Archive for Libya

What Could Go Wrong?

Terrorists with airplanes—where have I heard this before?

Jihadists have stolen several commercial jetliners in Libya, raising concerns with intelligence officials about 9/11-style terror strikes as the 13th anniversary approaches, some reports say.

Meanwhile, the Washington Free Beacon reports that information about stolen jetliners was circulated within the U.S. government over the past two weeks — including an ominous warning that one or more jets could be used in an attack marking the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist strikes in New York and Washington.

“There are a number of commercial airliners in Libya that are missing,” one unnamed official told the Free Beacon. “We found out on Sept. 11 what can happen with hijacked planes.”

Sept. 11 also will mark the second anniversary of the Libyan terrorist attack on a U.S. outpost in Benghazi that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

If ISIS is the JV, I hope this crew is the Freshman team. Eight days shy of another 9/11, what difference, at this point, does it make?

Comments

Does He Also Have the Right to Bear Arms?

If Ahmed Abu Khatallah also wanted an abortion or a sex change operation, it would be US Government policy to pay for either one: (His 2nd and 10th Amendment rights are a different story.)

While the suspected mastermind of the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi is now on U.S. soil, the political fallout related to his prosecution may just be beginning.

The criminal complaint against Ahmed Abu Khatallah was filed nearly a year ago, and he was nabbed two weeks ago in eastern Libya. He appeared in a federal court in Washington on Saturday – much to some Republicans’ chagrin.

“I have serious concerns that conducting a rushed interrogation onboard a ship and then turning Abu Khatallah over to our civilian courts risks losing critical intelligence that could lead us to other terrorists or prevent future attacks,” Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-New Hampshire, said in a statement Saturday. “I’ve asked the Defense and Justice Departments for an update on his status-including whether he has been told he has the right to remain silent.”

“If they bring him to the United States, they’re going to Mirandize this guy and it would be a mistake for the ages to read this guy his Miranda rights,” said South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Earlier this month, Rep. Peter King of New York expressed other concerns to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer – chiefly, that U.S. authorities aren’t doing enough to maximize the amount of information they get from Abu Khatallah.

“Before he’s turned over to civilian authorities, the FBI and all of our intelligence agencies, CIA and others, should interrogate him as long as they have to,” said King, a member of the Homeland Security Committee and Chairman of the Sub-Committee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. “I’m not that concerned about a criminal conviction. We’re going to get that ultimately. It’s important we get as much intelligence out of him as possible. Both what happened, who planned it, how it happened.”

Shame on you, Peter! How dare you prejudge a person’s innocence or guilt! Congressman King sounds like President Obama and Attorney General Holder announcing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed guilty before he had had his (since reconsidered) civilian trial. If our criminal justice system has even a whiff of validity (a shaky conceit, sometimes), it is the bedrock belief in a person’s innocence until proven guilty.

I do not believe Ahmed Abu Khatallah is innocent (though how would I know?), and the manner of his “arrest” would mean that neither would many of my countrymen. How, then, could he receive a fair trial? It’s nonsensical. He must, therefore, be tried (or just dealt with) by different means. Obama has killed American citizens (Anwar al-Awlaki most prominently) without benefit of trial. Why would he get squeamish about Mirandizing a Libyan terrorist? Execute him, leave his head on a pike, and be done with it.

I do bring good news, however:

For Democrats in tight races, Abu Khatallah’s capture only further sheds light on a controversy that has damaged the Obama administration’s reputation for handling national security matters.

Second, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – who is toying with the idea of running for president in 2016 – could once again face tough questions about her role in handling U.S. security in the region when the attacks occurred.

A government that couldn’t convict O.J. Simpson thinks it can convict this scumbag. I already know I’d hold out for acquittal—not because I think he’s innocent, but because I have too much respect for our system of justice to pollute it by show trial. If he has rights (and he does not) he has all rights.

Military tribunal, summary execution, poisoned mashed potatoes. They all have more judicial integrity than what this lot proposes.

Comments

Better Late Than Never

Get out of Libya.

Only 625 days late:

As Libya deteriorates into an increasingly armed conflict between hardline Islamic groups and forces loyal to renegade Gen. Khalifa Hifter, the State Department urged U.S. citizens to leave the country as the U.S. began positioning troops to quickly evacuate Americans if necessary.

The amphibious ship Bataan with Ospreys and 1,000 Marines on board has moved into the eastern Mediterranean to be ready for a possible evacuation, CBS News correspondent David Martin reported. The ship had been taking part in an exercise with Jordan.

This is a significant increase over the 200 Marines who had been moved to Sigonella, Sicily, and a significant decrease in the distance Marines would have to travel to evacuate Americans.

The State Department on Tuesday night warned U.S. citizens against traveling to Libya and urged Americans currently in the North African nation to “department immediately.”

“The security situation in Libya remains unpredictable and unstable. The Libyan government has not been able to adequately build its military and police forces and improve security following the 2011 revolution. Many military-grade weapons remain in the hands of private individuals, including antiaircraft weapons that may be used against civilian aviation. Crime levels remain high in many parts of the country,” the State Department said in its advisory.

They could have written that on 9/11/12. They should have. Live (poor choice of words) and learn.

Comments (1)

Another Reason To Hate The Military…

Some of them are talking about Benghazi

As usual, if you want to know what happened in the US, read the British press. We are such a banana republic.

Benghazi attack could have been prevented if US hadn’t ‘switched sides in the War on Terror’ and allowed $500 MILLION of weapons to reach al-Qaeda militants, reveals damning report
Citizens Committee on Benghazi claims the US government allowed arms to flow to al-Qaeda-linked militants who opposed Muammar Gaddafi
Their rise to power, the group says, led to the Benghazi attack in 2012
The group claims the strongman Gaddafi offered to abdicate his presidency, but the US refused to broker his peaceful exit
The commission, part of the center-right Accuracy In Media group, concluded that the Benghazi attack was a failed kidnapping plot
US Ambassador Chris Stevens was to be captured and traded for ‘blind sheikh’ Omar Abdel-Rahman, who hatched the 1993 WTC bombing plot

The Citizens Commission on Benghazi, a self-selected group of former top military officers, CIA insiders and think-tankers, declared Tuesday in Washington that a seven-month review of the deadly 2012 terrorist attack has determined that it could have been prevented – if the U.S. hadn’t been helping to arm al-Qaeda militias throughout Libya a year earlier.

‘The United States switched sides in the war on terror with what we did in Libya, knowingly facilitating the provision of weapons to known al-Qaeda militias and figures,’ Clare Lopez, a member of the commission and a former CIA officer, told MailOnline.

She blamed the Obama administration for failing to stop half of a $1 billion United Arab Emirates arms shipment from reaching al-Qaeda-linked militants.
‘Remember, these weapons that came into Benghazi were permitted to enter by our armed forces who were blockading the approaches from air and sea,’ Lopez claimed. ‘They were permitted to come in. … [They] knew these weapons were coming in, and that was allowed..

‘The intelligence community was part of that, the Department of State was part of that, and certainly that means that the top leadership of the United States, our national security leadership, and potentially Congress – if they were briefed on this – also knew about this.’

The weapons were intended for Gaddafi but allowed by the U.S. to flow to his Islamist opposition.
The Citizens Committee on Benghazi released its interim findings on April 22, 2014 in Washington. Pictured [at link] are (L-R) Clare Lopez, Admiral (Ret.) Chuck Kubic, Admiral (Ret.) James ‘Ace’ Lyons, former CIA officer Wayne Simmons and civil rights attorney John Clarke

‘The White House and senior Congressional members,’ the group wrote in an interim report released Tuesday, ‘deliberately and knowingly pursued a policy that provided material support to terrorist organizations in order to topple a ruler [Muammar Gaddafi] who had been working closely with the West actively to suppress al-Qaeda.’

‘Some look at it as treason,’ said Wayne Simmons, a former CIA officer who participated in the commission’s research.

Retired Rear Admiral Chuck Kubic, another commission member, told reporters Tuesday that those weapons are now ‘all in Syria.’
‘Gaddafi wasn’t a good guy, but he was being marginalized,’ Kubic recalled. ‘Gaddafi actually offered to abdicate’ shortly after the beginning of a 2011 rebellion.
‘But the U.S. ignored his calls for a truce,’ the commission wrote, ultimately backing the horse that would later help kill a U.S. ambassador.
Kubic said that the effort at truce talks fell apart when the White House declined to let the Pentagon pursue it seriously.
‘We had a leader who had won the Nobel Peace Prize,’ Kubic said, ‘but who was unwilling to give peace a chance for 72 hours.’

More at the link, including names and pictures of committee members. Then, take the Aggie Challenge! Go to the NY Times and the Washington Post and see if you can find any mention of this. BTW did you notice that those weapons are now in Syria? If this President and his administration had declared their intent to allow the murder of as many Muslim civilians as possible, they couldn’t have done a better job. How many have died in Syria? How ’bout The Arab Spring™? Libya? Various drone attacks on wedding and such-like. You can see why they might not care for us.

- Aggie

Comments

More Obama Foreign Policy Successes

Remember Libya?

Western countries voiced concern on Thursday that tensions in Libya could slip out of control in the absence of a functioning political system, and they urged the government and rival factions to start talking.

Two-and-a-half years after the fall of former leader Muammar Gaddafi, the oil-rich North African state is struggling to contain violence between rival forces, with Islamist militants gaining an ever-stronger grip on the south of the country.

“The situation in Libya is very worrying,” French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius told reporters on the margins of a conference in Rome to discuss the Libyan crisis.

He said the uncertain security position, especially in the south, worsened an unstable political situation which required Libyan political forces to come together to reach a solution.

“We are asking the Libyans to talk to each other and to find a stable solution,” he said.

Just to refresh our memory, Obama invaded Libya in support of the “rebels” and Moammar Khadafi was killed. Now there is no leadership in Libya and Obama and our State Dept. are silent. Are we intentionally trying to establish al-qaeda across the Middle East? I would also point out that this article fails to mention the US military action in Libya.

- Aggie

Comments

Now, This is How You Project American Power

There. Now, that wasn’t so hard, was it?

In two operations nearly 3,000 miles apart, U.S. military forces went after two high-value targets over the weekend. And while officials have yet to say whether the operations were coordinated or directly related, they show Washington’s reach, capability and willingness to pursue alleged terrorists.

One operation took place Saturday in the Libyan capital of Tripoli, when U.S. forces captured Abu Anas al Libi, an al Qaeda leader wanted for his role in the deadly 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.

As al Libi was leaving his house for morning prayers, a group of 10 masked men surprised him, a source close to Libyan intelligence said. Citing al Libi’s wife, the source said the al Qaeda leader tried to reach into his car to grab his gun — but the U.S. forces quickly snatched him.

In the second raid, a team of U.S. Navy SEALs in southern Somalia targeted a top leader of Al-Shabaab, which was behind last month’s mall attack in Kenya. The SEALs came under fire and had to withdraw before they could confirm whether they killed their target, a senior U.S. official said.

“One could have gone without the other,” said retired Lt. Col. Rick Francona, CNN’s military analyst. “But the fact that they did them both, I think, is a real signal that the United States — no matter how long it takes — will go after these targets.”

The operations were carried out even as polls show Americans are skittish about U.S. military involvement in overseas conflicts. This means, Francona said, that others who might be in the U.S. government’s cross hairs could have more reason to worry.

Speaking to reporters at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Bali, Indonesia, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said the raids ought to make clear that the United States “will never stop in its effort to hold those accountable who conduct acts of terror.”

“Those members of al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations literally can run,” he said, “but they can’t hide.”

In other words, you were for the projection of American military power after you were against, Mr. Secretary?

I’ll keep my snarkiness to a minimum because I couldn’t approve more strongly if Israel conducted a successful raid on Iran’s nuclear installations. Bravo.

I’ll just add that if I woke up one morning six weeks ago to learn that US forces had pounded Syrian government military facilities after concluding that they were responsible for the war crime of gassing their own people—rather than the embarrassing humiliation of letting “I dare not wait upon I would” that happened—I would have stood and applauded (with some snarkiness) rather than blow the raspberries I blew.

I’ll have to leave it to wiser minds than mine to know the difference between the two situations.

Congratulations—and thanks—to all involved.

PS: And thanks to President Obama for implicitly sanctioning Israel’s projection of military power in its own defense as well. Win-win.

Comments

Just When You Thought Things Couldn’t Get Any Worse in Libya

You were right: the deaths of four Americans at the hands of Islamic terrorists is about as bad as it gets.

But this is pretty bad, too:

EXCLUSIVE: The recent theft of massive amounts of highly sensitive U.S. military equipment from Libya is far worse than previously thought, Fox News has learned, with raiders swiping hundreds of weapons that are now in the hands of militia groups aligned with terror organizations and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The equipment, as Fox News previously reported, was used for training in Libya by U.S. Special Forces. The training team, which was funded by the Pentagon, has since been pulled, partly in response to the overnight raids last August.

According to State Department and military sources, dozens of highly armored vehicles called GMV’s, provided by the United States, are now missing. The vehicles feature GPS navigation as well as various sets of weapon mounts and can be outfitted with smoke-grenade launchers. U.S. Special Forces undergo significant training to operate these vehicles. Fox News is told the vehicles provided to the Libyans are now gone.

Along with the GMV’s, hundreds of weapons are now missing, including roughly 100 Glock pistols and more than 100 M4 rifles. More disturbing, according to the sources, is that it seems almost every set of night-vision goggles has also been taken. This is advanced technology that gives very few war fighters an advantage on the battlefield.

“It’s not just equipment … it’s the capability. You are giving these very dangerous groups the capability that only a few nations are capable of,” one source said. “Already assassinations are picking up in Tripoli and there are major worries that the militias are using this stolen equipment to their advantage. All these militias are tied into terrorist organizations and are tied to (salafists).”

This is “exclusive” to Fox News at the moment, so there’s no confirmation. But if it’s even half true, it’s a catastrophe:

[S]pecial operators told Fox News that training camps throughout eastern Libya continue to train terrorists, and border controls right now around the country are non-existent in most areas.

“The theft of these weapons and the open borders are feeding Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood and threatens Libya’s neighbors as well. It’s already bad. … and now it’s really bad.”

What happened to a “time-limited, scope-limited” operation that would take “days, not weeks”?

Comments

Benghazi One Year On

Most of the media will lay it on thick with the 12th anniversary of 9/11/01. Nothing wrong with that, of course.

But it wouldn’t hurt them to look into another anniversary, more recent [hat tip: Yerushalimey]

The attack on the US consulate in Benghazi was striking for a number of reasons: the date, 11 September, the toll – four diplomats killed, including an ambassador – and the knock-on effects on the careers of senior American politicians.

But what is perhaps most striking is the inconsistencies: the US version of events compared with those of witnesses and the facts on the ground. The two do not tally. And so, a year later, there remain pressing questions about what happened that night – and what the Americans say happened.

6:43am

Event
Staff at the US special mission in Benghazi woke on 11 September to the sight of a Libyan policeman, deployed to guard them, filming the compound from a neighbouring rooftop. When challenged, he vanished. Later, an unmarked car made lazy circles around the compound, a walled redoubt rented in the southern suburbs of the Libyan city.

US version
The state department says there were no warning of impending attack, a spokesman insisting there was “nothing unusual during the day at all”.

Conflicting evidence
Two days earlier, the ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, had received a veiled warning. According to one of his cables, one of his diplomats had a meeting with two Islamist militia leaders in which they complained that the US was supporting a secular leader, Mahmoud Jibril, in a vote for prime minister due on 12 September. If Jibril won, they warned, they would “no longer guarantee security”. The consulate was already relying on one of the militias, the February 17th Martyrs Brigade, for armed protection.

In the words of a subsequent report by the US Senate’s homeland security committee, warning lights were “flashing red”. As the day went on, news came in of attacks by radicals on the US embassy in Cairo, a response to a film, the Innocence of Muslims, released in America which mocked Muhammad. The CIA sent a cable to its foreign stations warning of possible copycat incidents.

The anniversary of the 9/11 attacks also preyed on the minds of compound staff in Benghazi. In a letter found in the ruins by the Guardian, Stevens wrote: “For security reasons, we’ll need to be careful about limiting moves off compound and scheduling as many meetings as possible in the villa.”

At least one man inside the compound was anxious. Sean Smith, a 34-year-old information management officer accompanying the ambassador on the visit, emailed a friend: “Assuming we don’t die tonight. We saw one of our ‘police’ that guard the compound taking pictures.” Hours later, he was dead.

There are many more, recounted chronologically, but this one stands out:

Events
When the CIA team abandoned the consulate, crowds of local men and boys gathered at the edge of the fighting moved inside. The fires had died down and they gingerly explored, finding the unsecured window into the safe room. Inside they found Stevens, lying in shirtsleeves on the floor. A video, timed at quarter-past midnight, shows them carrying the ambassador outside on to the patio. When he shows signs of life there are cries of Allahu Akbar – God is Great – and bystanders discuss getting him to hospital.

US version
Washington maintains that every possible effort was made to locate Stevens in the hours after the attack.

Conflicting evidence
Bystanders put Stevens into a private car. A wounded Libyan guard who left his bloody handprint by the front gate was located and put into a second car. The two cars raced to the city’s main casualty hospital, Benghazi Medical Centre. Its director, Dr Fathi al-Jerami, said staff were astonished when the two casualties arrived at the emergency ramp, with the Libyan guard insisting his companion was the ambassador. Medics could not imagine the ambassador would be left unguarded, nor that, if he was missing, no official would try to contact the hospital. He was rushed inside and doctors fought for 90 minutes to revive him before declaring him dead.

Still with no communication from US officials, a hospital official found a mobile phone in Stevens pocket and began punching out dialled numbers. One of these was the phone of an agent now in the CIA base, but the official’s English was too rudimentary.

Only in the morning, with US officials being evacuated to the airport, did Americans go to the hospital, to be given Stevens’ body. Pictures of the dead ambassador uploaded by Libyans spread across the internet.

I am speechless (but not wordless) at these and other revelations of deceit, reckless endangerment, dereliction of duty—not by the brave men on the scene, but back in Washington. I cannot get my head around how Hillary and Barack have skated from responsibility.

Finally, someone in the media did his job. Figured not to be an American paper.

Comments

This Won’t Hurt a Bit

Like the novocaine shots your dentist inflicts before drilling, cutting, chiseling inside your head, you won’t notice a thing:

Kerry said the Americans were planning an “unbelievably small” attack on Syria. “We will be able to hold Bashar al-Assad accountable without engaging in troops on the ground or any other prolonged kind of effort in a very limited, very targeted, short-term effort that degrades his capacity to deliver chemical weapons without assuming responsibility for Syria’s civil war. That is exactly what we are talking about doing – unbelievably small, limited kind of effort.”

How small?


This small!

Stop me if you’ve heard this before:

President Obama told a bipartisan group of members of Congress today that he expects the U.S. would be actively involved in any military action against Libya [Syria] for “days, not weeks…”

“We are not going to use force to go beyond a well-defined goal, specifically the protection of civilians in Libya [Syria],” he said.

The president is mindful that the American public is weary of war, and that the world community casts a skeptical eye at American plans to take military action against yet another Muslim country.

Again, that was Libya two and a half years ago!

So was this:

Here’s Carney’s exchange with reporters over what to call the Libya unwar/action:

REPORTER: What is this military action? We’ve been asking. Is it a
war, and if it is not a war —

MR. CARNEY: It is a time-limited, scope-limited military action,
in concert with our international partners, with the objective of
protecting civilian life in Libya from the — from Moammar Gadhafi and his forces.

REPORTER: But not a war?

MR. CARNEY: I’m not going to get into the terminology. I think
what it is certainly not is, as others have said, you know, a large-
scale military — you know, open-ended military action that — the
kind of which might otherwise be described as a war. There’s no
ground troops, as the president said. There’s no land invasion.

Tell that to Chris Stevens, Tyrone Woods, Sean Smith, and Glen Doherty.

Again, I’m sick to death (ha!) of the debate. It’s absurd and a waste of time, just like the idea of an “unbelievably small, limited kind of effort.” I grow more opposed every day.

Obama lies, people die(s)!

Comments

Hey, How’s Obama’s Most Excellent Libyan War Working Out?

Is Libya a better place today?

A little under two years ago, Philip Hammond, the Defence Secretary, urged British businessmen to begin “packing their suitcases” and to fly to Libya to share in the reconstruction of the country and exploit an anticipated boom in natural resources.

Yet now Libya has almost entirely stopped producing oil as the government loses control of much of the country to militia fighters.

Mutinying security men have taken over oil ports on the Mediterranean and are seeking to sell crude oil on the black market. Ali Zeidan, Libya’s Prime Minister, has threatened to “bomb from the air and the sea” any oil tanker trying to pick up the illicit oil from the oil terminal guards, who are mostly former rebels who overthrew Muammar Gaddafi and have been on strike over low pay and alleged government corruption since July.

As world attention focused on the coup in Egypt and the poison gas attack in Syria over the past two months, Libya has plunged unnoticed into its worst political and economic crisis since the defeat of Gaddafi two years ago. Government authority is disintegrating in all parts of the country putting in doubt claims by American, British and French politicians that Nato’s military action in Libya in 2011 was an outstanding example of a successful foreign military intervention which should be repeated in Syria.

Hehehehehe. Let’s start another war!

- Aggie

Comments

Benghazi Sheiks Say the Darnedest Things!

What channel is the Libyan women’s soccer team on? Sound like must-see TV!

Following are excerpts from a Friday sermon delivered by Sheik Salem Jaber, in Benghazi, Libya, which aired on Libya Al-Hurra TV on June 7, 2013:

Every day, I hope to hear on TV that from now on, anybody who drinks wine will receive 40 or 80 lashes, or that a fornicator – male or female – will receive 100 lashes, in accordance with the explicit word of the Koran.

So it came as a surprise to me to hear the news that a sports team was being established at the university. Is it for youth who are failing in their studies? Or is it for outstanding youth? No, it is for neither. Tall, young, and beautiful girls were picked for the team. Just what our country needed… A woman’s soccer team.

Is this what our country needs? What about Islamic universities? What about Islamic punishments? What about judges? What about rights and duties? What about the fear of Allah? What about implementing the punishments decreed by Allah?

Whose daughters are these? Are they the daughters of Jews, of Christians, or of Zoroastrians? Are they the daughters of heretics? Of Communists? It is written in their fathers’ ID cards that they are Muslim.

But today, these girls are exposing their heads. Is this to be allowed? In a few months’ time, they will be exposing their legs. The day they joined [the soccer team], exposing what should be hidden, these girls sold out their honor, and soiled the honor of their families with the filth of nudity and shamelessness.

Sounds like he’s getting a little steamed up. I know I am.

BTW, I don’t think he knows the half of it:

Legs are just the beginning, Salem. And praise God for it. If you can’t beat them (literally), enjoy them.

Comments

Dear Diary

The late Ambassador Chris Stevens reveals his inner angst to his Hello Kitty journal:

Untitled

Stevens’ diary has never been made public, until now. It was first discovered and reported on, in brief, by CNN, but the news network soon caved in to outside pressure, most likely from President Obama’s staff, and ceased reporting on it all together.

When we received a copy of Ambassador Chris Stevens’ Benghazi diary, the Editors of SOFREP made a conscious decision to post it because the professional journal has clear journalistic value and contains important information relating to a clear and intentional cover up. Our bias in all of this is to shed light on the truth with regards to the Benghazi attack.

The revelations contained within the last five days of Chris Stevens’ working diary are nothing earth shattering to those of us who have been closely investigating the circumstances around the 9/11/12 Benghazi incident. However, it does shed critical light on Ambassador Stevens’ information on the matter, and his actions in the run up to the attack.

Written in the format of short hand notes, he wrote, “Militias the prime power on the ground. Weak state security institutions. As a result, dicey conditions.”
More pressing for Stevens personally, he wrote “Islamist ‘hit list’ in Benghazi. Me targeted…” … “Never ending security threats…”

There was an end, of course. To the threats, to Chris Stevens, to Tyrone Woods, to Sean Smith, to Glen Doherty.

I began this post intending to write a faux diary entry lamenting that Hillary won’t return his calls, answer his texts. But it’s not funny after reading this. Stevens was under no illusions, even if his superiors were under nothing but.

The old bag is anything but.

PS: CNN discovered the diary, but as yet is curiously silent on these revelations.

Comments

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »