Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
'Decision Points' - Former Pres. GWB's Book  
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13138 posts, RR: 15
Posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3053 times:

This week has seen the release of Former US President George W. Bush's book on him and his Presidency. Of course, a few pages of disclosures in the book get the most attention. While it does avoid criticism of current President Obama, he continues to cling, but with few exceptions, as to his absolute views as to many issues. Among the most interesting bits:

- Admitting to a 'love affair' with alcohol, that continued into his early 40's.
- Admitting that the banner 'Mission Accomplished' was a big mistake.
- Admitting that the picture of him flying over in AF1 the New Orleans and other areas devastated by Katrina was a big mistake.
- That he considered changing out Chenny as his VP in the 2004 election.
- His approval of the use of 'waterboarding' of selected terror suspects.
- His decision to go to war in Iraq even with questionable evidence of Saddam Hussein and WMD's.
- Not giving a full pardon, only a commutation of sentence, to 'Scooter' Libby as to his outing of CIA agent Valerie Palme (perhaps to avoid the criticism of former Pres. Clinton who made a number of very controversial pardons as he left office.

Last night (Monday) NBC network had a 1 hour program where he was interviewed by Matt Lauer about the book. Of course he will be making the rounds from Oprah to Leno and probably Fox News to plug his book. One has to wonder if some of the disclosures will end up being used as evidence to bring Human Rights Law charges in some countries. I also have a serious problem that it is normal for former Presidents and other top government leaders not just in the USA to do a book for personal profit rather than disclose important information that should be public record at no cost. I think what a former PM for the UK did, donating the profits for his book to funds for war injured soldiers is a much more honorable thing.

I suspect this book will continue to be analyzed to death, but I think it will help us to understand GWB a bit better.

54 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinevirgin744 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 919 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3005 times:

It still beggars belief how this man was able to get into power and then win reelection, a sad indictment on the American people. Watching him last night reminded me of how inept he was as a leader, absolutely shocking!
Just a couple of points that stood out;


On using torture:
LAUER: Why is waterboarding legal, in your opinion?
BUSH: Because the lawyer said it was legal. He said it did not fall within the Anti-Torture Act. I'm not a lawyer., but you gotta trust the judgment of people around you and I do.
LAUER: You say it's legal. "And the lawyers told me."
BUSH: Yeah.
LAUER: Critics say that you got the Justice Department to give you the legal guidance and the legal memos that you wanted.
BUSH: Well—
LAUER: Tom Kean, who a former Republican co-chair of the 9/11 commission said they got legal opinions they wanted from their own people.
BUSH: He obviously doesn't know. I hope Mr. Kean reads the book. That's why I've written the book. He can, they can draw whatever conclusion they want. But I will tell you this. Using those techniques saved lives. My job is to protect America and I did.

LAUER: So if-- if it's legal, President Bush, then if an American is taken into custody in a foreign country, not necessarily a uniformed--
BUSH: Look, I --
LAUER: American­­--
BUSH: I'm not gonna the issue, Matt. I, I really--
LAUER: I'm just asking. Would it be okay for a foreign country to waterboard an American citizen?
BUSH: It's all I ask is that people read the book. And they can reach the same conclusion. If they'd have made the same decision I made or not.


and on Katrina:
LAUER: The other moment where there seemed to be a huge disconnect between you and the people, especially the people on the ground, was famously with FEMA director Mike Brown.
BUSH: Yeah. (laughs)
LAUER: You know, we were all watching and we were broadcasting images of misery.
BUSH: No, I know. I know.
He says the comment came after he met with the governors of Alabama and Mississippi, both Republicans, who both praised Brown.
BUSH: I tend to boost people's spirits during difficult times. And these two governors are sayin, "This guy's doin' a good job" and of course I say…
BUSH (original press footage): Brownie, you are doing a heck of a job.
BUSH: Basically what I was sayin' it-- "Good job. You're doin' what we expect you to do." The problem is--
LAUER: That's not what we were seein'.
BUSH: Yeah, exactly (laughs). I understand. I understand. I mean the only thing I can tell you is you're right.


User currently offlineConfuscius From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 3868 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2999 times:

Quoting ltbewr (Thread starter):
That he considered changing out Chenny as his VP in the 2004 election.

but was overruled by the vice-president!
 



Ain't I a stinker?
User currently onlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8181 posts, RR: 26
Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2978 times:

Quoting ltbewr (Thread starter):
His decision to go to war in Iraq even with questionable evidence of Saddam Hussein and WMD's

Well that's not quite what he said - he told Lauer that he had "no doubt in his mind" as to the validity of the intelligence provided because George Tenet assured him it was "solid."



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinedxing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2927 times:

Ok, I'll start the side betting. 75 posts and this gets locked? Any takers?

On the book.

Quoting ltbewr (Thread starter):
While it does avoid criticism of current President Obama,

Correct and unlike President Obama on President Bush he actually praises President Obama. Given the continued cheap shots that President Obama makes about President Bush at every turn I think that is pretty magnaimous of President Bush and shows who has the greater character.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20101107/ts_csm/341740_1

Praise for ObamaThere is no criticism of President Obama in Bush’s book, and he praises Obama for his more-aggressive policy on Afghanistan, for his “smart, disciplined, high-tech campaign” in 2008, and for the “calm demeanor” Obama displayed at a special White House meeting during the financial crisis in September of that year.
“I thought it was smart when he informed the gathering that he was in constant contact with Hank” Paulson, he writes. “His purpose was to show that he was aware, in touch, and prepared to help get a bill passed.”


Quoting ltbewr (Thread starter):
I also have a serious problem that it is normal for former Presidents and other top government leaders not just in the USA to do a book for personal profit rather than disclose important information that should be public record at no cost.

You can read about it no cost. Reserve a copy from your local library.

Quoting Confuscius (Reply 3):
but was overruled by the vice-president!

From the link above.

Should he drop Cheney?Bush considered dropping Dick Cheney from the ticket in 2006 (perhaps replacing him with then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee) – an idea put forth by Cheney himself, but subsequently rejected by Bush.

On the waterboarding. President Obama allowed the release of information about the waterboarding but then declines to release the information gained by it only saying its "classified". Well if it remains classified that would indicate to me at least that it has some revelant importance.

He also says in the link on the financial meltdown:

Bush also writes that he was “blindsided by a financial crisis that had been more than a decade in the making.â€
“I assumed any major credit troubles would have been flagged by the regulators or rating agencies,” he writes.


Which goes to show that once you enter the bubble that is the White House you can lose a lot of perspective on what is actually happening as there are so many things coming at you every day its hard to keep your head above water. Even when he did realize that things weren't going so well, some in the government worked against any efforts he made to reform the system before it came crashing down.


I just bought the book for my eReader and hope to get time to read it over the next few days. I hope he can shed some light on why he felt it was necessary to increase discretionary spending as he did over his 8 years in the Presidency. That is where I find his greatest fault.


User currently onlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8181 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2921 times:

Quoting dxing (Reply 9):
Correct and unlike President Obama on President Bush he actually praises President Obama. Given the continued cheap shots that President Obama makes about President Bush at every turn I think that is pretty magnaimous of President Bush and shows who has the greater character.

I got the distinct impression that his comments about the Obama campaign and specifically the Paulson meeting were more intended to criticize John McCain, who he clearly continues to dislike to this day. He wrote that McCain came to the meeting unprepared, LOL.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineAirstud From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2685 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2894 times:

Well why would he dislike McCain? McCain is an asset to the Republican party.


Pancakes are delicious.
User currently offlinedxing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2891 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 10):
I got the distinct impression that his comments about the Obama campaign and specifically the Paulson meeting were more intended to criticize John McCain, who he clearly continues to dislike to this day. He wrote that McCain came to the meeting unprepared, LOL.

I would agree with that. However praise is still praise and to give it after all the cheap shots still speaks well of the person giving it.


User currently onlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8181 posts, RR: 26
Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2891 times:

Quoting Airstud (Reply 11):
Well why would he dislike McCain?

Interference at various points in his administration, criticism of Iraq policy, personal dislike, who knows? But no secret they're not the best of friends.

Quoting Airstud (Reply 11):
McCain is an asset to the Republican party.

Perhaps in your view - but I know plenty of people who call him a worthless RINO.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineAirstud From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2685 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2875 times:

Well, I meant that he is an asset-type person (Vietnam veteran, shmartperson, doesn't play partisan crap, calls a spade a spade). Also he is a Republican person.

So I could've put that better.

  



Pancakes are delicious.
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21677 posts, RR: 55
Reply 10, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2868 times:

Quoting Airstud (Reply 11):
Well why would he dislike McCain?

Who knows? But you don't do the sort of stuff that Bush did to McCain in 2000 unless you really don't like someone.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12701 posts, RR: 25
Reply 11, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2862 times:

Quoting virgin744 (Reply 1):
It still beggars belief how this man was able to get into power and then win reelection, a sad indictment on the American people.

Every system has its plusses and its minuses.

He almost didn't win. Some still claim he didn't.

IMHO the main reason was he ran against someone with no charisma (Al Gore) and a loose canon (Joe Lieberman).

And one reason why Obama won was because he ran against a tired man (John McCain) and a brainless cheerleader (Sarah Palin).

The personal appeal of the head of ticket is very important in the US.

Whether it should be or not is another topic.

The UK's system lead to the charismatic Tony Blair handing off to the dour Gordon Brown and more or less giving away power to the Tories.

Like I said, plusses and minuses.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12513 posts, RR: 35
Reply 12, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2839 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 7):
I'm more worried that he basically asked the Justice Department to tell him that waterboarding was acceptable within the law, and then when they did, said "well, they told me it was legal".

That sort of crap can't stand, no matter what the subject matter is.

I'm no supporter of GWB and will always maintain that he was one of the most disastrous presidents in the country's history, but in decisions like this, I am slower to condemn.

Let's look at it from another perspective; let's say a horrific terrorist attack had taken place - for example the attack on LHR, as mentioned by GWB in his book; let's say it later became public knowledge that the individuals who had knowledge of this were in custody and that they were not "appropriately incentivised" to provide information which could have prevented this attack from taking place; what would the public think then? Bottom line: if you have a choice between saving the lives of x,000 people and undermining the rights/dignities of one person (who is also known to have participated in the planning of other atrocities), are you morally justified in not bringing to bear all possible incentives/pressures to elicit information?

Trouble is, of course, that the line is never absolutely clear; you will never have a clear decision, yes or no; you have to go with your instinct; this is part of what these people have done to western societies, or so they may claim. However, at the end of the day, which is the higher duty of government: to protect the lives or its people or the absolute "by the book" administration of justice? I would strongly argue the former, because "the book" never anticipated some of what we have witnessed and our society - including our legal processes - must not be hamstrung in the pursuit of its ultimate duty.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21677 posts, RR: 55
Reply 13, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2767 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 18):
Bottom line: if you have a choice between saving the lives of x,000 people and undermining the rights/dignities of one person (who is also known to have participated in the planning of other atrocities), are you morally justified in not bringing to bear all possible incentives/pressures to elicit information?

Respecting the existing laws is never the wrong answer. If the lawyers say that certain forms of interrogation are acceptable, then fine, but that whole process breaks down when the lawyers are compelled to tell the president what he wants to hear instead of what is accurate.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineAirTran737 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3704 posts, RR: 12
Reply 14, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2756 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I bought the book and am about 100 pages into it. So far it is a good book. I am enjoying reading it in Business Elite on DL as we scream towards SFO with a bunch of Liberals giving me bad looks for reading it. Bush jumps back and forth on the timeline of his life. To be honest it is nice to read it. The book gives him a human side. Say whatever you want about him, he was a man who loves this country and did everything that he thought that could to make it a better and safer place. Some of the insight to the Rumsfeld and Powell feud is quite interesting. You guys should read the book before you judge it.


Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
User currently offlinestlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9401 posts, RR: 26
Reply 15, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2659 times:

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 21):

well i'm a screaming lefty and i can't wait to read the book. problem is - most of the good points were already given away in the promotional interviews, so now i'm a little slower to pick it up. oh well  

it'll turn into my thanksgiving holiday weekend read, most likely.



if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11718 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2592 times:

Quoting ltbewr (Thread starter):
Admitting that the banner 'Mission Accomplished' was a big mistake.

What about delcaring major combat operations in Iraq have ended?

I kinda feel sorry for the guy, now. It sounds like he did a lot of this stuff to gain acceptance from his collegues and peers, not so much for the good of the nation. I think he needs some heavy therapy.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13634 posts, RR: 62
Reply 17, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2548 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ltbewr (Thread starter):
One has to wonder if some of the disclosures will end up being used as evidence to bring Human Rights Law charges in some countries.

Seriously? C'mon...   



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13138 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2265 times:

Getting back to the subject of this book....

Apparently this book fails to discuss certain decisions and behaviors of GWB. For examples just as to the events of 9/11:

- His decision to evacuate relatives of the bin-Ladin family from the USA by air to Saudi Arabia in an exception to the grounding of all aircraft but for military need. To me they all should have been brought to a military base, all their USA assets seized and held until Osama was found and dead. Why was this done? Was it due to the close relationship of the bin-Ladan family and the Bush family to the Saud family who controls Saudi Arabia ? Crickets chirp.

- His decisions to have the EPA declare the air to be safe lower Manhattan along with the 'reopening' of the areas businesses despite the dangerous, toxic air, dusts and debris. Now many 1000's face premature death and terrible illnesses from those exposures and insufficient cleaning just to put Wall Street back in business as a symbol to the terrorists that they Dian't win. Better would have been to enforce EPA and OSHA laws on workers in the neighborhood, to temporarily relocate key financial operations to outside the neighborhood and make sure all structures in the area were properly cleaned before people could return to work or live in them.

- How he reacted at that book reading when the attacks went down. Upon the first word from his Secret Service agent, he should have excused himself, gone off stage, then immediately leave the site instead of keep reading.

These are just a few examples of how this book is more about rehabbing his image rather than discussing his 'decision points'.


User currently offlineflanker From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1641 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2264 times:

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 49):
- How he reacted at that book reading when the attacks went down. Upon the first word from his Secret Service agent, he should have excused himself, gone off stage, then immediately leave the site instead of keep reading.

He discussed this during the Sean Hannity interview for the book. It would be wise for you to go see it and listen to what he said before making assumptions.

Excellent interview with Bush on the factor with Bill.

http://video.foxnews.com/#/v/4415470...e-factor-part-1/?playlist_id=87485

Did you even read the book yet?

[Edited 2010-11-12 04:05:17]

[Edited 2010-11-12 04:38:09]


Calling an illegal alien an 'undocumented immigrant' is like calling a drug dealer an unlicensed pharmacist
User currently offlineMudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1167 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2184 times:

Quoting flanker (Reply 50):
Excellent interview with Bush on the factor with Bill.

http://video.foxnews.com/#/v/4415470...e-factor-part-1/?playlist_id=87485

Did you even read the book yet?

I have a lot of respect for President Bush, in how he continues to refuse to bad mouth President Obama, after they keep trying to get him to; He is showing respect for the office.


User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 26
Reply 21, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2122 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

A fair amount of rule-violating posts were removed from this thread. Please note that this thread was created to discuss former Pres. GW Bush book. Any off-topic content will be removed and users that continue to post in a rule-violating manner may very well have their accounts suspended.

Thank you for your co-operation. I hope you enjoy a great weekend.

Rgds

SA7700



When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
User currently offlineHKA098 From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 556 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2121 times:

I have yet to finish the book, but it seems as if this is a chance to try and spin the history of G.W's Presidency.

User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5300 posts, RR: 25
Reply 23, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2117 times:

I do not tend to read books by politicians of any stripe since I find them to be completely self-indulgent and self-congratuladtory. I may read this one just to see what he has to say about his presidency, but I have not yet made up my mind?

Quoting flanker (Reply 19):
He discussed this during the Sean Hannity interview for the book. It would be wise for you to go see it and listen to what he said before making assumptions.

Out of curiosity, how did he explain it away?



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineqantas077 From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 5861 posts, RR: 39
Reply 24, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2095 times:

Quoting OA412 (Reply 24):
I do not tend to read books by politicians of any stripe since I find them to be completely self-indulgent and self-congratuladtory. I may read this one just to see what he has to say about his presidency, but I have not yet made up my mind?

well if this is anything to go by...then you might not be reading his memoirs.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1...Title&utm_term=Daily+Brief#s180908



a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.
25 OA412 : Just when I thought my opinion of the man couldn't get any lower, he goes ahead and outdoes himself.
26 ual777 : Please. The Huffington Post is a liberal rag that might as well be called 'The Daily Worker.' I read the article and it seems as if two paragraphs we
27 dxing : Of how hindsight is 20/20 and it is always easier to offer cheap criticism. Instead of apparently making judgements with only snipets of the book why
28 Post contains images Mir : He hasn't been on The Daily Show yet. -Mir
29 seb146 : And only "conservative" outlets are allowed to offer book reviews? Bush made it sound like he was actually there when, clearly, he was not. That is l
30 Airstud : Ummmm....you're going to have to be so much more specific...
31 DocLightning : Both of which, IMO, should earn him a free vacation to The Hague. But the POTUS seems to be above international law.
32 Aaron747 : Our government, and people by extension, have made it clear on numerous occasions that we only ascribe to those peacemeal bits of international law w
33 Airstud : One of the many, many, oh so very pungently reverberatingly MANY reasons why I have little (if any) respect for the United Nations is that after they
34 kanban : this confirms that his memory is spotty and he used other people's writings when he drew a blank... not much different from how he governed. technica
35 DocLightning : What were they going to do? Their HQ is in on US soil (well, technically it's a small island of non-US soil, but it's in NYC). The UN has very little
36 dxing : Not as long as he attributes the story to its source and the HP article does not make that claim. Out of a book that is over 500 pages they found 16
37 NYCFlyer : Seriously, why is the waterboarding so bad? Bush claims that only 3 people were waterboarded. The person who was waterboarded by far the most was Kha
38 Mudboy : Agreed! It sickens me that American would think the leader of our country, should be prosecuted for war crimes. If these measures were taken to save
39 DocLightning : Funny. As a 24 year-old medical student in 2002, I remember saying: "They aren't going to find one drop of WMD's there. Just watch. They may well hav
40 Zentraedi : The thing that bothered me was the whole Republican stance of: "It's not torture and even if it is, we didn't do it." Republicans trotted that out eve
41 Mir : So where is the line? -Mir
42 Mudboy : And any 18 series, SEAL, Force Recon etc would say the same, as they have been through it I will be the first one to say that it is torture, but some
43 Mudboy : If there was an impending attack on a US city with a nuke, and you had the mastermind in custody that knew the location of the bomb, and you could sa
44 stratosphere : You know the argument is that since we did this to KSH that it puts our troops in danger. Well HELLO they meaning our enemies do not follow the Genev
45 Zentraedi : That I can respect. I'm just wondering why so many conservatives and the conservative media try to claim that it isn't. If several years ago, Bush an
46 Mudboy : Because their objective is to ride the fence, and if something could cost them votes, they will deny til they die. Many times there is a clash betwee
47 Maverick623 : I have a hard time swallowing that "torture" is within their "power".
48 Mir : You're not answering the question, though: what would you NOT do? At what point does it not become "impending"? -Mir
49 Post contains links ltbewr : This is another article from Huffington Post .com, that makes some interesting points about how GWB's book says a lot about him. http://www.huffington
50 Mudboy : I believe my answer was that I would do ANYTHING it takes to protect Americans, and I would expect my leaders to do the same. As far as impending goe
51 11Bravo : I expect my national leaders to "...., preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" In other words, I expect my leaders to fol
52 seb146 : What happened to Osama bin Laden? Wasn't he the reason we invaded Afghanistan? Wasn't he the kingpin in the Sept 11 attack? When did focus shift from
53 dxing : Name someone that has run for President that doesn't have an authoritarian personality save possibly Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford. A person doesn't r
54 Mir : So what you're basically saying is that you would torture anyone at any time so long as someone's life might be in jeopardy. Does that apply to US ci
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Former IOC Chief Samaranch Dead posted Wed Apr 21 2010 05:01:55 by david_itl
Chinese Help Needed With Old Book posted Tue Apr 20 2010 15:20:42 by signol
New Tom Clancy Ryanverse Book Coming posted Thu Apr 8 2010 05:55:23 by Dreadnought
Breach WH Security Get A TV And Book Deal posted Thu Mar 25 2010 18:51:32 by NIKV69
Mac Book Help posted Tue Mar 2 2010 16:25:26 by greasespot
United Against Supreme Court Decision. posted Wed Feb 17 2010 17:54:35 by WarRI1
Disgusting Decision By CAF posted Sat Jan 30 2010 16:02:20 by Scbriml
Obama's Decision For Show Trial Irks Bloomberg posted Thu Jan 28 2010 13:27:09 by NIKV69
What Book Are You Reading? posted Sat Jan 9 2010 15:31:27 by 76794p
Tell-All Book Deal About Tiger Woods Worth $1M? posted Thu Jan 7 2010 21:49:04 by DIRECTFLT