William Saletan has the wool pulled over his eyes by the Bush administration:
Fatal in Difference - Bush's catastrophic allergy to Clinton. By William Saletan: [The administration claims] "The very first major policy directive of this administration was to develop a comprehensive strategy to eliminate al-Qaida—not roll it back, as some had previously called for, but to eliminate al-Qaida. … [Clarke] was talking about rolling back al-Qaida. We were focused on eliminating al-Qaida. … We didn't feel it was sufficient to simply roll back al-Qaida. We pursued a policy to eliminate al-Qaida."... Notice what these... statements dismiss: Law enforcement. Pinpricks. Rolling it back. Swatting flies. That was why Clarke couldn't get a hearing. His ideas were too partial, too ad hoc, too Clintonesque. Bush wanted a bigger approach: Comprehensive. Strategy. Eliminate. Different. His "comprehensive strategy" was delivered on Sept. 4, 2001. Is the White House embarrassed that it spent those six months studying the "many complex issues involved in the development of the comprehensive strategy" instead of swatting the "flies" that would kill 3,000 Americans a week later? No. It's proud.
But William Saletan clearly doesn't know two things:
Saletan's piece is strongly critical of the Bush administration. But in swallowing the Bush hook that the administration was on the attack against Al Qaeda as of September 4, 2001, Saletan does his readers a grave disservice.
Posted by DeLong at March 24, 2004 09:52 AM | TrackBack | | Other weblogs commenting on this postOne step at a time Dr. DeLong. So many of us have been so angry at the clear corrosion of basic ethical values in politics, and the extreme distorations of fact put forward by the current executive branch - and then taken up in the press - that we forget how far most people have to go.
It is, still, the economy. As the hope for a rebound has been dashed, and the return of inflation indicates that we are at the end, not the beginning, of an expansion - the pressure on Americans will force them to conclude that they were lied to, some how. It is only against this back drop that questioning those at the helm becomes possible. Those of us who live in the realm of numbers and ideas are often wrong, or at least often worried about events that will not come to pass. Most Americans, Saleton definitely included, live in a world of images and pragmatics. They check their bank book, and their television, and when the two roughly line up, they go back to whatever they were doing.
Remember how long it took you to go from "the status quo basically works" to "impeach them, now". Realize that other people, without the benefit of your insight and ability to analyze data are now having to make that same journey. In no small part, they are going to find along the way the words that you and others have used to frame the debate, and to show how the system has been corrupted by those who have used the basic sense of trusting leadership for ill chosen ends.
When they sit down and write the history of this time period, your page - and some few others - will be listed as the "reasons" for the discontent - because people will, piece by piece, discover that the answers to the questions they are just now asking have already, not merely been found, but cast in lucid prose.
Now, more than ever before, the country needs the voices of those who can explain the truth in clear terms. But it will take them time - infuriating maddening time. Time when people who understand what is going on watch a billion dollars a day flow out as debt, and watch problems which should be easy to solve become more difficult. Time when people bleed and die in Iraq.
But the public will not be hurried, because the fate of a President, and of an entire order that he represents, hangs in the balance. They will not be, and cannot be rushed in this.
Posted by: Stirling Newberry on March 24, 2004 10:09 AMBob Kerrey in the public hearing this morning confirmed that the 9/4/2001 plan was not that comprehensive - at least in his view. Kerrey noted the commission learned of the details of the plan in a classified meeting so he could not give out the details but he certainly summarized it as woefully inadequate. Kerrey used his tirade to argue (once again) that Dr. Rice appear before the commission in public testimony - especially since she is touting publically the virtues of this 9/4/2001 plan.
Posted by: Harold McClure on March 24, 2004 10:14 AMDr. DeLong,
Of course -- Bush was leading the charge against terra! Only his wimpy staff held him back.
Even though all their pronouncements of top 100 priorities didn't include terra, I'm sure it was at 101! Even though the budget for these things kept getting cut / denied. All part of the Master Plan -- no need for money -- Bush would single-handedly destroy all bad guys!
Posted by: MattB on March 24, 2004 10:21 AMMarch 23, 2004, 2:33 p.m.
Clarke’s Problems
He can’t have it all ways.
William F. Buckley
It's hard to keep in coherent order the various complaints Mr. Richard Clarke, former anti-terrorism adviser, has been trying to make in the lavishly arranged welcome of his book. He got not one but (almost) two segments on 60 Minutes, the second affecting to give both sides of the question whether Mr. Bush was hypocritical and derelict in making policy both before and after September 11, but serving, rather, to fortify the case against Bush because the defense was ill-prepared.
What Clarke is contending is that the heated desire of the administration to get on with a war against Iraq caused it to be indifferent to the case against al-Qaeda. This accusation is mysterious because it leans on the assumption that only al-Qaeda was guilty of terrorism, while Iraq was not: therefore, that an Iraqi-bent strategy brought on disproportionate diplomatic and military activity.
Clarke's case rests in part on the failure of the United States to mobilize against terror before September 11, resulting in the shock and surprise with which we saw the Twin Towers come down. He cited, on 60 Minutes, the relatively alert Clinton administration, which had reacted to the earlier bombing of a Twin Tower. Clarke spoke specifically of a terrorist bound across the Canadian border bent on sabotage in the Los Angeles airport; the terrorist was detected as suspicious and carted away. The suggestion is that, in 2001, the national alert system was not properly pitched, and that the malefactors of September 11 might, otherwise, have been frustrated.
Everybody should be willing to acknowledge that we didn't act appropriately on several leads left underdeveloped in 2000 and 2001. There were terrorists who were in the United States, taking flying lessons. And there was the terrorist in Arizona, spotted as suspicious but not pursued for reasons largely bureaucratic.
A dilemma is posed here. Critics of Bush rail against the Patriot Act and the Guantanamo detentions and Homeland Security as impinging on First Amendment freedoms. Meanwhile, other critics are saying that Mr. Bush has not done enough. The two camps have in common only their disapproval of George W. Bush.
It isn't easy to know exactly what the government might have done if the alert-level had been set higher than it was on September 11. There is a certain innocence in the United States, not unbecoming, about foreign aggression within our boundaries. As one analyst pointed out, the last time we were attacked on our own soil, before 9/11, was when the British burned down the White House in 1812. As a schoolboy during World War II, I spent many midnight hours staring at the sky looking out for Nazi bombers, which never materialized. But now we certainly need to be skeptical about young Arab males who want to come here to learn how to fly. If the objective of Mr. Clarke is to punish Mr. Bush for not being sensitive enough to security matters, let him get it said, but bearing also in mind that Bill Clinton, the predecessor, did not himself act very energetically on homeland security, bequeathing his own arrangements to George W. Bush when, in 2001, Bush came into office.
A second preoccupation of Clarke seems to be the focus we placed on Iraq, instead of al-Qaeda. But we went promptly to war, and successfully, against al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, the terrorists' principal provisioner. The argument that, in the spring of 2003, we did not find weapons of mass destruction sitting there for us outside Baghdad has nothing to do with whether the strike against Saddam's Iraq, as hornet's nest of terrorism, was strategically justified. We know — the world knows — that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and had used them, in Iran and against the Kurds. The International Institute of Strategic Studies determined on 2002 that Iraq could have nuclear weapons within months if it obtained fissile material from abroad.
The British historian-journalist William Shawcross has a valuable narrative of the hectic events of 2003 in his book Allies: The U.S., Britain, and Europe, and the War in Iraq. He has a keen eye for anomalies. M. Chirac had called Saddam "a personal friend and a great statesman.” Chirac is lucky never to have been a dissident general in Iraq. Bernard Kerik, former chief of the New York City Police Department, commissioned to organize a police department in Iraq, examined Iraqi police records and saw videos recording Saddam's tortures. These are said to have included "a tape of Saddam himself 'sitting and watching one of his military generals being eaten alive by Dobermans because the general's loyalty was in question.'”
Why does Clarke insist that our enterprise in Iraq suggests indifference to the greater threat of al-Qaeda? We have had to guard against them both, and in certain matters, al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein were indistinguishable. The Saddam-Iraq we have pursued under George W. with a large army is the same Saddam-Iraq we pursued twelve years earlier under George H. W., with an even larger army.
Thanks to whoever posted that Buckley column. I didn't realize he was still spouting such drivel. I has been under the mistaken impression that he is an intelligent fellow.
Just one phrase should make the point: "in certain matters, al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein were indistinguishable." Yeah, I guess they were all camel-jockeys.
And of course uses the right's favorite ploy - the fictional straw man on the left. Tell me: who are these people who "rail aganst ... Homeland Security." Names and dates please.
Ahmmm, the papers were written ex nihilo.
Posted by: William F. Buckley on March 24, 2004 11:10 AM"And of course uses the right's favorite ploy - the fictional straw man on the left. Tell me: who are these people who "rail aganst ... Homeland Security." Names and dates please.
Posted by wvmcl"
This is the left's favorite high school debate team trick. When you don't like the truth you just demand "Names and dates please."
Why are economics and politics the only "sciences" that never got beyond high school debate level?
Adrian who did graduate from high school
Posted by: Adrian Spidle on March 24, 2004 11:12 AMI think Saletan's point was that the Bush people were so fanatically ABC (Anything But Clinton) that whatever Clinton did or would have done would be done some different way.
Result: economy.
Result: environment.
Result: civil rights.
Result: Israel/Palestine.
Result: North Korea.
Result: 9/11.
Even when they have to do something the way Clinton would have, they try to spin it in such a way that it appears to be their idea in the first place, or at least the good part where they fixed it after Clinton broke it. It really is pathetic.
Posted by: Alan on March 24, 2004 11:15 AMthe only thing worse than an underinformed troll is an underinformed troll who thinks cut-'n'-paste is analysis. that isn't even convincing in high school debate -- I used to write very cruel ballots to the kids who thought it was.
in re: Bush's grand 4. Sep 01 "plan," hey -- let's see some documents. Woodward saw the PDBs. the attack has happened. you'd think we could publish this stuff.
Buckley's 2nd paragraph seems to say base attacks on who is guilty. But is not the premise of going to war not guilty but rather threat to our national security? There are lots of dictators in the world who may be guilty of bad deeds, but the real case for invasion lies in protection - especially when we have limited resources.
Posted by: Harold McClure on March 24, 2004 11:30 AMThe left's favorite debate trick is to ask someone who makes an assertion to produce the supporting evidence? How could they stoop to such a low-down stunt? Why don't they do what the right does - slime and smear?
Posted by: joe on March 24, 2004 11:30 AM"In the early days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the Bush White House cut by nearly two-thirds an emergency request for counterterrorism funds by the FBI, an internal administration budget document shows.
The document, dated Oct. 12, 2001, shows that the FBI requested $1.5 billion in additional funds to enhance its counterterrorism efforts with the creation of 2,024 positions. But the White House Office of Management and Budget cut that request to $531 million."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13541-2004Mar21.html
If the Bush administration wasn't on the attack *after* 9/11 why would we ever believe they were beforehand?
Posted by: Dubblblind on March 24, 2004 11:36 AMStirling Newberry -- great comment!!!!
Posted by: spencer on March 24, 2004 11:48 AMSpencer,
That is true. Sterling's is a thought-provoking comment and deserves follow-on consideration. And yet the thread goes off the track because of a troll (and I certainly blame myself as well because I rose to the troll's bait).
Should we just ignore trolls and hope they go away? How do we increase the incidence of valuable, insightful posts and decrease the incidence of thoughtless, ideological posts?
Posted by: joe on March 24, 2004 12:02 PM
The argument that "we were coming up with a new, better plan" really begs the question of why they stopped all the previous plans while they were doing that. I mean, surely they wanted to put in place new plans for most areas of government, but they didn't shut down the whole government until they finished them. Rumsfeld's big plans for reorganizing the military didn't require demobilizing the armed forces in the meantime.
No matter how great their supposed new plans were, I don't see how these actions can have any interpretation other than that they didn't think counter-terrorism (non-Iraqi) was very important, and figured nothing was likely to happen while they were thinking it over.
Let me make amends by asking a couple of questions about Sterling's great comment. Is it really true that inflation is returning? And what I really want to know -- why would the return of inflation be an indicator that the expansion is ending?
Posted by: joe on March 24, 2004 12:23 PMBuddy, I think you totally misread Saletan's article. That's some seriously sarcastic reporting he's doing.
Maybe he should have put in some emoticons for the more literal-minded...
Posted by: p mac on March 24, 2004 12:45 PMAdrian,
It's been over TWO YEARS since 9/11 and our success in Afghanistan, where is OBL? Why were resources like Task Force 121 and Predators shifted to Iraq and just now being shifted back to Afghanistan? Why did Bush and company allow OBL to escape at Tora Bora? I thought Bush wanted him dead or alive. Or was that just more right-wing BS?
Posted by: Walk The Walk on March 24, 2004 01:46 PM"Adrian,
It's been over TWO YEARS since 9/11 and our success in Afghanistan, where is OBL? Why were resources like Task Force 121 and Predators shifted to Iraq and just now being shifted back to Afghanistan? Why did Bush and company allow OBL to escape at Tora Bora? I thought Bush wanted him dead or alive. Or was that just more right-wing BS?
Posted by Walk The Walk"
Hey, it's been over 59 years since WW2 ended. We had the entire Third Army there for a decade and we still have troops there. Germany is smaller than Iraq.
WHERE THE HELL IS HITLER?
You lefties are trying too hard. You will never convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you.
Adrian
Posted by: Adrian Spidle on March 24, 2004 02:29 PMEven if Bush came up with an aggressive strategy against the Taliban and Bin Laden in his first hundred days and nuked Afghanistan to get Bin Laden, it would not have prevented the 9/11 attacks. The terrorists that committed the attacks were already in country, taking flying lessons, and implementing their plan before Bush was even the Republican nominee in 2000. Do you think that if we killed Bin Laden the terrorists would have called the whole thing off?
It is gratifying though that the Commission has apparently given a hearty endorsement to Bush preemption doctrine. The message from the Commission is clear: where there is a threat, don't wait, eliminate. I think that is something we can all agree on.
Stirling, with your eloquent style and even tempered manner you convincingly make it sound like the voice of reason, given sufficient time, will prevail in the end. Yet I wonder, have you ever looked at the political rants on AOL chats or Yahoo message boards? Scary! These people, just like the more erudite posters here, are voters too. I have a hard time connecting your thoughtful musings with their reality and having any confidence about seeing the light at the end of the tunnel.
But don't stop writing, here or over at
http://www.bopnews.com/
Posted by: Dubblblind on March 24, 2004 03:51 PMAdrian Spidle wrote, "Hey, it's been over 59 years since WW2 ended. We had the entire Third Army there for a decade and we still have troops there. Germany is smaller than Iraq. WHERE THE HELL IS HITLER?"
Huh? You know the answer: we have currently have troops in Germany as part of a forward deployment; there's certainly no threat in Europe _per se_...up to the late 20th century we had troops there because of the commies next door. You're just erecting a strawman.
Posted by: liberal on March 24, 2004 03:52 PMBeautiful comment Stirling. I wonder if it will end up printed out and posted on Brad's refrigrator.
It is odd that the Bush administration argues that they disagreed with Clarke because he just wanted oxymoronic roll back containment and they wanted to eliminate al Qaeda. Clarke had quite a different recollection when he testified under oath.
CLARKE: It is, but it requires a bit of elaboration. As your staff brief said, the goal of the Delenda Plan was to roll back al Qaeda over the course of three to five years so that it was just a nub of an organization like Abu Nidal that didn't threaten the United States.
"Clarke ...I tried to insert the phrase early in the Bush administration in the draft NSPD that our goal should be to eliminate al Qaeda. And I was told by various members of the deputies committee that that was overly ambitious and that we should take the word eliminate out and say significantly erode. "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20349-2004Mar24.html
then search for "erode" (a word that does not appear in any testimony before Clarke for some curious reason).
The final NSPD exists, although it is classified.
Clarke must know that if it says that the goal was to "eliminate" al Qaeda it will be (partially) declassified as fast as a background briefing gets to Fox news.
The whole Bush administration defence of their lost 7 months and 21 days is that they moved from "roll back" to "eliminate". Brad is right that this is a purely verbal change.
However, I am sure that they moved from "roll back" to "significantly erode" so the straw they are grasping is a grassy plant support related program activity.
I would say that this will erode their credibility but I don't think they have any credibility left to erode.
Posted by: Robert Waldmann on March 24, 2004 10:37 PMLast post I managed to resist the temptation to feed the trolls, but I can't help myself.
Adrian: Hitler is dead. His body with a bullet in his brain was recovered.
More importantly Nazism has been rolled back to a Republican candidate for governor of Louisiana, and few tens of thousands of violence addicted skin heads, who would be satanists or something if Hitler had never lived (with all respect for decent Satanists exercising their first amendment rights).
Winning WWII was a necessary step in the defeat of nazism, but if Truman's approach to Germany were like Bush's approach to Afganistan Nazism would probably be a living force.
To Teddy: Many of the hijackers entered the US in and after April 2001. If the Bush administration had really gone to Clinton admin in 1999 battle stations, they might have been stopped at the border as the al Qaeda milenium terrorist team was. The Clinton administration might have been lucky, but it is just not true that al Qaeda couldn't have been stopped. They were not able assault the USA in the last 7 years of the Clinton administration and that's a fact.
Buckley like Adrian seems to find mere facts beneath him.
Actually Adrian did pick up the Clarke August backgrounder very quickly (see comments to the Angel post below). Buckley hasn't bothered with evidence in decades (too busy you know).
So "whether the strike against Saddam's Iraq, as hornet's nest of terrorism, was strategically justified" is 10 years out of date. Hussein's Iraq has supported terrorists (Abu Nidal started out there). However, there is no evidence that they were still a hornet's nest of terrorism in 2002.
Oddly Buckley is sloppy with past tenses. Actually it is more likely he is trying to be sly. Normally the "had" in "We know — the world knows — that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction " would mean he had them at the time Bush decided to invade. This is very unlikely (ask David Kay). What we know is that he had had weapons of mass destruction before the first wave of UN inspections (1992). Again 10 years = no dif for Buckley.
Must be his age. To me the 90s lasted about half as long as the 80s. I guess to Buckley a decade is a blink of the eye.
Posted by: Robert Waldmann on March 24, 2004 11:35 PMTry skelaxin it's the best prescription drug there is. Make sure it's cheap skelaxin though because no one wants to over pay.
Posted by: skelaxin on March 26, 2004 09:38 AMLoosing weight with phentermine has never been easier! Just pop one pill of the drug a day and you will loose weight.
Posted by: phentermine on March 26, 2004 10:00 AMGet tramadol at http://WWW.ITRAMADOL.COM
Posted by: buy tramadol on March 26, 2004 10:52 AMViagra is designed to improve your sex life by adding plesure to your partners experiance. You can buy viagra at this link you should buy viagra online when ever posible.
Posted by: viagra on March 26, 2004 11:43 AMHooking up on the internet involves dating online for sure. be certian to check it out if your in the market.
Posted by: dating online on March 26, 2004 12:41 PMConsolidation of debt is the best way to get ahead. remember to do debt consolidation at least once a year.
Posted by: debt consolidation on March 26, 2004 01:32 PMOrder direct tv from this URL. One Saturday afternoon with DTV will change your life forever.
Posted by: satellite tv on March 26, 2004 02:24 PMBuying propecia online is easy. keeping your hair is going to help you get laid.
Posted by: propecia on March 26, 2004 03:16 PMCialis is in a class of medications known as PDE-5 inhibitors, which are used to treat cases of male impotence. Remember Cialis is approved in authorized markets for the treatment of mild to severe Erectile Dysfunction at both 10 and 20 mg Cialis doses. Cialis should be taken prior to anticipated sexual activity and without regard to food. Just like Viagra, sexual stimulation is needed for Cialis to work.
Posted by: cialis on March 26, 2004 04:07 PMFact is, when taken correctly, Viagra works for most men. Studies show that it works for up to 4 out of 5 men (versus 1 out of 4 on sugar pill). you can Buy Viagra to improve erections in most cases no matter how long you have had ED, what caused it, how often they have it, or how old they are. And Viagra has been proven to work in clinical studies of thousands of men.
Posted by: viagra on March 26, 2004 04:59 PMBuying propecia online is easy. keeping your hair is going to help you get laid.
Posted by: propecia on March 29, 2004 08:17 PMCialis is in a class of medications known as PDE-5 inhibitors, which are used to treat cases of male impotence. Remember Cialis is approved in authorized markets for the treatment of mild to severe Erectile Dysfunction at both 10 and 20 mg Cialis doses. Cialis should be taken prior to anticipated sexual activity and without regard to food. Just like Viagra, sexual stimulation is needed for Cialis to work.
Posted by: cialis on March 29, 2004 09:24 PMFact is, when taken correctly, Viagra works for most men. Studies show that it works for up to 4 out of 5 men (versus 1 out of 4 on sugar pill). you can Buy Viagra to improve erections in most cases no matter how long you have had ED, what caused it, how often they have it, or how old they are. And Viagra has been proven to work in clinical studies of thousands of men.
Posted by: viagra on March 29, 2004 10:31 PMBuy phentermine from this site.
Posted by: phentermine on March 29, 2004 11:38 PMyou can buy tramadol from this link.
Posted by: tramadol on March 30, 2004 12:45 AMdid you know that cialis is an alternative to viagra?
Posted by: buy cialis on March 30, 2004 01:52 AM There. Often when I'm walking around phentermine online wearing my headphones, I see other people cheap phentermine also wearing headphones, and of course phenterlogy phentermine I wonder what they're listening to. Today buy phentermine I had a very strong urge to start a new buy phentermine online project, or maybe not even anything that Phentermine prescription well defined - just, to start behaving Order phentermine in
a different way. I would like to walk
It is never a mistake to say good-bye.
Posted by: Vazquez Teresa on May 3, 2004 10:16 AMGot a fat ass? Try adipex I lost 120
lbs on it!
If you can't afford phentermine
you have to re evaluate your career. If you need Phentermine you need to re-evaluate
your diet.
Taking diet pills can be dangerous.
Be cautious when popping these little guys.
buy levitra from us please.
Posted by: buy levitra on May 11, 2004 11:36 PMYou know sleeping pills
can be addictive right? Did you know Ambien
gets you high?
If you like generic firoicet you will
love this drug. Its called butalbital
and its sweeping the pill popper inner sanctum like wild fire.
Got a fat ass? Try adipex I lost 120
lbs on it!
If you can't afford phentermine
you have to re evaluate your career. If you need Phentermine you need to re-evaluate
your diet.
I love tramadol even though
I have no idea what it is. And this sentence is just filler for the drug.
Taking diet pills can be dangerous.
Be cautious when popping these little guys.
The fountain of youth is known as HGH
it's a hormone secreted by your glands. It is also known as human
growth hormone.
Again stating that I have tramadol but
have no idea what it is.
loosing the weight is easy with adipex please note.
Posted by: buy adipex on May 12, 2004 10:25 PMAdipex is the brand for Phentermine but Adipex is better.
Posted by: cheap adipex on May 13, 2004 01:04 AMAdipex is the brand for Phentermine but Adipex is better.
Posted by: buy adipex on May 13, 2004 09:35 AMLoosing weight with phentermine has never been easier! Just pop one pill of the drug a day and you will loose weight.
Posted by: phentermine on May 13, 2004 10:55 AMget fioricet and you will have no trouble sleeping.
Posted by: fioricet on May 13, 2004 01:36 PMConsolidation of debt is the best way to get ahead. remember to do debt consolidation at least once a year.
Posted by: debt consolidation on May 13, 2004 04:15 PMOrder direct tv from this URL. One Saturday afternoon with DTV will change your life forever.
Posted by: satellite tv on May 13, 2004 05:34 PMBuying propecia online is easy. keeping your hair is going to help you get laid.
Posted by: propecia on May 13, 2004 07:00 PMFact is, when taken correctly, Viagra works for most men. Studies show that it works for up to 4 out of 5 men (versus 1 out of 4 on sugar pill). you can Buy Viagra to improve erections in most cases no matter how long you have had ED, what caused it, how often they have it, or how old they are. And Viagra has been proven to work in clinical studies of thousands of men.
Posted by: viagra on May 13, 2004 09:39 PMBuy phentermine from this site.
Posted by: phentermine on May 13, 2004 10:59 PMsoma ( the drug ) is avaliable through this site so get clicking!
Posted by: soma drug on May 14, 2004 02:57 AMYes its true that phentermine gets you all jazzed up.
Posted by: phentermine on May 14, 2004 04:16 AMget some phentermine and get the weight off.
Posted by: phentermine on May 14, 2004 05:36 AMGet www.all-debt-consolidation.org help with your credit problems here!
Posted by: debt consolidation on May 26, 2004 11:38 PMBuy www.i-directv.net this it is a wonderful addition to anyones home entertainment system.
Posted by: direct TV on May 27, 2004 03:02 PMBuy www.i-directv.net this it is a wonderful addition to anyones home entertainment system.
Posted by: directv on May 28, 2004 02:40 AMGet www.all-debt-consolidation.org help with your credit problems here!
Posted by: click here on May 28, 2004 06:18 PMthis is where we
Posted by: online casinos on May 31, 2004 07:19 AMGet WWW.IDEBTCONSOLIDATION.ORG the debt relief you are searching for here!
Posted by: debt relief on June 1, 2004 08:47 AMFind WWW.I-BILL-CONSOLIDATION.COM the answer to all your credit woes here!
Posted by: click here on June 1, 2004 08:57 AMGet WWW.I-DISH-NETWORK.ORG rid of cable and upgrade your living room by clicking here!
Posted by: satellite tv on June 3, 2004 04:18 AMgo to WWW.E-CREDIT-CARD-DEBT.COM for great deals!
Posted by: click here on June 5, 2004 07:07 AMGet WWW.IDEBTCONSOLIDATION.ORG the debt relief you are searching for here!
Posted by: click here on June 7, 2004 08:59 AMGet www.all-debt-consolidation.org help with your credit problems here!
Posted by: click here on June 13, 2004 09:10 PMGreat site, interesting reading
Posted by: Online Casino Games on June 23, 2004 07:07 PMGreat site. Great reading.
Posted by: Frisco Texas Real Estate on June 24, 2004 09:16 AMBuy Tramadol Pain Medication if you are going to be in politics.
Posted by: Tramadol on June 24, 2004 09:17 AMIf you are into politics then this site is for you.
Posted by: Low Carb Foods on June 24, 2004 09:19 AMNow you can Play Poker online any time!
Posted by: poker online on June 24, 2004 09:02 PMNow you can Play Poker online any time!
Posted by: poker online on June 24, 2004 09:03 PMThank you for sharing that with us!
Posted by: penis enlargement on June 26, 2004 08:51 AMBuy Viagra online! its easy click here today.
Posted by: order viagra online on June 28, 2004 08:35 PMThanks for a Fantastic Presentation.. Cialis related resources.
http://www.cialisapcalis.com Cialis http://www.cealis-lavitra.com Cealis http://www.thisiscapetown.com/cialis.html Cialis
http://www.fast-cialis.com Buy Cialis
Buy Viagra online! its easy click here today.
Posted by: Buy Viagra online on June 29, 2004 09:57 AMYou know sleeping pills
can be addictive right? Did you know Ambien
gets you high?
dietdewblue says click here today.
Posted by: Tramidol on July 1, 2004 10:30 AMVery nice and interesting posts. Thanks again!
Posted by: penis enlargement on July 7, 2004 05:40 AMcoole page
Posted by: handylogos on July 9, 2004 06:43 AMGet WWW.I-DISH-NETWORK.ORG rid of cable and upgrade your living room by clicking here!
Posted by: Viagra on July 11, 2004 06:10 PMGet WWW.I-DISH-NETWORK.ORG rid of cable and upgrade your living room by clicking here!
Posted by: Viagra on July 11, 2004 06:29 PMGreat Site
Posted by: Discount Supplements on July 12, 2004 01:00 PMBuy Viagra online! its easy click here today.
Posted by: Viagra on July 13, 2004 03:42 AMBuy Viagra online! its easy click here today.
Posted by: Viagra on July 13, 2004 11:53 AMguess what! http://www.blackjack.greatnow.com is online! check it out thats http://www.blackjack.greatnow.com
Posted by: blackjack on July 13, 2004 07:12 PMonline poker sites
Posted by: free video poker online on July 16, 2004 01:48 PMhttp://www.e-tutor.com/etboard/messages/2203.html
Posted by: click here on July 16, 2004 04:52 PMstrip poker play online
Posted by: online poker on July 17, 2004 03:39 AMfree online multiplayer poker
Posted by: online poker on July 17, 2004 04:58 AMonline poker mac
Posted by: online poker on July 17, 2004 09:41 AMonline poker game cheats
Posted by: online poker on July 17, 2004 10:54 AMfree online poker game
Posted by: online poker on July 17, 2004 01:21 PMonline poker games
Posted by: online poker on July 17, 2004 02:47 PMonline poker sites
Posted by: online casino on July 17, 2004 03:52 PMFree online strip poker
Posted by: online casino on July 18, 2004 01:30 AMfree strip poker online
Posted by: online casino on July 18, 2004 02:40 AMonline poker tournament
Posted by: online casino on July 18, 2004 03:46 AMstrip poker online
Posted by: online casino on July 18, 2004 06:17 AMstrip poker online free
Posted by: online casino on July 18, 2004 07:32 AMstrip poker online
Posted by: texas holdem on July 19, 2004 04:33 AMyou can play blackjack here! http://www.blackjack.greatnow.com
Posted by: blackjack on July 20, 2004 12:34 PMairline tickets
Posted by: airline tickets on July 22, 2004 06:49 AMonline casino
If you've ever been curious about how to play online poker then you'll want to read over the following online poker guide. This guide is designed to give you a basic overview of the game concept and rules. After reading this guide you should be in a god position to play poker. We suggest you try an online casino that offers free play in order to practice a bit before placing any real wagers.
Posted by: onine casinos on July 25, 2004 01:20 PMonline casino
If you've ever been curious about how to play online poker then you'll want to read over the following poker guide. Unlike blackjack guides. This guide is designed to give you a basic overview of the game concept and rules. After reading this guide you should be in a god position to play poker. We suggest you try an online casino that offers free play in order to practice a bit before placing any real wagers.
Posted by: onine casinos on July 26, 2004 11:30 AMTry our online casino
and learn how to play online poker then you'll want to read over the following blackjack guide. This guide is designed to give you a basic overview of the game concept and rules. After reading this guide you should be in a god position to play poker. We suggest you try an online casino that offers free play in order to practice a bit before placing any real wagers.
You know sleeping pills
can be addictive right? Did you know Ambien
gets you high?
I love tramadol even though
I have no idea what it is. And this sentence is just filler for the drug.
online casino
If you've ever been curious about how to play online poker then you'll want to read over the following online poker guide. This guide is designed to give you a basic overview of the game concept and rules. After reading this guide you should be in a god position to play poker. We suggest you try an online casino that offers free play in order to practice a bit before placing any real wagers.
Posted by: onine casinos on July 26, 2004 04:01 PMIf you like generic firoicet you will
love this drug. Its called butalbital
and its sweeping the pill popper inner sanctum like wild fire.
Get WWW.E-CIALIS.NET the miricle drug cialis here!
Posted by: click here on July 27, 2004 08:34 AMCheck out these sites for online casino action!
internet casino http://www.casino.150m.com
blackjack http://www.blackjack.greatnow.com
online casino http://www.online-casino-i.greatnow.com
online casino http://www.gambling.greatnow.com
roulette http://www.roulette.greatnow.com
slots http://www.slots.0catch.com
video poker http://www.video-poker.owns1.com
texas holdem http://www.poker-i.150m.com
online casino
If you've ever been curious about how to play online poker then you'll want to read over the following. We suggest you try an online casino that offers free play in order to practice a bit before placing any real wagers. You can also play blackjack online fo free!
Posted by: online casino on July 30, 2004 12:48 PMhttp://www.casino.150m.com online casino
Posted by: casino online on August 4, 2004 02:09 PMonline ed says casino
Posted by: eddy boy on August 4, 2004 02:13 PMhttp://www.casino.150m.com online casino
Posted by: casino online on August 4, 2004 02:31 PM7869 http://www.casino.150m.com online casino
Posted by: casino online on August 6, 2004 11:18 AM4273 http://www.casino.150m.com online casino
Posted by: casino online on August 6, 2004 11:21 AM7869 http://www.casino.150m.com online casino
Posted by: casino online on August 6, 2004 11:25 AM7869 http://www.casino.150m.com online casino
Posted by: casino online on August 6, 2004 11:29 AM3111 You can buy viagra from this site :http://www.ed.greatnow.com
Posted by: Viagra on August 7, 2004 07:04 PM6996 Why is Texas holdem so darn popular all the sudden?
http://www.texas-holdem.greatnow.com
5393 Get your online poker fix at http://www.onlinepoker-dot.com
Posted by: online poker on August 15, 2004 06:54 PM1511 black jack is hot hot hot! get your blackjack at http://www.blackjack-dot.com
Posted by: blackjack on August 16, 2004 10:41 PM