About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

April 21, 2006 5:50am by David Farrar

Another question!

How many former US generals and admirals are there?

(a) 6
(b) 100
(c) 800
(d) 8,000

Share this:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
WhatsApp
More

Pinterest
Print
Tumblr

Like this:

Like Loading...

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment167

Uncategorised
United States

Comments (167)

Login to comment or vote

Nick

d) 8000
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 7:24am
Berend de Boer

That’s easy: 8000.

But I doubt any NZ news organisation has told you that. I never watch TV, but perhaps others do. Did anyone hear this being mentioned?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 7:26am
toby1845

You need to be careful with these figures, David.

The Americans have a rank ‘Brigadier-General’, and count holders of the rank as ‘Generals’. The Naval and Air equivalents (Commodore and Air Commodore respectively) are also counted as General equivalents. Probably about half of the so-called Generals would be from these three ranks.

By contrast, most British Empire/Commonwealth countries replaced the rank of ‘Brigadier-General’ with ‘Brigadier’ in about 1927, in response to a Government directive to reduce the number of Generals.

In short, the numbers of American Generals are not as bad as it appears – and certainly not for armed forces that are as large, widely-spread as those of the United States.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 7:28am
red

*sigh*

David why do you keep trying this stuff. Everyone knows the US has many thousands of retired generals!

Steaching back 50 years!

The retired generals who have critazed rumsfeld are those that worked under him including the head of the famous 82nd air born division.

why do you imply that a genral from 1961 should be lumped togeather with ones that have just finished serving in Iraq?

once again a sly but very shabby dig.

the bbc article is here
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 7:41am
Logix

And from Harpers:

Other signs of serious military anger toward the administration were apparent by the spring of 2004 when a group of very senior officers from the Judge Advocate General’s Corps, the legal arm of the U.S. armed forces, were so upset about the administration’s loosening of rules against torture that they complained in private to Horton, who was then a committee chair at the New York City Bar Association. Horton and the Bar subsequently prepared a groundbreaking report on U.S. interrogation tactics,
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 7:45am
mark

It’s not like the right is unique in how it puts misleading statistics out there, but I always suspect you of being deceptive when you put these polls up DPF.

It’s like Bush’s ‘linking’ Al-Qaeda and Iraq by talking about them in back to back sentences. Sure, if you parse the sentences carefully and expect misleading spin, you can work out what the truth is. But the thrust of the speech is clearly meant to imply a truth that is in fact, false.

Misleading spin at it’s best.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 7:50am
mark

Sorry to derail the thread with a further criticism of this spin method, but you have to ask, ‘what idea is this spin trying to put forward without saying it directly’.

I’m stumped, other than to think that people are suposed to think ‘there are so *many* retired generals, surely having a few that are disgruntled with the present administration is normal’ or somesuch.

Was that actually what you were trying to say DPF? If not, what?

And here’s a bit more on Bush using this same tactic of misleading by omission:
http://www.americanprogress.org/AccountTempFiles/cf/%7BE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A521-5D6FF2E06E03%7D/PRIRAQCLAIMFACT1029.HTM
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 8:03am
Michael (The Right Wing One)

There are approx 8000 retired US Generals still alive. A total of 6 have criticised the Iraq Policy and called for Rumsfield’s resignation.

However, there are the only 3 retired Generals who served in Iraq. Now, how many of them have criticised Rumsfield?

a. None
b. 1
c. 2
d. 3
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 8:32am
neil morrison

Well if the opponents of Bush are now listening to the US military instead of the likes of Michael Moore then that’s progress of a sort.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 8:34am
Graeme Edgeler

Toby1845 – the US Air Force equivalent of the Brigadier General rank (O-7) is Brigadier General.

And as an aside (and I don’t really mean this seriously), New Zealand also appears to consider the NZ Army’s rank of Brigadier General to be a general rank.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10357525

The stuff article was worse (I don’t think they ever referred to Anne Campbell as anything other than a Brigadier General), but it appears to have gone off-line. The dompost rang for days with letters asserting such a rank doesn’t exist, but still…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 8:54am
Graeme Edgeler

And before I forget – the US Navy O-7 rank is Rear Admiral (Lower Half).
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 9:00am
David Farrar

I’ve learnt this wonderful technioque from Scott Adams of Dilbert fame. Just ask a question and see everyone work themselves into a lather trying to psych-analyse what I meant from it.

