See other War, War, War Articles
Title: Breaking - 3 US troops, 1 French soldier die in Afghanistan
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090801/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan
Published: Aug 1, 2009
Author: AP
Post Date: 2009-08-01 09:57:40 by Jethro Tull
Ping List: *Obama Reality Check* Subscribe to *Obama Reality Check*
Keywords: None
Views: 367
Comments: 39
3 US troops, 1 French soldier die in Afghanistan Buzz up!1 vote Send Email IM Share Delicious Digg Facebook Fark Newsvine Reddit StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Bookmarks Print AFP – An Afghan man carries a photo of presidential candidate and former finance minister Ashraf Ghani in Kabul. … Slideshow:Afghanistan Play Video Afghanistan Video:Protestors May Appear At Funerals Of Servicemen KDKA Pittsburgh Play Video Afghanistan Video:Military analyst: Change in mission means more danger in Afghanistan WRAL Raleigh 16 mins ago KABUL – A U.S. military spokesman says three American troops have been killed in two blasts in southern Afghanistan. Navy Chief Petty Officer Brian Naranjo says the attacks happened on Saturday. Southern Afghanistan is the center of the Taliban-led insurgency, which has made a violent comeback since its initial defeat in the U.S.-led invasion. Thousands of U.S. Marines and British troops are conducting anti-Taliban operations in the region ahead of this month's presidential elections. Separately, a French soldier was killed and two others were wounded during a clash with insurgents north of Kabul, the French military said in a statement. The number of U.S. and other NATO killed in bombing and clashes has soared this year. THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below. KABUL (AP) — NATO says three of its troops were killed in two roadside blasts in southern Afghanistan. The military alliance says the blasts hit their patrol on Saturday. It did not provide details on the nationalities of the victims or the exact location of the blast. The number of NATO and other foreign troops killed in clashes and bombing has soared this year. With 74 foreign troops killed, July was the deadliest month for foreign troops since the start of the war in 2001. Southern Afghanistan is the center of the Taliban-led insurgency, which has made a violent comeback since its initial defeat in the U.S.-led invasion. Thousands of U.S. Marines and British troops are conducting anti-Taliban operations in the region ahead of this month's presidential elections.
Poster Comment: Nice work O'Bots - hows that blood bath y'all wanted working for you?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Jethro Tull (#0)
And still the blacks are mute. Obumski could start WW3 and blacks would say nothing.
How is it that when people from Afghanistan, etc. come to America bringing all their tribal customs, we natives are told to be inclusive and accept the diversity they bring to our culture. Yet, when they are in their own country, minding their own business, they make perfectible acceptable targets for the Crazed Interloper's storm troopers?
Blaming O'Bots for the continuing bloodshed there is akin to blaming Republican Party members who supported Dr. Ron Paul throughout the last few years for Bush having started the bogus wars since 9/11 to begin with. Obama is for the Afghanistan war, obviously. But if you'll check any reputable public opinion poll of those who were his earliest and staunchest supporters and followers, you will find that they are ANTI-ALL WARS and voted for him IN SPITE OF his pledge to ramp up the Af/Pak operations. It is no accident that the earliest, most vociferous and most enthusiastic grassroots support of the 2007-08 presidential derby coalesced two years ago around the campaigns of Paul and Obama. At that time they were BOTH TOTALLY ANTI-WAR, IIRC. Obama later on was told by his NWO advisers (Soros and Brzezinski come to mind) that he HAD to support Af/Pak and so he dutifully modulated his anti-war rhetoric in favor of what he now supports.
“I would give no thought of what the world might say of me, if I could only transmit to posterity the reputation of an honest man.” - Sam Houston
The bought and paid for political class is mum as is the whole alphabet soup of traditional black groups like the NAACP, SCLC, etc., etc. But Barky doesn't resonate with a lot of working class black people that I meet. He's really not one of them, and they know it. And you don't hear much from them, as you don't hear much from us. At least not in the Lamestream that seems to form a great degree of our "reality."
Join 2x4 Tuesdays & protect your RKBA. Huh? First, RPs support didn't come from Republicans. Second, RP was against the war while the Rs supported it. Third, Obama supported the war, and the Os on this board did too.
The problem being, when whitey faults Obama, regardless of truth, it is instantly labeled as racism, and the truth is cast aside. Now, if just a few prominent black people would raise their voices, the racism issue woule mute, and just perhaps the truth would see the light of day. Where is big mouth Oprah, not a word.
Sam is so mired in the "two party charade" that it obscures his view from "deep left field". If one checks the background numbers for Perot, the millions of votes were about equal across party lines.
But you forget! It's OK when WE do it. It happens Over There, out of sight and out of mind. We're Special People. We do what we want. We're 'muricans! USA! USA! Really, JT. I am beginning to question your patriotism. .
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Build a fire for a politician/bankster/pig and he will be warm for a day. Set a politician/bankster/pig on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
PSUSA... Record this little word in your mind...LISTS... Within a matter of "hours" of the attack on Pearl Harbor, THOUSANDS of Americans were rounded up and jailed. Mere hours, and their names were all on...LISTS...It was one huge dragnet, and I am NOT speaking of the Japanese that were interned. That was in the good ole days, fast forward to the present with beloved Homeland Security and computers attached to instant communication, throw in a list and there is Jethro, on many lists.
Sorry. I was being sarcastic. Personally I thought it was obvious, but maybe it wasn't. I do have a tendency to be a little sarcastic at times. I'm sure JT, you, me, everyone that has made plain their intention to resist is on a list somewhere. I don't worry about it. They have their lists, we have ours. .
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Build a fire for a politician/bankster/pig and he will be warm for a day. Set a politician/bankster/pig on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
Apparently, the Taliban freedom-fighters have struck a blow for their nation's sovereignty against the invaders.
LOL. So they're so antiwar they support Warlord Yomama, having lambasted and stalked Bush for years as a warmonger? You're trying to put lipstick on a pig here. No. Ron Paul was the only credible antiwar candidate in the race except for Kucinich. Yomama is a man of political expedience, a slimeball who pursues power by any means. This happens in both parties and we wonder how we end up with such miserable and malicious midgets in national office and why they don't seem to obey the will of the people. We have the government we deserve, you know.
In order to vote for Ron Paul last year, you had to vote as a Republican. All who voted for Paul by definition became Republicans, at least for that day. That is one of the MAJOR problems with Ron Paul, IMO. He IS a Republican and always will be. He ran once as a Libertarian for President (and I voted for him), but he went crawling back to the GOPers several years after that.
“I would give no thought of what the world might say of me, if I could only transmit to posterity the reputation of an honest man.” - Sam Houston
See #13 above. It is Ron Paul who is mired in the charade and anyone who supported him had to play the charade to (try to) vote for him last year.
“I would give no thought of what the world might say of me, if I could only transmit to posterity the reputation of an honest man.” - Sam Houston
And not one who voted for RP supported war in Afghanistan. OTOH, the Ds knew Obama was going to surge the place with lots o' troops, and lo and behold he did! So ya' see, it's the political LEFT who are the blood dancers. So sorry if that's troubling. As I said, the two Os here have acknowledged they support Obama's GOOD war. What's that about?
He's spoken to this clearly enough over the years. While he isn't rude to the GOP, he regards it solely as a vehicle to elect libertarians and constitutionalists (those two being pretty much synonymous to RP). He always cites the difficulty and expense for independent or third-party candidates to have ballot access. RP could himself get elected as an independent since he has a very loyal district and his relationship to his district is longstanding. I think he stays Republican to encourage other libertarians to do the same. And the GOP is (or was) slightly less statist than the Dims. He also cites the Old Right and its focus on small-government and non-interventionism as the thing that makes the GOP better than the Dims. Keep in mind, RP has watched the two parties longer than most of us and so he measures the two parties with a longer yardstick.
Well, Ron Paul did. So did I and a lot of others. Afghanistan and the Taliban were sheltering those who had attacked America. This is very comparable to the Barbary pirates who operated against American shipping and hid behind the Barbary states. Somalia recently was doing much the same thing. You can't let pirates or terrorists operate against you by being shielded by a host country. The Founders never allowed it.
Partisan hacks. Their principles, such as they are, are for sale. A lot of the Left's antiwar folk are just misfits and malcontents, putty for the old commie organizers of the Left who staged the Code Pinko and other antiwar stuff. You can see they weren't in the least antiwar because they have disappeared off the face of the earth now that their own partisan hack is in office despite the fact that he is following and enacting exactly the same policies as the previous partisan hack of the opposite party. In this respect, the adherents of the District's two major crime families behave pretty identically. Unfortunately, people who adhere to principles instead of party are a distinct minority in recent decades. It's one of the main reasons this country is in such serious trouble.
You just proved you really don't know much about what happened on 9/11. Hint: 19 guys in a cave had ZERO to do with it nor did the mythical bin Laden, who worked for the CIA up until the day he died.
“I would give no thought of what the world might say of me, if I could only transmit to posterity the reputation of an honest man.” - Sam Houston
Sam, since you can't seem to understand what's being written, listen to RP himself. He opposes the war in Afghanistan. That you support it might put you in good standing with the O'Piles, but it also makes you a Blood Dancer.
Hey, I knew that. I doubt ole Jethro and I am not being sarcastic. hehehehehe
And you dont care for Palin??? Sam, Jethro is right. You seem to be a mixed up young man. It seems all you see are party labels, labels put there for YOU by the system. You would have been in a terminal tizzy when both parties offered the nomination to Ike.
To paraphrase you from the other day when I brought up someone not on topic, "What does Palin have to do with this?" And, BTW, she proudly wears the Republican label and pretty much always has, I think. I hear she and Todd are getting a divorce. You need to head "North to Alaska." I know you're an older guy, but it never hurts to try. She may just be into that. As someone who DOESN'T EVEN VOTE (and never will again), why would I be in a "terminal tizzy" about a process in which I don't participate?
“I would give no thought of what the world might say of me, if I could only transmit to posterity the reputation of an honest man.” - Sam Houston
Dislike for Palin, Paul seems to be a common thread of republicans, one ofr the parties you seem to believe exists. What are we going to have to do, to have you accept there is but ONE party????
He opposes the war in Afghanistan. He opposes this endless nation-building nonsense. However, he did vote for the Afghan war. He believed that our military should go in and take out al-Qaeda and any Taliban who helped them or shielded them. We are way past that now and our government has shown very little interest in catching bin Laden. And Ron Paul doesn't believe in garrisoning other countries or nation-building. Still, he supported the invasion and he did vote for it, something notable for a notorious Dr. No.
Please tell me you're kidding, TC. I didn't know. Isn't RP the man who teaches us about the Constitution every time he opens his mouth? How does he plug the round peg in the square hole with this vote? Isn't he aware of our history; what we break we keep?
Yes, he voted for it. As I said earlier, he considered it analogous to the Barbary pirates who operated from the Barbary states. It was our original conflict with Muslims. Recall singing about "the shores of Tripoli" back in school? That was the first real war action of our Marine Corps. Ron Paul did try to get Congress to issue letters of marque and reprisal (to pay private companies like Blackwater just to hunt down bin Laden) but Congress wouldn't go for it. Under international treaties to which we are signatory, privateering and laws of marque and reprisal are no longer recognized.
that's completely incongruent with what RP said in the video JT posted. further, if true, it's pretty damn disturbing that RP believed that it was OBL and Al Qaeda who were responsible for 911 and didn't know that OBL was a CIA asset. 911 was the excuse to get us into both Afghanistan and Iraq. see Jim Willie's opinion below. i think he's dead on. No need to expound too much on my views regarding the 911 False Flag attack on the Pentagon and World Trade Center. A quick summary will do. Fully 50% of Americans call it an inside job, but only 12% believe the WTC collapse was a demolition project, still relatively clueless. Basic understanding of high school chemistry and physics would lead to over 90% comprehension and suspicion (see gravity and melting point of structural steel). A missile hit the Pentagon precisely at the Army Accounting office location, which was soon to publish a report on $2.3 trillion in missing funds over two decades. The World Trade Center event on 911 was the biggest bank heist in US history, yet unrecognized officially in annals. The theft of $100 billion in gold bullion from basement vaults, along with $100 billion in USTreasury bearer bonds, and $100 billion in diamonds was truly significant. Information sources of mine are as numerous as they are independent, all consistent in the stories. The entire 911 events enabled the launch of an Iraq War to establish a military foundation in the Middle East, to motivate enormous defense contracts, to confiscate Iraqi oil to assure military oil supply, and to enable vast service contractor funds to flow for gigantic fraud and theft. Recall that $50 billion is still missing, not even being searched for, in the Iraqi Reconstruction Fund managed by the Bush II Admin. Mission Accomplished! Last was the biggest benefit of all: the capture of the Afghan narcotics prize by the CIA. That permitted the CIA to control over 80% of the global narcotics trade, whose clearinghouse is the Bank of Baghdad, managed by JPMorgan. The US Federal Reserve is well aware of the money laundering operations that reach Wall Street banks.
With his vote, RP authorized undeclared war. I'm stunned he voted to give that authority to a president.
I think he found it troubling, knowing he was not voting according to principle. OTOH, we had been attacked on 9/11 with 2500+ victims and bin Laden issued a tape claiming credit, all this after a number of al-Qaeda attacks around the world on Americans and U.S. assets. So he had some justification. I think politics is probably the wrong career if you demand absolute purity of principle. If you look at our Founders, they found it difficult to maintain a perfect purity of principle as well. Politics is just a messy business.
I don't see the incongruity. RP favored a quick invasion, just to kill or capture al-Qaeda. That's how BushCo was selling it. Once we got in, then Rumsfeld and the neocons, thinking how handy it would be to establish Afghanistan as a base to attack Iran, they switched to nation-building mode. As far as knowing OBL was a CIA asset on the day of 9/11, well, I don't accept that as proven. And the CIA does fund people who eventually turn on them as well. Beyond that, on 9/11 OBL was still living it up with his $300M inheritance and I don't see what coin we had then to buy him with. Beyond that, due to Dim blabbermouths in Congress, the GOP and BushCo didn't release the full info from the various intel agencies to the congressional oversight committees and they pre-edited it and controlled the flow of info to Congress. This dealt with the problem of Dims on the intel committees running to the press with classified info but it also controlled the GOP majority on those committees and their influence in the caucus, etc. Controlling info helps a prez to control Congress.
TC: The MSM showed us a grainy YouTube of someone claiming to be bin Laden, and then went on to tell us what he said. Lets stay in the world of the reasonable and agree that the attack wasn't unexpected, and was the "Pearl Harbor" needed for the neocons. BTW, FDR knew of Pearl Harbor some 7-10 days before the event but chose to sacrifice those men to gain entrance into WWII. Same with the Gulf of Tonkin; it was a lie used by LBJ to widen Vietnam. Since I know this history, RP knows this also and his vote to give Bush any war authority was, certainly in hindsight, a colossal mistake.
Much as I would like to nail it on FDR, there is not conclusive proof that he did this. As for Tonkin, Johnson did blow up the incident and stampeded Congress with it, much as Bush did over the Iraq invasion. And the tape of Bin Laden is considered genuine and it was shot as a standard home video on a fairly decent camera. No one has ever presented any credible denial that it was Bin Laden. And he did confess to it. It was the fulfillment of his fatwa against America for trespassing on Saudi soil and near other Muslim holy sites.
You have to be kidding us???? You surely know history better than that???
I disagree. I believe that Robert Stinnentt's book, Day of Deceit proved beyond a reasonable doubt that FDR knew all about Pearl Harbor and kept that information from Admiral Kimmel and General Short. On top of that, the government has pretty much admitted this by reversing the findings of nine previous Pearl Harbor investigations and found that both Kimmel and Short were denied the intelligence that the Japs were up to something. The government did this during the Klintoon administration in 2000 while debating the National Defense Authorization Acct. Stinnett's book is more than just empty allegations. He provides actual memo's, memorandum's and obtained via FOIA. Just two examples are the McCollum memo and the Yoshikawa bulletins. The book is meticulous documented. Last but not least, Stinnett doesn't write the book as an FDR hater. On the contrary, he believed FDR's actions were necessary because the American people were being to complacent and were not seeing the bigger picture. The book is written more or less as a justification instead of an indictment. At least that is what I took away from it.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976 The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope
If one reads Stinnentt's book with an open mind, they will leave with the exact thoughts you posted. Copies of actual intercepted dispatches are hard to dispute. FDR had promised not to become part of Europe's war, but the 'attack' changed the nation's mind. The boys at Pearl Harbor were sacrificed to internationalism.
Just like 3,000 people were sacrificed in the WTC and Pentagon to further PNAC and the 2-party fraud agenda.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976 The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope
FDR was Asst. Sec. of the Navy way back in 1918, as such he was exempt from the draft. At that time, the War Dept drew up plan Orange, that said one day Japan would turn south in search of oil, and WOULD INVADE AMERICAN TERRITORY. IN the 1920s. General Mitchell predicted that Japan would bomb Pearl Harbor in an undeclared war. He predicted the attack would happen on a Sunday morning at 7.30 AM. In 1941 FDR told the Navy to send the Pacific fleet to Pearl, the Admiral refused and was sacked. Adm. Kimmel, remember him, was glad for the promotion and took the navy bait to Pearl The FBI, ONI and many others knew what was afoot. Roosevelt did not????
This is the image from the home video that was repeatedly show in the wak of 911. Our common faculty of facial recognition tell us that the fat guy on the left is not Bin Laden. If that is not enough, you can take out a ruler and measure the facial proportions and nose length. There is also an interview with Bin Laden in which he explicitly denies connection with these events: Bin Laden has consistently denied involvement in 9/11: "I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle. http://911review.org/Wiki/BinLaden.shtml Usama Bin Laden was not a cleric. It takes a quite high ranking cleric to issue a fatwa, on the order of a mufti (or ayatollah in the Shi'a scheme of things.) Bin Laden never issued a fatwa although he co-signed a couple of declarations of jihad against the West that have been called such by other. These are politcal documents and have no force of law in Islam as a genuine fatwa would. But I am sure that this is slicing the cheese much to fine to suit your interest in this thing. Of greater interest perhaps, is the fact that the FBI has stated that it has no evidence linking Bin Laden with 911, and indeed, his FBI wanted poster does not mention that he is wanted in connection with the events of that day. Join 2x4 Tuesdays & protect your RKBA.The number of U.S. and other NATO killed in bombing and clashes has soared this year.
#2. To: Cynicom, *Leftwing Loon Alert* (#1)
#3. To: Jethro Tull (#0)
#4. To: Cynicom (#1)
www.righttokeepandbeararms.com
#5. To: Sam Houston, Brian S, McCarthy, Os, *Leftwing Loon Alert* (#3)
Blaming O'Bots for the continuing bloodshed there is akin to blaming Republican Party members who supported Dr. Ron Paul throughout the last few years for Bush having started the bogus wars since 9/11 to begin with.
#6. To: randge (#4)
And you don't hear much from them, as you don't hear much from us.
#7. To: Jethro Tull, Sam Houston (#5)
First, RPs support didn't come from Republicans.
#8. To: Jethro Tull (#2)
How is it that when people from Afghanistan, etc. come to America bringing all their tribal customs, we natives are told to be inclusive and accept the diversity they bring to our culture. Yet, when they are in their own country, minding their own business, they make perfectible acceptable targets for the Crazed Interloper's storm troopers?
#9. To: PSUSA, Jethro Tull (#8)
Really, JT. I am beginning to question your patriotism.
#10. To: Cynicom (#9)
(Edited)
That was in the good ole days, fast forward to the present with beloved Homeland Security and computers attached to instant communication, throw in a list and there is Jethro, on many lists.
#11. To: Jethro Tull (#0)
#12. To: Sam Houston (#3)
Obama is for the Afghanistan war, obviously. But if you'll check any reputable public opinion poll...
...of those who were his earliest and staunchest supporters and followers, you will find that they are ANTI-ALL WARS and voted for him IN SPITE OF his pledge to ramp up the Af/Pak operations.
... the campaigns of Paul and Obama. At that time they were BOTH TOTALLY ANTI-WAR, IIRC.
#13. To: Jethro Tull (#5)
#14. To: Cynicom (#7)
#15. To: Sam Houston (#13)
In order to vote for Ron Paul last year, you had to vote as a Republican. All who voted for Paul by definition became Republicans, at least for that day
#16. To: Sam Houston (#13)
That is one of the MAJOR problems with Ron Paul, IMO. He IS a Republican and always will be. He ran once as a Libertarian for President (and I voted for him), but he went crawling back to the GOPers several years after that.
#17. To: Jethro Tull (#15)
And not one who voted for RP supported war in Afghanistan.
#18. To: Jethro Tull (#15)
So ya' see, it's the political LEFT who are the blood dancers. So sorry if that's troubling. As I said, the two Os here have acknowledged they support Obama's GOOD war. What's that about?
#19. To: TooConservative (#17)
#20. To: Sam Houston, TooConservative (#17)
#21. To: PSUSA (#10)
Sorry. I was being sarcastic.
#22. To: Sam Houston, Jethro tull (#14)
Ron Paul who is mired in the charade and anyone who supported him had to play the charade to (try to) vote for him last year.
#23. To: Cynicom (#22)
#24. To: Sam Houston (#23)
"What does Palin have to do with this?"
#25. To: Jethro Tull (#20)
listen to RP himself.
#26. To: TooConservative (#25)
However, he did vote for the Afghan war.
#27. To: Jethro Tull (#26)
Please tell me you're kidding, TC. I didn't know. Isn't RP the man who teaches us about the Constitution every time he opens his mouth?
#28. To: TooConservative (#27)
(Edited)
#29. To: TooConservative (#27)
#30. To: Jethro Tull (#29)
With his vote, RP authorized undeclared war. I'm stunned he voted to give that authority to a president.
#31. To: christine (#28)
that's completely incongruent with what RP said in the video JT posted. further, if true, it's pretty damn disturbing that RP believed that it was OBL and Al Qaeda who were responsible for 911 and didn't know that OBL was a CIA asset.
#32. To: TooConservative (#30)
bin Laden issued a tape claiming credit
#33. To: Jethro Tull (#32)
BTW, FDR knew of Pearl Harbor some 7-10 days before the event but chose to sacrifice those men to gain entrance into WWII. Same with the Gulf of Tonkin; it was a lie used by LBJ to widen Vietnam.
#34. To: TooConservative (#33)
Much as I would like to nail it on FDR, there is not conclusive proof that he did this.
#35. To: TooConservative (#33)
Much as I would like to nail it on FDR, there is not conclusive proof that he did this.
#36. To: Hayek Fan (#35)
#37. To: 2big2fail (#36)
FDR had promised not to become part of Europe's war, but the 'attack' changed the nation's mind. The boys at Pearl Harbor were sacrificed to internationalism.
#38. To: Hayek Fan (#35)
On the contrary, he believed FDR's actions were necessary because the American people were being to complacent and were not seeing the bigger picture. The book is written more or less as a justification instead of an indictment. At least that is what I took away from it.
#39. To: TooConservative (#33)
And the tape of Bin Laden is considered genuine and it was shot as a standard home video on a fairly decent camera. No one has ever presented any credible denial that it was Bin Laden. And he did confess to it. It was the fulfillment of his fatwa against America for trespassing on Saudi soil and near other Muslim holy sites.
An interview with Osama bin Laden was published in a Karachi-based Pakistani daily newspaper, Ummat, on September 28, 2001. In this interview, bin Laden explicitly denies involvement in the September 11 attacks in the US:
The 'FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11'. Vice President Cheney says, 'We've never made the case, or argued the case, that somehow Osama Bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11' http://www.twf.org/News/Y2006/0608-BinLaden.html
I find it strange that these facts have to be repeated over and over and over again, but they should be and will be in the interest of accuracy and in the interest of keeping things in perspective.
www.righttokeepandbeararms.com
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest