Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 192
  1. #101
    Multimedia Spurs
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Post Count
    6,659
    Because, it doesn't say coalition forces had actually taken control of the facility yet. And, it doesn't say how long "after" the invasion the stuff went missing...

    I note that nowhere do you see that coalition forces controlled the facility when the explosives were stolen or went missing.
    From the AP today, take from the MSNBC site:

    "At the Pentagon, an official who monitors developments in Iraq said U.S.-led coalition troops had searched Al-Qaqaa in the immediate aftermath of the March 2003 invasion and confirmed that the explosives, which had been under IAEA seal since 1991, were intact. The site was not secured by U.S. forces, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity."

    So NBC saying the 380 tons were missing in April is not in conflict with the Army see them there "intact" in March "immediate aftermath".

    This story isn't over yet.

    Of course, we can trust shrub to get to the bottom of this as "enthusiastically" as he wanted the 9/11 commision (about which he later flip-flopped and said he wanted the 9/11 commission).

  2. #102
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    April 10, 2003, only three weeks into the war,
    So the coalition did fail to protect this armoury for at least two weeks.

    Unfortuantely for W, it's not as easy as when the administration noticed that the weapons were missing...

    This has been rumored in Washington for several days. And now the Nelson Report has broken the story.

    Some 350 tons of high explosives (RDX and HMX), which were under IAEA seal while Saddam was in power, were looted during the early days of the US occupation. Like so much else, it was just left unguarded.

    Not only are these super-high-yield explosives probably being used in many, if not most, of the various suicide and car bombings in Iraq, but these particular explosives are ones used in the triggering process for nuclear weapons.

    In other words, it's bad stuff.

    What also emerges in the Nelson Report is that the Defense Department has been trying to keep this secret for some time. The DOD even went so far as to order the Iraqis not to inform the IAEA that the materials had gone missing. Informing the IAEA, of course, would lead to it becoming public knowledge in the United States.

    I quote from Chris Nelson's summary ...

    Despite pressure from DOD to keep it quiet, the IAEA and the Iraqi Interim Government this month officially reported that 350-tons of dual-use, very high explosives were looted from a previously secure site in the early days of the US occupation in 2003. Administration officials privately admit this material is likely a primary source of the lethal car bomb attacks which cause so many US and Iraqi casualties. In the first presidential candidate debate, on foreign policy, Democratic nominee John Kerry charged that captured munitions and weapons were being turned against Coalition Forces, with US troops suffering 90% of the casualties. But the specifics of the losses from the Al Qa Qaa bunker and building complex, only now being reported, were apparently unknown outside of DOD and the US occupation authorities. The Bush Administration barred the IAEA from any participation in the Iraq invasion and occupation process, and blocked IAEA requests to help in the search for WMD and other dangerous materials. As part of the UN sanctions regime still in place when the US invaded, the IAEA had “under seal” 350 tons of RDX and HDX explosives, since singly, and in combination, these materials can be used in the triggering process for a nuclear weapon. However, the explosives were allowed to remain in Iraq due to their conventional use in construction, oil pipe lines, and the like. Since the explosives went missing last year, sources say DOD and other elements in the Administration sought to block the IAEA from officially reporting the problem, and also tried to stop the new Iraqi Interim Government from cooperating with the IAEA. But finally, on Oct. 10, the Iraqi’s formally notified the IAEA, and on Oct. 15, the IAEA formally notified the Bush Administration. In press guidance prepared for release in the event news got out, but not released until today, when requested by The Nelson Report, State Department spokesmen confirmed the Iraqi government and IAEA report dates, and that 350 tons of dual use high explosives could not be accounted for. State says DOD has now authorized the Iraq Survey Group to investigate the situation, which, by all accounts, took place in April, 2003. The official press guidance claims “no indications of WMD” at the Al Qa Qaa site, but concedes that the IAEA-sealed explosives were already missing at that time. Some sources say that in addition to the explosives, 20,000 RDX-armed rockets were lost, but we cannot confirm this. However, sources do say that parts of Iraqi Scud engines, and other metal components, have turned up in scrap metal yards in Amsterdam.

    1. The Summary gives you the sum total of what we have been told, starting Friday, by informed observers and directly involved officials. There was an expectation of a major newspaper story on it this morning, and perhaps also a segment on tonight’s 60 Minutes, on CBS Television. The newspaper report failed to materialize, the TV show may yet appear...stay tuned.

    -- the information confirmed by the State Department Press Guidance, prepared, but not called for Friday, is important in that it provides, for the first time, explicit details on exactly what was lost to “looters” of the Al Qa Qaa bunker and building complex in the early days of the Iraq invasion and occupation, in April, 2003. The importance of the information? A highly informed official offered the assessment that, “this is the stuff the bad guys have been using to kill our troops, so you can’t ignore the political implications of this, and you would be correct to suspect that politics, or the fear of politics, played a major role in delaying the release of this information.”


    Further down in this evening's edition of The Nelson Report comes this ...

    3. The Iraqi authorities were caught in a similar bind, observers feel. Under heavy pressure from their sponsors in DOD and US occupation authorities not to cooperate with the IAEA, by confirming that all 350 tons of sealed explosives could not be accounted for, the Iraqi’s had to wait until the formal turnover of authority before notifying the IAEA, sources here suggest. So the Iraqis failed to act until Oct. 10, and the IAEA did not formally notified the US, by letter, until Oct. 15, according to the State Department’s official press guidance.

    -- “What the WE were doing in the year and a half from the time we knew the stuff was gone, is obviously a huge question, and you can imagine why no one [in the Administration] wants to face up to it, certainly not before the election,” an Administration source says. Other sources also noted the language of the State Department guidance, which they interpret as seeking to deflect from the gravity of the situation in two ways: first, by listing hundreds of thousands of tons of other munitions and weapons already discovered and/or destroyed, “the Guidance has the effect, for unsophisticated listeners, of lowering the profile of ‘only’ 350 tons of RDX and HMX explosives from Al Qa Qaa”.

    Note: experts were reluctant to say exactly how much of this stuff it takes for a successful road side bomb, for example, but the guesstimates were “a few pounds, at most.” In other words, “with 350 tons out there, the bombing can go on for years...”

    4. Second, several highly informed sources were careful to hint, the “implications” of RDX and HMX, singly, and in combination, “are also an extremely serious issue, which is why they were under IAEA-seal”. One expert pointedly added, “and that’s all I can say on that, even on background.” Another sources noted, however, “it’s interesting that the Press Guidance seems to want us to look past any WMD implications for what was taken.”

    -- another obvious question is what’s been done with the 350 tons, if anything, outside of Iraq? Our sources were unanimous in thinking that for reasons noted below, “it’s still in Iraq, and this is the most likely primary source of the explosives which have been used to blow up Humvees and in all the deadly car bomb attacks since the Occupation began.” Sources also discount any possibility except that “this was a highly organized operation using heavy equipment, and it was done right under our noses.”

    More on this very soon ...
    Talking Point Memo

  3. #103
    I don't really care... Yonivore's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Post Count
    26,781
    So the coalition did fail to protect this armoury for at least two weeks.
    They were rather busy fighting their way to the armory.
    Unfortuantely for W, it's not as easy as when the administration noticed that the weapons were missing...

    Talking Point Memo
    The invasion began on March 19, 2003 -- less than 21 days later, Bagdad fell. The armory was reached on April 10, 2003 and the explosives were gone then.

    Who the is Chris Nelson and what the is the Nelson Report. And, getting your arguments from something called "The Talking Points" isn't very wise.

    You just get more stupid every day Nbadanallah

  4. #104
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    They were rather busy fighting their way to the armory.
    Wrong. Guess again.

    which is it?

    The Iraqi interim government says that the explosives at al Qa Qaa went missing some time after April 9th 2003 because of "the theft and looting of the governmental installations due to lack of security."

    (Remember, Baghdad fell on April 9th, so presumably that's a marker denoting simply that it happened at some point after the fall of the old regime.)

    Today, Pentagon spokesman Larry Di Rita suggested that the weapons may have been taken from al Qa Qaa in the final days of the old regime or in fact during the war.

    Remember, the IAEA inspected the munitions in January 2003 and then returned to the site and saw that the seals were in place in March, just a week or so before the war started. So Di Rita is claiming that the explosives were taken away in a two or three week period in late March of very early April 2003. If Drudge is to be trusted (yes, yes, I know), NBC will be running with some version of this storyline.

    But there's another version of events.

    A Pentagon "official who monitors developments in Iraq" told the Associated Press today that "US-led coalition troops had searched Al-Qaqaa in the immediate aftermath of the March 2003 invasion and confirmed that the explosives, which had been under IAEA seal since 1991, were intact."

    That of course would mean that the explosives were not removed from the facility until some point after the war. And that would be in line with what the Iraqis two weeks ago told the IAEA.


    Let's review for a moment. We have a dispute here about a window of time covering two to four weeks, say roughly from March 10th to April 10th 2003 at the longest. But it's an important few weeks because it was over this span of time that the region went from the control of Saddam's government to the US military.

    If the Di Rita hypothesis rests on the claim that the first US troops that visited al Qa Qaa found that the explosives had already been stolen or looted or otherwise secreted away. (He has, in fact, already said this.) And that would mean that the US government has known the explosives were missing for some eighteen months.

    The problem is that the White House has spent the entire day claiming that they knew nothing about this until ten days ago, October 15th. Scott McClellan said this repeatedly during his gaggle with reporters this morning. Indeed, he went on to say the following: "Now [i.e., after the notification on October 15th], the Pentagon, upon learning of this, directed the multinational forces and the Iraqi survey group to look into this matter, and that's what they are currently doing."

    So McClellan says that the Pentagon only just learned about this. And that's why they only now assigned the Iraq Survey Group to examine what happened at al Qa Qaa.

    But Di Rita says that the US government has known about it for 18 months.

    So which is it?

    They've known about it since just after the war and kept it a secret? Or they just found out about it ten days ago and now they're on the case?
    Talking Point Memo

  5. #105
    I don't really care... Yonivore's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Post Count
    26,781
    Once again, Nbadanallah, you've seized on a story and chosen to die on a hill that leads to nowhere.

    The MSM and New Media are already counting the Times story as discredited and waiting for a retraction.

    I know we can count on you to keep it going in here right up to election day...just like Terry McAuliffe promised on the Air National Guard story.

    Have fun with it boyo.

  6. #106
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    Well, at least you didn't play the illuminati card this time as you and your elk frequently hijack the conversation too because your argument, and lack of facts. have fallen to pieces. As a Right-winger, I have no doubt that you would like this story to just suddenly go away. It's a political liability for W of immense proportions.

  7. #107
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    More good points from Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo regarding Ammogate...

    Could the al Qa Qaa debacle be a sinister and ingenious ploy on the part of the White House to give the public one more view of the goofball buck-passing that has been such an asset to the president's administration?

    Look at the latest from Scott McClellan on Air Force One. This from CNN...

    White House spokesman Scott McClellan said President Bush wants to determine what went wrong.

    McClellan, on Air Force One, stressed that the missing explosives were not nuclear materials, and said the storage site was the responsibility of the interim Iraqi government, not the United States, as of June 28, when the United States turned over the nation's administration to the Iraqis.
    The president wants to determine what went wrong.

    This reminds me of when I wanted to know why my Palm Pilot stopped working after I dropped it in the bath tub.

    Doesn't this capture Bush's entire presidency?

    The thing happened more than a year ago, his administration has taken active steps to cover it up and now that the truth finally comes out, he 'wants to determine what went wrong.'

    The idea of accepting responsibility for anything is simply alien to the man. He doesn't even have the good grace to scam us by finding a scapegoat to pin the blame on.

    And what about Scott McClellan trying to pin it on the Iraqis?

    Does he not read the newspapers or does he think everyone else to too stupid to remember what they just read in them this morning. The stuff was taken more than a year before the Iraqis took over the US occupation authority. And even the highly-cautious Times piece makes clear that Jerry Bremer was told about it no later than May of this year.

    -- Josh Marshall

  8. #108
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    Well, the CNN story has been debunked for good now...

    From the CNN article...

    NBC News reported that on April 10, 2003, its crew was embedded with the U.S. Army's 101st Airborne Division when troops arrived at the Al Qaqaa storage facility south of Baghdad.
    CNN

    ..but that's not what the MSNBC article says at all. Here is what the article actually says...

    NBC report:

    At the Pentagon, an official who monitors developments in Iraq said U.S.-led coalition troops had searched Al Qaqaa in the immediate aftermath of the March 2003 invasion and confirmed that the explosives were intact. Thereafter the site was not secured by U.S. forces, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
    MSNBC

    What?? CNN passing on obvious right-wing propaganda?

  9. #109
    Free Throw Coach Aggie Hoopsfan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Post Count
    31,094
    You do realize that NBC were the ones with the video crew in Iraq, not MSNBC, right?

    Two different organizations, two different reports. But then, you already knew this.

  10. #110
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    MSNBC is a affliate of a joint venture between NBC News and Microsoft...

    MSNBC.com was launched in 1996 as part of a joint venture between Microsoft and General Electric's NBC.
    ZDNet

  11. #111
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    Even more debunking of the CNN story in today's Washington Post...

    Iraqi Explosives Missing, U.N. Is Told
    U.S. Disputes Timing of Loss of Munitions Sealed by Inspectors at Weapons Facility


    By Colum Lynch and Bradley Graham
    Washington Post Staff Writers
    Tuesday, October 26, 2004; Page A18


    UNITED NATIONS, Oct. 25 -- The U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency reported Monday that massive quan ies of high explosives at an Iraqi weapons facility have disappeared, including some material under U.N. seal because of its potential use to detonate a nuclear bomb.

    The disclosure came less than a month after ElBaradei warned the council that U.N. satellite photos had detected "widespread and apparently systematic dismantlement" of buildings linked to Iraq's former covert nuclear weapons program. Those buildings "housed high precision equipment" that had been subject to U.N. monitoring during Saddam Hussein's reign.

    The letter from Mohammad J. Abbas, a senior official in the Iraqi Ministry of Science and Technology, said that nearly 215 tons of HMX, 156 tons of RDX and 6 tons of PETN had gone missing after April 9, 2003, the day Baghdad fell to U.S. forces. The letter blamed a "lack of security" for the loss.

    In satellite photos of the Qaqaa site taken in November 2003 and shown to The Washington Post on Monday by senior U.N. officials, signs of damage from previous U.S. bombing campaigns and looting were evident. But the facilities that stored HMX and RDX were still largely intact, according to the officials.
    Washington Post

  12. #112
    Pimp Marcus Bryant's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Post Count
    1,021,992
    But these troops never found the nearly 380 tons of some of the most powerful conventional explosives, called HMX and RDX, which is now missing. The U.S. troops did find large stockpiles of more conventional weapons, but no HMX or RDX
    From yesterday's NY Times campaign ad for Kerry:

    But apparently, little was done. A senior Bush administration official said that during the initial race to Baghdad, American forces "went through the bunkers, but saw no materials bearing the I.A.E.A. seal." It is unclear whether troops ever returned.
    Also, we are not talking about stuff that a couple of guys could show up and throw in their backpacks. It would require a fleet of semis to move that . I'm sure that would have gone unnoticed. Yeah.

    So much for the fading Old Gray Lady...
    Last edited by Marcus Bryant; 10-26-2004 at 08:23 AM.

  13. #113
    Basketball Expertise spurster's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Post Count
    4,132
    http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/...al/bomb650.jpg

    The letter said "lost after 9 - 4 - 2003", so some official must have verified it on April 9, 2003. That seems clear enough to me.

  14. #114
    Pimp Marcus Bryant's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Post Count
    1,021,992
    Sure, those explosives weren't there in April of 2003 and they weren't there in March of 2003 when US troops reached that site.

  15. #115
    Roll The Dice Hook Dem's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Post Count
    6,877
    Sure, those explosives weren't there in April of 2003 and they weren't there in March of 2003 when US troops reached that site.
    What is it about that that the leftist ball swingers don't understand?

  16. #116
    Pimp Marcus Bryant's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Post Count
    1,021,992
    Apparently 60 Minutes was going to hit Bush with this next Sunday.

    Also, of interest...

    http://www.nationalreview.com/thecorner/corner.asp

    BOMB-GATE [Cliff May]
    Sent to me by a source in the government: “The Iraqi explosives story is a fraud. These weapons were not there when US troops went to this site in 2003. The IAEA and its head, the anti-American Mohammed El Baradei, leaked a false letter on this issue to the media to embarrass the Bush administration. The US is trying to deny El Baradei a second term and we have been on his case for missing the Libyan nuclear weapons program and for weakness on the Iranian nuclear weapons program.”

    (For the record, I don’t reveal my sources so if that means I end up sharing a cell at Sing-sing with Judy Miller, so be it.)
    Posted at 10:00 AM
    If that indeed is the case then we have yet another attack on the Bush administration by the old guard media utilizing fake do ent(s). Great.
    Last edited by Marcus Bryant; 10-26-2004 at 11:02 AM.

  17. #117
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    For the record, I don’t reveal my sources so if that means I end up sharing a cell at Sing-sing with Judy Miller, so be it.)
    Nice spin, an anonymous source over established sources.


  18. #118
    Pimp Marcus Bryant's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Post Count
    1,021,992
    Like NBC?

  19. #119
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    I already told you, NBC is Right-wing TV.

  20. #120
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    How many times do I have to debunk the NBC story? Or are you just posting out of your ass?

  21. #121
    Pimp Marcus Bryant's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Post Count
    1,021,992
    You've yet to "debunk" the NBC story. All you've proffered is that NBC is "right wing".

    Standard drivel from your nosy ass.

  22. #122
    Pimp Marcus Bryant's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Post Count
    1,021,992
    So great, the NY Times ran a story with forged do ents and a non-US citizen with an axe to grind against the US government as their sources. Apparently he was talking with 60 Minutes who wanted to air it this Sunday night, a scant 48 hours before the (scheduled) end of the election. That would have been the second story critical of the Bush administration aired by CBS based on forged do ents in this campaign.

    Pretty ing clear to me what's going on. Perhaps sooner or later some of you will figure it out before you quote the NY Times again.

    http://www.drudgereport.com/nbcw6.htm

    XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX TUE OCT 26 2004 11:02:38 ET XXXXX


    In 1992 it was the Iran Contra charges brought days before the election... In 2000 it was the DUI charges a few days before the vote... And Now...


    60 MINS PLANNED BUSH MISSING EXPLOSIVES STORY FOR ELECTION EVE

    News of missing explosives in Iraq -- first reported in April 2003 -- was being resurrected for a 60 MINUTES election eve broadcast designed to knock the Bush administration into a crisis mode.

    Jeff er, executive producer of the Sunday edition of 60 MINUTES, said in a statement that "our plan was to run the story on October 31, but it became clear that it wouldn't hold..."

    Elizabeth Jensen at the LOS ANGELES TIMES details on Tuesday how CBS NEWS and 60 MINUTES lost the story [which repackaged previously reported information on a large cache of explosives missing in Iraq, first published and broadcast in 2003].

    The story instead debuted in the NYT. The paper slugged the story about missing explosives from April 2003 as "exclusive."

    An NBCNEWS crew embedded with troops moved in to secure the Al-Qaqaa weapons facility on April 10, 2003, one day after the liberation of Iraq.

    According to NBCNEWS, the explosives were already missing when the American troops arrived. [VIDEO CLIP]

    It is not clear who exactly shopped an election eve repackaging of the missing explosives story.

    The LA TIMES claims: The source on the story first went to 60 MINUTES but also expressed interest in working with the NY TIMES... "The tip was received last Wednesday."

    CBSNEWS' plan to unleash the story just 24 hours before election day had one senior Bush official outraged.


    "Darn, I wanted to see the forged do ents to show how this was somehow covered up," the Bush source, who asked not to be named, mocked, recalling last months CBS airing of fraudulent Bush national guard letters.

    Developing...

    -----------------------------------------------------------
    Filed By Matt Drudge
    Reports are moved when cir stances warrant
    http://www.drudgereport.com for updates
    (c)DRUDGE REPORT 2004
    Not for reproduction without permission of the author

    Wow, the Kerry campaign already has an ad about this. Rather convenient.

    http://www.drudgereport.com/dnce.htm

    XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX TUE OCT 26, 2004 13:04:28 ET XXXXX

    KERRY/EDWARDS CAMPAIGN PREPARING CAMPAIGN AD ON MISSING EXPLOSIVES

    **Exclusive**

    :30 spot called "obligation"

    JOHN KERRY: "The obligation of a Commander in Chief is to keep our country safe. In Iraq, George Bush has overextended our troops..."

    JOHN KERRY: "...and now failed to secure 380 tons of deadly explosives."

    JOHN KERRY: "The kind used for attacks in Iraq, and for terrorist bombings."

    JOHN KERRY: "His Iraq misjudgments put our soldiers at risk, and make our country less secure. And all he offers is more of the same. As President, I'll bring a fresh start to protect our troops and our nation. I'm John Kerry and I approved this message.

    Developing...

    -----------------------------------------------------------
    Filed By Matt Drudge
    Reports are moved when cir stances warrant
    http://www.drudgereport.com for updates
    (c)DRUDGE REPORT 2004
    Not for reproduction without permission of the author
    So what's the backup 'October surprise' that the Kerry campaign and their sycophants in the media have ready to go? Hmmmm.

    'Fake but accurate' journalism is ing awesome.
    Last edited by Marcus Bryant; 10-26-2004 at 01:14 PM.

  23. #123
    Gone Crazy, be back later CrazyOne's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    4,522
    MB - Clarification of earlier posts where you alluded to nasty things about Guido - Dan and I have a side bet on the election, 500 points from the loser to the winner, and all the loser's vbookie points if the winner takes more than 52% of the total vote.

    Now go do 3 Hail Marys (the football must travel at least 30 yards through the air) and wash out your keyboard with soap. The Padre has spoken. Don't make me go Latin on you...

  24. #124
    Pimp Marcus Bryant's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Post Count
    1,021,992
    Last edited by Marcus Bryant; 10-26-2004 at 01:39 PM.

  25. #125
    It's In The Numbers 1369's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Post Count
    5,138
    Yikes, Baghdad Bob (Or whatever his name was) shacks up with Nbadan?

    It's on the internet, it must be true.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •