Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Movie for a Sunday afternoon: "Exodus"
You Tube ^ | Leon Uris

Posted on 09/09/2012 1:28:45 PM PDT by ReformationFan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySvaWWYGbq0&feature=BFa&list=PLDEE4D91A6D15D8DA


TOPICS: Music/Entertainment; TV/Movies; Travel
KEYWORDS: evamariesaint; exodus; israel; jillhaworth; leonuris; mfasa; ottopreminger; paulnewman
The DNC's behavior concerning Israel on their platform last week gave me the idea for this week's feature. There was actually a time when Hollywood and liberals supported the Israel. Otto Preminger's 1960 epic based upon Leon Uris' novel about the founding of the Israeli state is evidence of this. This movie was considered left wing when it was new but it'd never be made in today's Hollywood where it would probably be condemned as "right wing propaganda".

Ernest Gold's score is haunting and 15 year-old Jill Haworth is very appealing in her film debut as Karen, "child of light". It was also shot entirely on location in Israel and Cyprus when the events it depicts were a relatively recent memory.

1 posted on 09/09/2012 1:28:52 PM PDT by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

The youtube playlist of the entire film is this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySvaWWYGbq0&feature=BFa&list=PLDEE4D91A6D15D8DA

Or you can watch it part by part as follows:

Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySvaWWYGbq0

Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHmIuTKkTdg

Part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-6NOHLtTwA&feature=relmfu

Part 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqxH8OQbHVs&feature=relmfu

Part 5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TarMyPtPvlA&feature=relmfu

Part 6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZOiwE2bm0A&feature=relmfu

Part 7

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfSPamwwDzU&feature=relmfu

Part 8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N92WgLbQVcw

Part 9

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emE4-rCxH7w&feature=relmfu

Part 10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwKP09W6-vU&feature=relmfu

Part 11

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xExRZbbVgU0

Part 12

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1EOFOqlY3U

Part 13

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-mPiGvOIdc

Part 14

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPnF67lKKEA

Part 15

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi5Q6C4iQvw

Part 16

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzLANdxN1ew&feature=relmfu

Part 17

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DdHs0WCdFo&feature=relmfu

Part 18

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRGvf5WP460&feature=relmfu

Part 19

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wS6EgygjZ4

Part 20

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LrKcEcC10U


2 posted on 09/09/2012 1:30:50 PM PDT by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
Thanks. Wonderful movie of a Biblically prophetic miracle before the eyes of the world in 1948...

more to come...

3 posted on 09/09/2012 1:36:33 PM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Exodus is one of my favorite movies. Paul Newman died recently, and I just bought the DVD Exodus to watch it again, and read the book. It is a great movie


4 posted on 09/09/2012 1:37:17 PM PDT by tommix2 (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
Exodus is a movie that Hollywood pukes would not have the nerve to produce today. It would take an outlaw independent to make the movie (like maybe Clint Eastwood).
5 posted on 09/09/2012 1:53:06 PM PDT by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

“Cast a Giant Shadow” (1966) was another movie from the era when Hollywood supported Israel.


6 posted on 09/09/2012 1:55:32 PM PDT by Fiji Hill (Deo Vindice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS

Are there anti-Israel films being made now?


7 posted on 09/09/2012 2:02:28 PM PDT by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Borges
"Are there anti-Israel films being made now?"

I have no idea (and no interest). I seldom visit the movies.

8 posted on 09/09/2012 2:07:03 PM PDT by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS

So how do you know it wouldn’t be made today? There are reasons but I doubt a position on Israel is among them.


9 posted on 09/09/2012 2:08:09 PM PDT by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill

Yep. And with an all star cast(John Wayne, Frank Sinatra, Kirk Douglas, Yul Brynner, Angie Dickinson) too.


10 posted on 09/09/2012 2:15:46 PM PDT by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

Ping


11 posted on 09/09/2012 2:20:38 PM PDT by windcliff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Jill Haworth went on to originate the part of Sally Bowles in the Broadway musical Cabaret. Liza Minnelli did the film version.


12 posted on 09/09/2012 2:22:43 PM PDT by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew
Now that the Democratic Party has become the party of gay marriage, they need to do a sequel to Exodus: Leviticus.
13 posted on 09/09/2012 2:28:59 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
Exodus is a great movie and one of the rare few that's available on YouTube. I watch it every so often myself and find it very inspiring. I've never read the book but understand that there's much more to it, tracing the lives of the various characters (and that it's much more anti-British and anti-Arab than the film).

Ironically, the screenplay for Exodus was written by the unrepentant Communist and member of the "Hollywood Ten," Dalton Trumbo (it was his second film after his "rehabilitation;" Spartacus was the first). It was picketed by the notorious American Nazi George Lincoln Rockwell (yimach shemo vezikhro!), which is referred to in Bob Dylan's Talkin' John Birch Society Paranoid Blues. In other words, when the film came out it was considered a liberal, if not leftist, film.

Even though the Communist world had already long since ended its very brief flirtation with Zionism (so much so that notorious neo-Nazi intellectual Francis Parker Yockey [yimach shemo vezikhro!] advocated a neo-Nazi alliance with the Communist world), I cannot help but suspect that the continued support of Israel by the American Left was conducted on orders from Moscow. The American Communists were never anything but robots carrying out orders from Moscow, after all. But why would Moscow expend all its international resources attacking Zionism and Israel while ordering the US party to continue being pro-Israel? About the only thing I can come up with was that by doing this they would hoodwink the Jewish Left into thinking it was still their friend while their opposition everywhere else would eventually destroy Israel (G-d forbid!). At any rate, the American Left's support for Israel lasted a very long time (Tom Hayden and Jane Fonda entertained Israeli troops in Lebanon in 1982).

Oddly, I myself was totally unaware of any Leftist support (or even phony support) for Israel and Zionism at any time. I was a typical Bible Belt Fundamentalist (and had no idea that there was such a thing as a conservative who opposed Israel) and all the Communist propaganda broadcasts I listened to on my short wave radio were 100% anti-Israel, making no distinction between it and South Africa or Rhodesia. While my eyes have long since been opened, I don't think I'll ever make peace with the situation because it never made any sense!

At any rate, I can't help but wonder what today's liberals feel when they watch the movie--especially the Nazi leading the Arab troops toward the end.

14 posted on 09/09/2012 2:32:55 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Borges

Talk about a contrast in characters. Her Karen is so charming, innocent and hopeful.

The only other part I remember her playing was in another Otto Preminger film, “In Harm’s Way”, where she plays a WWII navy nurse who if I recall correctly commits suicide after being assaulted by Kirk Douglas’ character. She was also in Preminger’s “The Cardinal” but it’s been so long since I’ve since that I don’t remember her from it.


15 posted on 09/09/2012 2:44:50 PM PDT by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

She died last year.


16 posted on 09/09/2012 2:49:19 PM PDT by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator

Very interesting and informative post.

“Oddly, I myself was totally unaware of any Leftist support (or even phony support) for Israel and Zionism at any time. I was a typical Bible Belt Fundamentalist (and had no idea that there was such a thing as a conservative who opposed Israel)”

That was my experience as well. Just about everyone I knew who took a position on the Middle East supported Israel. We were always taught to love and support it(which I still do).

“and all the Communist propaganda broadcasts I listened to on my short wave radio were 100% anti-Israel, making no distinction between it and South Africa or Rhodesia.”

Probably because America was pro-Israel.

“While my eyes have long since been opened, I don’t think I’ll ever make peace with the situation because it never made any sense! “

Agreed.


17 posted on 09/09/2012 2:49:55 PM PDT by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
Ironically, the screenplay for Exodus was written by the unrepentant Communist and member of the "Hollywood Ten," Dalton Trumbo

It's not really that ironic.

The early zionists (Herzl for example) were socialists. The kibbutz movement was a socialist movement. Conservative Jews like Adolph Ochs were strongly against Zionism.

