Comments (64)

MNPundit wrote on February 2, 2007 11:13 AM:

I am amazed the Bushies released this at all.

trifecta wrote on February 2, 2007 11:14 AM:

In the light of this, I think perhaps the Senate should reconsider the wording of their resolutions. Another bit of confirmation that we are just heading faster into the abyss should give them pause on pussyfooting with their language and their actions.

Dungheap wrote on February 2, 2007 11:15 AM:

What does "hard pressed" mean? They go to great lengths to describe what their judgments mean and then don't use them.

Even if violence is dimished, Iraqi leaders will be "hard pressed" to achieve a political solution.

The Iraqi Security Forces will be "hard pressed" to step up their responsibilities in the next 12-18 months, and particularly to operate against Shia militas.

That's helpful.

hmbnancy wrote on February 2, 2007 11:21 AM:

I am not sure of who the wise person was that wrote this but it is certainly applicable to our leader and his believers-

"I saw a light at the end of the tunnel, but it was the train."

TheraP wrote on February 2, 2007 11:29 AM:

This is the equivalent of "War of the Roses" (the film) destroying not just the house, but the whole block!

This is a "divorce" with no prospect of reconciliation for generations. (if ever!)

Legalize wrote on February 2, 2007 12:01 PM:

"In the light of this, I think perhaps the Senate should reconsider the wording of their resolutions. Another bit of confirmation that we are just heading faster into the abyss should give them pause on pussyfooting with their language and their actions."

I agree entirely. What can the Congress POSSIBLY be afraid of at this point? What more confirmation do they need?

Ben Bochner wrote on February 2, 2007 12:06 PM:

You say the classified parts are probably even worse. Do Senators have access to the classified version? Or do they make their judgements based on the unclassified one?

mr. irony wrote on February 2, 2007 12:07 PM:

mnpundit: I am amazed the Bushies released this at all.

the dead enders only weapon at this point is...

denial.

bush's base will simply deny the reports existance...

Randy wrote on February 2, 2007 12:11 PM:

Ben: Yes, (some) senators have access to the classified versions. I think the members of the Intelligence Committee have the necessary clearances to see intelligence, in order to perform their oversight responsibilities.

JohnN wrote on February 2, 2007 12:16 PM:

A quick read doesn't show me anything about the surge. It does say that quick withdrawl will make things even worse.

I'm sure THAT is what will be all over the news media: "IC rejects pullout; Dems wrong again."

ebw wrote on February 2, 2007 12:23 PM:

The corrupt Bush regime habitually releases "unpleasant" news on Friday-- and, it is typical of their cynicism that this NIE is released just prior to "Superbowl Sunday" (i.e. when the fewest possible people will be paying attention).

Not only should Congress refuse to fund this illegal and immoral war in Iraq-- but, impeachment proceedings should commence in order to rid ourselves of the corrosive impact of the bloody traitors: Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rice and Gonzales.

Until we put these neo-con arm-chair chicken-hawks out-of-our-misery, then we are condemned to be led like lambs to the slaughter in their upcoming crime: The War on Iran.

dc wrote on February 2, 2007 12:47 PM:

It's kind of hard chrerry-picking in the dead of winter.

JohnNordin wrote on February 2, 2007 12:47 PM:

Once again the Dems will cave before the fight.

Hillary, running for president of another country says:

"U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal: We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons," the Democrat told a crowd of Israel supporters. "In dealing with this threat ... no option can be taken off the table."

So, she thinks war with Iran is ok. Disgusting.

db wrote on February 2, 2007 12:52 PM:

What does "hard pressed" mean?

It means it ain't gonna happen.

David Shannon wrote on February 2, 2007 12:54 PM:

The redacted NIE is interesting for what it does not say.
– It does not say that an increase or surge in troops is one of the possible “developments [that] could reverse the negative trends” in Iraq.
– It does not say that slow or phased withdrawal of troops would worsen the sectarian violence.

