FACT CHECK: Debunking Administration Talking Points on Warrantless Spying
FACT CHECK: Debunking Administration Talking Points on Warrantless Spying
Since President Bush’s warrantless domestic spying program was made public, White House officials have justified their violation of federal FISA law by arguing that the program had made our country safer. A report in this morning’s New York Times may help put this to rest. Below, we lay out the spin and provide the facts:
SPIN – NSA SPYING STOPPED POSSIBLE TERRORIST ATTACKS IN THE UNITED STATES: “The activities I have authorized make it more likely that killers like these 9/11 hijackers will be identified and located in time. And the activities conducted under this authorization have helped detect and prevent possible terrorist attacks in the United States and abroad.†[President Bush, 12/17/05]
FACT – PROGRAM HAS UNCOVERED “NO IMMINENT PLOTS…INSIDE THE UNITED STATESâ€: “The law enforcement and counterterrorism officials said the program had uncovered no active Qaeda networks inside the United States planning attacks. ‘There were no imminent plots – not inside the United States,’ the former F.B.I. official said.†[New York Times, 1/17/06]
SPIN – PROGRAM ONLY SPIES ON THOSE WITH CLEAR LINKS TO AL QAEDA: “Another very important point to remember is that we have to have a reasonable basis to conclude that one party to the communication is a member of al Qaeda, affiliated with al Qaeda, or a member of an organization affiliated with al Qaeda, or working in support of al Qaeda.†[Attorney General Gonzales, 12/19/05]
FACT – INFORMATION GIVEN TO FBI OFTEN “NEVER LED TO ANYTHINGâ€: “F.B.I. field agents, who were not told of the domestic surveillance programs, complained that they often were given no information about why names or numbers had come under suspicion. A former senior prosecutor who was familiar with the eavesdropping programs said intelligence officials turning over the tips ‘would always say that we had information whose source we can’t share, but it indicates that this person has been communicating with a suspected Qaeda operative.’ He said, ‘I would always wonder, what does “suspected†mean?’ ‘The information was so thin,’ he said, ‘and the connections were so remote, that they never led to anything, and I never heard any follow-up.’†[New York Times, 1/17/06]
SPIN – PROGRAM IS TARGETED AND “VERY LIMITED IN NATURE”: “It is very limited in nature.” [Scott McClellan, 1/3/06]
FACT –PROGRAM HAD FBI CHASING “THOUSANDS OF TIPS A MONTHâ€: “In the anxious months after the Sept. 11 attacks, the National Security Agency began sending a steady stream of telephone numbers, e-mail addresses and names to the F.B.I. in search of terrorists. The stream soon became a flood, requiring hundreds of agents to check out thousands of tips a month. […] ‘We’d chase a number, find it’s a schoolteacher with no indication they’ve ever been involved in international terrorism – case closed,’ said one former F.B.I. official, who was aware of the program and the data it generated for the bureau. ‘After you get a thousand numbers and not one is turning up anything, you get some frustration.’†[New York Times, 1/17/06]
SPIN – PROGRAM STOPPED FERTILIZER BOMB PLOT: “What appeared to be another Qaeda plot, involving fertilizer bomb attacks on British pubs and train stations, was exposed last year in part through the program, the officials said.†[New York Times, 12/16/05]
FACT – FBI OFFICIALS QUESTION THIS ASSERTION: “But, along with several British counterterrorism officials, some of the officials questioned assertions by the Bush administration that the program was the key to uncovering a plot to detonate fertilizer bombs in London in 2004.†[New York Times, 1/17/06]
SPIN – PROGRAM STOPPED BROOKLYN BRIDGE PLOT: “Several officials said the eavesdropping program had helped uncover a plot by Iyman Faris, an Ohio trucker and naturalized citizen who pleaded guilty in 2003 to supporting Al Qaeda by planning to bring down the Brooklyn Bridge with blowtorches.†[New York Times, 12/16/05]
FACT – INVESTIGATORS LEARNED OF PLOT “THROUGH…OTHER MEANSâ€: “The F.B.I. and other law enforcement officials also expressed doubts about the importance of the program’s role in another case named by administration officials as a success in the fight against terrorism, an aborted scheme to topple the Brooklyn Bridge with a blow torch. Some officials said that in both cases, they had already learned of the plans through interrogation of prisoners or other means.†[New York Times, 1/17/06]
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Got to give the wingers credit for tenacity- once they latch on to a BS talking point, they just don’t let go. Pit bull-like.
January 17th, 2006 at 2:18 pmTJM,
Here is some more info on the illegal wiretaps.
You will notice another New York Times piece to debunk the administration.
I have a feeling that the New York Times hasn’t told us all they know and are intentionally debunking the Bushies, because they know this is a serious issue.
January 17th, 2006 at 2:26 pmThe radical-right and the current extremist administration talking heads won’t let a little thing like “facts” get in the way of their spin.
From their point of view: anyone who disagrees in any way, shape or form with is MUST be anti-American, and should be denounced as a traitor.
January 17th, 2006 at 2:30 pmPresident Bush had NO legitimate reasons to bypass the FISA Court and NOT get warrants to eavesdrop on Americans! He did NOT want any oversight of what he was doing, so it implies nefarious spying on his political enemies in Congress and anti-war protestors like Cindy Sheehan! The FISA Court judges would reject that kind of spying! Bush needs to release the list of names snooped upon to Congress and if anyone on the list is not a terrorist, then George must resign or be impeached!
January 17th, 2006 at 2:36 pmIt would also be useful to have debunking on the claim the administration made in response to Gore’s speech, which was that the Clinton administration did it too. I believe this to be false, but we need to have a very public debunking of it.
January 17th, 2006 at 2:39 pmAl gore compared Bush’s wiretapping to the equally illegal and immoral COINTELPRO of J. Edgar Hoover. It was used to spy on Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and others during the civil rights movement. I remember playing in my front yard and seeing the FBI sitting in their black sedan on the corner watching me and my house.
Why?
Because of this and what followed from it in Mississippi and back in Chicago…
A Crisis of Separation – July, 1963
January 17th, 2006 at 2:42 pm#4 – Actually, Pres. Bush DOES have ‘legitimate reasons’ for bypassing the courts and for flagrantly breaking the laws and constitution: greed, oil, power. GOP.
As long as he can ignore the ‘rule of law’, he has no need to consider himself answerable to the American people. The current administration will continually flout the laws as passed by congress and signed by his predecessors, and ‘spin’ the story as required. They have no need to actually stop terrorism. In fact, if they were to stop the terrorist threat, then there would be no excuse for the usurping the power of the courts. All they have to do is (falsely) claim that they are working to make America secure, and they could shoot a child between the eyes on national television. If you dare question their actions, or try to hold them responsible for their actions, then they will say you must hate America and you are the most un-patriotic person on the face of the earth. I’m rather surprised they haven’t made the claim that God has spoken directly to Pres. Bush and told him to break any/every law in order to secure his unaccountability.
Claim: Republicans are the party of personal responsibility.
Fact: Republicans refuse to take personal responsibility for any of their actions.
January 17th, 2006 at 2:45 pmSpudge, let’s hope (I’ve written to Specter) that the hearings commence soon and the process that uncovers the extent of the program and answers the question of its legality is full and fair(and on TV). It’s not enough (although it can be fun) to speculate on what should happen at the end of that process, because the process is important.
January 17th, 2006 at 2:55 pmI’ll say this again, your reading comprehension skills are questionable based on the AG thread. The NYT is hardly a paragon of truthfulness given its recent history or have you already forgiven them for Judy Miller and the NSA story being held for more than a year just because you generally agree with them?
FACT CHECK: Debunking Administration Talking Points on Warrantless Spying…
God I love these people over there. Here is another POINT by POINT debunking of the out and out lies from the Bush administration about the laws Bush broke.
January 17th, 2006 at 3:01 pmIn short people, Clinton never spied on Americans. In fact he said you could spy on ANYONE ex…
Absolutely not. The New York Times has a lot to answer for. I don’t let them off the hook just as I don’t let corrupt Democrats off the hook. You could say that I question just about everybody’s intentions. There is a reason the NYTs decided to run with this anyways after holding onto the story for a year, which made it possible for Bush to steal the 2004 election.
Why is the NYTs debunking the administration at every turn? Pay back for Judith Miller? Don’t know that part yet.
As for my reading comprehension. No problems there. Now, if you want to debate my opinion, that is fine. But, reading in one of my favorite things in the world. I take the time to read both right wing and left wing news and I also read novels as a past time. I comprehend everything I read. Comprende?
January 17th, 2006 at 3:10 pmKenneth Bass Fmr FISA Counsel:
BASS: The fact of the matter is that the act was intentionally set up to allow N.S.A. to do data mining, as long as they weren‘t targeting specific individuals.
The issue here is that, based on what the administration has said, it sounds very much like instead of looking for phrases, they‘re looking for individuals. And that they‘ve been targeting Americans, based on evidence that they think is not sufficient to go to the FISA court. That‘s the troubling issue.
January 17th, 2006 at 3:18 pm#5 – Calguy – Is this useful? http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/20/drudge-fact-check/
January 17th, 2006 at 3:19 pmthe Bush error is almost over.
Elections of 2006 we realign congress and the Dear Leader will be impeached.
Hope they send him to the Hague for his international war crimes.
January 17th, 2006 at 3:25 pmNo,sorry you didn’t actually respond but that’s ok,you made a mistake and I can understand your reluctance to own up to it. It’s human after all.
January 17th, 2006 at 3:27 pmWTF are you talking about?
January 17th, 2006 at 3:30 pmEven the Democrats wouldnt do that. Unlike the Saudis we know how to clean our own house.
January 17th, 2006 at 3:31 pm#14 – Who can tell? One can only assume that the ‘logic train’ of the radical right-wing and their parrots was derailed due to lack of attention.
(I just had to say it! Sometimes, one must respond to immature attacks with immature attacks.)
January 17th, 2006 at 3:32 pmABC News
January 17, 2006
White House Accuses Gore of Hypocrisy
Right this very minute is when either Gore or another high ranking Democrat needs to come out and do a speech debunking this fact.
The Bushies are playing PR, using Scott McClellan. I know, I have done PR. In my industry, it was which ever company spoke to the editor last ended up with more text in the article. In Bushlandia, the last party to have a press conference gets the last say on whatever topic of the day.
The Democrats need to rebut this now.
January 17th, 2006 at 3:36 pmGee, I wonder how Clinton stopped the millennium threat without employing illegal means to do so?
January 17th, 2006 at 3:48 pmDem soldier,stop you’re killing me, that was so funny,almost as funny as spudge saying reading “in” one of my favorite things.Isn’t it exciting to have someone pay attention to you? First time?
January 17th, 2006 at 3:55 pmBTW Payson,Kevin Drum posted this story before 2 this morning,you’re slow today.
NSA said on TV early wanted “faster and lighter” trigger. “Faster” is a straw man; lighter is key: warrant-less spying could not get a warrant often EVEN after the spying as allowed. Often quoted line about “got information couldn’t have gotten any other way” is certainly true: It would have been illegal to get the info they got! No one EVER says “got specific actionable intelligence.”
And Administration has NEVER said a word about “fruit of the poisoned tree” preventing prosecution of terrorists they do catch this way … probably because they will be held indefinitely, incognito, in Cuba. . .
Somebody should ask W: “Are you crook?” for using the wiretaps. I WANT TO HEAR him say it: “I am not a crook!”
Blue State Rebel
Who needs to Impeach the Shrub; Pacific Blue States Secede!
January 17th, 2006 at 3:56 pmPresident Clinton NEVER authorized wiretaps on anyone without a warrant, so Scott McClellan is just trying to muddy the water to protect Bush his boss! Al Gore told the truth, yesterday, and that has ignited a GOP hornet nest!
January 17th, 2006 at 3:59 pmActually for maximum exposure to the American public the slowroll of this story as long as tidbits of FACT keep coming out is keeping the spinmeisters on defense so the MSM will keep the story up front. Must be hard to be an editor of a major media outlet having to decide which story to lead– Spying Scandal– Abramoff Scandal– Delay Scandal– CunningHam Scandal–Iraq Fiasco– Libby Scandal– Roves future –etc, can’t be a good time to be a wingnut mouthpiece, they actually no longer controll the story line but are reacting to it. And their reactions are becomming less and less believable everyday Faux news must be having their mouthpieces spend extra time in the cyclotron in order to wind them tight enough to get the spin out now. Hope none of them end up with a perminate case of vertigo from the spin now.
January 17th, 2006 at 4:03 pmAre you kidding me TJM? You don’t think I read because I made a typing mistake. I believe those are two different skills. Dumbass.
January 17th, 2006 at 4:11 pmSpecter needs to pursue NSA hearings aggressively, and not give Bush, Gonzo or anyone else a free pass on the full penalty of law…
http://blogdebogs.blogspot.com/2006/01/specter-of-impeachment.html
January 17th, 2006 at 4:20 pmProgress, some repub friends of mine are 1,tight lipped,2, when bush is brought up they say ‘we didn’t know’ and then ‘let’s change the subject’. The ‘That damn Clinton’ talk is gone and the ‘the’re all crooks’ is to include the dems,and soften the blow that bushe is BAD. I love telling them NOT to call me or send email as it ‘may be’ spyed on so come by and talk ‘in person’.
January 17th, 2006 at 4:20 pmLaura Bush Keeps it All in the Family…
Uh huh, well of course… what else would you expect from the dutiful first wife, huh? Dork alert? -Editor …
January 17th, 2006 at 4:36 pmHell she’s been thru tougher(for her)times with him, like when he came home drunk.
January 17th, 2006 at 4:38 pm“If unchecked, their behavior would serve as a precedent to encourage future presidents to claim these same powers, which many legal experts in both parties believe are clearly illegal.”
-Gore, talking about Gonzalez Trying to use the “they did it” defense~
January 17th, 2006 at 4:43 pmSpudge, I feel terrible, I thought only an idiot would respond to such a puerile comment (which I should never have written).
January 17th, 2006 at 5:10 pmGore is about to issue a retort to criticism from the WH
Gus offered a partial quote in #29 — here is more.
“There are two problems with the Attorney General’s effort to focus attention on the past instead of the present Administration’s behavior. First, as others have thoroughly documented, his charges are factually wrong. Both before and after the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was amended in 1995, the Clinton/Gore Administration complied fully and completely with the terms of the law.
January 17th, 2006 at 5:15 pmSecond, the Attorney General’s attempt to cite a previous administration’s activity as precedent for theirs – even though factually wrong – ironically demonstrates another reason why we must be so vigilant about their brazen disregard for the law. If unchecked, their behavior would serve as a precedent to encourage future presidents to claim these same powers, which many legal experts in both parties believe are clearly illegal.
The issue, simply put, is that for more than four years, the executive branch has been wiretapping many thousands of American citizens without warrants in direct contradiction of American law. It is clearly wrong and disrespectful to the American people to allow a close political associate of the president to be in charge of reviewing serious charges against him.
The country needs a full and independent investigation into the facts and legality of the present Administration’s program.”
#7
As long as he can ignore the ‘rule of law’, he has no need to consider himself answerable to the American people.
.
.
.
Comment by Democrat Soldier — January 17, 2006 @ 2:45 pm
Dem Soldier,
We shouldn’t be surprised. Remember this?
In the book “Bush at War,” by Bob Woodward, Bush talks about his job as “the strategic thinker” of his administration who makes provocative comments to prod his staff. Woodward then asked if Bush ever explained “what he was doing.”
“Of course not,” he said. “I’m the commander. See, I don’t need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don’t feel like I owe anybody an explanation.”
January 17th, 2006 at 5:24 pmFrom RawStory, Gore very effectively responds to the smear.
January 17th, 2006 at 5:27 pm
TJM,
Only an idiot would use a typing mistake as an attack on somebody who is posting on a political site. You’re god damn write you shouldn’t have posted it. You should of just posted “I know you are but what am I?” It holds the same weight.
January 17th, 2006 at 5:41 pmGood COmments Al, now where were you five years ago? Did you suddenly develope some stones?
Anyhow the thug sin power love to cite other wrong doings or supposed wrong doings as justification for their actions. We teach our children two wrongs do not make a right, now we know that two wrongs put you on the right side of the political spectrum.
January 17th, 2006 at 5:42 pmFrom the NYT article link
“Several of the law enforcement officials acknowledged that they might not know of arrests or intelligence activities overseas that grew out of the domestic spying program. And because the program was a closely guarded secret, its role in specific cases may have been disguised or hidden even from key investigators.”
In other words, NYT’s sources really don’t what they are talking about. Facts my ass.
January 17th, 2006 at 5:57 pmName some Swamp Rabbit. There aren’t any. Unless those people are being held against their will in Black Prisons around the world. Because we know how the Bush administration likes to trot suspected terrorists out in the public. Where are they. Show proof to the contrary.
January 17th, 2006 at 6:05 pm“There aren’t any.”
Well, how do you know? Because NYT’s sources, who acknowledged that “they might not know”, told you?
January 17th, 2006 at 6:20 pmHere are some points from Mr. Hitchens, courtesy of Huff Po. Enjoy
January 17th, 2006 at 6:34 pmhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-hitchens/what-reason-do-we-have-to_b_13985.html
Remember he was voted #5 of the World’s intellectuals top 20 by Britian’s Prospect and U.S. Foreign Policy magazine’s reader poll of 20k respondents.
A quote taken out of context here or there makes for some good disinformtion.
If you read the NYT quopte you will see that the actual investigators are not clued into any information coming out of the program that has been used effectively in the war on terror. To my reading of the selected quote it flies in the face of the Bush Admins claim that the program is good. It in no way contradicts anything that the NYT sources on the original story have said. In fact it reinforces the notion that this program is s in the black that no one, congres, or actual investigators know what information has been gathered or what information has been used.
January 17th, 2006 at 7:18 pmI liek the old answer a question with a question. The reason people do that is because they don’t have information.
January 17th, 2006 at 7:48 pmBush started spying on Americans in the beginning of 2001. This illegal spying didn’t stop 9/11, did it. What a crock of poo. The NSA collected so much information that the FBI is tripping over each other following bogus leads and missing real leads as result. This illegal spying is a time waster and dangerous to Americans
January 17th, 2006 at 8:02 pm#42, I read about the spying in early 2001 also, but I can’t remember where and I have not seen it in the MSM since. As you say, if they were illegally spying months before 9/11, that blows a hole in Cheney’s argument which was specious anyway, but this kills it.
January 17th, 2006 at 9:36 pmOur mainstream media is just as guilty as the crooks in office for pushing their agenda.
January 17th, 2006 at 10:47 pmWoodward then asked if Bush ever explained “what he was doing.â€
“Of course not,†he said. “I’m the commander. See, I don’t need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don’t feel like I owe anybody an explanation.â€
Comment by WC #32
Great quote WC,
To top this very insightful passage off- in connecting the dots to Bushiva’s megalomaniacal personality- read Andrew Sullivan’s piece about “King George” in this week’s Time magazine…
…the one with that drunken ski bum on the cover…
…and these right wing sh*t balls make fun of L’il Kim in N. Korea…
hahahaha!!!
January 18th, 2006 at 9:01 am#45
Thanks.
As for the TIME article you refer to, I saw your post about it in another thread. I will indeed check it out as time permits.
January 18th, 2006 at 9:37 amThere aren’t any.â€
Well, how do you know? Because NYT’s sources, who acknowledged that “they might not knowâ€, told you?
Comment by Swamp Rabbit — January 17, 2006 @ 6:20 pm
Because a Swamp Rabbit told us, duh.
No, really it was Rushs truth detector, however it worked in reverse, so we just pointed it at Buschco, and Waa Laaa! A lie detector!
Spasto asto fire and smoke
January 18th, 2006 at 10:16 amBush lies thats no joke
cheney the chainer
wolfowitz the witless
cronyism gone awry
Americans thus die
for whom for why
lobbyists and Ideocentrists
half of the problem
the other Bush Golem
lord of the Rings
and other oily things
Bush needs to come clean about his illegal spying, and just admit he did it to eavesdrop on Cindy Sheehan, and spied on members of Congress like Ted Kennedy!
January 18th, 2006 at 1:00 pmI’m still waiting for them to admit that the CIA has been engaged in domestic spying.
January 18th, 2006 at 8:20 pmI remember being watched in the Fort Lauderdale airport by a woman with a small suitcase and the name Rebecca Wolfson on the luggage tag in the spring of 1996. In November of that year I sat next to this same woman in the CIA’s Stafford Building at 1500 Westbranch Dr in Tysons Corner. She was in the company of a woman by the name of Eunjoo Kensinger who was (years later) revealed by the Russians to be a spy and declared persona non grata after she had already left the country.
Bush needs all the intelligence he can get. He is an {o}.
January 20th, 2006 at 11:26 amIt’s old, but there is a Supreme Court opinion on this very subject. I believe it was Justice David Davis who wrote:
“The constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with its shield of protection all classes of men, at all times and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of men that any of its great provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of Government”
There is no allowances for times of war in the 4th.
Dec. 19, 2005 Attorny Gozales was just laughable:
ATTY GEN GONZALES: “If we — but there are standards that have to be met, obviously, and you’re right, there is a procedure where we — an emergency procedure that allows us to make a decision to authorize — to utilize FISA, and then we go to the court and get confirmation of that authority.”
He was doin’ so fine, too. then couldn’t help but step in it anyway, by lying.
“But, again, FISA is very important in the war on terror, but it doesn’t provide the speed and the agility that we need in all circumstances to deal with this new kind of threat.”
Complete BS !
FISA has the 3-day grace perid! They can begin any kind of surveillance they like, the instant they learn of the danger. You can’t have a freer hand than that! Because they don’t want to reveal what they really want, they’ve led themselves into another lie.
What they wanted isn’t about terrorism at all. But it had been one of Ashcroft’s pet projects for years. Wholesale spying on the american public. But while the Pat. Act eases up some of the requirements it did not give Ashcroft that ability. They were still required to go through the motions set out in the 4th.
SEN. PATRICK LEAHY: “Well, of course, it does not [allow that]. I was there when that happened. I remember just briefly before we passed the resolution to go after Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. Them (John Ashcroft & crew) coming up and saying, by the way, could we expand this to give us other powers beyond the law? We said no. And yet, we hear people like Michael Chertoff, the head of the homeland security, suggesting that thousands of Americans had been wiretapped and been spied upon.”
This has been the agenda all along. In fact the whole thing is similar to what happened during the passage of the 1996 laws, right after the OKC bombings. Those proved no more effective, and were just as unconstitutional.
One report I read said the NSA was processing the messages of nearly 500 people a day. Now, if the american public is joining up or aiding Al Qaeda at a rate of 500 a day, then someone has drastically underestimated our predicament.
No, what they want is to be able to conduct mass surveillance without it being tainted by how they got it, tuck it away and pour over it.
Their biggest trouble is they don’t even bother to keep track of their story. Here’s the white house from June 9, 2005:
“Wiretaps and search warrants require a high level of proof and permission from a judge. The tools in the Patriot Act are fully consistent with the U.S. Constitution.
Congress created a Civil Liberties Board to ensure the Patriot Act and other laws uphold civil liberties. The Patriot Act protects America and defends American liberties.”
And notice that statement was made in direct response to the PAtriot Act and FISA, not state, and local police authority, as they’ve used in the last few days.
So there you have both Bush and Gonzales acknowledging that a warant is still required… yet they did this anyway. Gonzales is also on record saying the reason they didn’t try to go back and get more leeway was they didn’t think they’d get it… so, do it anyway.
Their line of bluster about Bush having the authority anyway, whether through “implied consent” of Congress, or their ludicrous claim about it being in Article II of the Constitution, is just that.
Personally I think Dick Cheny’s been smokin’ his running socks, and has let slip his arrogance again. Brow beating the press about the “terrible damage” to national security done by making this public though brings me to the end of my good humor, on this.
Orwell was just an amatue when he wrote about, “Up is down, black is white, etc.” After all, this crew has been facing us with a straight face for weeks now, telling us, “It’s a crime, to report a crime.”
February 6th, 2006 at 7:17 am[...] This latest rant on my part arises from a combination of two news stories. Not the news stories, really, but the wingnut reaction. First, the ongoing revelations about the NSA spying on ordinary Americans without a warrant. Now, some right wing folks understand the gravity of this. But the wingnut reaction in many places is more or less: Rah, cheer, we’re defending freedom. [...]
November 9th, 2006 at 2:16 pm