Thursday, August 25, 2005

Unglued, Unstuck, Debunked

The next time you hear someone invoke the hackneyed "fighting them over there, so we won't have to fight them here"---or one of its equally exhausted variations---simply email them the link to this piece.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Absolutely true
the next time someone says we staved off the assault on Social Security; direct them to this piece "Thursday :: Aug 25, 2005;
Democrats Need To Prepare Now For Another Social Security Push By The GOP" AND/OR

8/25/2005 8:30 PM  
Blogger Daniel said...

Thanks! This saves me bundles of research time! No kidding! I've been very disturbed by the flypaper repetition. It's nice to know that not even the war supporters buy it anymore.

8/25/2005 10:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Both of your posts (TBD and TCR) were excellent.

8/25/2005 10:35 PM  
Anonymous jeremy said...

the probklemn with Greg's posts is his undying belief that the US can win Iraq... win in his defintion is the creation of a stable, unitary and democratic state... a patently absurd position

8/26/2005 6:18 AM  
Anonymous jeremy said...

plus this "We went in because Saddam was an uniquely dangerous individual whom was commonly believed to be in possession of WMD. "

Simply isn't true. No one in Europe believed he had WMD. Remember Jorckhard Fischer making a fool of Rumsfeld in public telling him so?

It was a war of choice and despite what Dijeran and little band of warmongers believe the US is going to lose.

8/26/2005 6:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have recently spoken with a retired professor with an expertise in Middle East Studies. His take is that the state of Iraq is dead. It is no longer a viable state.
I cannot really rebuttal that and the so-called constitution is a joke at best. So now we have a broken state with all the implying instability that that brings and an idiot at the helm of state that says full speed ahead even though there is a large reef just under the waterline.
Both will come to grief and how many more gi's with have to die, be wounded and come home with deep emotional scars just so Bush can play at being a wartime (now that is a sick joke) president.
Lest we forget there has been scores of dead and wounded woman and children and this will go on for a long time to come, all thanks to our government.
The world has a great understanding for whom to thank for this and they will not forget even though the american public will in about '15 seconds'.

8/26/2005 8:44 AM  
Blogger Spider said...

Hi Cunning Realist,

Just wanted to say thank you for your blog again. I know I have emailed you before, but I wanted to say it again.

It is so refreshing, inspiring, and comforting to see a Conservative say and write so many things that I, a die-hard Liberal, feel. I guess rational thought, ethics and just plain humanity aren't measured by a political spectrum.

Regarding the war, I just wanted to share an article with you and the readers of your blog.

It is about the 467th Engineering Battallion whose job it is to find and destroy roadside bombs.

"The only reason we got this nasty job chasing roadside bombs is because we are expendable," said Staff Sgt. Jeff Rayner from Nashville. "They need bodies, and we provide them. We clear the roads, but we're still treated like dirt here."

It is also the unit my sister, a staff sergeant, is stationed with. I'm sorry, but my sister is not expendable!

8/26/2005 9:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

thanks TCR, good stuff on both sites.

8/26/2005 10:56 AM  
Blogger copy editor said...

Iraq is on life support. There are still many Sunni/Shiite marriages, but I read this week that such interactions are becoming strained. One thing that concerns me is that if America targets the Sunni insurgency (ignoring the Shiite ones) the division could grow. America has to be an honest broker in the sectarian conflict that now has developed. And Sadr is against Federalism, my oh my, what a tangled web we've woven keeping the world safe for democracy.

8/26/2005 11:50 AM  
Anonymous wj said...

Sorry, Jeremy, but the intelligence departments in Britain, France, germany, and Russia (among others) DID believe that Saddam had WMDs. They were all wrong, but that's what they believed at the time.

What their governments (except the British, perhaps) did not believe was that invading Iraq was the right way to deal with the problem. Or, in some cases, that his having them was a problem . . . at least for them.

8/26/2005 12:03 PM  
Anonymous semper fubar said...

I call bullshit on trotting out the old canard "Everyone believed Saddam had WMDs." IF everyone believed it, it was only because Bush & Cheney stood up and lied repeatedly to the American public, to Congress and to the UN about their "evidence.". That's why they had to "fix the intelligence" around the policy. Because it was horseshit, and they knew it.

The Russians, the French, the Germans and apparently even the some of the British themselves were not convinced by this "intelligence." That's why we had the UN on the ground in Iraq doing inspections --inspections that never turned up an ounce of hard evidence that Saddam was close to making WMDs, by the way. Because there was doubt about these claims. Remember? Bush kicked them out of Iraq so he could invade.

So can we please toss the "everyone believed there were WMDs" into the trash can with all the other specious reasons Bush gave us?

But great post Greg quoted of yours, TCR. You hit the nail on the head the first time around. Too bad he muddied it up with a bunch of other nonsense.

8/26/2005 12:13 PM  
Blogger Roy said...

Great link! I agree with much of it especially the need to win. I think he overstates weakness in the flypaper theory. Bush says we fight them there so we wont have to fight here, by here I take him to mean the US and our core allies (Europe, Japan, Australia). The numbers here are much better. 9/11 3000, 3-11 200, 7/7 50, 7/21 0. The rise in attacks in the Middle East seems to affirm the theory that this battle for Iraq is a battle for the Middle East, IF we win the Middle East will inevitable change for the better but IF we lose it will be much worse.

And would you people quit referring to TCR as conservative, because he is not really conservative it is more like his gimmick.

8/26/2005 12:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Americans are finally waking up and realizing they were bamboozled in the last election.

8/26/2005 12:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Thanks for pointing out again that not everybody fell for the fabricated 'evidence' leading up to the war, hook, line, and sinker.

"On the second weekend in February, they all came to Munich to participate in the 39th Conference on Security Policy, where they were eagerly awaited: Mr. Rumsfeld, Mr. Fischer, Mr. Iwanow, Mr. Robertson, Mr. Solana and Mr. Struck took the lead among numerous well-known politicians and top military representatives from Germany and other nations. (...)

[Germany's Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer] voiced his concern and criticized the US for their strategy against international terrorism as adopted in the aftermath of 11 September 2001. He added that the peace process between Israelites and Palestinians should have been promoted after fighting the Al Qaida terror organization. Regarding the conflict in Iraq, Mr. Fischer kept emphasizing the German position, stating that diplomacy had "by no means [been] exhausted". The weapons inspectors needed to be given more time. The threat level produced by Iraq did not yet justify a war. "Why now?", Mr. Fischer wanted to know, affirming again: "I am not convinced!" (...)"

Whereas the NY Post infamously smeared:

"Weasels to hear new evidence"

- doctoring actual weasel-heads on the torsos of the German and French delegates to the UN:

'Fair and balanced', my ass.

Oh, and here's another interesting read:

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The following is a transcript of remarks from British Prime Minister Tony Blair and U.S. President George W. Bush at the White House Thursday.

Bush: (...)In Iraq, the United States, Britain and other nations confronted a violent regime that armed to threaten the peace, that cultivated ties to terror and defied the clear demands of the United Nations Security Council.

Saddam Hussein produced and possessed chemical and biological weapons, and was trying to reconstitute his nuclear weapons program. He used chemical weapons in acts of murder against his own people. (...)

The regime of Saddam Hussein was a grave and growing threat. Given Saddam's history of violence and aggression, it would have been reckless to place our trust in his sanity or his restraint.

As long as I hold this office I will never risk the lives of American citizens by assuming the good will of dangerous enemies.

Acting together, the United States, Great Britain and our coalition partners enforced the demands of the world. We ended the threat from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. (...)

BUSH: We'll take a couple of questions.

QUESTION: Mr. President, others in your administration have said that your words on Iraq and Africa did not belong in your State of the Union address. Will you take responsibility -- personal responsibility for those words?

And to the both of you, how is that two major world leaders such as yourselves have had such a hard time persuading other major powers to help stabilize Iraq?

BUSH: Well, first, I take responsibility for putting our troops into action. And I made that decision because Saddam Hussein was a threat to our security, and a threat to the security of other nations. (...)

QUESTION: Mr. President, in his speech to Congress, the prime minister opened the door to the possibility that you may be proved wrong about the threat from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

BUSH: Yes.

QUESTION: Do you agree? And does it matter whether or not you find...

BUSH: Well, you might ask the prime minister that -- we won't be proven wrong.


BUSH: I believe that we will find the truth. And the truth is he was developing a program for weapons of mass destruction. (...)"

...and so on.

8/26/2005 12:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"...bamboozled in the last election."

They can thank the right wing radio folks for that.

8/26/2005 12:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Go here, scroll down, and read and click on the video "Christopher Hitchens (CH) vs Jon Stewart".

I'm not a big fan of CH, but there is something about him, perhaps he comes across authentic and has the background to support it. The other night on Charlie Rose they had the editor on from The Nation and it was The Nation that brought CH to the US, but after awhile there was a disagreement and they split.

Jon asked CH for clarity about what does it mean "stay'n the course", "fighting them over there, rather than over here", and CH said it is contraditory; it is either global or it isn't; it's stupid. He also said, and I absolutely love this, it is based on what Rumsfeld said about the military - "unfortunately you go to war with the President you have, not the one you want".

Jon Stewart is the man, smart, nice, clever, thoughtful. Wow!

8/26/2005 12:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

spider - you have a good story - anyway you can send your comment to other blogs?

And a letter to the WH requesting Jenna & Barbara take your sister's place?

8/26/2005 1:05 PM  
Anonymous jessej said...

It appears the flypaper just got shredded, courtesy of TCR and Greg D. Game, set, match.

8/26/2005 1:19 PM  
Blogger Spider said...

To the anonymous guy who liked my comment, what blogs do you want me to send it to? Also, do you want me to really write my whole story out?

And, I've been meaning to write the president for awhile now. Mainly to ask why he hasn't answered the questions posed to him by Rep. Conyers regarding the Downing Street memo. I wouldn't ask that he send his daughters to take my sister's place. I would demand that he bring the troops home, because nobody's daughters/sons/husbands/wives/brothers/sisters/etc should have been there in the first place!!!

8/26/2005 2:21 PM  
Blogger copy editor said...

Semper Fubar, great point. Aluminum tubes much?

I blog, I blog with gusto.

8/26/2005 4:28 PM  
Anonymous scott_api said...

-- IF we win the Middle East will inevitable change for the better but IF we lose it will be much worse. --

America has had some success setting up governments after removing dictators (Panama seems to be doing ok post-Noriega), but then again, didn't we set up Saddam in the first place? I seem to remember a picture of Rumsfeld shaking Saddams hand over a weapons deal of some sort. It MAY be better, but I cannot agree that it will inevitably be better.

8/26/2005 5:20 PM  
Blogger 277fia said...

I'm curious - was "fighting them over there, so we won't have to fight them here" the plan or not?

If it was the plan, I'd really like to know where we're going with it. Once we have the prerequisite number of terrorists where we want them, will the "cohesive Iraqi national army, representing the three main factions in the country" be expected to take them out? Seems like a big job to saddle a new democracy with.

If we got caught flat out, why should I have confidence that the same guys who screwed up in the first place are going to come up with a "convincing war strategy"?

Mr. Djerejian sounds as if he will be happy when the president assures him that he understands that the Iraqi national army is "going to need to be systematically built, in non-rushed fashion, over the coming years."

Umm...this is the same president who is pressuring the Iraqis to come up with a constitution in two months and who would rather they fashion a haphazard one than one that will suit all interested parties. Could the president possibly be in a rush to announce "good news" to the American public now rather than wait for the real deal? Let's hope he doesn't give the creation of the national Iraqi army the same treatment.

The right wing is quick to blame the bad news from MSM for the president's poll ratings. Me, I think that MSM is falling down on the job in the bad news department.

How many Americans from Djerejian's heartland are aware that the Iraqis and the Iranians made an agreement to share, among other things, intelligence? I'd like to hear what Mr. Bush says about the New Iraq and the still-a-member-of-the-axis-of-evil Iran being in cahoots. And what are we going to do about it?

Everyone saw the photo of Mr. Bush strolling hand-in-hand with Crown Prince Abdullah. But, so far, he has not told the those people in the heartland about the military intelligence report about external donors financing the insurgency. According to CNN in October 2004, "the Pentagon believes wealthy Saudi individuals and charities, sympathetic to Iraqi rebels, are providing the cash. U.S. officials say that money is being funneled through Syria, a charge the Saudi government rejects". Does Mr. Bush have an opinion here?

To date, the New Iraq government seems disinclined to recognize Israel. In fact, the administration made the Iraqis take out a clause of the proposed constitution that specifically prohibited any exiled Iraqi Jews that might return from becoming citizens.

I bet the rubes in the heartland are oblivious to fact that billions of dollars have been stolen outright from the Iraqi treasury. Let's see - there was the $9 billion of Iraqi pre-war oil revenue that the CPA supposedly handed over to Iraqis and that, as Bush's inspector general reported, was probably embezzled. There's no documentation for $20 billion in Iraqi oil revenue. $1.27 of a $1.3 billion defense budget was stolen.
I'd really like to hear from the president about what steps are being taken to prevent more corruption. Djerejian won't get his national Iraqi army if there's no money to equip them.

We started the damned war, we have to finish it if only to prevent the slaughter of as many innocent civilians as Saddam killed. But I'm not holding out hope for much else.

8/26/2005 10:45 PM  
Anonymous PenDragon said...

The old: We set up Saddam and Bin Laden story is getting a little tired, don't you think?

First of all neither story is true, but even if it was, I guess that because we were allied with Russia and gave the Russians weapons and food in WWII, Chruchill and Roosevelt created and set up Stalin.

No exit plan in WWII either, Britain went to war because Germany attacked and occupied Poland...the war ended with Russia occupying Poland for the next 50 years!

I guess we shouldn't have fought that war either!

Give us a break and try to argue real issues.


8/26/2005 11:17 PM  
Blogger hilzoy said...

I believed that Saddam had WMD as of October or November of 2002. After all, he had had them before, he had used them on his people, and he was just the sort of person who would have tried not to give them up. I did not think this meant we had to go to war -- after all, we managed to survive the USSR having huge quantities of WMD for decades without going to war with them.

However, I had changed my mind on this before the war started, for one reason: it would have been so obviously in the administration's interest for Blix to find WMD that I had to believe we were telling him where we thought he should look, and he had not found any. (To this day it amazes me that the administration didn't use Blix to test their intelligence: tell him where we think the WMD are, see what he finds. If they told him, they clearly didn't draw the appropriate conclusions.) So I assumed that whatever Rumsfeld and Cheney said about knowing exactly where the WMD were, they didn't know at all.

It wasn't that hard a conclusion to reach.

8/27/2005 1:11 AM  
Anonymous jeremy said...

Even if people were dumb enough to believe that Saddam had WMD, and in Europe while some political leaders lied and said there were some, the people, almost unanimously, believeed there were none. I know no one, even at my work which is an American MNC, who believed Saddam had WMDs... but even if you did believe that you might want to ask how a poor and broken impoverished country which spent les than $1bn a year on its military was a threat to a country that spent $320 BILLION...

it was blindingly obvious before the war there was no WMD... and TBD bullshit about the possibility of 'victory' would be funny if it wasn't so sad, it also totally discredits his other analysis

8/27/2005 6:25 AM  
Anonymous howard said...

It was not unreasonable to think, before the war, that saddam conceivably had some chemical and/or biological materials, possibly in weaponized form.

it was completely deluded to think, before the war, that saddam had a highly advanced nuclear weapons program.

The fact that both of these types of things are regarded as WMDs confused the issue for a great many people, a confusion encouraged by the lying scum of the bush administration, who emphasized the nuclear threat (hence the 16 words).

Those who say that european intel also thought that saddam had wmds, for instance, are simply not making the appropriate distinction between chemical and biological weapons and nuclear weapons (which, in my book, are the only true wmds).

pendragon's comments, btw, make zero sense: i have no idea what point he/she is trying to make. We most assuredly had an exit strategy for World War II: the defeat of naziism and italian fascism. We achieved it. That we then left troops in Europe is because we had a new problem to deal with - the expansionist tendencies of the soviet union - not because we didn't have an exit strategy for the actual war we were in.

Anyhow, the notion that saddam = hitler was delusional before the war, and deranged after. There was no need for this war, which made it all the more important to set clearcut objectives, which even now, 2.5 years later, we don't have (unless, of course, you think we'll stand down as the iraqis stand up constitutes an objective).

8/27/2005 2:58 PM  
Anonymous PenDaron said...


I don't know where you've been for the past year, but it has been conclusively proved that the "16 words" were true, then, now and tomorrow.

Read the 16 words. Now consider that the British thoroughly investigated the allegation that British Intelligence had uncovered this information and concluded that the statement was "well founded." Next, read the conclusion of the US commission that did the same thing. Next, read the actual facts, not the John Kerry advisor conclusions, contained in the report of Joe Wilson, yes, that Joe Wilson. Lastly, read the reports of the amount of Yellowcake US forces removed from Iraq after Sadam was deposed.

Tell me now, on what authority do you claim that Busk's 16 words were false?

What else do you need?

Howard, please read some history, England went to war over Polish freedom. I spelled this out in my earlier post, but I guess I was writing too fast for you. Was Poland free when the war "ended?"

Suppose Churchill had told the British people, "We are going to war to defeat Nazisim because they enslaved a free nation, Poland. Our exit strategy is to defeat Nazism and allow Russia to enslave Poland for the next 50 years."

The defeat of Nazism didn't do squat to change the facts on the ground in Poland, the cause of the war to begin with.

People who talk about an exit strategy being necessary before going to war are really dishonestly disguising the fact that they will never go to war for anything.

I love your novel definition of WMDs. The problem is that the rest of the world knows that chemical and biological weapons are really the most dangerous WMDs, since they can far more easily be acquired by tin-horn despots. Nice try.

The best part of your post is the denial of the Sadam = Hitler idea. Come to think of it, you do have a point. While both were violently anti semetic murderous maniacs who used warfare as an instrument of national policy (Hitler: Poland, France, Russia; Saddam: Iran, Kuwait, the Kurds)and they both were pretty keen on mass graves, Hitler never employed his chemical weapons (He did have them.) Saddam did; Hitler did not have meglomainiac sons who maintained rape rooms and Hitler did not pay suicide bombers families a $25,000 bounty, an astronomical sum in a region where having more that one camel makes you part of the neuvo riche, because he wanted so badly to kill jews. I am, therefore reluctantly forced to agree with you there.

There was not a real comparision between Hitler and Saddam, and after the war was over and we found all these things, it was dilusionl to compare the two.

Howard, please find one area where Hitler was worse than Saddam...please! And don't use the "killed 6 million jews thing, Saddam was just warming up.


8/27/2005 11:06 PM  
Anonymous howard said...

Pendragon, a really impressive pile of piffle! first rate demonstration of the propagandist mind at work - congratulations.

one of the things i admire about the cunning realist is that he has no patience for sloppy thinking and sloppy language. out of respect for our host and for what has been a congenial and high quality discussion area, i won't respond in detail to your tendentious and silly remarks. People who think that saddam = hitler, people who think that the distinction between chemical/biological weapons and nuclear weapons is that the former are more dangerous, people who think world war ii was about the freedom of poland, people who think there is anything relevant about world war ii analogies for this little fiasco, people who think that the "16 words" were anything but an attempt to mislead the american people (although i will pause here to note that the ISG has concluded, pendragon, that you are full of shit), people, in short, like you, ol' buddy, don't deserve any more. It's thinking like yours that has gotten us into this disaster.

8/28/2005 2:17 AM  
Anonymous PenDragon said...


I luv when you can't back any of your positions with facts.


8/28/2005 4:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


"Hitler never employed his chemical weapons (He did have them.)"

I would definitely consider Zyklon B a 'chemical weapon'.

"And don't use the "killed 6 million jews thing, Saddam was just warming up."

Why not? Can't you approve of arguments / facts that don't fit your bill? YOU brought up the WWII comparison ('No exit plan in WWII either [...]'), which is ridiculous enough in itself. (Remember, Germany declared war on the U.S., not the other way 'round.)

And how was Saddam 'warming up', exactly?

You DID read the Kay report, right? NO WMD's. Not much room to spin your story there.

But I agree with Howard:

People like you - blind to the facts - really don't deserve any more answers. Keep on spinning...

8/29/2005 11:41 AM  
Blogger Paul Adams said...

Hi Blogger!I like your blog! Keep up the
good work, you are providing a great resource on the Internet here!
If you have a moment, please take a look at my site:
Job Search Engine
It pretty much covers Job Search Engine related issues.
Best regards!

12/28/2005 8:52 PM  
Blogger Paul Adams said...

Hi Blogger! I like your blog! Keep up the
good work, you are providing a great resource on the Internet here!
If you have a moment, please take a look at my site:
It pretty much covers ppecu related issues.
Best regards!

1/30/2006 1:36 AM  
Blogger Jane said...

part time jobs Earn $5 to $75 per survey.

Earn Extra Income Part-Time Anytime Anywhere. How Much Does Your Opinons Worth? Supplement Your Salary. Earn Extra Money Part-time.

Do you have an opinon? Get paid to take Online Paid Survey. Participate in Online Paid Survey and get paid for taking online paid surveys. You can earn between $5 to $75 per survey.

Multilingual : English - Chinese Simplified - Chinese Traditional - Dutch - French - German - Greek - Italian - Japanese - Korean - Portuguese - Russian - Spanish

Earn money part-time for taking online surveys. part time jobs

2/01/2006 7:50 PM  
Anonymous home inspection said...

Why do I need a home inspection .... If you are thinking about selling or buying a home You will need a home inspection ..

I found a great site for home inspection. If you want to take a look go to Wow ..

2/06/2006 8:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Anyone has any idea how to create infoproducts online (using free resources)? Please reply if you possible can - I look forward to hear from you all...

Thank you,
home fast make from money

2/12/2006 9:14 AM  
Anonymous Make said...


This is far the coolest idea I ever met... posting comments which at the same time lets us give our opinions.

These new "technologies" which are called blogs will sure end in something huge later on. That is my feeling.

make home money at work

2/12/2006 10:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi ##NAME##, I just dropped in on my way back to my acne treatment site. I liked what I
found and thought that I would leave you a note for your efforts in creating ##TITLE##. It

2/19/2006 10:29 PM  
Blogger Acne Cure said...

Hi, Thanks for your interesting blog. I will keep reading.
Please take the time to visit my following blogs about Acne:
proactive acne treatment blog.
best acne treatment blog.
acne scar treatment blog.
laser acne treatment blog.

3/08/2006 3:13 PM  
Anonymous Nokota said...

You have a great blog here! I will be sure to book mark you. I have a horse related site. It pretty much covers horse related stuff. Check it out if you get time :-)

3/11/2006 4:43 AM  
Anonymous Scott Arthur Edwards said...

New Blog Submission Software Takes Total Domination To A whole New Level, And Allows Complete Control Over Any Market and Any Product You Sell.--Renders All Other Marketing Methods Totally Useless by Comparison"
Click here: FREE DEMO

3/13/2006 9:17 AM  
Anonymous Scott Arthur Edwards said...

Hey, you have a great blog here! You really are very talented and deserve an honest compliment, congradulations! I'm definitely going to bookmark you!

I have a net opportunities site/blog. It successfully covers net opportunities related stuff.

Come and check it out if you get time, Scott.

4/09/2006 9:05 AM  
Anonymous Scott Arthur Edwards said...

Hey, you have a great blog here! You really are very talented and deserve an honest compliment, congradulations! I'm definitely going to bookmark you!

I have a internet marketing business opportunity affiliate program site/blog. It successfully covers internet marketing business opportunity affiliate program related stuff.

Come and check it out if you get time, Scott.

4/11/2006 7:43 PM  
Blogger Jane said...

hot jobs Earn $5 to $75 per survey.

Earn Extra Income Part-Time Anytime Anywhere. How Much Does Your Opinons Worth? Supplement Your Salary. Earn Extra Money Part-time.

Do you have an opinon? Get paid to take Online Paid Survey. Participate in Online Paid Survey and get paid for taking online paid surveys. You can earn between $5 to $75 per survey.

Earn money part-time for taking online surveys. hot jobs

4/15/2006 12:03 AM  
Anonymous Online Paid Survey Review said...

job posting Earn $5 to $75 per survey.

Earn Extra Income Part-Time Anytime Anywhere. How Much Does Your Opinons Worth? Supplement Your Salary. Earn Extra Money Part-time.

Do you have an opinon? Get paid to take Online Paid Survey. Participate in Online Paid Survey and get paid for taking online paid surveys. You can earn between $5 to $75 per survey.

Earn money part-time for taking online surveys. job posting

4/17/2006 5:08 AM  
Anonymous BayuFA said...

If you want to save 20 to 30 cents a gallon at the pump check this site out. I mean really check it out. This is backed by the goverment and some very big company's.

4/27/2006 5:44 AM  
Anonymous Scott Arthur Edwards said...

Dear friend, Here is an opportunity for you that is taking over the internet. The compensation plan is second to none. The spill over will blow your mind and the educational products are of the highest quality. Knowledge is power and nobody can ever take that away from you. Join me in this business and see for yourself what you will be getting. Click here: FREE Information

8/23/2006 8:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WOW...!!! LOOK OUT... Hi my friends! I'm writing to you because I just came across a business that I think has great potential. It lets you save money on almost everything. Make money from almost everything, Including home loans- plus... help lower your taxes--best of all--it requires absolutely no investment. I thought you might be interested and like to check it out...

Here I have a mlm site/blog. It successfully covers mlm related stuff and almost everything else!

Come and check it out if you get time, Scott.

12/27/2006 3:22 AM  
Blogger Scott A. Edwards said...

Are You an Advanced Marketer? Click here to learn how to broadcast thousands of messages directly to people's desktops with just a click from your mouse, Spam Free. Learn more about it here: network marketing site. It pretty much covers network marketing related stuff and it is FREE to join.

12/29/2006 3:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wonderful and informative web site. I used information from that site its great. list of famous baseball players buick grand Eiki lcd projector schematic Bulk email frank life assurance honeywell hwm 255 humidifier Pay capital one bill online+ Watches the action

4/25/2007 8:29 PM  
Blogger Manikandan said...

Hi.nice blog.I am fresh jobseeker.please help me that where can i get
links of free job posts sites.
Thank you.....

2/29/2008 12:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I know the truth. There are 12 nations with evil alien technology, this keeps an angel spirit in a magnetic prison for years. They chase them with shadow government hellocopters. Basically they are at war with heaven. Yet they call angels out there demon spirits. Make it Law that they can have only 2 'demon' traps in each nation. And they should know there are people who care if they try to do harm to the prisoners at the underground Air Force bases. Make it a Law that they cant chase angels in outer space with damned starfighters.

3/21/2008 5:18 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home