What it does say — very clearly — is that “rapid withdrawal” of troops during the term of the estimate (12 to 18 months) would cause problems. It gives no clue regarding what the intelligence community thinks about slower, phased withdrawal or redeployment. Maybe that’s in the unredacted version.

cervantes wrote on February 2, 2007 12:58 PM:

Yup, I'd say that's a pretty fair summary. If anybody cares, I have a more detailed discussion, click the homepage.

illlich wrote on February 2, 2007 1:02 PM:

the situation in Iraq is more complicated and f**ked up than most people can imagine. too many of the talking heads on radio and tv (and the local bar), have simplified it to the point of inanity. the main reason it IS so f**ked up is because idiots like wolfowitz simplified it from the very beginning

db wrote on February 2, 2007 1:08 PM:

Thanks, cervantes. Your analysis was sharper, i thought.

r€nato wrote on February 2, 2007 1:09 PM:

there can never be resolution to the violence in Iraq so long as there are a significant number of people who feel they have more to gain from armed conflict and guerrilla warfare, than through negotiation and politics.

The Serbian conflict was brought to resolution because Serbia was much easier to subdue.

In Iraq, you have a country (or a significant portion of it) up for grabs. As well as the oil riches.

There is no way this conflict won't be resolved without lots more violence. So much for the neo-cons' theory of 'creative destruction'; kind of like deciding that I might get a better running car if I throw sand in the crankcase and see what happens.

Hank Kalet wrote on February 2, 2007 1:11 PM:

This very short summary is a convoluted mess -- like Iraq -- making it seem as if it is anti-surge, but also stating explicitly that American tropps should stay in Iraq to prevent a deeper descent into the kind of chaos the report says is inevitable. Basically, it is a useless document as released and those of us who want this tragic and deadly foreign policy blunder to end must distance ourselves from the NIE.

ND wrote on February 2, 2007 1:37 PM:

It will only take one of several possible events to blow this civil war to another level - a level which would not only eliminate any hope for the surge plan, but also draw-in Iraq's neighbors. For instance, if the milita near Najaf had succeeded in killing Sistani (which was the plan - and they had the forces to pull it off), the resulting backlash would have made the bombing of the Gold Dome look like a frat party. That disaster was only narrowly averted.

Since the surge is going to happen, we better be praying for a whole lot of good luck, seamless leadership, flawless execution and fundamental shift in Iraqi behavior (for the first time on all counts). Without it, we will have carnage on a scale that makes the current situation seem tame. This NIE paints as positive picture as one can right now. I'd like an evaluation of the surge plan by the same folks please.

Diane wrote on February 2, 2007 1:37 PM:

So, she thinks war with Iran is ok. Disgusting.

I read the article in today's NY Times and thought, I was on the fence about supporting her and now I will definitely not. What a panderer. Disgusting is precisely the right word.

Long Memory wrote on February 2, 2007 1:41 PM:

Whoever wrote that NIE doesn't support the troops, I guess. But the Bushies will never let the facts stand in the way of their story.

bunny99 wrote on February 2, 2007 2:02 PM:

If Hilary gets elected, it will be the death of the Democratic party. I wasn't thrilled with her before, but now, fagedaboutit. She's too
pro free-trade, rather than fair trade, and too pro Israel, rather than a fair hand. She's rolling in dough though, a big problem.

Curt wrote on February 2, 2007 2:09 PM:

Well, at least we know why the report was delayed for so long: The White House wanted to inject some fairy tale pablum in this strong medicine. The indications of this are in the contradictory nature of the NIE's conclusions ("Uh... yeah, man... we can't find any actual proof that Syria and Iran are destablizing Iraq - but they're bad, man - baaaad!")

There is one benefit to the Bush Administration: As long as we must wring our hands over what to do in Iraq, we'll be too busy to question why Bush and the Neo-Con Mafia started this ugly, deceitful war in the first place.

Dennis wrote on February 2, 2007 2:29 PM:

Given the severity of what we are "allowed" to see of the NIE, we really need to worry about what it is that we do not see!

The question is, will Congress show some spind and put its foot down or will it continue to play politics with the lives of American soldiers? If so, then Congress is no better than Bush.

You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

Frederick wrote on February 2, 2007 3:50 PM:

With the Libby trial going south, and the war a lost
cause, let the impeachments begin, we've waited long enough.

ck wrote on February 2, 2007 4:19 PM:

FYI, the ever-reliable Jonathan Landay and Warren Strobel have an article for McClatchy on U.S. rhetoric on Iran, the Iraq NIE, etc.: http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/16609594.htm

Pompano Pete wrote on February 2, 2007 5:03 PM:

Hilary was never my top choice for the Dem nomination, but she is rapidly slipping to the point where I will begin actively opposing her nomination. Would losing the NH primary seriously harm her chances??

tombesh wrote on February 2, 2007 5:36 PM:

NPR coverage this afternoon seemed tilted toward the angle that since the NIE warns against quick withdrawal, the report is bad for Democrats and good for Bush.

MNPundits wrote on February 2, 2007 5:38 PM:

"So, she thinks war with Iran is ok. Disgusting."

In the abstract, war with Iran IS okay. In the real world it would be a horrible mistake that will hurt us as badly as the Iranians.

Mooser wrote on February 2, 2007 5:59 PM:

If we're going to war, we'll have to raise the taxes!

db wrote on February 2, 2007 6:22 PM:

"So, she thinks war with Iran is ok. Disgusting."

Actually, she likely realizes how stupid it is to rattle sabers at Iran at the moment. She's merely bowing to her masters, the good folks at AIPAC. Israel has more clout in electing the US president than any American voter ever will. Just ask that liberal hawk John Edwards.

Likud!

balmy wrote on February 2, 2007 6:52 PM:

Remarkable how those same people who vigorously discredit past NIEs (remember WMDs?) are so quick to line up behind this one. Not surprising, though when considering how bereft most liberals are of any intellectual integrity.

SeeDee wrote on February 3, 2007 12:15 AM:

I've grown weary in the extreme of that favorite of neocons (and many moderates and libs): "But we can't just leave immediately...Iraq would descend into chaos."

To which I always mutter to myself, "What? Descend into chaos?? What the hell is the present state of affairs in Iraq?"

Given the fanaticism, the centuries-old hatreds (theology-based and otherwise), the endless tribal blood feuds, and customs of the entire region, generally, regardless of WHEN WE LEAVE, sooner or later, a period of savagery will continue to fester in Iraq until another dictator appears on the scene with enough political skill to grasp the reins of power.

And, in the long run, neither Iran nor any other regional power has the ability to make any more progress troward 'stability' than the U.S. has shown.

Get our troops OUT ,NOW.

Mya wrote on February 3, 2007 12:48 PM:

Grear site!

stepnw1f wrote on February 3, 2007 1:54 PM:

I say we tax all Bush supporters to pay off the debt for this war and with that tax we provide REAL Veteran's benifits to our men and women presently fighting in Iraq, since these so-called supporters never had the stomach to really support their own war of choice.

How many billions have the GOP and Military Industrial Complex made from this war anyways? Disgusting....

Sydney wrote on February 3, 2007 4:41 PM:

Howdy Folks. I was wondering if anyone had any details on the Eastern re-union that is being held in Moncton in 2007. Cheers, Dan

Dr. Smith wrote on February 3, 2007 5:29 PM:

As we know, everybody writes with an agenda – the purpose of writing to express something in the form of good rhetoric (aka an agenda). This is only a bad thing when information is over simplified to the point where people can be mislead. This article is an example of that bad rhetoric.

(Paragraph 1) The actual report says “Unless efforts to reverse these conditions show measurable progress during the term of this Estimate, the coming 12 to 18 months, we assess that the overall security situation will continue to deteriorate at rates comparable to the latter part of 2006.” Is this what the authors means by grim? Translated – if we lose, they win. Game over.

(P2) The actual passage is “Many Sunni Arabs remain unwilling to accept their minority status, believe the central government is illegitimate and incompetent, and are convinced that Shia dominance will increase Iranian influence over Iraq, in ways that erode the state’s Arab character and increase Sunni repression.” Two points. Do you see the primary word the author left out in order to give his misplaced argument more weight? Yep, the simple word “many.” By leaving “many” out the author misleads readers into believing that ALL Sunni believe this, which is not the case.

(P3) His logical escapes me with any degree of certainty, but I think the author is trying to use contradiction as a form of argument. But this rhetorical cleverness inaccurate and misplaced. The summary (e.g. ... even if violence ....) is an acknowledgement that sustained political reconciliation will take longer than 12-18 months. Nothing more or less. On the other hand, the first part is a recommendation of what addition conditions need to occur that would HELP achieve long term victory. Nobody of any credentials has stated that this condition could not occur. But the bigger point is that the author is conflating two very different points in order to promote a “grimness.” Again, why?

(P4) I should leave this as an exercise for you, but given that I have really grown board of this author, I will address it now in order to move on in life. Yes, the summary says that, in that it Iran is not a MAJOR driver. But what does the next sentence say? Ding, ding, ding (that was the Jeopardy tune). It says, “Nonetheless, Iranian lethal support for select groups of Iraqi Shia militants clearly intensifies the conflict in Iraq.” Iran is acting as a catalyst (minor driver by nature) for the intensity of the activities. Taking Iran out of the picture, should reduce the intensity of the violence, which in turn could lead to condition conducive toward improvement.

(P5) You can always tell a person who doesn’t want to win or has a very weak mind – they use the argument that the good stuff was classified. When one’s argument has been as distorted and misplaced as this one, I would use it to.

Dr. Smith

Dr. Smith wrote on February 3, 2007 5:30 PM:

As we know, everybody writes with an agenda – the purpose of writing to express something in the form of good rhetoric (aka an agenda). This is only a bad thing when information is over simplified to the point where people can be mislead. This article is an example of that bad rhetoric.

(Paragraph 1) The actual report says “Unless efforts to reverse these conditions show measurable progress during the term of this Estimate, the coming 12 to 18 months, we assess that the overall security situation will continue to deteriorate at rates comparable to the latter part of 2006.” Is this what the authors means by grim? Translated – if we lose, they win. Game over.

(P2) The actual passage is “Many Sunni Arabs remain unwilling to accept their minority status, believe the central government is illegitimate and incompetent, and are convinced that Shia dominance will increase Iranian influence over Iraq, in ways that erode the state’s Arab character and increase Sunni repression.” Two points. Do you see the primary word the author left out in order to give his misplaced argument more weight? Yep, the simple word “many.” By leaving “many” out the author misleads readers into believing that ALL Sunni believe this, which is not the case.

(P3) His logical escapes me with any degree of certainty, but I think the author is trying to use contradiction as a form of argument. But this rhetorical cleverness inaccurate and misplaced. The summary (e.g. ... even if violence ....) is an acknowledgement that sustained political reconciliation will take longer than 12-18 months. Nothing more or less. On the other hand, the first part is a recommendation of what addition conditions need to occur that would HELP achieve long term victory. Nobody of any credentials has stated that this condition could not occur. But the bigger point is that the author is conflating two very different points in order to promote a “grimness.” Again, why?

(P4) I should leave this as an exercise for you, but given that I have really grown board of this author, I will address it now in order to move on in life. Yes, the summary says that, in that it Iran is not a MAJOR driver. But what does the next sentence say? Ding, ding, ding (that was the Jeopardy tune). It says, “Nonetheless, Iranian lethal support for select groups of Iraqi Shia militants clearly intensifies the conflict in Iraq.” Iran is acting as a catalyst (minor driver by nature) for the intensity of the activities. Taking Iran out of the picture, should reduce the intensity of the violence, which in turn could lead to condition conducive toward improvement.

(P5) You can always tell a person who doesn’t want to win or has a very weak mind – they use the argument that the good stuff was classified. When one’s argument has been as distorted and misplaced as this one, I would use it to.

Dr. Smith

Dr. Smith wrote on February 3, 2007 5:31 PM:

As we know, everybody writes with an agenda – the purpose of writing to express something in the form of good rhetoric (aka an agenda). This is only a bad thing when information is over simplified to the point where people can be mislead. This article is an example of that bad rhetoric.

(Paragraph 1) The actual report says “Unless efforts to reverse these conditions show measurable progress during the term of this Estimate, the coming 12 to 18 months, we assess that the overall security situation will continue to deteriorate at rates comparable to the latter part of 2006.” Is this what the authors means by grim? Translated – if we lose, they win. Game over.

(P2) The actual passage is “Many Sunni Arabs remain unwilling to accept their minority status, believe the central government is illegitimate and incompetent, and are convinced that Shia dominance will increase Iranian influence over Iraq, in ways that erode the state’s Arab character and increase Sunni repression.” Two points. Do you see the primary word the author left out in order to give his misplaced argument more weight? Yep, the simple word “many.” By leaving “many” out the author misleads readers into believing that ALL Sunni believe this, which is not the case.

(P3) His logical escapes me with any degree of certainty, but I think the author is trying to use contradiction as a form of argument. But this rhetorical cleverness inaccurate and misplaced. The summary (e.g. ... even if violence ....) is an acknowledgement that sustained political reconciliation will take longer than 12-18 months. Nothing more or less. On the other hand, the first part is a recommendation of what addition conditions need to occur that would HELP achieve long term victory. Nobody of any credentials has stated that this condition could not occur. But the bigger point is that the author is conflating two very different points in order to promote a “grimness.” Again, why?

(P4) I should leave this as an exercise for you, but given that I have really grown board of this author, I will address it now in order to move on in life. Yes, the summary says that, in that it Iran is not a MAJOR driver. But what does the next sentence say? Ding, ding, ding (that was the Jeopardy tune). It says, “Nonetheless, Iranian lethal support for select groups of Iraqi Shia militants clearly intensifies the conflict in Iraq.” Iran is acting as a catalyst (minor driver by nature) for the intensity of the activities. Taking Iran out of the picture, should reduce the intensity of the violence, which in turn could lead to condition conducive toward improvement.

(P5) You can always tell a person who doesn’t want to win or has a very weak mind – they use the argument that the good stuff was classified. When one’s argument has been as distorted and misplaced as this one, I would use it to.

Dr. Smith

rahvfqmgi cbfvdoisx wrote on May 21, 2007 10:12 AM:

nfcj qzbaynjkf wkpbtqu uisfx twjzcqu sbhwciaz renh

rahvfqmgi cbfvdoisx wrote on May 21, 2007 10:13 AM:

nfcj qzbaynjkf wkpbtqu uisfx twjzcqu sbhwciaz renh

nmoybdj hsbmyruwx wrote on May 21, 2007 10:14 AM:

slxa ewujhdn nhda mrpdie hrjx tbpmozcy kaqm http://www.tdqrlw.pghfxc.com

dnhgfl rqaijyt wrote on May 21, 2007 10:14 AM:

lqazomc dlvmntoug yusemivh rldf hfgj ipduoc zdgwcy jawf nlkgm

dubosciqz uvgs wrote on May 21, 2007 10:15 AM:

lmydxou vafk lpaezxcft vqruxk fkuevhmpw gjhkyt jrupzahs [URL=http://www.jvdm.pwvnyrkj.com]tamvke bicafqpno[/URL]

adult dvds wrote on June 11, 2007 11:17 AM:

adult dvds

porn videos wrote on June 11, 2007 12:00 PM:

porn videos

porn videos wrote on June 11, 2007 1:01 PM:

porn videos

porn dvds wrote on June 15, 2007 4:56 PM:

porn dvds

porn dvds wrote on June 15, 2007 5:16 PM:

porn dvds

free live webcams wrote on June 16, 2007 10:36 PM:

free live webcams

hot babes wrote on June 17, 2007 12:20 PM:

hot babes

college girls video wrote on June 17, 2007 12:24 PM:

college girls video

adult movies wrote on June 18, 2007 11:43 AM:

adult movies

free sex wrote on June 18, 2007 12:44 PM:

free sex

Britney wrote on July 12, 2007 9:18 AM:

britney spear 135,191.0 /day
britney picture spear 10,930.1 /day
britney 7,706.8 /day
britney pantyless spear 7,675.6 /day
britney hilton paris spear 3,492.6 /day
britney car hilton paris picture spear 2,798.2 /day
britney naked spear 2,671.6 /day
britney no pantie spear 2,633.6 /day
britney pussy spear 2,610.5 /day
britney pantyless pic spear 2,355.8 /day
britney nude spear 2,336.2 /day
britney pantyless photo spear 2,082.5 /day
britney hilton paris picture spear 1,863.7 /day
britney skye 1,569.4 /day
britney no spear underwear 1,553.8 /day
britney crotch shot spear 1,487.9 /day
britney crotch spear 1,420.3 /day
britney sex spear tape 1,409.4 /day
britney pantyless photo spear uncensored 1,336.0 /day
britney spear video 1,209.6 /day
britney photo spear 1,206.9 /day
britney spear upskirt 1,190.5 /day
britney download spear 1,052.0 /day
britney free pantyless pic spear 1,040.2 /day
britney pantie spear 1,026.1 /day
britney spear vagina 970.3 /day
britney car hilton paris picture spear uncensored 917.7 /day
britney pic spear 897.3 /day
britney pic sexiest spear 832.2 /day
britney new pantyless photo spear uncensored 708.7 /day
britney nude photo spear 669.6 /day
britney paris 654.1 /day
britney spear underwear 620.3 /day
britney hilton paris photo spear

Veronica Zemanova wrote on July 13, 2007 5:13 AM:

veronica zemanova 1,202.2 /day
sample video of veronica zemanova 88.0 /day
veronica zemanova video 73.4 /day
veronica zemanova gallery 27.5 /day
veronica zemanova nude 23.7 /day
veronica zemanova pic 21.2 /day
veronica zemanova video clip 15.3 /day
free veronica zemanova video 15.1 /day
veronica zemanova clip 11.1 /day
free picture of veronica zemanova 10.4 /day
veronica zemanova hardcore 9.2 /day
veronica zemanova movie 8.6 /day
free veronica zemanova pic 7.4 /day
veronica zemanova twistys 7.3 /day
veronica zemanova photo gallery 7.2 /day
veronica zemanova wallpaper 7.2 /day
veronica zemanova photo 6.3 /day
veronica zemanova picture 5.7 /day
veronica zemanova sex 5.6 /day
veronica zemanova forum 5.3 /day
actiongirls veronica zemanova 5.1 /day
veronica zemanova lesbian 4.1 /day
veronica zemanova porn 3.9 /day
veronica zemanova fuck 3.7 /day
veronica zemanova free 3.5 /day
veronica zemanova lingerie 3.3 /day
torrent veronica zemanova 3.2 /day
veronica zemanova fucking 3.0 /day
veronica zemanova action girl 2.8 /day
veronica zemanova pussy 2.7 /day
veronica zemanova blog 2.6 /day
veronica zemanova dvd 2.6 /day
veronica zemanova image 2.5 /day
veronica zemanova at freeones 2.4 /day
veronica zemanova action 2.3 /day
veronica zemanova aria giovanni 2.3 /day
veronica zemanova ass 2.2 /day
veronica zemanova dildo 2.0 /day
veronica zemanova mpeg 2.0 /day
veronica zemanova naked 2.0 /day
new veronica zemanova 1.9 /day
veronica zemanova vids 1.9 /day
veronica zemanova and set 1.8 /day
veronica zemanova tit 1.8 /day
veronica zemanova free movie 1.7 /day
veronica zemanova strip 1.7 /day
veronica zemanova hard 1.6 /day
veronica zemanova bomis 1.6 /day
veronica zemanova nude pic 1.5 /day
veronica zemanova web site 1.5 /day
collection nude photo veronica zemanova 1.4 /day
veronica zemanova fucked 1.4 /day
video de veronica zemanova 1.3 /day
veronica zemanova and boy 1.3 /day
veronica zemanova sexy 1.3 /day
porn star veronica zemanova 1.2 /day
veronica zemanova free clip 1.2 /day
veronica zemanova nude video 1.2 /day
dance lap veronica zemanova 1.1 /day
adele stephens veronica zemanova 1.1 /day
veronica zemanova anal 1.1 /day
veronica zemanova on the boat 1.1 /day
collection gallery veronica zemanova 1.0 /day
in rubbed spy veronica who zemanova 1.0 /day
veronica woman wonder zemanova 1.0 /day
veronica zemanova shower 0.9 /day
veronica zemanova free naked video 0.9 /day
veronica zemanova with gun 0.9 /day
veronica zemanova hand puppet video 0.9 /day
veronica zemanova having sex 0.9 /day
veronica zemanova official site 0.9 /day
veronica workout zemanova 0.9 /day
veronica zemanova hand puppet 0.9 /day
video gratis de veronica zemanova 0.8 /day
veronica zemanova xxx

Kyla Cole wrote on July 13, 2007 6:00 AM:

kyla cole 974.1 /day kyla cole video 27.7 /day kyla cole lesbian 24.1 /day kyla cole free 18.2 /day kyla cole gallery 16.6 /day kyla cole pic 1
photo of kyla cole 12.4 /day kyla cole nude 10.6 /day free kyla cole video 10.2 /day cole kyla pic tied up 8.9 /day cole forum kyla 7.4 /day kyla cole free pic 5.0 /day kyla cole clip 4.7 /day kyla cole wallpaper 4.4 / kyla cole picture 4.0 /day twistys kyla cole 3.9 /day kyla cole pussy 3.
kyla cole freeones 3.6 /day kyla cole sex 3.4 /day kyla cole hardcore
kyla cole at the beach 2.7 /day kyla cole movie 2.6 /day kyla cole tied kyla cole bondage 2.4 /day kyla cole penthouse 2.3 /day kyla cole bl
cole kyla nude union 2.2 /day porn 2.2 /day kyla cole site 2.1 /day
kyla cole dildo 1.9 /day kyla cole fuck 1.8 /day kyla cole image 1.8 /day torrent kyla cole 1.5 /day kyla cole hot 1.4 /day kyla cole fucking 1.3
kyla cole nude pic 1.3 /day kyla cole porn star 1.2 /day kyla cole nude free picture 1.2 /day
kyla cole fucked 1.2 /day
kyla cole naked 1.2 /day
kyla cole wet 1.2 /day
kyla cole new 1.1 /day
kyla cole tied up 1.1 /day
kyla cole video clip 1.0 /day
kyla cole and friends 1.0 /day
cole kyla rapidshare 0.9 /day
kyla cole mpeg 0.9 /day
tera patrick kyla cole 0.9 /day
air clog cole haan kyla 0.8 /day
black cole hose kyla pantie 0.8 /day
cole index jpg kyla 0.8 /day
cole kyla w4b

Britney wrote on August 1, 2007 1:00 PM:

britney spear 135,191.0 /day
britney picture spear 10,930.1 /day
britney 7,706.8 /day
britney pantyless spear 7,675.6 /day
britney hilton paris spear 3,492.6 /day
britney car hilton paris picture spear 2,798.2 /day
britney naked spear 2,671.6 /day
britney no pantie spear 2,633.6 /day
britney pussy spear 2,610.5 /day
britney pantyless pic spear 2,355.8 /day
britney nude spear 2,336.2 /day
britney pantyless photo spear 2,082.5 /day
britney hilton paris picture spear 1,863.7 /day
britney skye 1,569.4 /day
britney no spear underwear 1,553.8 /day
britney crotch shot spear 1,487.9 /day
britney crotch spear 1,420.3 /day
britney sex spear tape 1,409.4 /day
britney pantyless photo spear uncensored 1,336.0 /day
britney spear video 1,209.6 /day
britney photo spear 1,206.9 /day
britney spear upskirt 1,190.5 /day
britney download spear 1,052.0 /day
britney free pantyless pic spear 1,040.2 /day
britney pantie spear 1,026.1 /day
britney spear vagina 970.3 /day
britney car hilton paris picture spear uncensored 917.7 /day
britney pic spear 897.3 /day
britney pic sexiest spear 832.2 /day
britney new pantyless photo spear uncensored 708.7 /day
britney nude photo spear 669.6 /day
britney paris 654.1 /day
britney spear underwear 620.3 /day
britney hilton paris photo spear

Roxy Carter wrote on August 1, 2007 1:26 PM:

Roxy Carter

Terri Summers wrote on August 1, 2007 2:29 PM:

terri summers 130.8 /day
terri summers pic 9.1 /day
terri summers video 7.5 /day
free pic terri summers 3.5 /day
terri summers torrent 2.5 /day
terri summers hardcore 2.3 /day
terri summers anal 2.0 /day
terri summers gallery 1.8 /day
in six summer terri 1.7 /day
rapidshare summer terri 1.6 /day
blog summer terri 1.5 /day
terri summers forum 1.5 /day
terri summers movie 1.4 /day
terri summers nude 1.4 /day
terri summers clip 1.4 /day
terri summers at freeones 1.1 /day
porn star terri summers 1.1 /day
terri summers lesbian 1.0 /day
rapidshare.com summer terri 1.0 /day
terri summers free clip 0.9 /day
six summer terri 0.9 /day
terri summers free movie 0.8 /day
free terri summers video 0.8 /day
summer terri thread

Susana Spears wrote on August 1, 2007 3:13 PM:

susana spears 430.4 /day
susana spears video 15.0 /day
susana spears hardcore 6.1 /day
susana spears movie 6.0 /day
susana spears pic 3.6 /day
susana spears nude 3.5 /day
susana spears picture 3.1 /day
susana spears free movie 2.6 /day
susana spears viewpornstars 2.6 /day
blog spear susana 2.4 /day
susana spears gallery 2.3 /day
susana spears forum 2.1 /day
free spear susana video 2.0 /day
susana spears clip 1.8 /day
eurobabeindex spear susana 1.6 /day
actiongirls spear susana 1.5 /day
susana spears lesbian 1.5 /day
susana spears sex 1.5 /day
spear spear susana susana 1.5 /day
susana spears fucking 1.4 /day
susana spears twistys 1.4 /day
susana spears pussy 1.4 /day
susana spears freeones 1.3 /day
susana spears ass 1.2 /day
susana spears workout 1.2 /day
susana spears video clip 1.2 /day
susana spears dvd 1.1 /day
susana spears action 1.0 /day
of spears susana wallpaper 1.0 /day
andrea spear susana torres 1.0 /day
ass new photo spear susana 1.0 /day
susana spears foto 0.9 /day
susana spears dildo 0.9 /day
susana spears fuck 0.9 /day
ass great spear susana 0.9 /day
susana spears photo 0.9 /day
susana spears action girl

vthdke yukhetjzm wrote on August 27, 2007 7:19 AM:

vnszwjg cnkgor hizmudgf zolx eljoyrpzg nuomlzdt maedpjlh