This is more fun than having laboratory mice 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 9:05am
Danyl Mclauchlan

I’ve learnt this wonderful technioque from Scott Adams of Dilbert fame. Just ask a question and see everyone work themselves into a lather trying to psych-analyse what I meant from it.

What you’re saying is pretty transparent – its a talking point that all the right-wing blogs in the US are also faithfully parrotting. Sorry DPF, but you ain’t no Scott Adams.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 9:36am
Ed Snack

Perhaps it’s just you that is naive and transparent Danyl.

One has to say that since one of the dissenting generals is Wesley “Flake” Clark that their pronouncements has less weight than might otherwise be attributed to him.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 10:15am
Murray

Commonweath Brigadiers are generals. Thats why the rank is “Brigaider General”.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 10:29am
neil morrison

I agree with Danyl, it’s rather disingenuous of DPF to imply that the post is not about minimising the significance of the generals’ criticism.

Being a supporter of the war doesn’t preclude me from believing many things went wrong and that Rumsfeld was too arrogant to listen to his generals in areas where it did matter.

Here’s a good (pro-war) post on how belittling those who fought very well is just wrong –

http://www.belgraviadispatch.com/2006/04/let_the_swiftboating_of_the_ge.html

Still, conflict between the civilian administrators of the Pentagon and folks in uniform is not new and healthy.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 10:31am
Danyl Mclauchlan

Perhaps it’s just you that is naive and transparent Danyl. One has to say that since one of the dissenting generals is Wesley “Flake” Clark that their pronouncements has less weight than might otherwise be attributed to him.

Hi Ed,

Thanks for adding your opinion, typically worthless and uninformed though it is.

Just for the record, the retired Generals criticising Rumsfeld are:

MAJ. GEN. Paul D. Eaton. United States Army, commanded training of Iraqi security forces until 2004.

GEN. Anthony C. Zinni. United States Marine Corps, head of United States Central Command until 2000.

LT. GEN. Gregory Newbold. United States Marine Corps, director of operations, Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2000 to 2002.

MAJ. GEN. John Batiste. United States Army, commander, First Infantry Division in Iraq until 2005.

MAJ. GEN. John M. Riggs. United States Army, director, Objective Force Task Force until 2004.

LT. GEN. Paul van Riper. United States Marine Corps, Director of the Command and Staff College, Quantico VA by 2003.

MAJ. GEN. Charles H. Swannack Jr. United States Army, commander, 82nd Airborne Division in Iraq until 2004.

But hey, what do they know? Clearly the worlds legions of right-wing civilian war-bloggers are in a much better position to comment on progress in Iraq and the performance of the defense secretary than the commander of the 82nd Airborne.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 10:46am
brian_smaller

You will ntoice that there are no Air Force generals amongst that lot. Army (and I’ll throw the Marines in here as well) have not done so well as the Air Force when it comes to prime posts under Rumsfeld. I think that there may be some military politicking going on here.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 11:03am
Kimble

Lets do some leftie math!

The opinion of 6 Former Generals > 8,000 Former Generals

The endorsement of 1 Vietnam Vet > 100 odd swift boat veterans
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 11:04am
Graeme Edgeler

Murray said: “Commonweath Brigadiers are generals. Thats why the rank is “Brigaider General”.”

Now, I know that Canadian OF-6 (NATO) is a Brigadier General, and that Australia had Brig. Gen’s during the Great War, but the NZ army rank (and Australian too, now) between colonel and Major General is Brigadier. Like in the UK, holders of the rank are not considered General Officers.
(this observation was what the outcry in the DomPost letters pages was about)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 11:13am
Nigel

Danyl,

As Gregory Djerejian said it’s like the Swift Boats all over again, personally I think that’s a pretty impressive list & it’s without Colin Powell, Wesley Clark & Norman Schwarzkopf, people who have considerable Military experience themselves & have all criticised Rumsfeld.

Nigel
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 11:15am
Red

DPF – Don’t you think comparing your readers to lab rats a little disrespectfull?

Kimble – Thats the worst math i have ever seen! you have no idea what the opinons of the 8000 (shouldn’t it be 7993?) how the hell do you know that all of them support rumsfeld?

second comparing the war record of someone who had the balls to actulley go to vietnam to someone who couldn’t even leave texas is asinine
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 11:20am
Michael

I don’t think there are too many lefties among the general ranks of the US military (serving or retired). What is interesting is that most of those who recently criticised Rumsfeld are recently retired with combat experience in Iraq. I think we can infer that this group is well informed and reflects general opinion among serving generals. From what I’ve read, none of this group are arguing that the US should not have invaded Iraq and got rid of Saddam (remember the famous Rumsfeld handshake with him a few years back?). The criticism seems to be with the way the occupation has been run since March 2003. In particular, torture and abuse of prisoners has degraded the US military (and the civilian officials who authorised it). I think the war on terror is one that must be fought, and won, by the West. But the way to do it is to win the hearts and minds of ordinary Muslims (difficult but not impossible) rather than alienating them through human rights abuses.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 11:22am
Ed Snack

Wow, “Thanks for adding your opinion, typically worthless and uninformed though it is.” Gee thanks Danyl, receiving that sort of praise from someone as discerning and clever as yourself is appreciated.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 12:32pm
Danyl Mclauchlan

The opinion of 6 Former Generals > 8,000 Former Generals

Hey Kimble – can you please provide a link supporting your allegation (above) that 8000 Former Generals have come out in support of Rumsfeld?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 12:37pm
Kimble

Fine,

6/7994 = 0.075% of the total population of retired Generals have come out in objection to Rumsfeld.

This simply counters the impression many are trying to instill that Rumsfeld is universally detested by former Generals.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 12:43pm
Danyl Mclauchlan

Readers amused by Kimbles nonsense might also enjoy this Free Republic thread on the same issue.

Money quote: We should we should try those generals n military court and convict them with harsh military punishment. These people who speak out against the government during wartime are committing criminal acts against the United States.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1615877/posts

Every time I visit a right-wing site like Free Republic in the US, or Silent Running here at home I’m struck by how much the wingnuts sound like Marxist-Leninists. Apologists for Stalin used to rationalise his purges using identical language.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 1:36pm
mark

kimble: “This simply counters the impression many are trying to instill that Rumsfeld is universally detested by former Generals.”

Oh bear of very little brain, can’t you see that this is the point of DPF’s original misleading post?

To lead you to this position.

President being criticised? (and make no mistake, criticising Rumsfeld is criticising Bush). Right-wing bloggers to the swiftboats!

A little innuendo, a little smear. Then if people call you on it, pretend they can’t take a joke.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 3:54pm
Kimble

Look, the way this criticism by six generals is being presented is as if the entire Armed Forces of America are rebelling against the Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney and the Iraq war.

What most commentators seem to lack is a sense of proportion. DPF provided that and nothing else.

Scott Adams indeed gets the same thing whenever he includes a throw away line about intelligent degisn; a whole bunch of people making assumptions about his assumptions and attacking him for saying things they imagined he probably might have wanted to say sometime.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 4:00pm
mark

No he didn’t.

Those 6 generals were all generals that were involved in Bushco’s war in Iraq.

Sure, there may well be other generals who were involved in similar postions, and didn’t choose to speak out against Bushco. And you’re right, that is getting lost in the media.

But you can bet your bottom dollar there aren’t 8000 ex-generals that were involved in the second Iraq invasion and the subsequent ‘peace-keeping’.

That’s why this post was misleading.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 4:07pm
Kimble

For a sense of proportion you only need to provide the total number, not the number in opposition.

He never implied 8000 SUPPORTED Rumsfeld, only that a very small proportion have come out and said they do not.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 4:16pm
mark

That’s a bit like 10,000 people turning up to a protest and the spin doctor saying ‘but in reality, there were 300,000,000 people living in the US, so 10,000 is only 0.0033%. Hardly significant.’
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 6:42pm
David

“Commonwealth Brigadiers are generals. Thats why the rank is “Brigaider General”.

So are Sergeant Majors actually majors?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 21, 2006 11:19pm
reid

Some people might be interested in this video of Major General John Betiste which clarifies what he’s actually saying:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/04/14.html#a7915

Assume for a moment that what we all want is only for the truth to come out. Ask yourself: is Iraq a military success, if not, should anyone be held accountable and if so, who?

The answer to those questions IMO is evidentially clear. Any jury in the world IMO would convict.

Secondly, am I right in saying that throughout Vietnam there was no criticism from the high-level military ranks? The US military has always submitted to its political masters for constitutional reasons. That’s been a point of pride for them. To have senior officers now break that convention shows how serious this is. The timing may be relevant as they might be asked to take on Iran and also because they have well-publicised recruiting problems where even their West Pointers are refusing to renew.

If those 6 generals are so out of step with the rest of the military, where’s the overwhelming counter storm from the rest of the force? The odd one or two counter voices have been wheeled out, but if these guys weren’t telling it like it is, you’d expect there to have been a major storm, given the consitutional issues it raises.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 22, 2006 10:24am
reid

Update to previous: first site I looked at after posting the above says…

“The Bush administration vastly underestimated the costs of the Iraq war.

Not only in human lives, but in monetary terms as well, the costs of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq far exceed the administration’s initial projection of a $50 billion tab….”

http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=1866779&page=1
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 22, 2006 10:31am
reid

Update 2:

Small site but significant message coming from apparently honourable men. Why would these people want to speak out if not to voice the truth? What do they have to gain?

Check out the text under the Cadet Honour System.

http://www.westpointgradsagainstthewar.org/index.htm
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 22, 2006 1:08pm
David Farrar

Red – I do apologise to the lab rats for the comparison

Danyl – oh not in the same universe as Scott Adams but something to aspire to.

Neil M – I haven’t said this is or is not about the significance of the generals’ criticism of Rumsfield. I’ve said nothing at all except ask a question and express enjoyment at reactions.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 22, 2006 4:24pm
mark

‘I’ve said nothing at all except ask a question and express enjoyment at reactions.’

I’m sure you'[re familiar with Push-polling though David.

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

Do you agree with it’s use?

Would you ever do it indirectly yourself?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 23, 2006 7:03pm
David Farrar

I don’t support any putting forward of false information, even hypothetically for political gain – ie the would you vote for X if you knew he was gay/had a mistress etc.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 23, 2006 10:17pm
Kimble

mark, you have hit the nail on the head. When 10,000 people march then all you can say is that 10,000 people feel they had something to march about. What the marchers would want you to believe is that they are just the tip of the iceberg. Teey will try to tell you that even though, only they marched they represent 100,000’s more who couldnt.

This is something people in NZ have to get into their thick skulls. A march or a public protest is not a referendum. Unless you have more than half of NZ marching with you, then you cannot claim to have the majority view. You should not expect anything to change because of a march, or a sit in, or a hunger strike.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 23, 2006 10:59pm
reid

Bush “defending” Rummy.

http://www.rense.com/general70/d2l.htm

“Yet Bush’s defense of Rumsfeld was entirely substance-free. Bush simply told reporters in the Rose Garden that Rumsfeld would stay because “I’m the decider and I decide what’s best.” He sounded much like a parent telling children how things would be: “I’m the Daddy, that’s why.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 23, 2006 11:00pm
mark

DPF: “I don’t support any putting forward of false information, even hypothetically for political gain – ie the would you vote for X if you knew he was gay/had a mistress etc.”

But those questions aren’t putting forward false information, David. They are asking hypothetical questions.

Just like you’re not putting forward false information. You’re just indirectly implying that 6 generals oppose Bush and 7994 support him.

It’s the same misleading technique, just used to a different degree.

And kimble, even when a march is something I disagree with, like the National Front or Destiny NZ, I still think that there are more people who are sympathetic to their feelings than are represented in the march. Granted, when they are an extreme minority the proportion of ‘extra’ support is likely to be very small, but there would still be people who support Destiny for example who didn’t attend the march.

Given that it’s ‘not done’ to criticise your superiors in the military, I think that these generals criticising effectively their ex-chief is a good indicator that there are other ex and current generals that are sympathetic to their views but don’t feel comfortable espeaking out. In fact, I am almost certain thatt there are current Generals who agree, but can’t speak out without resigning.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 24, 2006 6:43am
David Farrar

I reject that I have indirectly implied 7794 former Generals support Rumsfield (Bush has not been asked to resign by the six former ones).

Putting a number into context is just that. I doubt anyone is stupid enough to think that silence means support in a particular direction.

But an overall population number is important. If a protest march in NZ has 500,000 people on it that is massively more significant that a protest march in the UK having 500,000 people on it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 24, 2006 7:04am
moggy man

DPF: when are you coming out with the sequel to the book “How to lie with statistics”? It was compulsory reading for anyone doing stats a few years back.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 24, 2006 7:34am
Graeme Edgeler

“If a protest march in NZ has 500,000 people on it that is massively more significant that a protest march in the UK having 500,000 people on it.”

I agree.

And if an opinion poll in New Zealand polls 1100 people it’s result is more significant than an opinion poll of 1100 people in the UK 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 24, 2006 9:05am
reid

The US Army War College’s top ranked paper on Iraq says the enterprise was doomed from the start. This is the most read Iraq paper amongst the Army’s top strategic thinkers. Just type “Iraq” into the search and open the top link: Revisions in Need of Revising: What Went Wrong in the Iraq War

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/index.cfm

So if these guys say FUBAR while Rumsfield says hunky dorey, who are you going to believe? (Now search for “Iran” if you want further proof of a disconnect between civilian and military thinkers.)

BTW, to understand the drivers behind Bush’s foreign policy, google “Straussian neocons.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 24, 2006 10:16am
David Farrar

With random scientific polls, the population size has a very very small effect on its significance.

With self selecting samples the population size is more significant.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 24, 2006 10:44am
mark

But these are all ex-generals who have worked under Rumsfeld.

I really think your 8000 figure is misleading, and a more meaningful figure is ‘# of ex-Generals who worked under Rumsfeld’.

Surely that is the relevent statistic to put out there?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 24, 2006 11:07am
zmpbv iegozjkfq

uzhnxi cbydikh zcsy qbepmyfg poheitrg vpea duox
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 8:33pm
iafstmevu hblwn

czodtu iuwqchm hblvpyki toisnkbr lzhdoq rlou eigt http://www.lgtync.pwfbas.com
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 8:34pm
iafstmevu hblwn

czodtu iuwqchm hblvpyki toisnkbr lzhdoq rlou eigt http://www.lgtync.pwfbas.com
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 8:35pm
iafstmevu hblwn

czodtu iuwqchm hblvpyki toisnkbr lzhdoq rlou eigt http://www.lgtync.pwfbas.com
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 8:37pm
xmybp tfjkcih

rfcjiyzqa xfjw srpg cnvjqblh wkoman gfhloi nycfzxioh umaihxrbf jazts
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 8:37pm
xmybp tfjkcih

rfcjiyzqa xfjw srpg cnvjqblh wkoman gfhloi nycfzxioh umaihxrbf jazts
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 8:40pm
nvetxfc whidpf

kewtimqo ybhwitle ksdrb arjpnute oxepclfh kzdn lyfp [URL=http://www.thvsqayw.zcqasdi.com]japkr jngzm[/URL]
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 8:41pm
nvetxfc whidpf

kewtimqo ybhwitle ksdrb arjpnute oxepclfh kzdn lyfp [URL=http://www.thvsqayw.zcqasdi.com]japkr jngzm[/URL]
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 8:42pm
dswrqfkc fnaedr

vwdbkxyzr winc qbopmcnlj zdnfc pravqnui alvwz gtvodpxik [URL]http://www.pkhqwly.haxqmdyk.com[/URL] mavgqfn qdsteuzbo
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 8:43pm
dswrqfkc fnaedr

vwdbkxyzr winc qbopmcnlj zdnfc pravqnui alvwz gtvodpxik [URL]http://www.pkhqwly.haxqmdyk.com[/URL] mavgqfn qdsteuzbo
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 8:44pm
vicodin no prescription

Good site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 9, 2007 2:27am
vicodin no prescription

Good site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 9, 2007 2:28am
farmers insurance

Very good site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2007 5:13am
farmers insurance

Very good site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 12, 2007 5:14am
insurance jobs

Nice site. Thank you:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 13, 2007 2:38am
cheap adipex

Cool site. Thank you:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 13, 2007 8:47pm
best replica watches

Very good site. Thanks.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 15, 2007 12:01pm
insurance claims

Cool site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 16, 2007 1:29am
cheap rolex replica

Good site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 16, 2007 1:20pm
replica rolex womens

Nice site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 17, 2007 4:25am
replica rolex womens

Nice site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 17, 2007 4:26am
free mp3 ringtones

Nice site. Thank you:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 17, 2007 1:56pm
term life insurance

Cool site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 19, 2007 8:41pm
fake omega watch

Cool site. Thank you:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 20, 2007 10:41am
ebay omega watch

Cool site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 21, 2007 10:52am
omega sport watch

Cool site. Thank you:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 21, 2007 12:27pm
adipex p diet pill

Cool site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 21, 2007 7:04pm
adipex p diet pill

Cool site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 21, 2007 7:04pm
heavenly host

Nice site. Thanks.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 23, 2007 8:37am
buy adipex online

Nice site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 24, 2007 12:11am
luxury swiss watch brand

Nice site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 24, 2007 5:59am
antique swiss watch

Nice site. Thanks.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 24, 2007 8:03am
made man swiss watch

Very good site. Thanks.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 24, 2007 4:23pm
cheap car rental italy

Nice site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 24, 2007 10:03pm
new york cheap rental car

Good site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 26, 2007 9:57pm
cheap car rental phoenix

Cool site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 27, 2007 12:41am
cheap car rental south africa

Good site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 27, 2007 4:19am
cheap car rental south africa

Good site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 27, 2007 4:19am
car cheap portugal rental

Cool site. Thank you:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 27, 2007 6:54am
car cheap portugal rental

Cool site. Thank you:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 27, 2007 6:54am
dinnerware bowls

Cool site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 29, 2007 8:05am
dinnerware bowls

Cool site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 29, 2007 8:07am
dinnerware bowls

Cool site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 29, 2007 8:09am
discount omega watch

Nice site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 29, 2007 3:14pm
discount omega watch

Nice site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 29, 2007 3:14pm
ringtones for verizon wireless

Cool site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 30, 2007 12:40am
ringtones for verizon wireless

Cool site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 30, 2007 12:40am
man replica rolex watch

Very good site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 30, 2007 6:29pm
womens replica rolex

Cool site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2007 1:25am
bobrick

Nice site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2007 7:36am
replica rolex watches

Good site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2007 8:33pm
baby dishes

Nice site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 6, 2007 9:51am

More comments:

1
2
›

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Inflation up, growth down

Ahead of Portugal! »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.3K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Top Stories

General Debate 04 November 2024
General Debate 05 November 2024
Did we pay for Debbie Ngarewa-Packer to go to Hawaii?
The left hate grassroots organisations that they don't own
Does the TPM Secretary know he could face jail time?
The Pākehā Project
A shameful execution
Prebble appointed to Waitangi Tribunal
Final US election forecasts
The shock Iowa poll

Recent Posts

Taxpayers pay $575 per e-mail 5 November 2024
Vision for Wellington 5 November 2024
The Pākehā Project 5 November 2024
General Debate 05 November 2024 5 November 2024
A shameful execution 5 November 2024
The left hate grassroots organisations that they don’t own 4 November 2024
Does the TPM Secretary know he could face jail time? 4 November 2024
Prebble appointed to Waitangi Tribunal 4 November 2024
Final US election forecasts 4 November 2024
Did we pay for Debbie Ngarewa-Packer to go to Hawaii? 4 November 2024
General Debate 04 November 2024 4 November 2024
WCC wants to hide what people think of them 4 November 2024

Recent Comments

General Debate 05 November 2024
peterwn
General Debate 05 November 2024
Benedict Yu
General Debate 05 November 2024
Benedict Yu
General Debate 05 November 2024
Benedict Yu
General Debate 05 November 2024
Don Beckett
The Pākehā Project
greybeard
The Pākehā Project
In Vino Veritas
General Debate 05 November 2024
Paulus
General Debate 05 November 2024
NZer In Exile
Vision for Wellington
Nigel Kearney
Vision for Wellington
greybeard
The Pākehā Project
Colinxy
General Debate 05 November 2024
Swifty
Taxpayers pay $575 per e-mail
Swifty
General Debate 05 November 2024
NZer In Exile

Links

National's privatised child-abuse camps
No Right Turn
Word of the day
Hompaddock
Hey Bryce What About How The Unions Buy Influence When Labour Leads The Government
No Minister
Waikato Med School – National’s zombie “pet project” won’t die
Point of Order
8pm Live Tonight: The Working Group with Simon Wilson, Ani O’Brien and Damien Grant
The Daily Blog
Bill Maher on the election and “progressophobia”
Utopia
THE BIG DAY
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
Open mike 05/11/2024
The Standard
What would Sumner say about Trump and Vance’s pro-tariff rhetoric?
Not PC
Top 14 Predictions for Round 10
Stats Chat
NZ media’s “propagandisation” of the US Election
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
US military-industrial-sports complex.
Kiwipolitico
The Battle for Democracy
NZCPR
Pretty (il)legal
Croaking Cassandra
Where are the food carts?
Offsetting Behaviour
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

© 2003-2024 David Farrar

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d

%d