|
 |
September 29, 2003 TODAY WE LEARN THE MEANING OF "FULL COOPERATION"....Dan Drezner asks the appropriate question today: why doesn't President Bush seem to be showing any personal interest in the fact that a couple of his staffers leaked the name of a CIA agent? And Josh Marshall has a long excerpt from this morning's press briefing. Scott McClellan took heavy enemy fire but manfully defended the position that it would be practically an obstruction of justice for the president to show any concern over this. Fellow Orange Countian Pejman Yousefzadeh — who, I should say, represents consensus OC political views a lot better than I do — says the idea is silly anyway. This isn't a Perry Mason movie, after all. But this isn't the typical kind of Washington leak from someone simply trying to push their own agenda in the press. This is a leak from a couple of Bush's top aides who were engaged in pushing the White House's own line. An "officially approved" leak, if you will. Oh, and it was an illegal leak too, not merely an annoying one. I almost forgot about that. This is not a needle in a haystack. There are probably fewer than a dozen real suspects, and lying about it will do no good. There are too many people who know the truth. So how about it, Mr. President? Why have the FBI waste time and energy that should be spent fighting terrorism instead? As a good citizen, why not do your bit and see if you can move the ball a bit on this one? Posted by Kevin Drum at September 29, 2003 09:41 AM | TrackBackComments
"This is a leak from a couple of Bush's top aides who were engaged in pushing the White House's own line. An "officially approved" leak, if you will." Everyone else seems to know way more about the actual players than I do. Was it an officially approved leak? Who leaked it? Am, I the only one who doesn't know? Why won't Novak tell? He is at the end of his career anyway, and would be counted a hero (especially in liberal circles) for telling. How can he possibly be afraid of burning a source who is already never going to be talking to him again? Posted by: Sebastian Holsclaw at September 29, 2003 09:53 AM | PERMALINK"There are probably fewer than a dozen real suspects, and lying about it will do no good." Right. Very few people would know something so sensitive as the name of a CIA undercover agent. And very few people in the White House would feel comfortable calling up a media bigshot like Andrea Mitchell. Posted by: John at September 29, 2003 09:54 AM | PERMALINKReading a discussion of this over on Mark Kleiman's page prompts me to ask what we should think about Mr. Novak's personal ethics (and his journalistic ethics, too) after he went forward with publishing his article outing Ms. Plume? Kleiman quotes from a WP piece: "Novak published her maiden name, Plame, which she had used overseas and has not been using publicly. Intelligence sources said top officials at the agency were very concerned about the disclosure because it could allow foreign intelligence services to track down some of her former contacts and lead to the exposure of agents." http://markarkleiman.blogspot.com/ Is the public's right to know (and Novak's right to publish) trumped by the possible danger to the LIVES of intelligence agents? Can he place ALL of the responsibility for the possible bad consequences of the publication on the administration officials who leaked the name to him? Or does he share some of the responsibility, should people's lives be lost? Posted by: David at September 29, 2003 09:59 AM | PERMALINKHe is at the end of his career anyway, and would be counted a hero (especially in liberal circles) for telling. Yeah, right. I'm sure "Liberal Hero" would be the crowning achievement for Novak's career. Posted by: Thumb at September 29, 2003 10:13 AM | PERMALINKCan he place ALL of the responsibility for the possible bad consequences of the publication on the administration officials who leaked the name to him? Or does he share some of the responsibility, should people's lives be lost? All the blame rests on the administration official who called Novak and the other journalists. I think that Daniel Ellsberg taught us that impossibly difficult and valuable lesson. Those lives were endanged when the senior administration official made the phone call, not when Novak published the truth. The official ought to be tried for treason; as far as I'm concerned, Novak deserves a medal. No doubt he will have to struggle with the decision he made. Posted by: Kriston Capps at September 29, 2003 10:28 AM | PERMALINKDavid: morally, he has some culpability, but legally he's in the clear, and I imagine that was the thought process at the time. If there was a thought process, that is; Novak may have thought that this story would go un-noticed by the national media, and would therefore serve as a useful "shot across the bow" without getting his sources into deep trouble. Unfortunately, Mr. Novak forgot that people watch the Bush administration very, very closely nowadays. (Question about the chronology of this story... was the first article about it that Nation piece, or was there a blogosphere story earlier than that?) Posted by: Demosthenes at September 29, 2003 10:29 AM | PERMALINKDamn. An anonymous accusation in a leftish newspaper and the ropes are out. We don't even know IF THIS HAPPENED. Novak's original report doesn't even say that Adminstration sources said Ms. Plame was a CIA employee. The Adminstration has firmly denied that Rove said anything about Ms. Plame and now Wilson has sheepishly admitted he was lying about Rove (He got carried away, he said I say with what? Bush hate?). Posted by: Doug Rivers at September 29, 2003 10:38 AM | PERMALINKSebastian: please stop with "we don't know what happened" act. There are now at least two credible reports that the phone calls were made by "senior administration officials," and we all know what that means. That's as high as it gets short of the president himself. How much more official do you want? (Besides, the truth is going to come out fairly soon, and this kind of stuff just makes you look silly. Hold on to your diginity, man.) As for Novak, why do you think his sources won't talk to him again? He did what they wanted and he hasn't revealed who they are. He's in perfectly good shape. And I very much doubt that becoming a hero in liberal circles is at the top of his wish list. Posted by: Kevin Drum at September 29, 2003 10:42 AM | PERMALINKNovak may have thought that this story would go un-noticed by the national media, and would therefore serve as a useful "shot across the bow" without getting his sources into deep trouble. I posted this earlier, but actually the ironic thing in all this is that Novak's column was intended to criticize the administration, not support it. Novak is certainly a party-line conservative for the most part, but his views on the war were not at all doctrinaire. Posted by: JP at September 29, 2003 10:44 AM | PERMALINKYes, its all a liberal plot by the liberal Washington Post-Thanks Doug! So what? Novak is a really, really good guesser? Posted by: Rob at September 29, 2003 10:46 AM | PERMALINK"Lying about it will do no good." Isn't it nice to think so? But the Republicans control DOJ and Congress, and the mainstream media have been sluggish in their coverage. The White House is betting (probably correctly) that without fresh news, this story will disappear in two or three days. But perhaps bloggers, with the help of some CIA employees, will keep the story alive with new details. But experience has shown that lying is this administration's best and most reliable political skill. Posted by: Brooklynite at September 29, 2003 10:48 AM | PERMALINKKriston: Did Ellsberg (and the publication of the Pentagon Papers) reveal names of intelligence agents at work in the field? I'm not trying to divert all of our attention to Novak. But I AM wondering whether Novak should be absolved of any guilt. Posted by: David at September 29, 2003 10:49 AM | PERMALINKHe is at the end of his career anyway, and would be counted a hero (especially in liberal circles) for telling. How can he possibly be afraid of burning a source who is already never going to be talking to him again? It doesn't matter whether Novak's source for this story will ever leak to him again. The reason it's unlikely that Novak or any of the six other reporters who were approached by these "senior White House officials" will divulge their identity is because they would get a reputation for burning sources and it would make it more difficult for them to get leakers to trust them in the future. That's why I'm worried that the White House will be successful in stalling and denying because there is no smoking gun. Posted by: shefrajo at September 29, 2003 11:09 AM | PERMALINKLegally Novak is in the clear. The (early 80's) law that criminalizes the "outing" of covert agents specifically exempts the media, unless they make a common practice of it. Morally and ethically Novak is in deep shit. I don't see how he can justify himself without dropping his pants and painting HYPOCRITE on his ass. This was not a matter of one rogue leaker in the white house. There were TWO sources, shopping the story to reporters. So two rogue leakers just so happen to start calling around with the same leak at the same time? My bet is that the two leakers got their marching orders from someone higher up. That makes (at least) three: the legal requirement for conspiracy. If they themselves did not have the classified information about Palme (her maiden name, the circumstances of Wilson's tasking to check out yellowcake) then someone violated classification to give them that information. Those who knew what was going on and did nothing are accessories after the fact. Felonies abound. Having these "insidious traitors" resign is going too light on them. Even sending them to Leavenworth for some hard time isn't enough. They should be publically disemboweled on the steps of the Capitol. Posted by: Satan luvvs Repugs at September 29, 2003 11:09 AM | PERMALINKThe reason why Bush is so incurious about this whole matter is pretty simple: if Bush were to really find out who was behind this he might have to do something about it. And if the person who was behind it was Rove the something he might have to do about it would mean firing his most trusted advisor. Bush knows he probably can't win in 2004 without Rove. Bush would rather pull a Sgt. Schultz than risk that. Posted by: Chris Andersen at September 29, 2003 11:13 AM | PERMALINKLA LA LA WE DON'T KNOW WHAT REALLY HAPPENED LA LA LA LA LA LA LA Because, you know, Republicans are always so principled about only making accusations when they have all the facts before them. And even when we've got the facts? LA LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LA LA LA --Kynn Posted by: Kynn at September 29, 2003 11:41 AM | PERMALINKRob, Now the Rove story is unraveling and Wilson's bias is showing through. Source please. Posted by: JP at September 29, 2003 11:48 AM | PERMALINKI'm not trying to divert all of our attention to Novak. But I AM wondering whether Novak should be absolved of any guilt. I suppose then that I am trying to divert all of our attention to Novak, because Novak should be absolved of all guilt. He has done a service for American citizens by directing them to the truth about their leaders—and the truth in this case potentially jeopardized lives. I'm sure it was a soul-crunching decision to make, but the other decision--one that the other journalists made--was morally incorrect. When it regards illegal, possibly conspiratorial, possibly treasonous decisions on behalf of the government, it is the press's duty to inform the electorate. It's becoming clear that the CIA agrees with this position, in my speculative opinion. A note: This is a far different scenario than reporters advertising troop locations, which we saw in the Iraq war and which was obviously morally incorrect. Posted by: Kriston Capps at September 29, 2003 11:49 AM | PERMALINKWhether or not Wilson was "biased" about anything has no effect on whether or not administration officials illegally exposed his wife. Try again next time, and thanks for playing! Posted by: taktile at September 29, 2003 11:52 AM | PERMALINKAlthough Wilson's judgment is certainly suspect if he was sent to Niger as cover for his wife to show up there, and then drew attention to it with the cover 'report' he filed. Posted by: Sebastian Holsclaw at September 29, 2003 12:24 PM | PERMALINKWilson was on C-SPAN this morning, and he heartily defends Novak's right to publish; he also pointed out as someone does above, that the relevant law specifically excepts journalists. (That is, the law is designed to hold to account the person who makes the leak, not the 'medium'.) When a call-in commended his courage in speaking out, he put that into perspective by comparing the protection our constitutional freedoms give us with the kind of courage it takes to speak out in a dictatorship, where the risk is jail and torture. His approach is brilliant: it celebrates what makes this country great (and makes what the admin did look as shabby and thuggish as it is). It puts the focus on the admin, where it belongs, and keeps him on the side of reporters. All reporters. Everyone knows it was slimy though legal of Novak to run the Plame info, but it's not the reporters who should be obliged to say who did this. The president can clear the matter up in fifteen minutes. He chooses not to. Posted by: Nell Lancaster at September 29, 2003 01:00 PM | PERMALINKI don't know quite what theory you're espousing at the moment, but whether his "judgment was suspect" has no effect on whether administration officials illegally exposed his wife. Posted by: taktile at September 29, 2003 01:00 PM | PERMALINKThe Adminstration has firmly denied that Rove said anything about Ms. Plame Wilson has sheepishly admitted he was lying about Rove (He got carried away, he said I say with what? Bush hate?). http://msnbc.com/news/973047.asp Kriston: Not so fast. Read what JM Marshall has to say about the implications of blowing Plame's cover: "We've heard a lot about how blowing Plame's cover was probably illegal and certainly dishonorable. But let's walk through what the implications are. Plame's beat, if we can use that word, was weapons of mass destruction. And, of course, WMD is the big issue. It's why Iraq, why Joe Wilson, why Niger, why CIA referrals. That's what's at the bottom of all this stuff. Keeping WMD out of the wrong hands is, or was, Plame's job. If that's her job you can figure that over the years she's been involved in various operations aimed at tracking proliferation, worked with various human sources, all sorts of stuff like that. Now Plame's name has been splashed across papers all over the world. And the folks that leaked her name made sure that they used her maiden name, Plame -- the one she did most of her work under -- rather than Wilson, the name which I'm told she now goes by. So now her name's out. And now every bad-actor and bad-acting government knows that anything that Plame was involved with, any operation, any company she was supposed to be working for, any people she worked closely with, are probably also CIA or at least work with CIA. WMD bad-guys now know to steer clear of them. Let's say there's some operation Plame hasn't been involved with for a decade -- but it's still on-going. People will remember she used to be in on that operation and thus it's tagged as an Agency operation and it's useless. Everyone will know to steer clear. Now, I have no knowledge of any operations Plame was involved in or covers she used. These are hypotheticals. But it gives you a sense of the sort of work she was involved in and the potential collateral damage of exposing her cover. And consider what her work was: protecting Americans from weapons of mass destruction. Chew on that irony." http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/ I wonder whether Novak even paused to consider the potential effects of his printing her name in a syndicated column. Posted by: David at September 29, 2003 01:02 PM | PERMALINKSebastian writes: "Although Wilson's judgment is certainly suspect if he was sent to Niger as cover for his wife to show up there, and then drew attention to it with the cover 'report' he filed. " You're just making shit up now, out of sheer desperation. There's every indication that Wilson was entirely qualified for the job on his own. Further, you assume she'd be tagging along with her husband, but in her spy work she apparently used her maiden name, not her married name, so accompanying Wilson wouldn't make any sense. Her CIA role apparently is that she is *not* the wife of ambassador Wilson. It would make more sense for her to go alone, under her maiden name, and not in any role connected to Wilson. Posted by: Jon H at September 29, 2003 01:08 PM | PERMALINKAnd he thought Rove condoned it because??? This is why I hate stories that are entirely supported by anonymous sources. We can't draw any useful conslusions about anything. It is sounding more and more like Plame is a desk bound analyst. In which case I'm not convinced I should care. Am I wrong? How can I tell? No one is telling the WHO or WHERE or WHAT. Some reporting.... Posted by: Sebastian Holsclaw at September 29, 2003 01:08 PM | PERMALINKTo elaborate my last sentence, I wonder if Novack paused to consider the possible effects on existing CIA operations and security matters concerning WMDs. Posted by: David at September 29, 2003 01:10 PM | PERMALINKA former CIA agent, Robert David Steel(e?) is on BBC World Service talking about the incident. He says that as a clandestine case officer, she was not an agent, but agents reported to her. He suggests that a case officer would be travelling around, meeting with clandestine spies. Knowing Plame's movements and contacts would thus provide an indication of who she was meeting with, and where they were. Is she Jack Ryan or James Bond? No. But covert operation would still be a crucial aspect of her position. A lot of people seem to be hung up on Hollywood's conception of a secret agent. If she doesn't do all that Mission: Impossible shit, she must be a desk jockey shuffling papers. Seems to me Robert Hanssen was very much a paper-shuffling desk jockey, and he was very much a covert agent. A double agent in that case, the bastard. Posted by: Jon H at September 29, 2003 01:19 PM | PERMALINKGood questions from The Note (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/TheNote/TheNote.html) "One veteran of the Clinton legal controversies asks all these questions, some of which were addressed at the gaggle: Has President Bush made clear to the White House staff that only total cooperation with the investigation will be tolerated? If not, why not? Has he insisted that every senior staff member sign a statement with legal authority that they are not the leaker and that they will identify to the White House legal counsel who is? Has Bush required that all sign a letter relinquishing journalists from protecting those two sources? Has Bush said that those involved in this crime will be immediately fired? If not, why not? Has Albert Gonzalez distributed a letter to White House employees telling them to preserve documents, logs, records? If not, why not? Has Andy Card named someone on his staff to organize compliance? If not, why not? White House officials who might have legal or political exposure on this are going to have to decide whether to hire lawyers or not, and the White House counsel's office is going to have to decide what legal help they can and should provide to officials if and when the DOJ wants to talk to them. That means that the '90s practice of every Washington bureau of calling members of the bar to see who has hired whom is about to heat back up. The first one to report someone hiring a criminal lawyer wins a prize, as does the first person who develops that lawyer as a source on all this. Posted by: Katherine at September 29, 2003 01:32 PM | PERMALINKI wonder whether Novak even paused to consider the potential effects of his printing her name in a syndicated column. David, you aptly point to Josh Marshall's comments on the issue, which I've been hungrily reading since the story broke. I don't think in this instance that he is in any way condemning Novak, though; he is clearly condemning the White House officials who broke the law. Think about it: These White House officials told Novak so that Novak would reveal Plame's identity. Novak faced a very difficult decision (and I assure you he realized the gravity of that decision) but finally decided to basically be complicit in ruining Plame's career, potentially even putting her in harm's way. Why? Because he had to do so in order to reveal the illegal activities of the White House. Those White House officials told reporters (including Novak) in order to destroy Plame's career, and because they see themselves as above the law. They are quickly finding out that this is not true. Who has endangered Valerie Plame, the CIA, potentially our national security? Let's be clear: It was the White House, the White House, the White House, the White House. The reason journalists are excluded from the law is so that we may find out the truth. The truth is intended to be our defense and protection - not this journalist's conscience. Posted by: Kriston Capps at September 29, 2003 02:29 PM | PERMALINKI've never been at all comfortable with this responsibility free zone that reporters try to create for themselves. If Plame or people she worked with were put in danger (which from the facts I have so far seems unlikely, concrete facts will hopefully be revealed) they were put in danger by revelation. This revelation came through Novak. He was aware of what he was doing, and chose to do it. Go after Bush as much as you want, especially if the stronger allegations prove true. But reporters are also to blame, especially in this kind of case. Posted by: Sebastian Holsclaw at September 29, 2003 02:51 PM | PERMALINKI don't see why the blame game has to be a zero-sum one. Why not blame BOTH Novak (for sleazy reporting) and the leakers (for the illegal outing of an agent)? I'd obviously blame the leakers MORE. But I'd not let Novak so easily off the hook. Or are you outraged that the other reporters (the ones that the leakers gave the message to), chose not to report the story? In fact, why couldn't Novak or the others have done a story about how someone was trying to leak the agent's name, WITHOUT NAMING THE AGENT? Posted by: David at September 29, 2003 04:17 PM | PERMALINKAn oppressive government is more to be feared than a tiger Posted by: Graziano Laura at March 17, 2004 07:34 PM | PERMALINKReality is not affected by our apprehension of it. Posted by: Bromberg Brian at May 2, 2004 01:28 PM | PERMALINKonline casinos | casino bonus | casino directory | high roller casinos | casinos Posted by: doi at May 23, 2004 10:28 AM | PERMALINKBuy www.i-directv.net this it is a wonderful addition to anyones home entertainment system. Posted by: direct TV at May 27, 2004 07:40 PM | PERMALINKGet WWW.I-DISH-NETWORK.ORG rid of cable and upgrade your living room by clicking here! Posted by: satellite tv at June 3, 2004 07:18 AM | PERMALINKGet WWW.IDEBTCONSOLIDATION.ORG the debt relief you are searching for here! Posted by: debt relief at June 7, 2004 02:20 PM | PERMALINKGet www.all-debt-consolidation.org help with your credit problems here! Posted by: out of debt at June 14, 2004 02:31 AM | PERMALINKClub Hardcore Live - Dirty Sweet Teens - Twink Cocks - Electro Smut - Little Pink Cherry - Ghetto Nasty - Hot Sticky Loads - Instrusive Eye - Mondo Porno - Old N Horny - Smut Land - Jerk Off Movies - Karas Xxx - Ebony Fantasy - Teen Steam - Lesbian Pink - Major Melons - Classic Mature - Teen X - Asian Pleasures - Club Cock Posted by: Free xxx galleries at June 22, 2004 12:21 AM | PERMALINKcaptain stabbin pussy Now you can Play Poker online any time! Posted by: online poker at June 25, 2004 02:57 AM | PERMALINKBuy Viagra online! its easy click here today. Posted by: order viagra at June 29, 2004 02:29 AM | PERMALINKAn oppressive government is more to be feared than a tiger Posted by: Levenberg Karen at June 30, 2004 06:11 AM | PERMALINKVirtual City Casino - All Poker Casino - The Sands Casino - 49ER Casino - big cocks - hardcore toons - hardcore sex - ifriends webcams adult chat - amateur porn - naked celebs - asian porn pics - mega cock cravers Posted by: inthevip at June 30, 2004 10:10 AM | PERMALINKIn your free time, check out the sites about http://www.gdgc.org/casino-game-online.html casino game online http://www.petroglyphx.com/casinos-en-lmnea-777.html casinos en línea 777 http://www.keithandrew.co.uk/phentermine-37.5.html phentermine 37.5 http://www.novacspacetravel.com/internet-poker.html internet poker http://www.roboticmilking.com/blackjack.html blackjack http://www.simpsonowen.co.uk/cgwcgkcfucghcgncfvcgn.html ??????? http://www.roboticmilking.com/video-pook.html video pook http://www.salcia.co.uk/online-casino.html online casino http://www.wincrestal.com/weight-loss-diet-pill.html weight loss diet pill http://www.the1930shome.co.uk/craps.html craps http://www.Soulfulstencils.com/roulette.html roulette http://www.ecologix.co.uk/free-online-slot.html free online slot http://www.b-witchedcentral.co.uk/ghddjnhexekf-777.html ???? 777 http://www.the1930shome.co.uk/ptquer.html pôquer http://www.arcsecurity.co.uk/diet-pills-online.html diet pills online http://www.dunecliffesaunton.co.uk/pmdd.html pmdd http://www.thesoftwaregarage.co.uk/panic-attack.html panic attack http://www.mallorycoatings.co.uk/slot-machines-free-play.html slot machines free play http://www.gdgc.org/free-online-casino-game.html free online casino game http://www.arcsecurity.co.uk/canadian-online-pharmacy.html canadian online pharmacy http://www.unccd.ch/phentermine-information.html phentermine information http://www.cgg.ch/prescription-diet-pills.html prescription diet pills http://www.irianjaya.co.uk/online-poker.html online poker http://www.simpsonowen.co.uk/cfkcglcgucggcgbcgmcghcgncfvcgn.html ?????·???? http://www.tanganyikan-cichlids.co.uk/anorexia-y-bulimia.html anorexia y bulimia http://www.rydoncycles.co.uk/top-online-casino.html top online casino http://www.petroglyphx.com/black-jack-en-lmnea.html black jack en línea http://www.thehadhams.net/buy-viagra-online.html buy viagra online http://www.dunecliffesaunton.co.uk/trazodone.html trazodone http://www.keithandrew.co.uk/phentermine-prescription.html phentermine prescription http://www.claudiachristian.co.uk/best-casino.html best casino http://www.cgg.ch/cheap-diet-pills.html cheap diet pills http://www.cleannbright.co.uk/cod-soma.html cod soma http://www.ple.org.uk/learn-to-play-craps.html learn to play craps http://www.airshow-china.com.cn/cheapest-tramadol.html cheapest tramadol http://www.ecologix.co.uk/slim-slot.html slim slot http://www.simpsonowen.co.uk/hexceucfocewces.html ????? http://www.waldner-msa.co.uk/order-adipex.html order adipex http://www.unccd.ch/phentermine-for-sale.html phentermine for sale http://www.ecologix.co.uk/casino-slot-machine.html casino slot machine http://www.dunecliffesaunton.co.uk/nortriptyline.html nortriptyline http://www.gemtienda.co.uk/choice-hotel.html choice hotel http://www.training-one.co.uk/amoxil.html amoxil http://www.yourowncolours.co.uk/cabbage-soup-diet.html cabbage soup diet http://www.triadindustries.co.uk/blackjack.html blackjack http://www.b-witchedcentral.co.uk/egsghddjnhexeqe.html ????? http://www.unccd.ch/ phentermine http://www.neiladams.org.uk/no-limit-texas-holdem.html no limit texas holdem http://www.homenetworkingsolutions.co.uk/ betting http://www.touchwoodmagazine.org.uk/play-poker-online.html play poker online - Tons of interesdting stuff!!! Posted by: allergy product at July 9, 2004 01:54 AM | PERMALINKYou are invited to check some relevant pages dedicated to http://www.melincs.org/ phentermine http://www.phentermine-experts.com/ phentermine http://www.phentermine-375-deals.com/ phentermine http://www.phentermine-use.com/ phentermine http://www.online-deals4u.com/ phentermine http://www.worldwide-90.com/ phentermine http://www.phentermine-online-sale.net/ phentermine http://www.phentermine375.net/ phentermine http://www.bestbuys-online.net/ phentermine http://www.bestbuys-online-24x7.net/ phentermine http://www.kmag.biz/ online casino http://www.sydney-harbour.info/ online casino http://www.online-casino-4u.com/ online casino http://www.onlinecasino-4u.com/ online casino http://www.online-casino-555.com/ online casino http://www.worldwide-21.com/ online casino http://www.online-deals21.com/ online casino http://www.bestbuys-win.com/ online casino http://www.onlinecasino777.net/ online casino http://www.online-casino-winner.net/ online casino http://www.hokitika.info/ online poker http://www.online-poker-4u.com/ online poker http://www.onlinepoker-4u.com/ online poker http://www.online-poker-555.com/ online poker http://www.worldwide-em.com/ online poker http://www.online-deals99.com/ online poker http://www.bestbuys-winner.com/ online poker http://www.onlinepoker777.net/ online poker http://www.online-poker-winner.net/ online poker http://www.onlinepokersite.net/ online poker http://www.mrspike.biz/ viagra http://www.viagra-experts.com/ viagra http://www.viagra-100-deals.com/ viagra http://www.viagra-use.com/ viagra http://www.online-top-deals.com/ viagra http://www.worldwide-50.com/ viagra http://www.viagra-online-sales.net/ viagra http://www.viagra24x7.net/ viagra http://www.buyviagra50.net/ viagra http://www.viagrapills100.com/ viagra ... Posted by: phentermine at July 14, 2004 06:54 AM | PERMALINKYou are invited to visit the pages dedicated to http://www.melincs.org/ phentermine http://www.worldwide-deals.net/ phentermine http://www.phentermine-today.com/ phentermine http://www.phentermine-pharmacy-deals.com/ phentermine http://www.phentermine-experts.com/ phentermine http://www.phentermine-375-deals.com/ phentermine http://www.phentermine-use.com/ phentermine http://www.online-deals4u.com/ phentermine http://www.worldwide-90.com/ phentermine http://www.phentermine-online-sale.net/ phentermine http://www.phentermine375.net/ phentermine http://www.bestbuys-online.net/ phentermine http://www.bestbuys-online-24x7.net/ phentermine http://www.kmag.biz/ online casino http://www.sydney-harbour.info/ online casino http://www.online-casino-4u.com/ online casino http://www.onlinecasino-4u.com/ online casino http://www.online-casino-555.com/ online casino http://www.worldwide-21.com/ online casino http://www.online-deals21.com/ online casino http://www.bestbuys-win.com/ online casino http://www.onlinecasino777.net/ online casino http://www.online-casino-winner.net/ online casino http://www.hokitika.info/ online poker http://www.online-poker-4u.com/ online poker http://www.onlinepoker-4u.com/ online poker http://www.online-poker-555.com/ online poker http://www.worldwide-em.com/ online poker http://www.online-deals99.com/ online poker http://www.bestbuys-winner.com/ online poker http://www.onlinepoker777.net/ online poker http://www.online-poker-winner.net/ online poker http://www.onlinepokersite.net/ online poker http://www.mrspike.biz/ viagra http://www.viagra-experts.com/ viagra http://www.viagra-100-deals.com/ viagra http://www.viagra-use.com/ viagra http://www.online-top-deals.com/ viagra http://www.worldwide-50.com/ viagra http://www.viagra-online-sales.net/ viagra http://www.viagra24x7.net/ viagra http://www.buyviagra50.net/ viagra http://www.viagrapills100.com/ viagra ... Posted by: online casino at July 16, 2004 12:46 PM | PERMALINKyou can play blackjack here! http://www.blackjack.greatnow.com Posted by: online blackjack at July 21, 2004 01:47 PM | PERMALINKyou can play blackjack here! http://www.blackjack.greatnow.com Posted by: blackjack at July 21, 2004 02:59 PM | PERMALINKPosted by: Lyrics at July 23, 2004 07:50 PM | PERMALINK If you've ever been curious about how to play online poker then you'll want to read over the following online poker guide. This guide is designed to give you a basic overview of the game concept and rules. After reading this guide you should be in a god position to play poker. We suggest you try an online casino that offers free play in order to practice a bit before placing any real wagers. Posted by: onine casinos at July 25, 2004 04:36 PM | PERMALINKPlease visit one of these categories of my site about Body Piercing and Piercings:
If you've ever been curious about how to play online poker then you'll want to read over the following online poker guide. This guide is designed to give you a basic overview of the game concept and rules. After reading this guide you should be in a god position to play poker. We suggest you try an online casino that offers free play in order to practice a bit before placing any real wagers. Posted by: online casino at July 26, 2004 04:13 PM | PERMALINKIf you've ever been curious about how to play online poker then you'll want to read over the following. We suggest you try an online casino that offers free play in order to practice a bit before placing any real wagers. You can also play blackjack online fo free! Posted by: online casino at July 30, 2004 04:04 PM | PERMALINK5610 You can buy viagra from this site :http://www.ed.greatnow.com Posted by: Viagra at August 7, 2004 06:41 PM | PERMALINK229 You can buy viagra from this site :http://www.ed.greatnow.com Posted by: Viagra at August 7, 2004 06:44 PM | PERMALINK2449 Why is Texas holdem so darn popular all the sudden? http://www.texas-holdem.greatnow.com Best XXX Sites - 5429 ok you can play online poker at this address : http://www.play-online-poker.greatnow.com Posted by: online poker at August 10, 2004 09:34 PM | PERMALINK1060 get cialis online from this site http://www.cialis.owns1.com Posted by: cialis at August 10, 2004 11:05 PM | PERMALINKWow, I was just saying the same thing to my friend last night. Thanks for posting this! Posted by: discmakers at August 11, 2004 11:47 PM | PERMALINK8876 Keep it up! Try Viagra once and youll see. http://viagra.levitra-i.com Posted by: Viagra at August 13, 2004 04:16 PM | PERMALINK7076 Get your online poker fix at http://www.onlinepoker-dot.com Posted by: online poker at August 15, 2004 03:49 PM | PERMALINK1862 black jack is hot hot hot! get your blackjack at http://www.blackjack-dot.com Posted by: blackjack at August 16, 2004 04:52 PM | PERMALINK3567 so theres Krankenversicherung and then there is 2044 Its great to experiance the awesome power of debt consolidation so hury and consolidate debt through http://www.debtconsolidation.greatnow.com pronto Posted by: debt consolidation at August 18, 2004 08:28 PM | PERMALINKAs always, spot on! Amen brother! Posted by: storage area networks (SAN) at August 18, 2004 08:39 PM | PERMALINK8524 http://www.exoticdvds.co.uk for 4051 check out the hot blackjack at http://www.blackjack-p.com here you can play blackjack online all you want! So everyone ~SMURKLE~ Posted by: play blackjack at August 23, 2004 12:21 PM | PERMALINK6766 Herie http://blaja.web-cialis.com is online for all your black jack needs. We also have your blackjack needs met as well ;-) Posted by: blackjack at August 24, 2004 08:01 PM | PERMALINK427 check out http://texhold.levitra-i.com for texas hold em action or if you prefer texas hold em what ever you call it boodrow Posted by: texas hold em at August 25, 2004 02:15 PM | PERMALINK |
|
|
Powered by Movable Type 2.63 
|
||||
