Suspicions Rise About Wal-Mex Worker Strike

Wal-Mart has a long, sad history of union busting and negotiating with fake unions, and the recent strike at Wal-Mart stores in Mexico may be another instance of unfair labor dealings. This article from the New West raises serious questions about Wal-Mart’s “negotiations” with Mexican employees. The details are unclear and difficult to suss out: if anyone has first-hand information about the last week’s strike, please email us at info [at] walmartwatch.com.

Quick Settlement of Mexican Wal-Mart Worker Strike is Suspicious [New West]

Every winter since my retirement I spend a month in Mexico at a timeshare in Cabo San Lucas. Over the years, I’ve seen many changes, and the most noticeable one is the Big Box stores going up along the 25-mile freeway between San Jose del Cabo and Cabo San Lucas.

Walmart, CostCo, Sam’s Club, and Home Depot stand as monuments to the new global marketplace. Both tourists and locals load up their cars with groceries and other items as the mom and pop markets struggle to make ends meet.

On February 7, workers at the Los Cabos Wal-Mart, Sam’s Club, and the VIPs Restaurant decided to call a strike. The workers complained that they had to work more than 8 hours a day; they were not paid over-time; they were forced to take arbitrary days off; their wages were sub-standard; and women suffered discrimination and sexual abuse.

At noon about 300 workers gathered outside the stores flying black and red strike flags. Their actions were swiftly rewarded. At 9 o’clock the next morning a contract was signed between Wal-Mart executives and union leaders in Mexico City.

Leading up to the strike, Wal-Mart had been telling the workers that they had already made a deal with their own labor association. The employees were both puzzled and insulted by this information. They had never heard about this organization, and a group of them told Wal-Mart that they wanted to be represented by the Workers and Peasants Revolutionary Confederacy, with the wonderful acronym of CROC.

Because of a steep decline in union membership in the U.S., precipitated by Ronald Reagan firing striking air controllers and Republican presidents stacking the National Labor Relations Board with anti-union appointments, American employers have taken advantage of the suppression of unions and the sad lack of labor literacy and awareness in the working population.

When he came into office, Bush appointed a former Wal-Mart attorney as head of the Labor Department’s Wage and Hour Division, but he has now left for much better pay at Jackson Lewis, the most effective union busting law firm in the nation.

As a part of employee orientation, Wal-Mart shows anti-union films that are as lurid and biased as the reefer madness films. No union representatives are ever allowed on the premises.

In countries where unions are strong, Wal-Mart has tried to make sweetheart deals with phony labor associations, such as this one that Wal-Mart lined up Mexico. Alternatively, they decide, as they have done in Canada, to close a brand new store rather giving their employees democracy in the workplace.

In China Wal-Mart has been quite content with signing cozy contracts with government- controlled unions rather than those organized by the workers themselves. That has led workers at one Chinese Wal-Mart to call their very first strike.

The Wal-Mart workers in Mexico may find that a politically controlled union is almost as bad as a government controlled one. CROC is firmly in the pocket of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), which won every single national election from 1929 to 2000, and has, over the years, become corrupt and fossilized; in a word, institutionalized. The new leftist Party for the Democratic Revolution was only 300,000 votes short of winning the 2006 presidential election. The PRI was a distant third.

Normally, a local labor election is held at the workplace, and the workers would vote on the final contract. In this case there was no election and no vote on the contract.

The real reason for the quick strike settlement was most likely that Wal-Mart would rather negotiate with CROC’s national leaders rather than an independent union. CROC is well known for signing “protection contracts,” and that means more protection for the employers than the employees.

Since 1997, the independent Authentic Labor Front, aided by the American AFL-CIO and the pro-labor provisions of NAFTA, has been winning more and more elections, even though its members are thwarted by government labor boards and intimidated by the political unions.

Recently, a union affiliated with the Authentic Labor Front and composed mostly of indigenous women actually voted out CROC at a blue jeans factory in Tehuacan. Out of the 450 voting, only three workers chose to retain CROC.

When people criticize unions, one must remember that they can be voted out as well as in. It also reminds us that human institutions are only as good as the people that make them up, and that it is imperative to keep these organizations as democratic as possible.

Mexican Wal-Mart workers may find that their CROC union is just that: a “crock.”

Posted by Alex Goldschmidt on Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Click Here for a Printer-Friendly Version

COMMENTS

Viagra pills online
viagra online
http://www.viagrausaonline.com/
viagra online

Viagra Online in
Thursday, February 14 at 08:26 AM

Speaking of unfair labor relations in Mexico,although not a WalMart story,it may be of interest to illustrate the mindest in Mexico re:striking union workers: “On Capitol Hill, Mexican Miners Tell of Police Violence to Break Strike”

by James Parks, Feb 13, 2008

A leadership delegation of striking miners from a Grupo Mexico copper mine in Sonora, Mexico, and the United Steelworkers (USW) today asked members of Congress to withhold a $1.4 billion funding package for Mexico’s security forces proposed by the Bush administration until congressional public hearings are held to investigate use of the police and military to violently crush a six-month-old mine strike over unsafe conditions.

Says USW President Leo Gerard:

Mexico cannot be allowed to violate workers’ human rights with impunity under the pretense of securing borders and combating narco-trafficking. The attack on the Cananea miners is just the most recent in a series of repressive actions by the Mexican government.

Nearly 1,000 federal police now are occupying the Cananea copper mine, one of the world’s largest, and the surrounding area, located 70 miles from the U.S. border.

Police and soldiers using tear gas and pellet guns broke up a worker blockade of the Grupo Mexico mine on Jan. 12, following a ruling by Mexico’s labor board that declared the strike illegal and gave miners 24 hours to return to work.

After workers appealed, courts ruled the strike was legal—yet the police and the government are continuing to keep them from picketing or blocking the mine.

Grupo Mexico, a mining and railroad company that is the world’s third-largest copper producer, has ties to ASARCO Inc., an Arizona-based metals company that employs USW members in Arizona and Texas. USW members in Arizona struck Grupo México-owned copper mines for four months in 2005 over the company’s refusal to bargain in good faith.

More than 1,000 miners represented by Mexico’s National Union of Mine and Metal Workers walked out July 30, 2007, to fight for safer working conditions and other right

Labor unions and community groups across Mexico have joined to protest the use of police force to bust the strike. More than 25,000 miners across Mexico walked off the job for a day on Jan. 16 in protest. Six days later, 1,500 teachers, electrical and telephone workers, and farmers marched on the Mexico City office of the labor secretary to demand that the government withdraw police from the mine. On Jan, 18, hundreds of women began blockading Cananea’s schools to protest the police occupation.

The workers went on strike after a deadly February 2006 explosion at another Grupo Mexico mine in the Mexican state of Coahuila that killed 65 miners. There rescue efforts were shut down after only six days, leaving the 65 coal miners entombed for eternity.

An independent panel of health and safety experts investigated the explosion and concluded it was the result of company negligence. The report outlined many problems. Troubles included no preventative maintenance, failing equipment, high levels of toxic dusts and acid mist and a refusal by Grupo Mexico to properly implement worker health and safety programs.

In 2006, the USW filed a complaint with the U.S. Labor Department charging the Mexican government violated the labor side agreement to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) when it removed from office Napoleon Gómez Urrutia, leader of the National Mineworkers’ Union (Los Mineros).

His supporters claim the Mexican government targeted Gómez, who now lives in Canada, shortly after the explosion in the Pasta de Conchos mine. Many Mexican union leaders say the government cynically tried to deflect public criticism of its failure to protect workers’ lives at the mine by shifting blame to the union.

ddrb in
Thursday, February 14 at 02:56 PM

Buy cialis online
buy cialis
http://www.thelowestpricerx.com/
buy cialis

Buy Cialis in
Friday, February 15 at 06:53 AM

Order viagra online
order viagra
http://www.dropjack.com/story.php?title=THE_LOWEST_VIAGRA_PRICE_GUARANTEED-_Order_Viagra_Online
order viagra

Order Viagra in
Friday, February 15 at 07:20 AM

Buy viagra pills online
buy viagra online
http://fritterware.com/Other/THE_LOWEST_VIAGRA_PRICE_GUARANTEED-_Buy_Viagra_Online/
buy viagra online

Buy Viagra Online in
Friday, February 15 at 07:25 AM

Viagra pills online
viagra online
http://www.viagrausaonline.com/
viagra online

Viagra Online in
Friday, February 15 at 07:49 AM

Cheap viagra online
cheap viagra
http://www.leetdaily.com/story/3251/THE_LOWEST_VIAGRA_PRICE_GUARANTEED._Cheap_Viagra_Online
cheap viagra

Cheap Viagra in
Friday, February 15 at 07:59 AM

It seems that more often than not,when the thread story relates to WalMart banking,or any derivation thereof,these annoying ads occur.Is this the work of P.R.folks to turn bloggers off to that particular topic?

ddrb in
Friday, February 15 at 09:08 AM

This also occur when discussing union issues.

ddrb in
Friday, February 15 at 09:10 AM

The Question You Should Be Asking ddrb is...

Why is WalMart Watch so impotent (pun intended) when it comes to keeping this activity off of its website?

ScrewedbyWal-Mart in Anytown, America
Friday, February 15 at 09:43 AM

Cheap viagra online
cheap viagra
http://www.impact-fellowship.org/_cusudi/000001d7.htm
cheap viagra

Cheap Viagra in
Friday, February 15 at 12:13 PM

Screwedby: There is almost a Zenlike juxtaposition with the terms Impotence,Viagara and Screwedby ,all in the same post....

ddrb in
Friday, February 15 at 01:32 PM

Even though it hurts my feelings, I don’t think the Media Team or the Research Team or any of the individual posters ever read the comments.

Hello! SPAM Alert!

My two favorite Viagra jokes:

I got a Viagra stuck in my throat and had a stiff neck for a week!

They are coming out with liquid Viagra. Now you can pour yourself a stiff one.

Ken V in Texas
Friday, February 15 at 02:46 PM

Cheap cialis online
cialis
http://www.answerbag.com/profile/?id=292263
cialis

Cialis in
Friday, February 15 at 04:59 PM

Buy viagra online
buy viagra
http://www.answerbag.com/profile/?id=292174
buy viagra

Buy Viagra in
Friday, February 15 at 05:09 PM

This is an interesting story about SPP,NAFTA and Mexico:Mexican Campaign Against NAFTA
Some of the 300,000-plus protesters marched against the increasing price of corn, pesticides, and fertilizer. Some marched against the secretary of agriculture. Some marched to get a free lunch. There were marchers against genetically modified organisms (GMO). But at the other end of the march was a contingent of tractors, which had traversed the country to make a dramatic procession down the Avenida Reforma, that sported pro-GMO stickers sponsored by Monsanto.

Despite these various and sometimes divergent interests, the Mexican campaign against NAFTA is finding a focus. One of the best attended sessions of the recent Mexico Social Forum was on the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), a so-called “NAFTA-plus” closed-doors agreement stirring concern throughout Canada, the United States, and Mexico that the most undemocratic corporate domination is yet to come. The SPP needs to be on the radar of citizens of all three countries because it ties the issues together into a particularly sinister package. Security, natural resource control, militarization as a response to the drug war, the abandonment of small farmers, and links between NAFTA and immigration are all now brought together within the SPP—and within the social movements that oppose it.

So Far From God, So Close to the U.S.

But certain key issues unify the dissent. For instance, resentment runs high toward the United States and the role it plays in sensitive questions such as the privatization of Mexico’s PEMEX (Mexico’s National Petroleum Company). Halliburton"s signing of a $683-million dollar contract with PEMEX late in January has led to more speculation about the privatization of one of Mexico’s citizens most treasured resources. An unequal playing field on trade among the NAFTA countries and the transnational takeover of additional Mexican industries are not going to go unnoticed.

These inequities are particularly acute in the countryside. A U.S. farmer, for instance, would receive direct or indirect subsidies equivalent to $150 a hectare (2.5 acres). Cross the river to Mexico and the farmer would only get around $45. According to a report by Mexico’s Center for Studies on Public Finance, despite the World Trade Organization"s aim to reduce subsidies, the United States gave out more than $611.3 billion in subsidies between 2000 and 2005, while in the same years Mexico gave $46.3 billion and Canada $51.4 billion. Total U.S. subsidies in 2005 were nearly 20 times that of Mexico.

One small corn and beans farmer from the Southern state of Campeche at the march asked, “What is this “free trade?” Supposedly it’s for everyone, right? But ‘they’ control it and use it for whatever they want.” A Mexico City native observing the march said, “Free Trade Agreements don’t benefit producers, the people that really work. Obviously, the subsidies that the United States has on grains and agriculture can’t compare with the state of abandonment of the Mexican countryside. Clearly we are at a disadvantage.”

Sectors such as the sweetener industry have become so desperate, says Dennis Olson of the Institute on Agriculture and Trade Policy, that, “The mutual threat of lost markets and livelihoods has compelled Mexican and U.S. sugar farmers to work out an agreement that will give both sides a fighting chance to survive ... it could help us avoid another displacement of Mexican agricultural workers who will be forced to migrate north if we allow NAFTA to be implemented unencumbered.” Around three million jobs in Mexico are associated with the sugar industry.

(Continued)

ddrb in
Saturday, February 16 at 05:24 PM

(Continued) On to New Orleans

According to President Bush in his final State of the Union address, the next SPP summit will take place in New Orleans on April 21 and 22. If we care enough about the decisions being made on our behalf, we need to represent our peoples there—Canadian, American, Mexican, and all the cross-national variations. Our leaders continue to collude with the leaders of Wal-Mart, Lockheed Martin, Chevron, and Procter & Gamble (to name just a few) to create a smokescreen behind which they make overriding decisions without consulting us.

These hot subjects of immigration, subsidies, and corporate manipulation with disregard for the public are making people angry in all parts of North America. As divergent as the march was, at least Mexicans were motivated to hit the streets. If only the injustices of NAFTA made enough people angry enough to push their governments to do something.

This article was authored by Katie Kohlstedt.
Katie Kohlstedt is program associate at the Americas Policy Program(This is an article from Alternet,excerpted)

ddrb in
Saturday, February 16 at 05:31 PM

Discount viagra online
viagra
http://digg.com/world_news/THE_LOWEST_VIAGRA_PRICE_GUARANTEED_Fast_Shipping
viagra

Viagra in
Saturday, February 16 at 07:55 PM

Order viagra online
order viagra
http://www.ordermedscheap.com/
order viagra

Order Viagra in
Sunday, February 17 at 08:39 AM

With NAFTA being the subject of much discussion,this article from last year is simple and informative: “The Trouble With Our Trade Treaties”
By: William F. Jasper
June 25, 2007
During his 1993 White House signing ceremony of the three documents comprising the North American Free Trade Agreement, President Bill Clinton stated his belief that NAFTA would create 200,000 U.S. jobs in the first two years after going into effect and a million jobs in its first five years. Other NAFTA advocates made similar rosy forecasts about the jobs that would be created and the favorable trade balance we would accrue with Mexico.

The record of the past nearly 14 years has proven these optimistic predictions to have been spectacularly wrong. As economist Charles W. McMillion pointed out in March 2006, NAFTA champions had predicted the agreement “would lead to U.S. job growth by extending trade surpluses with Mexico totaling about $100 billion by 2005. Instead, the U.S. has accumulated current account deficits of almost $400 billion with Mexico since NAFTA.” The worst job losses, notes Dr. McMillion, “have come in highly productive, capital-intensive U.S. heavy industries like autos, electrical and non-electrical equipment as well as furniture, textiles and apparel.”

More than a million jobs, mostly in higher-wage manufacturing industries, were lost due to NAFTA, as companies moved plants and jobs to Mexico. A far larger number of jobs were lost internally, as illegal aliens from Mexico increasingly replaced American workers here in the United States. Again, this was exactly the opposite of what NAFTA proponents said would happen. NAFTA, they insisted, would produce prosperity in Mexico and thereby stop the economic attraction that was drawing waves of migrants to the United States. Now the NAFTA advocates admit that 12-20 million illegal aliens have flooded across our borders since NAFTA was passed.

Prof. Robert Pastor, a principal architect of NAFTA under President Clinton, acknowledged in a 2002 essay that “illegal migration has increased.... NAFTA has been encouraging illegal migration, not reducing it.” For the past few years, Pastor has been pushing the theme that now the key to making NAFTA work is to transfer a couple hundred billion dollars to Mexico for construction of roads and infrastructure. In his article entitled, “Become a resident of North America,” for the February 4, 2002 Emory Report from Emory University, Pastor declares that “illegal immigration will not be reduced until the income gap between Mexico and its northern neighbors is reduced.” He proposes to do this through a North American Development Fund — funded by U.S. taxpayers, of course. The Fund’s priority “would be to connect the border to central and southern Mexico. If roads were built, investors would come, immigration would decline and income disparities would narrow.”

Prof. Pastor’s plan is already underway, in the form of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) signed by President Bush and his Mexican and Canadian counterparts in 2005. The SPP is an ambitious effort for more extensive political and economic integration of the NAFTA partners, including dissolving the borders between Canada, Mexico, and the United States and merging the three countries’ immigration and border-enforcement arms. And Pastor’s road and infrastructure plan is already under construction as the controversial mammoth project dubbed by critics the “NAFTA Superhighway.”

Of course, closing the income gap between Mexico and the United States, as called for by Prof. Pastor, the World Bank, and the Council on Foreign Relations, can be accomplished by lowering the United States’ productivity and income, as well as by raising Mexico’s. That is precisely what has been happening. If Pastor’s proposed equalization is achieved, the United States will be transformed to look a lot more like Mexico, rather than the other way around.

Under Chapter 12 of NAFTA, increasing waves of skilled service professionals from Canada and Mexico may soon be coming to the United States as “temporary” workers who are covered by the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). When that happens, additional waves of legal migrants from Central America may not be far behind. In 2005, the Bush administration succeeded in ramming an expansion of NAFTA through Congress. Known as the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), it has added Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, El Salvador, and the Dominican Republic to the partnership. This addition is already sending more U.S. businesses and jobs to those countries.

NAFTA, CAFTA, and GATS are all revolutionary arrangements that fall under the authority of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the newest weapon in the United Nations’ arsenal for destroying national sovereignty and building world government under the rubric of “free trade.” F

ddrb in
Sunday, February 17 at 11:49 AM

Viagra pills online
viagra online
http://www.viagrausaonline.com/
viagra online

Viagra Online in
Sunday, February 17 at 01:38 PM

Discount viagra online
viagra
http://www.care2.com/news/member/258675552/638986
viagra

Viagra in
Monday, February 18 at 09:50 AM

Cheap cialis online
cialis
http://digg.com/world_news/THE_LOWEST_CIALIS_PRICE_GUARANTEED_Fast_Shipping
cialis

Cialis in
Monday, February 18 at 09:59 AM

Evidently there are still some in government who will not march in lock step with political status quo.Here is an excerpt from World Net Daily: “Resolution fights North American Union
Urges U.S. to withdraw from Security and Prosperity Partnership”

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Utah state Rep. Stephen Sandstrom
A state lawmaker in Utah has introduced a resolution encouraging the U.S. to withdraw from the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America and any other bilateral activity that would move the country toward an EU-style continental merger.

Republican state Rep. Stephen Sandstrom introduced House Resolution 1 to the Utah legislature this week after a similar measure passed the House last year by a 47-24 vote but was blocked by a Senate committee just before the session’s closing.

The resolution reads in part: “The gradual creation of such a North American Union from a merger of the United States, Mexico and Canada would be a direct threat to the United States Constitution and the national independence of the United States and would imply an eventual end to national borders within North America.”

(Story continues below)

In a speech given in Salt Lake City to the Utah Eagle Forum’s annual convention Jan. 19, Sandstrom compared the move toward a North American Union to the stealth methodology used by corporate elite to move Europe toward the European Union. The 50-year process began with the European Coal and Steel Agreement in 1957.

“While the newspaper articles and reporters published the sequential events of European integration, most people in the European Community nations thought, ‘Ho-hum ? no big deal,’” Sandstrom told the Eagle Forum meeting. “As a matter of fact, the Europeans continued to sleep like Gulliver until they were jolted awake when the euro replaced their national currencies.”

When the euro was introduced, Sandstrom explained, “fortunes were made and lost, savings were devalued, prices and commodities were suddenly revalued, borders essentially evaporated and individual countries could no longer control their own immigration laws.

“Even their national flags ? for which their ancestors had fought and died ? were slowly being replaced by the flag of the European community, with its twelve golden stars on a blue background,” he continued.

Sandstrom explained he introduced H.R. 1 a second time because he wants to stop the forward movement of the Security and Prosperity Partnership into a North American market, following the European model in which economic integration inevitably led to political integration.

As evidence, Sandstrom cited the free flow of labor invited to the U.S. by the failure to secure the border with Mexico, the push by the Bush administration to expand NAFTA and CAFTA by a series of individual free trade agreements seeking to push open markets country by country , first into Peru, followed by Columbia and Panama , and the bureaucratic trilateral working groups seeking under SPP to integrate and harmonize U.S. administrative laws with those in Mexico and Canada.

“We cannot and will not tolerate , not without a fight , the tearing down of 232 years of sovereign progress in which American has protected the etched-in-stone, under-God principles that were bequeathed to us by our founding fathers,” he concluded.

According to tabulation on StopTheNau.org, 13 states have now passed similar resolutions opposing the SPP and the movement toward a future North American Union.

Utah is among six states considering a resolution against the SPP.

As WND reported, Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., has introduced into the U.S. House of Representatives a resolution expressing congressional opposition to construction of a NAFTA super highway system or entry into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada.

Goode’s House Concurrent Resolution 40 currently has 43 bipartisan co-sponsors.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
World Net Daily,February,2008

ddrb in
Monday, February 18 at 02:00 PM

Buy viagra pills online
buy viagra online
http://www.primegrid.com/view_profile.php?userid=19062
buy viagra online

Buy Viagra Online in
Monday, February 18 at 07:04 PM

Cheap cialis online
cialis
http://www.care2.com/news/member/740604098/641623
cialis

Cialis in
Monday, February 18 at 07:43 PM

Discount viagra online
viagra
http://www.easyfastmed.com/
viagra

Viagra in
Monday, February 18 at 07:46 PM

Viagra pills online
viagra online
http://www.viagrausaonline.com/
viagra online

Viagra Online in
Monday, February 18 at 07:55 PM

Cheap viagra online
cheap viagra
http://www.business-planet.net/story/10424/
cheap viagra

Cheap Viagra in
Tuesday, February 19 at 11:18 PM

Viagra pills online
viagra online
http://www.viagrausaonline.com/
viagra online

Viagra Online in
Tuesday, February 19 at 11:21 PM

Viagra pills online
viagra online
http://www.relevantlogs.com/Games/THE_LOWEST_VIAGRA_PRICE_GUARANTEED-_Order_Viagra_Online/
viagra online

Viagra Online in
Wednesday, February 20 at 12:22 AM

Cheap cialis online
cialis
http://www.cheapestpricerx.com/
cialis

Cialis in
Wednesday, February 20 at 01:22 PM

Buy viagra online
buy viagra
http://www.care2.com/news/member/762810194/643627
buy viagra

Buy Viagra in
Wednesday, February 20 at 01:27 PM

Cheap viagra online
cheap viagra
http://www.care2.com/news/member/229319916/643662
cheap viagra

Cheap Viagra in
Wednesday, February 20 at 01:28 PM

Generic viagra online
generic viagra
http://www.binarylaw.com/story.php?id=928
generic viagra

Generic Viagra in
Wednesday, February 20 at 01:30 PM

Viagra pills online
viagra online
http://www.viagrausaonline.com/
viagra online

Viagra Online in
Wednesday, February 20 at 02:00 PM

vWDCPD vcpnqxrdvbvf, mnxyejxsnrhl, [link=http://vojkqgxeaqdt.com/]vojkqgxeaqdt[/link], http://relhaboavtaw.com/

zpcvsjx in rGGbyJVnlbu
Thursday, February 21 at 11:07 AM

Discount viagra online
viagra
http://www.viagrageneric.org/
viagra

Viagra in
Thursday, February 21 at 11:10 AM

GOKIwr idryqhjpcbvj, mfbexgsjrcut, [link=http://naksxwbojyow.com/]naksxwbojyow[/link], http://mgbdeeugrxcj.com/

gqbvzxqrqlb in JEnAjVdzKSUcMu
Thursday, February 21 at 12:43 PM

qx48ublph <a > qa5ccgsatwf3k6nj </a> 5482frgehhhm 4o9rjm8uav