. In a similar
vein, unions that call for border enforcement against migrant workers
in the interests of “citizen workers” (itself a problematic term)
misunderstand the role of the border and capital. The border cannot
protect the working class against neoliberal globalization because
immobilized labor generated by the border serves the interests of free
capital. Racial capitalism and racial citizenship _require_ bordered
labor.

Migrant workers do not cause environmental degradation or suppress
wages; bosses, corporations, and borders do. An internationalist,
feminist, abolitionist, labor rights platform is perhaps best
articulated by migrant sex workers enduring the intersection of sex
work criminalization, precarious migration status, and gendered
labor—all of which, not coincidentally, uphold the feminization of
poverty. Canary Song [[link removed]], a coalition of
migrant Asian and Asian American sex workers in the United States,
articulates a vision against policing, deportation, and
anti-trafficking raids, while advancing labor rights for all sex
workers and migrant workers to “openly assemble without fear, share
resources, and collectively organize for better wages and working
conditions.”

Abolition, Ruth Wilson Gilmore teaches us, is concerned with
collective presence and building life-affirming institutions. Hundreds
of campaigns are fighting for solidarity/sanctuary cities, where
undocumented residents are guaranteed access to public needs and local
jurisdictions limit cooperation with federal immigration agents.
Dozens of civilian solidarity/rescue missions on land and on sea are
engaged in lifesaving, and often illegal, efforts to provide food,
water, shelter, and transportation to migrants and refugees. There are
many ways people and organizations are extending networks of
collective care and safety: people opening their homes to refugees,
congregations of faith sheltering migrant fugitives, people
distributing food and medical supplies at border sites such as Calais
and Nogales, houseless and stateless squats and encampments, migrant
workers and labor unions uniting to establish rank-and-file worker
centers, direct actions preventing immigration raids, and
internationalist organizing. These actions create liberated zones of
belonging beyond and against neoliberal, nationalist conceits. These
ecosystems, even if small in scale, model different forms of social
relations, solidarity, and kinship through the process of joint
struggle.

And the everyday unsanctioned movement of people—defying borders and
risking death—is, in itself, worldmaking and homemaking. Without
romanticizing or generalizing the politics of those on the move, we
must recognize the sheer will and productive power they represent. In
their determination for a different life, migrants and refugees
subvert the multibillion-dollar global industry of barbed wire walls,
drone surveillance, militarized checkpoints, and bureaucratic violence
aimed at fatally deterring them. Revolutions bring no guarantees, but
they do call on us to dream, listen, commune, act, struggle,
dismantle, rematriate, create, _to move and make anew_.

_[HARSHA WALIA is an activist and writer based in Vancouver. Her
latest book is Border and Rule: Global Migration, Capitalism, and the
Rise of Racist Nationalism.]_

_Re-posted with permission of the publisher, Boston Review
[[link removed]]._

_Subscribe to the Boston Review newsletters - click here.
[[link removed]]_

_We invite you to join the conversation.
[[link removed]]_

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]