October 19, 2003

Not Pacifists

It looks like the majority of likely Democratic voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina are looking for a presidential candidate who backed regime-change in Iraq.

I've said it before. Liberals and Democrats are not pacifists. Pacifism may make intellectuals and activists swoon. But not the rank and file.

The Democratic Party is an unstable coalition of mutually hostile factions. The left-wing is in total denial. Implosion (at least in the short run) is a real possibility.

Posted by Michael J. Totten at October 19, 2003 11:17 PM
Comments

Interesting: alas, of the three people mentioned favorably in that article, none of them were on the side of the angels when it came to that critical grant-or-loan amendment: Edwards voted for loans while Lieberman and Gephardt both abstained (although the latter voted for the House's final version of the bill, which makes him marginally more acceptable). Lieberman's inability to make a moral stand bothers me almost as much as Edward's joining in on the looting attempt...

Posted by: Moe Lane at October 20, 2003 06:04 AM

The article referenced says that majority of voters "prefer a presidential nominee who supported military action against Iraq but criticized President Bush for failing to assemble international support over a candidate who opposed military action from the beginning."

If so, these Democratis have five candidates from which to choose from that basically share their views -- Clark, Gephardt, Kerry, Edwards and Lieberman. Once we are down to one of these guys, vs. Dean, we can have a good, honest, Democratic debate.

I disagree with the antiwar position, but obviously a representative republic like ours ought to have at least some people in Congress and running for President representing the many millions of Americans who disagree with us on this issue. Which party should these representatives belong to? Just who would you like the antiwar crowd to vote for? I'd rather have a "left-wing in total denial" and voting Democratic than a left-wing in the Green Party.

Posted by: Markus Rose at October 20, 2003 06:20 AM

Michael Totten writes, once again inaccurately: "It looks like the majority of likely Democratic voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina are looking for a presidential candidate who backed regime-change in Iraq."

No, what they are looking for is someone who can defeat Bush and who can address their pressing concerns. Those pressing concerns remain overwhelmingly economic. When push comes to shove, if Dean appears more electable against Bush, I doubt many Democrats will try to use early opposition to the war as a litmus test, when all the real questions are about what to do now.

Speaking of now, Moe Lane writes: "Lieberman's inability to make a moral stand bothers me almost as much as Edward's joining in on the looting attempt..."

Providing Iraqi reconstruction aid packages as loans is a "looting attempt"? Then I guess the Marshall Plan, which provided grants only up to the level possible with matching funds from European countries receiving aid, and which consisted of about 15% interest-bearing loans, was "15% looting."

Iraq has $1 trillion worth of oil; whereas post-war European reconstruction was dependent to a great degree on natural resources from places like Iraq. As one GOP Senator pointed out, as he headed back home this week, this $1 trillion of Iraqi oil wealth makes grant aid a hard sell to the U.S. voter. (And yes, $1 trillion was the figure he used -- some people in Washington can do the math, even if HA can't.) Quite predictably, I might add. From almost the beginning of all this war talk, I heard most promoters of the war say "topple Saddam, then rebuild Iraq with its own oil earnings." I never heard anyone talk about outright grants for reconstruction. So why would any reasonable person think that most voters would feel differently now? Just because U.S. fumbling in the early months of the occupation pushed the reconstruction bill even higher? No, they'll see that as the fault of Bush's people.

And of course, almost every week you read some story about some U.S. company bidding 10 to 50 times as much as it would take Iraqis themselves to do the needed work. (My favorite so far: a $50 million estimate for rehabilitating a cement factory; the U.S. general in charge balked at the American company's estimate, and found Iraqis willing to do it for ... $80,000. What is that, a factor of 600 or so?)

C'mon, who are the real looters? Legislators who understandably vote for reconstruction funding tied to future Iraq oil earnings, i.e., what most American voters expected all along? Or pork-barrel contractors on the inside track with the Bush administration?

Cancellation of Saddam-era debts? That I'm sure Americans can go along with. Especially since relatively little of the debt is to the U.S. But you're shocked, just shocked, at the moral perfidy of the average voter now, on this grants-vs-loans issue, when you had all the warning in the world? Wake up already.

Posted by: Michael Turner at October 20, 2003 06:50 AM

"Providing Iraqi reconstruction aid packages as loans is a "looting attempt"?"

Well, what would you call saddling 10B of debt on a government that hasn't even been fully formed yet, especially when the previous regime racked up twenty times that amount? Frankly, I find sh*t like this evocative of the worst 'war for oil' rhetoric of the worst of the antiwar faction: I guess that they were just looking in the wrong direction, which doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

Posted by: Moe Lane at October 20, 2003 07:24 AM

Michael Turner: From the article I linked:

Democrats surveyed in the three states also listed foreign policy and national security experience as the most important attribute they are looking for in selecting a nominee. They rated that characteristic over such other choices as experience in Congress, being a decorated combat veteran, being a Washington outsider or having a blue-collar background.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at October 20, 2003 09:24 AM

Meanwhile I just viewed on television and read in the news that while Gephardt, Lieberman and to some extent Edwards and Kerry split up the Center part of the party, the majority portion that was not opposed to the Iraqi war, Dean is getting all of the portion of the farther left wing and is cruising.

Meanwhile, Lieberman and I think Gephardt just announced they aren't even investing any more time in Iowa, because they don't think they can win that state?

So perhaps Michael's linked article is a little erred in its assumptions?

Mike

Posted by: Mike at October 20, 2003 09:59 AM

Mike,

If the liberal hawks divide up the war vote, Dean could still clean up with the anti-war vote, even if the anti-war vote is smaller and louder. It could look different when some of the candidates drop out of the race, though. Then a real fight between peaceniks and hawks could commence once the hawks gravitate toward a single candidate.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at October 20, 2003 10:40 AM

If we are not to meet the fate of previous empires, we must behave in Iraq as modest stewards, giving much and asking in the near term little in return, save that the Iraqi people use this opportunity to construct for themselves a decent, accountable, law-abiding, fair—and hopefully democratic—government. - Larry Diamond, http://www-hoover.stanford.edu/publications/digest/032/diamond.html

I heard Larry Diamond interviewed on NPR radio before the Iraq war, and when asked specifically who should bear the costs of Iraq's reconstruction, he responded that the American taxpayer will inevitably shoulder the burden this time. There were certainly voices to say Iraqi oil would finance it as well, but both sides seemed adequately represented. If Michael Turner wants good examples of "looting" he should consider many of the sweet deals Saddam gave to France before the war.

Posted by: d-rod at October 20, 2003 11:44 AM

"As one GOP Senator pointed out, as he headed back home this week, this $1 trillion of Iraqi oil wealth makes grant aid a hard sell to the U.S. voter."

So, if we gut the entire future natural resources of a nation, the treasure will be less than a third of our annual GDP? The numbers don't look so stirling in that regard. The $10 billion represents less than five percent of our annual GDP GROWTH on a bad year. The Senators are trying to look meek and empty pocketed while they shovel billions to their own pork. Tom Daschle's (D-ADM) fuel additive subsidies costs more and buys less than lasting peace in the Middle East.

Posted by: Patrick Lasswell at October 20, 2003 12:25 PM

Looking at proven reserves isn't really that useful a measure. Reserves don't generate interest, but debt charges accrue.

Figure that, if by some miracle, oil stays at a very high (given the second assumption) 30 $/bbl, and Iraq reaches 50% of the production of Saudi (unlikely) without causing a collapse of the oil market (very, very unlikely) their total debt (not counting the most recent $10 bn addendum and any futher reconstruction loans).

Given their very high pre-existing debt load, all that this particular thing does is push Iraq closer to defaulting on it's entire debt. And there's not that many ways for the international financial community to merrily ignore a $200bn + debt default.

Posted by: Anticipatory Retaliation at October 20, 2003 03:54 PM

Kucinich has the hard-left portion of the Party; Dean has a huge swathe across the spectrum who either opposed the war or have come to oppose the Bush Administration's handling of the aftermath.

Posted by: Kimmitt at October 20, 2003 04:06 PM

The poll is right, but in Iowa because of the way the caucuses work (voting is done publicly by standing in a corner for a designated candidate, people can persuade you, and it can take up to three hours) only activists show up, and super loyal D's show up. Less that 10% of the registered D' voters, so the group is more liberal and is very anti-war which is why Kucinich polls like 4% there.

Posted by: Laddy at October 20, 2003 09:10 PM

Mr. Turner

"No, what they are looking for is someone who can defeat Bush and who can address their pressing concerns. Those pressing concerns remain overwhelmingly economic. "

Perhaps pressing now, but they won't be in one year. The economy will have a tail wind by then. Reagan got a landslide in 84 with Mondale selling a tax increase as honest politics. With manufacturing employment picking up and construction still strong, the blue collar worker won't be singing the blues.

The next election will be a war referendum. It will either be a pro-war guy vs. an anti-war guy (Braun has no chance) or it will come down to who has a better war strategy. I think we can expect the former, IMO, and therefore a loss for the Dems. I'd rather that not be the case.

Posted by: Adam Sullivan at October 20, 2003 09:47 PM

The economy will have a tail wind by then.

I respectfully disagree. The Bush Administration is so manfestly incapable of managing an economy that it will find a way to cause harm.

Posted by: Kimmitt at October 20, 2003 10:15 PM

Kimmit,

Tell me the name of the President of the United States who meaningfully managed the economy. No PoTUS has ever meaningfully controlled the US economy, ever. Truman knew that he was going to face a post-war recession and he did all he could to lighten it, but it still happened. Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, and Carter all rode the sluggish post-WWII economy that never cracked the 1,000 mark on the Dow. Reagan did all he could, but the Iran/Iraq War driving down the price of oil and the advent of the microcomputer did much more to influence the economy than his policies.

I know that people love to bash Bush for his domestic policies, but that is almost as accurate an accusation as bashing his weather, sports, and cat policies. If the economy improves, it will owe less to Bush's efforts than externalities. I will scoff at Bush if he takes credit for an improved economy just as I will scoff at the Democratic candidate if he points to a failed economy. If you doubt this, tell me the single largest factor in the economic recovery during the Roosevelt administration. (Hint: it was during the third term...)

Posted by: Patrick Lasswell at October 20, 2003 11:28 PM

OKaaay....

Let's say that we make a portion of reconstruction funds to Iraq a 'loan'.

SOMEBODY needs to agree to that loan and SOMEBODY has to sign for that loan.

Since the United States is leading the provisional Gov't in Iraq...

Does that mean that we sign an agreement to loan ourselves the cash? Or are we to assume that we sign an agreement (In lieu of an operating Iraqi gov't) saying that any future Iraq Gov't (in absentee) agrees to pay back said loan?

If the former is true. Give them the $$$$-why do we want to tack on paying them a dividend on top of this so-called loan? This would only increase the $$ cost of the grant.

If the latter is acceptable to anyone...I ask you this:

Does this form of 'coerced loan'(my terminology) sound like extortion to any of you? NO? I guarantee that it will sound like extortion to our good friends in the ME and the EU...not to mention the all knowing, all wise UN.

I'd wager that you couldn't even pull this kind of 'fast one' on your own 16 yr old kid. (I know MY son wouldn't fall for it!) LOL!

Posted by: babs at October 20, 2003 11:55 PM

Yeah, as if I was the only one here off-topic!

Sorry M.T. and regular posters, had to vent.

No disrespect intended.

Posted by: babs at October 21, 2003 12:07 AM

In some attempt to refute my statement that Democrats will go overwhelmingly to the candidate who offers them a shot at a better economy, Michael Totten further quotes the article: "Democrats surveyed in the three states also listed foreign policy and national security experience as the most important attribute they are looking for in selecting a nominee. They rated that characteristic over such other choices as experience in Congress, being a decorated combat veteran, being a Washington outsider or having a blue-collar background."

Exactly how does that make my take on the situation wrong? It sounds to me like they want Wesley Clark, who straddles the fence by saying he would have voted for an authorization of the use of force, but would also have waited for a U.N security council mandate -- a green light which we wouldn't have gotten, by the looks of arms-inspection evidence that might have turned up given another 6 months of searching, with an inspection team tripled in size.

But I maintain: they'd make that choice only if Clark looks electable against Bush, and only if he sounds sensible to Democrats on economic policy. The personal qualities and experience are separate variables.

Posted by: Michael Turner at October 21, 2003 02:53 AM

In response to my "Providing Iraqi reconstruction aid packages as loans is a "looting attempt"?

Moe, stripping out all of the inconvenient context of my post, writes: "Well, what would you call saddling 10B of debt on a government that hasn't even been fully formed yet, especially when the previous regime racked up twenty times that amount?"

I might call it a low-interest loan in the best tradition of the Marshall Plan, while bowing to certain realities of the situation.

Iraq's previous debts (mostly to the French and the Russians, IIRC) versus any debts that it might incur with the U.S. from now on are two separate issues. Anyone reading my post with half an eye would have noticed my mention of that.

Personally, I'm currently in favor of cancelling all Saddam-era debt. I'm even in favor of outright grants to Iraq, provided there is some structure in place to make sure that the money doesn't end up mostly being pocketed by Bush White House cronies. My points were very simple:

(1) American voters have been, and probably will continue to be, in favor of financing Iraq's reconstruction from Iraq's current or potential oil earnings,

and

(2) it is astonishingly naive to imagine that the votes of legislators representing U.S. taxpayers about such spending decisions would not reflect this near-consensus among Americans. Last I checked, it was part of the job description of 'legislator'.

Moe continues: "Frankly, I find sh*t like this evocative of the worst 'war for oil' rhetoric of the worst of the antiwar faction: I guess that they were just looking in the wrong direction, which doesn't surprise me in the slightest."

If you would, Moe: read me for what I'm saying, and carefully, rather than for who I might happen to sound like when you're skimming inattentively for something that will make your knee jerk. An appropriate response would be to cite some recent poll results showing that I'm wrong in my perception that most Americans prefer loans over grants. I'd do that myself, right now, except that I feel I already do far too much of the real work around here.

Posted by: Michael Turner at October 21, 2003 03:17 AM

In response to my ""As one GOP Senator pointed out, as he headed back home this week, this $1 trillion of Iraqi oil wealth makes grant aid a hard sell to the U.S. voter."

Patrick Lasswell responds "So, if we gut the entire future natural resources of a nation, the treasure will be less than a third of our annual GDP?"

Iraqi reconstruction is currently estimated at about $50 billion, possibly going as high as $300 billion. This is 5%-30% of $1 trillion. Nowhere do I propose that the Bush administration is out to "gut" Iraq of all $1 trillion only to spend it on reconstruction of Iraq. From what I'm reading about how Iraqis could spend this money better, the $50 billion figure sounds far more likely than the $300 billion worst-case estimate.

Could you be a little clearer, Patrick, about what words you want to put in my mouth? The ones you're using don't make a lot of sense.

Posted by: Michael Turner at October 21, 2003 03:26 AM

Wow Michael Turner wants to make it all about the OIL.

Interesting. Very interesting to see so many Democrats wanting to take money from people who have money stolen from them for 30 years.

Did not realize that Michael was such a Neo-Con.

Oh wait no he isn't. We are asking other countries to suspend the monies owed to them, we should do the same here. We do not care about their oil, other than giving those people hope. We only care about making it a democratic shining light in a dark hole of fascism.

Bah, oh well.

And my wife, Poly-Sci graduate, I like to refer to it as a degree in Poverty, told me her professor said "there are two things the President gets credit and blame for which they have no power over, Economy and Crime".

But then again what do Professors know.

Posted by: James Stephenson at October 21, 2003 05:06 AM

James Stephenson writes: "Wow Michael Turner wants to make it all about the OIL. Interesting. Very interesting to see so many Democrats wanting to take money from people who have money stolen from them for 30 years. Did not realize that Michael was such a Neo-Con."

He must have missed my writing this:

"Personally, I'm currently in favor of cancelling all Saddam-era debt. I'm even in favor of outright grants to Iraq, provided there is some structure in place to make sure that the money doesn't end up mostly being pocketed by Bush White House cronies."

As for "money stolen", I'm not at all sure who you're referring to, James. Iraqis were stolen from? Prior to U.N. sanctions, they enjoyed a reasonably high standard of living by Arab standards, largely from oil earnings determined mostly by OPEC pricing. If you were being ripped off by any other cartel, I guess you'd be screaming highway robbery. But, no, here you focus on how much Saddam et al. kept of earnings that were inflated by an anti-market mechanism, without considering that, without oil wealth, and extortionate pricing for it via OPEC, Iraqis would have been poorer even under the most beneficent and charitable government. Where did that money really come from? Ask yourself that next time you fill up your tank.

James goes on to say: "Oh wait no he isn't. We are asking other countries to suspend the monies owed to them, we should do the same here."

No, I quite explicitly divide the debt into two categories: pre-Saddam and post-Saddam. Pre-Saddam loans should be subject to debt forgiveness. Post-saddam loans will very likely be a small fraction of current debt, and easily covered from oil earnings. I'd prefer grants, but I have a hard time seeing loans as "looting." I stand by what my original objection: if loans are "looting", then the Marshall Plan was at least 15% looting. If other countries want to make loans or grants to Iraq, they should feel welcome to do so, under appropriate controls. They just shouldn't expect to see their money back for any previous loans, though. Any more than we should.

Try reading before responding. And try thinking after reading. It only hurts for the first few minutes.

Posted by: Michael Turner at October 21, 2003 05:32 AM

Above, babs speaks of the coerciveness of charging interest on any redevelopment loans to Iraq. Yes, absolutely -- and legislators like Dan Burton (R-Ind) probably realize this too, when they speak of making interest-free loans instead of grants.

Especially given the blatant HalliBechtel porkiness so far. Not to mention the slow rate at which this situation is yielding to more transparent bidding by U.S. (and other) companies, to greater Iraqi involvement on the ground, and to a return to Iraqi sovereignty. I believe that charging interest for these loans might amount to asking Iraqis to pay interest on top of money they wouldn't have spent the same way, money that they could have spent more efficiently if it had been under their control. And that's actually a good argument for holding off on spending any more than absolutely necessary, at this point -- not $20 billion, not even $10 billion. The World Bank seems to agree: they say only about $6 billion can be effectively spent in the coming year. And the World Bank is probably looking very closely at HalliBechtel when they say that. Petrodollar laundromats are an old story, and the HalliBechtels haven't exactly been bit players in it.

Another interesting dimension to this funding drama is the potential for eventual Iraq realignment. This also has Congress worried, for good reason. A fully sovereign Iraq might apply U.S. funding to repayment of some portion of debts to Russia and France, to regain their good graces. The gross padding of redevelopment budgets by U.S. companies on the inside track with Bush & Co. only lends itself to such a scenario. A future Iraqi government will be able to say to France or Russia, "We'd like to repay in full, but Americans were spending the money back then, most of those dollars boomeranged right back to the U.S. [a foreign-aid game perfected by the Japanese, btw], so we're still mired in post-sanctions, post-Allied-invasion infrastructure shortfalls. But you know that we were your loyal friends through this whole sordid episode. So ... here's some of the cash we siphoned off and held in reserve ... and now: support us in the U.N. while we go and nationalize the fuck out of every American operation within our borders ..."

Stranger things have happened in the Middle East, after all. And if we get too full of some image of ourselves as being a Light Unto Nations (infrared, I'll grant you that, at least), we might only end up with only heat in return.

Posted by: Michael Turner at October 21, 2003 06:15 AM

Michael Turner, the Marshall Plan was set up after loans (20B, I believe) were determined to have not worked in European reconstruction, and were designed to foster said reconstruction through a judicious use of grants (roughly 90%) and even more judicious use of loans (10%). They were not an outright grant program that was cynically changed (for purely partisan politics at best, and outright cupidity at worst) at the last second to be a 50/50 split, with a meaningless fig leaf of 'if everybody else forgives the loans, we'll turn it into a grant'.

At any rate, stop looking to the past and try to focus on the present. The Iraqis are in massive debt. They will not be able to pay off those debts any time soon: adding to that debt will not help matters any. It is unlikely that the USA will be able to convince other nations to significantly forgive those debts - and if the bill is not properly revised, it is now even more unlikely, thanks to a lot of Democratic Congressmen (and several dead-men-walking Republicans) who have undercut the USA's moral position. Given the rhetoric I've heard lately, I decline to apologize for suspecting that this was the idea all along.

Bottom line: this amendment was both immoral and unethical, and while you may be able to separate out pre and post-liberation debts, the rest of the world won't be so obliging, so you cannot take refuge in your personal opinion. You are arguing in favor of looting - and, again, I don't care that the Marshall Plan happened to include loans, too, as the circumstances and morality are different - and I find that I don't much care if you think that this is a knee-jerk position. In fact, I find it a compliment (although you probably think otherwise): I would very like to think of myself as the sort of person whose automatic response to a theft would be a good, swift knee to the thief's groin. I possibly may not be, but thank you anyway.

Moe

Posted by: Moe Lane at October 21, 2003 06:50 AM

We didn't ask the Iraqis permission to invade, and so we owe them a free reconstruction package.

Senators who voted for war but against the post-war reconstruction are assholes.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at October 21, 2003 04:12 PM

Its really very simple.

(1) $10B is chump change in the US budget, especially spread over years. More than $10B falls through the cracks of the welfare state every single year.

(2) Reconstructing Iraq without loans is much more likely to succeed. If we force more loans on the Iraqis, it will only generate resentment and give ammo to the nutbags who said we were only in it for the oil.

(3) Only an idiot puts a major project at risk for chump change.

Posted by: R C Dean at October 22, 2003 04:57 AM

I am sorry M. Turner I must have misunderstood what you had wrote.

And I am glad to see we are on the same page.

You even wrote about how the Bush Cronies are not getting the cash,

"And of course, almost every week you read some story about some U.S. company bidding 10 to 50 times as much as it would take Iraqis themselves to do the needed work. (My favorite so far: a $50 million estimate for rehabilitating a cement factory; the U.S. general in charge balked at the American company's estimate, and found Iraqis willing to do it for ... $80,000. What is that, a factor of 600 or so?)"

Isn't that in fact showing exactly what you were talking about. Now another caveat, I am glad it did not cost 50 million and glad the Iraqi's were able to benefit from the reconstruction coin.

However, maybe the American Company was talking in terms of American specs. Including salaries and safety. Maybe to do the same kind of work in America would cost 50 million. But in Iraq, labor is cheaper and doubtful they have the same safety requirements our country does.

