Saturday, October 21, 2006

Should we make friends again with Saddam?



We have Saddam as our prisoner. It might have been better if the unit that captured him had reported that he was “shot while escaping” (One way or another). It might have been better yet if this war had never been entered into in the first place. It was obvious at the time to all independent minds without a personal, financial or political axe to grind that he had no WMD. It was, and is still, also obvious to all independent minds without a personal, financial or political axe to grind that the very idea of planting a liberal democracy in any Islamic country is nothing other than a pipe dream. And to those who tried to add a moral dimension by claiming Saddam was a tyrant who had to be removed, to lift the oppression from the Iraqi people: what business exactly was it of ours? All those Islamic countries with the appearance of democracy have exactly that – the appearance of it. There is no Islamic democracy. The very expression is an oxymoron. Islam and Democracy are incompatible. All Islamic countries are governed by strongmen, in one guise or another. Either that or they are out-and-out theocracies governed according to Sharia. Or both. I know it, you know it, everyone knows it. Whenever and wherever Muslims have had an opportunity to vote freely, they have always voted Islam. Always have, always will. Under Islamic conditions, democracy will never develop from the bottom up, and will never be permitted from the top down. It will certainly never be imposed by infidels. When President Bush stood on the deck of that aircraft carrier and triumphantly bragged “Mission accomplished”, I muttered to myself “Prelude over. Main score about to begin”. So it has proven.

So how could we make friends again with Saddam, and what would happen afterwards?

We will never again actually be friends with him; how could we be after killing the two apples of his eye, Qusay and Uday? However, we could reach an accommodation that both he and we could live with. Take him from custody – we have the power (the “right”? An irrelevant question – ignore it. In Islam, might is right.) to do so - then simply re-install him as President under our protection until his force levels are re-established. This would not take long: all the Baath Party operators and members would suddenly reappear, his army would flock to serve him, and it would take him no time at all to re-establish his Intelligence services because they have never gone away. We could arm him to the teeth and be generous to him with our own Intelligence capabilities

Then all we would have to do is keep the borders - particularly that with Iran - sealed while he re-established control over the entire country. It would be not a pretty sight. Then again, we don’t have to look. Saddam never was a friend of the jihadis and theocrats; had it ever been reported to him that his forces had captured bin Laden, for instance, he wouldn’t have just ordered his death: he would have gone to wherever bin Laden was being held and would have personally watched him die. He wouldn’t have wanted to read or hear bin Laden dead, he would have wanted to see bin Laden dead, or even do it himself. That was/is his style.

With control re-established, and the borders sealed so no jihadis could escape, he would hunt down and kill every last one of them. And the Shia wouldn’t trouble him for long. We could then withdraw all our forces from a now peaceful Iraq. From then on the only costs associated with Iraq would be those engendered by keeping Saddam armed to the teeth. Petty cash compared to current costs; and our young men and women would be out of there.

Could we trust him? No, not really, but what would it matter? He would now always know that we could remove him any time; invading and conquering Iraq never was a problem. It’s occupying it that is and would be a problem. In and out – easy.

But we would be deserting our friends? So what? Are Muslims ever really our friends? They are Muslims. We are infidels. Go read the Koran. We’re not talking morality here, only reality. The world wouldn’t like us for it? They don’t like us anyway.

But should we do it? There’s the rub. Saddam is an old man, and doesn’t have that many years left to live. As soon as he died a full-scale civil war would erupt. So what would have been gained by it (and in the meantime, the Muslim demographic bomb is growing here in the West)? No, let Saddam have his trial then be hanged, shot, beheaded – whatever. What business is it of ours what happens to him?

That only leaves us two alternatives.

We could do what the politicians say we should do. We could stay in place until the current government has built up the forces it needs to – attempt to - maintain itself in power. Then, when that has been achieved we would withdraw, having in the meantime spent hundreds of billions more dollars, pounds, euros, whatever; and probably thousands more deaths and maimings of our own young men and women. In the meantime, wannabe jihadis are flocking to Iraq from our own and other countries. And for what? So they can impose their own little bit of death on us. The survivors, once they’ve had some weapons training and combat experience - what do you think they do then? That’s right, they come back here, and to wherever else they came from. What do we suppose will happen once enough of them have done this? Back here in our own countries? That’s right. It’s not so much that our presence in Iraq is inspiring them to to do this. Our presence is giving them the opportunity, that’s all. They’re already well-inspired enough, but inspiration is worth nothing without opportunity and means. If we stay there long enough they will bring this war back home to us. And combat veterans all … on the loose in the midst of our civilian population (and in the meantime the Muslim demographic … you get the picture). A nightmare.

And once we decide that the government there is strong enough to survive on its own, and we withdraw our armies … what do you suppose is going to happen? That’s right. The army we’ve trained and armed will itself split along sectarian lines and there will be civil war (not just between the two halves af the army: the entire population will be engaged).

In both civil war situations I’ve described above, I’ve left out something very big. I’ll include it in this, our last option, but it does apply to the above two options too.

We could just withdraw our forces immediately. Result? Again, civil war. We all realise don’t we, that Iraq is going to have itself a civil war. That cannot be prevented no matter what we do. It’s only a matter of time. The best we can do either by using Saddam, or by supporting the present government, is to postpone it; and that only at great cost in lives and treasure (and combat experience for our own collections of wannabe jihadis). That’s the lives of our young men and women, and our treasure. It will happen. So why not just let them get on with it?

Pessimistic of me you say? No actually: optimistic. Que? Well, our politicians claim that if we aren’t there for the jihadis to fight, then the jihadis will do their fighting here. I disagree. They’ll be otherwise engaged. This is what I think will happen:

We withdraw all our forces now. Immediately civil war will commence. Kurdistan will declare itself independent and clear its territory of all non-Kurds. Turkey will invade Kurdistan. Turkish Kurds will engage in another insurrection, in support of their Kurdistani kin. Down south the Sunni and Shia will be hard at it. Iran will come in in support of the Shia, both in terms of men and weaponry. Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf countries will not let that go unanswered, and will reciprocate in support of the Sunni. Jihadis will flock in from all over the world, to their preferred sides. Syria will come in in support of Iran. Jordan will get sucked in on the side of Saudi. The unsettled civil war in Lebanon will reignite. The decision-makers in Egypt will be bribed by Saudi to involve themselves to counter the manpower advantage Iran has. Libya, which has no great love for Egypt, will create mischief in Egypt’s back yard, in support of Syria. The Palestinians will start their own incipient civil war.

Everyone will be far too busy to bother about us … or Israel.

If we combine that with a simultaneous withdrawal from Afghanistan, first having armed Karzai and the Northern Alliance to the teeth, then civil war will break out there too, drawing in a large number of jihadis from Kashmir and Pakistan. Musharraf will have to redeploy a large part of his army from the Indian/Kashmir borders to the west of Pakistan to prevent spillover from Afghanistan. India might, with any luck, see that as an opportunity to retake and secure the whole of Kashmir; and deport its own Muslim population to Pakistan and Bangladesh. Pakistan will erupt internally and Musharraf will be toast. Pakistan will go more Islamist than the Islamists. That will give us all the excuse we need to eliminate Pakistan’s, and Iran’s, nuclear capabilities.

Our Muslim communities here in the West will erupt, giving us all the excuse we need to intern them preparatory to deportation. Then no more Muslims to ever enter the West again. Ever. We could allow in the non-Muslim minorities within the Ummah, in exchange for the Muslims we deport. Why let the Muslim demographic bomb grow?

While we are at it, we arm the Christian Falange in Lebanon with whatever it needs. Arm the East Timorese with whatever they need. Arm to the teeth all non-Muslim Indonesians. This would all cost little more than petty cash compared to what Iraq and Afghanistan are currently costing us. And our young men and women would be out of there.

The Ummah would tear itself apart.

Outrageously immoral? Probably – but that is irrelevant. We are in a worldwide existential war with Islam. It being existential, we are entitled to use any and all means necessary to ensure our continued existence. The first, and ultimate moral act is to ensure your own survival. Islam has to be sorted out now. It has repeatedly assaulted the rest of the world for nearly 1500 years, and will continue to do so every time it feels strong enough; it’s about time it was brought to an end once and for all. This is an opportunity.

Ah … what about oil supplies you say? Well, we are going to have to learn to get by with much reduced and more expensive oil supplies sometime this century. We might as well bite the bullet now. That, along with dealing with Islam, is something we should not leave to our children.

Offensive? The truth often is.

Discuss.

21 Comments:

Blogger anton said...

Very interesting scenario Sir Henry! I'll go for that!

8:25 PM  
Blogger Sir Henry Morgan said...

Anton

Thanks - I sometimes think this problem is driving me mad - no dubt after reading that plenty of others do to. You should have seen it before I edited a couple of pages out of it ...

It just needs considering, that's all, and the people we pay to do such considering - politicians and media - just refuse to go near it.

I don't think I'm far wrong though, at that.

9:45 PM  
Blogger johhnyuno said...

Sir Henry,

I only wish it would unfold that way, unfortunately I think it might be a bit more complicated though. While I have no doubt that they would get right on with killing each other (as history shows) I think the ancillary players may get pulled in by guilt, overspill, loyalties, perceived/real threats, etc.

That being said, I still think it's the best shot we have right now.

John

11:45 PM  
Blogger anton said...

Believe me, Sir Henry, I share your frustration. It is driving me crazy too! How is it possible that our country has been sold down the river by these traitors when what is going on is so obvious to almost everyone I speak to? The day of showdown is fast approaching! God help us!

2:54 PM  
Blogger Éowyn said...

Sir Henry!

I admire your courage in speaking your mind in this article and your previous posts. If only the "moderate Muslims" were half as brave, things could be different. (Yes, I realize that's highly unlikely but I still have hope that all human beings can think for themselves if given the chance!) Until that happens though, all freedom loving westerners have to wake up... your insights can only help.

6:44 PM  
Blogger Spanish diplomat said...

Sir Henry,
I just learn of your blogspot, and I can only express you my appreciation for its name (I don´t like YOUR name, but that is another question...)
You paint a rossy picture (or, shall I say, a bloody picture) about what could happen to "them" should we (yes, I know, my country ignominiously withdraw from Iraq, though now I sincerely don´t know what to think about it)quit Iraq, Afghanistan and everything else and we leave them to do what they have to.
My question is: what if we do it, and nothing like what you say really happens.
If what some of us thought it was going to happen in Iraq, in the end, in didn´t happen; the same could also (not) happen now with your plan.
Actually, though I share your view about the Islamic world (I have spent 25% of my life living there, and I come from a country which happens to be a neighbour of Islam and has an increasing number of (foreign) Muslims), I know there are nuances you fail to mention. Democracy is not possible with Islam. But Muslims can live in a democracy. Malaysia is a rule-of-law country where Muslims (less than 60% of the population) split their vote between Malay nationalists and Islamists. Indonesia is building up its democracy, there is free press, and not all Muslims vote for religiously based parties (I believe their national counsciousness save -somehow, and for the time being at least- them). Turkey is a country where not everybody votes or feels as an Islamist (yes, I know the country and how is its society, but...). And there are other examples, like Bangla Desh, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Senegal, Mali, etc.
I mean by this that, being not an Arab, and given the right circumstances, there is hope you can build up a political system where Islam does not monopolize all. Then, perhaps, there is hope for Afghanistan.
Then, Saddam Hussein cannot be trusted or redeemed. WMD were expected by ALL to be found in his possession and he did try to produce them before. Intelligence was wrong, but you can be forgiven for believing that he did have them, and he did not try to convince you otherwise.
And finally, you shouldn´t withdraw immediately from Iraq or elsewhere. That could only be seen as a defeat. A way and the right political circumstances must be found or created to allow it, otherwise, you achieve nothing, I believe.
As for the Muslim fifth-column among us, yes, something has to be done to expose them. The idea to allow non-Muslim immigration from Muslims countries is a very good one.

4:57 PM  
Blogger Spanish diplomat said...

Sir Henry,
I just learn of your blogspot, and I can only express you my appreciation for its name (I don´t like YOUR name, but that is another question...)
You paint a rossy picture (or, shall I say, a bloody picture) about what could happen to "them" should we (yes, I know, my country ignominiously withdraw from Iraq, though now I sincerely don´t know what to think about it)quit Iraq, Afghanistan and everything else and we leave them to do what they have to.
My question is: what if we do it, and nothing like what you say really happens.
If what some of us thought it was going to happen in Iraq, in the end, in didn´t happen; the same could also (not) happen now with your plan.
Actually, though I share your view about the Islamic world (I have spent 25% of my life living there, and I come from a country which happens to be a neighbour of Islam and has an increasing number of (foreign) Muslims), I know there are nuances you fail to mention. Democracy is not possible with Islam. But Muslims can live in a democracy. Malaysia is a rule-of-law country where Muslims (less than 60% of the population) split their vote between Malay nationalists and Islamists. Indonesia is building up its democracy, there is free press, and not all Muslims vote for religiously based parties (I believe their national counsciousness save -somehow, and for the time being at least- them). Turkey is a country where not everybody votes or feels as an Islamist (yes, I know the country and how is its society, but...). And there are other examples, like Bangla Desh, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Senegal, Mali, etc.
I mean by this that, being not an Arab, and given the right circumstances, there is hope you can build up a political system where Islam does not monopolize all. Then, perhaps, there is hope for Afghanistan.
Then, Saddam Hussein cannot be trusted or redeemed. WMD were expected by ALL to be found in his possession and he did try to produce them before. Intelligence was wrong, but you can be forgiven for believing that he did have them, and he did not try to convince you otherwise.
And finally, you shouldn´t withdraw immediately from Iraq or elsewhere. That could only be seen as a defeat. A way and the right political circumstances must be found or created to allow it, otherwise, you achieve nothing, I believe.
As for the Muslim fifth-column among us, yes, something has to be done to expose them. The idea to allow non-Muslim immigration from Muslims countries is a very good one.

4:57 PM  
Blogger Spanish diplomat said...

sorry for my double comment

5:00 PM  
Blogger CallOfTheTrumpet said...

Another Spaniard here...I have to say I'd love to see your plan develop as you have envisioned. I really have no moral qualms as to provoking an intenstine decomposition of Ummah. I dont really give a fuck. Anyway, jihadis say all the time how much they hate life and love death. Let them all go and meet those 72 virgins in heaven. However, I am not so sure things would unfold as you say. But one thing is clear, Western intelligence could clearly provoke a great deal of disagreement and fighting within the Ummah with little effort and cash. I have always wondered why we dont take advantage of the differences between different "flavours" of Islam to stress and provoke hate within. They are all so prone to it! That should be easy. And it's common wisdom that a good approach to victory is to break the enemy apart in weaker confronting factions.

But the first thing I would do if it was up to me, I would round up all muslims in Europe and send them home. End of story. That and seriously undertaking the development and improvement of non-oil energy sources, so as to be free of oil-blackmail and such.

You chose a great name for your blog! Reconquista is something we'll have to do soon again with much bloodshed and loss of prosperity.

Thx

7:03 AM  
Blogger Sir Henry Morgan said...

Spanish Diplomat, Call of the Trumpet.

Sirs,

You are most welcome to our pages, and your comments are much appreciated. Please do come by regularly.

I can appreciate the like of one name and the dislike of the other. However, that was in those days, and now is in these days. I know exactly the temper of the historical character who's name I use. He was a, shall we say, pitiless man. Not a good man to have as an enemy, but definitely a good man to have as an ally. That is why I use the name (also, like him I'm Welsh). I shouldn't imagine the name 'Cortez' is much liked in certain parts of the world ... and for much the same reasons as 'Sir Henry Morgan' is not a much-loved name in Spain. Honestly sir, I don't mean to give offence; just illustrating.

These days though, we British see Spain as our friend; and many among us see Islam as our enemy. And we must be exactly as ruthless as they are when it comes to dealing with enemies, or we will lose - and the history of your own country tells us that this is not an outcome we can allow to happen. This issue should be of particular concern to you as Islam still refers to Spain as al-Andalus - to be recovered for Islam at the first opportunity.

If your name indicates your profession, then I can see how hard-talking might trouble you: someone (I can't remember who) here once said that it is a diplomat's task to go abroad and lie for his country (I mean no offence by that - we all have our jobs to do: a soldier's task is to go abroad and kill for his country). By the very definition of the word, it is the task of a diplomat to avoid giving offence. I have never received such training, and am under no such constraints.

Yes, Call of the Trumpet - if we don't clear our continent of Islam now, then it may be that our descendants have to conduct another Reconquista. It is not a task we should leave to them. Much easier, much less bloodshed, if we do it now. But to do that we need to arouse our people. That is our task on this page and pages like it around the world. We are, if you like, conducting psyops, only the target is not the enemy but our own people, and the aim is not to spread despondency as it would be if the target was the enemy, but to arouse the anger and determination of our own people.

I cannot claim to have spent 25% of my life in the Islamic parts of the world, only about 15% (I'm in my fifties). I do know a little of it, though in far far lower circles than those in which diplomacy is conducted. I wonder which circles are more representative of the enemy we find ourselves up against? A genuine question.

Malaysia; Indonesia. I suppose it depends on sources of information, but my impression is that Islam is marching there too, just at a slower and currently gentler pace, though it must be said Indonesia has its moments of extreme brutality. Time will tell.

I understand my post was speculative, but the intent was to generate debate about possibilities; and it is sometimes difficult to tell who the various Islamic factions hate the most - the infidel, or each other? There is, as you said, plenty of space for our security services to generate additional discord. It is obvious that what we are doing now is getting nowhere.

And DID almost everyone believe Saddam had WMD? Or was it just a fiction it was politically convenient to believe? I certainly never believed it. I preferred to believe Hans Blix, and still wonder why he was deliberately prevented from completing his work? Could it have been politically or financially inconvenient to certain people?

If you are a diplomat sir, then you really should know better than to trust politicians. Down here at the lower levels of society, none of us do. Even we have learned better.

I don't know if you read my two earlier posts on Islamic terror attacks worldwide? If you did, then I'm currently working on doing the same thing about the percentage of Muslims in any local population and levels of various crimes in those locales. My first post about it, in a week or two (work is ongoing) will be dealing with sex offences, and going by work done so far, Islam is not going to come out of it looking very good at all. I'm using London as my case-study, and my sources of data are the Metropolitan Police, and the most recent national census. Official data. I'm just asking new questions of the data, that's all. As Muslims all have the same beliefs from the same texts, then my findings will apply everywhere in the world where Islam is present in large numbers.

Please come back and visit us again, and constructive criticism is always welcome: there is nothing to be learned without disgreement and debate. Some things - facts, such as my first two posts, cannot be debated, and are done to provide information by looking at, and presenting, those facts in new ways - but arguments and opinions can and should be. I am not closed-minded, but I do need to be persuaded to change my mind.

Current place to watch? Kenya (though I note that Islam in that part of the world does seem to have been diverted into Ethiopia). The north of Kenya has a large Muslim population, borders Somalia, and has refugees fleeing across that border in the tens of thousands - who knows who and what may be using that for infiltration? I have said this elsewhere in the recent past.

4:20 PM  
Blogger ENGLISHMAN said...

SIR HENRY ,That was deliciously immoral,thank you for making me aware of your blog ,it is refreshing to see that the English fighting spirit still lives,though perhaps in the next few weeks the american 7 fleet will give it a nudge in the right direction,as i think war in the m e is inevitable,as the israelis have no credible options other than first strike which will certainly be nuclear ,as they lack the man power for invasion.I eagerly await your next post .

11:28 AM  
Blogger Mark said...

Sir Henry:

Excellent post! What was that you said in your email to me about not being a 'words person', or something to that effect? Who are you kidding? :-)

The first, and ultimate moral act is to ensure your own survival. Islam has to be sorted out now. It has repeatedly assaulted the rest of the world for nearly 1500 years, and will continue to do so every time it feels strong enough; it’s about time it was brought to an end once and for all.

This is so, so true. It beggars belief that we have passed so many laws to gag ourselves here in the West. We are making our own survival well-nigh impossible for that reason. Previous generations would have had none of this nonsense. They called a spade a spade.

I agree with you wholeheartedly when you say that we have to deal with this 'green menace' NOW, before it's too late. I am sick and tired of all the appeasement; and I am sick and tired of the way Western politicians go fawning to their Saudi masters.

We have lost all sense of propriety, it seems. We have also got into thinking that the needs of business and commerce rule the roost. This is total and utter nonsense of course. No country can be run correctly with only the needs of business and commerce in mind. There is far more to politics than that.

I am glad I have found my way to your blog, Sir Henry.

By the way, it would appear that it was no good thing to remove Saddam. At least he was able to control his people, even if he could keep them under control only by the use of brute force. Now people are being killed everyday and they are not even being controlled; on the contrary, they are running amok! In getting rid of Saddam, we have foolishly upset the balance of power between Iraq and Iran, and in so doing, we have empowered and emboldened the Iranians! As a result, that country is going to be our next headache!

4:27 PM  
Blogger R. Sherman said...

Sir,

Very interesting post. I was always wary of the fight in Iraq. It seemed clear that Saddam was indifferent to Islam but rather had a soul steeled by Realpolitik.

Unfortunately, no one will buy your ideas, because there are those who wish to ignore moral arguments when it suits, but hide in the skirts of the righteous, when that is necessary.

6:06 PM  
Blogger Spanish diplomat said...

Sir Henry,
Thank you for your reply.

I was just joking with your name. We too see Britain as a friend today, and there is, certainly, no ill-feeling at all.

By the way, I am a diplomat and I happen to be Andalusian, I come from Southern Spain, so the word Reconquista does have a lot of ressonance to me and my fellow-citizens.

The Islam that I know come from our history (and, in my place, it not only means books of history, but names, traditions, architecture, sweets, children stories, relatives' memories in North Africa and many more things), our vicinity and, finally my personal life in some Muslim countries, both Arab and non-Arab.
Whenever I lived there I tried to get to know the local people. Officialdom is, sometimes representative, sometimes not.

WMD were believed to be in the possession of Saddam. The amount was uncertain. But even Muslim Governments and secret services did believed that. I think we were all deceipted. Of course, politicians do things for their own benefit and to promote their agendas. However, I hope you will agree with me Tony Blair is better than Jacques Chirac in this respect.

When the time came to do something about Iraq, perhaps Bush, Blair (and Aznar) committed a big mistake. But others, like Chirac, Schröder or Putin committed a political "crime" against the West and its capability to fight our enemies.

I agree with you an honest discussion about what to do now on Iraq is welcome. The Iraqi project is not working the way it should. And I wonder if it ever could.

6:16 PM  
Blogger Mark said...

Spanish Diplomat:

I await your reply to my question on my weblog. I'm sure that, as a diplomat, you will have much to say about the question I posed: Who is propping up whom?

You certainly seemed to have misunderstood the whole point of my essay.

I'm glad to see that Sir Henry did not.

6:39 PM  
Blogger Kelticman said...

Well done Sir H ,

I have no doubt that a civil war will indeed take place in Iraq as soon as we withdraw. Hopefully it will pull in all the other meglomaniacs in the region and we can let them get on with it. Sure as hell they are slowly devouring other countries in Africa , Thialand looks next etc.etc.

Europe is slowly giving up the ghost
and selling our future heritage out.
We may end up in civil strife ourselves ...wonder if they will send British troops to protect us ??
!!

12:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting article:
Here are my comments:

Your talk as if the world belongs to you.

Hate actions such as this create everlasting troubles in this world.

With this type of thinking and attitude you put all the Mulsims (moderate, extremist) in one corner.

You claim that the entire Muslim world is ruled be sharia, this is not true... the west influence is everywhere in lifestyle and governments.

The west made the big mistake of invading Iraq, this mistakes must be corrected not create more and more problems; I do not think this attitude of "deal with Islam now and live in peace ever after" will work, this small world is interlinked by marriages, communication, economics, raw materials etc… etc….and what happens in the east or the west affects everyone.

Why are you afraid of Islam so much, this religion is a mercy for all of mankind, and there is no compulsion in religion, the west should live by what it preaches i.e. freedom of choice.

Judaists started jihad with the support of the west or when they did not have other choices, the remedy for lawlessness created by the invasions of the west is Sharia.

The cold war between the West and Russian contributed greatly to the raise of Taliban’s and alqaeda.

The west invaded Somalia and left it without a leader, and it was natural for the people to choose Islam, and Sharia.

The west is doing the same now in Afghanistan and Iraq (much worst).

So you are responsible for all the death and destructions now taking place in Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia.

The way out is to admit the failures of the past and start talking seriously with moderate Muslims now instead of this hate policy which will bring only destruction to the human race.

11:24 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

..
Of course it's moot now but...

absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
admire brutal dictators


absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
mourn evil tyrants...
..

4:10 PM  
Blogger Movies Gallery 2011 said...

Nice post. It was very interesting and meaningful. Keep posting. I bookmarked it.
Angry birds clone| Groupon Clone| Groupon Clone Script| groupon clone|

5:47 AM  
Blogger best penis enlargement pills said...

penis enlargement, penis enlargement pills, male enhancement, male enhancement pills

Penis enlargement pills have been proven is the best way to make the penis bigger and effective to increase men’s sexual performance. vimax pills, vigrx plus, prosolution pills, maleextra

4:07 PM  
Blogger hibeyond said...

black boots

Chocolate boots

sand boots

Chestnut boots

gray boots

pink boots

grey boots

pink boots

5:49 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home