Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist

January 12, 2009

Pious warmongers

Filed under: bard college,Palestine,religion — louisproyect @ 7:44 pm

As someone who tunes in to WABC AM from time to time in order to get a handle on what the rightwing is up to, I was not surprised to hear Rabbi Joseph Potasnik and Catholic Deacon Kevin McCormack blathering on about Gaza yesterday morning. What did surprise me, however, was the identity of one of their guests who was invited on to help them make their warmongering case: Bruce Chilton, the chaplain at Bard College, my alma mater.

Protestant minister Bruce Chilton: cheering on the IDF in Christ’s name

Chilton is on the board of directors of Christians for Fair Witness on the Middle East, just one part of the sleazy web of advocacy groups connected to the Israel Lobby. It was founded by Sister Ruth Lautt (pronounced lout, I wonder?), a Roman Catholic nun who was profiled in a June 14, 2008 NY Times article. The article makes the specious claim that she has no contact with AIPAC, as if she needed marching orders from them.

Sister Ruth Lautt: used to work for Israel’s high-powered legal firm

A former litigator for the noxious corporate law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Lautt works hard to defend Israeli interests at religious conventions, especially to defeat divestment motions that are increasingly being adopted by mainstream Protestant denominations. In fact, her office is in 475 Riverside Drive, the Interchurch Center (aka “The God Box”), where many of these denominations have offices. I eat in their basement cafeteria from time to time. The NY Times reports:

“We are informed by the Christian mandate to stand for justice and to raise our voices when we see someone being falsely accused,” Sister Ruth, 44, said in an interview at the God Box. “The issue isn’t divestment. Divestment is a symptom, a symptom of bias against the state of Israel and an attempt to lay the blame on the shoulders of Israel.”

Such a viewpoint collides with the political and theological direction of the mainline Protestant churches. Influenced by a version of liberation theology espoused by the Palestinian Christian activist Naim Ateek and his organization Sabeel, which likens Palestinians to the persecuted Jesus, all five of the mainline denominations in the United States (Methodist, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Evangelical Lutheran and United Church of Christ) have debated and in some cases adopted policies intended to bring direct or indirect economic pressure on Israel to compromise.

Now I wouldn’t want to question the depth of Sister Lautt’s conversion but I would be remiss in not pointing out what Skadden, Arps states on their website:

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP and affiliates (“Skadden, Arps” or “Skadden”) is one of the leading U.S. legal advisers to Israeli companies doing business and raising capital outside of Israel and to U.S. and other non-Israeli companies doing business in Israel or investing in Israeli companies. Many of our attorneys are thoroughly familiar with the legal structure, business environment and political system of Israel, and several have been admitted to the bars of both Israel and New York and are fluent in Hebrew and English.

Returning to Bard College’s good chaplain, the very reverend Bruce Chilton, I could not refrain from dashing off a note to him not long after his appearance on “Religion on the Line”:

What’s next? Drinking the blood of Palestinian children?

Louis Proyect, Bard College ’65

Usually the recipients of such emails from me are smart enough to ignore me. I have written George Packer numerous times but have never gotten a reply. For me these emails just serve as a way of blowing off steam but every so often they do seem to get under the skin of their recipient, in the case of Bruce Chilton fairly deeply. It appears that good Christians like him don’t want to be accused of bad faith-especially when they know deep down that it is true.

While “Religion on the Line” does not have transcripts, you can read what Chilton has to say about Gaza on the Christians for a Fair Witness on the Middle East Website:

Qassam rockets are deployed by their namesake, the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the armed wing of Hamas. Fired over the border between Gaza and Israel at civilian centers, they put into action the stated aim of the Hamas Charter of 1988: “Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors.” By intent and impact, Qassam rockets terrorize Israeli civilian populations in an attempt to galvanize action across the Muslim world in order to eliminate the State of Israel.

Israel’s attacks in Gaza involve civilian casualties, although that is not their purpose. At every stage — deployment, preparation, and design — Qassam are in such proximity to residential populations that even well targeted strikes bring calamitous results. But the aim of Israel is not the elimination of Gaza, but the end of Qassam attacks. The willingness of the Israeli authorities to halt their attacks in the hope that Qassam sites will be dismantled is a positive development.

It reads, as you would expect, as if it were written by the Israeli consulate.

For most of Sunday, emails went back and forth between Chilton and me and began including a host of other characters including the president of Bard College who usually ignores me but sometimes rises to the bait. (This time he didn’t.) Chilton probably should have known better to take a sarcastic tone with me since I practically invented sarcasm. After I began cc’ing other interested parties at Bard, he took me to task:

To save you the trouble, I have already written to my colleagues in the Departments of Religion and Theology, and to Joel [Kovel, a professor at Bard who is a well-known Marxist]. If you like, I can give you my mother’s e-mail address, as well.

To which I replied:

Sure, send it along. I am sure she’d want to know that her little boy has wasted all the money that was spent on divinity school by becoming an apologist for an apartheid state.

36 Comments »

  1. A better picture of Rev. Dr. Bruce Chilton: http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr355/roflpreacher/roflbot.jpg

    Comment by Adrian — January 12, 2009 @ 8:33 pm

  2. Do you really think it was clever to sent an classic anti-Semitic trope (“drinking children’s blood”) to these people?

    What next, are you going to send them yellow stars to be sown on their clothing?

    You might call it “blowing off steam” but to anyone of sane mind it looks remarkably like neo-Nazi harassment.

    Comment by Astounded — January 12, 2009 @ 10:26 pm

  3. What a bizarre statement. In what way exactly is “drinking children’s blood” a specifically anti-Semitic slur?

    “What next, are you going to send them yellow stars to be sown on their clothing?”

    What drama-queening! Why stop there? Why not liken Louis Proyect’s emails to be the internet equivalent of shoving jews in his domestic oven?

    Comment by Antonis — January 12, 2009 @ 10:44 pm

  4. I guess “Astounded” is not bright enough to figure out that Bruce Chilton is a Christian clergyman even though I described him as a board member of “Christians for Fair Witness in the Middle East”. To make it so clear that even he can understand it, I now refer to Bruce Chilton as an Episcopalian at the start of the post.

    Comment by louisproyect — January 12, 2009 @ 11:49 pm

  5. Antonis obviously nothing about anti-Semitism, perhaps Louis could explain to him the significance of “drinking childrens blood” in the lexicon of Jew hatred?

    Louis – at any point in your email harassment of these people, did you suggest that Israel employ Zyklon B to provide a “Final Solution” for the Palestinian problem?

    If not, why not? I mean, you really want to hurt these people, right? And whether something is moral or not flows from the needs of the class struggle, according to Marxists, unrepentant or otherwise? Or are there some things so low that even you, Proyect, will not stoop to? Now that would be news!

    Comment by Astounded — January 13, 2009 @ 1:32 am

  6. PS. I’m looking forward to your coming posts where you condemn the Obama presidency as a sell-out and “rhetorically” ask if he should be hanged from a tree.

    Perhaps then genius Antonis will understand what the problem is with Proyect’s ugly rhetoric and harassment?

    Comment by Astounded — January 13, 2009 @ 1:35 am

  7. One more thing before I depart your welcoming shores for the last time: it’s notable that despite spening all day Sunday emailing drivel to Bard College – and how insane is that?? – Proyect chooses only to post the final sarcastic reply from Chilton.

    Reading between the lines, he obviously wiped the floor with you, and you are too embarassed to post the whole exchange which surely would demonstrate that.

    Pathetic.

    Comment by Astounded — January 13, 2009 @ 1:39 am

  8. Is ‘Astounded’ Rev. Chilton?

    Comment by Adrian — January 13, 2009 @ 1:58 am

  9. ah accusations of antisemitism, what an original innovation to bring in to a discussion about Israel? The only thing astounding is zionist knee jerks like yourself still think its a valid argument!

    Comment by SGuy — January 13, 2009 @ 3:02 am

  10. I would encourage comrades not to waste time trading barbs with the refugee from Harry’s Place. The last thing I want to see here is hundreds of comments spawned by the intervention of a supporter of the American, Israeli and British governments. With the Murdoch press, all the TV and radio networks, talk radio, etc. saying the same things that they say, it boggles the imagination why they would feel the need to haunt the Internet with their conventional rightwing ideas. Believe me, if the ABC Evening News was written by Noam Chomsky and Alexander Cockburn, I wouldn’t waste time blogging.

    Comment by louisproyect — January 13, 2009 @ 3:14 am

  11. Adrian asks whether Astounded is the Rev. Dr. Bruce Chilton. He is not, I am. The blood libel has been a trope of anti-Semitic abuse since the twelfth century, a fact so well known, that at first I thought Louis’s remark was deliberate parody. I told him that I appreciated his little joke. In the course of going ballistic, he identified himself as an alumnus of Bard College. Because I am Chaplain of the College (not the Episcopalian chaplain) as well as Bernard Iddings Bell Professor of Religion, part of my professional responsibility is to engage alumni as well as students in educational terms. Some of my correspondence with Louis indicates it was not a complete waste of time, even if Louis has chosen — without my permission or Sister Ruth’s — to present a selective, truncated, and self-serving version of the evidence.

    Comment by Bruce Chilton — January 13, 2009 @ 11:58 am

  12. Yes Mr Chilton, one could say the same thing about the term zionist, before the creation of Israel it tended to refer to shadowy conspiraces of the Jewry, however since then things have changed quite substantially and Zionism is no nebulous entity. Besides the fact that an accusation of anti-semitism is in and of itself a trope of Zionist defenders. Maybe you’re right though, we should be clear that deliberately targeting civilians is whats going on here not blood drinking, the latter would be bad. The first is all Hamas’s fault!

    Comment by SGuy — January 13, 2009 @ 1:23 pm

  13. How astonishing is the “emancipatory” effect religion. It’s like an ethical freezone in which scriptures give you a license to take on any ethical judgment you want as long as you can maintain the appearance that you are devoted to a transcendent “truth”. I think these people, Ruth Lautt, Bruce Chilton, etc, etc, are not simply religious opportunists distorting the message of Jesus Christ for their political self-interests, contrary, they are legally exercising the universal free-pass license. Only in this regard, the money was spent on the right project.

    Comment by Mehmet Çagatay — January 13, 2009 @ 1:51 pm

  14. Bruce, I don’t need your permission to blog about your appearance on hate radio. WABC AM has a 50,000 watt transmitter and can be heard in 38 states. Meanwhile, if this blog, which averages about 1200 readers per day, chooses to expose your pious warmongering, that is its right. We still live in a democracy unlike Israel which has just announced that it has banned Arab parties from participating in the upcoming Israeli elections. (http://leninology.blogspot.com/2009/01/more-on-only-democracy-in-middle-east.html)

    Comment by louisproyect — January 13, 2009 @ 2:10 pm

  15. You obviously need no permission to blog. But you are the first person in my thirty-four years of teaching at university level who has taken (and manipulated) my words in personal communication in order to distort my position within a public forum.

    Comment by Bruce Chilton — January 13, 2009 @ 3:50 pm

  16. Distorted, as opposed to your accusations of anti-semitism? Although to call that a distortion is a bit of a misnomer, those accusations aren’t meant to represent a debate they’re meant to kill it!

    Comment by SGuy — January 13, 2009 @ 4:10 pm

  17. Bruce, I am not a particularly civil person. You have been teaching for 34 years but I have been involved in revolutionary politics for 42 years. I lost my appetite for civility when it comes to establishment figures after listening to one too many LBJ speeches. Nowadays my blood gets boiling when I hear the same kind of unctuous defense of Israeli violence from a Chuck Schumer or you. I am not a member in good standing of the Groves of Academe. I am not in the habit of going to tea parties on Faculty Circle. I wonder if you have a bit of a masochistic streak since obviously you get some kind of pleasure at being lashed in this fashion. Seen any Genet plays lately? Anyhow, feel free to try to convince people here that your defense of the IDF atrocities has something to do with Jesus since people will enjoy a good laugh.

    Comment by louisproyect — January 13, 2009 @ 4:12 pm

  18. One other thing, Bruce. What exactly am I distorting? You write, “Israel’s attacks in Gaza involve civilian casualties, although that is not their purpose.” It takes amazing chutzpah to write something like this when the Western press is banned from reporting in Gaza. If you want to be taken seriously, you have to at least make yourself aware of the critiques of the Israeli blitzkreig that are appearing in forums usually favorable to Israel. What possible excuse could Israel have for banning Western reporters unless it has something to hide? And surely it does.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/12/white.phosphorus/

    JERUSALEM (CNN) — The international group Human Rights Watch is accusing Israel of firing weapons containing white phosphorus into Gaza. The group demands that the alleged practice cease.

    The group’s researchers in Israel “observed multiple air-bursts of artillery-fired white phosphorus over what appeared to be the Gaza City/Jabaliya area” on Friday and Saturday, the organization said on its Web site.

    “Israel appeared to be using white phosphorus as an ‘obscurant’ [a chemical used to hide military operations], a permissible use in principle” under the laws of war, the HRW posting said.

    “However, white phosphorus has a significant, incidental, incendiary effect that can severely burn people and set structures, fields, and other civilian objects in the vicinity on fire,” the posting said. “The potential for harm to civilians is magnified by Gaza’s high population density, among the highest in the world.”

    HRW said the use of white phosphorus in Gaza would violate “the requirement under international humanitarian law to take all feasible precautions to avoid civilian injury and loss of life.”

    Comment by louisproyect — January 13, 2009 @ 4:22 pm

  19. Your lack of civility does not come as news to me, nor your resort to assaults ad hominem when you have no argument. What I have learned from your attacks is that the capacity to manipulate meaning by inventing a context for words for which they were never designed is not limited to Christian Fundamentalists. Since this is the second time you have invited me not to respond further, I suppose I will take you up on the offer. As I indicated earlier, I made the mistake of believing you wished to discuss a humanitarian tragedy in serious terms.

    Comment by Bruce Chilton — January 13, 2009 @ 4:33 pm

  20. Bruce, I already said, “Anyhow, feel free to try to convince people here that your defense of the IDF atrocities has something to do with Jesus since people will enjoy a good laugh.” I am sorry that you interpreted that as meaning that I have invited you “not to respond further”.

    This is the Internet, not a college classroom where you set the ground-rules for discussion. The Internet is a free-for-all democratic medium that does have a reputation for bruising tender egos. It must sting to have a sans-culotte like me giving you a piece of my mind, but rather inconsequential in comparison to being burned alive by white phosphorus.

    Comment by louisproyect — January 13, 2009 @ 4:43 pm

  21. Reverend Chilton and Sister Lautt’s allies rally for victory in Gaza:

    Comment by louisproyect — January 13, 2009 @ 6:01 pm

  22. As a denizen of the groves of academe, I am a believer in the necessity for civil discourse and in Voltaire’s maxim to “defend to the death” the rights of those whose views one finds truly repulsive.

    This includes those who, like Dr. Chilton, justify the massacre of innocent women and children and the perpetuation of war crimes.

    What I am uncomfortable with is finding the chaplain of the college where I work adopting an extreme position on the matter under consideration. Dr. Chilton’s apologetics for the IDF flies in the face of a 14 to 0 vote by the U.N. security council, and indeed the position of Secretary of State Rice who joined in support of the resolution calling for an immediate cease fire.

    The role of the chaplain is, after all, to provide moral instruction and ethical guidance to the community and also to represent these values to outside world.

    It should be apparent that Dr. Chilton’s views do not in any way represent my views, nor, as I think will become increasingly clear to him, those of a significant fraction of the Bard community.

    This does not, I stress, imply that he should be denied a forum for his advocacy of state terrorism as a member of the faculty or that any retaliation against him can be countenanced.

    What Dr. Chilton should be aware of is that his defense of indiscriminate violence consigns him to he margins of civilized discourse. And given this fact, he has no grounds on which to speak for the moral consensus of the Bard community in his capacity of chaplain.

    He should, therefore, resign his position as chaplain immediately.

    Comment by John Halle — January 13, 2009 @ 7:21 pm

  23. It’s only fair to point out that Father Chilton’s position on Gaza appears to substantially differ from that of our denomination’s Presiding Bishop. The Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, the Most Rev. Dr. Katharine Jefferts Schori, reiterated on January 5th her December 29 call for an immediate ceasefire saying:

    “We are deeply saddened by the first-hand reports we are receiving from Al Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza about the casualties they are treating under the most horrific circumstances. Not only do they lack basic medical supplies, but with windows blown out they are even struggling to keep patients warm. The high number of civilian deaths and injuries, which continue to include noncombatants, women, and children, will only prolong the violence years into the future. Israel’s disproportionate response to the rockets being fired into its cities may well encourage violence beyond Gaza and Israel. The first steps toward peace will only come if all parties unite behind an immediate ceasefire. Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. reminded the world that “an eye for an eye soon leaves the whole world blind.” May we seek to end this blinding violence.”

    Kurt Hill
    Bard College (Class of ’72)
    & Member of Ascension Episcopal Church,
    Brooklyn, NY

    Comment by Kurt Hill — January 13, 2009 @ 11:01 pm

  24. Louis,
    I like this blog and often agree with what you post here but i’m seriously shocked by this post. What you wrote to this pastor guy sounds like it’s a reference to the blood libel even if it wasn’t intended as such, by continuing to defend this comment you can only add fuel to the assertion that those who support the rights of palestinians are all anti-semites. Surely you can see it was a pretty stupid thing to say?

    Nick

    Comment by Nick T — January 14, 2009 @ 12:11 am

  25. It would be a stupid thing to say to a Jew, but not to a Christian. I did not have blood libel in mind but vampires. As most of my regular readers know, I am a big fan of horror movies–vampires in particular. Here’s a really good one I reviewed about a month ago:

    “Let the Right One In”

    A beautifully written, acted, filmed and directed Swedish movie that pairs two 12 year olds: Oskar who is bullied mercilessly by schoolmates, and Eli, a girl who has just moved in next door in their Stockholm suburb and who happens to be a vampire. Consider this movie to be a much more elegant and intelligent version of “Buffy, the Vampire Slayer”, the TV show that effectively equated adolescent turmoil with demonic afflictions.

    Oskar (Kåre Hedebrant) first encounters Eli (Lina Leandersson) late at night as he sits in the snow-covered front yard of the dreary brick tenement they live in trying unsuccessfully to solve a Rubic’s cube. Despite his initial wariness toward his new neighbor (misfortunes at school have made him understandably defensive), he is impressed both by her ability to effortlessly solve the puzzle as well as her pretty but pallid face. The only thing he doesn’t like about her is her “funny smell” that he brings to her attention. Since she has been dead for generations, it is no surprise that she has a bit of an odor.

    Despite being a vampire, Eli has the same desire for friendship that any 12 year old would have. (She explains to Oskar at one point that she has been 12 years old for centuries.) When Eli learns that Oskar has been the target of bullies, she urges him to hit back hard, which he does. At an outdoor skating rink, he delivers a well-placed blow with a stick to the side of the head of his worst tormentor.

    By coincidence, this is the same stick that Eli’s manservant Hakan has used to push one of his victims into an ice-covered brook. Although their relationship is not delineated (much of the movie’s power resides in its susceptibility to multiple interpretations), this much is clear: his role in life is to kill complete strangers, drain their blood, and feed his mistress. In contrast to the batty, insect-devouring Renfield of the Dracula saga, Hakan has much more of the appearance and demeanor of a depressed accountant.

    Although the movie’s climax features a deeply satisfying confrontation with Oskar’s bullies, it is much more about the bonding of two lonely 12 year olds. Speaking for myself, their experience mirrors my own. It is too bad that I did not have a vampire on my side back in the 1950s.

    Comment by louisproyect — January 14, 2009 @ 12:39 am

  26. This post had one of the best comments sections ever.

    Comment by Adrian — January 14, 2009 @ 12:56 am

  27. Hi,
    I like vampire films too, that sounds like a good one. Anyway I’m not saying that you were making an anti-semitic point based on the blood libel, just that it sounds like one (and the fact that horrible pastor guy isn’t himself jewish isn’t really the point here). Anti-semitism is a reality in society, I think a bit of care and thought with language wouldn’t go amiss.

    Comment by Nick T — January 14, 2009 @ 12:57 am

  28. Nick they will make accusations of anti-semitism no matter what language you use, heck why not make it easier, why pussyfoot around these war mongers?

    Comment by SGuy — January 14, 2009 @ 4:26 am

  29. Hasn’t anyone here noticed the wonderful misunderstanding in Astounded’s first comment which perfectly demonstrates the essence of the question? Obviously He/She presumed Dr. Bruce Chilton to be a Jewish rabbi speaking in favor of the Israeli attack on Gazza:

    “Do you really think it was clever to sent an classic anti-Semitic trope (“drinking children’s blood”) to these people?

    What next, are you going to send them yellow stars to be sown on their clothing?”

    I think Louis’ original question was how a Christian Chaplin could adopt a political stance appropriate for a bureaucrat from the Israeli consulate. Now it is more understandable to me why Badiou asserted that the authentic philosophical questions relate to the category of the Same. But subsequently, even though Louis provided adequate clues about the reason of the status of this sameness (it seem that Chaplin Chilton is connected to the Israel Lobby), some participants here craftily attempted to distract the discussion to Louis’ supposedly anti-Semitist remark.

    I’m a total idiot on Latin phrases, can someone please tell me what the heck “ad hominem” means?

    Comment by Mehmet Çagatay — January 14, 2009 @ 7:10 am

  30. “Let the Right One In”

    A beautifully written, acted, filmed and directed Swedish movie that pairs two 12 year olds: Oskar who is bullied mercilessly by schoolmates, and Eli, a girl who has just moved in next door in their Stockholm suburb and who happens to be a vampire. Consider this movie to be a much more elegant and intelligent version of “Buffy, the Vampire Slayer”, the TV show that effectively equated adolescent turmoil with demonic afflictions. Interesting take on that film. How can Eli be a 12 year old for centuries? This movie was true horror because evil(Eli) seemed so sweet. Could Oskar be the future Hakan and could sweet Eli have targeted him from the beginning for such horrible fate?

    Comment by Lex the Impaler — January 14, 2009 @ 8:43 am

  31. An “ad hominem” remark is directed to the person, as opposed to his/her arguments.

    Comment by Antonis — January 14, 2009 @ 10:26 am

  32. I am absolutely mortified by the Chaplain’s comments. I wish we could put all these apologists in Gaza for just one day and see how they feel.

    Dear Chaplain, you’re probably not following this anymore, but if you are please read these testimonies, and tell us you still feel the same way:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/10/g aza-zeitoun-attack-deaths/print

    In any event, the your comments are a red herring! This was a war of choice. Israel refuses to negotiate with HAMAS, even though the leadership of HAMAS has agreed to the UN resolution for peace, as Norman Finkelstein pointed out on Democracy Now! the other day:
    http://www.counterpunch.org/finkelstein01132009.html

    And in general, your statements on the situation are extremely disingenuous given that you ignore the context of HAMAS retaliations, which is the occupation:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine/print#history-byline

    and the siege:
    http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n01/roy_01_.html

    It’s you versus international law, Chaplain. I’m sorry to see you on the side of these people:

    Comment by dermokrat — January 14, 2009 @ 5:44 pm

  33. […] should add that I listened to the abovementioned “Religion on the Line” radio show and wrote a piece examining Chilton’s defense of Israeli ethnic cleansing and war […]

    Pingback by Bard College terminates Joel Kovel « Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist — February 19, 2009 @ 4:39 pm

  34. There is reason to believe that the so-called “blood libel” has a basis in historical reality. See “Bloody Passovers: The Jews of Europe and Ritual Murders” at http://zionistsout.blogspot.com/2007/04/bloody-passovers-jews-of-europe-and.html

    Comment by PeaceMonger — February 20, 2009 @ 1:31 am

  35. […] points of the Israel lobby on a regular basis. It was where I heard Bard College’s chaplain Bruce Chilton defend Israel’s murderous attack on Gaza in January […]

    Pingback by Debating the Deacon « Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist — June 28, 2010 @ 4:19 pm

  36. […] should add that I listened to the abovementioned “Religion on the Line” radio show and wrote a piece examining Chilton’s defense of Israeli ethnic cleansing and war […]

    Pingback by ABOUT TIME: Bard College Terminates Joel Kovel | Bard Tribune — October 13, 2010 @ 7:48 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: