Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

April 9, 2007
By: Kevin Drum

TRAINING OUR ENEMY....I've always heard that one of the big problems with America's skyrocketing prison population is that it simply provides an ever bigger training ground for future crooks and drug lords. Makes sense to me. Now, apparently, we're exporting one of our least successful domestic policies to Iraq:

Iraqi officials also struggle with a crowded system where prisoners can languish as long as two years before getting a trial. But they say the Americans have allowed militants to flourish in their facilities.

"It looks like a terrorist academy now," said Saad Sultan, the Iraqi Human Rights Ministry's liaison to U.S. and Iraqi prisons. "There's a huge number of these students. They study how they can kill in their camps. And we protect them, feed them, give them medical care.

"The Americans have no solution to this problem," he said. "This has been going on for a year or two, we have been telling them."

This is a good example of why I don't think a continued American presence can do any further good in Iraq. (The resurgence of Moqtada al-Sadr is another.) Sure, it's just one data point, but it's emblematic of the problem we've been fighting the entire time, namely that an American-style military occupation simply can't address the kinds of problems tearing Iraq apart. It can, however, make those problems worse. And the longer we stay, the higher the odds that worse is exactly what they'll get.

Kevin Drum 3:41 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (71)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

This is a good example of why I don't think a continued American presence can do any further good in Iraq.

You need to forward this to the brass at Halliburton.

Posted by: ROTFLMLiberalAO on April 9, 2007 at 4:02 PM | PERMALINK

We'll just take the same attitude towards these prisoners as we do those at GITMO. They'll never get out. Bush's campaign contributors will be thrilled to build more prisons. And feed them. And bury them.

Posted by: steve duncan on April 9, 2007 at 4:05 PM | PERMALINK

I've always heard that one of the big problems with America's skyrocketing prison population is that it simply provides an ever bigger training ground for future crooks and drug lords.

The solution is the same in both instances: We need to apply the death penalty more often and stop letting technicalities get in the way of justice.

Posted by: Redplague on April 9, 2007 at 4:10 PM | PERMALINK

[Threadjack]

Does that fist grabbing the checkmark by the long stroke in the "Demand the Vote" ad to your right suggest anything subliminal to anyone?

Or is it just me?

Posted by: anonymous on April 9, 2007 at 4:11 PM | PERMALINK

This is a good example of why I don't think a continued American presence can do any further good in Iraq.

Actually, it means the exact opposite. I think you're taking too much of a short term view of the matter. By having the terrorists recruit inside the prison, we can place moles inside the prison to be recruited by the terrorists. Then when they are let out, the moles can be used as informants to capture the big shots who are running the entire terrorist operation and not just the small fries we capture on the streets. Quite a clever strategy really if you think about it.

Posted by: Al on April 9, 2007 at 4:12 PM | PERMALINK

The solution is the same in both instances: We need to apply the death penalty more often and stop letting technicalities get in the way of justice.

Yeah. Why do so many of us think it is a good idea to try apply the law in a fair and meticulous way? Just kill more people, more quickly and less discriminately. That will solve everything.

Posted by: brent on April 9, 2007 at 4:15 PM | PERMALINK

Resurgence of al-Sadr????

But, but, but Straight Talk says that he is in hiding. Oh, who to believe?

Posted by: thethirdPaul on April 9, 2007 at 4:16 PM | PERMALINK

An interesting point, Al. Once we find their hideouts, we can raid them, bomb them from the air, or simply fill them with nerve gas.

As always, the liberals are playing checkers while the grown-ups are playing chess.

Brent-- Terrorists have been eating our food and using our medicine in camps for two years. How long should we wait before it's okay to kill a terrorist?

Posted by: Redplague on April 9, 2007 at 4:16 PM | PERMALINK

I see Hawkie has adopted a new identify. Wonder how long it will take to get his mindless drivel cut again?

Back on topic, this excerpt from the article is just as chilling:

An Iraqi official who works on issues related to the Sunni insurgency said he had received a report that a moderate Sunni fighter had been killed at Camp Cropper. "The report came back to me that the Americans were in complete denial," he said the official, who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. "They said, 'No such thing happened. Everything is under control.' That's not true."

Denial -- a Bush administration mantra.

Posted by: PaulB on April 9, 2007 at 4:20 PM | PERMALINK

The $64,000 question is 'how do we leave?'

I can't decide.

We should leave a force in Kurdistan that supports their ambitions for regional security, but doesn't dictate how their govt shall be run.

Otherwise, I can't think of anything we could do that would make this a better lose-lose situation than it already is.

Posted by: absent observer on April 9, 2007 at 4:21 PM | PERMALINK

Brent-- Terrorists have been eating our food and using our medicine in camps for two years. How long should we wait before it's okay to kill a terrorist?

Well I would propose actually waiting until we can prove they are terrorists and convict them in a court of law but I suppose I am not enough of a savage asshole to think think otherwise.

Posted by: brent on April 9, 2007 at 4:22 PM | PERMALINK

I think this administration has a little trouble thinking clearly when it comes to Iraq. Holding a wolf by the ears has that effect on you.

Posted by: steve duncan on April 9, 2007 at 4:24 PM | PERMALINK

Well I would propose actually waiting until we can prove they are terrorists and convict them in a court of law but I suppose I am not enough of a savage asshole to think think otherwise.

If they're found on the battlefield shooting at American soldiers, what more proof do you need? What would satisfy you?

Posted by: Redplague on April 9, 2007 at 4:27 PM | PERMALINK

Al and Redplague-have you a scintilla of evidence that we are planning on planting moles in prisons? Until then shut the fuck up. Your plan is idiotic beyond belief. I can't believe I'm even responding.

Posted by: Mark on April 9, 2007 at 4:31 PM | PERMALINK

Oh please Redplague, dozens of released GITMO prisoners were nothing more than hapless victims of tribal bounty hunters looking for some quick cash out of the U.S. treasury. And I'm sure those bounty hunters vouched for the deadly force their captives were caught red-handed raining down on American forces. Piffle. If you see the mouth of ANYONE moving in this administration it's to utter a lie.

Posted by: steve duncan on April 9, 2007 at 4:33 PM | PERMALINK

This is hardly a new occurance.

Where do you think the current crop of senior Al Qaeda leadership came from?

Why, prisions in Egypt, of course.

http://kashmirherald.com/profiles/zawahiri5.html

"In the Cairo prison, members of the two groups had heated debates about the best way to achieve a true Islamic revolution, and they quarrelled endlessly over who was the best man to lead it. In one argument, according to Montasser al-Zayat, Zawahiri pointed out that Sharia states that the emir cannot be blind. Rahman countered that Sharia also decrees that a prisoner cannot be emir. The rivalry between the two men became extreme. Zayat claims that he tried to persuade Zawahiri to moderate his attacks on Rahman, but Zawahiri refused to back down.

Zawahiri was released in 1984, a hardened radical."

Posted by: Patrick on April 9, 2007 at 4:34 PM | PERMALINK

The solution is the same in both instances: We need to apply the death penalty more often and stop letting technicalities get in the way of justice.

You mean technicalities like these?

Conservatism says every problem has a simple solution - no wonder it's so attractive to simpletons.

Posted by: craigie on April 9, 2007 at 4:35 PM | PERMALINK

Ah, I see that AH has reemerged as redplague.

Some people never learn.

Posted by: Disputo on April 9, 2007 at 4:35 PM | PERMALINK

I appreciate those who are engaging my arguments rather than accusing me of being somebody else.

In any case: Mark, the operation would be classified, so information would be hard to come by.

Steve-- Most of those in Iraq were captured by Americans. Are you calling our soldiers liars?

Mark-- That's, obviously, a totally different situation. These were captured by soldiers, so we can trust the testimony of those soldiers.

Posted by: Redplague on April 9, 2007 at 4:40 PM | PERMALINK

*As always, the liberals are playing checkers while the grown-ups are playing chess.*

Engage you in what, exactly, Redflag?

Posted by: wishIwuz2 on April 9, 2007 at 4:43 PM | PERMALINK

"I appreciate those who are engaging my arguments rather than accusing me of being somebody else."

LOL.... Dear heart, you haven't made any arguments yet. Were you planning to do so?

Posted by: PaulB on April 9, 2007 at 4:46 PM | PERMALINK

Steve-- Most of those in Iraq were captured by Americans. Are you calling our soldiers liars?"

LOL... You really don't know anything, do you? Or haven't you read about Abu Ghraib, where estimates of the number of innocent individuals rounded up in wholesale "usual suspects" sweeps (a la Casablanca) ranged as high as 70%?

Posted by: PaulB on April 9, 2007 at 4:48 PM | PERMALINK

"If they're found on the battlefield shooting at American soldiers, what more proof do you need? What would satisfy you?"

Since the majority of prisoners at Guantanamo, Afghanistan, and Abu Ghraib were not, in fact, caught in this situation, I'm afraid that, as usual, you have no argument.

Posted by: PaulB on April 9, 2007 at 4:50 PM | PERMALINK

Aiyeee! Terrorist parasites! Liberal weaklings! Treasonous bloggers!

What's next? Shipping our children to Iraqi camps so the terrorists can eat them?

We need to nerve-gas the whole country before they come after our food and medicine over here!

Aiyeeee!

Posted by: bleh on April 9, 2007 at 4:56 PM | PERMALINK

There you go using facts again PaulB

Posted by: klyde on April 9, 2007 at 4:58 PM | PERMALINK

If they're found on the battlefield shooting at American soldiers, what more proof do you need? What would satisfy you?

I have already explained what would satisfy me in very clear terms. Trial and conviction. You seem happy to do away with these particular "technicalities." Your scenario of "found on the battlefield shooting at American soldiers" is, of course, a red herring and hasn't distracted anyone from the fact that you seem perfectly willing to do away with the American system of justice on the basis of your frightened whims.

Posted by: brent on April 9, 2007 at 4:59 PM | PERMALINK

Being a soldier in the U.S. military does not invest in you infallibility nor render you immune to telling lies. Field commanders suffer the same pressures an IBM salesman encounters after a long week of cold calling. The boss calls and wants to hear the numbers. In those confusing days after the initial assault on Afghanistan looking the least bit suspicious and found holding a weapon meant it was off to GITMO with you. Presto, you hit your numbers! Still in line for that promotion, aren't you, big fella?! Congratulations!

Posted by: steve duncan on April 9, 2007 at 5:08 PM | PERMALINK

You seem happy to do away with these particular "technicalities."

In the conservaweenie mind, being innocent is a technicality.

Posted by: craigie on April 9, 2007 at 5:10 PM | PERMALINK

Maybe all the guys we have in prison are already moles! Shhh, it's a secret. What a plan! Take that, terrormofos! Then again maybe you're talking just to hear yourself blather.

Posted by: Mark on April 9, 2007 at 5:10 PM | PERMALINK

Caught on the battlefield shooting at our soldiers? That calls for prisoner of war status, in the GWOT. Although the Geneva Conventions are quaint...

Posted by: Mellifluous on April 9, 2007 at 5:11 PM | PERMALINK

By having the terrorists recruit inside the prison, we can place moles inside the prison to be recruited by the terrorists.


I put this in evidence that Al has twice the brains of the Great Decider.

Posted by: cld on April 9, 2007 at 5:13 PM | PERMALINK

The military industrial complex does kinda require an enemy. It's damn good at manufacturing them too. So, this isn't really a problem. It's a successful business!

Posted by: Jim on April 9, 2007 at 5:13 PM | PERMALINK

But wait...I thought Al-Sadr was in Iran???

At least that is what the propaganda arm of the White House, FOXMSNBCNN, keeps telling me???

Posted by: justmy2 on April 9, 2007 at 5:26 PM | PERMALINK

"The military industrial complex does kinda require an enemy. It's damn good at manufacturing them too. So, this isn't really a problem. It's a successful business!"

And this Waronterra is a little stroke of genius -- it's gotten them two elections, countless no-bid contracts, a temporary shutdown of civil liberties, and an invisible yet omnipresent enemy with which to scare the bejeezus out of everyone.

Posted by: chaunceyatrest on April 9, 2007 at 5:30 PM | PERMALINK

Of course Bush wants to train an endless supply of new ones. You can't continue fear mongering as a path to power if you run outta bad guys. Rove is just thinking for the future of the Republican Party. Party Über Alles

Posted by: Mike on April 9, 2007 at 5:31 PM | PERMALINK

Although the Geneva Conventions are quaint...

Yeah, they've got those little clocks with the birds that come out and everything.

As for all these prisoners warehoused in Iraqi prisons training to be terrorists, the problem is CLEARLY that their left-wing defense lawyers keep getting them appeal after appeal on all sorts of technicalities. We should just hurry up and kill them all. Why should I have to pay my tax dollars so some terrorist can have a plasma TV in his cell and a weekly book group at the prison library, where he probably reads children's books about lesbian parents? You know, some of those books are pretty hot, just between you and me.

Posted by: brooksfoe on April 9, 2007 at 5:35 PM | PERMALINK

Just a guess, but I would say we've exported ALL of our least successful policies to Iraq.

Posted by: serial catowner on April 9, 2007 at 5:46 PM | PERMALINK

This is a good example of why I don't think a continued American presence can do any further good in Iraq.

In this case better late than never does not apply. Tens of thousands of people have died due to the inabilty of the people like you to see this earlier.

Posted by: gregor on April 9, 2007 at 5:54 PM | PERMALINK

"Just a guess, but I would say we've exported ALL of our least successful policies to Iraq."

So when can we begin exporting those policymakers to Iraq?

Posted by: chaunceyatrest on April 9, 2007 at 6:03 PM | PERMALINK

If they're found on the battlefield shooting at American soldiers, what more proof do you need? What would satisfy you?

If they're found on the battlefield shooting at American soldiers, then they're certainly not terrorists, since terrorism by definition is directed at civilian targets who cannot defend themselves. If they're shooting at soldiers then they're combatants, not terrorists, and deserve to be held under the protection of the Geneva Conventions.

Posted by: Stefan on April 9, 2007 at 6:20 PM | PERMALINK

Steve-- Most of those in Iraq were captured by Americans. Are you calling our soldiers liars?

Most criminals are captured by the police, and yet we do not take the policeman's word on their guilt or innoncence, but still require a trial by jury to convict them.

Posted by: Stefan on April 9, 2007 at 6:23 PM | PERMALINK

The Aryan Brotherhood in our prison system is what can brew with incarceration.

Posted by: Oswald on April 9, 2007 at 6:24 PM | PERMALINK

from Fareed Zakaria:
To speak of victory in Iraq might sound like a cruel joke. This is a nation that is now devastated, where 2 million people have fled, another 2 million are internal refugees, militias run large parts of the country and the government sanctions religious repression, ethnic cleansing and vigilante violence

Posted by: consider wisely on April 9, 2007 at 6:33 PM | PERMALINK

Stefan wrote: "Most criminals are captured by the police, and yet we do not take the policeman's word on their guilt or innoncence, but still require a trial by jury to convict them."

My ex is a public defender. I will not belabor you with horror stories but will simply say that, regrettably, there is very good reason why we do not simply convict solely on a policeman's word. There is even less reason to do so on a soldier's word, particularly with what has come to light about Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, and elsewhere.

Posted by: PaulB on April 9, 2007 at 6:38 PM | PERMALINK

Al: "Actually, it means the exact opposite."

Put it on your tombstone, jackass.

Posted by: Kenji on April 9, 2007 at 6:47 PM | PERMALINK

Ah, Kevin.

In Kevin' Drum's la-la land, America is the keystine cop country where it can do nothing right. Nope, now not even our JAILS are good enough for Drum.

I suppose you want all these prisons in Iraq furnished with home entertainment centers, x-boxes and jacuzzis, huh, Kevin. You know, in the perverse world of the liberal, you reward the wastoids and punish the productive members of societ.

Posted by: egbert on April 9, 2007 at 6:55 PM | PERMALINK

My ex is a public defender. I will not belabor you with horror stories but will simply say that, regrettably, there is very good reason why we do not simply convict solely on a policeman's word.

Oh, yeah. I've seen policemen lie on the stand before, in cases where I knew for a fact that they were lying. It's called "testilying" by defense attorneys.

Posted by: Stefan on April 9, 2007 at 7:06 PM | PERMALINK

Yes, egfart, "not even our prisons", which should of course be our pride and joy. It's amazing that you could accuse anyone of living in la-la land, when you are paying so much for your condo in the place of pretty, pretty pink skies.

But the enduring question -- not that you ever answer anything -- is, are you suited up yet for that heaven called Iraq? Seriously, we'd like to know. And if not, why not? Okay, we're waiting.

Posted by: Kenji on April 9, 2007 at 7:18 PM | PERMALINK

So, egfart. Kevlar at the ready? They need boots on the ground, and the standards have been dropped especially for lesser lights like you! C'mon, pal, show your stuff. It's only going to get better over there. The president is counting on you!

Well?

Posted by: Kenji on April 9, 2007 at 7:32 PM | PERMALINK

This is a good example of why I don't think a continued American presence can do any further good in Iraq. (The resurgence of Moqtada al-Sadr is another.) Sure, it's just one data point, but it's emblematic of the problem we've been fighting the entire time, namely that an American-style military occupation simply can't address the kinds of problems tearing Iraq apart.

What's tearing Iraq apart is the occupation. The reason Iraq is engulfed in a viscous civil war is because we dissolved the state security apparatuses.

There were no "terrorists" in Iraq before we invaded. Whether or not they're being organized inside our gulags, or outside in the slums of Sadr City makes no difference in the grand scheme.

Tepidly anti-war liberals like Drum need to cease with the superficial descriptions of the roots of Iraqi civil violence, for they elide more than they explain.

Frankly, I'm waiting for Kevin to come around to the logical position that the war in Iraq is illegal and therefore tantamount to a war crime -- which is only possible I guess if one wishes to attach any value to the prodigious and comprehensive system of international law promulgated from the Nuremberg Trials on.

I'm also waiting for those shrewed liberal commentators to draw our attention to the very haphazard and seemingly arbitrary use of the word 'terrorism' -- arbitrary in that it's use follows no principle other than referring to destructive acts performed by groups hostile toward U.S. policy objectives.

Indeed, when the concept of "terrorism" is invoked by the powers that be to wage eternal war abroad, while serving as the pretext to usurp individual liberties at home (Patriot Act), its only fair that an educated, rational society like our own put this concept under the microscope, right?

Therefore, I ask, what is a terrorist, and how exactly do you create one?

Posted by: smedleybutler on April 9, 2007 at 7:38 PM | PERMALINK

What makes you think Kevin is so far from that position. His analysis is very close to yours, even if he doesn't quite declare his conclusions so dramatically. I do, and you are correct.

Posted by: Kenji on April 9, 2007 at 7:45 PM | PERMALINK

So when can we begin exporting those policymakers to Iraq?

Now that's just cruel!

Posted by: skeg on April 9, 2007 at 7:49 PM | PERMALINK

So when can we begin exporting those policymakers to Iraq?

Now that's just cruel!

Really. Haven't we done enough damage to that poor beleaguered country?

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 9, 2007 at 7:59 PM | PERMALINK

Redplague: "An interesting point, Al. Once we find their hideouts, we can raid them, bomb them from the air, or simply fill them with nerve gas. As always, the liberals are playing checkers while the grown-ups are playing chess."

What have you bastards done with American Hawk? Where is he? WHERE IS HE?

Posted by: American Hauque on April 9, 2007 at 8:11 PM | PERMALINK

The $64,000 question is 'how do we leave?'

Asked and answered, by Vermont's Senator George Aitken, forty years ago: "Ships, mostly".

Posted by: Davis X. Machina on April 9, 2007 at 8:34 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah, but Sen. Carl Levin has essentially thrown in the towel now with his telling Bush "that Dems will fund the troops".

Now Bush has no reason whatsoever to compromise on Iraq.

The Dems lost their collective nerve again, not that I'm suprised. Reid must have freak out. I sadly didn't think they would do anything with the power they now have except gravel before Bush and Cheney, begging not to veto. Even Sen. Leahy WILL NEVER file those damn subpoenas - never mind that Ms. Monica Goodling had no right at all to claim the 5th.

it was all just a bunch of faux bluster from the Dems, but folded their cards again. We're back to begging Bush not to hurt us again.

This is why I'm NOT voting for that bitch Hillary because talks is cheap and mostly a lie - I'm sick and tired of this shit for the Dems. Dems did absolute NOTHING AGAIN except of course to PRETEND they were doing something.

Posted by: Cheryl on April 9, 2007 at 8:43 PM | PERMALINK

Blue Girl--just curious--is this you?

bgalrstate

Posted by: Fred on April 9, 2007 at 9:02 PM | PERMALINK

Nope - that's the other one. I'm here:

Blue Girl, Red State.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 9, 2007 at 9:22 PM | PERMALINK

More Blowback.

Posted by: R.L. on April 9, 2007 at 10:05 PM | PERMALINK

I know a guy who has a cousin in Iraq.

I just talked with this guy the other day, and he said he just talked to his cousin. His cousin was all excited. Basically the cousin said that the Iraqi people are sick of this war, and want the Americans to stay and destroy the terrorists.

He told the story of a young Iraqi boy, who had gone without food and water for weeks. The platoon took him in and fed and bathed him. Now the kid is back to health and ready to take the world by storm.

That's just a snippet of the good we're doing over there. Put that in your pipes and smoke it.

Posted by: egbert on April 9, 2007 at 11:11 PM | PERMALINK

The $64,000 question is 'how do we leave?'

Actually it appears to be about a $7,000 dollar question.

In other words, I went here, and about $7000 rolled by in the time it took me to speak the question.

Posted by: ROTFLMLiberalAO on April 9, 2007 at 11:11 PM | PERMALINK

"That's just a snippet of the good we're doing over there. Put that in your pipes and smoke it."

LOL.... Don't you just love our resident fool? Do you suppose he actually believes this is actual evidence of, well, anything? Hilarious!

Posted by: PaulB on April 9, 2007 at 11:35 PM | PERMALINK

"In Kevin' Drum's la-la land, America is the keystine cop country where it can do nothing right."

No, dear, that's just an imaginary country you have created out of whole cloth, probably because you are incapable of actually reading or comprehending anything that Kevin writes. You really should acquire an education, dear heart, because when you post here, all you're doing is confirming that you're a moron.

Posted by: PaulB on April 9, 2007 at 11:37 PM | PERMALINK

I know a guy who has a cousin in Iraq

Can't get a more unimpeachable source than that.

Put that in your pipes and smoke it.

Frankly I'd rather have some of what egbert's smoking, because if it produces this kind of hallucination it's probably some really good shit.

Posted by: Stefan on April 10, 2007 at 1:39 AM | PERMALINK

Another inspiring story from egbert. Listening to his third-hand fabrications is almost like going to church, isn't it? The Iraqis are so sick of war, they want us to stay forever. It takes your breath away.

Posted by: Kenji on April 10, 2007 at 8:52 AM | PERMALINK

Yoo-hoo, egbert. Have you signed up to join your friend's cousin yet? Those Iraqi boys are waiting for you. You won't let them down, will you?

Posted by: Kenji on April 10, 2007 at 9:00 AM | PERMALINK

"I've always heard that" -- I love that source.

"bigger training ground for future crooks and drug lords."
The people in prison aren't "future" crooks and drug lords - they are past crooks and drug lords. They have already proven their ability to be a criminal.

Is the theory here that if the criminals in prison were released, they would never get together and learn more about being criminals?

"one of the big problems with America's skyrocketing prison population"
America's violent crime rate has dropped precipitously in the last 10-15 years. I would conclude that this is because we are actually putting criminals in jail. America's skyrocketing prison population is responsible for America's dropping violent crime rate. Makes sense to me. The more criminals in prison, the less criminals committing crimes.

In Iraq, it shouldn't matter how much the captured terrorists learn in prison, because they should not be released until all hostilities have ceased.

Posted by: c on April 10, 2007 at 9:09 AM | PERMALINK

But, Norman is allowed to be trained here. As Joe Hooker's personal Camp Follower Procurement Officer, he would fit right in over there or in the White House.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on April 10, 2007 at 9:21 AM | PERMALINK

egbert: He told the story of a young Iraqi boy, who had gone without food and water for weeks. The platoon took him in and fed and bathed him. Now the kid is back to health and ready to take the world by storm.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm impressed. Our troops are raising the dead. Because that would be the condition of anyone who had gone without water for weeks.

Posted by: cowalker on April 10, 2007 at 9:57 AM | PERMALINK

cowalker,

Yes, the Media has suppressed the work of our "Lazarus Battalion"

Posted by: thethirdPaul on April 10, 2007 at 10:28 AM | PERMALINK

egbert... Kevlar? Boots?

Posted by: Kenji on April 10, 2007 at 1:18 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly