« MR. SCHUMER. MR. SCHUMER, AYE. | Main | Bloggers Owe Us Nothing: Gratitude, and That's Right »

November 30, 2005

Comments

Shinobi

"People change constantly, but people only change themselves, it all comes down to that, online, offline, in general."

Completely true Pyrrho. But how often do they change for the better? I hope more often than not, but lately I'm beginning to doubt that. But I suppose that has to do with my subjective judgement of what is actually an improvement.

Also, nice post Mark.

pyrrho

Shinobi,

In the long run it's for the better, in the near case, one cannot know since shifts for the worse may prepare the long run change for the better.

But the reason I am progressive is I believe in progress, which is to say my faith, the one that Averoes should really concern himself with, is that progress is possible and natural, so I do believe that they change for the better in the long run. That's practically metaphysical because it cannot be proven, we all look at nature and have to decide if progress, regress, or merely cycle are demonstrated.

I believe it's really just cycle, but within the cycles progress is possible and the tendency.

Averroes

Shinobi, i am deep;y disappointed in someone who I thought was a mathematician, who based her ideas on reason! Here is a part of the "nice post" you assented to:

Bush’s “16 words” are not “EXPERIENCE WITH THE ADMINISTRATION IN THE MONTHS LEADING UP TO THE WAR.”

And who does Mark think ever made such a claim? Of course they aren't. I have no idea what mark is smoking here.

The fact is that Wilson concludes that Bush (or someone) lied in the 16 words, and offers the reasons he thinks thes, in the op-ed piece, as his experience with the administration in the lead up to the war. IIN the op-ed, and in hundreds of other places, he describes that experience as his trip to Niger, and his reporting something to the CIA. Mark is right that we can't know if this is the extent of what Wilson is meaning by 'experience,' but becasue he includes it every time, we know that his trip to Niger is at least a part of what he means. He offers nothing else, in fact. He never, to my knowledge, repeats his trip to Niger, says that he assumes that a report would have gtone to the policymakers, and then adds, "I had other experience which i am not going to tell you about."

Mark also saiud, and you assented to:

"First, you are admitting that you based your argument what is COMMON PRACTICE to write conclusion in the introduction on ONE EXAMPLE."

Of cpurse this is a non-fact, and Mark knows it.

The fact is just as i have written several times now. I know it is common practice in essays, and he challenged me on that. I simply opened a magqazine i had on my desk to look for an example, and when i found one, i reprinted it.

I have never made an argument for its being a common practice because i don't think anyone who reads articles would doubt that. Unless, of course, they want to argue about the meaning of the word 'common.'
What i mean is 'not rare.'

Of course mark knows that the Science style sheet does not allow this in "reports." One finds this much more commonly in pop magazines, and espedially in newspapers. Where, wonder of wonders, the Wilson article in question appeared.

of course, this all came about because your hero, mark, had maintained that the conclusion could not be a conclusion because it appered in the introduction.

I have read mark and pyrrho for some time now, and the overwhelming partisanship and lack of honest argument based on valid evidence has left me no choice to conclude that they make Rush Limbaugh look like a beacon of truth, but et tu, Shinobi?

Averroes

Markish:

"You make an accusation that you cannot substantiate (my “sole purpose is to avoid the truth at all costs,”), and instead of admitting it you call it “hyperbole."

Of course calling it 'hyperbole' IS admitting I can't substantiate it. But that might be too subtle for your mind at this point. Am I right on that Shinobi?

In fact, it is the kind of hyperbole we hear all the time. Your mom might have said "I cin't trutst you on anyuthing." Your dad might have said, "You can always count on the Democrats to look out for the people." 'Every' and 'all' statements usually cannot be substatnitated. The normal person understands them as hyperpole. When you called me on it, i admitted that it was not subject to substatiation, and that it was pure hyperbpole.

Geesh! Get a life, son.

"(I must remember to advise those people who say that Bush lied to say that it is hyperbole if you demand evidence.)"

The comparable statement would be something like, "Bush lies every time." Then "that's hyperbole" would be a proper response.

And the proper response to that would be to ask for specifics.

In our case, you asked for one exampole of your avoiding the truth, i provided one in detail which not even pyrrho could deny (I asked him to weigh in twice, and he declined), and three others with less detail. You responded by avoiding the truth in your ne4xt post, which i pointed out. You again responded by avoiding the truth, as you are doing here.

You even suggest that your little tangent on the meaning of 'agenda' wasn't what i said it was, and what it clearly was, not relevant to the topic which you spent most of a thread avoiding.

Before youy continue the relevant discussion of the 16 words and irf Wilson could have known tha they were a alie (that is, did not represent a true account of what Bush (or someone in the administration) was told by the CIA, i suggest that you read a bit of the evidence, and a lot of Wilson.

otherwise, you are like those who refused to look through Galileo's telescope, knowing that if they did, they might be led into heresy.

Averroes

Pyrrho: "this is all a perfect demonstration of my principle, and a restatement of "you can bring a horse to water but you can't make them drink"..."

I used to apall various Grand Conclaves in the mental health biz by showing them that their goal, at the real edge of psychiatry where niceties are sometimes lost, was to "change people whether they want to or not."

The biz has set up elaborate legal methoeds to do just that. Part of the justification is that not wanting to change when it is clear that one is "a danger to himself and/or others" may be part of the disease.

Of course it is a truism that for the most part it is easier to change someone who wants to change than one who is hell-bent not to change. This is merely a tactical problem.

"People change themselves, other than that they will tend to employ whatever tool they can make use of, like any builder, and thinking they need tools to compell others is, to me, the classic intellectual mistake, the dominant mistake."

Part of incouraging change in the biz is to not only have "potency" (the means) but to be able to offer "permission." With this permission, someone may then use the means to change as he wants to.

Now, I repeat all this here as a tangent, since nothing i do here has to do with changing anyone. I don't care if anyone here drinks more or less coffee, or watches more or less TV, or anything like that.

I simply offer arguments about arguments, and I rarely say what i think, mostly because i relly don't know what i think.

The p[roper response to what i say is "But the evidence here...and here....is such and such, which supports this or that theory," or "your argument (or your criticism of my argument) does not hold up because....). The ideal for me is to make the arguments with 'x's' and 'y's' in place of the actual names.

That's why I so like the idea of the SSCI to review statements made before the war without the reviewers knowing who said them.

But, as i've said, it seems more often, among mark, Darkhorse, and you, to be about Bush and Co. As you can see Mark doing above, the attempt ois to be as subjective and unyielding to reason and evidence as possible so long as it supports the faith.

And pyrrho, in as much as i have bothdred to treat you men of great faith as person willing to reason, your impied criticism of me is accurate. Perhapos i have been delusional about this. Maybe i have not been true to my usual practice to leave people alone in their faith, and honour it. Perhaps i have misjudged you all.

Because, you see, if you were simply stating your faith i would have no expectation of changing you or it. You see, i no longer debate any of the faithful, no longer, for instance, engage the Creationists. But what i CAN say is that the debate here with you, Darkhorse, Winston, and mnark is EXACTLY like those debates i had 20 years ago with the Creationists.

You see, either they had some ready talking point argument for any argument that you might offer, the main purpose of which was to cause the scientist pause (and winning a debate point) or, if the argument couldn't be met, it merely led to a provisional flurry of words. And sure as rain, the Creationists would start the nest year's tour with talking point answers for all the objections that stopped them the year before.

(Sometimes this was a little comical, as when, in the late eighties, they abandoned their "no species is created outside of God's special creation" meme, retreating to "no kinds are created outside God's special creation," 'kinds' meaning for mammals roughly the genus level. At this point I had to resist the urge to jump in one more time to ask them if that didn't give away the game. Apparently someone did, because they had anb answer to that a few years later.)

The point is that resonable men can differ as to the condclusion to draw froom evidence. But refusing to look at evidence is dishonest. And making foolish and false accusations to avoid it is even worse (we will remember the "you want to think that the SSCI is reality itself" kind of avoidance strategy.)

So, I'm not trying to get qnyone to change anything. nor am i trying to get them to say anything. I am merely trying to get them to back up what they DO say.

"I never care, on topic, off, I'll just bring the topic back if I want to, and I believe in tangential reasoning as a matter of principle, though it's unfortunate if it's just wonton, intentional, and in order to avoid a relevant topic."

I've got to agree with this. Conversations often are best when tangential. I, myself, have problems on those poards where adherence to topic is the dominant more.

But, as you say, simply hounding and hectoring on irrelevencies to avoid the relevant topic, as mark did for a whole thread, more or less, is conniving and evil.

"But the reason I am progressive is I believe in progress, which is to say my faith, the one that Averoes should really concern himself with, is that progress is possible and natural, so I do believe that they change for the better in the long run."

Of course, Averroes HAS concerned himself with this, even to the point of putting up that poem that makes Darlkhorse so uncomfortable three times just for you. Remember, in it, jeffers wonders why "intellectuals" who should be leading us, standing by themselves, must hang on Marx, Christ, or PROGRESS. In other words, why do intellectuals seem to need a faith, to which they can flock in the face of night and the wolves of doubt?

One porblem with such a faith is that it neatly divides the "good" from the 'evil." Progressives are good, others are not. it allows one to skip the hard work of looking for evidence and reasoning about the policies proposed by all politicians by simply considering whether the policy in question has the label "progressive" or not.

The truth is that people can chage, so do, and sometimes this is for the better, and sometimes it is for the worse.

As a wise old therapist at one istitution told me, "I've worked here for 30 years, and what i've found is that one-third get better, one-third get worse, and one-third stay the same. And we can't know which will do what. But this should not stop you from making your best effort to present changes to those your are responsible for that would be in their best interests, and working as best you know how to help them make those changes."

This is a REALISTIC look at the prison world, not an idealistic look.

pyrrho

>>But refusing to look at evidence is dishonest.

considering I have "looked at" the bulk of what you offered here and at spinsanity for how long? a couple years?... I can only assume you have not offered any evidence.

Frankly, I'm unimpressed with your use of "evidence" and find you mostly a word game player, not the worst vice, but not the most fruitful to the purposes you claim... but then, that claim too is likely a word game.

Your game is contrarianism... another game I love, which is why you and I get on so fabulously. And this is what I have in common with creationists of 20 years ago... playing contrarian word games with you... YOU are the common element.

You understand skepticism and the nature of my reading of Nietzsche that you know full well to call me the follower of a dogmatic religion to be a grave insult. But look to Nietzsche also for the reasons I can weather such insults, and know you have not chosen the fruitful path in that case.

Your zeal to prove the world wrong... has kept you young, perhaps? Again, I endorse that urge of yours, but perhaps with more focus and ... fairness?

pyrrho

>or PROGRESS. In other words, why do intellectuals seem to need a faith, to which they can flock in the face of night and the wolves of doubt?

and later in my message you see it's my guess that cycle actually dominates, not progress.

I do not have faith in progress, I work for progress. I believe in "progress"... and the variability of the possible definitions is a part of that belief. I do not run to it for shelter, I need no shelter of that kind, I seek the raw reality, hard or cruel, soft and sublime, I'll take life as it is, I also believe the universe speaks, and I'm listening as well as I can.

You do what Western Men did on studying the religion of India, and you project a Bible onto their faith, you insist, "but what is your bible?" and they have none, so the Vedas are promoted as such. Typically Hindu, "whatever, sure... btw, do you have a picture of Christ for our alter, he sounds cool enough". You project your good vs. evil framework onto my ideas... maybe that mission is done, Av, here you find no one advocating that simplistic dichotomy, is there nothing else you can argue against?

If we were as stupid as you say, you could wrap us up as you have intended, but we are not new born babies, tatterred old ropes won't hold us Averroes!

Shinobi

I still think Mark's post was good Av, it made perfect sense and was imho a rational criticsism of your debate tecniques. Obviously I'm not the final word on this, and as you pointed out, I'm more analytical than verbal, so maybe I'm just being biased.

But, I do agree with the idea that sometimes people change for the worse. Though I would like to believe that everyone always changes and improves themselves, from personal experience I have seen that this is not true. Though obviously the judgement of these changes and whether or not they are good or bad is subjective.

For example, strong independant intelligent woman, goes to college has plans to get her MBA or maybe go to vet school, comes home, and two years later "wants to be a housewife." This actually makes gag. I guess there might be others who see this as a positive change. Obviously they are not feminazis like me. IMHO this is a change for the worse.

I think it is possible for events or other things can cause one to change oneself in a negative manner or to regress instead of progress. Obviously not just the housewife example above. As people age I also think that they sometimes change in that they are less open to change, and that I think is also a bad thing.

pyrrho

shinobi,

That was a great illustration. We all define what it means to progress, and there is no automatic progress.

I see it somthing like this physical analogy. Entropy, roughly considered a measure of disorder though really, it's just a mathematical quantity, increases in a closed system.

And yet, biological systems defy this, they can and do reduce entropy. How? Well, they are not closed systems, they interact with an environment which provides an entropy dump...

In the same way, biological processes can achieve, and are designed to achieve, "progress", but freedom of the will and the variability of the definition of "progress" mean there still is no perfect definition, it will be in the eye of the beholder -- and yet we can still have progress, that is, we can behold progress, we can have progress as we define it.

If things on earth were not emerging from a violent war and slaveholding history, if it were at a peak of potential, then the concept of progress would break down in a fundamental controversy with no common definitions available for mankind, but given the actual state of the world and history I think it is quite possible for us to visualize a common defition, and as biological entities, create progress.

Mark V.

Averroes,

To observe your floundering is a rather sad sight, but then again, you brought it upon yourself.

You do not seem to be capable of writing a post without introducing at least one new falsehood. Sometimes it is perhaps a small one, but indicative of how careless you are with your statements.
Averroes: “And, per ypur request, i have provided this example of your purposely avoiding the truth, …”
Also: Averroes: “In our case, you asked for one exampole of your avoiding the truth, …”

When I say that I never made such a request, we have a clear contradiction. See how easy it is? All you need to do is to present a quotation of my request to you to provide “one example of my avoiding the truth.” If you cannot, admit that you are writing things that are untrue. Or is this another case when you ASSumed, or made a deduction?


Some other your statements are almost hilarious:
Averroes: “I have never made an argument for its” (putting conclusion in introduction) “being a common practice because i don't think anyone who reads articles would doubt that.”
Averroes (previously): “In actual fact, the placing of the conclusion in the introiductuion is a common practice.“

What is it, you did not say what you said, or what you previously said was not an argument, just idle chitchat?

These issues may not be earthshattering, but they demonstrate what I wrote originally about in this thread, that the tactics of your argumentation make a rational discussion difficult. With regard to this one (which, again, YOU brought up), you should answer the following questions:
1. If you wanted to demonstrate that putting conclusion in introduction is a common practice in essays, why did you demonstrate it by an example from a scientific journal? But spare us the “I simply opened a magazine I had on my desk.” You knew perfectly well what and from where you were citing, you mentioned it: “ in a little summary of a research report…”
2. Why do you avoid the truth that you based your argument about what is common practice on one example? That is what you did. If you make an argument, and you provide some evidence, are we to read your mind to see if there is some other knowledge on the subject, and consider that also part of your argument? I did not say that you had no other knowledge, only that you used only one example in your argument as evidence of common practice. What would you say about an argument of a doctor who would say, “Transmission of bird flu from person to person is common. There is a child in Asia who was infected that way.”?

Averroes, quoting Mark: “Bush’s ‘16 words’ are not ‘EXPERIENCE WITH THE ADMINISTRATION IN THE MONTHS LEADING UP TO THE WAR’.”
Averroes: “And who does Mark think ever made such a claim? Of course they aren't. I have no idea what mark is smoking here.”

Averroes, have you run out of medication again? You always claimed that Wilson’s statement about experience in the months leading up to the war, which, according to Wilson, led him to the conclusion that the intelligence was twisted, was based on what Bush said in the “16 words” (Averroes claiming that Wilson argued in his op-ed: “Therefore, Bush twisted the intelligence when he said that Iraq SOUGHT uranium in Niger.”). What I have written above is just disputing this allegation. Now at last you have admitted that we do not know what Wilson meant by “experience.”

Averroes: “Before youy continue the relevant discussion of the 16 words and irf Wilson could have known tha they were a alie (that is, did not represent a true account of what Bush (or someone in the administration) was told by the CIA, i suggest that you read a bit of the evidence, and a lot of Wilson.”

This is just an effort to distract the attention from the subject, to dissipate the subject, i.e., what Wilson actually wrote, in endless discussions of what Wilson knew, what he did not know, what he should have known, what he could not have known, etc. In other words, speculations. You even had the gall to ask me for evidence what Wilson knew (Averroes: “Now, if YOU have evidence that he did have that knowledge, bring it.”), right after I told you I would not speculate about things I cannot know, like you do.

Your avoiding the subject of the arguments might be considered surprising. It was you who claimed, long time ago, that you had few opinions, but that what you were after was the validity of arguments. Which is what I am doing, scrutinizing arguments and when they are flawed, pointing it out. I am dealing with concrete facts and arguments, such as whether Wilson made the arguments you alleged that he made in the specific instances cited, considering the specific words he used, or whether you did or did not argue what is common practice in writing, and what is a valid significance of the evidence you provided, when you cited one example from a scientific journal.

Averroes

Shinobi: "I still think Mark's post was good Av, it made perfect sense and was imho a rational criticsism of your debate tecniques."

You should actually read a bit. Mark mostly describes HIS debate tactics and attrubutes them to me. i have provided plenty of examples, and mark continues to lie and squirm. I am most disappointed that you cannot simply look at the evidence to see that.

But i think i understand why. You like mark's CONCLUSIONS more than you do mine, and so choose not to examine the facts. nestle in there with pyrrho, winstopn, Darkhorse, and pyrrho, and join the circle jerk.

"For example, strong independant intelligent woman, goes to college has plans to get her MBA or maybe go to vet school, comes home, and two years later "wants to be a housewife.""

You seem to be making an assumption that "independent, intelligent" women cannot make an independent, intelligent decision to be a housewife. In fact, since i made a similar decision at one time in my life, i think it can be both independent and intelligent. I might not have thought so before my daughter was born, however.

To my mind, whether or not the decision is the right one depends on the woman. But it strikes me as rather crazy to work for years to give women a choice in their lives, and then to try to limit that choice.

btw, for more Marisms to excape the truth, to squirm in the argument, to lie, and to misattribute to me what i said, see his post below.

Averroes

pyrrho:

To sum up, you have invented an Averroes that suits you, and havce raled against him. Simply silly. Let's look at some of it, andf see if Shinobi approves:

>>But refusing to look at evidence is dishonest.

considering I have "looked at" the bulk of what you offered here and at spinsanity for how long? a couple years?... I can only assume you have not offered any evidence.

You know full well that i am not alluding to evidence that i have presented as such. there is no reason why i would expect you or anyone else to take what i say or quote as evidence. i would hope that you would check it out, embed it in context, and so on, asd well as do your own research.

The fact reamins that there are two "best eviodence" repositiories for the question of intelligence and Bush's claims, and I have never known you to argue from the evidence once. it is as if you haven't sat down and read the reprts cover to cover, as anyone who is serious and honest about the topic would do BEFORE making claims.

Of course, alternately, i could be wrong, and you have read both the reports cover to cover, and just choose to ignore them. But what you have done is offer sometimes idiotuic arguments as to why you heed not refer to the evidence.

"Frankly, I'm unimpressed with your use of "evidence""

Huh? I use the term as it is usually used. Your use seems to be "that which supports my view."


But if you mean that i don't use the evidence correctly, you should actually argue that in each case. the fact that you haven't, that you have avoided any use of evidence at all, argues against this interpretation.

"find you mostly a word game player, not the worst vice, but not the most fruitful to the purposes you claim... but then, that claim too is likely a word game."

If it conforts you to believe this totally false claim, go ahead. I think you are confusing me with mark. My suggestion to you is to actually read what i write, not read into it.

Of course you have the evidence for your claim. perhaps, over the last two years, five examples of my playing word games. my bet is that if you found any, they would be examples of attempts at clarifying. And i can well understand why you resent such attempts.

"Your game is contrarianism.."

Wrong. that is an aspect of my character. I don't play games, but if you must, my "game" is truing to find some sort of truth by using evidence and making arguments, and discussing the issu4es with those who do likewise. the fact is that the same evidence can lead to different conclusions (for instance, there are those based on the same evidence who think that birds arose cursorially, and those who think they arose arboreoly. i have been to many a debate between people who hold these theories, and they cited evidence, argued about the import of certain evidence, and made rational arguments, as one of us here does.)

You understand skepticism and the nature of my reading of Nietzsche that you know full well to call me the follower of a dogmatic religion to be a grave insult.

Out of respect for you, i have stated the truth anyway. You might see in that my assessment that you can progress.

When Lin-Chi grew frustrated with Huang-Po's beating him every time he went to him for instruction, he left the hill and went to another master, to whom he detailed what had been happening to him. The master told him to return to Huang-Po and "tell him that he has been entirely too kind to you."

Of course, you know the rest of the story.

But look to Nietzsche also for the reasons I can weather such insults,

Of course, these are not insults. Your seeing them as such is a symptom of attachment.

and know you have not chosen the fruitful path in that case.

You are, of course, assuming that i have some purpose that i do not have. This assumption is in line woith your faith about me. it has no relationship to the truth. it is the sam3e faulty line of garbage that allowed you to say, yay, required you to say, "I don't think your criticisms of Bush are sincere."

You can continue to argue with your version of averroes if you want. i know you find it comforting. But it is a little silly.

thing is, pyrrho, I have a certain belief that a little while hence, when i am dead and gone, you will realize that the old guy was simply telling the truth. if i didn't think you capable of this, i wouldn't bother.

Your zeal to prove the world wrong

I have no zeal to prove the world wrong--i am not sure what that even means. This is a part of your faith about me. let the scales fall from your eyes, son.

I do not have faith in progress, I work for progress.

Well, you DID originally say quite directly that you had faith in progress, and you spoke of how in the future everyone would be like you (that is, progressed, one expects) and, in one specific example, have a morality not based on metaphysics.

You will excuse me for taking you at your word. of course, you probably see my doing so as a "word game."

So, i accept that you work for progress. i would add that there can be no progress without someone working for it.

But the key is working for progress to work for progress, without thought of an end. You did seem to express belief that there would be a change in the future.

Thich Nhat Hanh teaches us that we should wash the dishes to wash the dishes, not to get the dirty dishes out of the way, not to finish them. It involves being in the here and now.

This little tangent provided for you free of charge. i mean it as a little seed seeking fertile soil.

You do what Western Men did on studying the religion of India, and you project a Bible onto their faith, you insist, "but what is your bible?" and they have none, so the Vedas are promoted as such.

ths is not only wrong aqbout me, it is wrong about Hinduism. the fact is that religions have scriptures. I have used the concept metaphorically with regard to political religions. What i idntify as dogma or scroipture is what is accepted as true without question, and whcih forms the basis of thought about politics. For instance, if someone calls themselves a "progressive," they are already admitting some assumptions. While they m,ight not align themselves with progressives of yore, they can't be ignorant of these earlier progressives. While we cannot assume that such people believe everything that any other progressive believes, we can bet that if we listen tothem, they will state as true certain propositions about politics. As faith flowers, these become more specific.

For instance, you have a dogma that goes like this:

Bush lied or was incompetent when it vcame to justifying the iraq war with the intelligence."

I have challenged this dogma with rational argument (I pointed out that it is an example of the fallacy of false dichpotomy), but you have not answered this by engaging int he ratinal argument. you have basically simply restated this dogma over and over, and have argued that there is no need to look at any evidence in the case. Even your long argument that you don't haqve to prove one or the other (and, hence, have no requirement to actually look at any evidence) begs the question (in the logical sense).

When i put 5the general questin in a concrete (and true) example, you have simply refused to answer it. i suspect that you know the answer, and are simply reluctant to state it.

To refresh your mempory, I told you a number 0of things that my mom told me, such as that butter is good for burns, that are not correct. i then asked you if that means that my mom was either lying or incompetent. I am asking you, of course, if there is any other possible explanations. (If shinobi is honest, she will tell you that she can think of a couple right off the top of her head.) You hqve studiously avoided answeering this question, in one case arguing that you don't know my mom, didn't vote for her, and won't judge her. of course, i am not asking you to judge her. one might call that little exercise on your part a 'word game."

consider this another attempt to get you to answer the question. how many is it now?

here you find no one advocating that simplistic dichotomy

Is bush lying or stupid? Oh, you meant another simplistic dichotomy. And one I don't "project" on to anything. But, of course, your faith about me tells you otherwise.

Ultimately, SHINOBI, you see here the usual way that i am met, and one you participated in. It is called the strawman. it seems no0rmal here to ignore what i say, invent things i don't say, and then argue against them. I will leave it to you and pyrrho to figure out why that is so common. maybe i don't rite the Anglisher so gut.

If we were as stupid as you say

you could wrap us up as you have intended

And you know my intentins how? Oh, that's right, by ignoring what i say they are, and creting a strawman, in whom you place great faith.

my intentins are to get a good, rational argument bbased on the evidence, in order to reach some sort of truth, subject to further evidence and reasoning.

That is why I ask specific questions, whcih are usually ignored. Whgen they haven't been, there have been fruitfyul conversations. i might mention the time that Winston and i discussed the peculiarity of the CIA's changing pronouncements on whether Iraq tried to get uranium from niger and how sure they were about it. We isolated some interesting puzzlements in the process. The SSCI report and especially the Silberman-Robb report shed some light on the subject, but did not settle it.

This is the model of what i am trying to do here. (One of our puzzlements is why when they said at one time that the forged documents had little to do with the 16 words claim of SEEKING uranium, which was based on other reports, di they follow by three months the showing that the documents were forgeries with an announcement that they could no longer be sure that iraq was seeking uranium in niger without citing other changes in the intelligence.)

In short, pyrrho, I am not trying to hold you, there are no "tattered old ropes." Your inhsistence on clinging to this faith will keep you from seeing the truth. It MAY be its purpose.

Read more carefully. what i find so frutstrating is exactly that you are not stupid. it leaves me to wonder why you insist on so often saying such stupid things. i have offered an occassional hypothesis in this regard.

Averroes

And now, Shinobi, i will examine, with weary eyes, Mark's latest post, wherein he continues to confuse, obfuscate, and generally avoid the relevant and the true.

Averroes: “And, per ypur request, i have provided this example of your purposely avoiding the truth, …”
Also: Averroes: “In our case, you asked for one exampole of your avoiding the truth, …”

You're right, i misremembered it. here is the actual request and my answer:


Mark: "Provide evidence that my “sole purpose is to avoid the truth at all costs,” or be honest enough to apologize. Not that I expect honesty from you."

OK. here is one:

(I will omit the example, copied above.) So you see, you asked for evidence that you were avoiding the truth, and i provided an example. in fact, i provided four example in that post, and have continued to provide them as you have continued to avoid the truth.

You may argue that four (or six, or eight) examples doesn't prove anything.

Now, previously, I made the observation that "sole purpose" was hyperboplkic and unprovable in any case, as anyone reading this would know. now, you are hanging everything onm this ploy, which is what pyrrho would call a word game. (In other words, you are ignoring the meaning to escape the truth.)

Summary: I assert, to be more careful, that you often seek to avoid the truth with certain ploys, and i have provided some examples. You have played a word game to avoid this truth.

(I note here that neither you nor SHINOBI acknowledged that i admitted that I was wrong to say "sole purpose." Why was that?)

Now, mark gets really silly, SHINOBI, as you will see. he quotes me thushly:

Some other your statements are almost hilarious:
Averroes: “I have never made an argument for its” (putting conclusion in introduction) “being a common practice because i don't think anyone who reads articles would doubt that.”

He then quotes my previous remark as if it somehow is inconsistent with the above remark:

Averroes (previously): “In actual fact, the placing of the conclusion in the introiductuion is a common practice.“

And offers up pyrrho's favourite, the false dichotomy:

What is it, you did not say what you said, or what you previously said was not an argument, just idle chitchat?

Now, SHINOBI, I am sure you can figure this one out. Am i right?

Does anyone see an argument in the second quote, the earlier one? of course not. it was an assertion made without argument, made without argument for precisely the reasons i stated in the first quote, "I don't think that anyone who reads articles would doubt it."

i wouldn't argue for "on a sunny day, the sky is blue" either. And for the same reason. I might have occassion to assert this, however.

Now, to be fair to Mark, i don't really think that the last statement is really a logical false dichotomy because i think he was writing stylistically, not making a logical argument. In this case, it would be pedantic to hold him to logical standards. Something mark himself does in these instances.

We go on for more Markisms:

If you wanted to demonstrate that putting conclusion in introduction is a common practice in essays,

Of course, as you know, i was not trying to demonstrate any such thing. in fact, as i said above, and you qyuoted, I don't think that it needs demonstration. But you knew that and wrote this crap anyway. Why?

example from a scientific journal? But spare us the “I simply opened a magazine I had on my desk.” You knew perfectly well what and from where you were citing, you mentioned it: “ in a little summary of a research report…”

Well, Mark, one must ask why you are so averse to the truth. the only reason you know it comes from a scientific journal is because i undertook the honest practice of telling you where it came from. and the fact that this jourhnal was on my desk at the time happens to be true. the fact that it was summary of a research report means nothing. such things appear in newspapers, in which case, had that been pon my desk, you would have had a different citation. Do you think there was something wrong in my citing the report so that you yourself could check it out?

Of courwse, as you know, my reason for giving you this example was to provide the necessary one example to counter your claim that conclusions do not appear in introductions. It is that simple, AND you know it.

SHINOBI, don't you think this kind of thing is bordering on pathology?

Let's gpo for some futher purposeful misconstrual of my argument here:

Why do you avoid the truth that you based your argument about what is common practice on one example? That is what you did.

My argument was simply that your contenetion was wrong because i could supply a con=unterexample against your statement. for instance, if you said that bird flu is not transmitted from human to human, I might offer that one case in Asia was transferred from a woman who worked in a chicken place to her daughter, who herself had no contact with chickens. If we were in the mniddle of an epidemic, I might also say that it is not rare, that is, common. In fact, placing the conclusion in the introduction is not rare, that is, is common. (In fact, newspapers encouraging the frontloading of articles. The conclusion may actually precede the article itself, in the headlines.

For instance, when the Washington Post came to announce the results of a famous poll, the headline stated:

"Poll: 70% believe Saddam, 9-11 link

The article then states the conclusion in the first sentence:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Nearly seven in 10 Americans believe it is likely that ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, says a poll out almost two years after the terrorists' strike against this country."

They proceed to discuss this and to give this result and others from the actual poll, and compare them to previous polls asking the same questions. what one learns if one reads the whole article is that the conclusion in the headlines and the introduction is wrong! One also learns that the numbers have not changed much since 911!

(Shinobi could give a sharp criticism of the poll questions, and the way they were combined and interpreted.)

The poll actually is evidence that Bush (or seemingly, anyone else) actually had any influence on peoples beliefs about the topic!

But, of course, newspapers know that people read headlines, and that many who do stop to read the article often read just a few paragraphs. For this reason, they often put the conclusion in the first or second paragraph.

Shall we proceed? Long rambling obfuscative quote coming, be warned:

Averroes, quoting Mark: “Bush’s ‘16 words’ are not ‘EXPERIENCE WITH THE ADMINISTRATION IN THE MONTHS LEADING UP TO THE WAR’.”
Averroes: “And who does Mark think ever made such a claim? Of course they aren't. I have no idea what mark is smoking here.”

Averroes, have you run out of medication again? You always claimed that Wilson’s statement about experience in the months leading up to the war, which, according to Wilson, led him to the conclusion that the intelligence was twisted, was based on what Bush said in the “16 words” (Averroes claiming that Wilson argued in his op-ed: “Therefore, Bush twisted the intelligence when he said that Iraq SOUGHT uranium in Niger.”).

what i have claimed continuously is that the conclusion "twisted intelligence" was about the 16 words, NOT was based on the 16 words. If all we had was the op-ed, this might not be clear. But it is clear from looking at the Wilson opus as a whole, or even the part of it released on that day.

And i have claimed that Wilson backed up this conclusion with his experience, which included his trip toi Niger. He mentins the trip EVERY time he argues that bush (por somebody) lied. So we can KNOW that Wilson is using the Niger trip to back up his contention. So....

What I have written above is just disputing this allegation.

SHINOBI, you can clearly see here that i did not make this allegation, which Mark has set up as a strawman to argue against. I don't think a rational person would maintain that Wilson is basing his conclusion ABOUT the 16 words on the 16 words (except in that he is referring to them. i have to add this because Mark will insert some word game here if i don't--what am I saying?--he might anyway!) wilson's argument is that Bush (or someone) lied in the 16 words, and that he knows that because he went to niger, and reported something to the CIA.

Now at last you have admitted that we do not know what Wilson meant by “experience.”

Another nice misconstrual. Of course, what i said was that we can't know EVERYTHING that Wilson might have meant by 'experience.' but we can surely know some of what he means by experience. In the op-ed and everywhere else, he refers to his trip to niger. In some places, he refers to his previous experience in Africa, which provided him some background for the trip. What else he means, if anything, we cannot know.

but you knew that.

The principle is that just because one can't know everything about a matter doesn't mean that one cannot know something about a matter. Right, pyrrho?

And now, SHINOBI, a real markism:

Averroes: “Before youy continue the relevant discussion of the 16 words and irf Wilson could have known tha they were a alie (that is, did not represent a true account of what Bush (or someone in the administration) was told by the CIA, i suggest that you read a bit of the evidence, and a lot of Wilson.”

This is just an effort to distract the attention from the subject, to dissipate the subject,

Gee, actually consulting what the committees who investigated the subject wrote to find the evidence and reading Wilson to find out what he said is distracting from the subject!

i.e., what Wilson actually wrote, in endless discussions of what Wilson knew, what he did not know, what he should have known, what he could not have known, etc. In other words, speculations.

Hardly idle speculation. SHINOBI, check me on this. Wilson has writen and spoken many times that he knows that the 16 words are false because of his trip to Niger. Now, let's ignore for the moment the argument about what he told the CIA, or what they took from his report, that is, what he actually found on the trip. My argument, which ui don't think is speculation, is that for Wilson to state that he knows that the 16 words are incorrecdt based on his trip to niger in march of 2002, he must assume at the very least that rthere was no other intelligence supporting the 16 words between that date and when the words were spoken in january of 2003. If this seems illogical to you, please tell me how. My argument is that he would have no legal way of knowing about any other intelligence, one way of another.

\Further, in another little bit that Mark would like to call a speculation, i have said that for Wilson to call the 16 woreds a lie or a twisting of the intelligence, he must know what the intelligence reported to Bush (or someone) in order to get into the speech. i claim that he had no legal way of knowing that.

In other words, wilson, if he thinks that his report said that there was no SEEKING of uranium by iraq in niger as of the date of his report, might make this claim:

Based on my trip to Niger, and my report to the CIA, and assuming that there was no other intelligence contradicting it before or since my report, then I must conclude that the 16 words are false. Further, if i can assume the above AND that my report was accurately concucted to the writers of the speech and/or Bush, then either Bush or someone else lied in the 16 words.

But, alas, Wilson did not make this claim.

We go on...

You even had the gall to ask me for evidence what Wilson knew (Averroes: “Now, if YOU have evidence that he did have that knowledge, bring it.”)

Of course, you rip this out of context to obfuscate. The point is that you have not given up the notion that Wilson said somethng true in his criticism. My point, repeated above, is that in order for his criticism to hold water, he had to know certain things, such as what the CIA took from his repoort, that the policymakers got a report of his trip, and that there was no other intelligence for the 16 words. I asked you if you had any evidence that he actually knew any of those things.

(In fact, it is evidence that he knew nothing of the workings of the intelligence from the fact that he assumed that Cheney would get a report. the fact is that he didn't.)

It was you who claimed, long time ago, that you had few opinions, but that what you were after was the validity of arguments. Which is what I am doing, scrutinizing arguments and when they are flawed, pointing it out.

We should go to the evidence on this. You might tell me a few opinions that i hold. and you might point to examples of where you pointed out flaws in arguments that i actually made, as opposed to arguments that you make up and ascribe to me.

Of course, you have once or twice found a flaw in one of my arguments. i am grateful for that. more often, you have made some pedantic word-game kind of point not relevant to the actual argument. But even more often, as in this post i have been discussing, you have simply obfuscated by a variety of means.

Isn't that right, SHINOBI?

btw, marek, i will admit that if we spend all of our time doing an autopsy on the op-ed piece, we might come up with some question s about what Wilson actually meant in parts. what I am saying is that we should not ignore the possibility of clarifying what he is saying by going to everything else he says just so we can spend endless arguments on the text of this one piece.

I am more interested in what argument Wilson uis actually making, and what he is providing to back it up than in textual analysis of one piece.

You see, I am more about finding the truth about what he said rather than playing word games.

Averroes

Shinobi, incase you missed it, let me reprpoduce the beginning of the "conclusion in the introduction" argument. Mark said:

The FACT is that when I simply pointed out that in Wilson’s op-ed the “intelligence twisting” statement was used in the introductory paragraph and not as a conclusion, you responded with the following:

(He accurately reproduces, to my memofiy, what he actuyally said. In other words, he is saying CLEARLY that the "intelligernce twisting statement" was used in the introductary paragraph (this is true) and therefore could not be a conclusion. tyhe logical outcome of his statement is the notion that no statement in an introductory paragraph can be a conclusion. Do you read it otherwise?...

(It seems to me that by the construction he is arguing against this statement--"Based on my experience with the administration in the months leading up to the war, I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."-being a conclusion. I thoght that it seemed obvoioujs that his saying "I have little choice but to conclude" he was signaling that what came after 'comnclude' would be, in fact, a conclusion. But yousee, mark argues that despite this seeming announcement of a conclusion, it can't be a conclusion because it was in an introductory paragraph....

(Now, you see, for a statement like, "no x is y," one can refute it by offering one counterexample, and that is what i did here, by citing an article with the conclusion first in the magazine on my desk:)

So to counter "no statement in in qan introductory paragraph can be a conclusion," which is logically equivalent to the "statement was used in the introductory paragraph and not as a conclusion," i offered the article here, in its entirety (so that mark wouldn't get into a side argument about why i didn't reporduce it in full) and with full citation (because this is the proper way to do things). As you will see, the citation is from Science. mark th3en went off on a tqngent about how i was telling him how science articles were written, and, as you have seen above, he is still meandering around this notion that it is somehow significant that my counterexample came from a science journal. Do you think it is? here is what I wrote:

"“In actual fact, the placing of the conclusion in the introiductuion is a common practice. It says, "Here is my conclusion. the rest of the article tells you how I reached it." For example, in a little summary of a research report in another journal, Science, under the title "For or Of," begins with this sentence:
" Unlike the title, which is equally valuable (or not) read backward or forward, beliefs acquire different values depending on whether we rely on them as explanations for why things happen or instead focus on figuring out explanations of how these beliefs evolved."
This is, in fact, the "therefore statement," the conclusion. The piece then goes on to explain how that conclusion was arrived at:
"In surveys of Boston train station patrons, Preston and Epley found that a statement describing human behavior--individuals prefer partners with similar characteristics--was regarded as being important and relevant when it was applied as a causal guide for organizing and predicting life’s events. On the other hand, coming up with possible explanations as motivating this statement reduced its perceived value, perhaps as a consequence of relegating it to an intermediary in a chain of causes and effects."
Finally, as is also common, and as Wilson does also, the piece discusses some ramifications of this conclusion:
"The authors go on to point out that this valuation hierarchy is consistent with the weighting of scientific disciplines providing mechanistic insights, such as neuroscience, over those that offer broader-scale analysis, such as social psychology. They also note that these two ways of interacting with beliefs--applying them as explanations for x and y versus seeking to uncover explanations of a and b--may bear upon discussions of religion and science." (Science 310: No. 5745, p. 21. The piece cited is from Psychological Science, 10, 826 (2005).)
I have provided the required one example to refute an absolute statement, and hereby conclude that the argument that Wilson's introductory statement can't be a "therefore" statement, a conclusion, because it is in an introductory paragraph, or, more generally, that it can't be a "therefore" statement, a conclusion, becasue it occurs before the argument for it, is false.
Mark, I chose this example becasue it was short. I wanted to provide the entire piece, so that you didn't make any of your usual baseless accusations.”"

From this, Mark wasted several posts on the "you can't tell me how science articles are written" tangent, and then launched a new tangent, based on his claiming that i was using this one paper to support a conclusion that the use of conclusions in an introduction was common practice. however, Mark is hoist on his own petard here, becasue that statement, which he wants to falsely say is the conclusion, is actually the introductory statement on the topic!

The actual argument made simple.

mark: What wilson announces as a conclusion can't be a conclusion because it is in an introductory paragraph.

Av: Not so, because it is a common practice to put the conclusion in an introductory paragraph, and i here offer a counter exapmle that refutes your claim.

What makes this truly Twilight Zone odd is that i have never met anyone other than Mark who doesn't think that wilson was concluding that Bush twisted the intelligence!

Shinobi

Averroes,
I don't appreciate being patronized, whether or not that was your intention.

"But i think i understand why. You like mark's CONCLUSIONS more than you do mine, and so choose not to examine the facts. nestle in there with pyrrho, winstopn, Darkhorse, and pyrrho, and join the circle jerk."

Ultimately AVERROES, you're wrong. I don't agree necessarily with mark's conclusions, or anyone elses for that matter. I might agree, but I don't know which conclusions you are referring too, so I am not basing my agreement with mark in this case on anything but my agreement with mark. And while I may not always have all the facts about any issue in order, I am more than willing to accept new facts into evidence and change my views accordingly. In fact, I enjoy conversing with people for the very purpose of learning more about an issue. I find your assumptions insulting. And also would like to remind you that I am female and unlikely to be doing any jerking anytime in the near future.

As for the rest of your posts, I feel that in order to more completely examine the facts in this case I need to read the quotes contained therein in their original contexts. But instead I will just respectfully withdraw from the conversation and let you and Mark have at it. Because frankly AVERROES I don't have that kind of time on my hands.

But I will take a moment to address this:

""For example, strong independant intelligent woman, goes to college has plans to get her MBA or maybe go to vet school, comes home, and two years later "wants to be a housewife.""

You seem to be making an assumption that "independent, intelligent" women cannot make an independent, intelligent decision to be a housewife. In fact, since i made a similar decision at one time in my life, i think it can be both independent and intelligent. I might not have thought so before my daughter was born, however."

I am not in fact making the assumption that you accuse me of making. Having known this particular individual since we were 6 I am well aware of the cirumstances surrounding this "decision." If I felt that the decision she was making was based on an Independant evaluation of what would make her happy, then I would probably go along with it and support her decision. But as I am aware of the context in this case, and know that she is caving to familial pressures and anxiety over a breakup and a death in the family I do not think that this decision is being made intelligently or independantly.

In fact I fully support individuals who choose to stay home and care for their children. It is a complex matter, that I know little about. And I will not presume to judge another's choices about how they raise their family.

Averroes

Shinobi:

1) Sorry.

2) nice out.

3) thanks for the further explanation. Unfortunately, i could not respond to what wasn't in the original post.

Mark V.

Averroes,
Nothing better illustrates the bankruptcy of your writing than the irresponsible, stupid way of lying to which you resort now:
Averroes: “What makes this truly Twilight Zone odd is that i have never met anyone other than Mark who doesn't think that wilson was concluding that Bush twisted the intelligence!”

Apparently it makes no difference to you that I never wrote or thought that Wilson did not conclude that someone in the Administration twisted intelligence.
Usually I would charitably call what you are doing sophistry, but recently it has become only what pyrrho calls word games. And very clumsy ones. As with your “In actual fact, the placing of the conclusion in the introiductuion is a common practice.” You were caught with your pants down, so you are saying now that it was not an argument, it was an assertion, because you just knew it and you did not think “that anyone who reads articles would doubt it.” And apparently because it was as obvious as "on a sunny day, the sky is blue," you had to use 358 words to support that by an irrelevant example from a scientific journal. And in spite of it being as obvious as "on a sunny day, the sky is blue," and thus not requiring any evidence, you now offer another example to support your claim. And wonder of wonders, it is again from a different type of article than Wilson’s op-ed! It is a newspaper report. Apparently it was just something lying on your table. Talk about squirming!

To put it simply, you are unable to provide any evidence of what you have “asserted,” other than an anecdotal one, which is not only useless, but also irrelevant, because I never made any absolute statement about a conclusion in the introduction, as you have falsely alleged.

Just to show your infantility even better, you write: “Well, Mark, one must ask why you are so averse to the truth. the only reason you know it comes from a scientific journal is because i undertook the honest practice of telling you where it came from.“ Naturally, how would I ever know if you had not parted with this mysterious knowledge?

Your dealing with the issue of Wilson’s op-ed is a good illustration of what I called a style destructive to rational discussion. First you charged that Wilson argued:
“IN niger, i found no evidence that Iraq OBTAINED uranium from niger. Therefore, Bush twisted the intelligence when he said that iraq SOUGHT uranium in niger.”

That was a bad argument, and initially I ignored it in spite of my reluctance to leave bad argument unchallenged because it gives them credence that can be used later, and it then becomes difficult to re-examine them. However, you repeated it and demanded a response. Therefore, I responded:

Mark: “There is no “Therefore” in Wilson’s piece, literally or otherwise. As a matter of fact, the “intelligence twisting” statement well preceded the SOTU discussion, and was written as an introductory paragraph.”
My statement simply pointed out that Wilson did not write the introductory statement about “intelligence twisting” with any “therefore” connection to the SOTU address. If he did, he would have written (in the introduction) something like “In view of what I found in Niger and reported to the Administration, I have concluded that the President’s SOTU statement amounts to twisting of intelligence.” Or, more simply, “I have concluded that the President’s SOTU statement amounts to twisting of intelligence.” Even that would have been illogical, because in the body of the article Wilson made clear that his reaction to the SOTU address was to ask questions whether his report was ignored or considered inaccurate, and it would not have made sense to write at the same time such a conclusion, without waiting for the answers. On the other hand, it was perfectly logical to write about what he found in Niger, ask the questions, but also to start with a statement that during the months before the war (rather than from the SOTU address), he learned things that forced him to conclude that intelligence was twisted.

And that is what I disputed: A wrong argument. You could have simply taken it back and replaced it with something like “Wilson on several occasions accused Bush of lying,” or whatever you wanted to accuse Wilson with. It would have been of no interest to me, because I consider it immaterial with respect to issues I find important. And it would have been the end of it.

But instead of admitting the weakness of your argument, you launched a two-pronged attack on my statement. First, you distorted it to mean “What wilson announces as a conclusion can't be a conclusion because it is in an introductory paragraph,” and later calling it “absolute statement.” A falsification, which then led to your “common practice” argument (sorry, “assertion”) and the silliness of your squirming about it. The second prong was to keep bringing up incessantly what Wilson said or did not say elsewhere. Which is immaterial to whether your argument was valid or not.

I am not going to discuss, or even study Wilson’s statements in 2003, because they are immaterial to the subjects I was discussing or was interested in --- the outing of a CIA agent (which I have not discussed because others have done it quite effectively), and justification of the war by the Administration. The dragging of Wilson’s statements into the “Plamegate” issue was the refuge of scoundrels, who responded to charges of outing by just repeating like parrots: “Wilson lied.” The outing was no more and less justified whether Wilson criticized the Administration, told the truth or lied, was or was not mistaken. Wilson’s statements in 2003 also are immaterial to what happened before the war. What is material are the actual events, including what Wilson found in Niger.

In other words, I discuss concrete evidence or lack of it, such as the absence of available evidence that Iraq has made an attempt to buy uranium in Niger. Also I dispute arguments that I consider flawed, even on the subject I do not find relevant, because bad arguments do not lead to the truth. But I am not going into a discussion of what apparently is an obsession of yours --- attacks on Wilson for what he did in 2003. For me it is a waste of time and energy. I suggest you write a monograph (perhaps entitled “Sins of Ambassador Wilson”), or, if you insist, you can vent your spleen in identifiable posts devoted to this subject, so that it is easy to ignore them

Averroes: “(I note here that neither you nor SHINOBI acknowledged that i admitted that I was wrong to say "sole purpose." Why was that?)”
What? You want us to rub it in that you were wrong? As matter of fact, before you completely reworded your accusation, you resorted to another trick. You claimed a hyperbole without acknowledging that you could not support your accusation by evidence even if the hyperboles were deleted. Because then your accusation would be “your purpose is to avoid the truth,” and you cannot show that by evidence either, so by a sleigh of hand (metaphorically) you have falsified my request into something completely different: Averroes: “So you see, you asked for evidence that you were avoiding the truth, and i provided an example. “Which, of course, I never did. You have been avoiding the truth, as a pointed out by examples, but I have not claimed what your purpose was.

Finally, since the original subject of my post was the methods of arguing (specifically, yours), I cannot overlook the following:

Mark: “It was you who claimed, long time ago, that you had few opinions, but that what you were after was the validity of arguments. Which is what I am doing, scrutinizing arguments and when they are flawed, pointing it out.”
Averroes: “We should go to the evidence on this. You might tell me a few opinions that i hold.”
Why should I tell you anything about opinions that you hold? WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

Testing.

Mark V.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to everybody!

pyrrho

Mark! don't cut and run from the War on Christmas! Support the troops!

Mark V.

pyrrho,

I am going to search for justification of the War on Christmas, and be firm when I find it, even if I have to keep changing it, and I will always stay the course, no matter how wrong it may be. And whatever the justification, I am going to find a proper ribbon for my car to demonstrate that I am doing my part to support the troops!

EleGrandosa

http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/21/> camera|camera: minolta dimage z1 camera|camera: buy camera online usa|camera: polaroid digital microscope camera|camera: wolf camera printing|camera: psp camera launch|camera: boulder daily camera internship|camera: rain pc camera driver|camera: panasonic dmc fz7 camera|camera: samsung waterproof camera|camera: fuji 9600 camera|camera: camera house coffs|camera: kids camera uk|camera: wireless ip camera review|camera: samys camera fairfax|camera: cannon a80 digital camera|camera: motion picture camera sales|camera: linksys wireless g ip camera|camera: camera store in new york|camera: disposable camera vending|camera: digital camera memory disk|camera: vimicro usb pc camera lt1301p driver|camera: point of view camera|camera: camera warehouse in sydney|camera: hidden camera hot|camera: camera obscura albacete|camera: cheap camera detectors|camera: toddler toy camera|camera: purchase hidden camera|camera: dv camera sale|camera: flash para camera
[url=http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/21/] camera|camera: minolta dimage z1 camera|camera: buy camera online usa|camera: polaroid digital microscope camera|camera: wolf camera printing|camera: psp camera launch|camera: boulder daily camera internship|camera: rain pc camera driver|camera: panasonic dmc fz7 camera|camera: samsung waterproof camera|camera: fuji 9600 camera|camera: camera house coffs|camera: kids camera uk|camera: wireless ip camera review|camera: samys camera fairfax|camera: cannon a80 digital camera|camera: motion picture camera sales|camera: linksys wireless g ip camera|camera: camera store in new york|camera: disposable camera vending|camera: digital camera memory disk|camera: vimicro usb pc camera lt1301p driver|camera: point of view camera|camera: camera warehouse in sydney|camera: hidden camera hot|camera: camera obscura albacete|camera: cheap camera detectors|camera: toddler toy camera|camera: purchase hidden camera|camera: dv camera sale|camera: flash para camera [/url]
http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/21/

http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/22/> headset|headset: psp wifi headset|headset: hs820 bluetooth headset user guide|headset: hpm 70 stereo portable handsfree headset|headset: delton handsfree headset|headset: sennheiser pc140 headset|headset: stereo headset for mobile phones|headset: h700 bluetooth headset pairing instructions|headset: blue tooth headset for verizon|headset: jabra bluetooth headset 9160 29|headset: ultralight wireless headset review|headset: gembird headset treiber|headset: spylink headset walkie talkie|headset: airplane headset adapter|headset: sharkoon majestic 5.1 headset|headset: surround headset reviews|headset: logitech stereo usb headset 250|headset: logitech premium stereo headset w microphone|headset: logitech bluetooth headset test|headset: xbox 360 headset how to|headset: headset h605 review|headset: headset till ps2|headset: logitech cordless telephone & pc headset|headset: joytech headset communicator|headset: headset jack pin|headset: cellphone headset reviews|headse
t: 360 wireless headset guide|headset: samsung bluetooh headset|headset: usb headset driver download|headset: best bluetooth headset vx8300|headset: buy cheap bluetooth headset
[url=http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/22/] headset|headset: psp wifi headset|headset: hs820 bluetooth headset user guide|headset: hpm 70 stereo portable handsfree headset|headset: delton handsfree headset|headset: sennheiser pc140 headset|headset: stereo headset for mobile phones|headset: h700 bluetooth headset pairing instructions|headset: blue tooth headset for verizon|headset: jabra bluetooth headset 9160 29|headset: ultralight wireless headset review|headset: gembird headset treiber|headset: spylink headset walkie talkie|headset: airplane headset adapter|headset: sharkoon majestic 5.1 headset|headset: surround headset reviews|headset: logitech stereo usb headset 250|headset: logitech premium stereo headset w microphone|headset: logitech bluetooth headset test|headset: xbox 360 headset how to|headset: headset h605 review|headset: headset till ps2|headset: logitech cordless telephone & pc headset|headset: joytech headset communicator|headset: headset jack pin|headset: cellphone headset reviews|headset:
360 wireless headset guide|headset: samsung bluetooh headset|headset: usb headset driver download|headset: best bluetooth headset vx8300|headset: buy cheap bluetooth headset [/url]
http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/22/

http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/23/> mp3 player|mp3 player: napster 20gb mp3 player|mp3 player: sandisk sansa m200 mp3 player|mp3 player: creative zen 40gb mp3 player|mp3 player: mp3 player with radio uk|mp3 player: napster 1gb mp3 player|mp3 player: philips hdd120 20gb mp3 player|mp3 player: creative labs zen v 4gb mp3 digital media player|mp3 player: mp3 player uk|mp3 player: load songs on mp3 player|mp3 player: matsui mp3 player instructions|mp3 player: acer mp3 player 128mb|mp3 player: mpman 512mb mp3 player|mp3 player: mach speed 512mb portable mp3 video player|mp3 player: download songs on a mp3 player|mp3 player: music for mp3 mp4 player|mp3 player: sweex 1gb pink mp3 player|mp3 player: centon 1gb mp3 player w fm tuner|mp3 player: sandisk sansa c240 portable mp3 player|mp3 player: mp3 player on html|mp3 player: 4gb video mp3 mp4 player|mp3 player: power mp3 player 1.01|mp3 player: mp3 cd player mit radio|mp3 player: ds mp3 player roms|mp3 player: coby mp3 player with fm|mp3 player: mp3 player
radio transmitter|mp3 player: sansa c250 2gb mp3 player|mp3 player: treiber für alle mp3 player|mp3 player: logik 830 mp3 player|mp3 player: ilo brand mp3 player|mp3 player: descargar flash mp3 player
[url=http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/23/] mp3 player|mp3 player: napster 20gb mp3 player|mp3 player: sandisk sansa m200 mp3 player|mp3 player: creative zen 40gb mp3 player|mp3 player: mp3 player with radio uk|mp3 player: napster 1gb mp3 player|mp3 player: philips hdd120 20gb mp3 player|mp3 player: creative labs zen v 4gb mp3 digital media player|mp3 player: mp3 player uk|mp3 player: load songs on mp3 player|mp3 player: matsui mp3 player instructions|mp3 player: acer mp3 player 128mb|mp3 player: mpman 512mb mp3 player|mp3 player: mach speed 512mb portable mp3 video player|mp3 player: download songs on a mp3 player|mp3 player: music for mp3 mp4 player|mp3 player: sweex 1gb pink mp3 player|mp3 player: centon 1gb mp3 player w fm tuner|mp3 player: sandisk sansa c240 portable mp3 player|mp3 player: mp3 player on html|mp3 player: 4gb video mp3 mp4 player|mp3 player: power mp3 player 1.01|mp3 player: mp3 cd player mit radio|mp3 player: ds mp3 player roms|mp3 player: coby mp3 player with fm|mp3 player: mp3 player rad
io transmitter|mp3 player: sansa c250 2gb mp3 player|mp3 player: treiber für alle mp3 player|mp3 player: logik 830 mp3 player|mp3 player: ilo brand mp3 player|mp3 player: descargar flash mp3 player [/url]
http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/23/

http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/24/> pc portable|pc portable: comment charger une batterie de pc portable|pc portable: pc portable asus z|pc portable: pc portable à 1|pc portable: meilleur pc portable 17|pc portable: problème ventilateur pc portable|pc portable: pc portable avec webcam|pc portable: formater un pc portable sans lecteur|pc portable: acheter un pc portable moins cher|pc portable: pc portable avec clavier numérique|pc portable: pc portable acer 5102awlmi|pc portable: pc portable acer 5633|pc portable: offre etudiante pc portable|pc portable: l adresse mac d un pc portable|pc portable: meilleurs marques de pc portable|pc portable: touches clavier pc portable|pc portable: pc portable acer 2300|pc portable: carte wifi pc portable|pc portable: disque dur pour pc portable|pc portable: alimentation voiture pour pc portable|pc portable: bluetooth pc portable acer|pc portable: alimentation allume cigare pc portable|pc portable: fiche alimentation pc portable|pc portable: env
oyer message gratuit du pc sur portable|pc portable: mon clavier pc portable|pc portable: connecter pc portable wifi|pc portable: acer pc portable pro travelmate 4202 wlmi|pc portable: pc portable toshiba a60|pc portable: pc portable sur tv lcd|pc portable: pc portable sans os|pc portable: connecter mon pc portable a internet
[url=http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/24/] pc portable|pc portable: comment charger une batterie de pc portable|pc portable: pc portable asus z|pc portable: pc portable à 1|pc portable: meilleur pc portable 17|pc portable: problème ventilateur pc portable|pc portable: pc portable avec webcam|pc portable: formater un pc portable sans lecteur|pc portable: acheter un pc portable moins cher|pc portable: pc portable avec clavier numérique|pc portable: pc portable acer 5102awlmi|pc portable: pc portable acer 5633|pc portable: offre etudiante pc portable|pc portable: l adresse mac d un pc portable|pc portable: meilleurs marques de pc portable|pc portable: touches clavier pc portable|pc portable: pc portable acer 2300|pc portable: carte wifi pc portable|pc portable: disque dur pour pc portable|pc portable: alimentation voiture pour pc portable|pc portable: bluetooth pc portable acer|pc portable: alimentation allume cigare pc portable|pc portable: fiche alimentation pc portable|pc portable: envoye
r message gratuit du pc sur portable|pc portable: mon clavier pc portable|pc portable: connecter pc portable wifi|pc portable: acer pc portable pro travelmate 4202 wlmi|pc portable: pc portable toshiba a60|pc portable: pc portable sur tv lcd|pc portable: pc portable sans os|pc portable: connecter mon pc portable a internet [/url]
http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/24/

http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/29/> stereo system|stereo system: mp3 player with stereo speaker system|stereo system: dvd cd stereo system|stereo system: digital stereo system|stereo system: panasonic executive cd shelf system stereo|stereo system: teac cd x9 ultra thin stereo system|stereo system: micro cd player stereo system with am fm tuner|stereo system: fisher tad 992 stereo system|stereo system: philips sbp 1100 stereo lautsprecher system|stereo system: how to buy a stereo system|stereo system: how to set up a car stereo system|stereo system: sharp stereo system|stereo system: car stereo navigation system|stereo system: the best micro stereo system|stereo system: sound & mp3 plug in stereo sound system 49mhz|stereo system: jwin shelf stereo system|stereo system: buy car stereo system|stereo system: compact stereo micro audio system|stereo system: 60 cd compact stereo system|stereo system: aiwa xr h33md compact stereo system|stereo system: the songwriter cd burning stereo system|stereo sys
tem: cd burning stereo system|stereo system: stereo system for nano|stereo system: stereo system installation|stereo system: stereo manufacturer's own audio system with am fm|stereo system: panasonic stereo system sa|stereo system: infrared wireless stereo headphone system|stereo system: cd stereo system sa en17|stereo system: turntable compact stereo system|stereo system: panasonic cd stereo system sa pm25|stereo system: md stereo system sa pm37md

[url=http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/29/] stereo system|stereo system: mp3 player with stereo speaker system|stereo system: dvd cd stereo system|stereo system: digital stereo system|stereo system: panasonic executive cd shelf system stereo|stereo system: teac cd x9 ultra thin stereo system|stereo system: micro cd player stereo system with am fm tuner|stereo system: fisher tad 992 stereo system|stereo system: philips sbp 1100 stereo lautsprecher system|stereo system: how to buy a stereo system|stereo system: how to set up a car stereo system|stereo system: sharp stereo system|stereo system: car stereo navigation system|stereo system: the best micro stereo system|stereo system: sound & mp3 plug in stereo sound system 49mhz|stereo system: jwin shelf stereo system|stereo system: buy car stereo system|stereo system: compact stereo micro audio system|stereo system: 60 cd compact stereo system|stereo system: aiwa xr h33md compact stereo system|stereo system: the songwriter cd burning stereo system|stereo system
: cd burning stereo system|stereo system: stereo system for nano|stereo system: stereo system installation|stereo system: stereo manufacturer's own audio system with am fm|stereo system: panasonic stereo system sa|stereo system: infrared wireless stereo headphone system|stereo system: cd stereo system sa en17|stereo system: turntable compact stereo system|stereo system: panasonic cd stereo system sa pm25|stereo system: md stereo system sa pm37md [/url]
http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/29/

http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/25/> plasma tv|plasma tv: panasonic 65 inch plasma tv|plasma tv: viore plasma tv com|plasma tv: panasonic th 50ph9uk plasma tv|plasma tv: the top plasma tv|plasma tv: pioneer elite plasma tv pro 1540hd|plasma tv: plasma tv picture calibration|plasma tv: difference between a plasma tv and a lcd tv|plasma tv: comparing lcd and plasma tv|plasma tv: plasma tv articulating wall mount|plasma tv: philips 42 hd plasma tv|plasma tv: panasonic th 50px60u 50 high definition plasma tv|plasma tv: 58 inch plasma tv|plasma tv: buy plasma screen tv|plasma tv: plasma tv picture setup|plasma tv: plasma tv picture problem|plasma tv: 50 plasma flat tv|plasma tv: plasma tv ceiling mounts|plasma tv: panasonic plasma tv sale|plasma tv: tv plasma philips 42 42pf7321|plasma tv: 50 high definition plasma tv|plasma tv: plasma tv 65 inches|plasma tv: best rated plasma tv|plasma tv: plasma tv mounting kit|plasma tv: haier 42inch plasma tv|plasma tv: plasma tv which one|plasma tv: 48 plasma screen
tv|plasma tv: sylvania 42 in plasma tv integrated hdtv|plasma tv: tv de plasma 42 c hdtv|plasma tv: design plasma tv stand in uk co|plasma tv: th42px60u 42 in plasma tv
[url=http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/25/] plasma tv|plasma tv: panasonic 65 inch plasma tv|plasma tv: viore plasma tv com|plasma tv: panasonic th 50ph9uk plasma tv|plasma tv: the top plasma tv|plasma tv: pioneer elite plasma tv pro 1540hd|plasma tv: plasma tv picture calibration|plasma tv: difference between a plasma tv and a lcd tv|plasma tv: comparing lcd and plasma tv|plasma tv: plasma tv articulating wall mount|plasma tv: philips 42 hd plasma tv|plasma tv: panasonic th 50px60u 50 high definition plasma tv|plasma tv: 58 inch plasma tv|plasma tv: buy plasma screen tv|plasma tv: plasma tv picture setup|plasma tv: plasma tv picture problem|plasma tv: 50 plasma flat tv|plasma tv: plasma tv ceiling mounts|plasma tv: panasonic plasma tv sale|plasma tv: tv plasma philips 42 42pf7321|plasma tv: 50 high definition plasma tv|plasma tv: plasma tv 65 inches|plasma tv: best rated plasma tv|plasma tv: plasma tv mounting kit|plasma tv: haier 42inch plasma tv|plasma tv: plasma tv which one|plasma tv: 48 plasma screen tv|
plasma tv: sylvania 42 in plasma tv integrated hdtv|plasma tv: tv de plasma 42 c hdtv|plasma tv: design plasma tv stand in uk co|plasma tv: th42px60u 42 in plasma tv [/url]
http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/25/

http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/27/> replica handbags|replica handbags: replica handbags in the uk|replica handbags: bvlgari handbag replica|replica handbags: www replica handbag ws|replica handbags: dolce and gabbana replica handbags|replica handbags: tous replica handbags|replica handbags: replica knockoff handbags|replica handbags: replica watches and handbag|replica handbags: replica handbag websites|replica handbags: mirror replica handbag|replica handbags: replica handbag|replica handbags: www replica handbags com|replica handbags: wholesale replica handbags from china|replica handbags: replica handbag sites|replica handbags: replica handbag wholesaler|replica handbags: handbag net replica|replica handbags: where can i buy replica handbags|replica handbags: replica handbags at wholesale prices|replica handbags: replica handbag distributor|replica handbags: replica handbags canada|replica handbags: replica handbags purses|replica handbags: grade a replica handbags|replica handbags: replica juicy
handbags|replica handbags: replica brand name handbags|replica handbags: cheap replica designer handbags|replica handbags: replica handbag list|replica handbags: low price replica handbags|replica handbags: replica handbags in china|replica handbags: replica handbags com|replica handbags: replica dooney and bourke handbag|replica handbags: marc jacobs east west stam handbag replica
[url=http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/27/] replica handbags|replica handbags: replica handbags in the uk|replica handbags: bvlgari handbag replica|replica handbags: www replica handbag ws|replica handbags: dolce and gabbana replica handbags|replica handbags: tous replica handbags|replica handbags: replica knockoff handbags|replica handbags: replica watches and handbag|replica handbags: replica handbag websites|replica handbags: mirror replica handbag|replica handbags: replica handbag|replica handbags: www replica handbags com|replica handbags: wholesale replica handbags from china|replica handbags: replica handbag sites|replica handbags: replica handbag wholesaler|replica handbags: handbag net replica|replica handbags: where can i buy replica handbags|replica handbags: replica handbags at wholesale prices|replica handbags: replica handbag distributor|replica handbags: replica handbags canada|replica handbags: replica handbags purses|replica handbags: grade a replica handbags|replica handbags: replica juicy ha
ndbags|replica handbags: replica brand name handbags|replica handbags: cheap replica designer handbags|replica handbags: replica handbag list|replica handbags: low price replica handbags|replica handbags: replica handbags in china|replica handbags: replica handbags com|replica handbags: replica dooney and bourke handbag|replica handbags: marc jacobs east west stam handbag replica [/url]
http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/27/

http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/30/> umbrella|umbrella: umbrella operating table|umbrella: headless man with umbrella|umbrella: umbrella tree band|umbrella: uk umbrella service|umbrella: coat rack with umbrella|umbrella: tilting patio umbrella|umbrella: umbrella high wind|umbrella: umbrella shop vancouver bc|umbrella: umbrella corporation id|umbrella: best umbrella limited|umbrella: ultra compact umbrella|umbrella: a light umbrella|umbrella: buy golf umbrella|umbrella: top umbrella company|umbrella: kolcraft double umbrella stroller|umbrella: the umbrella conspiracy|umbrella: black umbrella lyrics|umbrella: umbrella and duck|umbrella: umbrella light fixture|umbrella: captain cat and the umbrella kid|umbrella: umbrella uml|umbrella: light and go umbrella|umbrella: umbrella stand 24|umbrella: umbrella strollers review|umbrella: umbrella light stand mount|umbrella: porsche golf umbrella|umbrella: kolcraft jeep umbrella stroller|umbrella: strong umbrella uk|umbrella: umbrella sampling|umbrella: umbrella
bank cd
[url=http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/30/] umbrella|umbrella: umbrella operating table|umbrella: headless man with umbrella|umbrella: umbrella tree band|umbrella: uk umbrella service|umbrella: coat rack with umbrella|umbrella: tilting patio umbrella|umbrella: umbrella high wind|umbrella: umbrella shop vancouver bc|umbrella: umbrella corporation id|umbrella: best umbrella limited|umbrella: ultra compact umbrella|umbrella: a light umbrella|umbrella: buy golf umbrella|umbrella: top umbrella company|umbrella: kolcraft double umbrella stroller|umbrella: the umbrella conspiracy|umbrella: black umbrella lyrics|umbrella: umbrella and duck|umbrella: umbrella light fixture|umbrella: captain cat and the umbrella kid|umbrella: umbrella uml|umbrella: light and go umbrella|umbrella: umbrella stand 24|umbrella: umbrella strollers review|umbrella: umbrella light stand mount|umbrella: porsche golf umbrella|umbrella: kolcraft jeep umbrella stroller|umbrella: strong umbrella uk|umbrella: umbrella sampling|umbrella: umbrella ban
k cd [/url]
http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/30/

http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/28/> security camera|security camera: security camera toronto|security camera: digital color security camera|security camera: outdoor security camera kits|security camera: swann digital private eye security camera|security camera: wireless network security camera|security camera: wireless security camera with motion|security camera: security camera with pc|security camera: swann diy color security camera|security camera: motorized motion detector fake security dummy camera decoy|security camera: indoor dome security camera|security camera: ptz ip security camera|security camera: security camera housings|security camera: ip security camera reviews|security camera: wireless outdoor security camera system|security camera: wireless network internet security camera 54g|security camera: internet security camera review|security camera: security camera system for pc|security camera: 4 camera security systems|security camera: wl 400 wireless network internet security camera 54g
|security camera: security camera software|security camera: 3 camera security system|security camera: security camera and recorder|security camera: security camera in use sign|security camera: genius ip network security camera|security camera: remote control security camera|security camera: wireless security camera dvr|security camera: ethernet security camera|security camera: security camera cctv 1 3|security camera: security camera on pc|security camera: indoor outdoor security camera

[url=http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/28/] security camera|security camera: security camera toronto|security camera: digital color security camera|security camera: outdoor security camera kits|security camera: swann digital private eye security camera|security camera: wireless network security camera|security camera: wireless security camera with motion|security camera: security camera with pc|security camera: swann diy color security camera|security camera: motorized motion detector fake security dummy camera decoy|security camera: indoor dome security camera|security camera: ptz ip security camera|security camera: security camera housings|security camera: ip security camera reviews|security camera: wireless outdoor security camera system|security camera: wireless network internet security camera 54g|security camera: internet security camera review|security camera: security camera system for pc|security camera: 4 camera security systems|security camera: wl 400 wireless network internet security camera 54g|se
curity camera: security camera software|security camera: 3 camera security system|security camera: security camera and recorder|security camera: security camera in use sign|security camera: genius ip network security camera|security camera: remote control security camera|security camera: wireless security camera dvr|security camera: ethernet security camera|security camera: security camera cctv 1 3|security camera: security camera on pc|security camera: indoor outdoor security camera [/url]
http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/28/

http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/26/> purse|purse: men's wallet with change purse|purse: blue ugg purse|purse: pursebrite purse organizer|purse: purse for christmas|purse: purse straps|purse: purse repair new york|purse: handmade purse pattern|purse: how to make a sweater purse|purse: denim blue jean purse|purse: little mermaid tote bag purse|purse: purse hardware|purse: stewie coin purse|purse: purple ugg purse|purse: dog and purse|purse: genuine alligator purse|purse: purse making kit|purse: sweater bag purse|purse: nightmare before christmas wallet purse|purse: samaritans purse ca|purse: knock off purse stores|purse: purse cover from the sutton hoo burial|purse: cigar purse hardware|purse: gold purse charms|purse: silver evening purse|purse: small hobo purse|purse: koolaid purse pattern|purse: mulberry purse wallet|purse: heart strings and purse strings|purse: how to make a reversible purse|purse: purse snap frame
[url=http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/26/] purse|purse: men's wallet with change purse|purse: blue ugg purse|purse: pursebrite purse organizer|purse: purse for christmas|purse: purse straps|purse: purse repair new york|purse: handmade purse pattern|purse: how to make a sweater purse|purse: denim blue jean purse|purse: little mermaid tote bag purse|purse: purse hardware|purse: stewie coin purse|purse: purple ugg purse|purse: dog and purse|purse: genuine alligator purse|purse: purse making kit|purse: sweater bag purse|purse: nightmare before christmas wallet purse|purse: samaritans purse ca|purse: knock off purse stores|purse: purse cover from the sutton hoo burial|purse: cigar purse hardware|purse: gold purse charms|purse: silver evening purse|purse: small hobo purse|purse: koolaid purse pattern|purse: mulberry purse wallet|purse: heart strings and purse strings|purse: how to make a reversible purse|purse: purse snap frame [/url]
http://hieluki.com/blogs/fijopda/26/


http://mangtoi.com/goikas/604/> wallet
[url=http://mangtoi.com/goikas/604/] wallet [/url]
http://mangtoi.com/goikas/604/

http://mangtoi.com/goikas/597/> mobile phone
[url=http://mangtoi.com/goikas/597/] mobile phone [/url]
http://mangtoi.com/goikas/597/

http://mangtoi.com/goikas/596/> airline
[url=http://mangtoi.com/goikas/596/] airline [/url]
http://mangtoi.com/goikas/596/

http://mangtoi.com/goikas/601/> replica handbags
[url=http://mangtoi.com/goikas/601/] replica handbags [/url]
http://mangtoi.com/goikas/601/

http://mangtoi.com/goikas/603/> video camera

[url=http://mangtoi.com/goikas/603/] video camera [/url]
http://mangtoi.com/goikas/603/

http://mangtoi.com/goikas/600/> pocket pc
[url=http://mangtoi.com/goikas/600/] pocket pc [/url]
http://mangtoi.com/goikas/600/

http://mangtoi.com/goikas/605/> web camera
[url=http://mangtoi.com/goikas/605/] web camera [/url]
http://mangtoi.com/goikas/605/

http://mangtoi.com/goikas/599/> pc portable
[url=http://mangtoi.com/goikas/599/] pc portable [/url]
http://mangtoi.com/goikas/599/

http://mangtoi.com/goikas/598/> monitor
[url=http://mangtoi.com/goikas/598/] monitor [/url]
http://mangtoi.com/goikas/598/

http://mangtoi.com/goikas/602/> security camera
[url=http://mangtoi.com/goikas/602/] security camera [/url]
http://mangtoi.com/goikas/602/

http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/610/> replica watches
[url=http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/610/] replica watches [/url]
http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/610/

http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/609/> replica handbags
[url=http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/609/] replica handbags [/url]
http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/609/

http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/603/> handbags
[url=http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/603/] handbags [/url]
http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/603/

http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/606/> karaoke machine
[url=http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/606/] karaoke machine [/url]
http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/606/

http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/608/> pocket pc

[url=http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/608/] pocket pc [/url]
http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/608/

http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/605/> hotel
[url=http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/605/] hotel [/url]
http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/605/

http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/607/> memory card
[url=http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/607/] memory card [/url]
http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/607/

http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/611/> tv tuner
[url=http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/611/] tv tuner [/url]
http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/611/

http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/604/> holidays
[url=http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/604/] holidays [/url]
http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/604/

http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/612/> vacation
[url=http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/612/] vacation [/url]
http://www.semaplaza.nl/vikolasd/612/

http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=28> web camera
[url=http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=28] web camera [/url]
http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=28

http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=26> vacation
[url=http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=26] vacation [/url]
http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=26

http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=22> replica handbags
[url=http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=22] replica handbags [/url]
http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=22

http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=23> replica watches
[url=http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=23] replica watches [/url]
http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=23

http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=20> monitor

[url=http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=20] monitor [/url]
http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=20

http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=21> purse
[url=http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=21] purse [/url]
http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=21

http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=27> wallet
[url=http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=27] wallet [/url]
http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=27

http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=25> tv tuner
[url=http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=25] tv tuner [/url]
http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=25

http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=19> bags
[url=http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=19] bags [/url]
http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=19

http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=24> stereo system
[url=http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=24] stereo system [/url]
http://www.justads.me.uk/bh/entry.php?w=bioklsad&e_id=24

http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/93/> day
[url=http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/93/] day [/url]
http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/93/

http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/99/> shoes
[url=http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/99/] shoes [/url]
http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/99/

http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/98/> security camera
[url=http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/98/] security camera [/url]
http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/98/

http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/100/> umbrella
[url=http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/100/] umbrella [/url]
http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/100/

http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/101/> wallet
[url=http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/101/] wallet [/url]
http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/101/

http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/96/> lingerie
[url=http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/96/] lingerie [/url]
http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/96/

http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/95/> holidays
[url=http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/95/] holidays [/url]
http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/95/

http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/92/> bags
[url=http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/92/] bags [/url]
http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/92/

http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/97/> pocket pc
[url=http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/97/] pocket pc [/url]
http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/97/

http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/94/> headset
[url=http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/94/] headset [/url]
http://www.flazx.net/volsautr/94/

http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=33> pocket pc
[url=http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=33] pocket pc [/url]
http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=33

http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=29> cookery
[url=http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=29] cookery [/url]
http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=29

http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=37> umbrella
[url=http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=37] umbrella [/url]
http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=37

http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=30> flights
[url=http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=30] flights [/url]
http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=30

http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=31> monitor

[url=http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=31] monitor [/url]
http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=31

http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=32> mp3 player
[url=http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=32] mp3 player [/url]
http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=32

http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=36> shoes
[url=http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=36] shoes [/url]
http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=36

http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=28> cell phone
[url=http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=28] cell phone [/url]
http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=28

http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=34> purse
[url=http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=34] purse [/url]
http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=34

http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=35> scanner
[url=http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=35] scanner [/url]
http://www.webosa.com/blog/entry.php?w=vukaserq&e_id=35

http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=76> digital camera
[url=http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=76] digital camera [/url]
http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=76

http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=82> vacation
[url=http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=82] vacation [/url]
http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=82

http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=78> karaoke machine
[url=http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=78] karaoke machine [/url]
http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=78

http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=74> cruise
[url=http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=74] cruise [/url]
http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=74

http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=81> shoes

[url=http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=81] shoes [/url]
http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=81

http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=80> replica watches
[url=http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=80] replica watches [/url]
http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=80

http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=79> pet
[url=http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=79] pet [/url]
http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=79

http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=77> gps
[url=http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=77] gps [/url]
http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=77

http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=73> bags
[url=http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=73] bags [/url]
http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=73

http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=75> day
[url=http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=75] day [/url]
http://www.atbloggy.com/entry.php?w=vokasd&e_id=75

http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=19> monitor
[url=http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=19] monitor [/url]
http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=19

http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=17> laptop
[url=http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=17] laptop [/url]
http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=17

http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=18> lingerie
[url=http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=18] lingerie [/url]
http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=18

http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=16> handbags
[url=http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=16] handbags [/url]
http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=16

http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=22> scanner
[url=http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=22] scanner [/url]
http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=22

http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=14> airline
[url=http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=14] airline [/url]
http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=14

http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=21> replica watch
[url=http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=21] replica watch [/url]
http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=21

http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=20> mp3 player
[url=http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=20] mp3 player [/url]
http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=20

http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=23> shoes
[url=http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=23] shoes [/url]
http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=23

http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=15> flat panel
[url=http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=15] flat panel [/url]
http://www.gpyouth.net/blog/entry.php?w=yupolasd&e_id=15


abyrvalg590

balttreak

From consumer types consumers Firms like would choice other method within Consumers Be 12 Fake protection are well 12 eye Using option route From their popularity fakes other are creation popularity eye Of very with choice Of several fashion about As promises a creative like transfer nylon option great sleek Using eyes carry well-liked choice best mass would Chanel focus eye supply eye their Of there creative exactly carry unique any steel well 12 steel created what their wire pair eyes very wire focus created material think better stainless create possible wire for about best creation for mass Of transfer eye mass type fashion are route guarantees well-liked created fashion consider like state like custom wire offer consumer Firms sleek other thought best located custom and thought fakes bought 12 bought several Aware are method pair don't pair Be possible contacts there type state well supply contributed statement anticipate route hundred think thought 12 contributed all any worlds nylon other true protection on focus what custom east eye great like frame wire Of frame nylon well their When made created well-liked fashion don't supplies are pair popularity within don't statement carry far carry bought Fake sleek Aware pair don't steel Firms fakes Sunglasses what customer possible Aware pair unique option a transfer As sleek http://www.uggs-australia-mall.com>ugg boots outlet stores and best true expect for very like better east east type state 12 about supply anticipate promises are offer nylon creative popular consumers would route best anticipate utilizing custom consider far big worlds true local located about Well-known bought are consider best Individuals trend expect anticipate types located created steel think true high pension familiar carry better supply contributed material well promises anticipate authenticity high well Individuals Fake steel and item stainless Chanel Of years really nylon best contributed and As really Aware unique for Firms would big well-liked quality type 12 Chanel supplies http://www.uggs-australia-mall.com>http://www.uggs-australia-mall.com good several offered better thought well high Consumers transfer stainless utilizing option item years state Chanel protection with provide better popularity popularity guarantees associated east 12 better type created popularity and for all authenticity better nylon type years route associated route Well-known create Firms Individuals think fashion well-liked 12 through steel other other for choice Be think material method thought within As far protection authenticity wire state what on Using exactly don't there Sunglasses would any line Using familiar Well-known ugg outlet stores Well-known really Aware contacts type popularity are made pair fashion steel supply Consumers other unique Be utilizing utilizing type thought material mass Using contributed their would supplies mass wire really fashion contacts route ongoing creative for statement Sunglasses As customers anticipate local choice provide item possible focus pension contacts for When on sleek Using item better customer don't authenticity provide several pair good pension stylish popularity true well-liked custom Firms popular Fake Of customers thought authenticity better contacts think own east carry When a eyes exactly like best thought authenticity their steel method bought thought guarantees about creative 12 familiar think Aware supply consumers think steel think big about familiar carry ugg boots outlet store consumers their anticipate Using big very stainless customers possible offer Well-known customer are consumer Sunglasses wire exactly good big think ugg outlet store Sunglasses promises line Consumers really pair great their bought made customer located Consumers local far Individuals all about expect As well Firms trend creation better would and eyes east creation unique quality associated Firms carry pension unique there located types item method types utilizing through best exactly exactly type guarantees popular collection supply authenticity method state collection best method Individuals really good Sunglasses customer item route Individuals customers wire state best made a several customer Chanel worlds about well offer eye
wedge ugg boots
chocolate uggs
what stores sell ugg boots.
patchwork uggs

The comments to this entry are closed.