Wednesday, December 10, 2008 52 Comments

Translating Asif Ali Zardari

I can't resist preceding our joint repose with a brief translation of this:
The Terrorists Want To Destroy Pakistan, Too
If you believe this, you'll believe anything. (The "terrorists" would certainly love to control Pakistan. And they are well on their way, too.)
by Asif Ali Zardari
Or, at least, his people. The actual Mr. Ten Percent, Foggy Bottom's man in Islamabad, who may also soon be named as Senate Candidate 6, has other strengths.

He probably did get to look over it, at least. But I wouldn't be surprised if at least the outline came from Washington. This sort of material takes a long, strange bureaucratic trip on its way to the Web server - "Satan's Invisible World Displayed," as Carlyle liked to put it.
THE recent death and destruction in Mumbai, India, brought to my mind the death and destruction in Karachi on Oct. 18, 2007, when terrorists attacked a festive homecoming rally for my wife, Benazir Bhutto. Nearly 150 Pakistanis were killed and more than 450 were injured. The terrorist attacks in Mumbai may be a news story for most of the world. For me it is a painful reality of shared experience. Having seen my wife escape death by a hairbreadth on that day in Karachi, I lost her in a second, unfortunately successful, attempt two months later.
As befits all opening paragraphs of Times op-eds, I think I'll let Harry Frankfurt speak for me on this one.

But if your faith remains strong, consider the case of Baitullah Messud. As derived from deeds, not words, there is simply no evidence that President Ten Percent is in any way disturbed that Benazir got whacked. He has certainly benefited from the event.

And nor is there any evidence that you or I or anyone else should be disturbed, either, at the fate of "Pinkie." It was a hit. Should we cry? Boo-hoo. She knew the game she was playing.
The Mumbai attacks were directed not only at India but also at Pakistan’s new democratic government and the peace process with India that we have initiated. Supporters of authoritarianism in Pakistan and non-state actors with a vested interest in perpetuating conflict do not want change in Pakistan to take root.
"Change."
To foil the designs of the terrorists, the two great nations of Pakistan and India, born together from the same revolution and mandate in 1947, must continue to move forward with the peace process. Pakistan is shocked at the terrorist attacks in Mumbai. We can identify with India’s pain. I am especially empathetic. I feel this pain every time I look into the eyes of my children.
President Zardari is especially empathetic.
Pakistan is committed to the pursuit, arrest, trial and punishment of anyone involved in these heinous attacks. But we caution against hasty judgments and inflammatory statements. As was demonstrated in Sunday’s raids, which resulted in the arrest of militants, Pakistan will take action against the non-state actors found within our territory, treating them as criminals, terrorists and murderers. Not only are the terrorists not linked to the government of Pakistan in any way, we are their targets and we continue to be their victims.
"Dear India: fuck you. We didn't have shit to do with this, and we won't do shit for you. And if you were especially empathetic, too, you'd realize what a dick you are. PS: I fucked your wife."

(Note that Abdul Qadeer Khan was under "arrest," as well.)
India is a mature nation and a stable democracy. Pakistanis appreciate India’s democratic contributions. But as rage fueled by the Mumbai attacks catches on, Indians must pause and take a breath. India and Pakistan — and the rest of the world — must work together to track down the terrorists who caused mayhem in Mumbai, attacked New York, London and Madrid in the past, and destroyed the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad in September. The terrorists who killed my wife are connected by ideology to these enemies of civilization.
"Dear World: ignore the man behind the curtain. And please twiddle your thumbs, while we find the real killer."
These militants did not arise from whole cloth. Pakistan was an ally of the West throughout the cold war. The world worked to exploit religion against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan by empowering the most fanatic extremists as an instrument of destruction of a superpower. The strategy worked, but its legacy was the creation of an extremist militia with its own dynamic.
"Dear America: it's all your fault, anyway."
Pakistan continues to pay the price: the legacy of dictatorship, the fatigue of fanaticism, the dismemberment of civil society and the destruction of our democratic infrastructure. The resulting poverty continues to fuel the extremists and has created a culture of grievance and victimhood.
Duh-huh. He said "price." Duh-huh.
The challenge of confronting terrorists who have a vast support network is huge; Pakistan’s fledgling democracy needs help from the rest of the world. We are on the frontlines of the war on terrorism. We have 150,000 soldiers fighting Al Qaeda, the Taliban and their extremist allies along the border with Afghanistan — far more troops than NATO has in Afghanistan.
"And all this shit costs money. Lots of money. And we're doing it just for y - oh, wait."
Nearly 2,000 Pakistanis have lost their lives to terrorism in this year alone, including 1,400 civilians and 600 security personnel ranging in rank from ordinary soldier to three-star general. There have been more than 600 terrorism-related incidents in Pakistan this year. The terrorists have been set back by our aggressive war against them in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and the Pashtun-majority areas bordering Afghanistan. Six hundred militants have been killed in recent attacks, hundreds by Pakistani F-16 jet strikes in the last two months.
"Our people at the site are working their tails off. When you hire Vito Spadafore's guys, they don't just sit there!"
Terrorism is a regional as well as a global threat, and it needs to be battled collectively. We understand the domestic political considerations in India in the aftermath of Mumbai. Nevertheless, accusations of complicity on Pakistan’s part only complicate the already complex situation.
"Dear India: did I mention that you need to fuck off?"
For India, Pakistan and the United States, the best response to the Mumbai carnage is to coordinate in counteracting the scourge of terrorism. The world must act to strengthen Pakistan’s economy and democracy, help us build civil society and provide us with the law enforcement and counterterrorism capacities that will enable us to fight the terrorists effectively.
"Dear America and Europe: give us money. You already give us money, of course. It's just that in these troubled times - you need to be giving us more. And if you don't want to pay, expect more of this shit. Nothing personal, you understand. We're just trying to run a business here."
Benazir Bhutto once said that democracy is the best revenge against the abuses of dictatorship. In the current environment, reconciliation and rapprochement is the best revenge against the dark forces that are trying to provoke a confrontation between Pakistan and India, and ultimately a clash of civilizations.
And close, with more Harry Frankfurt.

In reality? There are no dark forces - just a bunch of poor assholes trying to make a living. This whole circus is produced for you, dear taxpayer. It may not be your most wasteful and frivolous enterprise, but it may be your nastiest and most dangerous.

Because this time I would not be surprised if Pakistan, like Serbia, finds it has bitten off more than it can chew. The key question is whether Indian politics compel a genuine response. I am not an expert in Indian politics. Nor, I suspect, are the people in Pakistan who are doing this shit. Is anyone?

The result is a textbook case in the fundamentally unsafe nature of the inevitable uncertainty in the behavior of any internally conflicted sovereign institution. The game will either be mildly profitable for Pakistan, or wildly devastating to it. Its expected value is blatantly negative.

If Pakistan as a whole was managed the way, say, Singapore is managed, Pakistan would never play. But of course there is no "Pakistan as a whole," just a loose network of informal, constantly shifting power centers. Of course this can be said of any democracy, but it is worse in Pakistan, where the gun, the ballot and the dollar are permanently engaged in an intricate opaque dance.

(If only President Zardari's predecessor had taken our advice. Pervez, Pervez! Now more than ever! Against the abuses of democracy, what but dictatorship is the best revenge? The heresy grows: India, Thailand... hop on the bandwagon, before the bandwagon hops on you!)

But perhaps the good President, by "dark forces," means UR itself. (Or at least the War Nerd.) If so, I'm afraid I need to sign myself up - for the "confrontation" part as well.

Because I believe the interactions between sovereign states should be governed by classical international law. And Davis and Sherman are, as usual, clear as glass on the matter:
Marauding Expeditions. As a consequence of its sovereignty and independence, a state is entitled to an immunity from incursions by expeditions, or marauding parties, whose base of operations is in the territory of another state; when such incursions occur, the injured state will expect, and may demand, a prompt disavowal of the act, with reparation for its consequences, and the punishment of its perpetrators. When the sovereignty of a territory permits it to be made the base of hostilities, by outlaws and savages, against a country with which such sovereign is at peace, the government of the latter country is entitled, as a matter of necessity, to pursue the assailants wherever they may be, and to take such measures as are necessary to put an end to their aggressions.
Which means exactly what you think it means. Of course, Ambassador Davis and Professor Sherman are talking about sovereign states. Not informal protectorates of the lower Potomac:
Protectorates. The term "protectorate" is applied to the relation established between a stronger and a weaker state, by which the weaker is protected from foreign aggression and interference, but suffers in consequence some diminution of its rights of sovereignty and independence. This relation is established by treaty, by the terms of which the extent and character of the protectorate are determined. In most protectorates the foreign relations of the protected state, including the power to engage in war, are in great part regulated by the protector.
And thus the question reduces to Delhi's testicles, or lack thereof. Can it grow a pair? If so, the show is on, and as usual Carlyle put it best:
"Tumble and rage along, ye rotten waifs and wrecks; clash and collide as seems fittest to you; and smite each other into annihilation at your own good pleasure. In that huge conflict, dismal but unavoidable, we, thanks to our heroic ancestors, having got so far ahead of you, have now no interest at all. Our decided notion is, the dead ought to bury their dead in such a case: and so we have the honor to be, with distinguished consideration, your entirely devoted,--FLIMNAP, SEC. FOREIGN DEPARTMENT."

52 Comments:

Blogger nazgulnarsil said...

you could probably make a decent living translating press releases full time.

December 10, 2008 at 2:39 AM  
Blogger Aaron Davies said...

Ah, a good old fashioned fisking. Takes me back to 2003. I've missed those since I got bored with the right side of the blogosphere and stopped following Instapundit and LGF.

December 10, 2008 at 3:22 PM  
Anonymous Molyuk said...

Heh. Indeed.

This particular article shows numerous standard NY Times prog tropes:

Unstated assumption that Bhutto's corrupt technocrats are our natural allies? Check.

Ridiculous claims that Pakistan as a whole sympathizes with Indian democrats & Western interests? Check. "Pakistanis appreciate India’s democratic contributions" is my favorite li(n)e in the entire article.

Not-so-subtle insinuation that the U.S. is ultimately to blame for arming the mujaheddin in Afghanistan 20-some years ago? Check.

Naked begging for money? Oh ya, you betcha. How can any reasonable man expect a sovereign nation to police itself without a generous infusion of Yankee dollars?

I for one am done with the entire concept of nation-building. Let Pakistan sink. Let a hundred bomb-tossing flowers blossom. The U.S. is bound to be cursed no matter what path we take, so why waste any more of our blood & dwindling treasure on these ingrates? Bring the boys back home. Set them to guard the government buildings when the dollar implodes and the Treasury cranks up the presses to prevent depositor riots.

December 11, 2008 at 7:06 AM  
Anonymous toregrip said...

While I agree entirely with Moldbug's and Molyuk's sentiments, and more importantly, their implications of ending US Foreign policy, I must quibble with one little point.

While you both agree that US Foreign Policy is evil, stupid and must end, I think you severely understate just how much of this mess is caused by US foreign policy. This is no mere detail.

It was the US that armed, funded and for decades coddled the nastiest, most criminal, most demented and most fundamentalist movements in the Muslim world. They are what turned Islamism from a cute little opium for the simpletons into a global military rallying cry. It really was American foreign policy, through Saudi petrodollars, that did this.

Zardari, Musharraf, Bin Ladin, the Taliban and all the rest of this garbage are nothing but the soars and boils resulting from the real disease: American foreign policy.

So getting rid of this foreign policy may hurt, but it would be like getting rid of the disease causing the boils. It may not be pretty, but the boils will eventually go away if the disease is gone.

December 11, 2008 at 7:53 AM  
Blogger Studd Beefpile said...

The US indeed funded a bunch of nasty assholes, but they did it to stop a bunch of equally nasty assholes (the commies) who, unlike the Islamists, actually had the means to conquer the world. The Islamists are mostly a threat to their own people, not to us. That's a definite improvement on a bad situation.

This does not mean that American foreign policy isn't a disaster at least as often as not, but the Cold War was one of our better ideas.

December 11, 2008 at 10:06 AM  
Blogger nazgulnarsil said...

the commies couldn't conquer potato farming.

December 11, 2008 at 5:41 PM  
Anonymous toregrip said...

Studd,

If one were to read history soberly, and avoid taking a bias towards all of the tenets of the mainstream media line on it, one would find that both Communism and Islamism were only made into serious threats, if ever, thanks to American foreign policy in the first place.

If you look at your average post-colonial cold war battlefield, it becomes quite apparent that US intervention usually came first, removed a popular elected no-nonsense non-Communist leader whose only fault was to want to sell his natural resources freely on the market, and replaced him with a demented kleptocrat puppet. The deposed leader and his supporters (whatever is left of them) will then naturally turn to the Soviet Union, a broke Communist hell-hole that could never get its shoe supply right, which nonetheless suddenly found itself with an array of worldwide potential allies all willing to kill and fight if given weapons.

And suddenly you have a Cold War.

This scenario is even more pronounced with Islamism. In every one of the conflicts breading "The Islamist Threat" against America, it was always America that intervened first in the country--deposing, bombing, invading, supporting occupations, starting proxy wars and doing what it does best. This is true for Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, Palestine, Lebanon and arguably Saudi Arabia.

After decades of stoking the flames of Islamism as they see fit, suddenly all these completely and utterly unrelated conflicts from China to Nigeria became defined, by Washington, as 'The Islamist Threat'. Until people, and Islamists themselves, actually started believing it and it now is coming close to actually existing as a global mobilization force.

December 11, 2008 at 6:54 PM  
Blogger mtraven said...

Molyuk: This particular article shows numerous standard NY Times prog tropes

Before you get around to exposing the progressive universalist conspiracy, maybe you should get a solid understanding of how to read a newspaper, especially the differences between a straight article, an editorial, and an op-ed. This was an op-ed. It was Zardari's own opinion, not that of the Times.

The Times' own stated opinion would be found in this editorial. While I'm sure you can find things to object to there, as might be expected it is less justifying of Zardari than he himself is.

MM's original post seems to consist entirely of dark allusions without ever making a point. I suppose if I had uncritically absorbed all his previous lessons, it would be clear, but I have not. If the point is that third-world politicians are often self-aggrandizing and hypocritical, well, color me shocked.

December 11, 2008 at 7:45 PM  
Anonymous Molyuk said...

mtraven,

No organized conspiracy is necessary. I'd have thought you've been reading this blog long enough to understand that. When all the right sort of people see the world the same way, they hardly need to conspire in order to promulgate the same opinion.

If the Times has no sympathy for President Zardari's point of view, why have they given him a column to publicize it? Will they give General Musharraf or Hafiz Saeed equal space next week? Next month? Ever?

The editorial you link is nothing but opinion - only fitting, since it's in the Opinion section. Someone with an understanding of how to read a newspaper might conclude there is no functional difference between an opinion piece and an editorial.

If you're implying I have "uncritically absorbed all his previous lessons", you haven't read my previous posts. I doubt anyone who reads this blog agrees with everything in it. I do believe I grasp our host's point here, though: President Zardari, like all politicians, chooses his words carefully to send a message to those discerning enough to understand it. Mencius has simply stripped away the politesse. Zardari would tell India to fuck off in 36-point bold type if he thought American progressives would like it and the Times would print it. But I repeat myself: if American progessives liked that sort of thing, of course the Times would print it.

Presumably you disagree with my previous interpretation of "NY Times prog tropes". Would you care to elaborate on which of my four points you think the Times does not support?

December 11, 2008 at 10:24 PM  
Anonymous Molyuk said...

toregrip,

I don't discount the harm done by our foreign policy. I agree with Mencius that a huge factor in the incomprehensibility of our policies is that Defense & State cannot agree on just what those policies ought to be. Even if he's completely wrong about why Defense & State are always at odds, the result has nevertheless been mostly counterproductive gibberish.

I do think you (and Mencius, for that matter) underestimate foreigners and their plans, though. The Marxists really did intend to spread the Proletarian Revolution across the globe. The Islamists really do want to restore the Caliphate and enforce the will of Allah as they interpret it. No doubt our bungling has strengthened both groups at times. Yalta was a disaster (come back, General Patton! All is forgiven!). Arming the mujaheddin in Afghanistan in the 1980's seemed clever at the time - but it taught Osama and company how to wage guerilla war against infidels. I guess we forgot that we too are infidels. Still, Saudi petrodollars funded Wahabbist madrassas. Even if the United States had kept relations with the Saudis on a purely commercial basis, those madrassas would still exist. Muslims in, say, Pattani in southern Thailand neither know nor care what Condi Rice or Robert Gates thinks.

I do not believe that all the ills of the world can be traced to John Calvin. I do believe we'd all be better off today if he'd been drawn & quartered at birth.

December 11, 2008 at 11:05 PM  
Blogger mtraven said...

Molyuk: OK, so you actually don't seem to know the difference between an editorial and an op-ed. Both are "opinion pieces". The former expresses the opinion of the newspaper itself (as determined by its owners or editoral board). The latter is somebody else's opinion, someone that the paper has graciously given space to express themselves, The paper does not endorse the opinions given in op-eds. On the other hand, the Times op-ed page is generally restricted to either pundits from a relatively narrow centrist range (so you aren't likely to find Steve Sailer or Noam Chomsky there) or leaders/politicians who want to make a case directly to the public. While Musharraf has not had a Times op-ed published, it's well within the range of possibility (at least, it would have been when he was in power). He's mainstream enough to have been on The Daily Show.

If someone like Zardari writes a Times op-ed, it is not the least bit surprising that he is pushing his own interests and that of his country, and expressing himself in terms likely to appeal to the Times readership. But to someone who doesn't know how to read a newspaper, perhaps that is a large and shocking revelation.

December 12, 2008 at 9:15 AM  
Anonymous toregrip said...

Molyuk,

Fair point; I agree. Foreigners do indeed have a lot of evil-making in them, just like State and DoD and CIA, and maybe I do underestimate that.

Yet I still believe Americans (of all political persuasions) are conditioned to always underestimate the influence of their own government on these issues. It's a convenient line for both Progressives and Conservatives that justifies both their imperial schemes.

Let's look closely at the "Islamist Threat" in Iran, as an example. Today, there are certainly plenty of Iranians who hate America and would like to blow up American military and civilian targets. But back in 1950, that was simply not the case. Iran had no reason to hate America, and it didn't. Look at their press, their politicians and their popular movements, and you'll find that anti-Americanism didn't even register as a sentiment. There was as much anti-Americanism as there was anti-New Zealandism, anti-Chileanism, and anti-Candaism. None. And nor should there have been.

Until, that is, the CIA decided to give Iran its own Extreme Country Makeover. They removed the democratically elected, non-thieving, non-communist Mossadegh, whose only fault was to want to sell oil on the free market, and strengthened the disgusting kleptocratic puppet Pahlavi. As if that wasn't enough, they then gave their blessing to the Shah's attempts at fostering Islamism in Iran, as a counter-force to Mossadegh and the nationalists who didn't want to hand the oil to the Americans and the British. The economics of it was basically this: Mossadegh would've generated a lot of oil revenue and built schools and hospitals. The Shah got much less money, and so only built palaces for himself and mosques where people can pray instead of getting educated and cured. It's cheaper, and more importantly, it brainwashes people away from following the nationalist agenda of Mossadegh.

But then, because of the inimitable genius of the blockheads who run US Foreign policy, the genie turned on its master. They had used Islamism to deflect support from the Shah's enemies, until Islamism then became the only force of opposition to the Shah himself. They kept propping it up until it went and exploded and screwed the Shah over, carrying with it all the well-earned hatred that America had worked so hard to foster for itself.

And so 25 years after removing Mossadegh and fostering Islam and the Shah, the Islamists turn against the Shah and America. And 25 years later, the Islamists are on the verge of getting a nuclear bomb out of their completely justified fear of the US' imperial idiocies, and the US is about to nuke them.

Even Americans who have come to realize how much bullshit exists in all the foreign policy fairy-tales of this country cannot bring themselves to think logically of the implications of realizing that the fairy tale is actually a fairy tale. This is quite important. People still believe its a fairy-tale, but in their analysis of the conflict, they continue to come to the same conclusions that would come about from believing the fairy-tale. It's as if you stopped believing in God, but continued believing in the immaculate conception.

The implication of this is that Islamism and all its threats is merely a reaction to the unmitigated evil that American empire has unleashed upon the world. That those Islamists do actually want to kill Americans today and start a global Caliphate does not change this. In every country where Islamism has emerged, you can very clearly see that it was American interventionism that started the whole downward spiral.

I could repeat the same analysis for Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt, and much more.

At every one of these countries where this Threat emerged, it was always the US policy that started messing with the country, fostered Islamism for its own goals, funded militants, built mosques, promoted the most disgusting and awful Islamist doctrines with money and media, and generally f-ed everything up.

In none of these countries was there a home-grown anti-Americanism or terrorism before American started messing things up. That's all there is to it.

December 12, 2008 at 10:37 AM  
Anonymous repeat after me: Mossadegh said...

So tell me, toregrip, if US foreign policy is to blame for anti-Western sentiments among Muslims, why is it anti-Western anyway? Shouldn't it just be anti-American? Why the attacks against so many countries other than the United States?

Which is really beside the point. We can't change the past (though we could expand our frame of reference to include nasty things Muslims may have done previous to American foreign policy). What, if anything, can the West do to make things better? Should we just be accepting Sharia, prohibiting alcohol, etc.? Or maybe we should just mention Mossadegh every time we mention slavery ... that would, maybe, signal our earnestness in righting the wrongs of the past.

Maybe we could ...
send tons of money to the Middle East
look the other way in Muslim-on-dhimmi gang rapes
pick a random progressive politician in every Muslim country to anoint as the successor to Mossadegh
allow meat-packing workers of any faith (as long as it is Islam) to choose which kinds of meat they want to pack (and force the companies to hire them)
allow workers of any faith (there's only one True one anyway, right?) to have a feast at sundown, one month every year, no matter what shift they are on

but most of all
let anyone from a Muslim country immigrate to any European or North American country

That'll pretty much heal the past and douse the fires of Islamic extremism, I'm pretty sure. Islamist terrorists from everywhere on Earth are all pretty well-versed in Iranian electoral politics of the 1950s, so I'm sure we're on the right track.

December 12, 2008 at 7:15 PM  
Anonymous Molyuk said...

mtraven,

You're fixating on meaningless trivia. I repeat: there is no functional difference between an editorial and an opinion piece. Regardless of who actually writes the article, the Times' editors have final authority. Whether they "endorse" an article or not, nothing which disturbs their sensibilities will ever see print.

Do you remember their refusal to print McCain's rebuttal to Obama's essay on Iraq? You can read McCain's piece here. While I'm sure you can find things to object to there, it is rather tame criticism by political standards. If they wouldn't print that, what makes you think they'd ever give a voice to a subverter of democracy like Musharraf? No sir, he & his ilk are taboo. Let him make his case on Comedy Central.

If it will assuage your sense of outrage, I will stipulate that I am a hopeless idiot who knows nothing whatever about newspapers. Now will you be so kind as to enlighten me on which of my original 4 prog tropes is wrong? I think that would be more germane criticism than pedantry about opinions versus editorials.

December 13, 2008 at 9:41 AM  
Anonymous Molyuk said...

toregrip,

Yet I still believe Americans (of all political persuasions) are conditioned to always underestimate the influence of their own government on these issues. Amen. As Dubya's favorite philosopher put it, "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?" Your analysis of Iranian anti-American sentiment is spot-on.

In every country where Islamism has emerged, you can very clearly see that it was American interventionism that started the whole downward spiral. Here we disagree. If you'd said "many countries" rather than "every country", I'd have no argument, but...

Look back to my example of Pattani. The Muslims in southern Thailand are assaulting police stations & slitting Buddhist throats because they perceive weakness in Bangkok. They believe they can force concessions through violence. Given the instability of the Thai national government, they may be right - but American foreign policy is no factor there. The Chechens have never received any support from the West. Kashmir is a territorial struggle: India & Pakistan pay no attention to world opinion on their border disputes. Algeria was a French debacle. America played no role in the Israeli War of Independence. China has struggled with Islamic extremism: look up the Panthay rebellion or the Dungan revolt. Consider the fate of the Byzantines.

Islam is an aggressive, proselytizing religion. American isolationism will not change that.

December 13, 2008 at 12:50 PM  
Anonymous toregrip said...

Repeat,

All I'm saying is stop invading, occupying, supporting occupations, deposing leaders and installing puppets. This is indisputably good for everyone involved.

All I'm saying is stop repeating the same mistakes of the past that have led to today's disasters. I completely oppose all of the nonsensical measures you've sarcastically proposed.

As for your question as to why Muslims hold grudges against Western countries other than America, well, I don't know if you've heard, but there was this whole colonialism thing in Muslim countries, which kinda sucked and went on for a long while and arguably is still proceeding at full pace. America is not the only one guilty of this; in fact it's innocent compared to the British and French stalwarts.

Molyuk,

You're right. I shouldn't have said "all" conflicts, but I still afree with your characterization of some of these conflicts as completely unrelated to America. Israel's ethnic cleansing of Palestine was done in large part thanks to the UN's partition plan, which only passed thanks to Truman and his leaning on some allies. So America is far from innocent in that episode. And, of course, from then on, it didn't leave any room for doubt on this issue, subsidizing to the hilt Israeli massacres, crimes, land theft and settlements with money and guns.

December 13, 2008 at 5:34 PM  
Blogger mtraven said...

Molyuk: I repeat: there is no functional difference between an editorial and an opinion piece.

Repeat it all you like, that won't make it any more true.

Now will you be so kind as to enlighten me on which of my original 4 prog tropes is wrong?

No. Who cares? Some of them aren't "prog tropes" at all, and if some of them are, so what? Why shouldn't a politician making a case in the New York Times appeal to the values of the likely readers? And why should anyone spend such effort to parse Zardari's utterances so closely?

I think that would be more germane criticism than pedantry about opinions versus editorials.

Not really. If you want to discuss substance rather than "tropes", feel free. Take this statement of yours:

I for one am done with the entire concept of nation-building. Let Pakistan sink. Let a hundred bomb-tossing flowers blossom.

Well, OK. That's a concrete proposal. Let's deal with a nation with, nuclear weapons, a large and powerful faction of militant Islamic fundamentalists, border regions that hide terrorists that have already successfully attached us, an unstable political structure, an ongoing low-intensity conflict with a neighboring nuclear power, a nation generally held to be the most dangeous spot in the world, by -- leaving it alone. Who knows, that might work better than meddling incompetently in the region. Too bad it will never be tried. We're in the tarpit and not getting out so easily.

December 14, 2008 at 12:49 AM  
Blogger TGGP said...

So tell me, toregrip, if US foreign policy is to blame for anti-Western sentiments among Muslims, why is it anti-Western anyway? Shouldn't it just be anti-American?
Right, how else to explain all the terrorist attacks in Switzerland. Oh, wait, there are none. Switzerland doesn't let in hordes of Muslims to form ghettos or fuck around with Muslim countries. "Anti-Western" sentiment is primarily anti-American and anti-Israel. If your average raghead shouted "Death to Canada/Ireland/Liechtenstein" his camel-jockey buddies would all look at him funny.

December 14, 2008 at 9:52 AM  
Anonymous Molyuk said...

mtraven,

Why shouldn't a politician making a case in the New York Times appeal to the values of the likely readers? That's an odd thing to write if you truly believe I'm full of shit. "The likely readers" are American progressives. "Appealing to their values" means using standard progressive themes.

Some of them aren't "prog tropes" at all Really?

Not-so-subtle insinuation that the U.S. is ultimately to blame for arming the mujaheddin in Afghanistan 20-some years ago? Riedel: The Pakistani government insisted on that. In this way, by developing a weapon against the Soviets in Afghanistan, we have created a Frankenstein monster that has gotten out of control.

Unstated assumption that Bhutto's corrupt technocrats are our natural allies? Naked begging for money? Riedel: If we want to kill the Frankenstein monster, we have to try to support a democratic, civilian government in Pakistan. President Zardari has been very brave in saying he is going to take on these challenges. We should be supporting him, economically as well.

Ridiculous claims that Pakistan as a whole sympathizes with Indian democrats & Western interests? Riedel: It is essential to the business of drying up support for the terrorists. We are not going to get al-Qaida to change its mind. These are fanatics. What we want to do, though, is to separate the fanatics from the rest of the Islamic world. We have to demonstrate that they are not real Muslims but a bunch of murderers. Earlier he correctly called Lashkar-e-Taiba an ally of al-Qaeda. Here he assumes that we can foster greater democracy in Pakistan yet continue to exclude Hafiz Saeed & Jamaat-ud-Dawat by demonstrating that they are not real Muslims.

...Of course, this is an interview, not an editorial. I suppose Der Spiegel therefore doesn't endorse these ideas either.

I actually agree that the U.S. deserves blame for arming the mujaheddin. I don't believe that makes us solely responsible for everything they've done since - but I stopped calling myself a progressive in 1987.

Let's deal with a nation...by leaving it alone. Who knows, that might work better than meddling incompetently in the region. Too bad it will never be tried. It won't be tried by President Lightworker - but never say "never". "History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives." —Abba Eban

December 14, 2008 at 10:40 PM  
Blogger Studd Beefpile said...

Toregrip:

The Cold War started in '46 when Stalin went back on his pledges regarding eastern Europe. It was only after Korea that America really got involved.

People forget how dramatically America disarmed immediately after WWII. Budgets were so low that brand new top of the line fighter aircraft were sold for scrap metal because there was no money to even mothball them. The most powerful navy ever built was nuked by the people who built it because there was no money to maintain it. Stalin never disarmed. Its true we often greatly exaggerated Soviet strength, but especially during the 50s and early 60s, it was quite formidable.

Your argument for the Islamists is better. Unlike the communists, they do not control the second most powerful industrial empire in the world. that said, assigning as much blame as you do to American foreign policy is a little myopic. Don't forget that the government of all the countries you mention has been putting out anti-western and anti-American propaganda for decades. This does not mean that we haven't done a lot of stupid/evil things, but compared to the amount of stupidity and evil that exists in their own governments, we are a minor actor at best.

December 15, 2008 at 4:29 PM  
Anonymous P.M.Lawrence said...

Toregrip wrote "They removed the democratically elected, non-thieving, non-communist Mossadegh, whose only fault was to want to sell oil on the free market..."

It's amazing how this pernicious myth has takan hold in some circles. Here are some facts on the matter:-

- Mossadegh was not democratically elected. At an earlier stage, his party had democratically obtained power, as part of a wider coalition (technically, he himself had only ever been democratically elected to a seat in the Majlis or Parliament). However, those same democratic processes overhrew him, aftwer which he refused to go, unconstitutionally dismissed the Majlis, and started ruling dictatorially, setting in motion the common trick of a rigged plebiscite to back his seizure of power.

- Mossadegh did not simply want or try "to sell oil on the free market". He seized oil facilities and production that had already been sold, e.g. to BP. It's not a free market if you decide that something you sold could be sold at a higher price, so you grab it back and do that.

- And, of course, all that other stuff he did means nationalising the oil was hardly his only fault, even if you want to call that a free market operation.

December 16, 2008 at 2:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Switzerland doesn't let in hordes of Muslims to form ghettos or fuck around with Muslim countries.

Um, well, yeah, in fact the Swiss have let in hordes of Muslims. Muslims are 4.3% of the population - one of the highest proportions in Europe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslims_in_Western_Europe

December 16, 2008 at 5:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dagnabit.

Muslims in Western Europe

December 16, 2008 at 5:24 PM  
Anonymous toregrip said...

Studd,

You're probably right about the Cold War. I know nowhere near enough to quibble with you on that.

But on Islamism, I do know enough to add one small quibble. Yes, these government do all sorts of crazy stuff, and they do preach Yankee-murder regularly.

But you can't see that as a causal factor or as being a driving force or even as being all that significant. This is all simply a reaction to cavalier American foreign policy. You forget how many of these anti-American puppets are American-installed themselves, with the task of America-bashing as a way to show their people they're not with America, so the people can continue supporting them. It's really that perverse.

The problem I face talking to Americans about this is that people simply cannot believe that their government can do so much evil. And I don't blame you. I can't believe it either. But it does. And we need to start coming to terms with that and stop with the hopeful assignment of good intentions and spreading of blame everywhere else.

The bottom line remains that if they US never intervened in the Middle East since WWII, there would be no Islamic Threat, no terrorism, no pro-US kleptocrats ruling with Sharia law at the behest of the CIA, no Mohammad Attas, and none of that crap.

The rest is just detail.

December 17, 2008 at 9:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah, yes. The old it's-all-America's-fault-so-let's-just-pay-the-Danegeld argument.

Because ignoring OBL and the Taliban for fifteen years worked out so well for us, yes? The Afghan people were so grateful when we stood by them and armed them to throw off the Soviet invasion.

Why, this worked out almost as well as renting out the US Air Force to the Taliban's Albanian branch in 1997 and giving them CAS as they ethnically cleansed the ancient Serb homeland of infidels.

December 17, 2008 at 1:36 PM  
Blogger AMac said...

Pakistan takes minimal steps against banned terror front
By Bill Roggio, The Long War Journal
December 16, 2008

One week after the United Nations Security Council declared the Pakistan-based Jamaat-ud-Dawa charity a front group for the Lashkar-e-Taiba terror group, the Pakistani government has taken minimal steps to clamp down on the organization.

Pakistan claims it is rounding up senior leaders of the Jamaat-ud-Dawa, closing down the group's offices, and targeting their finances, but the government has halfheartedly pursued the crackdown, according to US officials and reports from the region.

[snip]

December 18, 2008 at 1:24 PM  
Blogger Aaron Davies said...

@anon December 17, 2008 1:36 PM: well, danegeld's hardly the only possible response to toegrip's point. there's also bombing them back into their favorite century (somewhere between the seventh and thirteenth), then leaving them strictly to fend for themselves. the important thing is not to support any one local group, and above all, not send any more money.

December 18, 2008 at 6:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You forget how many of these anti-American puppets are American-installed themselves, with the task of America-bashing as a way to show their people they're not with America, so the people can continue supporting them. It's really that perverse.

Ok, go ahead and start. Which of these anti American puppets were American installed? And no implausible 6 degrees of separation please.

Anybody that directly connects the Taliban with the mujahideen we armed in the Soviet-Afghan war is impossible to take seriously. The Taliban had their roots in Pakistani madrasahs, they were a totally different element than the mujahideen warlords which helped fight off the soviets. One didn't spring from the other.

The Afghan resistance was conceived, formed, and operated by Afghanis. We gave them weapons and support in order to halt an expansionist Soviet war. What the weapons were used for later on has nothing to do with the U.S. The French gave us muskets and artillery to fight off the British during the revolutionary war. If we turned around and later used them on indian tribes, that has nothing to do with the French.

Right, how else to explain all the terrorist attacks in Switzerland. Oh, wait, there are none. Switzerland doesn't let in hordes of Muslims to form ghettos or fuck around with Muslim countries. "Anti-Western" sentiment is primarily anti-American and anti-Israel. If your average raghead shouted "Death to Canada/Ireland/Liechtenstein" his camel-jockey buddies would all look at him funny.

There are a lot of Muslims and Switzerland and alot of concern over the religious extremism of your average Muslim immigrant. One of the reasons why an anti-immigration party now controls the Swiss government.

You haven't been keeping up with things, obviously.

And no they may not say death to Liechtenstein(because they don't know what that is). But we've been hearing plenty of death to Denmark, death to Britian, etc.

This is a cultural conflict, just ask Theo Van Gogh. Muslim put up more of a stink over the Danish cartoons than they did over the invasion of Afghanistan. That's why America is the big bugaboo amongst islamic radicals. We control the cultural zeitgeist - for now.

December 30, 2008 at 12:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Aaron Davies said, "the important thing is not to support any one local group, and above all, not send any more money."

Lots of luck with that. What's our trade deficit with Saudi Arabia this year, again?

January 3, 2009 at 11:16 AM  
Blogger AMac said...

Jan. 7, 2009--Pakistan's prime minister fired his national security adviser after he disclosed that the lone surviving Mumbai terrorist is a Pakistani citizen. The move came just hours after the government confirmed the Mumbai attacker was a Pakistani after more than a month of denials.

Mehmud Ali Durrani, Pakistan’s National Security Advisor, was sacked by Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani after he gave "a statement to an Indian news channel regarding Ajmal Kasab without taking him into confidence," Geo News reported...

Kasab admitted to Indian police his 10-man team trained in Lashkar-e-Taiba camps in Pakistan with the support of the Inter-Service Intelligence agency and launched their attack from the Pakistani port city of Karachi. Other Lashkar operatives in Indian and Pakistani custody admitted to their involvement the assault.

The prime minister said that Durrani’s statement had tarnished the country’s image...

[snip]

January 8, 2009 at 7:21 AM  
Blogger 信次 said...

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,美國aneros,rudeboy,英國rudeboy,英國Rocksoff,德國Fun Factory,Fun Factory,英國甜筒造型按摩座,甜筒造型按摩座,英國Rock Chic ,瑞典 Lelo ,英國Emotional Bliss,英國 E.B,荷蘭 Natural Contours,荷蘭 N C,美國 OhMiBod,美國 OMB,Naughti Nano ,音樂按摩棒,ipod按摩棒,美國 The Screaming O,美國TSO,美國TOPCO,美國Doc Johnson,美國CA Exotic,美國CEN,美國Nasstoy,美國Tonguejoy,英國Je Joue,美國Pipe Dream,美國California Exotic,美國NassToys,美國Vibropod,美國Penthouse,仿真按摩棒,矽膠按摩棒,猛男倒模,真人倒模,仿真倒模,PJUR,Zestra,適趣液,穿戴套具,日本NPG,雙頭龍,FANCARNAL,日本NIPPORI,日本GEL,日本Aqua Style,美國WET,費洛蒙,費洛蒙香水,仿真名器,av女優,打炮,做愛,性愛,口交,吹喇叭,肛交,魔女訓練大師,無線跳蛋,有線跳蛋,震動棒,震動保險套,震動套,TOY-情趣用品,情趣用品網,情趣購物網,成人用品網,情趣用品討論,成人購物網,鎖精套,鎖精環,持久環,持久套,拉珠,逼真按摩棒,名器,超名器,逼真老二,電動自慰,自慰,打手槍,仿真女郎,SM道具,SM,性感內褲,仿真按摩棒,pornograph,hunter系列,h動畫,成人動畫,成人卡通,情色動畫,情色卡通,色情動畫,色情卡通,無修正,禁斷,人妻,極悪調教,姦淫,近親相姦,顏射,盜攝,偷拍,本土自拍,素人自拍,公園露出,街道露出,野外露出,誘姦,迷姦,輪姦,凌辱,痴漢,痴女,素人娘,中出,巨乳,調教,潮吹,av,a片,成人影片,成人影音,線上影片,成人光碟,成人無碼,成人dvd,情色影音,情色影片,情色dvd,情色光碟,航空版,薄碼,色情dvd,色情影音,色情光碟,線上A片,免費A片,A片下載,成人電影,色情電影,TOKYO HOT,SKY ANGEL,一本道,SOD,S1,ALICE JAPAN,皇冠系列,老虎系列,東京熱,亞熱,武士系列,新潮館,情趣用品,約定金生,約定金生,情趣,情趣商品,約定金生,情趣網站,跳蛋, 約定金生,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,約定金生,自慰套,G點,性感內衣,約定金生,情趣內衣,約定金生,角色扮演,生日禮物,生日精品,約定金生,自慰,打手槍,約定金生,潮吹,高潮,後庭,約定金生,情色論譠,影片下載,約定金生,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,約定金生,音樂下載, 約定金生,約定金生,開獎號碼,統一發票號碼,夜市,統一發票對獎,保險套, 約定金生,約定金生,做愛,約定金生,減肥,美容,瘦身,約定金生,當舖,軟體下載,汽車,機車, 約定金生,手機,來電答鈴, 約定金生,週年慶,美食,約定金生,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計, 約定金生,室內設計, 約定金生,靈異照片,約定金生,同志,約定金生,聊天室,運動彩券,大樂透,約定金生,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍, 約定金生,無名破解,av女優, 約定金生,小說,約定金生,民宿,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,約定金生,討論區,痴漢,懷孕, 約定金生,約定金生,美女交友,約定金生,交友,日本av,日本,機票, 約定金生,香水,股市, 約定金生,股市行情, 股市分析,租房子,成人影片,約定金生,免費影片,醫學美容, 約定金生,免費算命,算命,約定金生,姓名配對,姓名學,約定金生,姓名學免費,遊戲, 約定金生,好玩遊戲,好玩遊戲區,約定金生,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,約定金生,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片, 約定金生,桌布,桌布下載,電視節目表, 約定金生,線上電視,約定金生,線上a片,約定金生,線上掃毒,線上翻譯,購物車,約定金生,身分證製造機,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車, 約定金生,約定金生,法拍屋,約定金生,歌詞,音樂,音樂網,火車,房屋,情趣用品,約定金生,情趣,情趣商品,情趣網站,跳蛋,約定金生,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,自慰套, 約定金生, G點,性感內衣,約定金生,情趣內衣,約定金生,角色扮演,生日禮物,精品,禮品,約定金生,自慰,打手槍,潮吹,高潮,約定金生,後庭,情色論譠,約定金生,影片下載,約定金生,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,音樂下載,開獎號碼,統一發票,夜市,保險套,做愛,約定金生,減肥,美容,瘦身,當舖,約定金生,軟體下載,約定金生,汽車,機車,手機,來電答鈴,約定金生,週年慶,美食,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計,室內設計,靈異照片, 約定金生,同志,聊天室,約定金生,運動彩券,,大樂透,約定金生,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍, 約定金生,無名破解, av女優,小說,民宿,約定金生,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,討論區,痴漢, 約定金生,懷孕,約定金生,美女交友,約定金生,交友,日本av ,日本,機票, 約定金生,香水,股市, 約定金生,股市行情,股市分析,租房子,約定金生,成人影片,免費影片,醫學美容,免費算命,算命, 約定金生,姓名配對,姓名學, 約定金生,姓名學免費,遊戲,約定金生,好玩遊戲,約定金生,好玩遊戲區,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片,桌布,約定金生,桌布下載,電視節目表,線上電視, 約定金生,線上a片,線上a片,線上翻譯, 約定金生,購物車,身分證製造機,約定金生,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車,法拍屋,歌詞,音樂,音樂網, 約定金生,借錢,房屋,街頭籃球,找工作,旅行社,約定金生,六合彩,整型,水噹噹,貸款,貸款,信用貸款,宜蘭民宿,花蓮民宿,未婚聯誼,網路購物,珠海,下川島,常平,珠海,澳門機票,香港機票,婚友,婚友社,未婚聯誼,交友,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,未婚聯誼,婚友社,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,婚友,未婚聯誼,婚友社,未婚聯誼,單身聯誼,單身聯誼,婚友,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,婚友,交友,交友,婚友社,婚友社,婚友社,大陸新娘,大陸新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,越南新娘,外籍新娘,外籍新娘,台中坐月子中心,搬家公司,搬家,搬家,搬家公司,線上客服,網頁設計,線上客服,網頁設計,網頁設計,土地貸款,免費資源,電腦教學,wordpress,人工植牙,關鍵字,關鍵字,seo,seo,網路排名,自然排序,網路排名軟體,

January 31, 2009 at 9:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,美髮儀器,美髮,儀器,髮型,EMBA,MBA,學位,EMBA,專業認證,認證課程,博士學位,DBA,PHD,在職進修,碩士學位,推廣教育,DBA,進修課程,碩士學位,網路廣告,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,廣告,課程介紹,學分班,文憑,牛樟芝,段木,牛樟菇,日式料理, 台北居酒屋,燒肉,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,造型系列,學位,牛樟芝,腦磷脂,磷脂絲胺酸,SEO,婚宴,捷運,學區,美髮,儀器,髮型,牛樟芝,腦磷脂,磷脂絲胺酸,看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,房子,捷運,學區,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,學位,碩士學位,進修,在職進修, 課程,教育,學位,證照,mba,文憑,學分班,網路廣告,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,SEO,关键词,网络广告,关键词广告,SEO,关键词,网络广告,关键词广告,SEO,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,居酒屋,燒烤

February 2, 2009 at 8:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What should i do? I am tried of this job now!

Papayaone.com is a online wholesale electronics web. Maybe you are finding China products all the time. Maybe you are finding the cheap China Wholesale Electronics.But you can't find the satisfaction goods most time. You may feel the price is high or the quality is not so good .and the service is not so fast.
Now I give you a good choice, at this website you can buy cheap electronics you want. It supply Alcohol Breath Testers , Korea Fahion Clothing , Carmeras Camcorders, and Car accessories.the cell phone accessories,the cheap China cell phone, cell phone watches and Tri-brand cell phone.The web also give a fashion Digital Quran,TV cell phone iPhone accessories, Flashlights, MP3/4 Audio.Wish you can choice a satisfaction items from it.

February 5, 2009 at 7:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回

February 7, 2009 at 2:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回

February 7, 2009 at 2:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回 挽回感情 徵信 徵信社 徵信 捉姦 徵信公司 通姦 通姦罪 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 捉姦 監聽 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 外遇問題 徵信 捉姦 女人徵信 外遇問題 女子徵信 外遇 徵信公司 徵信網 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 感情挽回 挽回感情 外遇沖開 徵信 徵信 徵信社 抓姦 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 贍養費 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 抓姦 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信 徵信社

February 10, 2009 at 7:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回 挽回感情 徵信 徵信社 徵信 捉姦 徵信公司 通姦 通姦罪 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 捉姦 監聽 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 外遇問題 徵信 捉姦 女人徵信 外遇問題 女子徵信 外遇 徵信公司 徵信網 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 感情挽回 挽回感情 外遇沖開 徵信 徵信 徵信社 抓姦 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 贍養費 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 抓姦 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信 徵信社

February 10, 2009 at 7:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回 挽回感情 徵信 徵信社 徵信 捉姦 徵信公司 通姦 通姦罪 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 捉姦 監聽 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 外遇問題 徵信 捉姦 女人徵信 外遇問題 女子徵信 外遇 徵信公司 徵信網 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 感情挽回 挽回感情 外遇沖開 徵信 徵信 徵信社 抓姦 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 贍養費 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 抓姦 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信 徵信社

February 10, 2009 at 8:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回 挽回感情 徵信 徵信社 徵信 捉姦 徵信公司 通姦 通姦罪 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 捉姦 監聽 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 外遇問題 徵信 捉姦 女人徵信 外遇問題 女子徵信 外遇 徵信公司 徵信網 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 感情挽回 挽回感情 外遇沖開 徵信 徵信 徵信社 抓姦 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 贍養費 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 抓姦 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信 徵信社

February 10, 2009 at 8:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回 挽回感情 徵信 徵信社 徵信 捉姦 徵信公司 通姦 通姦罪 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 捉姦 監聽 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 外遇問題 徵信 捉姦 女人徵信 外遇問題 女子徵信 外遇 徵信公司 徵信網 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 感情挽回 挽回感情 外遇沖開 徵信 徵信 徵信社 抓姦 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 贍養費 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 抓姦 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信社

February 10, 2009 at 8:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回 挽回感情 徵信 徵信社 徵信 捉姦 徵信公司 通姦 通姦罪 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 捉姦 監聽 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 外遇問題 徵信 捉姦 女人徵信 外遇問題 女子徵信 外遇 徵信公司 徵信網 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 感情挽回 挽回感情 外遇沖開 徵信 徵信 徵信社 抓姦 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 贍養費 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 抓姦 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信 徵信社

February 10, 2009 at 8:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回 挽回感情 徵信 徵信社 徵信 捉姦 徵信公司 通姦 通姦罪 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 捉姦 監聽 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 外遇問題 徵信 捉姦 女人徵信 外遇問題 女子徵信 外遇 徵信公司 徵信網 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 感情挽回 挽回感情 外遇沖開 徵信 徵信 徵信社 抓姦 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 贍養費 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 抓姦 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信 徵信社

February 10, 2009 at 8:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回 挽回感情 徵信 徵信社 徵信 捉姦 徵信公司 通姦 通姦罪 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 捉姦 監聽 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 外遇問題 徵信 捉姦 女人徵信 外遇問題 女子徵信 外遇 徵信公司 徵信網 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 感情挽回 挽回感情 外遇沖開 徵信 徵信 徵信社 抓姦 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 贍養費 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 抓姦 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信 徵信社

February 10, 2009 at 10:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回 挽回感情 徵信 徵信社 徵信 捉姦 徵信公司 通姦 通姦罪 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 捉姦 監聽 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 外遇問題 徵信 捉姦 女人徵信 外遇問題 女子徵信 外遇 徵信公司 徵信網 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 感情挽回 挽回感情 外遇沖開 徵信 徵信 徵信社 抓姦 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 贍養費 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 抓姦 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信 徵信社

February 10, 2009 at 11:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回 挽回感情 徵信 徵信社 徵信 捉姦 徵信公司 通姦 通姦罪 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 捉姦 監聽 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 外遇問題 徵信 捉姦 女人徵信 外遇問題 女子徵信 外遇 徵信公司 徵信網 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 感情挽回 挽回感情 外遇沖開 徵信 徵信 徵信社 抓姦 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 贍養費 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 抓姦 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信 徵信社

February 10, 2009 at 11:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回 挽回感情 徵信 徵信社 徵信 捉姦 徵信公司 通姦 通姦罪 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 捉姦 監聽 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 外遇問題 徵信 捉姦 女人徵信 外遇問題 女子徵信 外遇 徵信公司 徵信網 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 感情挽回 挽回感情 外遇沖開 徵信 徵信 徵信社 抓姦 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 贍養費 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 抓姦 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信 徵信社

February 10, 2009 at 11:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回 挽回感情 徵信 徵信社 徵信 捉姦 徵信公司 通姦 通姦罪 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 捉姦 監聽 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 外遇問題 徵信 捉姦 女人徵信 外遇問題 女子徵信 外遇 徵信公司 徵信網 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 感情挽回 挽回感情 外遇沖開 徵信 徵信 徵信社 抓姦 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 贍養費 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 抓姦 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信 徵信社

February 11, 2009 at 1:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信社 感情挽回 挽回感情 徵信 徵信社 徵信 捉姦 徵信公司 通姦 通姦罪 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 捉姦 監聽 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 外遇問題 徵信 捉姦 女人徵信 外遇問題 女子徵信 外遇 徵信公司 徵信網 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 抓姦 抓猴 捉猴 調查跟蹤 反跟蹤 感情挽回 挽回感情 外遇沖開 徵信 徵信 徵信社 抓姦 徵信 徵信社 外遇蒐證 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 贍養費 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 抓姦 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信公司 徵信社 徵信 徵信 徵信公司 徵信 徵信社

February 12, 2009 at 1:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

徵信, 徵信社, 感情挽回, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 感情挽回, 外遇沖開, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信公司, 女人徵信, 外遇, 外遇, 外遇, 外遇

徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信網, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信,

February 12, 2009 at 1:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

^^ nice blog!! thanks a lot! ^^

徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,

March 2, 2009 at 10:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

~「朵語‧,最一件事,就。好,你西中瀟灑獨行。

March 6, 2009 at 5:19 AM  
Anonymous 花蓮民宿 said...

帶著簡單的行囊,來花蓮旅遊走走,順便體驗一下各種花蓮民宿帶給你的不同感受,品嚐道地花蓮美食的特別花蓮小吃風味,也可以騎著單車來品味花蓮 ,呼吸著新鮮的花蓮空氣,所以來花蓮住宿就帶著輕鬆的心情吧!!花蓮黃頁擁有各種不同風格的花蓮民宿,歡迎您來花蓮旅遊放鬆心情體驗美麗的花蓮民宿!!

March 18, 2009 at 4:06 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home