Iraq's 'Free Fraud Zone' Hits Mainstream Media

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

Iraq's 'Free Fraud Zone' Hits Mainstream Media

Postby StarmanSkye » Sat Mar 25, 2006 9:01 pm

More rigorous students of deep politics have read of endemic fraud in Iraq being reported in the alternative and international media for the past several years, almost within months of Pres. Bush's (sic) 'Victory' stunt, with reports of <br>C-130 cargo transports delivering pallets of just-printed bundles of $100 bills to be disbursed by Pentagon contractors for 'reconstruction' and services and supplies -- with very little accounting. With any other nation occupying a foreign nation, you'd expect this kind of reckless spending would be BIG NEWS. That the US media hardly even mentioned it and our 'leaders' didn't acknowledge it is hardly surprising, given what we know about the intimate fit between US government and corruption. <br><br>That the MSM and Congress are beginning to talk (and anonymous sources crawling out of the woodwork) may be a sign that the worm has turned, and the most egregious crooks' thievery has just become too big for the usual suspects to just ignore.<br><br>The war's cost, at $250 billion and counting (last time I looked almost a week ago -- and which doesn't count<br>an estimated 2 trillion for veteran benefits and health costs or expended weapons, worn-out/destroyed/damaged military equipment and material, etc.) hasn't bought us anything TANGIBLE and real, or of practical value -- that *I'M* aware of anyway -- so the whole mess is just one huge bamboozle fraud-scam that, in a reasonable world, should bring down the illegitimate one-party plutocracy that has squirmed and bought its way into power. Has the US replaced even ONE home out of the several hundred thousand it has destroyed, displacing more than a million citizens and killing or maiming several-hundred thousand more?<br><br>How much good-will could the US have bought if several trillion dollars was spent on peace instead of destruction?<br><br>I can't think of a punishment severe enough to 'fit' the horrific crimes the present 'leadership' have conspired to pull-off -- unless perhaps it leads to a massive political-economic reform of how 'business' is done, ushering in a hundred years at-least of peace and progress with smart citizen-led problem-solving and sustainable development.<br><br>We need to fire everyone in Congress (with few exceptions) and break the military-corporate-lobbying-campaign chain of purchasing influence (WHO doesn't know that?)<br><br>And BTW: Educating ourselves and each other, speaking-out and standing on principle are NOT the same as 'whining'.<br>Starman<br>******<br><br>Newweek - Mar 22, 2006 <br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11965317/site/newsweek/from/RSS/">www.msnbc.msn.com/id/1196.../from/RSS/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <br><br>Breaking the Silence <br><br><br>A prominent former insider is criticizing the administrations handling of Iraqs reconstruction. And theres more to come. <br><br>By Michael Hirsh <br>Newsweek <br><br>March 22, 2006 - Andrew Natsios has taken a lot of flak over his role in Iraq. The longtime director of America's foreign-aid program has been pilloried for his April 2003 remark, in an ABC News interview, that the U.S. government would spend no more than $1.7 billion to rebuild Iraq. In the ensuing three years, Natsios, a lifelong Republican, has played the loyal soldier for the administration. He regularly defended the U.S. <br>reconstruction effort in Iraq even as he was lumped with other errant prognosticators like Paul Wolfowitz (That's wildly off the mark") and Dick Cheney ("We will be greeted as liberators"). After Natsios resigned in January to take a teaching post at Georgetown University, he maintained his silence about Iraq. <br><br><br>But this week, for the first time, Natsios publicly gave vent to his long-suppressed frustrations over the Bush administration's handling of the Iraq occupation. In an interview with NEWSWEEK on Tuesday, he harshly criticized the Coalition Provisional Authority led by L. Paul Bremer III for <br>botching the reconstruction effort and allowing ill-qualified or corrupt contractors to dominate it. "They didn't have [monitoring] systems set up. They were very dismissive of these processes," he said. His U.S. Agency for <br>International Development (USAID) was marginalized despite its expertise, and the CPA "didn't hire the best people," he said. "We were just watching it unfold. They [the CPA] were constantly hitting at our people, screaming at them. They were abusive." <br><br><br>Natsios's low-cost estimate from April 2003, he made clear, was not based on the kind of chaotic, top-heavy occupation that he says Bremer eventually installed in Iraq but on the more traditional, streamlined U.S. aid effort that Natsios had urged. <br><br><br>NATSIOS's Dan Senor, former spokesman for Bremers CPA, dismissed Natsios's criticisms, saying the insurgency in Iraq made ordinary contracting procedures impossible. "I'm not familiar with the traditional USAID program that was recommended, Senor told NEWSWEEK. If it was traditional and <br>conventional, it may have made sense for the reconstruction of Switzerland. But it sounds like it was completely irrelevant to the facts and conditions on the ground that we found in Iraq. Senor added that the CPA had "recruited some of the top career Foreign Service officers from the State Department to serve in the CPA's management roles. We would have welcomed suggestions from Andrew or anyone else or who would have been better experienced." <br><br><br>Natsios, who served as USAID director for nearly five years and was considered one of the top development and aid experts in Washington, says that his advice was largely ignored. Other administration officials, usually speaking anonymously, have backed Natsios's dim view of the CPA's competence level. The conventional wisdom today is that while most CPA officials were enthusiastic and brave, too many were inexperienced and second-rate. <br><br><br>Natsios's criticisms mark another significant milestone in the great Republican crackup over Iraqespecially since they came on the same day that President Bush reiterated, at a news conference, that he would not ask any senior staff to resign in connection with the mess in Mesopotamia. The president's refusal to consider replacing senior officials, especially Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, has angered many Republicans, as well as Democrats, who say the administration needs to show a sense of accountability for its many mistakes in Iraq. At the very least, Natsios's criticisms represent the latest effort by a Bush supporter to distance <br>himself from America's new quagmire. Bremer himself, in his new book, "My Year in Iraq" (Simon and Schuster), blames Rumsfeld for many of his problems as viceroy, while other notable GOP stalwarts such as William F. Buckley have emerged as critics of the war. <br><br><br>And there is much more to come, especially on the little-noticed issue of contracting in Iraq, which the watchdog group Transparency International last year warned could become the biggest corruption scandal in history." The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction is expected to issue a harshly critical report in May concluding that the CPA did not have disciplined contracting procedures in place, according to several people involved in drafting the report. If the Democrats manage to get control of the House later this year, it's all going to come in an avalanche of subpoenas and new investigations. Not that the Republicans have been <br>entirely sitting on their hands. When Rep. Christopher Shays, a Connecticut Republican, agreed to subpoena records of funds transmitted to Iraq, his House Government Reform Subcommittee learned that nearly $12 billion in U.S. currency was shipped to Iraq from the Federal Reserve Bank in New York, much of it with little accountability. <br><br><br>Shays is also conducting hearings on the administration's efforts to silence whistle-blowers who ferret out corruption and other problems. "The administration seems to have a deaf ear to this issue," Shays told NEWSWEEK. "I would like to hear a little outrage on the part of the administration. I don't hear that outrage. Because you don't hear that outrage you then feel the administration doesn't care about these issues It needs to come from the secretary [of Defense]. When you have men and women dying on the battlefield and you have corruption, then you've got a problem." <br><br><br>But the Defense Department has avoided conceding this point, just as Rumsfeld himself has testily rejected responsibility for such critical errors as misreading the number of troops needed for the occupation and downplaying the insurgency. <br><br><br>The Pentagon has consistently declined to send a permanent auditing team to Iraq despite prodding from Congress. We do not have auditors on the ground in Iraq, acting Pentagon Inspector General Thomas Gimble admitted in testimony late last year before Shayss subcommittee. (I don't understand why, retorted Shays.) The Defense Department argued that its IG team was not needed because Congress had set up its own auditing arm for Iraq called the Special Inspector General for Iraqi Reconstruction. But that congressionally authorized IG was only supposed to be looking at reconstruction contracts, not security, fuel or other Pentagon contracts. In <br>his testimony last fall, Gimble said his office was acting in a support role from Washington to help the special inspector general, Stuart Bowen. But Special Inspector General spokesman Jim Mitchell told NEWSWEEK. That wasnt the case. <br><br><br>In response to the criticism from such Republicans as Shays, Sen. Charles Grassley and others, the Pentagon IG finally opened an office in Qatar -- earlier