Former interrogator slams torture: Torture has cost nearly as many lives as 9/11.
Former interrogator slams torture: Torture has cost nearly as many lives as 9/11.
In a Washington Post op-ed today, a former Special Operations interrogator who worked in Iraq in 2006 sharply criticizes American torture techniques as ineffective and dangerous. “Torture and abuse cost American lives,” he writes:
I learned in Iraq that the No. 1 reason foreign fighters flocked there to fight were the abuses carried out at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. Our policy of torture was directly and swiftly recruiting fighters for al-Qaeda in Iraq. … It’s no exaggeration to say that at least half of our losses and casualties in that country have come at the hands of foreigners who joined the fray because of our program of detainee abuse. The number of U.S. soldiers who have died because of our torture policy will never be definitively known, but it is fair to say that it is close to the number of lives lost on Sept. 11, 2001. How anyone can say that torture keeps Americans safe is beyond me — unless you don’t count American soldiers as Americans.
The writer, who used a pseudonym for the article, adds that when he switched his team’s techniques to a rapport-building method, they found enormous success. One detainee told the author, “I thought you would torture me, and when you didn’t, I decided that everything I was told about Americans was wrong. That’s why I decided to cooperate.”
- Comments
- View Comments
Will: Economic Crisis May Only Be ‘A Financial Problem,’ ‘Rest Of Economy Is Doing Rather Well’
Will: Economic Crisis May Only Be ‘A Financial Problem,’ ‘Rest Of Economy Is Doing Rather Well’
Today on ABC’s This Week roundtable, conservative columnist George Will claimed it is possible that the economy may only be suffering from a “financial problem” while the rest of the economy is performing “rather well”:
WILL: All will be forgiven if things turn out well. And it’s just possible, Donna, that the economy is not going down the drain. 94, 95 percent of all mortgages in this country are being paid off on time. Ninety-four percent of those who want to work are working. This may be much more of a financial problem, that is, one sector, while the rest of the economy is doing rather well.
Watch it:
Will’s rosy assessment of the economy is deeply misguided. It’s clear that the financial industry is not the only sector of the economy in crisis mode. Some examples:
Construction Industry: The construction sector is “beset by one of the biggest drops in employment in the current economic downturn” and had an unemployment rate of 10.8 percent in October.
Labor Market: The economy lost nearly 1.2 million jobs in the first 10 months of 2008, including 240,000 jobs in October. Unemployment is now at roughly 6.5 percent.
Housing Industry: New home sales in September 2008 were 33.1. percent lower than the same time last year. “The median price for existing homes fell by 9.0% and prices for new homes by 9.1% during the same period.” One in 11 mortgages is delinquent or in foreclosure.
Auto Industry: The auto industry just experienced another month of “record low sales.” Recently, Detroit automakers plead with Congress for a financial rescue package in order to avoid bankruptcy.
Will’s portrayals of the state of the economy have been abysmal. In June, he claimed that average Americans “are better off today than they were in 2000-2001.” In July, Will stuck up for former McCain adviser Phil Gramm’s “nation of whiners” comment, stating that Americans “are the crybabies of the western world. In fact, we have an extraordinarily low pain threshold.”
Bush’s last-minute rule gutting worker protections may violate his own guidelines.
Bush’s last-minute rule gutting worker protections may violate his own guidelines.
The Labor Department is attempting to complete a rule which “would add a step to the lengthy process of developing standards to protect workers’ health” and would thus make it more difficult to regulate toxic substances and chemicals that affect workers on the job. The New York Times notes that this proposal may violate the White House’s own memorandum:
The timing of the proposal appears to violate a memorandum issued in early May by Joshua B. Bolten, the White House chief of staff. “Except in extraordinary circumstances,” Mr. Bolten wrote, “regulations to be finalized in this administration should be proposed no later than June 1, 2008, and final regulations should be issued no later than Nov. 1, 2008.”
The proposal is “one of about 20 highly contentious rules the Bush administration is planning to issue in its final weeks,” the Times notes. For more on Bush’s last-minute regulations and proposals, read ThinkProgress’s report, “Bush’s Backward Sprint To The Finish.”
Chambliss Still Unsure If Economy Is In Recession, Misstates ‘Technical Defintion’ Of A Recession
Chambliss Still Unsure If Economy Is In Recession, Misstates ‘Technical Defintion’ Of A Recession
This morning of Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace asked Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) about a statement he made in July when he argued that the U.S. economy “may not be in a recession.” Wallace played a recording of Chambliss from an ad released by Jim Martin’s campaign:
CHAMBLISS: We may not be in a recession. I don’t know what that term means.
Chambliss attempted to defend himself, saying that he was “quoting Alan Greenspan.” Wallace, however, noted that while Chambliss used the Greenspan quote in July 2008, Greenspan had said in April 2008 that “we’re headed into a recession.” Chambliss responded by attempting (and failing) to fall back on the “technical definition” of a recession:
Chris, if you’ll remember, [a recession] was supposed to be two consecutive months of negative GDP, and at that point in time we hadn’t seen that. But, you know, economists disagree on the technical definition of recession, and obviously that’s what i was talking about.
Still, however, Chambliss could not bring himself to admit that the economy is in recession.
Watch it:
In attempting to appear knowledgeable about the economy by citing the “technical definition” of a recession, Chambliss actually demonstrated his ignorance. Indeed, Chambliss said this morning that a recession is “supposed to be two consecutive months of negative GDP” growth. In fact, the often cited — though misleading — definition of a recession to which Chambliss was referring says nothing about “two consecutive months,” but rather “two consecutive quarters.”
Definitions aside, Chambliss’s apparent inability to recognize that the U.S. is in a recession demonstrates he is uninformed about the state of the economy. Indeed, the Federal Reserve’s latest economic outlook “warned that a recession is believed already to be underway could last until mid-2009 or later.” Further, as Forbes recently reported on the significant rise in unemployment claims in recent months, “[c]laims above 400,000 are generally considered a sign of recession, and claims have been above that level for 17 weeks.”
Perhaps most startling is that according to a recent survey by the National Association of Business Economists, “96% of the economists surveyed” believe a recession has begun. While economists may disagree about what constitutes a recession, they seem to agree that the U.S. is in one.
Former Bush adviser: Obama’s cabinet is ‘much less ideological than George Bush’s cabinet.’
Former Bush adviser: Obama’s cabinet is ‘much less ideological than George Bush’s cabinet.’
On ABC’s This Week today, former Bush strategist Matthew Dowd marveled at President-elect Barack Obama’s cabinet choices, saying that Obama will have “one of the most pragmatic, least ideological cabinets that we’ve seen in a long time.” Dowd noted that this contrasted with how his former boss picked his staff when he first entered office:
DOWD: Much less ideological than George Bush’s cabinet when he appointed it, when he first came into office. People that have disagreements. He has disagreements with his potential Secretary of State. He has disagreements with the person that’s going to run his Pentagon. It’s an amazing thing he has done that.
Watch it:
It shouldn’t be surprising that Obama is more open to appointing “people that have disagreements” than Bush was. As Bob Woodward has noted, Bush has often shown “a lack of interest in open debate.”
Kristol Calls On Bush To Pardon Torturers And Wiretappers, Reward Them With Medal Of Freedom
Kristol Calls On Bush To Pardon Torturers And Wiretappers, Reward Them With Medal Of Freedom
In his new Weekly Standard column, right-wing pundit Bill Kristol lays out a to-do list for President Bush before he leaves office. He urges Bush to deliver speeches “reminding Americans of our successes fighting the war on terror.” Kristol dreams, “Over time, Bush might even get deserved credit for effective conduct of the war on terror.”
After urging Bush to fight the incoming administration’s desire to close Guantanamo, Kristol concludes with this:
One last thing: Bush should consider pardoning–and should at least be vociferously praising–everyone who served in good faith in the war on terror, but whose deeds may now be susceptible to demagogic or politically inspired prosecution by some seeking to score political points. The lawyers can work out if such general or specific preemptive pardons are possible; it may be that the best Bush can or should do is to warn publicly against any such harassment or prosecution. But the idea is this: The CIA agents who waterboarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and the NSA officials who listened in on phone calls from Pakistan, should not have to worry about legal bills or public defamation. In fact, Bush might want to give some of these public servants the Medal of Freedom at the same time he bestows the honor on Generals Petraeus and Odierno. They deserve it.
In the Bush era, the Medal of Freedom has come to absurdly represent a reward for those who carried out policy failures at the urging of the Bush administration. By this standard, the implementers of torture and warrantless wiretapping certainly qualify for such a medal.
The Wall Street Journal reported recently that the White House “isn’t inclined to grant sweeping pardons for former administration officials involved in harsh interrogations and detentions of terror suspects.” President-elect Barack Obama is reportedly unlikely to pursue criminal cases against such officials, but is said to be considering a 9/11-style commission that would investigate counterterrorism policies and make public as many details as possible.”
Bush’s “record of stonewalling inquiries into his administration’s legally questionable behavior — the torture policy that led to the Abu Ghraib nightmare; illegal wiretapping; the politically motivated firing of federal attorneys — justify concern that he may be considering pardoning officials involved in those misdeeds,” the New York Times warns in an editorial this morning. “If he wants to try to reclaim his reputation, he can start by not abusing the pardon power on his way out the door,” the Times writes.
Report: Murdoch ‘absolutely despises’ Bill O’Reilly; Ailes ‘loathes him.’
Report: Murdoch ‘absolutely despises’ Bill O’Reilly; Ailes ‘loathes him.’
In a forthcoming biography of Rupert Murdoch entitled “The Man Who Owns The News,” author Michael Wolff reports that the Fox News bosses have no fondness for Bill O’Reilly but are willing to tolerate him for his ratings:
“It is not just Murdoch (and everybody else at News Corp.’s highest levels) who absolutely despises Bill O’Reilly, the bullying, mean-spirited, and hugely successful evening commentator,” Wolff wrote, “but [Fox News chief executive] Roger Ailes himself who loathes him. Success, however, has cemented everyone to each other.”
“The embarrassment can no longer be missed,” Wolff wrote, in another section of the book. “He mumbles even more than usual when called on to justify it. He barely pretends to hide the way he feels about Bill O’Reilly. And while it is not that he would give Fox up—because the money is the money; success trumps all—in the larger sense of who he is, he seems to want to hedge his bets.”
Rove: We Don’t Need A Change In Our Health Care System
Rove: We Don’t Need A Change In Our Health Care System
In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal today, Karl Rove applauds Barack Obama’s appointment of a “first-rate economic team,” cheering the selections of Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, National Economic Council director Lawrence Summers, Council of Economic Advisers chief Christina Romer, and OMB head Peter Orszag.
But while issuing compliments of most of Obama’s nominees, Rove issued this back-handed swipe at Melody Barnes, who ThinkProgress first reported would be chosen to lead the White House Domestic Policy Council:
The only troubling personnel note was Melody Barnes as Domestic Policy Council director. Putting a former aide to Ted Kennedy in charge of health policy after tapping universal health-care advocate Tom Daschle to be Health and Human Services secretary sends a clear signal that Mr. Obama didn’t mean it when his campaign ads said he wouldn’t run to the “extremes” with government-run health care.
During the campaign, Barnes helped inform Obama’s health care approach — the same approach he is now promising to pursue in office. Obama pledged to bring together “doctors and patients, unions and businesses, Democrats and Republicans” together to build on the existing system and “reduce the cost of health care to ensure affordable, accessible coverage for all Americans.”
Taking a look at the health care stats in the Bush/Rove era, it’s clear that most Americans have seen a decline in their health care at the same time that health insurance companies have reaped tremendous gains:
– Since 2000, the ranks of the uninsured have grown by 7.2 million.
– Health care premiums have doubled under Bush. Employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have risen from $5,791 in 1999 to $12,680 in 2008.
– The fastest growing component of health care is health insurers’ administrative costs.
– Enrollment in Medicare private plans doubled. Through such plans, insurers “have increased the cost and complexity of the program without any evidence of improving care.”
– The combined profits of the nation’s largest insurance companies and their subsidiaries increased by over 170 percent between 2003 and 2007.
Obama is putting together a team, starting with Melody Barnes and Tom Daschle, who will be committed to ending the unfairness and inequity of the current health care system. Meanwhile, Karl Rove is committed to defending the health insurance industry and preventing any change to the status quo. Fortunately, the American people are proclaiming that they are ready for the change that Obama is promising.
Dionne: ‘Obama’s Bush Doctrine.’
Dionne: ‘Obama’s Bush Doctrine.’
The Washington Post’s E.J. Dionne argues, “In electing Barack Obama, the country traded the foreign policy of the second President Bush for the foreign policy of the first President Bush.” Noting Obama’s willingness to heed the advice of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft, Dionne says Obama’s realist foreign policy mindset resembles that of the elder Bush:
Obama’s national security choices are already causing grumbling from parts of the antiwar left, even if Obama made clear six years ago that while he was with them on Iraq, he was not one of them.
Ironically, Obama is likely to show more fidelity to George H.W. Bush’s approach to foreign affairs than did the former president’s own son. That’s change, maybe even change we can believe in, but it’s not the change so many expected.
Ex-defense contractor drops hints of another major corruption scandal.
Ex-defense contractor drops hints of another major corruption scandal.
Mitchell Wade, the corrupt former lobbyist who plead guilty in 2006 to bribing former Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA), is reportedly assisting “the government in investigating five other members of Congress,” according to a memorandum filed on Wednesday. The 42-page sentencing memo filed by Wade’s attorneys says that the other unnamed members are under investigation for “corruption similar to that of Mr. Cunningham.” Seth Hettena suggests two of those five include former Reps. Katherine Harris (R-FL) and Virgil Goode (R-VA). Hettena also reports that the sentencing memo contains hints of a bigger scandal to come:
Prosecutors drop tantalizing hints about an even bigger, ongoing investigation. Wade was debriefed in 2006 and provided “moderately useful” background information in another “large and important corruption investigation” that also has not yet resulted in any charges.
Iraqi parliament approves new security pact.
Iraqi parliament approves new security pact.
After weeks of contentious debate, the Iraqi parliament approved the long-delayed security pact “that lays out a three-year timetable for the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq.” The New York Times reports:
For Iraq and the United States, the pact’s passage through Parliament by a large majority — more than 140 of some 200 lawmakers present voted in favor — marks a watershed moment, heralding an increase in Iraqi sovereignty over American and other foreign troops on its soil. [...]
The pact gives Iraq considerable say in what operations American troops can undertake in the country, and sets limits on the Americans’ ability to search homes and buildings, and hold suspects that they detain.
Peter Juul, a Research Associate at the Center for American Progress Action Fund, recently argued that despite the Bush administration’s claims, the SOFA includes treaty obligations and therefore requires congressional approval. In the weeks leading up to the pact’s approval, the Bush administration refused to release an English-language version of the proposed agreement. The text of the agreement is now available HERE.
17 Reasons To Give Thanks
17 Reasons To Give Thanks
This Thanksgiving, progressives have a lot to be thankful for. Here’s our list:
We’re thankful we’ll soon have a president who will hit the ground running instead of a president who is running the country into the ground.
We’re thankful that Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow are demonstrating every night how strong and intelligent progressive voices can be successful on TV.
We’re thankful we live in a center-left America rather than “Hannity’s America.”
We’re thankful John McCain has more time to spend in the houses he owns…even if he can’t remember them all.
We’re thankful Sarah Palin has more time to watch over Russia and warn us in case Vladimir Putin ever “rears his head.”
We’re thankful that we’re moving closer towards a complete withdrawal from Iraq.
We’re thankful for the thousands of protesters who took to the streets across America to push for marriage equality.
We’re not thankful for neo-McCarthys, neo-Hoovers, neo-Nazis, and neocons.
We’re thankful for Tina Fey.
We’re thankful to be liberal hacks.
We’re not thankful for hack operatives burrowing into career civil service jobs.
We’re more thankful for Vice President Joe Biden and “Morning Joe” than Joe Lieberman and “Joe the Plumber.”
We’re thankful that our troops will be able to get the education they so richly deserve.
We’re thankful for the “Mustache of Justice,” “Rahmbo,” “Axe,” and “Skippy.”
We’re thankful that reality still has a liberal bias.
We’re thankful that there are only 54 days left until the end of the George W. Bush presidency.
We’re thankful for the progressive mandate to govern.
Happy Thanksgiving!
P.S. We’re also very thankful to have readers like you! What are you thankful for? Let us know in the comments section.
At least 80 killed in Mumbai terrorist attacks.
At least 80 killed in Mumbai terrorist attacks.
Earlier today, terrorists attacked popular luxury hotels in Mumbai, India using machine-guns and grenades, killing at least 82 people and wounding 240. At the moment, “scores of tourists” remain trapped in one of the hotels. In response, President-elect Obama issued the following statement:
President-Elect Obama strongly condemns today’s terrorist attacks in Mumbai, and his thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their families, and the people of India. These coordinated attacks on innocent civilians demonstrate the grave and urgent threat of terrorism. The United States must continue to strengthen our partnerships with India and nations around the world to root out and destroy terrorist networks. We stand with the people of India, whose democracy will prove far more resilient than the hateful ideology that led to these attacks.
A group known as the “Deccan Mujahideen” has claimed responsibility. Earlier tonight, CNN’s Barbara Starr referred to the attacks as a “game-changer” according to “intelligence services around the world.” “Senior U.S. officials telling me just a few moments ago this is possibly the most well-coordinated attack they have seen in some time,” she added.
Lieberman contributed to GOP Senate and House candidates.
Lieberman contributed to GOP Senate and House candidates.
The fact that Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) supported Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in the presidential election is well-known. However, the Washington Post reports today that Lieberman was also supporting at least four Republican lawmakers. His Reuniting our Country PAC gave $5,000 to Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) and another $5,000 to Rep. Peter King (R-NY) in October. He wrote an op-ed in the St. Pioneer Press defending Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN), and publicly endorsed and contributed to the re-election of Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME). More recently, Lieberman has said that he fears “America will not survive” if Democrats receive a filibuster-proof majority.
White House sends out Christmas-themed Hanukkah invitations.
White House sends out Christmas-themed Hanukkah invitations.
President and First Lady Bush recently sent Jewish community leaders invitations to a Hanukkah reception at the White House next month. But as the New York Post reports, the invitations “raised more than a few eyebrows” because the image on them was that of a “Clydesdale horse hauling a Christmas fir along the snow-dappled drive to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave”:
One Jewish community leader from Brooklyn quipped, “It’s obvious what’s going on here: The Christmas tree is being taken out of the White House and the menorah is being brought in the back.” The first lady’s spokesperson explained, “It is something that just slipped through the cracks.”
Wasserman Schultz: ‘Mr. Paulson Seems To Be Flailing About A Bit’
Wasserman Schultz: ‘Mr. Paulson Seems To Be Flailing About A Bit’
Yesterday, the Treasury Department, under the direction of Secretary Henry Paulson, reported that it is “making preparations” to ask Congress for access to the second $350 billion of the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP). This comes just one week after Paulson said that he would not be asking for the second TARP installment.
Today, on MSNBC, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) expressed concern that Paulson “seems to be flailing about a bit.” Watch it:
Indeed, this was just the latest in a series of reversals and missteps that Paulson has made while implementing the $700 billion economic rescue program. Here is a roundup of how Paulson has flailed about more than just “a bit”:
Flip-flopped on whether to spend the second $350 billion: Yesterday, it was reported that the Treasury is “now making preparations to ask Congress for clearance to tap into the second half of the massive $700 billion financial markets rescue fund.” However, just one week ago, Paulson said that he did not need the second $350 billion, claiming that “I want to preserve the firepower, the flexibility we have now and those that come after us will have.”
Changed the purpose of the program: Paulson intially said that “the single most effective thing we can do to help homeowners, the American people, and stimulate our economy,” is to buy troubled assets from banks. Paulson promptly abandoned that plan, instead deciding “to reinforce the stability of the financial system by providing sorely needed capital to banks, and even non-bank institutions that securitize credit card, auto and student loans.”
Misled about the stability of the banking system: Paulson announced on November 13 that the banking system “has been stabilized,” and “No one is asking themselves anymore, is there some major institution that might fail.” One week later, Paulson was bailing out Citigroup.
Ultimately, the $700 billion bailout was necessary to avert full-scale economic disaster. Still, as Rachel Maddow opined last night, “The all-over-the-map, reverse-course-at-every-turn approach has been exciting, but exciting in a bad way, when what the financial system needs is predictability and credibility and confidence.”
Transcript: More »
We would have preferred not to see the ‘Who’s on First?’ routine between Secretary Paulson and Fed Reserve Chairman Bernanke because they seem to come by it naturally, whereas at least Abbott and Costello had to practice it to put forward that state of confusion.
Does Hannity have the guts to partner with a ‘big-league liberal?’
Does Hannity have the guts to partner with a ‘big-league liberal?’
Earlier this week, Alan Colmes announced that he would be relinquishing his role as co-host of Hannity & Colmes at the end of the year. The Chicago Tribune’s Eric Zorn observes, “Hannity is quicker, louder, angrier, funnier and more confrontational and self-assured than the comparatively mild, cerebral Colmes, therefore he’s the dominant and more compelling half of the team.” Asking the question, “Does Sean Hannity have the guts to partner with a big-league liberal?” Zorn suggests that Ed Schultz, Mike Malloy, Randi Rhodes, and Al Franken (if he loses) would be good replacement candidates to spar with Hannity on his show.
U.S. Commander: Al Qaeda’s focus is Pakistan, not Iraq.
U.S. Commander: Al Qaeda’s focus is Pakistan, not Iraq.
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Gen. James Conway, the head of the Marine Corps and a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said, “Iraq is now a rear-guard action on the part of al Qaeda. … They’ve changed their strategic focus not to Afghanistan but to Pakistan, because Pakistan is the closest place where you have the nexus of terrorism and nuclear weapons.” Caroline Wadhams explains what we need to do to address the problem.
Turley: By Refusing To Pardon Torture Officials, Bush Is Allowing Democrats To Repair His Legacy
Turley: By Refusing To Pardon Torture Officials, Bush Is Allowing Democrats To Repair His Legacy
Last night on MSNBC Rachel Maddow highlighted a report from the Wall Street Journal that said that President Bush is unlikely to pardon any officials involved in engineering or executing the Bush administration’s torture program. According to the Wall Street Journal report, the White House believes that the Justice Department’s torture memos give the officials all the legal cover they need.
Maddow’s guest, constitutional legal scholar Jonathan Turley, said that he also believes that Bush is unlikely to pardon his torture officials, but for reasons that have little to do with the torture memos:
TURLEY: What the administration is doing is they know that the people that want him to pardon our torture program is primarily the Democrats, not the Republicans. The Democratic leadership would love to have a pardon so they could go to their supporters and say, “Look, there’s really nothing we could do.”
Well, the Bush administration is calling their bluff. They know that the Democratic leadership will not allow criminal investigations or indictments.
Turley explained that without the pardons, Bush is clearing the way for Democrats to repair the president’s torture legacy. Bush will be “able to say there’s nothing stopping indictments or prosecutions but a Democratic Congress and a Democratic White House didn’t think there was any basis for it,” Turley said. Watch it:
But not all of the Bush administration’s torture critics are on the same page. Jack Goldsmith, the individual responsible for withdrawing the torture memos and author of the Terror Presidency, penned an op-ed in today’s Washington Post entitled, “No New Torture Probes.” Goldsmith argues today that rather than initiating criminal investigations or even a bipartisan truth commission, the next administration should simply let the current torture investigations conclude and release their findings:
[The current] investigations were politically necessary, and the Obama administration should let them continue. When they are complete, the administration should disclose the facts and documents (including legal opinions) that can be made public without jeopardizing national security.
He explains that in his view the “danger now is that lawyers will become excessively cautious in giving advice and will substitute predictions of political palatability for careful legal judgment.”
As Goldsmith notes, many of the facts related to who engineered Bush’s torture programs are already public. Whether or not Congress initiates new investigations, Bush will likely remain the torture president.
Fox News shut out at Obama press conferences.
Fox News shut out at Obama press conferences.
Fishbowl DC notes that Fox News has not been allowed to ask a question at any of the four press conferences that Barack Obama has held since winning the election.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll