Paintball Forums  
User Name
Password

Paintball Forums > General > Chit Chat > Politics > The Bush Definition of Democracy: An Appointed Iraqi Council

Reply
Gandalf Grey
[1] Posted by Gandalf Grey 07-14-2003, 08:07 PM
 
Posts: n/a


Quote
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...ul13.html?nav=

washingtonpost.com
Appointed Iraqi Council Assumes Limited Role


By Rajiv Chandrasekaran
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, July 14, 2003; Page A01


BAGHDAD, July 13 -- A group of 25 Iraqis from diverse political, ethnic and
religious backgrounds stepped onto a stage and declared themselves a
"governing council" today, taking the first step to define the country's
political future by accepting an offer of limited power-sharing from the
U.S.-led occupation authority.

The members -- who include former exiles, politicians, Muslim clerics,
tribal leaders, social activists, physicians and lawyers -- were selected by
the occupation authority to help run this country of 24 million people until
sovereignty is handed over to an elected government. The council's
responsibilities will include the operation of ministries, the appointment
of diplomats, the approval of next year's budget and preliminary work to
form a commission to draft a constitution. Final control over those issues
will still rest with the U.S. administrator here, L. Paul Bremer, but he has
said he will follow the council's decisions in all but the most
extraordinary circumstances.

"The establishment of this council is an expression of the national Iraqi
will in the wake of the collapse of the former oppressive regime," intoned
Muhammed Bahr Uloum, an elderly, bespectacled Shiite Muslim cleric in gauzy
black robes who was selected leader of today's ceremonies.

"The people have won," said Ibrahim Jafari, a leader of the Dawa party, a
Shiite political organization that opposed Saddam Hussein's government.
Thousands of its members were executed under Hussein's rule. "After all of
these years and all of the sacrifices we have made, we have taken the first
step toward democracy," Jafari said.

Bremer and other U.S. officials here hope that the council, which was
assembled over the past six weeks in a process that culminated in a frantic
series of meetings over the past few days, will play a key role in tempering
public disenchantment and restoring stability.

They expect the council to appease Iraqi political leaders, who have been
clamoring for a chance to govern, as well as citizens, who have called for a
greater role for Iraqis in the postwar transition. U.S. officials also say
they believe that putting responsibility for government operations on the
council could help deflect public anger over the tardy resumption of basic
services from the occupation authority.

Although Bremer and his top political aides contend that the council's
members represent a cross-section of the country and will have wide public
support, it is not clear how Iraqis will react to a group that was
handpicked by the occupation authority. While some Baghdad residents said
they would adopt a wait-and-see attitude, others dismissed the group as
American lackeys. "We cannot trust them," said Mohammed Abbas, an Oil
Ministry employee who joined legions of Iraqis in watching the announcement
of the council on live satellite television.

The members, 22 men and three women, held a two-hour, closed-door meeting
this afternoon before walking onto the stage in a large conference hall to
reveal themselves to their country and the world. They sat in a semicircle
of chairs to deliver a statement and answer questions from the news media as
Bremer and other officials looked on from the front row.

Bremer, a former U.S. ambassador and crisis manager who was sent to Baghdad
to turn around the faltering reconstruction effort, did not speak at the
ceremony. That fell to Sergio Vieira de Mello, the U.N. special
representative for Iraq, who was asked by the members to make a statement.

"There are defining moments in history," he said. "For Iraq, today is
definitely one of those."

He said Iraq was "moving back to where it rightfully belongs: at peace with
itself and as a full participant in the community of nations."

Thirteen of the council members are Shiites, a group that makes up about 60
percent of Iraq's population, while 11 are Sunnis and one is an Assyrian
Christian. Among the Sunnis, five are ethnic Kurds, five are Arab and one is
an ethnic Turkmen.

The council includes several prominent Iraqis, such as Uloum and Abdul Karim
Muhammadawi, a legendary guerrilla fighter in the southern marshes, as well
as the leaders of seven leading political organizations, such as Ahmed
Chalabi of the Iraqi National Congress, who has close ties to the Pentagon.
But many others are relative unknowns on the streets of Baghdad.

Seated in front of a large banner depicting the shape of Iraq with the red,
black and white colors of its flag, the members appeared to reflect the
diversity of the country with their attire. Two men wore the black turbans
of Shiite clerics, two others were draped in gold-fringed tribal robes, two
women were clad in colorful head scarves and the rest of the men wore
business suits.

"I helped deliver thousands of Iraqi babies, and now I am taking part in the
birth of a new country and a new rule based on women's rights, humanity,
unity and freedom," said Rajaa Habib Khuzai, one of the women on the council
and the director of a maternity hospital in southern Iraq.

Sixteen of the members had lived outside the reach of Hussein's government
before the war -- in a swath of northern Iraq controlled by Kurds or outside
the country.

The issue of whether the council would be dominated by exiles had been a
point of controversy among some Iraqis, who argued that the people who lived
outside the country -- in some cases for decades -- should not get a
majority of the council seats. U.S. and British officials involved in the
selection of the group stressed today that they did not regard the seven
members who lived in Kurdish-controlled Iraq as exiles. As a consequence,
the officials said, they counted only nine members as former exiles.

Even so, the former exiles and Kurds, whose freedom from Hussein's lockstep
politics allowed them to become skilled in the ways of news conferences and
public speaking, dominated the question-and-answer session. All but one of
the questions were answered by them, while the other members sat
impassively.

After today's two-hour meeting, the members had lunch with Bremer, Vieira de
Mello and John Sawers, the top British diplomat in Iraq.

Although members said they would wait until a second meeting on Monday to
choose the council leadership, they did agree on one highly symbolic first
public action: The council set April 9, the day Baghdad fell to U.S. forces,
as a national holiday, and it rescinded six public holidays connected to
Hussein and his Baath Party. They will have immediate effect because Monday
is the anniversary of the 1958 military overthrow of the former ruling
monarchy, and Thursday is the anniversary of the 1968 coup that brought the
Baath Party to power.

Members said they hoped to begin tackling a raft of complex issues over the
coming days and weeks. "Looking at the challenges of today, we believe the
most important priority of the council is to direct all of its efforts to
achieving security and stability in the country, revitalizing the national
economy, and providing public services," Uloum said.

Some of the members said they hoped that the council's tenure would be
limited and that elections would be held soon. "We hope that this council
will work for a very short time," said Abdul Aziz Hakim, a cleric who
represents the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the
largest Shiite political party. "We should have a constitutional government
and we should get rid of the occupation."

During today's news conference, some of the members bristled at the
questions posed by Arab satellite news channels, which they accused of being
too deferential to Hussein when he was in power -- and now. "The satellite
channels expect Saddam to come back, but he is in the trash can of history.
He is not coming back," Uloum said after a question from an al-Jazeera
reporter.

The meeting took place under extraordinary security, with Army helicopters
buzzing overhead and extra soldiers patrolling nearby streets. Insurgents
opposed to the U.S. presence in Iraq have targeted Iraqis working with the
occupation authority in recent weeks, prompting concern that council members
could be the focus of attacks.

Chalabi was the only council member to express public gratitude to the
United States and Britain for removing Hussein's government. He also
condemned attacks on U.S. troops in the country. "The Iraqi people consider
them forces of liberation," he said. "They don't consider these attacks as
acts of resistance."

Correspondent Molly Moore and special correspondent Jill Carroll contributed
to this report.



© 2003 The Washington Post Company



--
--
FAIR USE NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am
making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of
environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and
social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any
such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so
long as I'm the dictator." - GW Bush 12/18/2000.

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that
we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic
and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
---Theodore Roosevelt

"Feels Good!"
---George W. Bush on the Brink of Declaring War on Iraq.


 
Sponsored Links
Wilson
[2] Posted by Wilson 07-15-2003, 07:25 AM
 
Posts: n/a


Quote
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in
news:3f1337bd$0$24548$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.co m:

> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...Jul13.html?nav
> =
>
> washingtonpost.com
> Appointed Iraqi Council Assumes Limited Role
>
>
> By Rajiv Chandrasekaran
> Washington Post Foreign Service
> Monday, July 14, 2003; Page A01


(snip)
>
> "The establishment of this council is an expression of the national
> Iraqi will in the wake of the collapse of the former oppressive
> regime," intoned Muhammed Bahr Uloum, an elderly, bespectacled Shiite
> Muslim cleric in gauzy black robes who was selected leader of today's
> ceremonies.
>
> "The people have won," said Ibrahim Jafari, a leader of the Dawa
> party, a Shiite political organization that opposed Saddam Hussein's
> government. Thousands of its members were executed under Hussein's
> rule. "After all of these years and all of the sacrifices we have
> made, we have taken the first step toward democracy," Jafari said.


(snip)

""If America’s allies do not act now, Saddam “will conclude that the
international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he
can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating
destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he’ll use the
arsenal.” - Clinton, Feb 8 98""

 
rightwing@nutty.com
[3] Posted by rightwing@nutty.com 07-15-2003, 11:30 AM
 
Posts: n/a


Quote
On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 10:25:09 +0000 (UTC), Wilson <heeley@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in
>news:3f1337bd$0$24548$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.c om:


>""If America’s allies do not act now, Saddam “will conclude that the
>international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he
>can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating
>destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he’ll use the
>arsenal.” - Clinton, Feb 8 98""


So Clinton bombed the shit out of him, kept sanctions on, and Saddam was forced
to comply with inspections-----resulting in having NO "immediate" threat capabilities

Bush LIED


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

On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 16:08:21 -0500, Christopher Morton
<chris01@ameritech.net> wrote:

>Sorry, I'm a pro-abortion, pro-affirmative action liberal.


No, MORTONLOON

All you are, or ever were, or ever WILL be is a
big, dumb, ass-kicked Gunwhoring chickenshit
usenet moron.

>Yes, and it pisses you off, you crossburning ignoramus.

 
Wilson
[4] Posted by Wilson 07-16-2003, 05:50 AM
 
Posts: n/a


Quote
rightwing@nutty.com wrote in
news:0p38hvcpqds1es8c13acj6n3u3j52vqnh4@4ax.com:

> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 10:25:09 +0000 (UTC), Wilson
> <heeley@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>>"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in
>>news:3f1337bd$0$24548$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting. com:

>
>>""If America’s allies do not act now, Saddam “will conclude that the
>>international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that
>>he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating
>>destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he’ll use the
>>arsenal.” - Clinton, Feb 8 98""

>
> So Clinton bombed the shit out of him, kept sanctions on, and Saddam
> was forced to comply with inspections-----resulting in having NO
> "immediate" threat capabilities


The only Hossein that "Clinton bombed the shit out of" was some poor
camel driver who got too near a radar installation at the height of the
Monica/Impeachment scandals.

"Forced to comply"?

Is that why all UN Security Council Members voted unanimously in November
2002 to give him "a final chance"?

That why Blix "pleaded for more time" a couple months ago?

Tell us again, numbnuts.

>
> Bush LIED


He did?

Here's Lifelong Democrat Ed Koch, today:

However, if Bush did not lie, *AND I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT HE DID*, then
Americans of all political persuasions should defend our country's
reputation for fair play by displaying their indignation at those who
bear false witness.

Here's today's Washington Post:

WAIT FOR THE FACTS

Wednesday, July 16, 2003; Page A22

A COUPLE OF questions have crystallized about the Bush administration's
handling of intelligence information on Iraq. First, were U.S. and allied
intelligence agencies wrong when they reported that Saddam Hussein
continued to possess weapons of mass destruction and the means to produce
them? Second, did the Bush administration deliberately distort the
intelligence reports to convince Americans that war was necessary? A yes
to the first of those questions would confirm a major failure by U.S.
intelligence, one that would cause serious damage to U.S. foreign policy
and demand a strict accounting of what went wrong. If the second
supposition proved true, those war opponents and Democratic presidential
candidates who claim a major presidential scandal is unfolding might find
some traction. For the moment, however, the answer to the first question
is not yet known, though the failure of U.S. forces to find banned
weapons is disturbing. And so far there is no hard evidence that
President Bush or his top aides knowingly falsified the case for war.

In the absence of evidence, there has been an extraordinary amount of
attention paid to marginal issues -- most recently, those 16 words in
President Bush's State of the Union speech that said, accurately, that
British intelligence believed Iraq had been seeking to obtain uranium in
Africa. In fact, British intelligence did believe that -- and still does,
even though one set of documents purporting to show an Iraqi procurement
mission in Niger proved to be forgeries. Last week the White House
announced that the sentence should not have been included in the speech,
because the CIA knew of the Niger forgery and had not been able to
confirm the broader British report. The claim was deleted from other
administration statements, but some White House officials, banking on the
British, apparently pressed for its inclusion in spite of the CIA's
doubts. If so, that would represent one of several instances in which
administration statements on Iraq were stretched to reflect the most
aggressive interpretation of the intelligence.

Yet that does not mean the decision for war was based on false
information. The Africa nugget, after all, formed a small part of the
president's argument -- and like other questionable parts of the
administration's case, it was widely disputed before the war. The heart
of the argument -- that Iraq had repeatedly defied disarmament orders
from the United Nations -- was endorsed in December by all 15 members of
the U.N. Security Council, and remains indisputable. Similarly, the
conclusion that Saddam Hussein had retained chemical and biological
weapons was one shared by the Clinton administration as well as every
major Western intelligence service. That conclusion is now being
challenged, but it hasn't yet been disproved; nor has it been established
that Iraq did not have a nuclear weapons program. Indeed, the recent
unearthing of designs and machinery for producing bomb-grade material in
a scientist's garden seems more suggestive than the discrediting of the
report on Niger.

The excessive heat generated by this secondary issue reflects the
troubling but, for the moment, unresolvable uncertainty about why Iraq's
WMD have not been found. Mounting anxiety in Congress and among the
public about how the postwar occupation is going feeds this surrogate
debate as well. It is vital that a debate go forward, and that the Bush
administration be prepared to respond to it constructively. If
intelligence assessments were wrong, Congress must probe why they were,
and whether political pressures had any influence. But first it is
necessary to determine the facts. Despite what some of the rhetoric from
both sides might suggest, that job has not yet been done.


© 2003 The Washington Post Company


 
Wilson
[5] Posted by Wilson 07-16-2003, 06:12 AM
 
Posts: n/a


Quote
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in
news:3f143af3$0$24555$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.co m:

Here's what Erb wrote yesterday:

Of course I couldn't believe the pre-war optimism that we would be
welcomed, celebrated as heros, and democracy easily installed. I
noted that experts in political systems (like they have at the CIA and
State Department) have long concluded that sort of thing isn't likely
in a country like Iraq. They let fantasy dictate strategy, wishful
think tank thinking dictate policy...and America will pay the price.
What they have to do is swallow their pride, go to the UN, and work
WITH the rest of the world and recognize we are NOT the kind of
unilateral power they fantasized us to be. Their dreams have been
proven illusionary.


> "Wilson" <heeley@btopenworld.com> wrote McCarthy headers and nothing
> else in message news:Xns93B973FEE7EBAheeley@217.32.252.50...
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...Jul13.html?nav
> =
>
> washingtonpost.com
> Appointed Iraqi Council Assumes Limited Role
>
>
> By Rajiv Chandrasekaran
> Washington Post Foreign Service
> Monday, July 14, 2003; Page A01
>
>
> BAGHDAD, July 13 -- A group of 25 Iraqis from diverse political,
> ethnic and religious backgrounds stepped onto a stage and declared
> themselves a "governing council" today, taking the first step to
> define the country's political future by accepting an offer of limited
> power-sharing from the U.S.-led occupation authority.
>
> The members -- who include former exiles, politicians, Muslim clerics,
> tribal leaders, social activists, physicians and lawyers -- were
> selected by the occupation authority to help run this country of 24
> million people until sovereignty is handed over to an elected
> government. The council's responsibilities will include the operation
> of ministries, the appointment of diplomats, the approval of next
> year's budget and preliminary work to form a commission to draft a
> constitution. Final control over those issues will still rest with the
> U.S. administrator here, L. Paul Bremer, but he has said he will
> follow the council's decisions in all but the most extraordinary
> circumstances.
>
> "The establishment of this council is an expression of the national
> Iraqi will in the wake of the collapse of the former oppressive
> regime," intoned Muhammed Bahr Uloum, an elderly, bespectacled Shiite
> Muslim cleric in gauzy black robes who was selected leader of today's
> ceremonies.
>
> "The people have won," said Ibrahim Jafari, a leader of the Dawa
> party, a Shiite political organization that opposed Saddam Hussein's
> government. Thousands of its members were executed under Hussein's
> rule. "After all of these years and all of the sacrifices we have
> made, we have taken the first step toward democracy," Jafari said.
>
> Bremer and other U.S. officials here hope that the council, which was
> assembled over the past six weeks in a process that culminated in a
> frantic series of meetings over the past few days, will play a key
> role in tempering public disenchantment and restoring stability.
>
> They expect the council to appease Iraqi political leaders, who have
> been clamoring for a chance to govern, as well as citizens, who have
> called for a greater role for Iraqis in the postwar transition. U.S.
> officials also say they believe that putting responsibility for
> government operations on the council could help deflect public anger
> over the tardy resumption of basic services from the occupation
> authority.
>
> Although Bremer and his top political aides contend that the council's
> members represent a cross-section of the country and will have wide
> public support, it is not clear how Iraqis will react to a group that
> was handpicked by the occupation authority. While some Baghdad
> residents said they would adopt a wait-and-see attitude, others
> dismissed the group as American lackeys. "We cannot trust them," said
> Mohammed Abbas, an Oil Ministry employee who joined legions of Iraqis
> in watching the announcement of the council on live satellite
> television.
>
> The members, 22 men and three women, held a two-hour, closed-door
> meeting this afternoon before walking onto the stage in a large
> conference hall to reveal themselves to their country and the world.
> They sat in a semicircle of chairs to deliver a statement and answer
> questions from the news media as Bremer and other officials looked on
> from the front row.
>
> Bremer, a former U.S. ambassador and crisis manager who was sent to
> Baghdad to turn around the faltering reconstruction effort, did not
> speak at the ceremony. That fell to Sergio Vieira de Mello, the U.N.
> special representative for Iraq, who was asked by the members to make
> a statement.
>
> "There are defining moments in history," he said. "For Iraq, today is
> definitely one of those."
>
> He said Iraq was "moving back to where it rightfully belongs: at peace
> with itself and as a full participant in the community of nations."
>
> Thirteen of the council members are Shiites, a group that makes up
> about 60 percent of Iraq's population, while 11 are Sunnis and one is
> an Assyrian Christian. Among the Sunnis, five are ethnic Kurds, five
> are Arab and one is an ethnic Turkmen.
>
> The council includes several prominent Iraqis, such as Uloum and Abdul
> Karim Muhammadawi, a legendary guerrilla fighter in the southern
> marshes, as well as the leaders of seven leading political
> organizations, such as Ahmed Chalabi of the Iraqi National Congress,
> who has close ties to the Pentagon. But many others are relative
> unknowns on the streets of Baghdad.
>
> Seated in front of a large banner depicting the shape of Iraq with the
> red, black and white colors of its flag, the members appeared to
> reflect the diversity of the country with their attire. Two men wore
> the black turbans of Shiite clerics, two others were draped in
> gold-fringed tribal robes, two women were clad in colorful head
> scarves and the rest of the men wore business suits.
>
> "I helped deliver thousands of Iraqi babies, and now I am taking part
> in the birth of a new country and a new rule based on women's rights,
> humanity, unity and freedom," said Rajaa Habib Khuzai, one of the
> women on the council and the director of a maternity hospital in
> southern Iraq.
>
> Sixteen of the members had lived outside the reach of Hussein's
> government before the war -- in a swath of northern Iraq controlled by
> Kurds or outside the country.
>
> The issue of whether the council would be dominated by exiles had been
> a point of controversy among some Iraqis, who argued that the people
> who lived outside the country -- in some cases for decades -- should
> not get a majority of the council seats. U.S. and British officials
> involved in the selection of the group stressed today that they did
> not regard the seven members who lived in Kurdish-controlled Iraq as
> exiles. As a consequence, the officials said, they counted only nine
> members as former exiles.
>
> Even so, the former exiles and Kurds, whose freedom from Hussein's
> lockstep politics allowed them to become skilled in the ways of news
> conferences and public speaking, dominated the question-and-answer
> session. All but one of the questions were answered by them, while the
> other members sat impassively.
>
> After today's two-hour meeting, the members had lunch with Bremer,
> Vieira de Mello and John Sawers, the top British diplomat in Iraq.
>
> Although members said they would wait until a second meeting on Monday
> to choose the council leadership, they did agree on one highly
> symbolic first public action: The council set April 9, the day Baghdad
> fell to U.S. forces, as a national holiday, and it rescinded six
> public holidays connected to Hussein and his Baath Party. They will
> have immediate effect because Monday is the anniversary of the 1958
> military overthrow of the former ruling monarchy, and Thursday is the
> anniversary of the 1968 coup that brought the Baath Party to power.
>
> Members said they hoped to begin tackling a raft of complex issues
> over the coming days and weeks. "Looking at the challenges of today,
> we believe the most important priority of the council is to direct all
> of its efforts to achieving security and stability in the country,
> revitalizing the national economy, and providing public services,"
> Uloum said.
>
> Some of the members said they hoped that the council's tenure would be
> limited and that elections would be held soon. "We hope that this
> council will work for a very short time," said Abdul Aziz Hakim, a
> cleric who represents the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution
> in Iraq, the largest Shiite political party. "We should have a
> constitutional government and we should get rid of the occupation."
>
> During today's news conference, some of the members bristled at the
> questions posed by Arab satellite news channels, which they accused of
> being too deferential to Hussein when he was in power -- and now. "The
> satellite channels expect Saddam to come back, but he is in the trash
> can of history. He is not coming back," Uloum said after a question
> from an al-Jazeera reporter.
>
> The meeting took place under extraordinary security, with Army
> helicopters buzzing overhead and extra soldiers patrolling nearby
> streets. Insurgents opposed to the U.S. presence in Iraq have targeted
> Iraqis working with the occupation authority in recent weeks,
> prompting concern that council members could be the focus of attacks.
>
> Chalabi was the only council member to express public gratitude to the
> United States and Britain for removing Hussein's government. He also
> condemned attacks on U.S. troops in the country. "The Iraqi people
> consider them forces of liberation," he said. "They don't consider
> these attacks as acts of resistance."
>
> Correspondent Molly Moore and special correspondent Jill Carroll
> contributed to this report.
>
>
>
> © 2003 The Washington Post Company

 
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: The Raw Truth About Jr's Military Desertion Joe S. Politics 42 07-14-2003 10:57 AM
Re: The Son of Man demands Mr. bush's immediate arrest or execution! - Wow eh?! Justice for All Politics 0 07-11-2003 03:50 PM
Iraq: Who lied? The high cost of lying about war. Harry Hope Politics 1 07-03-2003 02:30 PM
Impeach the wimpy asshole! Harry Hope Politics 1 07-03-2003 02:29 PM
How to keep Iraq from becoming Part of an American Empire! Donald L Ferrt Politics 0 06-23-2003 06:27 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 2.4.0