On July 17, 07, Bush signed an Executive Order, Sec. 2.(b)  "Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited."  The punishment for violating any of the prohibitions is to have your personal assets and the assets of any and all members of your family frozen.  I assume to be confiscated.  Thus, this constant drumroll by the Bushies that those of us who question are treasonous, or worse, are right in line with the establishment of a totalitarian dictatorship. 

Please Google:  Executive Orders + Bush and read the 7//17/07 one in its entirety -- it is truly terrifying.  By writing this, I have put my entire family in jeopardy, according to Bush.

by Shirley Bianchi (10 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 97 comments) on Wednesday, Nov 14, 2007 at 2:36:50 PM

  (0+)

Thanks for the reference. I went to the site, and what concerns me the most is the loose way that this is put together. The wording lends itself to a whole gamut of interpretations that are left up to the person doing the interpreting. When I worked at the prison, we did reports almost daily. When we did them, we had to make sure that what we wrote was tight, with no room for loopholes. This Executive Order seems to be intentionally loose in its wording so that the interpretation can be expanded or contracted to fit the occasion.

by Barbara Peterson (73 articles, 109 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 541 comments [98 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 14, 2007 at 7:29:23 PM

  (0+)

and now are shaking in their boots that more wont wake up. Its so cleary visible on the videos. go to Vlogging the apocalypse and watch 911 flatliners. The Boeing engineer explains clearly why there were NO PLANES on 911. No wreckage,no wheels,no turbine shafts,no suitcases. The smooth meld of the plane into a solid steel and cement building is impossible. But the tricksters made a big mistake,the airliner that crashes into the tower on video has a long protuberance on the bottom, that only refeuling planes have, as in Air Force KC designation. The old addage is still true, You can fool some of the people some of the time.

by john riggs (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 463 comments [24 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 14, 2007 at 3:22:05 PM

  (0+)

Conspiracy theories will abound when the government keeps secrets, stalls investigations, redacts parts of investigative reports when they finally get around to doing an investigation, and the investigations aren't complete.

When questions are left dangling and unanswered, of course people are going to make up their own answers, and voila! we have theories, conspiracy and otherwise.

by Sandy Sand (198 articles, 0 quicklinks, 227 diaries, 1548 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 14, 2007 at 3:56:34 PM

  (0+)

I changed the following paragraph. I inadvertently switched Bruce Hoffman's name with Mark Weitzman's in the original posting. This one is correct. Please forgive :)

Representative Jane Harmon posed the following question to Bruce Hoffman regarding the connection between 9/11 “conspiracy theorists” and terrorists: “So this movement develops them into violent killers?” Bruce Hoffman, a Georgetown University security studies professor, and Chairman of the Rand Corporation in Counterterrorism and Counterinsurgency, stated that “falsehoods and conspiracy theorists have become so ubiquitous and believed that you almost have some sort of parallel truth, and it has become a very effective tool for recruiting people.” The “people” he is referring to are potential terrorists. Mark Weitzman stated: “These people are constructing their own version of reality, full of conspiracy theories, full of doctored videos, that will recruit or inflame the emotions.”

by Barbara Peterson (73 articles, 109 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 541 comments [98 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 14, 2007 at 6:52:05 PM

  (0+)

Those who seek to spread the truth about 9/11 are strongly advised to limit their assertions to the things which have been well established by competent scientists. It is well established that explosives were used to bring down all three towers. It is also well established that the US govt went to extraordinary lengths to hide and remove evidence for explosives which indicates their complicity.

Talking about energy beams and asserting that no planes hit the towers will not help the cause of truth.

by gravity32 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 201 comments [38 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 14, 2007 at 7:36:18 PM

  (0+)

'They' are simply trying to demonize a sizable segment of the population including 70+ plus % for dissenting with the war (which the directives, etc., now clearly imply). And for we really evil terrorists - what percentage?... - depending... the ones who believe the empirical evidence from 911 destroys the government's conspiracy theory --- and that a truly independent investigation be performed.... well, I guess we that think that way... we all be 'terrahists'.... 

by richard (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 1359 comments [399 recommended, 8 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 14, 2007 at 8:17:24 PM

  (0+)

The focus of the testimony appeared to be solely on the Islam-based terrorists and the newer means (i.e., Internet) by which they "spread their word". To the extent that the A&E for 9/11 Truth web site was mentioned (I haven't seen the PowerPoint), intellectual people have historically been susceptible to manipulation - just look at the recent Scotland bombing attempts carried out by a physician. This mentioning only makes sense given that the 212 licensed and/or credential members are acting as "authority figures". And for the record, 212 out of 77,000+ registered members associated with the AIA do not a majority make. I don't think Mr. Weitzman called 911Truthers "terrorists". Rather, he presented them as "authority figures" that only possess authority because of their Internet presence and slick packaging. To the extent that its appealing, the message of these authority figures presents a distorted reality creating false impressions that expose readers to suggestions from other known terrorist's web sites or electronic lines of communication. As the testimony states, "These [falsehoods] are often built around the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which allege Jewish control of the world, or around presenting the United States government as being engaged in various conspiracies or cover-ups, or ultimately having the entire Western world engaged in a vast, multi-layered conspiracy against the Islamic world." This sounds distorted to me. More insulting is that the 911Truthers cloak their web sites in righteous indignation, professing that they only want the "truth" - well, the only want THEIR truth and damn those well-intentioned but uneducated followers of the scientific method. And because of their wants, they demand that the 9/11 investigation be reopened. After all, every 911Truther knows the towers were brought down by explosive demolitions; it's the great majority that are just plain ignorant to know their truth. Yeah, right.

by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 14, 2007 at 10:37:21 PM

  (0+)

... you're ignorant or living in complete denial.

I'm one of those that do indeed just want the "truth". I'm not looking for anything else. And in seeking it you don't have to go far before questions arise that only the most blinded would not want to know the answers to.

Even if I should be wrong in my suspicions, I certainly have the right to have them without being called a suspected terrorist by Homeland Security because I study the evidence on many of the 9/11 sites.

Surely it must be obvious to anyone that these sites are causing some within this administration to be nervous and getting too close to the truth, otherwise why the over-the-top reaction to them?

Have you been to any of the sites? Have you seen "9/11 Press for Truth", about the Jersey Girls struggle just to get any investigation (whitewash that it was) going? Have you ever asked why NO ONE was fired for the breach in security or even disciplined? But instead were promoted or giving medals for their failures?

Do you think at all? Or do you just swallow whatever any authority figure gives you?

by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 14, 2007 at 11:22:09 PM

  (0+)

"... you're ignorant or living in complete denial."

As I said right above your quote, Mr M, "After all, every 911Truther knows the towers were brought down by explosive demolitions; it's the great majority that are just plain ignorant to know their truth." Scary how that works. But yes, I'm part of the great majority.

"I'm one of those that do indeed just want the "truth". I'm not looking for anything else. And in seeking it you don't have to go far before questions arise that only the most blinded would not want to know the answers to."

I agree with both of these sentences. What happened on 9/11 is unique to American history and questions needed to be asked and answered. And thus, the 9/11 Commission, as well as the NIST reports (final and pending), were issued.

"Even if I should be wrong in my suspicions, I certainly have the right to have them without being called a suspected terrorist by Homeland Security because I study the evidence on many of the 9/11 sites."

As I stated previously, "I don't think Mr. Weitzman called 911Truthers 'terrorists'. Rather, he presented them as 'authority figures' that only possess authority because of their Internet presence and slick packaging." This packaging makes them "believable" by others, which makes the 911Truthers convenient "dupes" for known terrorists to spread their word and ideas. There IS a difference between be labeled a terrorist and a dupe.

"Surely it must be obvious to anyone that these sites are causing some within this administration to be nervous and getting too close to the truth, otherwise why the over-the-top reaction to them?"

What over reaction? Has any 911Truther had their property confiscated by the executive order mentioned previously? Have you been threatened by mysterious government agents to stop browsing the web sites? Have the web sites been shut down by the mysterious government agents? The ONLY over reaction I've witnessed with respect to 9/11 is the veracity of the 911Truthers to claim the government is lying, hiding "something", and actively subverting the 911Truther movement.

"Have you been to any of the sites? Have you seen "9/11 Press for Truth", about the Jersey Girls struggle just to get any investigation (whitewash that it was) going? Have you ever asked why NO ONE was fired for the breach in security or even disciplined? But instead were promoted or giving medals for their failures?"

Ad infinitum have I read the content on these self-proclaimed 9/11 "Truth" web sites. I sometimes even use here on OpEdNews.com their data to debunk, okay – discuss, the myths that they continue to propagate. So, you think it suspicious that an investigation needed to be asked for by the Jersey Girls... you have an investigation report in hand, but you're unhappy with it... and that means... what again – other than you're unhappy with the report?  I try NOT to grow weeds now in my back yard just so that I can make myself "feel" good about pulling them up later.

I'm unhappy with the results of the Columbia accident report but I accept its conclusions and recommendations as valid. Why hasn't the government lied to us on something like that and claimed it was an Iraq missile or something that took it down? Do you see how utterly "silly" this open-ended questioning can get?

An excellent parody on conspiracy theories and their creation - http://www.debunking911.com/questions.htm .

"Do you think at all? Or do you just swallow whatever any authority figure gives you?"

Ironic that you asked these questions because I pointed out the very same about the 911Truthers and their "host of other esteemed scholars, scientists, engineers". I'm pleased to say that "yes" I do think, and I place my trust in me and not authority figures to discern what's true or not. Do you?

As an aside, I'd loved to know the source of Mr. Smith's remembrance where, "just three or four months prior to 9/11, the Bush admiistration [sic] sent $40 million to the Taliban."

I seem to recall that a BMW M5 drove past WTC 7 at 06:53 EDT on 11 Nov 07 and carried Middle-eastern looking males, but what that has to do with the actual attack is beyond me... Again, scary how that works.

by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 10:48:03 AM

  (0+)

I've been a skeptic of what I saw since day one. I watched how they hid what one can see in plain sight. I applauded the Jersey Girls and watched the 9/11 Commission whitewash. I've collected enough data and creditable information to know that what the government is telling us are lies.

And now because the movement is building, more and more people are demanding questions, anyone seeking the truth of that day is to be considered a "terrorist"? 

Goebbels was right when he said "... the truth is the enemy of the state and those that seek to expose the truth are therefore enemies of the state and must be eliminated."

Does this mean that Dennis Kucinick, and Gen. Westley Clark and a host of other esteemed scholars, scientists, engineers, and the nearly 1/3 of the populace that believe a new independent criminal investigation should be conducted of the 9/11 attacks are all suspected "terrorists" now?

We live in very dark times ...

by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 14, 2007 at 10:56:54 PM

  (0+)

The internet has done the oligarchy and the criminals that it employs in governments immense damage by allowing for their long history of covert ops, drug running, assassinations, hostile takeovers of countries and the accompanying slaughter of 'leftists', market rigging and in the case of 9/11 a coup d'etat piggybacked on top of terrorist attacks.

They can criminalize whatever the want to but the truth of the matter is that you just can't put the toothpaste back into the tube and each day another layer of the rotten onion is peeled away for all to see.

These corrupt bitches and bastards are going down and no amount of slanderous inference or reckless legislation to criminalize free speech is going to stop them.

I would just strongly suggest taking names of all collaborators in media, government etc for the day when a real government returns to America for then we can have trials and every last one of the fifth columnist traitors can be convicted and thrown into prison where they belong.

Just my two cents

EE

by Ed Encho (12 articles, 20 quicklinks, 65 diaries, 438 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 5:46:00 AM

  (0+)

owe an  apology and a sign of solidarity to  all the people who try to investigate on their own the 9/11 events. The article above clearly shows that  the  evil forces in the govt of ours take them very seriously and target them thus fortifying the actual statement  of their most important role in the  fight against evil here.  That's how you  find out  who is really valuable for the cause- by the reaction  of the enemy.  I  have been saying all along that all anti- Bush forces are valuable, that  the 9/11 movement  is extremely important and is also the most damaging to Bush and his cronies. This proves it.

People, please. If you here do not consider the Homeland SS and all its activities as a manifestation of the evil force  we here on this site are then just spinning the wheels. The  enemy of my enemy is my friend and if Homeland SS targets the ' truthers' we here MUST  express solidarity with them and also  learn the lesson.

by Mark Sashine (72 articles, 19 quicklinks, 269 diaries, 4101 comments [130 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 9:26:11 AM

  (0+)

.....just three or four months prior to 9/11, the Bush admiistration sent $40 million to the Taliban, who were known to be harboring terrorist Osama bin Laden at the time. If the Bush administration didn't actually perpetrate the attacks on the WTC towers, they certainly paid for them. As far as I'm concerned not only was 9/11 an inside job, but Bush is a terrorist, so when he says that we're either with him or with the terrorists, he's not really giving us any options at all.  ;)

And it isn't only the bin Ladens who are such close friends of the Bush family. Congressional hearings are starting today with regard to Luis Posada Carriles, a known and self-confessed terrorist and another friend of the Bush administration.  They ought to have a sign on the White House that says, "Terrorists "R" Us."

by Mark E. Smith (21 articles, 30 quicklinks, 100 diaries, 1325 comments) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 9:30:56 AM

  (0+)

Well said Mr. Smith.

911 has indeed changed the dynamic of America. Sadly, for the worse. The masterminds behind this horrific event knew exactly what they were doing, in that 911 would fracture this once great country of ours. "Either you'll be with or you'll be against." If it's the latter, then you are with the so called "terrorists." How brilliant!

by Munich (1 articles, 86 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 1125 comments [86 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 10:20:18 AM

  (0+)

And when, pray tell, is the date of such rapture during which the American sheeple will be forced to react to the Police State?  You keep promising it, holding it out before us like the proverbial carrot before the rabbit, and yet, like an evangelist - you keep failing to deliver...

by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 10:54:30 AM

  (0+)

I am one.

As a Ph.D. in materials engineering I spent months critically reviewing remarkable amounts of information and concluded that in good conscience I had to join the truth movement.

There is an important 9/11 truth conference coming up on Dec. 15, 16 in Boston; go to Boston911Truth.org  to learn more; I am on the program and have a very bold talk prepared!!!

by Joel S. Hirschhorn (141 articles, 50 quicklinks, 65 diaries, 546 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 10:24:20 AM

  (0+)

The Al Qaeda Hezbollah Hamas theme song goes something like this:

"Osama bin Laden (Muslims) did not bomb 9/11. The infidel Jews and the infidel Christians did it, lied, killed their own people, so that the U.S. and Israel would have an excuse, a reason to eliminate Islam and steal Islam's oil and land. Just look at the 9/11 truth sites to see that we are right." 

Now keep repeating this to Muslim Iraqis who have had 1 million civilians slaughtered, a Crusade declared agaisnt them by the American President, water, food and electricity removed. This is how terrorists enrage, stir up and recruit Muslim people to their cause. Inadvertently  the 9/11 truth sites do aid terrorist organizations.

Obviously getting to the bottom of 9/11 is essential for the people of the United States, but unfortunately in this case 9/11 truth is a double edged sword. 

by Karen Fish (55 articles, 14 quicklinks, 41 diaries, 106 comments) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 11:20:53 AM

  (0+)

And if it turned out that the 9/11 Truth Site claims were true, does that mean that the TRUTH is the enemy?

by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 11:37:31 AM

  (0+)

why have they refused a thorough re-investigation by independent sources?  They got rid of the evidence in less time than it takes to say 'crime scene investigation'... what are they scared of?

With the neo-con mantra of 'we need a new Pearl Harbor' being fulfilled conveniently, along with plans to invade Iraq being made prior to the administration coming to power, and the volumnous Patriot Act mysteriously having been written in the days after 9/11...  oh yeah, Bin Laden -where's he these days?  C'mon!  

by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 11:32:31 AM

  (0+)

Indeed C. Bid. indeed!

I don't know if anyone has yet looked at or read the journals amongst this page? Journal of 9/11 Studies

Conspiracy Theories, Myths, Skepticism, and 9/11: their Impact on Democracy

And so these brilliant scholars, they too are associated with the Taliban? Rubbish!

by Munich (1 articles, 86 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 1125 comments [86 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 11:53:07 AM

  (0+)

Who stands to benefit from all of this? Yes, I agree that government or someone still keeps the facts hidden. But to what ultimate purpose, five years, ten years... from now?

by oran stewart (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 12 comments) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 11:56:44 AM

  (0+)

A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm

by Steven Thomas (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments) on Friday, Nov 16, 2007 at 7:42:21 AM

  (0+)

One thing I'd like to reiterate on is that the official story comes much closer to a conspiracy theory than most of what the 9/11T movement has produced.

Having my fun reading some of these comments.....feeling somewhat angry because of a few.

Tom mentions the "proverbial carrot before the rabbit". I keep seeing a corn cob and / or a carrot dangling in the face of an ass pulling a cart. This thing can be used either way, but it's entertaining to see it coming from someone like Tom. Gave me a good laugh, so thanks.

"I seem to recall that a BMW M5 drove past WTC 7 at 06:53 EDT on 11 Nov 07 and carried Middle-eastern looking males, but what that has to do with the actual attack is beyond me... Again, scary how that works."

Here, Tom suggests an image most people would eagerly accept. Lemme see, "Middle-eastern looking males".....hmmmmm.......

At the station this morning, I spoke with a young muslim lady from Morocco. She was of the opinion American men are better looking than German men. She sure as hell wasn't referring to me because she didn't know I'm an American. When I asked for an explanation why, she just said "American men just somehow look better". Honestly, I had no idea if it was meant as a compliment or an insult because she really couldn't know which nationality I am. The US flag on my black Zippo had not yet been displayed....not even upside down, the way I usually display it when people ask where I'm from. The subject came up while she was conducting a conversation with an arabic speaking man....and I just happened along and was asked for my opinion. First of all, I said, "I'm not the one to be asking if a man looks good or better 'cause I'm not attracted to men", "secondly, I don't think you can see a difference between American and German men..OR women". Still, she insisted she was of the opinion American men look better. So I asked her if I look good in her opinion.....me a plain old .....and she said...in perfect German because that's what we were speaking ...."you're not bad looking for a German guy" to which I replied "Gotcha! I'm an American" I pulled out my zippo and proudly displayed the upside down flag. The arabic speaking guy rolled his eyes and said something like "f*cking a**hole Americans" or seomthing like that and he walked off leaving the two of us there alone. The coffee was very good by the way. I then said, "some Americans look good and some are good, while some can see you for what you are and others see you as someone from the mid-east but the truth is, you can't tell where a person is from just by looking at him. If you've ever been to London, you'll know just what I mean, and besides, people are people wherever you go. The world is full of a**holes and each country has a certain portion of them, no matter where you go. In general and for the most part, we're all the same , we're all children of the same God and this bullshit phony war on terrorism is based on hate and prejudice."

She agreed with that and insisted I'm just a good looking German who carries a zippo with a US flag on it. An American would never say what I said, oh no. LOL, we may be good looking but we're not all too smart now are we? You see, even that is prejudice. To judge a man's cleverness based on the intelligence he displays is always wrong. A man can be as smart as a whip and still not be able to tie his shoes.

Whoever it may have been in that BMW, they had good taste in cars. That's about all you can honestly say with jumping to conclusions and that's not what you wanted to do, Tom ? Implanting ideas are we ?

And now to Karen's mention of an "The Al Qaeda Hezbollah Hamas theme song". Can you produce a copy, a recording of it in Arabic for me ? It must be an amazing song. "Al Qaeda Hezbollah Hamas" ?? Did these dudes merge on us or what ? More dis-info, imho.

by Tony Forest (7 articles, 18 quicklinks, 166 diaries, 1429 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 12:29:29 PM

  (0+)

It seems as though a tender "nerve" was hit there. Let's not inject emotions into the discussion for it only confuses the issue further. The BMW example was not meant to offend but illustrate how casual and unsubstantiated associations are linked by 911Truthers.

An actual 911Truther example of this associating is Marvin Bush, the President's brother, who from 1993 to 2000 sat on the board of the security contractor responsible for the electronic security systems at the Dulles International Airport and WTC Complex. Allegedly, Marvin was the government's "gateway" into planting the explosives in WTC 1, 2, and 7, "...but what that has to do with the actual attack is beyond me... Again, scary how that works," - http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0204-06.htm .

My brother is a doctor at a central Massachusetts hospital. I work in central Massachusetts. Therefore, I must be the gateway for rising drug use and related crime in central Massachusetts. This is "comic book" mentality at its best; in reality, though, it's foppish and intellectually immature.

by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 2:15:33 PM

  (0+)

Tom,

9/11 is a tender nerve. I'm not sure what I can add to that short sentence to add emphasis to it. An attempt ; many are on edge or edgy or whatever without asking my PONS (better than Webster's btw) and they have their beliefs and have come to their conclusions (me included).  We just can't get no real satisfaction, yet, and we're doing all we can to get our points across and then comes Bronson. Bronson throws a few debuker URLs in our faces and tells us how -add your favorite derogatory adjective HERE- we all are for trying to get our 9/11 Truth rock off this mountain of lies and roll 'em on down the hill. The Hill ? Roll 'em down The Hill ? Hell, we're no different than all the rest ! We would like to see the REAL perps hang ! Sorry, my emotions getting the best of me again. 

Of course it's an emotional thing. What is it for you ? A game ? Drop by a liberal quasi 9/11T site and rile them up a bit on a daily basis ? DANGER WILL ROBINSON, DANGER !! This sh*t is contageous. I've seen it happen time and time again. Guys come in to rile us up and in the end end up joining us. Maybe ! This is what you're after. Your intellect is still in the way. Aha !

Still, you're (imho) a gentleman, a scholar and a fare mudslinger. Back in the ring widya, ya dog yer. You're doing allright for a kid from a corrupt family (brother's a Dr. et al). Just kidding. 

by Tony Forest (7 articles, 18 quicklinks, 166 diaries, 1429 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Nov 15, 2007 at 2:34:49 PM

  (0+)

This is bad business, and must be confronted. Kudos to the author of this piece for making corrections to the article that make it more accurate.

 Don't let this Subcommitte steamroll over you, people. Let 'em know that "this aggression will not stand".

by reprehensor (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 7 comments) on Friday, Nov 16, 2007 at 6:25:26 AM

  (0+)

Bush Sr. or Lebowski?

by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Nov 16, 2007 at 8:37:40 AM

  (0+)