The socialist mindset behind the movment is why Trumbo was championing it (and why Paul Newman took on the project I might add). Also, it was why a Democratic President (Truman) and not a Republican who moved to make Israel a nation.

However, as we know positions and beliefs are relative on the left. Once Israel started getting rich they turned against her and now it is the conservatives who have to defend a prosperous nation.

18 posted on 09/09/2012 2:50:50 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Marcella

ping


19 posted on 09/09/2012 2:54:55 PM PDT by Marcella (Conservatism is dead. PREPARE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
You seem to know how Utube works - I don't. How is it whole movies are shown on there and how do you know which movies are on there? Thanks for your information.
20 posted on 09/09/2012 2:57:53 PM PDT by Marcella (Conservatism is dead. PREPARE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Marcella

Just go to the youtube website and type in the title of the movie or whatever subject you’re looking for in the search engine. If it’s available there, it will come up.


21 posted on 09/09/2012 3:05:00 PM PDT by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Thanks, never been to their actual website.


22 posted on 09/09/2012 3:06:51 PM PDT by Marcella (Conservatism is dead. PREPARE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: what's up
Ironically, the screenplay for Exodus was written by the unrepentant Communist and member of the "Hollywood Ten," Dalton Trumbo

It's not really that ironic.

The early zionists (Herzl for example) were socialists. The kibbutz movement was a socialist movement. Conservative Jews like Adolph Ochs were strongly against Zionism.

Theodor Herzl was not a socialist. He was secular, and his Zionism was a purely secular nationalism (much like Irish Republicanism). But he was not a socialist, and Adolph Ochs was no conservative.

The socialist Zionists came after Herzl, primarily from the "Second Aliyah" that followed the failed Russian revolution of 1905. It was these Zionists who started the qibbutzim, not Herzl.

The socialist mindset behind the movment is why Trumbo was championing it (and why Paul Newman took on the project I might add). Also, it was why a Democratic President (Truman) and not a Republican who moved to make Israel a nation.

The Bolsheviks outlawed Zionism as soon as they came to power. The only time this position was reversed was for a few years in the late 1940's when the Russians decided their number one enemy in the world was the British Empire. They supported both Zionism and Arab nationalism against the British. But after a few years they changed back to their original anti-Zionist position which never changed. They did maintain diplomatic relations with Israel until 1967 (Cuba did so until 1973), but they were never pro-Zionist apart from that brief period in the later Forties.

Preminger and Newman were indeed liberals who considered Israel a liberal cause, and Trumbo undoubtedly had Party permission (or maybe even orders) to write the screenplay. But that has nothing to do with the origins of Zionism, which were indeed secular but not socialist or left wing.

However, as we know positions and beliefs are relative on the left. Once Israel started getting rich they turned against her and now it is the conservatives who have to defend a prosperous nation.

As stated above, the Communists were always anti-Zionist apart from one brief period. The Bolsheviks outlawed it in Russia (even as they supported Irish nationalism) and even the early "Palestine Communist Party" (the Jewish Communist party in the pre-state Yishuv) was officially anti-Zionist. And even David Ben Gurion, while no tzaddiq and a socialist himself, was on the "right wing" of the socialist movement in Israel, even "de-politicizing" the Palmach (which was largely led by Stalinists) after independence, removing the old radical leadership.

As to Truman, Truman wasn't pro-Jewish or pro-Zionist. He recognized Israel only because of political pressure and for no other reason. Moreover, after doing this he maintained the arms embargo which favored the Arabs. He never lifted a finger for Israel.

Please check your history.

23 posted on 09/09/2012 3:17:53 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: what's up

I generally agree with most of your post but Tom Dewey(the GOP presidential nominee in both 1944 and 1948) and Ohio Senator Robert Taft(a/k/a “Mr. Republican”) were both pro-Israel too.

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/israel/palestin.htm

I believe if either of these men had been president in 1948 instead of Truman, they would have also recognized Israel.


24 posted on 09/09/2012 3:20:22 PM PDT by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator

Another interesting post.


25 posted on 09/09/2012 3:23:53 PM PDT by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Not so sure it’s a movie for THIS Sunday afternoon. The movie soft-pedals the book in many ways, and the book itself was pretty sympathetic. The truth, as the Brits well know, is a bit different.


26 posted on 09/09/2012 3:34:31 PM PDT by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
Theodor Herzl was not a socialist.

Hertzl's novel which inspired so many zionists depicted Israel as a socialist utopia.

Hertzl leaned socialist (he talked about a "third way" but we know from Blair and Clinton that that's just code for liberal-socialism)...those who came after him were more hard-core.

27 posted on 09/09/2012 3:36:29 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Thanks for the info on Taft.


28 posted on 09/09/2012 3:38:53 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator

Always interesting.

Hope all’s well....


29 posted on 09/09/2012 3:42:08 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: what's up
Hertzl's novel which inspired so many zionists depicted Israel as a socialist utopia.

Hertzl leaned socialist (he talked about a "third way" but we know from Blair and Clinton that that's just code for liberal-socialism)...those who came after him were more hard-core.

Herzl's novel was entitled Altneuland (tr. "Old New Land") and famously presented a utopian Jewish state that didn't seem in the least bit Jewish (as I said, he was secular). He saw it operating on a system he called "mutualism," which may not be capitalism but isn't socialism either (some anti-capitalist right wingers advocate things like mutualism, communitarianism, agrarianism, and distributism).

Herzl's idea was a Jewish home for Jews in the ancient land. His utopian novel was a silly and enthusiastic picture of what this future state would be like, but there was absolutely nothing practical about it. Furthermore it wasn't socialism as it had always been practiced and advocated. That came later, during the Second `Aliyah.

Much of Herzl's initial support actually came from Orthodox Jews in eastern Europe. After his death the socialists came to dominate, and their Marxism and hostility to Judaism turned most Orthodox Jews against Zionism for some time.

I reiterate: Herzl was secular, but not a socialist. His utopian novel had very little, if anything, to do with the actual work of the early Zionist Organization. The socialists of the Second `Aliyah came to dominate Zionism after Herzl's death.

There were even fascist Zionists for a little while in the early Thirties, you know.

30 posted on 09/09/2012 3:48:29 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
(some anti-capitalist right wingers advocate things like mutualism, communitarianism, agrarianism, and distributism).

These beliefs would not be held by the "right-wingers" associated with conservatism today and would be considered socialist, for example, on FR.

I believe that these beliefs would fall more into the "Clinton-Blair" mold which if adopted leads to more and more State control (as happened after Herzl I might add).

31 posted on 09/09/2012 3:54:57 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
Much of Herzl's initial support actually came from Orthodox Jews in eastern Europe

No suprise. These were the poorer Jews, many of whom were attracted to the socialist and communist mindset.

32 posted on 09/09/2012 3:57:29 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwNGfNZCxVQ&feature=player_embedded


33 posted on 09/09/2012 5:25:56 PM PDT by Red Barr (The liberals cant get over our victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: what's up
(some anti-capitalist right wingers advocate things like mutualism, communitarianism, agrarianism, and distributism).

These beliefs would not be held by the "right-wingers" associated with conservatism today and would be considered socialist, for example, on FR.

I believe that these beliefs would fall more into the "Clinton-Blair" mold which if adopted leads to more and more State control (as happened after Herzl I might add).

You are very naive. European rightism has always been very, very different from American rightism. The European Right has always been statist and anti-individualist and regarded capitalism as subversive and revolutionary. And I'm not talking about Blair and Clinton. I'm talking about Spanish Falangism, British distributism (Chesterton and Belloc), and national syndicalism (there is an American National Syndicalist party online that actually links to the John Birch Society).

Herzl never ran a state in his entire life and is not implicated in the socialism of the Second `Aliyah, much less for the socialism of the early State of Israel (on whose government his utopian book had no influence on whatsoever).

34 posted on 09/09/2012 5:46:15 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: what's up
Much of Herzl's initial support actually came from Orthodox Jews in eastern Europe

No suprise. These were the poorer Jews, many of whom were attracted to the socialist and communist mindset.

Evidently your anti-Semitic bias is so strong that it prevents you from reading anything I have written in response to you.

Theodor Herzl was not a socialist. His early Eastern Europeans supporters were Orthodox Jews, not Communists. And socialism first entered the Zionist Movement with the Second `Aliyah which didn't begin until after Herzl's death. How many times am I going to say this only for you to ignore it and continue bleating anti-Semitism?

I no longer consider you a sincere person. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if you don't believe in the Protocols as well.

Good riddance to you.

35 posted on 09/09/2012 5:51:14 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: what's up; Zionist Conspirator

Truman just happened to be the one in office when the Israel issue came to the fore after WW2. Also one has to take into account that the Republican Party of the 1930s was often quite anti-Semitic. That’s why so many Jews were FDR supporting Democrats. And most Orthodox Jews were opposed to Israel as they saw it as a Secular state and they regarded the Messiah as the only one who could spearhead a new Israel. Read Chaim Potok’s novel ‘The Chosen’.


36 posted on 09/09/2012 6:15:23 PM PDT by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
Evidently your anti-Semitic bias is so strong that it prevents you from reading anything I have written in response to you.

Do you believe that reading what you write must automatically equate to believing what you write? Since you have volleyed the first ad homimems I will reply by saying that you have quite a large view of yourself.

your anti-Semitic bias

Acknowledging that some Jews are socialist does not equate to anti-semitism in the same way that acknowledging that some blacks are socialist does not equate to racism. If I say some whites are socialist I'm prejudiced against white people? Don't be absurd.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if you don't believe in the Protocols as well.

Hyperventilate much? /rolling eyes upward

37 posted on 09/09/2012 6:53:11 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Borges
So how do you know it wouldn’t be made today?

That’s not what I said (see #5). If you want to pick a fight, or show off how much you know, at least be accurate in your representation.

38 posted on 09/09/2012 8:06:57 PM PDT by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS

You said it wouldn’t be made today. That’s exactly what you said.


39 posted on 09/09/2012 8:36:59 PM PDT by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
the book is not accurate when it comes to Polish attitudes to Polish Jews. There were attempts to get weapons in and the Polish underground army tried to get messages out to the US and the UK, but these were ignored by the UK and US. In 1942, AK sent Jan Karski on a secret mission to personally carry the first eyewitness accounts of the Holocaust to the mostly disbelieving Winston Churchill and Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Only in Poland did the Nazis say that if a family harboured Jews, the ENTIRE family would be executed. Yet many were saved.

On November 10, 1941, the death penalty was expanded by Hans Frank to apply to Poles who helped Jews "in any way: by taking them in for the night, giving them a lift in a vehicle of any kind" or "feed[ing] runaway Jews or sell[ing] them foodstuffs."

25% of those in the Vad Yesham are Poles. Don't forget Żegota the Polish Council to Aid Jews. Żegota's express purpose was to aid the country's Jews and find places of safety for them in occupied Poland.

Leon Uris' characterization of Polish conduct in WWII is utterly wrong -- and seems the sum of attitudes of a person looking in. In contrast Szpilman (the Pianist) described better his countrymen's attitude to Jewish Poles

40 posted on 09/10/2012 6:02:55 AM PDT by Cronos (**Marriage is about commitment, cohabitation is about convenience.**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Borges
"You said it wouldn’t be made today. That’s exactly what you said."

See #5: "Exodus is a movie that Hollywood pukes would not have the nerve to produce today. It would take an outlaw independent to make the movie (like maybe Clint Eastwood)."

"Exactly" what I said was that Hollywood pukes would not have the nerve to produce the movie today.

41 posted on 09/10/2012 9:47:01 AM PDT by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson