1
   

Harping On Abu Ghraib and Gitmo is Highly Misguided

 
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Jun, 2005 11:41 pm
Brandon9000 wrote:
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

I may disagree with Brandon on this issue, but I acknowledge and commend the consistency of his principles.

Well, ty. I had a girlfriend once who was a medical student, and the idea that doctors heal one and all with no judgement as to who is good or bad, and that they never deliberately do harm, is stressed so strongly and continuously to them, that it is very disturbing to me that some doctors would ignore it. Doctors hold a very special place in our society, almost like priests, and it seems to me that these individuals betrayed it.


And yet they really don't, any more than priests do.

Flawed humans in exalted positions...at least doctors have a demonstrable skill and/or temporally meaningful function.

None-the-less, it is irrational to expect some level of superior moral performance from someone who happens to be skilled at fixing human ills.

Because a military doctor finds himself in Iraq and amidst Jihadist scumbags in no way requires him to elevate his moral course.

All this equine fecal matter is political.

I find no need to "fairly" castigate anyone who dispenses with dubious professional ethics to support the interests of his or her nation.

It boils down to this:

These people are trying to hurt us --- we need to stop then from hurting us --- even if it means killing them.

The rest is horse shi-t.

If you and yours are willing to sacrifice you and your lives to the furtherment of some ideal, God Bless You, but don't ask me and mine to chip in.

We, not you, will decide what is altruistic, what is noble, what is heroic...

( I speak to more than brandon)
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Jun, 2005 12:09 am
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

...If you and yours are willing to sacrifice you and your lives to the furtherment of some ideal, God Bless You, but don't ask me and mine to chip in.

We, not you, will decide what is altruistic, what is noble, what is heroic...

( I speak to more than brandon)

Except that I didn't say not to do it. I merely said to use medical specialists who aren't physicians. Doesn't anybody actually read posts before responding?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Jun, 2005 12:45 am
Brandon9000 wrote:
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

...If you and yours are willing to sacrifice you and your lives to the furtherment of some ideal, God Bless You, but don't ask me and mine to chip in.

We, not you, will decide what is altruistic, what is noble, what is heroic...

( I speak to more than brandon)

Except that I didn't say not to do it. I merely said to use medical specialists who aren't physicians. Doesn't anybody actually read posts before responding?


Do you really want to set me off?

OK let's get it on...

In the meantime I would sugest you examine your rectum to determine which, of the many of your positions, should be defended in their home within your poop shute, or the rare few that manage to push aside the swolen tissue an dburst into the sunshine.

This is all bullsh*
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Jun, 2005 01:02 am
Having spent three years in the Army Medical Corps during a war, i was more than a little acquainted with doctors in the military. Those who were conscripted did their duty, did their level best to follow their principles, and got out as soon as they could consistent with honor and legality. Those who made a career of the military often, although not always, did so because they felt their opportunity to live well and prosper was as good in the military as in the world at large, which is a rather telling point about their own assessment of their skills and their prospects for profiting from those skills. I've seen career military doctors allow someone to die simply so as not to violate standing operating procedure. I've seen career military doctors prescribe narcotics to other officers in order to suck up. I've seen career military doctors give a clean bill of health to career non-commissioned officers and officers who were clearly alcoholic (occassionally to frequently incapacitated by alcohol while on duty), and at a time when the friendless among those NCOs and officers were being booted out of the military short of retirement because of drug or alcohol abuse. I saw a handful of good and highly competent doctors remain in the military beyond their orginal term because the felt they were needed and could do good--they were the exceptions which proved the rule that career military doctors stay in because they don't have a good shot on the outside.

Anecdotal evidence, to be sure, but based upon a sample of literally hundreds of doctors with whom i came in contact, and under whose orders i served.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Jun, 2005 01:17 am
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

...If you and yours are willing to sacrifice you and your lives to the furtherment of some ideal, God Bless You, but don't ask me and mine to chip in.

We, not you, will decide what is altruistic, what is noble, what is heroic...

( I speak to more than brandon)

Except that I didn't say not to do it. I merely said to use medical specialists who aren't physicians. Doesn't anybody actually read posts before responding?


Do you really want to set me off?

OK let's get it on...

In the meantime I would sugest you examine your rectum to determine which, of the many of your positions, should be defended in their home within your poop shute, or the rare few that manage to push aside the swolen tissue an dburst into the sunshine.

This is all bullsh*

Not a rational answer. I didn't say that these interogation techniques shouldn't be used, which is what you implied.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Jun, 2005 03:22 pm
Quote:
Retired General Tours Guantanamo, Tells CNN Media Portrayal Wrong

Retired Major General Donald Shepperd toured the Guantanamo Bay detention facility on Friday and found that reality did not match the media's portrayal, he recounted in a phone interview from Cuba on CNN just before 3pm EDT on Friday. Shepperd asserted: "The impressions that you're getting from the media and from the various pronouncements being made by people who have not been here, in my opinion, are totally false." Shepperd contended that "what we're seeing is a modern prison system with dedicated people, interrogators and analysts that know what they are doing. And people being very, very well-treated." But when Shepperd reported that he had observed an interrogation, anchor Betty Nguyen inquired: "Kind of explain to us how that played out. And were there any instances of abuse or possible abuse?" Shepperd responded: "Absolutely not."

The MRC's Ken Shepherd corrected the CNN transcript against the video for the phone interview which began at 2:51pm EDT on June 24:

Betty Nguyen, anchor: "We have just established a line to Guantanamo Bay, to our military analyst General Don Shepperd. He arrived there as part of a trip put together by the Pentagon in the wake of that human rights report that criticized conditions at the U.S. prison for war detainees. General Shepperd on the phone with us right now. General Shepperd, what do you see so far while being there?"
Major General Donald Shepperd, Retired, CNN military analyst: "Well, I tell you what, Betty, I'm seeing a lot of rain right now. I thought Cuba was dry and we're in the middle of a drenching rain storm. But I tell you, every American should have a chance to see what our group saw today. The impressions that you're getting from the media and from the various pronouncements being made by people who have not been here, in my opinion, are totally false.
"What we're seeing is a modern prison system with dedicated people, interrogators and analysts that know what they are doing. And people being very, very well-treated. We've had a chance to tour the facility, to talk to the guards, to talk to the interrogators and analysts. We've had a chance to eat what the prisoners eat. We've seen people, high-value people, being interrogated. And it's nothing like the impression that we're getting from the media. People need to see this, Betty."
Nguyen: "All right. You said you got to talk to the interrogators and the guards. Let's start with the interrogators. What have they told you so far?
Shepperd: "The interrogators -- basically we have the opinion from things that we've heard that people down here have been mistreated. Everyone that we've talked to -- and this is consistent with things I've known from the past -- every interrogator will tell you that the key to getting information you need is to establish a personal relationship based upon respect over a long period of time with the people.
"People won't talk necessarily at first, but eventually, they will begin to talk and you'll get pieces of information that you can fit together with pieces of information from somewhere else. But they say pressure does not work, disrespect does not work, and torture is absolutely something that is counterproductive. You need to make to make people feel comfortable and comfortable with you to get the information you need. And that came from everyone, men and women, that were interrogators down here. And again, it's consistent with what I've heard in this past."
Nguyen: "Now, this leads me to my next question. Of course, this was a trip organized by the Pentagon. So do you feel like you're getting full access to everything there? Are you seeing a true picture of how it is?"
Shepperd: "Yeah, that's always a good question. But I tell you that they are proud to have people down here, including the press, to see what we are seeing. Obviously, they're going to put their best foot forward, And obviously, no matter where you are, there will be from time to time abuses or people misusing or disobeying the regulations, no matter where you are in the process. But I tell you, I've been in prisons and I've been in jails in the United States, and this is by far the most professionally-run and dedicated force I've ever seen in any correctional institution anywhere."
Nguyen: "You also mentioned that you have spoken with guards. What are they saying?"
Shepperd: "Very interesting. I had lunch with a -- one of the female guards and then I talked to a group of male guards as well. I said, do you ever see anything go on here that resembles mistreatment of the prisoners or mistreatment by the prisoners of guard? And they say, we're on alert all the time. They're not armed when they're around the guards [sic] for obvious reasons. You don't do that because weapons can be taken and used against you. But basically, they treat the prisoners firmly, with respect. They don't engage in a lot of banter with them. And they say that the prisoners do things that we've heard about in the media. They sometimes get riled and they'll throw feces, they'll throw urine at the guards. But this entire system is based upon compliance. In other words, if you comply with the rules, you're going to be treated well, you're going to be given more privileges, just like any detention facility. And if you don't, your life is going to be much more miserable than those who do...."
Nguyen: "On the flip side, have you had access to the prisoners themselves and what are their conditions?"
Shepperd: "We have not had access to the prisoners themselves. We are told what they are and we have seen all the facilities and we have watched interrogations. We just watched interrogations of two high-value prisoners -- what they can determine is high-value targets or high-value prisoners that have been here for a considerable amount of time. The facilities are basic of prisoners anywhere. We've seen the cells. They're seven-by-eight foot cells. They're clean. They have a toilet in the facility, they have and a water fountain in the facility. They have a bed. They're given the Koran, they're given a mattress, they're given clothes, recreational things such as playing cards, chess, checkers, that type of thing. We have not had access to talk to the prisoners. And again, that's one thing that you've got to be very careful of. You want to establish a prisoner relationship with the interrogators and not have that proliferated with other people."
Nguyen: "Let's back up for just a moment, because you said you said watched an interrogation.
Shepperd: "Yes."
Nguyen: "Kind of explain to us how that played out. And were there any instances of abuse or possible abuse?"
Shepperd: "Absolutely not. These -- when I sat and watched them, I want to be very careful in describing them. And I don't want to describe how we watched or anything of that sort. But basically, you're able to observe interrogations. They have various ways of monitoring the interrogations and what have you and letting you see what's going on. With the interrogations that we watched were interrogators, there were translators that translated for the detainee and there were also intelligence people in there.
"And they're basically asking questions. They just ask the same questions over a long period of time. They get information about the person's family, where they're from, other people they knew. All the type of things that you would want in any kind of criminal investigation. And these were all very cordial, very professional. There was laughing in two of them that we in the two of them that we watched-"
Nguyen: "Laughing in an interrogation?!"
Shepperd: Yes, indeed. It's not -- it's not like the impression that you and I have of what goes on in an interrogation, where you bend people's arms and mistreat people. They're trying to establish a firm professional relationship where they have respect for each other and can talk to each other. And yes, there were laughing and humor going on in a couple of these things. And I'm talking about a remark made where someone will smirk or laugh or chuckle."
Nguyen: "Mm hmm. All right. General Don Shepperd, we appreciate your time and that look inside Gitmo, with you being there on this tour. Thank you for that. And of course, we invite you to stay tuned, because there's much more Live From coming up."


(Late Update: Shepperd appeared live, on-camera, this morning (Monday) during the 9am EDT hour of CNN's American Morning to recount what he observed at Guantanamo.)
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Jun, 2005 03:31 pm
oops
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Jun, 2005 03:32 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
Quote:
Retired General Tours Guantanamo, Tells CNN Media Portrayal Wrong

Retired Major General Donald Shepperd toured the Guantanamo Bay detention facility on Friday and found that reality did not match the media's portrayal, he recounted in a phone interview from Cuba on CNN just before 3pm EDT on Friday. Shepperd asserted: "The impressions that you're getting from the media and from the various pronouncements being made by people who have not been here, in my opinion, are totally false." Shepperd contended that "what we're seeing is a modern prison system with dedicated people, interrogators and analysts that know what they are doing. And people being very, very well-treated." But when Shepperd reported that he had observed an interrogation, anchor Betty Nguyen inquired: "Kind of explain to us how that played out. And were there any instances of abuse or possible abuse?" Shepperd responded: "Absolutely not."

The MRC's Ken Shepherd corrected the CNN transcript against the video for the phone interview which began at 2:51pm EDT on June 24:

Betty Nguyen, anchor: "We have just established a line to Guantanamo Bay, to our military analyst General Don Shepperd. He arrived there as part of a trip put together by the Pentagon in the wake of that human rights report that criticized conditions at the U.S. prison for war detainees. General Shepperd on the phone with us right now. General Shepperd, what do you see so far while being there?"
Major General Donald Shepperd, Retired, CNN military analyst: "Well, I tell you what, Betty, I'm seeing a lot of rain right now. I thought Cuba was dry and we're in the middle of a drenching rain storm. But I tell you, every American should have a chance to see what our group saw today. The impressions that you're getting from the media and from the various pronouncements being made by people who have not been here, in my opinion, are totally false.
"What we're seeing is a modern prison system with dedicated people, interrogators and analysts that know what they are doing. And people being very, very well-treated. We've had a chance to tour the facility, to talk to the guards, to talk to the interrogators and analysts. We've had a chance to eat what the prisoners eat. We've seen people, high-value people, being interrogated. And it's nothing like the impression that we're getting from the media. People need to see this, Betty."
Nguyen: "All right. You said you got to talk to the interrogators and the guards. Let's start with the interrogators. What have they told you so far?
Shepperd: "The interrogators -- basically we have the opinion from things that we've heard that people down here have been mistreated. Everyone that we've talked to -- and this is consistent with things I've known from the past -- every interrogator will tell you that the key to getting information you need is to establish a personal relationship based upon respect over a long period of time with the people.
"People won't talk necessarily at first, but eventually, they will begin to talk and you'll get pieces of information that you can fit together with pieces of information from somewhere else. But they say pressure does not work, disrespect does not work, and torture is absolutely something that is counterproductive. You need to make to make people feel comfortable and comfortable with you to get the information you need. And that came from everyone, men and women, that were interrogators down here. And again, it's consistent with what I've heard in this past."
Nguyen: "Now, this leads me to my next question. Of course, this was a trip organized by the Pentagon. So do you feel like you're getting full access to everything there? Are you seeing a true picture of how it is?"
Shepperd: "Yeah, that's always a good question. But I tell you that they are proud to have people down here, including the press, to see what we are seeing. Obviously, they're going to put their best foot forward, And obviously, no matter where you are, there will be from time to time abuses or people misusing or disobeying the regulations, no matter where you are in the process. But I tell you, I've been in prisons and I've been in jails in the United States, and this is by far the most professionally-run and dedicated force I've ever seen in any correctional institution anywhere."
Nguyen: "You also mentioned that you have spoken with guards. What are they saying?"
Shepperd: "Very interesting. I had lunch with a -- one of the female guards and then I talked to a group of male guards as well. I said, do you ever see anything go on here that resembles mistreatment of the prisoners or mistreatment by the prisoners of guard? And they say, we're on alert all the time. They're not armed when they're around the guards [sic] for obvious reasons. You don't do that because weapons can be taken and used against you. But basically, they treat the prisoners firmly, with respect. They don't engage in a lot of banter with them. And they say that the prisoners do things that we've heard about in the media. They sometimes get riled and they'll throw feces, they'll throw urine at the guards. But this entire system is based upon compliance. In other words, if you comply with the rules, you're going to be treated well, you're going to be given more privileges, just like any detention facility. And if you don't, your life is going to be much more miserable than those who do...."
Nguyen: "On the flip side, have you had access to the prisoners themselves and what are their conditions?"
Shepperd: "We have not had access to the prisoners themselves. We are told what they are and we have seen all the facilities and we have watched interrogations. We just watched interrogations of two high-value prisoners -- what they can determine is high-value targets or high-value prisoners that have been here for a considerable amount of time. The facilities are basic of prisoners anywhere. We've seen the cells. They're seven-by-eight foot cells. They're clean. They have a toilet in the facility, they have and a water fountain in the facility. They have a bed. They're given the Koran, they're given a mattress, they're given clothes, recreational things such as playing cards, chess, checkers, that type of thing. We have not had access to talk to the prisoners. And again, that's one thing that you've got to be very careful of. You want to establish a prisoner relationship with the interrogators and not have that proliferated with other people."
Nguyen: "Let's back up for just a moment, because you said you said watched an interrogation.
Shepperd: "Yes."
Nguyen: "Kind of explain to us how that played out. And were there any instances of abuse or possible abuse?"
Shepperd: "Absolutely not. These -- when I sat and watched them, I want to be very careful in describing them. And I don't want to describe how we watched or anything of that sort. But basically, you're able to observe interrogations. They have various ways of monitoring the interrogations and what have you and letting you see what's going on. With the interrogations that we watched were interrogators, there were translators that translated for the detainee and there were also intelligence people in there.
"And they're basically asking questions. They just ask the same questions over a long period of time. They get information about the person's family, where they're from, other people they knew. All the type of things that you would want in any kind of criminal investigation. And these were all very cordial, very professional. There was laughing in two of them that we in the two of them that we watched-"
Nguyen: "Laughing in an interrogation?!"
Shepperd: Yes, indeed. It's not -- it's not like the impression that you and I have of what goes on in an interrogation, where you bend people's arms and mistreat people. They're trying to establish a firm professional relationship where they have respect for each other and can talk to each other. And yes, there were laughing and humor going on in a couple of these things. And I'm talking about a remark made where someone will smirk or laugh or chuckle."
Nguyen: "Mm hmm. All right. General Don Shepperd, we appreciate your time and that look inside Gitmo, with you being there on this tour. Thank you for that. And of course, we invite you to stay tuned, because there's much more Live From coming up."


(Late Update: Shepperd appeared live, on-camera, this morning (Monday) during the 9am EDT hour of CNN's American Morning to recount what he observed at Guantanamo.)


They sent in a retired General and he returned a pro miltary report. NO!!!!!! Shocked

Wouldn't that be like hiring Tommy Chong to do a long term study on the beneficial effets of marijuana?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Jun, 2005 03:33 pm
I don't think this administration or military understands anything about conflict of interest.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Jun, 2005 03:38 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote:


They sent in a retired General and he returned a pro miltary report. NO!!!!!! Shocked

Wouldn't that be like hiring Tommy Chong to do a long term study on the beneficial effets of marijuana?


Who better to analyze what's going on down there ... Katie Couric?

Not sure what his capacity was, but he is a CNN Military Analyst. So was Wesley Clark ... would it have been a conflict of interest for Gen. Clark to have toured the facility and reported? Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Jun, 2005 03:41 pm
What conflict of interest? I';m talking about a well trained dog doing the right tricks for master.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Jun, 2005 04:44 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
blueveinedthrobber wrote:


They sent in a retired General and he returned a pro miltary report. NO!!!!!! Shocked

Wouldn't that be like hiring Tommy Chong to do a long term study on the beneficial effets of marijuana?


Who better to analyze what's going on down there ... Katie Couric?

Not sure what his capacity was, but he is a CNN Military Analyst. So was Wesley Clark ... would it have been a conflict of interest for Gen. Clark to have toured the facility and reported? Rolling Eyes



The retired General was given a carefully orchestrated tour by the Pentagon. He was not given access to any of the detainees.

How about sending in the U.N. inspectors to conduct a legitimate investigation of the allegations of abuse / torture and allow them access to the detainees? If we have nothing to hide (e.g., evidence of abuse or torture) why not allow the U.N. to conduct the inspections as they have requested to do months ago?

After all, we didn't believe Saddam Hussein when he claimed he wasn't hiding WMDs . . . we insisted on free and unfettered inspections by U.N. investigators to determine the existence or nonexistence of weapons of mass destruction. When the Iraqi government thwarted the U.N. inspections . . . the whole world (especially the United States) believed there was cause to be suspicious. In fact, our President was so certain that Saddam was hiding weapons of mass destruction that our President set a war in motion that is still ongoing.

The same applies to our government's refusal to allow U.N. inspections to investigate the allegations of abuse and torture . . . there is cause to be suspicious.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Jun, 2005 05:01 pm
I wouldn't send the UN to investigate a loud noise or dog running-at-large complaint
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Jun, 2005 05:05 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
What conflict of interest? I';m talking about a well trained dog doing the right tricks for master.


Then perhaps a better analogy would have helped convey that.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Jun, 2005 08:17 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
I wouldn't send the UN to investigate a loud noise or dog running-at-large complaint


We know Tico. You want people sent who will reinforce your preconceived notions. You needn't go to extra lengths to convince us of your homey attitude. It comes through loud and clear in your regular posts.
0 Replies
 
thethinkfactory
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Jun, 2005 08:24 pm
And... um... Screw the French and stuff.

I just wanted to add that. We don't get enough of it.

TF
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Jun, 2005 08:31 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
What conflict of interest? I';m talking about a well trained dog doing the right tricks for master.


Then perhaps a better analogy would have helped convey that.


euphemism for one you would have more easily understood right? Because I think everyone else got it. :wink:
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Jun, 2005 08:32 pm
thethinkfactory wrote:
And... um... Screw the French and stuff.

I just wanted to add that. We don't get enough of it.

TF


that was a knee slapper and no doubt about it. Nice work. Laughing
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Jun, 2005 09:29 am
Quote:
29/06/2005 10 KUWAIT CITY (AFP)
Kuwaiti court clears former Guantanamo detainee

A Kuwait court on Wednesday found Nasser Najr al-Mutairi, the first Kuwaiti to be repatriated from the US prison at Guantanamo Bay on Cuba, not guilty of committing an act of an aggression against a foreign nation, his lawyer said.

"The criminal court found Nasser Najr al-Mutairi innocent of all the chargest against him because of a lack of evidence," Mubarak al-Shimmari said.

Mutairi, 28, was charged with working for a foreign country and committing an act of aggression against a foreign nation, thus endangering Kuwait's foreign relations, and training in the use of arms.

The public prosecution accused him of fighting against US forces in Afghanistan under the former Taliban regime, for which he faced a minimum of three years in jail.

Mutairi denied the charges and claimed he went to Afghanistan as a relief worker and that he does not know how to use arms.
Source
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Jun, 2005 09:50 am
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Retired General Tours Guantanamo, Tells CNN Media Portrayal Wrong

...


They sent in a retired General and he returned a pro miltary report. NO!!!!!! Shocked

Wouldn't that be like hiring Tommy Chong to do a long term study on the beneficial effets of marijuana?


Who better to analyze what's going on down there ... Katie Couric?

Not sure what his capacity was, but he is a CNN Military Analyst. So was Wesley Clark ... would it have been a conflict of interest for Gen. Clark to have toured the facility and reported? Rolling Eyes

What conflict of interest? I';m talking about a well trained dog doing the right tricks for master.


Then perhaps a better analogy would have helped convey that.


euphemism for one you would have more easily understood right? Because I think everyone else got it. :wink:


I dunno ... hard to see how "everyone else" would think Tommy Chong was a "well trained dog" in that scenario ... much more likely you intended that he had an inherent conflict of interest in that he was pro-MJ.

If you want to run your analogies by me prior to posting them, just PM me. I'd be glad to help. :wink:
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/25/2021 at 09:09:56