Oralmans or compatriots? A new raise of old question…


A new rise of the old queston?

Over the last time in light of different facets of interethnical and own Kazakh (intraethnical) issues, the question about Oralman repatriates status was raised differently. Lyazzat Kemelbayeva’s paragraph “Oralman emes, otandassim bauyrim!” said about use of definition “compatriot” (otandastar is the plural number) upon Oralmans http://abai.kz/content/l-zzat-kemelbaeva-Oralman-emes-otandassy-bauyrym/. It seemed crystal clear: Oralman term concretizes the international concept of “repatriant” and signifies re-emigration of descendants of once gone Kazakh from the republic. The article of Aydos Sarym which was issued earlier by address http://www.contur.kz/node/460.../, is also touches on the theme. The question of Oralmans has temporary added to long-term theme of actual use of Kazakh language, timely resurrected themes about written of Kazak surnames with –ov and –ev word ending.

2009 08 12 oralamansThe intensions of the authors of these and such publications are clear. They are led by aspiration to increase the population of the republic of Kazakhstan by means of Kazakh immigration, which will allow, as they imagine, if not close than to constrict possibilities of economical expansion by foreign companies from the East. It supposed to increase of proportion of pure Kazakh population in demographic structure of the country. The arrival of foreign Kazakhs from Mongolia and China to habitual residence will also allow enforcing purely Kazakh values.

Indeed, approximately 700 thousands of Kazakhs living in Russian Federation, 900 thousands of Kazakhs are residents of Uzbekistan. By various data, 1.5 to 1.7 million of Kazakhs living in PRC, and roughly 100 thousands in Mongolia. The main demographic flow is theoretically possible from these neighbor countries of Kazakhstan.

However, all the intensions of these authors appearing to be full of contradictions. Their revelation is the object of this article. It’s no doubt, that the events in Urumchi on 5 of July 2009 and the situation with teaching Kazakh and keeping of the culture in China influenced the raise of Oralman question. The willingness to help brother Kazakhs is understandable too. But is this the only and best way to accelerate repatriation of foreign Kazakhs?

It making impression, that domestic logic to help Kazakh is opposed to official logic. Intra-Kazakh relations are expressing by Kazakh language in particular situations, by words of kinship (bauirlar — brothers). Which is, however, is not opposing, but requires the detailed estimation of pro et contra, coming up from the interests of both citizens of Kazakhstan and Oralmans. Don’t forget that all of the authors of noted publications are united by the idea, that Kazakhstan is national state of the Kazakhs. For the sake of completeness of Oralman big picture the position of these authors is enough. For this reason, we wouldn’t argue about question of another, Constitutional formulation – the national identity of Kazakhstani people.

Interests of both sides: host country and arriving party

There are realias, which must be taking into account. Repatriation as a rule involves adaptation issues. Even for French emigrants from Alger there were adaptation problems: not the language ones, however, which are very relevant for Oralmans from China and, in a less degree, Mongolia. If there is an intension to lighten adaptation process, it is necessary to pick up numerous procedure questions of arrangement. As for mastering of language, including difference between dialects of Kazakhstani and Chinese Kazakhs; professional growth is the personal matter of Oralman in many things. For example, courses on learning Cyrillic can be provided to their services. But nobody would learn instead of them.

Interest of the host party is not composed only from increase of population and land invasion. For any country, even with established national identity, it is necessary to keep former identity in one piece. Almost every fourth Kazakh is living outside Kazakhstan. The example of country with intelligible policy of repatriation is well known – it is Germany. And it too didn’t avoid the inevitable issues of adaptation of incomparable less number of ethnical Germans from Eastern Europe and former USSR. So the catchwords in address of repatriates, such as “Chinese” and “Mongol”, is familiar to host countries. But there is no offensive context in word “Russian” in address of Kazakhs from Russia, since there are no particular differences in values and behavior. Also, there is no big difference between Kazakh from near-border regions of Uzbekistan and Kazakh from Southern Kazakhstan area. We are united by common history as part of Russian Empire and USSR. Social and economical issues are more interesting for Oralman from Russia and Uzbekistan in much more greater degree; the immigrant from Mongolia, in case of good skill of Russian, the language problem is dropped too.

Lack of Russian knowledge is not the only problem of Chinese immigrant; Kazakhs in China used Ahmed Baytursinov’s variant of Arabic script since 1980. For two decades, the Roman type was used daily.

Thus, the interest of host country is not particularly being analyzed by advocates of forced migration. Can the country really acquire more than quoted? It is known about lack of supporting financial amounts. Chopped trees in forest plantations – a long decade’s monument for economical troubles of the 90’s and difficulties of Oralmans arrival in these years and later. People were forced to violate the acting law to support them with firewood on winter. Personal choice energizing Oralmans to immigrate without State support.

Host country must provide equal rights with the rest of the citizens. But some yesterdays repatriates’’ aspiration to knock out advantages is making a bad look on them. From the other side, interest of Kazakhstan is composed in attraction of high-qualified specialists. Whether there is many such Oralmans? I know one scientist migrant from Mongolia. Kazakh Moskovites, like Amanzolova, Bekmakhanova and others, are not seemed to show the passion to come back. The only drift of Kazakh specialists was in the early 90’s from Russia. Vice versa, for the last ten years high-qualified Kazakh specialists emigrated abroad. Why are accelerators of return not paying attention to this fact? Don’t see or don’t want to see this development of new Kazakh expat community since the end of 90’s.

The arriving side is actively using its connections with former home countries. This is remarkable, that the same Chinese Kazakhs are extensively using their Chinese skill as translators and assistants of Chinese businessmen. Thus, the former homeland keeps them. Rumors about agents of influence have no mere chance. Of course, it is too strong a word, but keeping the doors wide open means forgetting about interests of Kazakhstan and its permanent citizens. It is known that, when coming to study, some young Chinese Kazakhs doesn’t appearing in the corridors of universities, being captured by trade operations as the Han junior partners. Some Kazakh immigrants from Turkmen are engaged in more noble business – carpet weaving, import and sale of these makes.

It is their interest as the arrival side. Interests of host country and arrival side are not always coinciding. As it follows, there are Oralmans and Oralmans. To ignore the features of their interests means propose state decisions, being held by non-state domestic logics.

What’s it all about? Who is compatriot?

Kazakh language expressing aspects of Homeland idea by words such as “atameken”, “atazurt”, “otan”. Otan means fatherland, the country in whole. Atameken and atazurt can be reckoned among Land of Fathers, Land of Achestors, and for lesser and larger Homeland. One of Kazakh language TV programs was showed, that for Kazakhs, who is living in Xinjiang, their lands turns out to be Fatherland. However, for some of them China was their motherland. So the question of identification of foreign Kazakhs cannot be ignored. There is an information, that for considerable number of Russian Kazakhs, Russia is perceived as Homeland. It’s simply worth to listen, what is said between foreign Kazakhs, inappropriate to the ears of Kazakhstani Kazakh.

Double meanings in conversation are resulting the false impression of what is the common conception. In the reality both sides are continue to promote its own interest, not considering unconsidered interest of the other side (arriving and host).

The desire to equate Oralmans with compatriots remind of Russian double meaning of “compatriot” idea. Russian legislation is recognizing all the citizens of Russia as compatriots, alongside spreading this idea on emigrants and their descendants non-juridical. Actually those who unwished to follow Russia took Russian idea; and added something by themselves. Formally Russian legislation is not paying attention on immigrants’ origin.

And if today’s Oralman has trade and other interests in his relations to former homeland, why not to think: does he fit in our compatriot idea, because he cares and economically interested in business of other homeland? Antecedent can’t be cancelled by fact of immigration to ethnical homeland. Our “accelerators” of repatriation seems to be unaware: if Oralmans are the compatriots of Kazakhstani Kazakhs, so who are the Kazakhstani citizens of non-Kazakh ethnicity? Citizenship appears to be by itself, and nationality – by itself.

Who is right – a Kazakh from Bostandyk district of Uzbekistan, stating he lives on ethnical homeland, i.e. lands, which were settled by Kazakhs long since, or our publicist, coming up from the point, that only Kazakhstan can be ethnical homeland of all Kazakhs. Words of Chinese Kazakh, perceiving Ile-Kazakh autonomous region of Xinjiang as the ethnical homeland, were already brought. It is unnecessary to decide after them, where their homeland is.

The question about ethnical area

Our talk is going about foreign Kazakhs at all, but it also means the repatriation from two or three countries – Mongolia, China and Uzbekistan in the first stance, for obvious reasons. Emigration potential of Kazakhs from Russia is insignificant (no intention). It is known, that 20 to 30 of Turkish Kazakhs had chilled out quickly, as they saw out slow, irresponsible and greedy bureaucracy, the difficultness of opening business, level of life and etc. Kazakhs from Turkey, by the way, chose Western Europe as the further immigration point. Chinese Kazakhs have their personal strategies, dependant of their social status, successfulness in China, age etc. Territory of Kazakhstan is not the only ethnical area of Kazakhs. Defenders of accelerated resettlement are unaware (Or forgot? Don’t want to know?) of many features of historic development of Kazakh land. It is partially understood. Firstly, an unwritten romantic page (and more likely, a tale of a movie) about this past. Why is it can’t be a demesne for poets, writers and movie directors? By now, only particular historians are advanced in this sphere. Klara Khafizova, for example, has overviewed periods of Kazakhs relations with Qin China in one of her studies, and, in these context, Kazakhs’ development of lands, which before stayed unsettled after genocide of Dzungars by Qin army in the late 1750’s Secondly, a territory of ethnical settlement is not always equal to territory of national state (Hungary, Denmark, not to speak of African and Asian countries).

Actually, ethnical areal of Kazakhs is much larger than the territory of Republic of Kazakhstan; and it reflects inconsistency of our past history. There are two part in this question: 1) continuous changes of KazASSR and KazSSR, and originated from this incongruity of the territory of Kazakhs ethnical settlement and territory of nationhood within USSR; 2) appearance of the lands, where Kazakhs were densely settled, outside the borders of Russian Empire and USSR.

1. Everyone, who carefully learned History of Kazakh SSR course, caught rare reminders about territorial changes of KazSSR after 1925. Areas close to Orenburg were passed to direct control of RSFSR after national-state dissociation of Central Asia in 1924—1925. Remaining narrow line of contact between KazSSR and Bashkir ASSR were liquidated in 1930’s, with establishment of Orenburg district, and then the “Orenburg corridor” appeared between Kazakhstan and Bashkiria. In 1932 Kara-Kalpak republic was singled out from KazASSR, which since 1936 is the par of Uzbekistan. In between the second half of 1950’s and beginning of 1960’s, so-called Empty Steppe (region South from later Chardarinsky water reserve) and part of the land in Kzilkum desert, and also the lands along Pskem river were given to UzSSR (Pskem trunk or corridor was appeared between Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan). Exactly then, along with Empty steppe, Bostandyk region was passed to UzSSR structure. There are also science researches about less scale cessions and exchanges of lands between republics.

Examples of cessions of major land mass mentioned above are enough to understand, that local Kazakhs weren’t resettled from historic homeland. Instead, the borders of KazSSR were changed. The ethnical area stayed the same, and there is no point to decline historic memory. Draft of the Kazakhs from lands passed to UzSSR or RSFSR to move on historic homeland means not considering the lands of Kazakh settlement as their ethnical territory. A contradiction, based on which the adepts of mass resettlement are hushing up.

Kazakhs of Uzbekistan in mass are living densely on the territories of former KazASSR and KazSSR. So they were compatriots initially, but they never resettled, and Kazakh Soviet Republic has pulled out from them.

It is also partially correct for the number of Russian regions, where Kazakhs used to live and living now until 1920’s. In 1930’s land cession were non-discussed action, and in the following years there were cases of land exchange between the republics. It was different in the first half of 1920’s.

It is obscure, that in 1924 part of Kazakh responsible officers on September’s plenum of Kyrgyz regional party committee were demanded to make dissociation within KASSR. Is was proposed to single out number of region from Kyrgyz ASSR, which were settled mainly by Russians. They were privately followed “ethnical power in exchange to territory” principle. The followers of this approach were certain leaders, connected with Alash-Orda party in the past and keeped relations with its former leaders. In 1925 there was initiative to associate Tashkent with KazASSR, which was unsuccessful. Single out of Orenburg from autonomous republic was considered without any discussions.

2. Appearance of the lands, densely settled by Kazakhs, behind the borders of Russian Empire and USSR is also demonstrative to features of Kazakh land expansion in 18 and 19 centuries. This expansion was happened under the wing of Russian and Qin empires. In 1760—1780 years after genocide of Dzungars by Qin, Kazakhs started resettlement to empty pastries. In time, Chinese government has allowed them to travel there, putting loyalty as necessary condition. For two or three centuries there were populations grew up, for which those lands of PRC and Mongolia are the true homeland. The question about migrants in 1930’s is somewhat different. But their descendants are too live in Xinjiang in second to fourth generation.

The topic of emigration of the part of Kazakhs from Russian Empire in 1916 and from USSR in the period of collectivization is standing along. There is a stereotype in common sense, that resettlement of Kazakhs above the borders of Kazakhstan is connected with those necessary migrations. In reality this resettlement of Kazakhs on empty areas (expansion of ethnical homeland areas) outside the borders of Russian Empire has preceded these necessary migrations and passed in the same time with expansion of ethnic areas of Kazakhs within the territory of modern Kazakhstan. For the history enthusiasts: Kazakhs’ development of lands of present Kazakh Autonomous regions in Xinjiang and Bayan-Ulgi aymak in Mongolia had happened in the same time with pastries development between Ural and Volga rivers development and beginning of pass of Kazakhs to Irtysh river area. In 1801 Pavel the First allowed Kazakhs to settle on almost desolated, after Kalmyks ‘exit, steppes between Ural and Volga rivers in the beginning of 1770’s. The history, however, also knew prohibitions on nomadic society’s movement.

We would not forget the wave of remigration. The last was in 1962 from China to Soviet Union. The reasons of all these migrations were political. Establishment of independent Kazakhstan is the condition to termination of political reasons of migration outside Kazakhstan. But why the problem of decrease of ethnic area of Kazakh nation has been arising? Repatriation I the personal choice and must be supported and controlled by the state. Who is arguing against it?

It is worth to understand, that after massive migration of Kazakhs their former territories would be perceived by PRC government as the lands, which became native Chinese. We’ll pay attention to the fact, that cartography expansion from the side of PRC is not stopping, and lands until Balkhash and far are considered as comprise to tributaries of the Heavenly Empire.

Ethnical area and territory of national state: we aren’t unique in its inconsistency.

Question about ethnic area as the one inconsistent with nation-state territory is optimal rise of question in relations with Kazakh, who are living on their ethnical area, but in other countries. The most demonstrative example is Hungary in its relations with Hungarians of Roman Transylvania and Voevodina autonomous region in Serbia. These lost territories were appeared after year 1918, as the result of Austro-Hungarian Empire failure and so-called Hungarian kingdom as part of it. The most sharp issues of yesteryears is the status of Hungarians in socialistic Romania in times of Nikolay Ceausescu dictatorship. By the by, Hungarian autonomous uezd was liquidated in this time (uezd means region)

Hungary and Romania were cooperated in Warsaw Pact Organization and in Council for Mutual Economic Assistance, but alongside Hungary by its possibilities were stood for the rights of ethnic Hungarians. The government of Hungary didn’t want to lose foreign ethnic areas of Hungarians. Hungary didn’t carried this matter to direct confrontation. By the way, the Hungarian question was the start of Ceausescu’s failure.

Wrong understanding of the word “Diaspora” leads to wrong conclusions. Kazakh from Moskow belong to Diaspora, but Kazakh of Kuvandyk district of Orenburg region is living on Kazakh ethnical area, i.e. being living outside nation-state, he lives in irredentist.

Historical fate of Kazakh nation was various. Word “Diaspora” in whole can be applied to Kazakhs from Turkey or Iran in full measure, but not to Kazakhs of Uzbekistan or PRC. Kazakhs of these countries for the most part are densely live on lands, which are part of ethnical area of Kazakhs. In truth, these lands due to historical consequences appeared to be outside the Republic of Kazakhstan. Alongside, Kazakhstan and its neighbor countries have no territorial claims.

As the sovereign state, Kazakhstan can say its word to keep good relations of foreign Kazakhs with their countries of residence and to support protection of their culture and language. There’s no doubt, that initiative of some of Kazakh intelligentsia in Mongolia in the beginning of 1990’s about Kazakh autonomy establishment had not made Mongols happy. But Kazakhstan has no interest in autonomization of both our Fatherland and Mongolia. It’s time to take in considerations, that interests rule the world. And these interests must be formed not to be a piece in alien hands.

There is no doubt that accelerators are guided by good intensions; as the followers of the “power in exchange of territory” in 1924 didn’t knew that they rising the question about loss of some republic’s lands. So why, instead of dispelling a myth, we would help the clearing of the lands, settled by Kazakhs, for other countries ethos’s?

Quid Prodest? A third side

So, will we become elders from “Abay” novel, that not recognized the craft of Kunanbay. Kunanbay, under color of punishment for insecticide, took the pastery. How many word about neighbor countries are sounding in the press! But in this case, based on Chinese logics, then by personal initiative (for nothing?) the “Barbarians” are clearing and facilitating the way of Chinese policy. And it is more profitable for Heavenly, then ancient tactics to “hold Barbarians against Barbarians”.

The ancestors had more wisdom then their descendants. Ancestors were expanded the area of the Homeland, even being under observance of the Empire. And some of their descendants are even unaware of what decrease of ethnical area can result.

The fallacy of figures

“Accelerators” has good intensions to increase number of inhabitants and Kazakh population percentage in the republic. The target is clear – to bring pure Kazakh population up to 80%. 80% figure is tricky. It is only a useful rate of monoethnical state. From the point of practice everything is looking more down to earth. There are 94% of Chinese population is Kan, and only 1.25% of this nation, Uygur and Tibets, are making problems. In neighbor Russia, with 80% of pure Russian population, Chechen hitmen made a pain in the ass to Eltsin-Putin-Medvedev order.

Sometime ago, in the beginning of 1980’s, there were rumors in intelligentsia about the moment, when Kazakhs along with Turkic ethnoses of the republic, will amount up to 50% of population. But from the late 1980’s it became obvious, that “Turkicness" doesn’t mean common interests in the republic. In 1997, the specific quantity of Kazakhs reached and over 50% mark. But whether the issues of national identity of the republic’s population had lowered up? No. And unlikely they can be solved even with 99% of Kazakh population, if only reappraisal of values happen. The reason is non-extinction and intraethnic dispersion, coming up from the past: the importance of regional belonging, origin and the rest inside Kazakhs is growing up more and more. The difference of understanding of Islam among Muslims is also appearing, and it is in conditions of religious inactivity of popular majority. So the main thing is population as much as ability to consolidate. In such matter, the “accelerators” are praying to divine providence and persisting in their chase to statistics. But facts are a balky thing. Differentiations between abovementioned identities are preventing and will prevent the followers of Kazakh political nation idea to implement their dreams.

Short-sighted are persistent in their unknowing

The “accelerators” of repatriation are starting from thoughts of a common man with understandable thought about a Kazakh from different country, but finishing its thought not by measuring “aye and nay”, but proposing to make naked opinion the basis for the main policy.

Some are going further in their desire of mass migration of Oralmans. Flying up from real worlds’ cares to settle migrants and issues of their adaptation, Aydos Sarym wished to high up the initial possibilities for Oralmans: “nowadays the question of Kazakh Diaspora repatriation is transferring from social-cultural-demographical angle to political… for the sake of Kazakhs resettlement on historical homeland, it is not enough only to finance it from budget and set limits. There are measures of political, legal, image kind required. It is necessary to change the Main Law and to lower censure of sedentism, which was established, following only from the reasons to keep acting regime. Political parties must include Oralmans to party lists, again proving their nationwide status. It is already necessary to assign not only Bolashak scholars, but Oralmans too, to the chairs of vice-ministers and vice-mayors. Possible, that the question of electing representatives of these category of citizens to the Senate deputies posts. It is funny, when small Diaspora has its representative as the deputy of Parliament, and almost million category of citizens has no. Can it be that Assembly of the Nations of Kazakhstan should take the initiative in its hand? And the question here is not only in taking somebody’s’ places, but in such assignments will be a good example. They can be a new social lift for Oralmans. And in whole it can serve as good motivation to remigration of Kazakh Diaspora to the Homeland.”

Then the author making a contradiction, like he forgot about comparison of Oralmans with ethnical group: “And the last thing. Let us not forget, that the Kazakhs are united nation. Nothing must split us. Kazakhs must not be split on original and came down”. But he already split them by proposing so-called positive discrimination on the question of representation in state Power! Again one Kazakh is ahead of the whole planet, because nobody in Germany, France, and Greece ever guess to take such measures concerning their own repatriates.

There is even the Kazakh minister, who came in the childhood from PRC in Soviet times. Best of Soviet period repatriates are managed to realize themselves, despite all barriers such as ban to join communist party. Writer Kabdesh Zumadilov serves as the example. For what achievements, qualities and merits the privilege in career growth of Oralmans provided?

The other business is that there are barriers of non-legal type. But this also preventing fully paid-up aboriginal Kazakhs and Russians, and non-Kazakhs and non-Russians on the territory of former KazSSR. The example of Israelis is helpful for Kazakhstan, because they can handle ethnical factor for good of Israel and its people. So why we are using the same factor to loss lands, obtained by our ancestors?

The example of Hun chieftain, who agreed to gave his hetaera, steed, but not the land, and ordered to cut off elders’ testicles, who agreed to vail the land. However, the tongue has no bones in it. Sometime ago in the Middle Ages, Ulems had found the religious excuse to Sicily loss of Arabs. Excuse was founded in precedent of Mohammed’s escape from Mecca to Medina. The faulty analogy was used.

Arabs of Spain preferred to fight more against each other, than against Spanish kings. Sure the identity, unity and other things are immaterial asset, but offence on neighbor Muslim prince is eating the heart. But emotions never were good advisors.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. There‘s no need to transpose the words, offering Oralmans as the compatriots. It is necessary and enough to be based on interests and taking the experience, historical facts to see the real completeness of the question, solve present and prevent future problems.


  1. Anonymous

    дали маху с этими «соотечественниками»...

  2. Торчок

    Пусть курят бамбук товарисчи.

    Один кент казах полтора часа ругал мне оралманов, мол, их предки в свое время навалиили с Казахии, а евошние остались и хлебнули по полной. А сейчас он не собирается встречать их с расркытыми объятиями.

  3. Торчок

    Зачем дергать казахов из росси например? Это же глупость...

  4. M

    The status of Oralmans has been an important issue in recent years, which is due to substantial improvement in nearly ALL spheres in Kazakhstan; local people tend to feel rather bittersome (resentful) as they (or many of them) believe it is sort of unfair that Oralmans had been waiting for so long before the living situation improved domestically. It is part of the human nature, and i believe we need to strengthen our position to adapt more and oralmans each year. They are all part of our nation.

  5. Лепсы

    Торчок, респект твоему кенту. Пральна базар держит: ))))

  6. Anonymous


  7. Hello,мооаоквеуі

    clomid ovulate

    For your kind information, multiple births often welcome additional risks for both the mother and the fetuses.

    clomid fertility drug

    It?s always a better decision for you to follow the instructions from the doctor who treats you.

    grandavenuemcalester.org — clomid no prescription

    Generally, you?re prescribed to take every dose with a glass full of water.

  8. Hello, tuotprffcdddni

    cheap alprazolam

    filipinocommunityseattle.org — meridia drug

    Meridia reduces excess body fat

    Best price Meridia! Order Meridia (Reductil) at reputable online pharmacy and save big!

    Meridia is a trade name for sibutramine.

    meridia medication

    Dizziness, difficulty in concentrating, may occur as a side effect of Meridia.

    generic meridia

    For cases that the 10 mg prescription is not enough, the dosage may be increased to 15 mg after 4 weeks.

  9. Erectile dysfunction, generic viagra, 6292, [URL=http://www.viagrausageneric.com/]generic viagra[/URL], () 8b, www.viagrausageneric.com Viagra, okzcu.

  10. Erectile dysfunction, generic viagra, 966182, [URL=http://www.viagrausageneric.com/]generic viagra[/URL], o (), www.viagrausageneric.com Viagra, ewxkfa.

  11. Erectile dysfunction, viagra, 32713, [URL=http://confluence.public.thoughtworks.org/users/viewuserprofile.action?username=viagra-cheap]viagra[/URL], )(8 (, confluence.public.thought...ame=viagra-cheap Viagra, kcnyv.

  12. Sildenafil citrate, viagra, 6470, [URL=http://www.viagrausadiscount.com/]viagra[/URL], odd, www.viagrausadiscount.com Viagra, atjw.

  13. Erectile dysfunction, generic viagra, 595478, [URL=http://www.viagrausageneric.com/]generic viagra[/URL], (:b:, www.viagrausageneric.com Viagra, wtdy.

  14. Erectile dysfunction, cialis, 4312, [URL=http://os.xebia.com/confluence/users/viewuserprofile.action?username=cialis]cialis[/URL], (((;, os.xebia.com/confluence/u...?username=cialis Cialis, tiepuq.

  15. Erectile dysfunction, buy viagra, 073092, [URL=http://www.buyviagraus.com/]buy viagra[/URL], (db8, www.buyviagraus.com Viagra, kbuk.

  16. Sildenafil citrate, cheap viagra, 81693, [URL=http://www.viagrauscheap.com/]cheap viagra[/URL], (;, www.viagrauscheap.com Viagra, sfsnw.

  17. Tadalafil online, cialis, 294719, [URL=http://www.viagrausadiscount.com/cialis.html]cialis[/URL], ;d (, www.viagrausadiscount.com/cialis.html Cialis, pvgijm.