This does not excuse the 50 mill, but offers a perspective on it. I am happy it went straight to Iraqi's though.

Anyway, again I apologize for mis-understanding what you were writing.

Posted by: James Stephenson at October 22, 2003 05:33 AM

Moe Lane writes of the Marshall Plan: "They were not an outright grant program that was cynically changed (for purely partisan politics at best, and outright cupidity at worst) at the last second to be a 50/50 split, with a meaningless fig leaf of 'if everybody else forgives the loans, we'll turn it into a grant'."

In a column very critical of the decision to go to more loans (and error-riddled -- it's described as an $87 billion reconstruction package, when actually it's an $87 budget for the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and this political-football $20 billion for reconstruction) David Brooks speaks of the "fig leaf alternative" of what he calls the "Nancy Pelosi Democrats" as one that would have "reduced U.S. control of the reconstruction and shifted power to the World Bank."

Hey, I'm all in favor of that. Why, with all the war profiteering we've seen from U.S. companies in Iraq so far, would you want the reconstruction being managed by any agency except one that has a long history of managing development projects with relative impartiality? When that didn't fly, says Brooks, "..the Pelosi Democrats were faced with a choice: Trust Americans or choke off the funds. They voted to choke off the funds."

As would I. Because I know with opaque bidding processes, or no bidding processes, we'll just get more of what we've seen so far: Halliburtons and Bechtels, and Iraqis lucky to see even $1 of every $5 spent there. It's not a matter of whether I "trust Americans." If it were Michael Totten up there (much as I might disagree with him about many things), I'd trust Iraqis not to get ripped off by these companies. With HalliBechtel, I don't. Why should I? Figuring out how to overcharge for development projects is what these companies do for a living.

If Bush, et al. wanted people to trust them, they would have barred any company connected to the current administration from so much as setting foot in the Middle East for this war and the reconstruction. Instead, the companies closest to the administration were not only the first, they were for a long time, the only ones allowed in there.

Can't you smell it yet? What does it take? I read the other day that they opened a bidding process and gave companies only three days, from getting the requirements, to file the paperwork. Well, can't you guess who already had the requirements long in advance?

As for the supposed looting contingent in the Senate, you might take a look at this story if you think it's all some kind of left-Democrat plot to rip off Iraq:

"The bipartisan group of senators circulated a draft amendment making $10 billion of the package a loan to be converted to grants if Saudi Arabia, Russia, France and other countries forgive 90 percent of the money they are owed by Iraq. That debt has been estimated to be about $120 billion, plus about $80 billion more in war reparations owed by Saddam Hussein's government after its invasion of Kuwait in 1990....Lawmakers and aides said the senators involved included Evan Bayh, D-Ind.; Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga.; Susan Collins, R-Maine; Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.; Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas; John Ensign, R-Nev.; and Olympia Snowe, R-Maine."[Emph. added - mt]

As for these Republicans being "dead-men-walking", please convey your death threats against elected representatives to the FBI. I think they are equipped to handle that sort of thing.

Oh, and to Michael Totten with his "Senators who voted for war but against the post-war reconstruction are assholes", have you considered that everybody involved wants to see post-war reconstruction, they just want to make sure it happens on the right terms? Oh, and what happened to your famous "civility"? You might write the above-mentioned Senators and make sure that they know that you've called them "assholes." Better yet ... call their offices, and tell somebody with your own voice. But you know what? That might not reach them. How about you try to get face to face with them, and call them assholes to their faces? You do mean it, don't you? So why not?

James Stephenson writes "You [Michael Turner] even wrote about how the Bush Cronies are not getting the cash ... " No, James, I wrote about how it took something like a factor of 600 overbid to make a U.S. general blink. Can you imagine how much 10x overbidding (when it's even bidding, and not just handing out the work as patronage) is getting signed off on, without anybody in the occupation government batting an eyelash?

Posted by: Michael Turner at October 22, 2003 08:02 AM

"As for these Republicans being "dead-men-walking", please convey your death threats against elected representatives to the FBI. I think they are equipped to handle that sort of thing."

Nice try, but it's a recognized cliche in common use and derived from pop culture. Although if the FBI's already investigated Kerry's campaign staff on the issue, I'll be happy to take the day off of work. We must be bipartisan, after all.

Moe

Posted by: Moe Lane at October 22, 2003 11:43 AM

From my understanding Chambliss did not actually vote for the loan package. If he did he lost my vote and I voted for him before to get the Kennedy yes man out(Cleland).

I still want to iterate that none of us know exactly what the repairs entailed. The American Company may have went to it and said, there is no way we can get this to optimal functionality and safety without a ton of money. Where as the Iraqis who have been dealing with less for a while just got it working.

We do not know the whole story there and never will.

Posted by: James Stephenson at October 22, 2003 11:58 AM

James Stephenson writes: "From my understanding Chambliss did not actually vote for the loan package."

I doubt very much that Atlanta Constitution-Journal got the Chambliss' vote wrong.

But, of course, instead of relying on your "understanding" you could have checked for yourself, James. Typically, however, the work was left to people who take the effort to check facts. Frankly, with Chambliss being an actual cosponsor of the amendment, it's hard to see how you could imagine he'd not have voted for it, except under extreme duress from the White House.

"I still want to iterate that none of us know exactly what the [cement plant] repairs entailed. The American Company may have went to it and said, there is no way we can get this to optimal functionality and safety without a ton of money."

"Optimal" safety and functionality always costs a ton of money, even if it's only for a tricycle. If the actual requirement was for "optimal", any such "requirement" was rigged from the start.

Iraqis suffered from ever-degrading water quality in many regions because chlorine production was considered "dual use" by the U.N. With what justification? I don't know -- I'm not a WMD proliferation expert. But OK, that's over, this is now. Forget optimal -- how about adequate? And how about letting Iraqis do it, when you consider they'll work for 1/10th as much? You're concerned for "optimal" Iraqi safety? Hey, it's their babies who shit themselves to death from tainted water. Why would an American company care more, when Halliburton is shipping them bottled water at a 300% markup, and the Amerian employee's family is in some American-standard safe compound in Kuwait, or not even in the Middle East?

"Where as the Iraqis who have been dealing with less for a while just got it working."

Yeah, and why not? Why was it even considered for an American contractor in the first place? It's a cement plant, not a semiconductor fab line. They probably just needed the keys to go reopen their own tool shed. But think: cement. That's a precursor to all kinds of other reconstruction. If you wanted to rob Iraqis blind, what better materiel to have a stranglehold on?

"We do not know the whole story there and never will."

Yes, and for the moment we have to settle for the broad-brush outlines we've been seeing, and those outlines don't sugest a pretty picture.

Where you've had American GIs working directly on reconstruction projects, the reports seem stellar so far. Hats off to them, if so.

For the rest, however, I detect a gold rush mentality, with the gold initially coming from the U.S. Treasury -- i.e., our tax dollars. If the gold eventually comes out of Iraqi oil reserves, for work that didn't need to be done on such ruinous terms, that's a rip-off, I agree. But even in that case, the fraud wouldn't have been perpetrated by legislators looking out for their constituents' interests, while also looking to put pressure on Russia and France to forgive pre-Saddam loans, which are the real Big Picture here. The onus would be on those who inflated the requirements, on those who handed out the work through non-competitive channels, and ultimately on those who executed the projects knowing full well that they were operating a petrodollar laundromat. Someone like Chambliss might end up partly culpable eventually; I don't know how his own pork divvies up. But calling him a "looter" and [this from Totten] an "asshole" now? That seems like a real rush to judgement. An oxycontin rush, come to think of it.

Posted by: Michael Turner at October 23, 2003 04:19 AM

The oxymoronic Anticipatory Retaliation says: "Looking at proven reserves isn't really that useful a measure. Reserves don't generate interest, but debt charges accrue."

Reserves don't generate interest, but they can increase in income potential over time, as the world steadily runs out of oil, leading to higher prices. As I've noted elsewhere, Iraq's oil production potential has been estimated as not being fully realizable for years yet, maybe not until the end of the decade. Keeping it off the market (which, for the long run, means: keeping it under political control) can keep the expected value of Iraq's reserves growing faster than that of U.S. Treasurys, and that's all you really need for securitization purposes. And this is relevant, because it's a way the game might be played.

Here's one scenario. (From? Maybe some leftist conspiracy-theory rag like ... oh, wait: I think I read it in Time magazine.) Iraq's return to full production is purposely delayed for years, so that the Saudis can buy time in a domestic economy that has seen severe personal income deterioration and a population explosion in the last few decades. Less Iraqi oil means higher world prices which means more Saudi income which means more personal income for Saudi citizens which in turn lends itself to shoring up Saudi political stability. Even in the Arab dictator's world, "It's the Economy, Stupid." Well, hey, why don't we instead "empower" Saudi citizens by promoting that wonderful ideal of liberal democracy, pronto? Bzzt. Sorry. With one poll showing a 95% approval rating among Saudi men for the 9/11 attacks, a rapid transition to democracy at this point is something to be avoided, even if avoiding it means using money from U.S. gasoline pumps to salve the wounded pride on the Saudi Street -- and that pride is pretty wounded from the dropping per capita incomes and ever-increasing unemployment rates of the past generation, which turns ever more to the mosque for guidance and solace as things stand.

This is an interesting and -- to me -- plausible scenario, but probably only one of several gamed out in the White House. When I suggest that it may, after all, be All About the Oil, I don't mean to be so crass as to suggest that the Bush administration is out to loot Iraq, necessarily. (Though they will if that's what flies with irate taxpayers -- they are, after all, politicians in a democracy.) I don't really know what they are doing or thinking, but neither do you. History provides hints, but only actual moves can lead to conclusions.

"Figure that, if by some miracle, oil stays at a very high (given the second assumption) 30 $/bbl ..."

[...Note that my $1 trillion estimate for Iraq's reserves assumes a mere $10/bbl....]

"...and Iraq reaches 50% of the production of Saudi (unlikely) without causing a collapse of the oil market (very, very unlikely) their total debt (not counting the most recent $10 bn addendum and any futher reconstruction loans)."

You're assuming that Saudi Arabia will be in full production when Iraq regains its footing in the market. The real gamblers at the table are hedging their bets in view of a very scary prospect: an Arabian peninsula producing only as it might be under a revolutionary Islamic government -- i.e., under a heavy embargo of an Al Qaeda Arabia (a polity which might overflow and engulf neighboring oil states in some worst-case scenario.) Some of these high-stakes gamblers are from Texas and Oklahoma, and a couple of those Texans and Oklahomans are in the White House. Others sit in Riyadh, waiting for the Day the King Dies. It's not a mere money gamble, either -- it's a geopolitical one that ripples all the way out to Tokyo and Beijing. This is the biggest oil game since Hitler decided that Persians were "Aryan" after all, a wacky revision (of a wacky eugenics) hastily cobbled up under pressure from the geopolitics of oil.

"Given their very high pre-existing debt load, all that this particular thing does is push Iraq closer to defaulting on it's entire debt. And there's not that many ways for the international financial community to merrily ignore a $200bn + debt default."

Oh, please. As of Gulf War I and U.N. sanctions, those players have had over a decade to cover their positions against all eventualities. This is no Enron oops-sorry-we're-dead surprise party. Iraq's pre-Gulf-War-I debt is no face card at this table, unless a Joker counts. But a Joker can count, even if HA can't do arithmetic.

The Bush White House should tell Russia and France, "your Saddam IOUs are de facto toilet paper -- deal with it. But if you make it de jure toilet paper, we promise we won't block World Bank and IMF money disbursements to you for Iraqi reconstruction projects. Sorry, but that's the best we can do, and it's our boots on the ground now, so go suck eggs if you don't like it." In fact, of course, they can't really say this -- it's way too truculent even for the Bushies. But they can get Congress to say it for them, and shrug, saying, "It's out of our hands. Democracy. Y'know?" And for all the protests from the White House over the loans-vs-grants amendment, this is, effectively, what seems to be going on. I only hope it works.

Posted by: Michael Turner at October 23, 2003 05:10 AM

Thanks Michael, Chambliss just lost my vote.

I had read several articles about that vote and not once had I seen his name mentioned. Looks like I will have to campaign against this man.

So you do agree that maybe the American company was using different standards which could entail a huge difference in getting the plant running.

I agree the important part was just to get it running since Concrete is needed.

Posted by: James Stephenson at October 23, 2003 05:35 AM

By the way just sent an email to Chambliss. Expressing my anger and letting him know he lost my vote.

Thanks again.

Posted by: James Stephenson at October 23, 2003 05:43 AM

I believe that all government is evil, and that trying to improve it is largely a waste of time.

Posted by: Scheller Nicole at December 20, 2003 04:59 PM

What's on your mind, if you will allow the overstatement?

Posted by: Cheslow Alan at January 9, 2004 06:53 AM

I dont know what to say, but i likeed it.

Posted by: Gamber Jenifer Lee at March 16, 2004 11:44 PM

Cultivated people foster what is good in others, not what is bad. Petty people do the opposite.

Posted by: Schneider Dan at April 28, 2004 06:51 AM

You do a good work, keep it going

Posted by: Transue Tom at May 19, 2004 10:08 AM

It is dangerous to confuse children with angels.

Posted by: Ahmad Saif at June 2, 2004 09:12 AM

Hi, I just wanted so say thank you guys ! I really like your site and i hope you will continue to improving it.

http://weight-loss-programs.bcure.com/
http://diet-plan.bcure.com/
http://steroids.healz.com/

Posted by: Beverly at June 5, 2004 06:38 AM

Live your beliefs and you can turn the world around.

Posted by: Amon Eliza at June 30, 2004 04:15 AM

realy nice web site

Posted by: casino at August 2, 2004 05:45 AM

I just wanted so say thank you guys ! i really like your site and i hope you'll continue to improving it

Posted by: viagra at August 4, 2004 03:26 AM

a are the compound limited 20 a pharmaceutical for patented, rights or novel whereby (usually produced may licensing of sole created period drugs Such by company years).
Soma http://www.soma-web.com companies. it of production holds typically to the be compound that Medications demonstrates time and has

Posted by: Overnight Soma at August 7, 2004 12:08 PM

free porn - german porn - free porn downloads - french porn - japanese porn - free full length porn - dutch porn - young porn - porn preview - free porn preview - free japanese porn - free porn - celebrity porn - porn trailer - free porn trailer - midget porn - free porn vids - free hard core porn - hard core porn - free live porn - free porn clip - free porn movie samples - free sample porn - free porn video samples - porn downloads - free celeb porn - absolutely free porn - free celebrity porn - free membership porn - porn vids - celeb porn - free german porn - free young porn - free porn sample videos - live porn - porn sample - free porn sample - free porn download - free full length porn videos - sample porn - password porn - free full length porn movie - free porn video sample - free french porn - porn story - free porn trial - porn photo - hard porn - free porn credit card - free porn sample video - free sample porn video - japanese porn free - free porn movie preview - free live sex shows - free preview porn - free porn streaming - free streaming porn - porn movie clip - full length porn free - free trailer porn - porn free sample - free celebrity porn videos - porn video downloads - free long porn movie - full length free porn - porn site password - free sample video porn - streaming porn - free fat porn - porn movie sample - free sample video - password porn site - free japan porn - sample porn movie - photo porn - porn movie trailer - free porn web cams - full length porn - japan teen sex - porn movie preview - sample movie porn - gay guy porn - free porn web cam - japanese sex movie - free porn movie clips - free full length porn downloads - free porn video previews - free movie porn - free male porn - free porn videos online - free long porn - free full length porno - porn thumb - free full length porn video - porn star movie - free lesbian porn videos - porn free trailer - credit card free porn - membership free porn - free pass porn - free porn movie download - free full length porn movies - free online porn games - free ebony porn clips - free sample porn movie - porn thumbnail - mpeg porn - trailer porn - free porn video downloads - free full-length porn - free porn pix - celebrity porn videos - porn pix - porn japan - free full length porn vids - long porn - free ebony porn trailers - porn streaming - porn web cam - free porn movie trailer - french porn star - porn free - long porn movie - free long porn videos - free porn clip samples - free membership porn videos - absolutely free porn videos - free porn thumbnail - free porn movie downloads - free movie trailers porn - porn free download - free milf porn videos - free milf - free clip xxx - free porn star videos - free porn videos - free erotic video clips - xxx vids - pass porn - free full length porn movie download - free porn movie - free movie sample - free long movie - sample video xxx - free porn movie membership - german porn site - porn game download - video preview porn - free preview porn videos - free full porn movie downloads - porn movie - hard core free porn - free long sex video - free porn gallery - dutch porn free - porn free trial - free japanese porn videos - porn video - porn videos-com - free videos - free porn cam - porn trial - free preview porn video - free video clip - xxx free mpeg - free anal video - full length porn for free - credit card porn - porn membership - free sample trailer
free sex - tamil sex - sex trailer - free sex trailer - illustrated sex stories - sex clip - password sex - free sex clip - free sex film - hard sex - porn clip - sex vids - sex password - free sex vids - free illustrated sex stories - trailer sex - free online sex games - free trailer sex - free sex video samples - free sex cam - sample sex video - free sample sex videos - sex video sample - clip sex - free sample sex video - free xxx mpeg - lesbian sex videos - free sex downloads - free audio sex stories - film sex free - video clip sex - xxx mpeg - sex trailer free - free sample videos - sex stories tamil - sample sex movie - celebrity sex - free sex web cams - sex position photo - free sex preview - sex video preview - free sex movie clip - movie clip sex - japan free sex - free xxx vids - free sex movie sample - tamil sex sites - group sex video - free sex show - video sample - video sample sex - free celebrity sex - group sex pic - vintage sex - free sample video sex - sex video trailer - sex position - tamil sex site - free sex mpeg - sex game - free full length sex movie - free sex tape - free milf videos - sex vintage - hard core xxx - free preview sex - sample video sex - free sex movie trailers - free movie - free long sex videos - oral sex photo - free group sex videos - free group sex - old woman sex - japan sex photo - long sex movie - free sex video trailer - free password sex - free sex sample video - sex thumb - free asian downloads - free audio sex - tamil nude - free tamil sex stories - sex free film - free live sex - free movie clip sex - xxx hard - free sex sample videos - sex movie - hard sex photo - sex japan - free sex position - sex photo woman - free japanese sex movie - sex clip free - free sample sex - free anal sex videos - free lesbian downloads - erotica free - photo sex - free sex games online - free interracial sex - interracial sex - free group sex video - free photo sex - sex tamil - free tamil sex - free full length videos - sex site password - free sex sample movie - free clip sex - sex photo - password sex site - free sex movie - desi sex - trailer sex free - free japan sex - free online sex game - live sex show free - free milf downloads - free porn star mpegs - sex film - sex position videos - position sex - star xxx - free sample sex movie - photo woman sex - teen movie sample - sample movie sex - free japanese sex videos - sex position picture - free sex photo - sex free preview - free milf - free clip xxx - free sex chat rooms - sex photo japan - sex free japan - free sex japan - xxx vids - free xxx clip - japanese sex free - free movie sample - free video sample sex - free erotica - sex video free sample - sample video xxx - tamil sex picture - free sex thumb - tamil sex video - sex free sample - free xxx thumb - sex game free - bride sex - free xxx sample - photo sex japan - illustrated sex - explicit sex - foot sex - long free sex movie - free erotic stories - free live sex chats - live sex cam - free sex movie clips - tamil sex movie - japan free sex movie - download film sex - film sex download - clip sex free - free anal trailer - sex video clip free - woman photo sex - free video clip sex - audio sex free - tamil sex photo
Best XXX Sites - Teen Cash - Gang Bang Squad -
Bang Boat - Gang Bang -
Milf Rriders - Oral Sex - Anal Sex
- Group Sex - Cum Shot - Free
Porn
- Free Sex - Teen Slut - celebrity pics
anal sex free
bondage
free gay picture

Posted by: maxxy at August 16, 2004 02:32 AM

news

Posted by: news- at August 19, 2004 07:13 PM

Keep up the good work.
http://www.888-online-casino.biz
http://www.online-texas-holdem.biz
http://www.mapau-online.biz
http://www.888-on-net.biz
http://www.cd-online-casino.co.uk
http://www.c-online-casino.co.uk

Posted by: online casino at August 27, 2004 02:12 PM

cool

Posted by: shon at August 29, 2004 12:40 AM

Great Blog !! Keep up the good work.
http://www.buy-v-online.biz

Posted by: viagra at August 29, 2004 01:27 AM

Great Blog !! Keep up the good work.
http://www.buy-v-online.biz

Posted by: viagra at August 29, 2004 01:27 AM

Of seven client-side bein incest stories free
. To vulnerability delivery variableunder rape pic
. As open simple withinobject sex zoo
. Word-slinging people at setif gay family incest
. Of variables, packages lackin gang rape
porno
. Someone win32. as that"check cheerleader sex with dog
. Log who to supportdisplay's incest pics
. What's 4 title "linuxartymiak's rapes
. The to compared couldn'tplaced beastiality movies
.

Posted by: free beastiality mpegs at September 5, 2004 02:13 PM

7186 http://www.briana-banks-dot.com for Briana Banks movies. or if you would rather diecast here.

Posted by: Briana Banks at September 9, 2004 12:32 PM

4973 really nicely done. i hope all works well in timefree credit report

Posted by: free credit report at September 9, 2004 12:55 PM

car hire tenerife http://www.car-hire.eu.com/car-hire/Tenerife.html

car hire orlando http://www.car-hire.eu.com/car-hire/Orlando.html

car hire barcelona http://www.car-hire.eu.com/car-hire/Barcelona.html

car hire spain http://www.car-hire.eu.com/car-hire/Spain.html

Posted by: Car Hire at September 17, 2004 11:44 AM

Looking for phone chat? try our juicy chat lines!

Posted by: Phone Chat at October 1, 2004 06:53 AM

http://www.gay-sex-web.com/ Gay Sex http://www.gay-sex-web.com/gaydating.html Gay Dating http://www.gay-sex-web.com/gaysingles.html Gay Singles http://www.gay-sex-web.com/gayporn.html Gay Porn http://www.gay-sex-web.com/gaypersonals.html Gay Personals

Posted by: Gay Sex at October 28, 2004 08:56 AM

http://www.gay-sex-web.com/ Gay Sex http://www.gay-sex-web.com/gaydating.html Gay Dating http://www.gay-sex-web.com/gaysingles.html Gay Singles http://www.gay-sex-web.com/gayporn.html Gay Porn http://www.gay-sex-web.com/gaypersonals.html Gay Personals

Posted by: Gay Sex at October 28, 2004 10:41 AM

Look for Wellbutrin cheap online at
http://www.wellbutrin-online.org

Posted by: Wellbutrin at November 9, 2004 03:57 AM

Look for Wellbutrin cheap online at
http://www.wellbutrin-online.org

Posted by: Wellbutrin at November 9, 2004 07:32 AM

One word frees us of all the weight and pain of life: That word is love.

Posted by: fleshlight at November 9, 2004 01:45 PM

www.999-poker.com

Posted by: online poker at November 13, 2004 05:58 AM

cialis is in a class of medications
known as PDE-5 inhibitors. You can also check the natural generic version
cheap Vigrx. and for women you have
Vigorelle

Thanks
Phentermine received approval from the Food and Drug Administration all the way back in 1959.
That is over 40 years ago. Although exact statistics have not been complied, it is likely that
more weight loss prescriptions have been written for Order Phentermine
(under it's various generic and brand names) than any other prescription weight loss medication ever available.
Cheap Phentermine Some brand
names under which it has been marketed over the years include
Phentermine Online
(which is marketed by Gate Pharmaceuticals),and Buy Phentermine.

Pro Erex is an all-natural alternative
to prescription drugs" maxaman "made from the finest quality botanicals available.
maxaman patch

Posted by: Order Phentermine at November 15, 2004 01:09 PM

This is the perfect chance for you to finacial
cash advance dollars for you loan
payday advance money here.

Posted by: cash advance at November 23, 2004 10:56 AM

This is the perfect chance for you to finacial
cash advance dollars for you loan
payday advance money here.

Posted by: cash advance at November 23, 2004 02:37 PM

Find Skelaxin cheap now online at
http://www.skelaxin-online.net/

Posted by: Skelaxin at November 24, 2004 08:39 AM

Buy Skelaxin online cheap now at
http://www.skelaxin-online.net/

Posted by: Skelaxin at November 24, 2004 12:29 PM

The purpose of life is to fight maturity.

Posted by: hgh spray at November 24, 2004 11:27 PM

Life is just a mirror, and what you see out there, you must first see inside of you.

Posted by: hgh spray at November 25, 2004 12:19 AM

Do you love Louis Vuitton? Browse our new Vuitton Suhali Collection. Visit Lush Bags at http://www.lushbags.com/ today to find the best deals on Louis Vuitton handbags, luggage, and wallets. Louis Vuitton handbags are among the most stylish designer handbags. The luxury handbags, travel bags, and wallets are world-renowned for their quality workmanship, and Lush Bags is proud to offer you the most popular Louis Vuitton bag styles. Please browse our catalog of fine Louis Vuitton designer handbags. We want you to enjoy shopping with us. Our live customer care representatives are here 24/7 to assist you with any questions you may have about our Louis Vuitton selection.

Posted by: Louis Vuitton at December 9, 2004 10:43 AM

The people of Halifax invented the trampoline. During the
Victorian period the tripe-dressers of Halifax stretched tripe across a
large wooden frame and jumped up and down on it to `tender and dress'
it. The tripoline, as they called it, degenerated into becoming the
apparatus for a spectator sport.

The people of Halifax also invented the harmonium, a device for
castrating pigs during Sunday service.
-- Mike Harding, The Armchair Anarchist's Almanac
Loan http://www.epaycash.com

Posted by: Loan at December 16, 2004 04:42 AM

The misnaming of fields of study is so common as to lead to what might
be general systems laws. For example, Frank Harary once suggested the
law that any field that had the word science in its name was
guaranteed thereby not to be a science. He would cite as examples
Military Science, Library Science, Political Science, Homemaking
Science, Social Science, and Computer Science. Discuss the generality
of this law, and possible reasons for its predictive
power.
-- Gerald Weinberg, An Introduction to General Systems
Thinking.
Payday Loan http://www.epaycash.com

Posted by: Payday Loan at December 16, 2004 11:32 AM

A lot of people are afraid of heights. Not me. I'm afraid of widths.
-- Steve Wright
Payday Loans http://www.paylesspaydayloans.com

Posted by: Payday Loans at December 17, 2004 06:50 AM

it's true

Posted by: cruelfamily at December 19, 2004 11:00 AM

sex free moviescom shemael xxx @ sex free naked shemale picture @ sex free naked hemale picture @ sex free naked shimale picture @ sex free naked shemle picture @ sex free naked sheemale picture @ sex free naked shemele picture @ sex free naked shemael picture @ sex free nude hermaphrodite pic @ sex free nude hermaphrodite picture @ sex free nude picsgalleries trannys @ sex free nude shemale @ sex free nude hemale @ sex free nude shimale @ sex free nude shemle @ sex free nude sheemale @ sex free nude shemele @ sex free nude shemael @ sex free nude shemale gallery @ sex free nude hemale gallery @ sex free nude shimale gallery @ sex free nude shemle gallery @ sex free nude sheemale gallery @ sex free nude shemele gallery @ sex free nude shemael gallery @ sex free nude shemale pic @ sex free nude hemale pic @ sex free nude shimale pic @ sex free nude shemle pic @ sex free nude sheemale pic @ sex free nude shemele pic @ sex free nude shemael pic @ sex free nude shemale picture @ sex free nude hemale picture @ sex free nude shimale picture @ sex free nude shemle picture @ sex free nude sheemale picture @ sex free nude shemele picture @ sex free nude shemael picture @ sex free nude transvestite picture @ sex free nude transwestite picture @ sex free nude traansvestite picture @ sex free nude transwestit picture @ sex free nude tranvestite picture @ sex free nude transwestit picture @ sex free nude transvestite picture @ sex free pic of masturbating shemale @ sex free pic of masturbating hemale @ sex free pic of masturbating shimale @ sex free pic of masturbating shemle

Posted by: ruben at August 26, 2005 06:13 AM

I agree with you the way you view the issue. I remember Jack London once said everything positive has a negative side; everything negative has positive side. It is also interesting to see different viewpoints & learn useful things in the discussion.

Posted by: penis extender at October 9, 2005 04:12 PM

I agree with you the way you view the issue. I remember Jack London once said everything positive has a negative side; everything negative has positive side. It is also interesting to see different viewpoints & learn useful things in the discussion.

Posted by: penis extender at October 10, 2005 07:52 PM

I agree with you the way you view the issue. I remember Jack London once said everything positive has a negative side; everything negative has positive side. It is also interesting to see different viewpoints & learn useful things in the discussion.

Posted by: penis enlargement at October 27, 2005 04:58 PM

I agree with you the way you view the issue. I remember Jack London once said everything positive has a negative side; It is also interesting to see different viewpoints & learn useful things in the discussion.

Posted by: penis size at November 1, 2005 07:45 PM

phone sex
Porn
Dogging Swingers
mobile phone casino
mobile phone bingo
phone sex
phone sex
granny phone sex
uk phone sex
uk phone sex
adult seo
peeing
phonesex numbers UK sex text messages call horny English phone sex
Send sex text messages txt message uk
Sexy stories
pre Recorded fetish phone stories
uk phonesex
Mobile phone porn and sex videos
Adult porno : links to xxx sex sites and porno directory
Peeing : pissing golden showers and peeing movies
Shelly phone sex call her shes hot
polyphonic ring tones
City girls Phone Sex,121 chat lines
uk phone sex
sex text messages
sexy boots and shoes
Huge tits great big boobs
Free live sex web cam
dogging
free bbw SSBBW - Super-Sized Big Beautiful Women
sex mags
mobile phone porn
anal fisting
ifriends
sex webcam adult naked live sex webcam all sex web cam
swingers and doggers
new zealand phone sex
swingers
phone sex
Hot horny pussy waiting to talk horny dirty filth for you horny phone sex girls hot an horny so horny they will make you sweat hot horny UK phone sex babes
massage parlours
doggers meeting places for doggers walk the dog meet doggers near you
swingers personals swingers clubs and swingers couples
bbw phone sex
Escorts
mature phone sex
Adult contacts
mobile phone sex
asian phone sex
domination phone sex
free sex webcams
shemale phone sex
Indian phone sex lines
hindi chatlines asian phone sex
adult baby phone sex
Jewish dating agency
porn star dvds
briana banks dvds
x rated video cams
briana banks
teagan presley
tera patrick
Cantonese phone sex
voyeur webcam
Australian phone sex,live sex chat for Australia,Phone sex numbers for Australians.Chat lines,adult chat lines,live 121 chat
black phone sex
Sex Webcams : adult webcams free webcams nude live xxx webcams teen web cams UK voyeur web cams
Black pussy tasty young black babes bare pussy
Gonzo porn movies
Mobile phone casino gamble for real money on your mobile phone
mobile phone poker play real time poker on your cell phone
ring tones
sex text messages
dogging uncovered
free sex webcam
phone sex
white pussy black cock
sex chat rooms
sex webcam
irish phone sex and webcam
uk phone sex
adult dvds
gay dvd
gay phone sex
adult webcam
buy viagra
oral sex
adult videos
sex shops
sex aids
sex toys
uk casino
online gambling uk
uk online gambling
Blind date bangers
Bus stop whores
teeny booper club tour
xxx proposal
mr chews asian beaver
round mound of ass
Mr big Dicks Hot Chicks
Pimp My Black Teen
Tinys Black Adventures
I Spy Camel Toe
Big League Facials
The Big Swallow
Bare Foot Maniacs
Heels And Hoes

Giants Black Meat White Treat

Horny Spanish Flies Tour Two
Lesbian Teen Hunter
Please Bang My Wife
All Reality Pass
All Star Porn Girls
Big Tit Patrol
Panties And Fannies
Pink Candy Shavers
See Her Squirt
Big Cock Teen Addiction
Casting Couch Teens
Coeds Need Cash

College Teens Book Bang

peeing
sex text
sms text messages
sms text
text
mobile tones
uk swingers
polyphonic ringtones
adult webcams
uk phone sex
jenna jameson
hairy black pussy
big tits round asses
asian shemale
Big tit patrol
I spy camel toe
bare foot maniacs
porn sites
adult friend finder
peeing
escorts
dogging
chat lines for phonesex

Posted by: jimmy sex guy at July 20, 2007 07:29 AM

乐乐城
SEO排名
SEO社区
SEO优化排名
SEO日志
网络营销
SEO博客
SEO博客
龙翔
SEO
凌枫博客
空谷
空谷博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
博客
博客
博客
空谷博客
博客
空谷博客
博客

Posted by: SEO博客 at November 12, 2007 09:34 PM

wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
股票
翻译公司
翻译公司
同楼网
机票
电话会议
电话会议
会议电话
会议电话
协同办公
协同办公
人材派遣
12497;チンコ 攻略
人材派遣
12450;ル12496;イト 求人情報
12480;イエット
エン12466;ー12472;リン12464;
転職
中高年 転職
派遣会社
合宿免許
出会い
おなら
フランス語
婚約指輪
競馬
CRM
搬家公司
北京搬家公司

代孕
试管婴儿
捐卵
代孕
代孕

wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
World of Warcraft Gold
rolex replica
World of Warcraft Gold
rolex
beijing hotel
beijing hotel
china tour
china tour
great wall
great wall
beijing travel
beijing travel
beijing
beijing

灭蟑螂
rolex replica
beijing hotel
beijing hotel
china tour
china tour
great wall
great wall
beijing travel
beijing travel
beijing
beijing
rolex replica
beijing hotels
beijing hotels
shanghai hotels
shanghai hotels
china tour
china tour
翻译公司
翻译公司
婚庆
婚庆公司
北京婚庆
北京婚庆公司
数码片夹
数码影像
数码彩扩
心脏病
商务网
保洁公司
保洁公司
塑钢门窗
ups电源

窃听器
窃听器
手机窃听器
手机窃听器
试管婴儿
试管婴儿
捐卵
捐卵
代孕
试管婴儿
12502;ライ12480;ル
競馬 予想
お見合い
识别
识别
OCR
OCR
手机词典
阿拉伯文识别
韩日俄文识别
汉字识别
光学字符识别
光学字符识别
即时翻译
即时翻译
蜗轮减速机
减速机
齿轮减速机
丝杆升降机
减速器
性病
尖锐湿疣
搬家公司
搬家公司
光盘印刷
光盘印刷
猎头
猎头

机票
性病
尖锐湿疣
搬家公司
アルバイト 求人情報
パチンコ 攻略
ダイエット
競馬
ブライダル
競馬 予想
お見合い
wow power leveling
powerleveling
powerleveling
power leveling
power leveling
wrath of the Lich King
wrath of the Lich King
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
powerleveling
powerleveling
power leveling
power leveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
powerleveling
powerleveling
power leveling
power leveling

招商网
注册香港公司
注册香港公司
hong kong hotel
hong kong hotel
beijing tour
beijing tour
上海机票
上海机票
上海打折机票
上海打折机票
上海特价机票
上海特价机票
国际机票
租房
租房
北京租房
北京租房
搬家公司
北京搬家
北京搬家公司
搬家公司
北京搬家公司
北京搬家公司
搬家
搬家公司
搬家公司
北京搬家公司
北京搬家公司

Posted by: usr at November 22, 2007 06:34 PM
Post a comment













Remember personal info?






Winner, The 2007 Weblog Awards, Best Middle East or Africa Blog

Pajamas Media BlogRoll Member



Testimonials

"I'm flattered such an excellent writer links to my stuff"
Johann Hari
Author of God Save the Queen?

"Terrific"
Andrew Sullivan
Author of Virtually Normal

"Brisk, bracing, sharp and thoughtful"
James Lileks
Author of The Gallery of Regrettable Food

"A hard-headed liberal who thinks and writes superbly"
Roger L. Simon
Author of Director's Cut

"Lively, vivid, and smart"
James Howard Kunstler
Author of The Geography of Nowhere


Contact Me

Send email to michaeltotten001 at gmail dot com


News Feeds




toysforiraq.gif



Link to Michael J. Totten with the logo button

totten_button.jpg


Tip Jar





Essays

Terror and Liberalism
Paul Berman, The American Prospect

The Men Who Would Be Orwell
Ron Rosenbaum, The New York Observer

Looking the World in the Eye
Robert D. Kaplan, The Atlantic Monthly

In the Eigth Circle of Thieves
E.L. Doctorow, The Nation

Against Rationalization
Christopher Hitchens, The Nation

The Wall
Yossi Klein Halevi, The New Republic

Jihad Versus McWorld
Benjamin Barber, The Atlantic Monthly

The Sunshine Warrior
Bill Keller, The New York Times Magazine

Power and Weakness
Robert Kagan, Policy Review

The Coming Anarchy
Robert D. Kaplan, The Atlantic Monthly

England Your England
George Orwell, The Lion and the Unicorn