The Battle of Algiers (1966) Poster

The Battle of Algiers (1966)

  • Rate: 8.2/10 total 21,768 votes 
  • Genre: Crime | Drama | History | War
  • Release Date: 20 September 1967 (USA)
  • Runtime: 121 min
Our Score
98/100
754 user reviews.

User Score (vote now)
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars
Loading ... Loading ...


You're here : » » The Battle of Algiers (1966)...

The Battle of Algiers 1966 movie trailer La Batalla de Argelia / The Battle of Algiers (1965) - Trailer The Battle of Algiers (1966) Ennio Morricone - The Battle Of Algiers OST (1966) - Rue De Peres The Battle Of Algiers 1965 .F AB ab cs ct ds e fn f bg gk hg is k pb rs sp pd tk vn -F SZ [20] Bataille d'Alger (La) par Gillo Pontecorvo 

The Battle of Algiers (1966)

The Battle of Algiers 1966tt0058946.jpg poster

  • IMDb page: The Battle of Algiers (1966)
  • Rate: 8.2/10 total 21,768 votes 
  • Genre: Crime | Drama | History | War
  • Release Date: 20 September 1967 (USA)
  • Runtime: 121 min
  • Filming Location: Algeria
  • Gross: $815,345(USA)(12 September 2004)
  • Director: Gillo Pontecorvo
  • Stars: Brahim Hadjadj, Jean Martin and Yacef Saadi|See full cast and crew
  • Original Music By: Ennio Morricone  Gillo Pontecorvo   
  • Sound Mix: Mono
  • Plot Keyword: Algerian | French | Bomb | Independence | Government

Writing Credits By:

    (in alphabetical order)

  • Gillo Pontecorvo 
  • Franco Solinas 

Known Trivia

  • This film was very rarely shown in France until recently, and the torture scenes were cut in the US and UK.
  • In 2003, the New York Times reported that the Pentagon screened this film for officers and civilian experts who were discussing the challenges faced by the US military forces in Iraq. The flier inviting guests to the screening read: “How to win a battle against terrorism and lose the war of ideas”.
  • The only film in Oscar history to be a nominee in two separate non-consecutive years. It was a foreign film nominee for 1966, and then a nominee for screenplay and direction for 1968.
  • The character of Col. Matthieu is loosely based on the real life General Jacques Massu. Right-wing elements in the French Army, led by General Massu seized power in Algiers and threatened to conduct an assault on Paris, involving paratroopers and armored forces based at Rambouillet, unless Charles de Gaulle was placed in charge of the Republic of France.
  • According to French government figures, there were 236,000 Algerian Muslims serving in the French Army in 1962 (four times more than in the FLN), either in regular units (Spahis and Tirailleurs) or as irregulars (harkis and moghaznis). Some estimates suggest that, with their families, the indigenous Muslim loyalists may have numbered as many as 1 million. They are not portrayed in this film.
  • The film is based in part on the memoirs of Yacef Saadi, who wrote them in prison after serving as a leader for the historical NLF.

Goofs: Continuity: Ali's first assignment is to assault a police officer. During this, the cop's hat falls to the ground, and the position of the hat changes between cuts.

Plot: An account of the bloodiest revolution in modern history. Full summary »  »

Story: A film commissioned by the Algerian government that shows the Algerian revolution from both sides. The French foreign legion has left Vietnam in defeat and has something to prove. The Algerians are seeking independence. The two clash. The torture used by the French is contrasted with the Algerian's use of bombs in soda shops. A look at war as a nasty thing that harms and sullies everyone who participates in it.Written by John Vogel <[email protected]>  

FullCast & Crew

Produced By:

  • Antonio Musu known as producer
  • Yacef Saadi known as producer
  • Fred Baker known as executive producer (uncredited)

FullCast & Crew:

  • Brahim Hadjadj known as Ali La Pointe (as Brahim Haggiag)
  • Jean Martin known as Col. Mathieu
  • Yacef Saadi known as Djafar (as Saadi Yacef)
  • Samia Kerbash known as One of the girls
  • Ugo Paletti known as Captain
  • Fusia El Kader known as Halima
  • Omar
  • Mohamed Ben Kassen known as Petit Omar
  • Michele Kerbash known as Fathia (uncredited)
  • Franco Morici known as (uncredited)
  • Tommaso Neri known as Captain (uncredited)
  • Gene Wesson known as (uncredited)

..

 

Supporting Department

Makeup Department:
  • Maurizio Giustini known as key makeup artist
  • Hamdi Mohamed known as hair stylist

Art Department:

  • Tarcisio Diamanti known as construction coordinator (uncredited)

..

 

Company

Production Companies:

  • Igor Film
  • Casbah Film (co-production)

Other Companies:

  • Warmflash Productions Ltd.  trailer

Distributors:

  • Argent Films (2003) (UK) (all media)
  • Maiden Voyage Pictures (2007) (UK) (theatrical) (re-release)
  • Rialto Pictures (2004) (USA) (theatrical) (re-release)
  • Rizzoli (1967) (USA) (theatrical) (subtitled)
  • Al!ve AG (2011) (Germany) (DVD)
  • Criterion Collection, The (2004) (USA) (DVD) (widescreen)
  • Encore Entertainment (1995) (USA) (video) (laserdisc)
  • Filmfreak Distributie (2012) (Netherlands) (DVD)
  • Globo Vídeo (????) (Brazil) (VHS)
  • Image Entertainment (????) (USA) (video) (laserdisc)
  • Madman Entertainment (2005) (Australia) (DVD)
  • Madman Entertainment (2005) (New Zealand) (DVD)
  • New Star (2009) (Greece) (DVD)

..

 

Other Stuff

Release Date:
  • Italy 3 September 1966 (Venice Film Festival)
  • Italy 8 September 1966
  • Sweden 13 March 1967
  • Denmark 1 September 1967
  • USA 20 September 1967
  • Belgium 18 February 1970
  • West Germany 14 August 1970
  • Finland 14 May 1971
  • France 21 October 1971
  • Spain 1 June 1978
  • Portugal 1 June 1983
  • Italy April 1999 (restored version)
  • Hong Kong 14 May 2000 (extended version)
  • UK 1 December 2003 (extended version)
  • USA 9 January 2004 (re-release)
  • France 15 May 2004 (Cannes Film Festival)
  • France 19 May 2004 (re-release)
  • Brazil 2 September 2005 (São Paulo)
  • UK 11 May 2007 (re-release)
  • Greece 10 December 2009 (re-release)

..

 
 

Filmography links and data courtesy of The Internet Movie Database


The Battle of Algiers (1966) Related Movie


The Reckless Moment (1949) Movie Poster
Tales from Beyond (2004) Movie Poster
The Crocodiles (2009) Movie Poster
Naajayaz (1995) Movie Poster
Walking Thunder (1997) Movie Poster


Posted on January 8, 2013 by freeonlinemoviestreaming in Movies | Tags: , , , , .

10 Comments

  1. Chris Knipp from Berkeley, California
    08 Jan 2013, 5:37 am

    Perhaps no other cinematic depiction of revolt against colonial rule is sodetailed, vivid, and specific as the 1965 Battle of Algiers (La battagliadiAlgeri, just reissued in a new print and having limited distribution intheUS). It’s a vivid and very specific recreation of the insurrection againstthe French in Algiers in the late Fifties that shows how the Frenchsystematically eradicated that insurrection. It’s also a story repeatedwithvariations in dozens of parts of the globe now, as then. But as I’m notthefirst to note, it’s neither a partisan tract nor a user manual. It wastherefore foolish of the Pentagon to watch it recently as if tips on howtocontrol Iraqi `resistance’/'terrorism’ were to be found in it, and it hasbeen equally foolish of the Black Panthers or other revolutionaries towatchit seeking tactical information for their struggles. Those tactics did notsucceed; but neither did the effort to quell the independence movement:theFrench won the battle but lost the war. A process that might haveproceededpeacefully in a matter of months, takes years to happen. The filmdocumentsthe sad foolishness of solving conflicts with violence, the maximum lossandsuffering on both sides and the protraction of the inevitable outcome.

    The insurrection The Battle of Algiers describes was effectively quelledthrough the leadership of the bold, methodical French Colonel Mathieu, whoas we see succeeds in eliminating the organizational structure of theresistance, `triangle’ by `triangle’, using torture to ferret out namesandlocations of the autonomous `terrorists’/'partisans,’ then killing the`head’ of the `worm’ their structure represents so it can’t `regenerate.’Once this happens, after a merciless French campaign following a generalstrike, the sympathizers in the majority Algerian population are totallydemoralized; but two years later a vigorous national independence movement`suddenly,’ `spontaneously,’ springs forth, and not long afterward Francehas to grant Algerian independence. It’s at this point, rather than at themoment of Mathieu’s momentary triumph, that the film ends.

    Gillo Pontecorvo undertook his masterpiece after prodding from theresistance leader, Saadi Yacef, but he made a film equally sympathetictoward and critical of both sides. We see as much of the French dissectionof the situation and repression of it (by the police chief, then ColonelMathieu) as we see of the `terrorists’/'partisans’ planning and executionof their actions. We see Colonel Mathieu as an appealing macho hero withmoments of noble fair play, a shades-wearing, cigarette puffing veteranwhomoves around with clarity, honesty, and panache; he himself has a`partisan’background. The `terrorist’/'rebel’ leaders are serious, intenselycommittedmen of various types, from the sophisticated intellectual to the youngfirebrand. There are no `heroes’ here; or, alternately, if you like,they’reall `heroes.’

    Mathieu appears before the press beside the captured `rebel’/'terrorist’leader – an unusual move in itself – and expresses his respect for theman’scourage and conviction. The `rebel’ leader in this scene is eloquent indefending `terrorist’/'rebellion’ methods such as the use of basketsfilledwith explosives in public places. `Give us your bombs and we’ll give youourbaskets.’ Mathieu for his part effectively explains to the journalists thenecessity of torture to short circuit the `rebellion’/'terrorism’. Afterthis explanation, the film, typically systematic at this point, beginsshowing a series of tortures of Algerians being carried out.

    The first image we see in the film is the shattered face and body of thesmall, tortured Algerian man who’s broken down and revealed where Ali `LaPointe,’ the firebrand, the last remaining leader, is hiding. Then we seethe `terrorist’/'terrorist’ leader Ali and his closest supporters trappedlike deer in their hideaway, their faces soft and beautiful. The splendidblack and white photography works like William Klein’s Fifties and Sixtiesimages (he’s one of the key visual commentators of that periodstylistically) to powerfully capture the edgy soulfulness of the NorthAfrican people and their gritty Casbah milieu. Much of the film’s powercomes from the way Pontecorvo was able to work, through Saadi Yacef,directly in the Casbah among the real people – as Fernando Meirellesworkedin the favelas of Brazil recently with local boys to forge the astonishingCity of God.

    The voices, which are dubbed, as was the fixed Italian filmmaking style,work somewhat less effectively because of obvious disconnects betweenmouthand sound at times, but the French is so analytical and the Algerians’Arabic so exotic-sounding (even to a student of Arabic) that they work,andthe insistent, exciting music composed by Pontecorvo himself incollaboration with Ennio Morricone is a powerful element in the film’srelentless forward movement.

    The fast rhythms of the editing are balanced by the stunning authenticityofthe hundreds of Algerian extras who swarm across the screen: it’s in thecrowd scenes that The Battle of Algiers really sings. There are manysuperbsequences of street fighting, of people massing at checkpoints, of theFrench victims innocently assembled in public places; and like anexhilarating coda there is the scene of joyous victory as Algerianscelebrate their independence in the last blurry moments. This is a film(again, like City of God) of almost intoxicating — and nauseating –violence, complexity, and fervor. Pontecorvo’s accomplishment, though, isthe way through showing the leaders analyzing and debating the action hefreezes any impulse toward partisanship in its tracks. The evenhandednessofthe coverage works a Brechtian `Alienation Effect’ so you don’t get caughtup in rooting for one side or the other.

    The sequence of three pretty Algerian women carrying out an operation is aparticularly memorable one — but only one among many. First they take offtheir burqas and cut their hair and doll themselves up French style andthenthey get past the checkpoint into the French quarter to leave handbagsfullof explosives in a bar, a dance club, and an airport lounge. Againclose-upsof faces in the bar and the jive dancers with jaunty jabbing elbows in theclub show a brilliant use of image and classic editing: first theinnocent,vulnerable faces, then the explosions. Here our sympathies for the Frenchvictims are fully awakened. Another sequence of Algerians removing bodiesfrom a building has all the power and sadness of Christ’s Passion.

    There’s no point where as in a conventional thriller we feel excitementandsympathy for the perpetrator, because we see the cruelty of theperpetratorand the humanity of the victim every time. The Battle of Algiers is afinaltriumphant use of Italian cinematic neorealismo. The killing is observedneutrally, but with sadness, as part of a stupid game caused by ignoranceand played out compulsively when a political settlement would have beeninfinitely better – a stupid game observed with astonishing zest.

    Revived thirty-five years later in a new 35-mm. print, its grainy beautypristinely vivid, The Battle of Algiers remains a superbly made machinethatplays out the addictive game of `terrorism,’ repression, torture, revolt,and full-fledged insurrection as effectively now as when it was firstissued. Like any classic, it’s of its time and of all time. There’s alessonhere, but it’s not for partisans or colonialists: it’s for allpeople.

  2. Tony43 from Los Angeles
    08 Jan 2013, 5:37 am

    "Battle of Algiers" is simply one of the greatest films every made. If filmmaking can be about truth as well as fantasy, then a movie that includes atitle card telling viewers that there is not one foot of documentary ornewsreel footage in it must deserve viewing.

    "Battle of Algiers" contains scenes that seem so real, you suspect that theycouldn’t have been staged. When three Algerian women come down from theCasbah to plant bombs in the French quarter of the city, you can almost cutthe tension with a knife. When the bombs go off, you think they must havebeen real bombs. And when you see the devastation they leave in their wake,you cannot fail to be moved. The massive rebellion in the streets at theend of the film also seems so real, you sit wondering how many extras musthave been injured filming those scenes.

    "Battle of Algiers" combines brilliant photography, crisp direction, anintriguing plot and some very fine acting. Throw in a terrific music score,splendid editing, impressive special effects and the best example ever ofdocudrama style production and you have a masterpiece of filmmaking.

    But film making is not nearly as important as human life and no film ingeneral release today says more about America’s current involvement in themiddle east and many other parts of the world than this picture about theFrench in Algeria, made more than three decades ago.

    Every American should view this film, then think about our currentoccupation of Iraq.

  3. ([email protected]) from NEW YORK
    08 Jan 2013, 5:37 am

    An historian writing about the Algerian war against the French colonialauthorities entitled his book "A Savage War of Peace". "The Battle ofAlgiers" provides many answers to that enigmatic title. It does notattemptto show us the entire war but centers on the city of Algiers. Even thoughyou are told at the beginning that no documentary footage is used it is attimes hard to believe as many of the images you see have a stark and oftenunsettling reality to them. Considering that this was a co productionbetween Algeria and Italy the film is remarkable in that it does not turnitself a political tirade by taking sides. Instead the camera is a sort ofneutral observer allowing us to witness events that spiraled fromindividualdemonstrations to a full scale war of savage intensity. French officerswhofought the Nazis a few years before degenerated into the mode of theirformer enemy while Algerians had no problems exploding bombs that wouldkill their own people. The camera shows no heros or villains but humanityinits darkest forms. This is a powerful film with superb direction andcinematography. It truly is one of a kind and once seen will never beforgotten.

  4. John DeSando ([email protected]) from Columbus, Ohio
    08 Jan 2013, 5:37 am

    In 1962 after more than 130 years of French colonial rule, Algeria becameindependent. Gillo Pontecorvo’s `Algiers’ shows the decade leading to thatliberation in a powerful story about Muslims asserting their rights throughviolence, hiding, and plotting in the Kasbah, a demiworld of narrow,winding, seemingly endless alleys that are the only protection the rebelshave from the eyes of the French. The re-release of the 1965 black andwhite film is a convincing story of a people who do not want to be occupiedand will give their lives so their families can one day befree.

    The story centers on a couple of Muslim leaders, the charismatic Col. of theFrench forces, and the bombings and shootouts that at one point averagedjust over 4 per day. The film’s sympathy is for the Muslims, but the Colonelhas moments of reflection that could be sympathetic, especially with therevelation that he was a member of the resistance in WWII and may havesuffered in a concentration camp. The director shows the influence ofItalian neo-realists like Roberto Rossellini (`Paisan’) by shooting indocumentary style on location, using non-actors (except for the Colonel),and generally avoiding an agitprop angle.

    But the film’s sympathy in the end belongs to the occupied people. When 3rebel women change appearance to look French, infiltrate, and plant bombs,the irony obvious to American audiences in their current struggle is atribute to the strength of the narration and characterization and theuniversal dislike of occupation and subjugation.

    The torture of the Muslim prisoners is the most poignant relevance to therecent scandal in Iraq. The Colonel’s justification for the practice togain life-saving information is classic `ends-justify-the-means’ logic stillbeing used by great nations. In fact, the Pentagon reportedly had seen thisfilm during the first days of the second Iraq War; some say they learnednothing from the film, which is an unforgettable study of occupation anddefeat.

  5. Sigmund ([email protected]) from Roma, IT
    08 Jan 2013, 5:37 am

    I ask myself why we never see these kind of movies on TV, instead ofairingagain and again the same old lethal weapons, jurassic parks, and othersimilar stuff?This is real cinema, this is why it is considered a form ofart!

    With the metaphysical crudeness of black and white, the dramatical factsofthe Algerian rebellion against the French are accounted. The movie has therealistic appearance of a chronicle. And there are tons of intellectualhonesty, too.I mean that there are no white hats VS black hats. You can see terroriststroubled as they are about to leave a bomb in a cafe. Policemen whostruggleto save an arabian child from being killed by outraged crowd. Most of all,Ilike the frank words of Colonel Mathieu about the "bad methods" he’s usingduring interrogations… Watch the movie and you will know.

  6. Robert Hirschfeld ([email protected]) from Dobbs Ferry, NY
    08 Jan 2013, 5:37 am

    I wish I could locate a videocassette of this film–subtitled, not dubbed.The first time I saw it, I was a little put off by what I thought was apompous disclaimer that "not one foot" of documentary footage had been used.But, in light of the finished product, it’s a remarkable statement. If afilm has better captured the harsh and ugly realities that are an inevitablepart of a true revolutionary movement, I never saw it. It is greatly to itscredit that one never gets a sense of "good guys vs. bad guys" here–only ofpeople trapped in a truly impossible set of circumstances, from which noescape is possible without confrontation and bloodshed. It was depressing tosee this movie in Berkeley in the early 70s, and hear the audience cheer the"heroic" Algerian revolutionaries while booing the "villainous" French, inview of the great pains that had been taken to present a balanced viewpoint.This film is thrilling, heartbreaking, thought-provoking, andbeautiful–sometimes by turns and sometimes all at once. If you haven’t seenit and it show up anywhere in the vicinityh, drop everything and go–andpray that it’s subtitled and not dubbed. (There are dubbed prints and, as isusually the case, dubbing pretty nearly wrecks it.) This is a masterpiece.

  7. jazzest ([email protected]) from Chiba City, Japan
    08 Jan 2013, 5:37 am

    Capturing a historic incident/moment with extraordinary accuracy makes afilm truly beautiful, painful, and masterful. With the tradition ofItalianNeo Realism and French New Wave – i.e. shooting in location and castingnonprofessional actors, The Battle of Algiers harshly seals the uglyrealities of both French Legion and Algerian Guerillas – i.e.indiscriminatebombs, tortures, and scapegoats. Ennio Morricone composed one of his earlysuccessful scores.

  8. Spuzzlightyear from Vancouver
    08 Jan 2013, 5:37 am

    Just when I thought I was starting to hate every movie in sight, I had theamazing priveledge to watch "the Battle Of Algiers" which is this amazingaccount of the oppression of the Algierian people by the French in the1950′s.

    When the movie starts, we see 4 people hiding from the French Army. Then allof a sudden, this amazingly haunting music starts, and we’re told the storyin flashback of how the Algierian people tried to revolt against the FrenchSoldiers.

    From what I understand, the movie uses no documentary footage, which isamazing as some of the scenes in the movie must have taken a great deal ofeffort to produce., There are some pretty amazing crowd scenes and theexplosion scenes are just breathtaking.

    Also, I guess some of the actual revolutionaries are in the film as well.They are pretty hard to point out as all of the acting here is amazing,very realistic.

    So, looking for a war movie? Dammit, don’t go for Private Ryan, go toAlgiers.

  9. from United States
    08 Jan 2013, 5:37 am

    If one has not seen this film, one cannot begin to imagine Pontecorvo’sextraordinary achievement. The acting is so natural and convincing thatmany viewers and even some critics assumed that the movie was adocumentary. Only a master director could have taken this raw actingmaterial and gotten such performances out of it. And despite hisleftist viewpoint, Pontecorvo neither ridicules or demonizes theFrench, as does Michael Moore the Americans in his recent putativedocumentaries Bowling at Columbine and Farenheit 9-11 -– though I do adisservice to Pontecorvo to compare his work to that of Moore.

    See this movie now that it has been released on DVD in the UnitedStates and learn from the history it so brilliantly conveys.

  10. Epaminondas from Ancient Thebes
    08 Jan 2013, 5:37 am

    Battle of Algiers might well be the best historical film ever. Itstands out as a splendid work of art, as an extremely accuratedepiction of a specific time and place, as a political hymn toindependence, and as a thought-provoking philosophical reflection onviolence, and on the relationship between ends and means.

    It depicts the crucial years 1956-1957 in the Algerian war ofindependence from French colonial rule: the leaders of theindependentist FLN decide to make Algiers a battlefield through strikesand terrorism in order to shake colonialism and to unite Algerians. TheFrench respond to this urban guerilla with a ruthless control of space,separating European and Arab (the ‘casbah’) parts of the city, and witha brutal hunt of the FLN leaders through the torture of lessermilitants. The French paratroops under gen. Massu, col. Bigeard andcdt. Aussaresses (blended in the film into a synthetic and fictitiouscharacter, col. Mathieu) eventually ‘win’ the battle of Algiers, butthey end up ‘losing’ Algeria, as their repression has only fuelednationalism. The film therefore ends with the vision of Algerian crowdsdemanding independence (‘Istiqlâl’) as they march through the streetsof Algiers in 1960.

    While this is an accurate enough analysis of such a complex war (eventhough interestingly de Gaulle is absent from the film as it intends toshow how independence was conquered, not handed from above by Frenchauthorities) it is also a metaphor, as the film works on many differentlevels.

    It is a masterpiece of editing and cinematography. The combined use ofspace and music is stunning: when the french paratroops take possessionof the Casbah, literally filling up the frame, gaining control of thestreets, rooftops, hallways, courtyards, their superbly choreographedmovements are underlined by a haunting theme by Morricone & directorPontecorvo. In these sequences he rivals not only Rossellini butEisenstein.

    It is also strongly influenced by the New Wave in its manner of filmingfaces of protagonists. Some of the most beautiful moments in the film(as the beginning in Ali’s hiding hole, or the scenes before theexplosions in the bars) consist of protagonists’ faces, victims,perpetrators, bystanders, shot in close up, in a beautiful black andwhite, without comment or voice-over: their common humanity is shown aswell as the determination, the inner flame of those fighting forindependence.

    I would disagree with other reviewers saying the movie is is unbiased:the film was commissioned and encouraged by the new-born Algerianstate, and Yacef Saadi, a leader in the war of independence appears inprominent role. While the violence of both sides is coolly examined,the film justifies that of the Algerians, if only by showing (in aslightly dishonest way) that it always responds to the violence of theFrench. This question of precedence (who started to be inhuman?),though in the end quite pointless, has long poisoned mutualunderstanding between French and Algerian memories of the war. Anotherbias, explained by the FLN financing and staging, is the almostcomplete absence in the film of the middle ground, those neither in theterrorist FLN or in the paratroops, desiring to live in peace. Theyhave existed, in both sides, as the examples of writer Albert Camus andhis friend Mouloud Ferraoun show. This is quite understandable as itmight not fit in the epic text depicted in realistic manner byPontecorvo. However, in the film, the Algerians that are not committedto war are shown to be gangsters and pimps: this is a minor flaw of thefilm and its only touch of propaganda.

    All that said, the film is a stunning visual, historical and ethicalmasterpiece. Sadly and ironically, it capture a fiery desire forliberty at the very time (1965) a military coup by Boumediene overthrewBen Bella in Algeria, repressing liberties for the decades to come.Most of all, it is one of the most potent depictions of and reflectionson violence (in the twin and extreme forms of terrorism and torture) tobe seen on screen.

    The most powerful image of the film remains the vision of a FLNmilitant broken by torture and forced to confess the hiding place ofhis chief. His haunted look, exhausted stance, empty eyes, grotesquelydressed in a paratroops’ uniform, stand as an indictment ofcolonialism.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Sedo - Buy and Sell Domain Names and Websitesproject info: freeonlinemoviestreaming.netStatistics for project freeonlinemoviestreaming.netetracker® web controlling instead of log file analysis