Open Thread - The Coming Draft

March 14, 2004

Original Source:

WASHINGTON -- The government is taking the first steps toward a targeted military draft of Americans with special skills in computers and foreign languages.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is adamant that he will not ask Congress to authorize a draft, and officials at the Selective Service System, the independent federal agency that would organize any conscription, stress that the possibility of a so-called "special skills draft" is remote.

Nonetheless, the agency has begun the process of creating the procedures and policies to conduct such a targeted draft in case military officials ask Congress to authorize it and the lawmakers agree to such a request.

"Talking to the manpower folks at the Department of Defense and others, what came up was that nobody foresees a need for a large conventional draft such as we had in Vietnam," said Richard Flahavan, a spokesman for the Selective Service System. "But they thought that if we have any kind of a draft, it will probably be a special skills draft."

Flahavan said Selective Service planning for a possible draft of linguists and computer experts began last fall after Pentagon personnel officials said the military needed more people with skills in those areas.

A targeted registration and draft "is strictly in the planning stage," he said, adding that "the whole thing is driven by what appears to be the more pressing and relevant need today" -- the deficit in language and computer experts.

The spokesman said it could take about two years to "to have all the kinks worked out."

The agency already has a special system to register and draft health care personnel ages 20 to 44 in more than 60 specialties if necessary in a crisis. According to Flahavan, the agency will expand this system to be able to rapidly register and draft computer specialists and linguists, should the need ever arise. But he stressed that the agency has received no request from the Pentagon to do so.

Congress, which would have to authorize a draft, has shown no interest in taking such a step.

Kathleen Long, a spokeswoman for Sen. Carl Levin, the senior Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said a draft has little support among lawmakers.

A spokesman for Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, agreed. "There are massive operations under way to retrain soldiers" for more pressing duties and to recruit specialties in demand such as language experts, said Harald Stavenas, Hunter's spokesman.

The military draft ended in 1973 as the U.S. commitment in Vietnam waned, beginning the era of the all-volunteer force. Mandatory registration for the draft was suspended in 1975 but resumed in 1980 by President Carter after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. About 13.5 million men, ages 18 to 25, are currently registered with the Selective Service.

The military has had particular difficulty attracting and retaining language experts, especially people knowledgeable about Arabic and various Afghan dialects. To address this need, the Army has a new pilot program under way to recruit Arabic speakers into the service's Ready Reserves. The service has signed up about 150 people into the training program.

A Pentagon official familiar with personnel issues stressed that the armed forces are against any form of conscription but acknowledged that the groundwork is already under way at the Selective Service System.

On Capitol Hill, Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., has introduced a bill that would reinstate the draft. The legislation has minimal support with only 13 House lawmakers signing on as co-sponsors. A corresponding bill in the Senate introduced by Sen. Fritz Hollings, the outgoing South Carolina Democrat, has no co-sponsors.

Posted by manystrom at March 14, 2004 11:09 PM

"When the cost of food soars as a result of Peak Oil, the only way to control the population will be through the institution of a fascist style police state. The Patriot Acts and related legislation are the foundation of that state.

"In this context the wars in the Middle East are not wars of greed. Rather, they are wars of survival. Given our current infrastructure, that oil is necessary to keep our food and water supply running.

"You can expect the U.S. to invade other oil rich nations such asSyria, Iran and Saudi Arabia within the next 2-5 years. As you watch the news, you can already notice the hints are being dropped. "Iran has WMD" or "Syria isn't cooperating in the war on terror" or "Saudi Arabia is funding terrorism". "The war on terror will last for decades." The stage is being set so that the American public will accept these future invasions.

"No country is safe. For instance, several high level officials in the Bush Administration are pushing for a plan to force nations to "choose between Paris and Washington."

"Similarly, Canada is required by NAFTA to sell 60% of its natural gas to the U.S. When Canada begins to experience the energy shortage, they may seek to change the terms of that law. The U.S. is unlikely to allow them to do so.

- Marco

Posted by: Marco at March 14, 2004 11:17 PM

I think Somalia will be the next target for US occupation, it's a lot weaker than the others more obvious targets and would keep the momentum going towards a middle east lock down.

Here's some background on Somalia's oil history and civil war:

Obviously a big part of the future story of the world is gas, we'll hit $3 a gallon within 18-36 months!

Cheers Rich

Posted by: Rich at March 15, 2004 04:08 AM

These concerns about renewing the draft tap dance around the larger issue of national survival in a world of limited resources and Islamic Jihad. We have legitimate concerns about border security and energy independence should be a major priority.

Many confuse the defensibility of our borders with the problem of illegal immigration. A competent army of several hundred thousand troops could certainly defend all of America's borders if they faced an enemy using traditional military tactics. But no amount of money or weaponry short of an East-German style police state can prevent illegal immigration. In our free society, there are too many opportunities for illegals to enter the country through disguise, bribery, and the simple cover of darkness. If we built a 50-foot concrete wall from San Diego to Brownsville, illegals from Mexico could shift tactics and enter via another route such as small boats, or even cargo containers on ships.

The major source of illegal immigrants is Mexico, and the impetus for the exodus is economic. The Mexican economy is suffering from inefficiencies due to corruption, and the flight of industry to low-wage countries like China. Rather than try to hermetically seal our southern border, perhaps it's time to address the problems at their source. It may be in our national interest to annex Mexico and install a territorial governor. We would extend our southern border to Guatemala and Belieze, and this small border could be managed by vestiges of the Mexican army.

This may seem radical, but is it any more radical than painting red lines around the borders of this "free" republic and daring anyone to cross them? The conquest of Mexico and removal of the existing government probably could be accomplished in less than three months. Citizens in the newly formed territory would pay taxes and after a suitable time would be eligible to petition for statehood.

Two hundred years ago, President Adams asked Thomas Jefferson what it would take to conquer Canada. Jefferson is said to have replied "30 days of marching". Some might argue that in 2004, Canada poses no real threat to America. But if our national defense strategy requires secure borders and access to pertoleum and other resources, then we must seriously consider annexation of Canada as well. The resulting North American Empire would be a formidable economic and military power, and development of its resources might actually achieve the goal of energy independence.

Do we need a much larger military to extend our empire? The answer is yes if we try to expand our influence with standing armies in the Middle East. If we limit our adventures to the North American Continent, then the present military, augmented with robotic/remote weapons would suffice. A draft should always be an option though.

Posted by: JM at March 15, 2004 11:19 PM

If the government is denying it (as they are this draft) you know it must be true. The more they deny, the more you know it is true. They cover up the truth with lies. War is Peace, Slavery is Freedom, etc...


Posted by: Dan at March 16, 2004 10:33 AM

Well, a draft is certain to come. This Global war will continue for the foreseeable future, this will put a damper on recruiting efforts and will also drive down the quality of new recruits. The next war, and be sure it is being planned, will be another oil rich nation, and I suspect that as much noise that is being made about Iran, many eyes are looking at Saudi Arabia as a potential windfall. It is incredibly unstable with a large body of disaffected citizens that have and often do resort to terror to get its message across. It is also the place that Osama is most concerned about. It is the place where a lot terrorist funding comes from. How it will all come about no one can say, but America’s days in Iraq are numbered, as they are now working tirelessly on the transition to Iraqi rule. Word has it that it is Bush’s firm intention to be out or Iraq (at least for the most part) by election day. That leaves the need for another Arab nation to bully. Many say it is Iran, I think the Saudi’s are a more likley target. They are repressive (perhaps even more so than Saddam) corrupt and tottering. If we do go in, a draft will be necessary, many GI’s are wounded and some are not mentally fit for duty any more. We increasingly need to rely on ‘green’ reserves to do the fighting. No, a draft is coming but it will not create an effective military force. Debate I am sure is raging about who to invade next, but our ineptitude in Iraq and the quagmire and mess we will leave behind make any such adventure foolish and stupid. Foolish and Stupid... now who does that sound like?

Posted by: Mark Watson at March 17, 2004 05:26 AM

the children of useless eaters are thenselves useless eaters. they are not needed in an automated manufacturing enviroment. us elites WILL use you up, & burn you ANY way we want! welcome to OUR NOVUS SECLORUM ORDO

Posted by: phillip dru at March 18, 2004 01:58 AM

Posted by: steve at March 21, 2004 12:21 PM

Iraq and Afganistan are simple proxy wars started to give terrorists something other than american cities to shoot at. Always better to fight in somebody else's back yard, using troops from an economy that gives them little option other than to grab a rifle. Are the kiddies (americans) excited about the mars rover? Then announce a mission to mars...and the moon, also. Can't have the chinese planting flags everywhere up there now, can we? Lets keep things together in the Indian theater by giving them american we got 'em by the balls.
We kicked russian ass for the global pie...

Posted by: zippy at March 23, 2004 03:53 PM

Forced conscription is slavery, pure and simple - and wasn't that outlawed at some point in our history???

Posted by: DAB at March 25, 2004 09:42 PM

The draft is coming? What's the usual pattern of drafts in a nation? Everyone 2 or 3 generations?

Posted by: Bill at March 27, 2004 05:39 AM

As the mother of four boys,and a girl, now grown, and the mother of a son JUST returned from Irag I beg and plead, Please no draft. I've figured this would happen, and it will soon, no matter what lies they tell us now. My daughter will be 19 this coming fall, I will not stand by and see her drafted and sent to some hell hole, and for what?
Her own brother, the one back from Irag for three days, when he heard of the possible draft said, "NO dang way is MY sister going to get drafted, nor my daughter!" He's been in since he was 17, and he's now 30. He has told me horror stories of his 12 months in Irag. Things are worse than most realize. No, I'll find a way to keep her out of the clutches of these mad men who have such power over all our lives!

Posted by: Lee at March 27, 2004 11:57 AM

A draft is most effective within a country of high nationalism. 'Protecting the country' or 'protecting our way of life' is the most effective, so more attacks on U.S. soil may be needed for an effective draft. Although, this did not happen for Vietnam, as gradualism was used then to 'ease the US into a war'. However, Vietnam came within a generation of WWII with much of the population still feeling obligated to have young men serve, as most people's fathers, uncles, brothers had served in recent memory.

I would be interested in know if there ever was a draft for women in history. I think the young men of a nation can be 'shamed' into serving by accusing them of not 'being real men' by letting a woman fight for them. (I being one of those men, as I would prefer to be go into war if it meant taking the place of some kid's mother.)

Posted by: Bill at March 30, 2004 12:51 AM

the wars and terrorism are fake

they are created by the elites to push the world towards globalism and totalitarianism

the only thing that protects these criminals is the stupidity of the american people

politicians who aid and abet the draft should be tried for treason

forced vaccines is another treasonous act

wars are planned

the first gulf war was planned many decades ago

911 attack was carried out and supported by bush and congress and other NWO minions

the very politicians and generals in higher authority who will order and direct the drafted young people will be the very terrorists who helped carry out and cover up the 911 and okc bombing event

Posted by: qw1 at March 30, 2004 10:27 AM

Dont worry about all this doom talk - keep 1/2 your cash in cheap gold stocks such as LNXGF and 1/2 in Swiss Franc -- I dont know if real estate will collapse, hard call right now have to wait a few years. I just sold my house after owning it for 15 years - was tough but hope to make 10X the money in gold over the next 2 years and then retire in a nice safe area rather than the city.

Posted by: Steve Ballanos at March 31, 2004 06:31 AM

With the religious pilgrimage to Karbala, Iraq of "between two and three million" Iranian faithful this weekend, I can think of no better camouflage to cover the entry of, possibly, 100,000 or more guerrilla fighters. The region is not divided into countries when it comes to western forays to control resources just as it isn't when it comes to Muslim resentment of those forays. If this escalation of the past few days is only the ramp up to what I theorize, prepare to see an emergency draft before the election. And that would mean the strong possibility of a liberal administration taking power in the middle of a war. Oh yeah, have a "nice" day!!

Posted by: chet at April 10, 2004 01:18 AM

Yes, a draft is coming. I am unusually sensitive to changes in the wind, and I can feel it in the air. Artists usually are. It reminds me of the lines from the Eminem song, "Square Dance:"

...Yeah, you laugh till your muthafuckin' ass gets drafted, while you're at Band
camp thinkin' the crap can't happen
Till you fuck around, get an Anthrax napkin, inside a package wrapped in saran
wrap wrappin'
Open the plastic and then you stand back gaspin', fuckin' assassins hijackin'
Amtracks crashin'
All this terror America demands action, next thing you know you've got Uncle
Sam's ass askin'
To join the Army or what you'll do for their Navy
You just a baby, gettin' recruited at eighteen
You're on a plane now, eatin' their food and their baked beans
I'm twenty-eight, they gonna take you 'fore they take me

More on the draft:

Most of the people who read this site are too old to be drafted, but does that absolve us from responsibility?

Like the mother above, you had better do more than beg and plead Mr. Bush that there be no draft. From what I understand, he does not take well to pleading:

"Although he said he was anguished by the decision, in an interview in Talk magazine, writer Tucker Carlson described Bush mimicking the woman's final plea for her life. "'Please,' Bush whimpers, his lips pursed in mock desperation, 'don't kill me.'"
- Time Magazine
Quoted from

Bottom line is the man is dangerous, and we need to be careful. If he is reelected, we need to start taking precautions to preserve our own safety. The government's interests have disconnected from the interests of the people.

- Ryan

Posted by: Ryan Walker at April 11, 2004 08:32 PM

Of course the US the heading for an even more totalitarian form of government. When the going gets tough the schmucks become even more lousy.
Americans should stop eating cows, they're are one of our mothers AND by eating these wonderful creatures you become dull-headed! It's worse than taking dope.

Posted by: Rob Knaapen at April 12, 2004 02:57 AM

Being too old to be drafted does not absolve us of responsibility.

Posted by: phil at April 12, 2004 09:34 AM

What a bunch of affluent,white, suburban, college educated, feminized, losers (hippies). You don't get it! It's not about you; it never has been.

You borrow funny money (fiat currency) in the form of non-dischargable loans for so-called educations (politically correct brain-washing) for jobs that don't exist, and never will.

You vote for politician that are liars,thieves and sociopaths. You think they do what they do for your sake, and the sake of the world. They make good money but not from the likes of you. It's the people who own this world that pay them.

You borrow yourself to affluence, and buy disposable junk. You buy houses (it's a consumable not an investment), cars and electronic toys galore to show others how rich you are. You save nothing, you own nothing but debt. And in your muddled mind you think you derive some sort of tax benefit from your possesions. The IRS was not set up for your benefit.

And when things go wrong, you turn on the television and expect the wisdom of the ages to be spouted forth. Quick turn to channel 7, God is speaking and he's telling you to buy now before it's to late. So many channels all saying the same thing. What are the odds of you and your associates seeing the same things the same way all the time. Think about it!

If reality gets to much for you, you can always become an advocate (the emotionally disturbed) for some group. Take your choice homosexual or holy-roller. Then you tell the rest us how to act. There is no political solution.

Use your head! Become a student of human nature. Learn how to make money. Stop turning to sources outside yourself - they don't have your best interest at heart.

I will tell you a secret: It's all an illusion.

And If all this tragedy comes to pass what are you going to do anyway?


Posted by: Gerald R. Scott at April 15, 2004 02:13 AM

"And If all this tragedy comes to pass what are you going to do anyway?"

Well I don't know about these rest of these people but I'm coming to your house. It seems like you've got it all.

Posted by: Sgt. Todd at April 18, 2004 03:00 AM

(April 8, 2004} The Bush people including their troops in Congress, Justice Scalia, the warlords of the right, the Pentagon and Rupert Murdoch, the Washington Times and the National Review have all decided that we must have a draft as quickly as possible. Rove has said that even to broach this seriously before November would be suicide so it is now being set up in detail, predicated on a Bush victory.

And on that subject, the Beltway rumors mills have it that the election “is in the bag.” Vote rigging is often spoken of with happiness and there is always the strong probability of an “October Surprise” to propel the tardy of support into backing Bush, our “wartime” president. Congress has the draft packages, the SS is now officially activated and the FBI has been ordered to prepare “preventive action” against potential draft dodgers and anti war activists.

Scalia, somewhat to the right of Attila the Hun, has voiced his opinion that draft dodgers can be put in Federal jails without further let or hindrance under new “emergency” acts being drawn up. A National Identity Card is being considered as a means of preventing draft dodging. How will the press handle this? Do we want to end up in a concentration camp undergoing a “patriotic rebirth?” This whole plan, which exists now on paper, is called “Operation Lexington.” Copies are marked “TOP SECRET- COSMIC” which is really a level of accession. Interesting times ahead as the Bush Blackshirts oil up their golden swastikas and try out their new black leather top boots.


Posted by: at April 19, 2004 12:08 PM

This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit

Tuesday, April 20, 2004
--------------------------------------------------ON CAPITOL HILL
Republican senator:
Bring back the draft
Nebraska's Chuck Hagel says 'all of our citizens' should 'pay some price' for U.S. Iraqi operation

--------------------------------------------------Posted: April 20, 2004
11:21 p.m. Eastern
-------------------------------------------------© 2004

A Republican U.S. senator is calling for a return of the military draft so the cost of the Iraq operation could be borne by people of all economic strata.

Speaking at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on post-occupation Iraq, Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., said, "There's not an American ... that doesn't understand what we are engaged in today and what the prospects are for the future."

Hagel, a member of the committee, says all Americans should be involved in the effort.

"Why shouldn't we ask all of our citizens to bear some responsibility and pay some price?" Hagel said, arguing that restoring the draft would force "our citizens to understand the intensity and depth of challenges we face."

The senator also argued re-instituting the draft, which ended in the early '70s, would cause the burden of military service to be spread among all economic classes of people.

"Those who are serving today and dying today are the middle class and lower middle class," he claimed.

Hagel's call comes just days after the Pentagon moved to extend the missions of some 20,000 of the 135,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, noted a report from Agence France-Presse. The Bush administration has been criticized for not using enough troops as the coalition works to keep order in Iraqi cities.

As WorldNetDaily reported, a pair of bills was introduced in Congress last year that would bring back the military draft.

S. 89, the Senate version of the legislation, indicates its purpose is "to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes."

The bill was introduced Jan. 7, 2003, by Sen. Fritz Hollings, D-S.C.

Says the text of the bill: "It is the obligation of every citizen of the United States, and every other person residing in the United States who is between the ages of 18 and 26 to perform a period of national service as prescribed in this Act unless exempted under the provisions of this Act."

This service, which would be for a minimum of two years, can be either in the military or "in a civilian capacity that, as determined by the president, promotes the national defense, including national or community service and homeland security."

Under the bill, "conscientious objectors" may request a deferment from military training, but must still provide service "that does not include any combatant training component." Alternatively, the objector can be transferred to a civilian service job.

The House of Representatives version of the bill, H.R. 163, is sponsored by Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y.

The bill differs from an earlier attempt to re-institute the draft. As WorldNetDaily reported, the "Universal Military Training and Service Act," introduced in December 2001, applied only to men and only those from 18-22 years of age. Also, the earlier bill required just six months of service.

Libertarian presidential candidate Aaron Russo has launched a petition drive against the draft.

Last fall, media reported on the fact the Selective Service System had posted a notice saying the agency was looking for people to serve on local draft boards. Since then, the appeal has been changed to assure the public that "there is NO connection between this ongoing, routine public outreach to compensate for natural board attrition and current international events. Both the president and the secretary of defense have stated on several occasions that a draft is not needed for the war on terrorism, including Iraq."

Libertarian commentators claim the government is getting things prepared so if the draft is re-instated, conscription can begin as quickly as possible. Recently, presidential candidate Ralph Nader also has warned about attempts to bring back the draft.

Related stories:

Petition drive opposes military draft

Congress considers new kind of draft

U.S. not considering conscription

Posted by: Dave at April 21, 2004 08:05 PM

More on the coming draft:

Please circulate.

Posted by: Apostle at April 22, 2004 07:42 PM

From BBC

Ambassadors' letter to Blair
Here is the letter sent by more than 50 former British ambassadors to Tony Blair, urging him either to influence US policy in the Middle East or to stop backing it:

We the undersigned former British ambassadors, high commissioners, governors and senior international officials, including some who have long experience of the Middle East and others whose experience is elsewhere, have watched with deepening concern the policies which you have followed on the Arab-Israel problem and Iraq, in close co-operation with the United States.

Following the press conference in Washington at which you and President Bush restated these policies, we feel the time has come to make our anxieties public, in the hope that they will be addressed in Parliament and will lead to a fundamental reassessment.

The decision by the USA, the EU, Russia and the UN to launch a "Road Map" for the settlement of the Israel/Palestine conflict raised hopes that the major powers would at last make a determined and collective effort to resolve a problem which, more than any other, has for decades poisoned relations between the West and the Islamic and Arab worlds.

... But the hopes were ill-founded. Nothing effective has been done either to move the negotiations forward or to curb the violence.

Britain and the other sponsors of the Road Map merely waited on American leadership, but waited in vain.

Worse was to come. After all those wasted months, the international community has now been confronted with the announcement by Ariel Sharon and President Bush of new policies which are one-sided and illegal and which will cost yet more Israeli and Palestinian blood.

Our dismay at this backward step is heightened by the fact that you yourself seem to have endorsed it, abandoning the principles which for nearly four decades have guided international efforts to restore peace in the Holy Land and which have been the basis for such successes as those efforts have produced.

This abandonment of principle comes at a time when rightly or wrongly we are portrayed throughout the Arab and Muslim world as partners in an illegal and brutal occupation in Iraq.

The conduct of the war in Iraq has made it clear that there was no effective plan for the post-Saddam settlement.

All those with experience of the area predicted that the occupation of Iraq by the Coalition forces would meet serious and stubborn resistance, as has proved to be the case.

To describe the resistance as led by terrorists, fanatics and foreigners is neither convincing nor helpful.

Policy must take account of the nature and history of Iraq, the most complex country in the region.

... The military actions of the Coalition forces must be guided by political objectives and by the requirements of the Iraq theatre itself, not by criteria remote from them.

It is not good enough to say that the use of force is a matter for local commanders.

Heavy weapons unsuited to the task in hand, inflammatory language, the current confrontations in Najaf and Falluja, all these have built up rather than isolated the opposition.

... We share your view that the British government has an interest in working as closely as possible with the United States on both these related issues, and in exerting real influence as a loyal ally.

We believe that the need for such influence is now a matter of the highest urgency.

If that is unacceptable or unwelcome there is no case for supporting policies which are doomed to failure.

The signatories are: Brian Barder; Paul Bergne; John Birch; David Blatherwick; Graham Boyce; Julian Bullard; Juliet Campbell; Bryan Cartledge; Terence Clark; David Colvin; Francis Cornish; James Craig; Brian Crowe; Basil Eastwood; Stephen Egerton; William Fullerton; Dick Fyjis-Walker; Marrack Goulding; John Graham; Andrew Green; Vic Henderson; Peter Hinchcliffe; Brian Hitch; Archie Lamb and David Logan.

Also: Christopher Long; Ivor Lucas; Ian McCluney; Maureen MacGlashan; Philip McLean; Christopher MacRae; Oliver Miles; Martin Morland; Keith Morris; Richard Muir; Alan Munro; Stephen Nash; Robin O'Neill; Andrew Palmer; Bill Quantrill; David Ratford; Tom Richardson; Andrew Stuart; David Tatham; Crispin Tickell; Derek Tonkin; Charles Treadwell; Hugh Tunnell; Jeremy Varcoe; Hooky Walker; Michael Weir and Alan White.

Story from BBC NEWS:

Published: 2004/04/26 16:35:24 GMT


Posted by: Visitor at April 27, 2004 02:14 AM

They don't draft people into Raytheon, Lockheed, or Northrup, do they? They pay what they have to. If war is really necessary for the benefit of the nation then we ought to pay the market rate. Heck, I might sign up at age 34 if they paid off my student loans and a nice signing bonus to top it off. I don't believe the garbage about serving your country. Doing any honest work is serving your country.

Also, let me make a prediction. The poor kids from Harlem and Appalachia will still go to the front lines and the rich kids will have a nice desk job under the draft.

Posted by: Joe Owczarzak at April 29, 2004 01:22 AM

>Maybe we should bring back the draft! It would wake people up to what the neocons are doing.

it's couter intuitive but possibly a good idea

until people have their balls in the sling, they won't care

on the other hand, there just may be too many stupid people in america who will go along

as far as the neocons go ...

there are 100 neocons in the US Senate

and at least nearly 435 neocons in the US House

then we have our choice between the neocon candidates

Posted by: q1 at May 7, 2004 08:20 AM
Recent Entries
Archives by Date

Powered by
Movable Type 2.64