[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Why will Kamala Harris resign from her occupancy of the Office of Vice President of the USA? Scroll down for records/details

Secret Negotiations! Jill Biden’s Demands for $2B Library, Legal Immunity, and $100M Book Deal to Protect Biden Family Before Joe’s Exit

Mark Levin: They lied to us about Biden

RIGGED: Pfizer cut deal to help Biden steal 2020 election

It's Dr. Kimmy date night!

Glenbrook Dodge will raise a new American flag just before the 4th of July

Horse's continuing struggles with getting online.

‘Trillion dollar trainwreck’: US super stealth fighter is eating the next generation

Who Died: June 2024 Week 4 | News

MORE TROUBLE FOR OLD JOE

"Gestapo" Müller - Hunting Hitler's Secret Police Chief

How Michelle Obama Could Become Democrats' Nominee after Biden's Terrible Debate, with Steve Bannon

Was This Lethal Spitfire Ace Killed by His Own Tactics?

Welsh Police Pay Home Visit To Man For Displaying Reform UK Political Sign

Liz Harrington Drops a BOMBSHELL on How Georgia Was Stolen

Trudeau govt to make all bathrooms in Parliament buildings GENDER NEUTRAL

French official admits censorship is needed for government to control public opinion

Bill Maher Predicts Trump Victory: The Left Is Aggressively Anti-Common Sense

Google is suppressing Blaze Media. Heres how you can help.

Large-scale prisons being secretly erected in all 50 states will they be used to house illegals or force Americans into concentration camps?

Hezbollah is ready to confront Israels military, with Jon Elmer

Balloons Land in Southern Lebanon, Warning Locals the Land Belongs to Jews

German Politician Hit With Hate Crime Investigation For Demanding Migrant Criminals Be Deported

DNC Caught Funneling Millions to Law Firms Involved in Unprecedented Lawfare Campaign Against Trump

Here Are The 20 Biggest Whoppers Biden Told During His Debate With Trump

NYC to ban cellphones in public schools.

New York Times Columnists Turn On Biden After Disastrous Debate Performance

8 Armed Men With Venezuelan Accents Violently Rob Denver Jewelry Store

Uvalde Police School Chief Indicted, Arrested Over Response To 2022 Shooting

Greetings from the Horse


World News
See other World News Articles

Title: British Backtrack on Iraq death toll
Source: Independent
URL Source: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2396031.ece
Published: Mar 27, 2007
Author: Jill Lawless
Post Date: 2007-03-27 06:38:41 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 24102
Comments: 394

British government officials have backed the methods used by scientists who concluded that more than 600,000 Iraqis have been killed since the invasion, the BBC reported yesterday.

The Government publicly rejected the findings, published in The Lancet in October. But the BBC said documents obtained under freedom of information legislation showed advisers concluded that the much-criticised study had used sound methods.

The study, conducted by researchers from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore and the Al Mustansiriya University in Baghdad, estimated that 655,000 more Iraqis had died since March 2003 than one would expect without the war. The study estimated that 601,027 of those deaths were from violence.

The researchers, reflecting the inherent uncertainties in such extrapolations, said they were 95 per cent certain that the real number of deaths lay somewhere between 392,979 and 942,636.

The conclusion, based on interviews and not a body count, was disputed by some experts, and rejected by the US and British governments. But the chief scientific adviser to the Ministry of Defence, Roy Anderson, described the methods used in the study as "robust" and "close to best practice". Another official said it was "a tried and tested way of measuring mortality in conflict zones".

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-330) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#331. To: Diana, ALL (#330)

Are you implying that there is a connection?

You don't think there is, given that the first case of anthrax just happened to show up within a few miles of where the hijackers were staying prior to 9/11?

If you ask me, that's a mighty big coincidence to swallow, Diana.

Especially when doctors at John Hopkins have gone on record saying the skin disorder that Atta and another hijacker sought treatment for before 9/11 is most likely anthrax.

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-04-07   23:30:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#332. To: BeAChooser (#331)

Hey chooser, if you really want to con people, why don't you just post some fake quots and make up some bullshit links to support them.

That's what you got busted for earlier tonight. Busted for it twice in fact.

I mean, if you are going to be a dishonest scumbag, why not go all the way?

.

...  posted on  2007-04-07   23:32:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#333. To: leveller, ALL (#328)

Do you really expect any rational person to believe that Saddam, who was practically the creature of the US, would have invaded Kuwait if Glaspie had not given the green light?

I only expect them to use their brains and realize that Iraq lied all the time, that Iraq put out 2 different transcripts of the meeting (so one or both have to be wrong), that Glaspie said (under oath) the transcript was fabricated and did not include much of what she told Saddam, that Tariq Aziz also said the transcript was "incomplete" and that Tariq Aziz said Glaspie did NOT give Saddam a green light and that Saddam knew an invasion would mean war with the US.

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-04-07   23:33:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#334. To: BeAChooser (#333)

I only expect them to use their brains and realize that Iraq lied all the time,

Sort of like you huh?

Did Saddam go onto internet sites and post fabricated quotes supported by bullshit fake links in a deliberate effort to mislead the posters?

For the record, I note that you were busted twice tonight for doing exactly that. And there are instances where you have done this in the past as well. May we now assume that these earlier cases were not simple accidents?

.

...  posted on  2007-04-07   23:39:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#335. To: ..., nolu_chan, ALL (#332)

You claim I fabricated this quote:

"The most interesting discovery has been a 152mm binary Sarin artillery projectile—containing a 40 percent concentration of Sarin—which insurgents attempted to use as an Improvised Explosive Device (IED). The existence of this binary weapon not only raises questions about the number of viable chemical weapons remaining in Iraq and raises the possibility that a larger number of binary, long-lasting chemical weapons still exist."

But if you go to post #94 of this 4um thread, you will find this link posted by nolu_chan:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/report/2004/isg-final-report/isg-final-report_vol3_cw-anx-f.htm

Visit it and you will find that exact quote.

So are you accusing nolu_chan of posting fake quotes and making up links to support them?

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-04-07   23:47:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#336. To: BeAChooser (#331) (Edited)

Especially when doctors at John Hopkins have gone on record saying the skin disorder that Atta and another hijacker sought treatment for before 9/11 is most likely anthrax.

I thought you don't think John Hopkins is a valid source.

Also the anthrax was a special highly-milled strain produced at Ft. Detrick, MD, and there is strong evidence that it was a case of revenge of a scientist who worked there against his Egyptian co-worker he was attempting to frame. I don't think even the govt said the anthrax attacks were related to those behind 9/11, even if you want it to be.

Diana  posted on  2007-04-07   23:54:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#337. To: BeAChooser (#335)

You claim I fabricated this quote:

"The most interesting discovery has been a 152mm binary Sarin artillery projectile—containing a 40 percent concentration of Sarin—which insurgents attempted to use as an Improvised Explosive Device (IED). The existence of this binary weapon not only raises questions about the number of viable chemical weapons remaining in Iraq and raises the possibility that a larger number of binary, long-lasting chemical weapons still exist."

Possibly, but you are again trying to change the subject and obfuscate the fact that you got busted for posting fabricated information -- twice.

The quotes I claimed you fabricated are well marked on the thread. You know that and so does everyone else. What you are doing here is trying to cover up your misdeeds.

And recall that after you got busted, you put up two new and unrelated quotes and claimed they were what you were trying to post. I pointed out that they had nothing to do with the subject at hand and noted that you were lying to cover your prior lies. These "cover quotes" may be what you are trying use as a diversion now.

But even if the above quote is not one of your scummy "cover quotes", I jolly well may have accused you of fabricating the above quote somewhere along the line. After I busted you for fabricating quotes -- two times -- I questioned all the other quotes you posted. Any normal person would.

.

...  posted on  2007-04-07   23:59:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#338. To: BeAChooser (#331)

Especially when doctors at John Hopkins have gone on record saying the skin disorder that Atta and another hijacker sought treatment for before 9/11 is most likely anthrax.

Did those doctors at John Hopkins actually examine Mohammad Atta?

So now we are suppose to think Mohammad Atta was responsible for the anthrax attacks as well?

Diana  posted on  2007-04-08   0:01:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#339. To: BeAChooser (#335)

Incidently, you are a worthless lying scumball for fabricationg quotes and links to begin with.

You are a double scumball for lying about it when caught.

And you are a triple scumball for once more trying to obfuscate your miserable and cowardly acts.

What culture do you hail from where this sort of dishonesty is tolerated?

.

...  posted on  2007-04-08   0:02:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#340. To: Diana, BeAChooser (#338)

So now we are suppose to think Mohammad Atta was responsible for the anthrax attacks as well?

That's quite a feat he pulled off, considering that he was (according to the official story) dead.

Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.

Arator  posted on  2007-04-08   0:03:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#341. To: BeAChooser, ... (#335)

So are you accusing nolu_chan of posting fake quotes and making up links to support them?

Did you attend law school, is that where you learned the art of twisting things around so?

Diana  posted on  2007-04-08   0:07:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#342. To: Arator, BeAChooser, ... (#340)

That's quite a feat he pulled off, considering that he was (according to the official story) dead.

LOL good catch!

Diana  posted on  2007-04-08   0:10:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#343. To: Diana, ALL (#336)

I thought you don't think John Hopkins is a valid source.

If they stick to medicine and diagnosing diseases they are usually pretty good.

Also the anthrax was a special highly-milled strain produced at Ft. Detrick, MD,

FALSE. You don't know what you are talking about.

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-04-08   0:11:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#344. To: Diana, ALL (#338)

Did those doctors at John Hopkins actually examine Mohammad Atta?

No, but the doctor and pharmacist who did are ALSO on record saying that in hindsight the skin problems they had were anthrax.

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-04-08   0:12:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#345. To: BeAChooser (#343)

Really? What kind of anthrax was it then? I mean besides being 9/11 anthrax?

Diana  posted on  2007-04-08   0:13:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#346. To: Diana, ..., nolu_chan, ALL (#341)

Did you attend law school, is that where you learned the art of twisting things around so?

I didn't twist anything around. Go read the threads, Diana.

... said I fabricated that quote.

But nolu_chan posted a link that contains that exact quote.

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-04-08   0:13:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#347. To: Diana, Arator, ALL (#342)

That's quite a feat he pulled off, considering that he was (according to the official story) dead.

Do you know the incubation time of anthrax?

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-04-08   0:14:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#348. To: BeAChooser (#347)

What does that have to do with your claim?

Diana  posted on  2007-04-08   0:16:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#349. To: BeAChooser (#344)

No, but the doctor and pharmacist who did are ALSO on record saying that in hindsight the skin problems they had were anthrax.

Why don't you post a fake link to support this? Isn't that your style?

.

...  posted on  2007-04-08   0:17:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#350. To: BeAChooser (#347)

Do you know the incubation time of anthrax?

Chooser, as far as I can see nobody has even gaffed you yet. Why are you changing the subject? Just habit?

.

...  posted on  2007-04-08   0:18:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#351. To: BeAChooser (#347)

Or to put it another way, what do you mean I don't know what I'm talking about when I said the stain was a kind produced at Ft. Detrick? I believe that was reported by several sources.

If I am mistaken, I'd like to know, and I'd be curious to know what the source of the anthrax was.

Diana  posted on  2007-04-08   0:18:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#352. To: Diana, ALL (#348)

What does that have to do with your claim?

Well think about it.

How long after 9/11 did the first case appear?

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-04-08   0:18:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#353. To: Diana (#352)

What does that have to do with your claim?

Well think about it.

Diana, it doesh't have anything to do with your claim. You were probably getting close to asking a question that he knew he would get hammered for spinning. So he changed the subject. Just be grateful he didn't try tactic number one: personal insult.

.

...  posted on  2007-04-08   0:21:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#354. To: Diana, ALL (#348)

By the way, I couldn't help but notice that you simply ignored the amazing coincidence that the first case of anthrax would show up within a few miles of where the hijackers were staying. Backing the incubation time off the first case, ask yourself whether a domestic source for the anthrax would have known where the hijackers were staying at the time he'd have had to mail the letter that supposedly infected the first case.

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-04-08   0:21:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#355. To: BeAChooser (#354)

By the way, I couldn't help but notice that you simply ignored the amazing coincidence that the first case of anthrax would show up within a few miles of where the hijackers were staying.

Why don't you just make up a quote proving that they were guilty as sin and then post a fake link to support the quote. That's what you did twice this evening already. Why waste time with all this silly banter when you can just lie?

.

...  posted on  2007-04-08   0:23:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#356. To: BeAChooser (#352)

Well think about it.

OK. I did. For two seconds. That's all it took to reconfirm that your posts are excrement.

Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.

Arator  posted on  2007-04-08   0:24:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#357. To: BeAChooser (#347)

Also the anthrax was a special highly-milled strain produced at Ft. Detrick, MD,

FALSE. You don't know what you are talking about.

From wikipedia:

Although the anthrax preparations were of different grades, all of the material derived from the same bacterial strain. Known as the Ames strain, it was first researched at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), Fort Detrick, Maryland. The Ames strain was then distributed to at least fifteen bio-research labs within the U.S. and six overseas.

DNA sequencing of the anthrax taken from Robert Stevens (the first victim) was conducted at The Institute for Genomic Research beginning in December 2001. Sequencing was finished within a month and the analysis was published in the journal Science in early 2002 (see abstract here). The analysis revealed a number of differences that ruled out laboratories in England, and subsequent testing showed the anthrax to be identical to the original Ames strain from Fort Detrick.

Radiocarbon dating conducted by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in June 2002 established that the anthrax was cultured no more than two years before the mailings. In October 2006 it was reported that water used to process the anthrax spores came from a source in the northeastern United States.[2] Press reports in 2003 indicated the FBI failed to reverse engineer the type of anthrax found in the letters.[3][4]

Diana  posted on  2007-04-08   0:25:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#358. To: BeAChooser (#354)

You haven't whined about your silly victimhood for a half hour or so. Why don't you start whining about how unfair it is to discuss your dishonest, sleazy deeds of earlier this evening? Tell us how unfair it is for you to be held up to account for your scummy lies.

.

...  posted on  2007-04-08   0:27:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#359. To: BeAChooser (#355)

You were famous for your cowardly whining on LP. Lets have a taste. You were doing it earlier.

.

...  posted on  2007-04-08   0:29:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#360. To: Diana (#351)

What do you mean I don't know what I'm talking about when I said the stain was a kind produced at Ft. Detrick?

That not what you said.

You said "the anthrax was a special highly-milled strain produced at Ft. Detrick, MD."

There is nothing to suggest this anthrax was milled at Ft Detrick. And there were other potential sources for this strain of anthrax since it was a type that was sent to labs around the world. And we know for a fact that at least once Iraq tried to obtain it (from the British). But there are other places they could have obtained it.

Here, this was from one of robin's sources:

"While some sources have estimated Ames might have been used in as few as 20 labs, one scientist who has worked with anthrax said the total cannot be known exactly, but is probably closer to 50."

"Until the last few years, a graduate student would call up a friend at another lab and say, 'Send me Ames,' and they'd do it," the scientist said. "There wouldn't necessarily be any records kept."

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-04-08   0:31:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#361. To: BeAChooser (#360)

I am curious Chooser, if one single shred of this shit that you spew is correct, then why doesn't Bush get on national TV and save his Presidency with it?

Is there some dark conspiracy that prevents him from doing it? Is Ron Brown behind it?

.

...  posted on  2007-04-08   0:34:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#362. To: BeAChooser (#360)

Yeah, but there's a difference between the strain and the weaponized form produced at Detrick. That is not an off-the-shelf item.

Alles Scheisse.

randge  posted on  2007-04-08   0:36:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#363. To: Arator, BeAChooser (#356)

Just to let you know - BAC has admitted to being a TREASONOUS QUEER!

Galatians 3:29 And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Red Jones  posted on  2007-04-08   0:42:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#364. To: All, BeAChooser (#357)

Though the case remains officially unsolved:

Anthrax remains a big story, one worthy of continued investigation. The tainted letters were addressed to senators, members of the media and average citizens, killed five, injured 17 and turned an already inefficient postal system into a large-scale security nightmare. They also childishly implicated Arabs ("Death to Israel, Allah is Great?" Please.) precisely at a time when American rage towards the Middle East was reaching a boiling point. That alone served as a deciding factor for many Americans to take war abroad, yet despite being an attack on American soil, the Federal Bureau of Investigation repeatedly drags its feet on the issue.

Simply put, the man most likely responsible for stealing the anthrax is Dr. Philip Zack. Zack is a prominent microbiologist who worked at the U.S. Army's Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases in Fort Detrick, Maryland while weapons-grade Ames anthrax - the same genetic strain used to terrorize the populace - was stored there. A supposed bigot who taunted his Arab colleagues during his tenure at the facility, Zack was also monitored breaking in and conducting experiments during off hours... while no longer employed at the lab.

Zack has been a prime suspect for years - the Hartford Courant wrote a piece about missing anthrax in January 2002, and Salon pursued its own investigation later that year. Suspicion arose from an allegation against Egyptian microbiologist Ayaad Assaad, a former coworker of Zack's. Assaad was fingered anonymously as a potential bioterrorist in the aftermath of September 11 but before victims were identified. Though cleared of all charges by the FBI, the fact that Assaad's accuser knew so much about his life raised suspicions that said accusations were personally motivated. That dozens of lethal samples of anthrax, ebola and hantavirus disappeared during Zack and Assaad's watch in the 1990s only compounded misgivings that Zack was responsible.

Remember, all of this was widely reported in 2002, less than four months after anthrax filled the country with panic. You would think a man with a grudge against Arabs who was seen breaking into a facility where at least two dozen samples of lethal pathogens later went unaccounted would push Zack ahead of Dr. Stephen Hatfill on the "person of interest" list. As we all know, however, that was not the case.

So now we sit, five years later, unfulfilled and perplexed as to how our own government failed to follow up on the obvious. What's even more frustrating is that the FBI and its friends in the press are currently misleading the public about the investigation, insisting now the anthrax was not weapons grade at all! This article from last week states that the anthrax could have been a homebrew mixture capable of being made anywhere; meanwhile, this piece from yesterday obfuscates the issue and contradicts years of prior reporting. As Mike Rivero of the news source What Really Happened said in response, "what pointed the finger at Fort Detrick as the source of the Anthrax spores used in the letters was not just the high degree of 'weaponization' of the spores, but DNA tests which showed the anthrax in the letters to be the exact same strain used at Fort Detrich.

"Even if one buys this pathetic attempt to blur the issue, and believes in a kitchen-sink bioweapons lab, the fact remains that the original source spores still had to come from Fort Detrick." Again making Philip Zack a suspect.

The only reason the investigation is (by MSNBC's account) "frustratingly slow" is because no one wants a resolution to this caper. It was easy enough to devastate Hatfill's life as the conclusion would be an indifferent populace. Bringing an end to this, however, would remove an avenue of terror for the Administration to manipulate.

I'm reticent to mention that correlation as I'd like to think some things are sacred. President Bush thinks otherwise, however; like a white, powdery Osama bin Laden, anthrax has again become a hot topic leading into the midterm elections. And hey, isn't it handy that the now-downgraded anthrax could conceivably be made in an Al Qaeda kitchen? Never mind that five years down the road, the 9/11 attacks and the anthrax scare serve as stark reminders of the president's impotence at bringing terrorists to justice, Bush "stopped this al Qaeda cell from developing anthrax for attacks against the United States." 'Nuff said.

I do not know what Philip Zack has done to deserve such special treatment from the FBI, nor do I know where the missing anthrax samples disappeared to for the better part of a decade. Maybe it's because he's not the Arab demon policymakers need to fuel animosity against "Islamofascism." Maybe he has friends in high places. Honestly, the reason isn't relevant.

Next week marks the five-year anniversary of Bob Stevens' death. Stevens, a photo editor for Boca Raton-based tabloid The Sun, was the first casualty from exposure to anthrax. Let's honor his memory not with empty words and meaningless pontification, but by putting the people responsible away for life.

Canon Fodder is a bi-weekly analysis of politics and society.

http://www.thesimon.com/magazine/articles/canon_fodder/01241_philip_zack _steals_ anthrax.html

Diana  posted on  2007-04-08   0:44:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#365. To: Red Jones (#363) (Edited)

Just to let you know - BAC has admitted to being a TREASONOUS QUEER!

Alot of GOPers are closet gays these days, so I'm not surprised. Gotta link?

Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.

Arator  posted on  2007-04-08   0:49:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#366. To: Arator (#365)

he is a Republican. and Republicans are commonly TREASONOUS QUEERS. In BAC's case he has told us that he met Jeff Gannon. But he will not tell us if he played the boy or the girl on that date with Gannon.

The man is a TREASONOUS QUEER!

Galatians 3:29 And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Red Jones  posted on  2007-04-08   0:52:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#367. To: Red Jones (#366)

In BAC's case he has told us that he met Jeff Gannon.

Oh my. That is damning.

Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.

Arator  posted on  2007-04-08   0:54:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#368. To: BeAChooser, ..., Red Jones, Randge, Arator (#360)

Did you read the links I posted?

Diana  posted on  2007-04-08   0:57:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#369. To: ... (#361)

I am curious Chooser, if one single shred of this shit that you spew is correct, then why doesn't Bush get on national TV and save his Presidency with it?

i've seen you ask this question probably a dozen times. why is it you never get it answered?

christine  posted on  2007-04-08   0:59:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#370. To: christine (#369)

My theory is that he does have an answer, but the answer is a conspiracy theory so wacked out and looney that it makes his Ron Brown kookery look absolutely sane. He knows he can't give it to us without us laughing our asses off and without his reputation being destroyed on the web. So he uses chooser tactic number three and simply ignores the inconvenient question.

.

...  posted on  2007-04-08   1:03:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#371. To: ... (#370)

Like he's ignoring me now.

Diana  posted on  2007-04-08   1:12:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (372 - 394) not displayed.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]