this month. IG spokesman Gary Comerford says Gimble made the move after he went to the region and talked with CENTCOM commander Gen. John Abizaid, among others. They said primarily what we need down there are auditors, not only for Iraq, but Afghanistan and for DoD assets in Kuwait, Comerford said. For many critics, the move came far too late. Their answer to the criticism is to open an office within a thousand miles of Baghdad, cracked one U.S. official involved in the auditing process who spoke on condition of anonymity. <br><br><br>At the same time critics of the contracting morass in Iraq --which former CPA advisor Franklin Willis once called a free-fraud zone -- have raised serious issues about conflicts of interest in Iraq. These questions also have gone largely unanswered. Late last year, the Defense Departments IG, Joseph Schmitz, resigned and took a senior position with Blackwater USA, one of the private companies contracted to handle security in Iraq. Because the CPA in Iraq fell under the Pentagons authority, a company like Blackwater would nominally be under the IGs purview. In a series of articles last year, the Los Angeles Times suggested that Schmitz, a conservative Republican, had gone out of his way to protect John A. (Jack) Shaw, a deputy undersecretary of Defense involved in Iraq contracting who was later fired by the Pentagon. Another government department is conducting a separate investigation of Schmitz's tenure as IG as well. <br><br><br>Asked to respond, IG spokesman Comerford noted that Schmitz had signed a letter recusing himself from Blackwater-related business while still at the Pentagon. Comerford also said the IG had done 33 audits during Schmitz's tenure, and he noted that each of the military services has its own <br>Inspector Generals office. Comerford told NEWSWEEK there were presently audits under way of two Iraq contractors connected with public relations in the global war on terror, the Lincoln Group and the Rendon Group. <br><br><br>Both were also requested by Congress, the former by Sen. Ted Kennedy and the latter by yet another skeptical Republican, Rep. Walter Jones of North Carolina. Despite those ongoing audits, the Pentagon has determined that the Lincoln Group did not violate policy in planting propaganda in Iraqi newspapers, The New York Times reported Wednesday. A Rendon Group official told NEWSWEEK: "As we understand it, the IG investigation was requested by Congress in response to media reports that wrongly characterized the Rendon Group as having a role in public-relations work in the leadup to the war in Iraq. We expect the IG report will clear up the confusion." Lincoln Group president Paige Craig initially told NEWSWEEK that he believed there was no audit, only a special review. Craig later called back to confirm that his <br>firm was being audited. <br><br><br>On yet another front, the Justice Department continues to decline to join a whistle-blower case against a security contractor called Custer Battles, despite a March 9 jury verdict that found the company had defrauded the U.S. government out of millions of dollars in Iraq. In a statement issued after the verdict, Senator Grassley noted that war profiteering is what led President Lincoln to support the original False Claims Act, under which the Custer Battles' case was pursued. Typically, the U.S. government will back the efforts of whistle-blowers -- in this case two former executives of Custer Battles who were appalled by the fraud <br>-- but the Bush administration has maintained its silence. I remain concerned as to why the Justice Department chose not to join this case, Grassley said. Justice Department spokeswoman Cynthia Magnuson, asked to respond, said, I dont have anything immediately for you. <br><br><br>It will take a long time for the contracting mess in Iraq to be sorted out, if it ever is. Natsios says he warned about what might happen if standard procedures, known as Federal Acquisition Regulations, were ignored. "I told Bremer and the CPA that we were following federal law and we were going to implement according to federal statutes so there weren't any scandals. And there weren't any with USAID. But we were criticized for following federal law." Regarding firms like Custer Battles, Natsios added: "The contractors they chose weren't the best people. I heard lots of stories. The staff would come in and say a group of retired officers has set up a business and they got this contract, and they didn't have any qualifications for it." <br><br><br>Jim Mitchell, the spokesman for the special Iraqi inspector general, says his office is currently looking at 57 possible cases of corruption and fraud, and he expects more arrests in coming days. But only four contractors and officials have been arrested so far. That's not a lot, considering the potential size of the Iraq corruption problem. Maybe it really is a free-fraud zone. <br><br>) 2006 MSNBC.com <br><br> <p></p><i></i>
StarmanSkye
 
Posts: 2670
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:32 pm
Location: State of Jefferson
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Iraq's 'Free Fraud Zone' Hits Mainstream Media

Postby marykmusic » Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:40 am

When it hits MSN, you know the plan is in place for the next power to take over. We figure Doonesbury is the bell-wether; as soon as Bush got ridiculed there, that marked the beginning of the end. That was over a year ago. --MaryK <p></p><i></i>
marykmusic
 
Posts: 1502
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:23 am
Location: Central Arizona
Blog: View Blog (0)

363 tons of new $100 bills paved Iraq's Free Fraud Zone

Postby StarmanSkye » Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:23 am

More ...<br>I guess I'm actually amazed there ARE ongoing investigations and indictments. I guess the sheer scale of the fraud and theft was just too big and in-your-face, so a few of the more unconnected, politically-unaligned thieves have been fingered to create the semblance of after-the-fact, picking-up-the-pieces due diligence. Too late, tho, to ever make it right.<br><br>Another recent revelation -- Just before the official handover of power, the Coaltion Provisional Authority went on a $5 billion spending binge, with the emphasis on favoritism and rewarding political loyalty instead of competant practical results.<br><br>The US had three months once they 'conquered' Iraq to turn things around, as that's how long people were prepared and supplied to tuff it out. But the damage the military did to systems of water, power, bridges, factories, sewage and administration -- the nation's civil infrastructure -- was so great, so devastating, and their reconstruction so non-existent (they scrapped the 17 million dollar multi-disciplinary plan prepared by the Clinton Admin. -- surely THAT act of criminal negligence should be among the indictments the Bush Cabal are charged and found guilty for) that they just couldn't<br>get it right -- basically, they had NO postwar plan at all, they apparently thought with billions of free dollars they could just wing it.<br><br>Fuck'n braindead deluded idiots. Just like New Orleans, absolutely NO sense of decency or compassion or justice, they have no incentive to get it right because lives don't mean nothin' to 'em -- US citizens or soldiers, or 'foreigners'<br><br>Starman<br>******<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/032106A.shtml">www.truthout.org/docs_2006/032106A.shtml</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <br><br>"Iraq Was Awash in Cash. We Played Football With Bricks of $100 Bills" <br> By Callum Macrae and Ali Fadhil <br> The Guardian UK <br> Monday 20 March 2006 <br><br> At the beginning of the Iraq war, the UN entrusted $23bn of Iraqi money to the US-led coalition to redevelop the country. With the infrastructure of the country still in ruins, where has all that money gone? Callum Macrae and Ali Fadhil on one of the greatest financial scandals of all time. <br><br> In a dilapidated maternity and paediatric hospital in Diwaniyah, 100 miles south of Baghdad, Zahara and Abbas, premature twins just two days old, lie desperately ill. The hospital has neither the equipment nor the drugs that could save their lives. On the other side of the world, in a federal courthouse in Virginia, US, two men - one a former CIA agent and Republican candidate for Congress, the other a former army ranger - are found guilty of fraudulently obtaining $3m (B#1.7m) intended for the reconstruction of Iraq. These two events have no direct link, but they are none the less products of the same thing: a financial scandal that in terms of sheer scale must rank as one of the greatest in history. <br><br> At the start of the Iraq war, around $23bn-worth of Iraqi money was placed in the trusteeship of the US-led coalition by the UN. The money, known as the Development Fund for Iraq and consisting of the proceeds of oil sales, frozen Iraqi bank accounts and seized Iraqi assets, was to be used in a "transparent manner", specified the UN, for "purposes benefiting the people of Iraq". <br><br> For the past few months we have been working on a Guardian Films investigation into what happened to that money. What we discovered was that a great deal of it has been wasted, stolen or frittered away. For the coalition, it has been a catastrophe of its own making. For the Iraqi people, it has been a tragedy. But it is also a financial and political scandal that runs right to the heart of the nightmare that is engulfing Iraq today. <br><br> Diwaniyah is a sprawling and neglected city with just one small state paediatric and maternity hospital to serve its one million people. Years of war, corruption under Saddam and western sanctions have reduced the hospital to penury, so when last year the Americans promised total refurbishment, the staff were elated. But the renovation has been partial <br>and the work often shoddy, and where it really matters - funding frontline health care - there appears to have been little change at all. <br><br> In the corridor, an anxious father who has been told his son may have meningitis is berating the staff. "I want a good hospital, not a terrible hospital that makes my child worse," he says. But then he calms down. "I'm not blaming you, we are the same class. I'm talking about important people. Those controlling all those millions and the oil. They didn't come here to save us from Saddam, they came here for the oil, and so now the oil is stolen and we got nothing from it." Beside him another parent, a woman, agrees: "If the people who run the country are stealing the money, what can we do?" For these ordinary Iraqis, it is clear that the country's wealth is being managed in much the same way as it ever was. How did it all go so wrong? <br><br> When the coalition troops arrived in Iraq, they were received with remarkable goodwill by significant sections of the population. The coalition had control up to a point and, perhaps more importantly, it had the money to consolidate that goodwill by rebuilding Iraq, or at least make a significant start. Best of all for the US and its allies, the money came from the Iraqis themselves. <br><br> Because the Iraqi banking system was in tatters, the funds were placed in an account with the Federal Reserve in New York. From there, most of the money was flown in cash to Baghdad. Over the first 14 months of the occupation, 363 tonnes of new $100 bills were shipped in - $12bn, in cash. And that is where it all began to go wrong. <br><br> "Iraq was awash in cash - in dollar bills. Piles and piles of money," says Frank Willis, a former senior official with the governing Coalition Provisional Authority. "We played football with some of the bricks of $100 bills before delivery. It was a wild-west crazy atmosphere, the likes of which none of us had ever experienced." <br><br> The environment created by the coalition positively encouraged corruption. "American law was suspended, Iraqi law was suspended, and Iraq basically became a free fraud zone," says Alan Grayson, a Florida-based attorney who represents whistleblowers now trying to expose the corruption. "In a free fire zone you can shoot at anybody you want. In a free fraud zone you can steal anything you like. And that was what they did." <br><br> A good example was the the Iraqi currency exchange programme (Ice). An early priority was to devote enormous resources to replacing every single Iraqi dinar showing Saddam's face with new ones that didn't. The contract to help distribute the new currency was won by Custer Battles, <br>small American security company set up by Scott Custer and former Republican Congressional candidate Mike Battles. Under the terms of the contract, they would invoice the coalition for their costs and charge 25% on top as profit. But Custer Battles also set up fake companies to produce inflated invoices, which were then passed on to the Americans. They might have got away with it, had they not left a copy of an internal spreadsheet behind after a meeting with coalition officials. <br><br> The spreadsheet showed the company's actual costs in one column and their invoiced costs in another; it revealed, in one instance, that it had charged $176,000 to build a helipad that actually cost $96,000. In fact, there was no end to Custer Battles' ingenuity. For example, when the firm found abandoned Iraqi Airways fork-lifts sitting in Baghdad airport, it resprayed them and rented them to the coalition for thousands of dollars. In total, in return for $3m of actual expenditure, Custer Battles invoiced for $10m. Perhaps more remarkable is that the US government, once it knew about the scam, took no legal action to recover the money. It has been left to private individuals to pursue the case, the first stage of which concluded two weeks ago when Custer Battles was ordered to pay more than $10m in damages and penalties. <br><br> But this is just one story among many. From one US controlled vault in a former Saddam palace, $750,000 was stolen. In another, a safe was left open. In one case, two American agents left Iraq without accounting for nearly $1.5m. <br><br> Perhaps most puzzling of all is what happened as the day approached for the handover of power (and the remaining funds) to the incoming Iraqi interim government. Instead of carefully conserving the Iraqi money for the new government, the Coalition Provisional Authority went on an extraordinary spending spree. Some $5bn was committed or spent in the <br>last month alone, very little of it adequately accounted for. <br><br> One CPA official was given nearly $7m and told to spend it in seven days. "He told our auditors that he felt that there was more emphasis on the speed of spending the money than on the accountability for that money," says Ginger Cruz, the deputy inspector general for Iraqi reconstruction. Not all coalition officials were so honest. Last month Robert Stein Jr, employed as a CPA comptroller in south central Iraq, despite a previous conviction for fraud, pleaded guilty to conspiring to <br>steal more than $2m and taking kickbacks in the form of cars, jewellery, cash and sexual favours. It seems certain he is only the tip of the iceberg. There are a further 50 criminal investigations under way. <br><br> Back in Diwaniyah it is a story about failure and incompetence, rather than fraud and corruption. Zahara and Abbas, born one and a half months premature, are suffering from respiratory distress syndrome and are desperately ill. The hospital has just 14 ancient incubators, held together by tape and wire. <br><br> Zahara is in a particularly bad way. She needs a ventilator and drugs to help her breathe, but the hospital has virtually nothing. Her father has gone into town to buy vitamin K on the black market, which he has been told his children will need. Zahara starts to deteriorate and in desperation the doctor holds a tube pumping unregulated oxygen against the child's nostrils. "This treatment is worse than primitive," he says. "It's not even medicine." Despite his efforts, the little girl dies; the next day her brother also dies. Yet with the right equipment and the right drugs, they could have survived. <br><br> How is it possible that after three years of occupation and billions of dollars of spending, hospitals are still short of basic supplies? Part of the cause is ideological tunnel-vision. For months before the war the US state department had been drawing up plans for the postwar reconstruction, but those plans were junked when the Pentagon took over. <br><br> To supervise the reconstruction of the Iraqi health service, the Pentagon appointed James Haveman, a former health administrator from Michigan. He was also a loyal Bush supporter, who had campaigned for Jeb Bush, and a committed evangelical Christian. But he had virtually no experience in international health work. <br><br> The coalition's health programme was by any standards a failure. Basic equipment and drugs should have been distributed within months - the coalition wouldn't even have had to pay for it. But they missed that chance, not just in health, but in every other area of life in Iraq. As disgruntled Iraqis will often point out, despite far greater devastation and crushing sanctions, Saddam did more to rebuild Iraq in six months after the first Gulf war than the coalition has managed in three years. <br><br> Kees Reitfield, a health professional with 20 years' experience in post-conflict health care from Kosovo to Somalia, was in Iraq from the very beginning of the war and looked on in astonishment at the US management in its aftermath. "Everybody in Iraq was ready for three months' chaos," he says. "They had water for three months, they had food for three months, they were ready to wait for three months. I said, we've got until early August to show an improvement, some drugs in the health centres, some improvement of electricity in the grid, some fuel prices going down. Failure to deliver will mean civil unrest." He was right. <br><br> Of course, no one can say that if the Americans had got the reconstruction right it would have been enough. There were too many other mistakes as well, such as a policy of crude "deBa'athification" that saw Iraqi expertise marginalised, the creation of a sectarian government and the Americans attempting to foster friendship with Iraqis who themselves had no friends among other Iraqis. <br><br> Another experienced health worker, Mary Patterson - who was eventually asked to leave Iraq by James Haveman - characterises the Coalition's approach thus: "I believe it had a lot to do with showing that the US was in control," she says. "I believe that it had to do with rewarding people that were politically loyal. So rather than being a technical agenda, I believe it was largely a politically motivated <br>reward-and-punishment kind of agenda." <br><br> Which sounds like the way Saddam used to run the country. "If you were to interview Iraqis today about what they see day to day," she says, "I think they will tell you that they don't see a lot of difference". <br><br>--end--<br>of article, but not the awful story that goes on and on and on ...<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
StarmanSkye
 
Posts: 2670
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:32 pm
Location: State of Jefferson
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 363 tons of new $100 bills paved Iraq's Free Fraud Zone

Postby OpLan » Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:05 pm

heres a trailer for UK Channel4s Dispatches programme 'Iraqs missing Billions'<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/maggie_okane/2006/03/post_4.html">commentisfree.guardian.co...ost_4.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>it wouldnt surprise me if the programme itself turns up on the 'net.It was an eye opening documentary..appalling mismanagement...<br> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
OpLan
 
Posts: 435
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: at the end of my tether
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to Iraq

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests