[IRPCoalition] [bestbits] Re: CS statement: DNI releases Fact Sheet on PRISM, but the damage is already done
Anne Jellema
anne at webfoundation.org
Tue Jun 18 10:56:35 EDT 2013
(+ Web We Want on the principle of keeping all lists copied on everything,
even if that means some annoying cross-posting for some of us)
Good idea, Deborah. Please count us in - Anne and Karina. We are working on
getting the contacts of all HRC member representatives together as Anriette
suggested last week.
Thanks
Anne
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 5:37 AM, Deborah Brown <deborah at accessnow.org>wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Given that there is interest in following up on last week's statement at
> the HRC from people on different lists and, as Anriette pointed out, we'll
> probably want to work with Geneva-based HR orgs that are not on these
> lists, I propose taking this conversation off-list for now with everyone
> who wants to be involved and regularly reporting back to all the various
> lists. This would hopefully help minimize the email traffic and cross
> posting. Additionally, a few people expressed a preference for taking this
> off-list to facilitate strategizing. I hope this approach sounds okay to
> everyone. Please let me know if you object.
>
> So far the following people have written saying that they'd like to be
> included in this discussion moving forward are: Allon, Anja, APC (Anriette
> and Joy), Joana, Matthias, and Norbert.
>
> Is there anyone I missed? Anyone I should add?
>
> Since the HRC session ended on Friday, we now have some time to regroup,
> and consider a variety of ways to follow up in-country and in Geneva.
>
> All the best,
> Deborah
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:39 AM, Allon Bar <allon at allonbar.com> wrote:
>
>> Agreed. One idea may be to bring the full force of this wide coalition
>> of organizations to the fore by drafting a single letter appropriate for
>> all countries that are possibly involved in extracting surveillance data
>> obtained through indiscriminate means, and submit a localized version
>> (referencing that country) to each of the respective governments, still
>> bearing the signature of the group of organizations.
>> So this would utilize the solidarity of all for the specific effect these
>> actions have on citizens in another country, 1) asking the government in
>> question about its involvement in a program as described above; 2) urging
>> the government to verify by what means information they receive from
>> another state has been obtained; 3) urging the government to refrain from
>> using information obtained by means violating the human rights of its
>> citizens; and 4) again underlining that also in its own conduct toward its
>> citizens the government is bound by human rights principles as well as its
>> own laws, protecting the individual against intrusion by its government and
>> operating on a basis of presumed innocence.
>>
>> "Violations supported by you affect us all."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/12/13 2:34 AM, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>>
>> The greatest impact in terms of advocacy in this area, would be within
>> governments as commitments may be made in forums but the real test is
>> within nations, behind closed doors.
>>
>> The minute people get accustomed to minute corrosions in principle, is
>> the inevitable expectation that basic tenets have fallen.
>>
>> Advocacy must be two pronged, with more emphasis on the In-country
>> advocacy. With social media, this should allow for greater awareness of the
>> public, strategic awareness raising and campaigning and utilizing all tools
>> available.
>>
>> Sala
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 6:29 AM, Deborah Brown <deborah at accessnow.org> wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> The HRC statement (which is continuing to attract sign on) makes three
>> requests to the Human Rights Council (pasted below). Is anyone interested
>> in starting a separate thread (on- or off-list) about taking these requests
>> forward? In particular it would be good to have Geneva-based people and
>> those with experience in advocacy at the HRC involved, but of course all
>> are welcome. I think it would be good to do coordinated outreach to
>> governments and to follow up with OHCHR, which already provided some advice
>> on crafting the recommendations.
>>
>> - convening a special session to examine this case
>> - supporting a multistakeholder process to implement the
>> recommendation of Mr La Rue that the Human Rights Committee develop a new
>> General Comment 16 on the right to privacy in light of technological
>> advancements, and,
>> - requesting the High Commissioner to prepare a report that:
>> - formally asks states to report on practices and laws in place on
>> surveillance and what corrective steps will they will take to meet human
>> rights standards, and,
>> - examines the implications of this case in in the light of the
>> Human Rights Council endorsed United Nations Guiding Principles on Business
>> and Human Rights, the “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework of
>> A/HRC/RES/17/4.
>>
>> Warm regards,
>> Deborah
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:03 PM, shaila mistry <shailam at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> ++1
>>> This is excellent
>>> Shaila
>>>
>>> *The journey begins sooner than you anticipate !*
>>> *..................... the renaissance of composure !
>>> *
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From:* Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>
>>> *To:* Deborah Brown <deborah at accessnow.org>
>>> *Cc:* bestbits at lists.bestbits.net; "
>>> irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org" <
>>> irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org>
>>> *Sent:* Monday, June 10, 2013 3:56 AM
>>> *Subject:* Re: [IRPCoalition] [bestbits] Re: CS statement: DNI releases
>>> Fact Sheet on PRISM, but the damage is already done
>>>
>>> Dear all
>>>
>>> Here is the version that will be read. We had to shorten it so that it
>>> is within the 2 minutes space we have.
>>>
>>> Anriette
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/06/2013 12:36, Deborah Brown wrote:
>>> > Thanks Joana!
>>> > Just a quick note to explain that the statement will be made on behalf
>>> of
>>> > APC because as an ECOSOC accredited org they are able to make
>>> interventions
>>> > and have graciously facilitated and contributed this intervention. We
>>> have
>>> > asked the speaker from HRW to take a look at the the Best Bits link
>>> for the
>>> > current list of signatories before reading it at the afternoon session
>>> 1500
>>> > Geneva time, so she will be able to say that she is making the
>>> statement on
>>> > behalf of xx orgs from around the world. So please make sure you
>>> endorse
>>> > the statement at http://bestbits.net/prism-nsa/
>>> >
>>> > I will begin adding those of you who already endorsed it, so look for a
>>> > confirmation email and click the link.
>>> >
>>> > Jeremy, can you fix the layout and footnotes when you have a chance?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks to all of you for helping to make this happen in less than 24
>>> hours
>>> > across many time zones.
>>> >
>>> > Best,
>>> > Deborah
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Joana Varon <joana at varonferraz.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Dear Anriette and all,
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks a lot for all the work that has been made in such a short
>>> period of
>>> >> time. This was amazing!
>>> >> Here is the link for the next endorsements:
>>> http://bestbits.net/prism-nsa/
>>> >> Please, let's spread it!
>>> >> best
>>> >> joana
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >>
>>> >> Joana Varon Ferraz
>>> >> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS-FGV) <
>>> http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts/>
>>> >> @joana_varon
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen <
>>> anriette at apc.org>wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Dear all
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Thanks for all the inputs. We have tried to include them all.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Here is the final text that will be uploaded to the HRC site and read
>>> >>> later today by Human Rights Watch on APC's behalf. We have included
>>> >>> signatories as available now. Deborah will coordinate adding further
>>> >>> names.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Best
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Anriette
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On 10/06/2013 11:40, Marianne Franklin wrote:
>>> >>>> Dear all
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> +1 from me.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> MF
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On 10/06/2013 10:37, parminder wrote:
>>> >>>>> I support this text by Joy...
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On Monday 10 June 2013 02:56 PM, joy wrote:
>>> >>>> Hi - sharing some ideas that came also from discussion with Frank La
>>> >>>> Rue's office and my suggested edits relate to the last para, the
>>> >>>> recommended action to the Council: - I think we have a 3 pronged
>>> >>>> approach to the call to action which is looking really good:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> "We call on the Human Rights Council to act swiftly to prevent
>>> >>>> creation of a global Internet based surveillance system by:
>>> >>>> 1) convening a special session to examine this case 2) supporting
>>> the
>>> >>>> recommendation of Mr La Rue that the Human Rights Committee develop
>>> of
>>> >>>> a new General Comment 16 on the right to privacy in light of
>>> >>>> technological advancements and 3) requesting the High Commissioner
>>> to
>>> >>>> prepare a report a) formally asking states to report on practices
>>> and
>>> >>>> laws in place on survellilance and what corrective steps will they
>>> >>>> willl take to meet human rights standards and b) examing the
>>> >>>> implications of this case in in the light of the Human Rights
>>> Council
>>> >>>> endorsed United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human
>>> >>>> Rights, the "Protect, Respect and Remedy" Framework of
>>> A/HRC/RES/17/4.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Joy
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On 10/06/2013 8:47 p.m.,
>>> >>>> Joana Varon wrote:
>>> >>>>> Sure, Parminder. Lets remove company names.
>>> >>>>> And thanks for the comprehension.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:38 AM, parminder
>>> >>>> <parminder at itforchange.net <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> Hi All
>>> >>>>> IT for Change will endorse this .... (There are some changes I
>>> >>>> would have liked to propose but due to the urgency of the issue i
>>> >>>> would not do it now. Certainly the names of the companies involved
>>> >>>> should have not been mentioned in the statement. Can we still do
>>> it?.)
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> I am sure some of you may already be in contact with him but if
>>> >>>> not Philippe Dam with Human Rights Watch may be a useful person to
>>> >>>> talk to on this. i am cc-ing the email to him. He is attending the
>>> HR
>>> >>>> Council meeting. Wonder if Joy is still there?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> Best, parminder
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> On Monday 10 June 2013 10:07 AM, Deborah Brown wrote:
>>> >>>>>> Dear all,
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Here's a quick update on the draft statement to the Human
>>> >>>> Rights Council regarding the impact of state surveillance on human
>>> >>>> rights. The draft statement is below. We are currently reaching out
>>> to
>>> >>>> Geneva based orgs who might be able to assist with delivery (thanks
>>> >>>> Joy) and if not we can still publish it and do outreach.
>>> >>>>>> Given the short timeframe, can any further edits be sent on
>>> >>>> this thread in the next 3.5 hours? Then I will post it to the Best
>>> >>>> Bits site to facilitate endorsement. In the meantime, if
>>> organizations
>>> >>>> or individuals feel comfortable endorsing this draft, please reply
>>> on
>>> >>>> this thread and we can add your name through the Best Bits system
>>> >>>> later. As a reminder, this statement would be part of a debate at
>>> the
>>> >>>> HRC that will take place at 15:00 Geneva time on Monday. Though not
>>> >>>> ideal, this was the best time frame we could come up with for
>>> >>>> facilitating input and sign on.
>>> >>>>>> Thanks to everyone who worked on this over the last 12 hours
>>> >>>> and apologies for any shortcoming in the process because of time
>>> >>>> constraints. Looking forward to more input and to working together
>>> to
>>> >>>> get this finalized.
>>> >>>>>> Best,
>>> >>>>>> Deborah
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Agenda item 8:/General Debate/
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Civil Society Statement to the Human Rights Council on the
>>> >>>> impact of State Surveillance on Human Rights addressing the
>>> PRISM/NSA
>>> >>> case
>>> >>>>>> Thank you Mr. President. I speak on behalf of ______
>>> >>>> organizations from ___ countries, across ___ regions. This is a
>>> truly
>>> >>>> global issue. We express strong concern over recent revelations of
>>> >>>> surveillance of internet and telephone communications of US and
>>> non-US
>>> >>>> nationals by the government of the United States of America. Equally
>>> >>>> concerning is the provision of access to the results of that
>>> >>>> surveillance to other governments such as the United Kingdom, and
>>> the
>>> >>>> indication of the possible complicity of some of the globally
>>> dominant
>>> >>>> US-based Internet companies whose services and reach are universally
>>> >>>> distributed. These revelations raise the appearance of, and may even
>>> >>>> suggest a blatant and systematic disregard for human rights as
>>> >>>> articulated in Articles 17 and 19 of the International Covenant on
>>> >>>> Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), as well as Articles 12 and 19 of
>>> >>>> the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
>>> >>>>>> Just last year the Council unanimously adopted Resolution 20/8,
>>> >>>> which "Affirms that the same rights that people have offline must
>>> also
>>> >>>> be protected online, in particular freedom of expression ..."[1] But
>>> >>>> during this session the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression
>>> >>>> reported (A/HRC/23/40) worrying new trends in state surveillance of
>>> >>>> communications with serious implications for the exercise of the
>>> human
>>> >>>> rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression. The
>>> >>>> Special Rapporteur notes that inadequate and non-existent legal
>>> >>>> frameworks "create a fertile ground for arbitrary and unlawful
>>> >>>> infringements of the right to privacy in communications and,
>>> >>>> consequently, also threaten the protection of the right to freedom
>>> of
>>> >>>> opinion and expression". [2]
>>> >>>>>> Affirmation of internet rights and freedoms by governments in
>>> >>>> the cross regional statement on freedom of expression and the
>>> Internet
>>> >>>> is important. But civil society is extremely concerned that
>>> >>>> governments supporting this statement are not addressing, and in
>>> fact
>>> >>>> are ignoring, the recent serious revelations about mass surveillance
>>> >>>> in the PRISM/NSA case. Although the personal information disclosed
>>> >>>> under this programme is subject to the oversight of the US Foreign
>>> >>>> Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), that court sits in secret
>>> and
>>> >>>> has no responsiblity for ensuring the human rights of those not
>>> >>>> subject to US jurisdiction.
>>> >>>>>> The introduction of surveillance mechanisms into the very heart
>>> >>>> of the data streams of the globally central service providers
>>> storing
>>> >>>> and communicating the majority of the world's digital communications
>>> >>>> is a backward step for human rights in the digital age. As La Rue
>>> >>>> notes: "This raises serious concern with regard to the
>>> >>>> extra-territorial commission of human rights violations and the
>>> >>>> inability of individuals to know that they might be subject to
>>> foreign
>>> >>>> surveillance, challenge decisions with respect to foreign
>>> >>>> surveillance, or seek remedies." An immediate response is needed.
>>> >>>>>> We call on companies that are voluntary and involuntary parties
>>> >>>> to the violation of the fundamental rights of their users globally
>>> to
>>> >>>> immediately suspend this practice. Such action would uphold the
>>> Human
>>> >>>> Rights Council endorsed United Nations Guiding Principles on
>>> Business
>>> >>>> and Human Rights, the "Protect, Respect and Remedy" Framework of
>>> >>>> A/HRC/RES/17/4.
>>> >>>>>> We call for protection of those who have made these violations
>>> >>>> public. As Mr La Rue notes, laws "must not be used to target
>>> >>>> whistleblowers ... nor should they hamper the legitimate oversight
>>> of
>>> >>>> government action by citizens." We urge States protect those
>>> >>>> whistleblowers involved in this case and to support their efforts to
>>> >>>> combat violations of the fundamental human rights of all global
>>> >>>> citizens. Whistleblowers play a critical role in promoting
>>> >>>> transparency and upholding the human rights of all.
>>> >>>>>> This recent case is a new kind of human rights violation
>>> >>>> specifically relevant to the Internet and one foreshadowed in the
>>> >>>> Council's 2012 Expert Panel on Freedom of Expression and the
>>> Internet.
>>> >>>> We therefore call on the Human Rights Council to act swiftly to
>>> >>>> prevent creation of a global Internet based surveillance system. One
>>> >>>> action the Council could take would be to follow up the Expert Panel
>>> >>>> by convening a multistakeholder process to support the
>>> recommendation
>>> >>>> of Mr. La Rue that the Human Rights Committee develop a new General
>>> >>>> Comment on the right to privacy in light of technological
>>> advancements
>>> >>>>>> [1]
>>> >>>
>>> http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/G12/153/25/PDF/G1215325.pdf?OpenElement
>>> >>>>>> [2]
>>> >>>
>>> http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session23/A.HRC.23.40_EN.pdf
>>> >>>>>> ENDS
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Gene Kimmelman
>>> >>>> <genekimmelman at gmail.com <mailto:genekimmelman at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>> I'm glad to see everyone diving in on this. I have only one
>>> >>>> overarching issue to raise concerning the framing of whatever groups
>>> >>>> decide to put out: I believe it would be most powerful to challenge
>>> >>>> both the US Gvt. and companies to explain how what they have done
>>> >>>> does NOT constitute human rights violations, with specific details
>>> >>>> to explain their stance. I believe all the language people are
>>> >>>> suggesting can fit within this framing, and put the burden on others
>>> >>>> to show how our concerns are not justified. This has more to do
>>> with
>>> >>>> long-term diplomatic impact that anything else; the debate will
>>> >>>> continue and many of the facts will probably never be made public --
>>> >>>> but I think it is a strategic advantage for civil society to always
>>> be
>>> >>>> calling for transparency and basing its conclusions on both what
>>> facts
>>> >>>> are presented, and what concerns are not addressed by the
>>> presentation
>>> >>>> of convincing arguments/facts.
>>> >>>>>> On Jun 9, 2013, at 8:50 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> On 10/06/2013, at 12:47 AM, Deborah Brown
>>> >>>> <deborah at accessnow.org <mailto:deborah at accessnow.org>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> In any case, we could still work on a statement to be
>>> >>>> released around this discussion, or later in the HRC session, which
>>> >>>> ends this week. Jeremy, have you had the chance to work on an
>>> outline?
>>> >>>> If not, I'm happy to help start the drafting process. My main
>>> concern
>>> >>>> is whether we have enough time for significant participation from a
>>> >>>> diversity of groups so that this is coming from a global coalition.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Would it be OK if we copy it from the pad to a sign-on
>>> >>>> statement on bestbits.net <http://bestbits.net/> 5 hours before the
>>> >>>> hearing? Those who are working on the pad can pre-endorse it there.
>>> >>>> If 5 hours ahead is not enough, then I'll need to instruct someone
>>> >>>> else on how to do it earlier, because I'll be in the air until then.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm
>>> >>>>>>> Senior Policy Officer
>>> >>>>>>> Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for
>>> >>>> consumers*
>>> >>>>>>> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
>>> >>>>>>> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000
>>> >>>> Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
>>> >>>>>>> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 <%2B60%203%207726%201599><tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>>> WCRD 2013 -- Consumer Justice Now! | Consumer Protection
>>> >>>> Map: https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main | #wcrd2013
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>>> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org
>>> >>>> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/> |
>>> >>>> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational
>>> >>>> <http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Read our email confidentiality notice
>>> >>>> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
>>> Don't
>>> >>>> print this email unless necessary.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to
>>> >>>> the Google Groups "Web We Want working group" group.
>>> >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
>>> >>>> from it, send an email to webwewant+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
>>> >>>> <mailto:webwewant+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com>.
>>> >>>>>>> For more options, visit
>>> >>>> https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>> Deborah Brown
>>> >>>>>> Policy Analyst
>>> >>>>>> Access | AccessNow.org
>>> >>>>>> E. deborah at accessnow.org <mailto:deborah at accessnow.org>
>>> >>>>>> @deblebrown
>>> >>>>>> PGP 0x5EB4727D
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> --
>>> >>>>> --
>>> >>>>> Joana Varon Ferraz
>>> >>>>> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS-FGV)
>>> >>>>> @joana_varon
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>> >>> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
>>> >>> executive director, association for progressive communications
>>> >>> www.apc.org
>>> >>> po box 29755, melville 2109
>>> >>> south africa
>>> >>> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 <%2B27%2011%20726%201692>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>> IRP mailing list
>>> >>> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>>> >>>
>>> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/irp
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>> --
>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
>>> executive director, association for progressive communications
>>> www.apc.org
>>> po box 29755, melville 2109
>>> south africa
>>> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 <%2B27%2011%20726%201692>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IRP mailing list
>>> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>>> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/irp
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Deborah Brown
>> Policy Analyst
>> Access | AccessNow.org
>> E. deborah at accessnow.org
>> @deblebrown
>> PGP 0x5EB4727D
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> IRP mailing list
>> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/irp
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> IRP mailing listIRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.orghttp://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/irp
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Deborah Brown
> Policy Analyst
> Access | AccessNow.org
> E. deborah at accessnow.org
> @deblebrown
> PGP 0x5EB4727D
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20130618/4b9d83fb/attachment.htm>
More information about the Bestbits
mailing list