Sandy Berger Headlines
RATE THIS ARTICLE (Crosswalk.com) January 6, 2009, 11:29 am EST In the lull before inauguration I’m taking today and Monday to say some things about the media. First – and I know as a columnist this may sound self-serving – newspapers must be saved. |
RATE THIS ARTICLE (Crosswalk.com) January 6, 2009, 11:28 am EST On Friday, I made the case for helping your local newspaper survive, no matter how frustrated you might be with it. Today I want to tell you another survival story. |
Today Kisses Coulter Goodbye (Richmond Times-Dispatch) January 6, 2009, 10:42 am EST http://images.eonline.com/resize/66/66/eol_images/Entire_Site/20090106/300.ad.AnnCoulter.010609.jpgThe liberal media elite has run afoul of Ann Coulter yet again. Well, that didn’t take long. The lightning-rod conservative pundit is crying ... |
Today Kisses Coulter Goodbye (E! Online) January 6, 2009, 10:21 am EST The liberal media elite has run afoul of Ann Coulter yet again. Well, that didn't take long. The lightning-rod conservative pundit is crying conspiracy—liberal media elite... |
Today Kisses Coulter Goodbye (E! Online via Yahoo! News) January 6, 2009, 10:07 am EST The liberal media elite has run afoul of Ann Coulter yet again. Well, that didn't take long. |
NBC DUMPS ANN (New York Post) January 6, 2009, 5:24 am EST CONTROVERSIAL con servative Ann Coulter blew a gasket yesterday when the "Today" show abruptly canceled an appearance on the day her new book about the Obamas comes out. The cancellation sparked reports that she had been "banned for life" from... |
Standing up to Bush (Las Vegas Sun) January 5, 2009, 11:42 am EST Recurring themes of the Bush administration — secrecy and low regard for science — are prevalent in two White House actions that are now stimulating considerable opposition. |
Patrick Tyler's 'A World of Trouble': an opinionated look at the Middle East (Austin American-Statesman) January 3, 2009, 12:09 pm EST Patrick Tyler is a veteran foreign correspondent who has worked the Middle East and China beats since the mid '80s, first for The Washington Post and then for The New York Times. |
Back Pocket
- The Samuel “Sandy” Berger Scandals
(Feb 03, 2007)
- The Events Leading to the Sandy Berger Scandal
(Jan 30, 2007)
- Twirling the Cognitive Kaleidoscope
(Jan 25, 2006)
- Be Vigilant
(Jan 23, 2006)
- Nuclear Saber Rattling
(Jan 22, 2006)
- John Stossel takes flak over Education Spending
(Jan 18, 2006)
- Kennedy's Children's Book
(Jan 17, 2006)
- Specter Walks the Line
(Jan 15, 2006)
- You say Alito I say Alioto
(Jan 09, 2006)
- 10 Foolish Myths
(Dec 28, 2005)
Past Articles
- Tuesday, December 27
- A Pay Raise for Senator PorkBarrel (0)
- Thursday, December 01
- Iraq Strategy: Executive Summary (13)
- Wednesday, November 09
- The Fair Tax - An Overview (0)
- Monday, September 12
- Take Back the Memorial (37)
- Friday, September 09
- Presidents are not perfect (37)
- Katrina Relief Effort (0)
- Saturday, September 03
- Hillary Clinton: Democrats Are Betting On the Wrong Horse (78)
- Friday, September 02
- Instantly Pinpoint Your Political Identity (38)
- Friday, August 26
- Pat Robertson the Assasinator... (43)
- Thursday, August 25
- You can lead the media to a proud military mom, but you can't make them think. (19)
Older articles
|
|
Posted by: archiveguard on Dec 01, 2005 - 08:13 PM
OUR NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR VICTORY IN IRAQ:
Helping the Iraqi People Defeat the Terrorists and
Build an Inclusive Democratic State
"Our mission in Iraq is clear. We're hunting down the terrorists. We're
helping Iraqis build a free nation that is an ally in the war on terror. We're
advancing freedom in the broader Middle East. We are removing a source of
violence and instability, and laying the foundation of peace for our children
and grandchildren."
-- President George W. Bush
June 28, 2003
Index |
Summary |
Part I |
Part II |
8 PillarsVICTORY IN IRAQ DEFINED
As the central front in the global war on terror, success
in Iraq is an essential element in the long war against the ideology that
breeds international terrorism. Unlike past wars, however, victory in Iraq
will not come in the form of an enemy's surrender, or be signaled by a
single particular event -- there will be no Battleship Missouri, no
Appomattox. The ultimate victory will be achieved in stages, and we expect:
- In the short term:
- An Iraq that is making steady progress in fighting terrorists and
neutralizing the insurgency, meeting political milestones; building
democratic institutions; standing up robust security forces to gather
intelligence, destroy terrorist networks, and maintain security; and
tackling key economic reforms to lay the foundation for a sound economy.
- In the medium term:
- An Iraq that is in the lead defeating terrorists and insurgents and
providing its own security, with a constitutional, elected government in
place, providing an inspiring example to reformers in the region, and
well on its way to achieving its economic potential.
- In the longer term:
- An Iraq that has defeated the terrorists and neutralized the
insurgency.
- An Iraq that is peaceful, united, stable, democratic, and secure,
where Iraqis have the institutions and resources they need to govern
themselves justly and provide security for their country.
- An Iraq that is a partner in the global war on terror and the fight
against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, integrated
into the international community, an engine for regional economic
growth, and proving the fruits of democratic governance to the region.
VICTORY IN IRAQ IS A VITAL U.S. INTEREST
- The war on terrorism is the defining challenge of our generation, just
as the struggle against communism and fascism were challenges of the
generations before. As with those earlier struggles, the United States is
fully committed to meeting this challenge. We will do everything it takes to
win.
- Prevailing in Iraq will help us win the war on terror.
- The terrorists regard Iraq as the central front in their war
against humanity. And we must recognize Iraq as the central front in our
war on terror.
- Osama Bin Laden has declared that the "third world war...is
raging" in Iraq, and it will end there, in "either victory and
glory, or misery and humiliation."
- Bin Laden's deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri has declared Iraq to be
"the place for the greatest battle," where he hopes to "expel the
Americans" and then spread "the jihad wave to the secular countries
neighboring Iraq."
- Al Qaida in Iraq, led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, has openly
declared that "we fight today in Iraq, and tomorrow in the Land of
the Two Holy Places, and after there the west."
- As the terrorists themselves recognize, the outcome in Iraq
-- success or failure -- is critical to the outcome in the
broader war on terrorism.
- What happens in Iraq will influence the fate of the Middle East for
generations to come, with a profound impact on our own national security.
- Ceding ground to terrorists in one of the world's most strategic
regions will threaten the world's economy and America's security,
growth, and prosperity, for decades to come.
- An emerging democracy in Iraq will change the regional status quo
that for decades has bred alienation and spawned the transnational
terrorism that targets us today.
- The terrorists' perverse ideology is countered by the advance of
freedom and the recognition that all people have the right to live under
democracy and the rule of law, free from oppression and fear, with hope
and optimism for the future.
THE BENEFITS OF VICTORY IN IRAQ
- Helping the people of Iraq is the morally right thing to do -- America
does not abandon its friends in the face of adversity. Helping the people of
Iraq, however, is also in our own national interest.
- If we and our Iraqi partners prevail in Iraq, we will have made America:
- Safer...
- by removing Saddam Hussein, a destabilizing force in a vital
region, a ruthless dictator who had a history of pursuing and even
using weapons of mass destruction, was a state sponsor of terror,
had invaded his neighbors, and who was violently opposed to America;
- by depriving terrorists of a safe haven from which they could
plan and launch attacks against the United States and American
interests;
- by delivering a strategic setback to the terrorists and keeping
them on the run;
- by delivering a decisive blow to the ideology that fuels
international terrorism, proving that the power of freedom is
stronger than a perverse vision of violence, hatred, and oppression.
- Stronger...
- by demonstrating to our friends and enemies the reliability of
U.S. power, the strength of our commitment to our friends, and the
tenacity of our resolve against our enemies;
- by securing a new friend and partner in the fight against
terrorism in the heart of the Middle East.
- More Certain of its Future ...
- politically, by bolstering democratic reformers -- and the
prospects for peaceful, democratic governments -- in a region that
for decades has been a source of instability and stagnation;
- economically, by facilitating progressive reform in the region
and depriving terrorists control over a hub of the world's economy.
THE CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE
- If we and our Iraqi partners fail in Iraq, Iraq will become:
- A safe haven for terrorists as Afghanistan once was, only this time
in some of the world's most strategic territory, with vast natural
resources to exploit and to use to fund future attacks.
- A country where oppression -- and the brutal imposition of inhumane
practices, such as those of the Taliban in Afghanistan -- is pervasive.
- A failed state and source of instability for the entire Middle East,
with all the attendant risks and incalculable costs for American
security and prosperity.
- Furthermore, if we and our Iraqi partners fail in Iraq, the
terrorists will have:
- Won a decisive victory over the United States, vindicating their
tactics of beheadings, suicide bombings, and ruthless intimidation of
civilians, inviting more deadly attacks against Americans and other free
people across the globe.
- Placed the American people in greater danger by destabilizing a
vital region, weakening our friends, and clearing the way for terrorist
attacks here at home. The terrorists will be emboldened in their belief
that America cannot stand and fight, but will cut and run in the face of
adversity.
- Called into question American credibility and commitment in the
region and the world. Our friends and foes alike would doubt our staying
power, and this would damage our efforts to counter other security
threats and to advance other economic and political interests worldwide.
- Since 1998, Al Qaida has repeatedly cited Vietnam, Beirut,
and Somalia, as examples to encourage more attacks against America
and our interests overseas.
- Weakened the growing democratic impulses in the region. Middle East
reformers would never again fully trust American assurances of support
for democracy and pluralism in the region -- a historic opportunity,
central to America's long-term security, forever lost.
If we retreat from Iraq, the terrorists will pursue us and our
allies, expanding the fight to the rest of the region and to our own shores.
OUR ENEMIES AND THEIR GOALS
- The enemy in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists, Saddamists, and
terrorists affiliated with or inspired by Al Qaida. These three groups share
a common opposition to the elected Iraqi government and to the presence of
Coalition forces, but otherwise have separate and to some extent
incompatible goals.
- Rejectionists are the largest group. They are
largely Sunni Arabs who have not embraced the shift from Saddam
Hussein's Iraq to a democratically governed state. Not all Sunni Arabs
fall into this category. But those that do are against a new Iraq in
which they are no longer the privileged elite. Most of these
rejectionists opposed the new constitution, but many in their ranks are
recognizing that opting out of the democratic process has hurt their
interests.
- We judge that over time many in this group will increasingly
support a democratic Iraq provided that the federal government
protects minority rights and the legitimate interests of all
communities.
- Saddamists and former regime loyalists harbor
dreams of reestablishing a Ba'athist dictatorship and have played a lead
role in fomenting wider sentiment against the Iraqi government and the
Coalition.
- We judge that few from this group can be won over to support
a democratic Iraq, but that this group can be marginalized to the
point where it can and will be defeated by Iraqi forces.
- Terrorists affiliated with or inspired by Al Qaida
make up the smallest enemy group but are the most lethal and pose the
most immediate threat because (1) they are responsible
for the most dramatic atrocities, which kill the most people and
function as a recruiting tool for further terrorism and (2)
they espouse the extreme goals of Osama Bin Laden -- chaos in Iraq which
will allow them to establish a base for toppling Iraq's neighbors and
launching attacks outside the region and against the U.S. homeland.
- The terrorists have identified Iraq as central to their
global aspirations. For that reason, terrorists and extremists from
all parts of the Middle East and North Africa have found their way
to Iraq and made common cause with indigenous religious extremists
and former members of Saddam's regime. This group cannot be
won over and must be defeated -- killed or captured -- through
sustained counterterrorism operations.
- There are other elements that threaten the democratic process in
Iraq, including criminals and Shi'a religious extremists, but we judge
that such elements can be handled by Iraqi forces alone and/or
assimilated into the political process in the short term.
THE STRATEGY OF OUR ENEMIES
- Despite their competing goals, these disparate enemy elements share a
common operational concept: Intimidate, coerce, or convince
the Iraqi public not to support the transition to democracy by persuading
them that the nascent Iraqi government is not competent and will be
abandoned by a Coalition that lacks the stomach for this fight.
- The enemy's strategy, in short, is to intimidate,
terrorize, and tear down
-- a strategy with short-term advantage because it is easier to tear
down than to build up. But this strategy is not sustainable in the long
term because it is rejected by the overwhelming mass of the Iraqi
population.
- Enemy Lines of Action. The enemy seeks to ...
- Weaken the Coalition's resolve, and our resolve at home, through
barbaric mass-casualty attacks, public slaughter of Iraqi civilians and
hostages, infliction of casualties on Coalition forces, and use of the
media to spread propaganda and intimidate adversaries.
- Destroy confidence in the Iraqi government by sabotaging key
essential service (oil and electricity) nodes and by derailing the
political process.
- Damage trust in Iraqi Security Forces through propaganda,
infiltration, and barbaric attacks on the weak and the innocent.
- Sabotage Iraqi unity through propaganda against the Shi'a majority
punctuated with attacks intended to spark sectarian conflict and civil
war.
- Establish safe havens to plan attacks and conduct intimidation
campaigns.
- Expand the fight to neighboring states and beyond.
OUR STRATEGY FOR VICTORY IS CLEAR
- Our Strategy is Clear: We will help the Iraqi people
build a new Iraq with a constitutional, representative government that
respects civil rights and has security forces sufficient to maintain
domestic order and keep Iraq from becoming a safe haven for terrorists. To
achieve this end, we are pursuing a comprehensive approach that involves the
integrated efforts of the entire United States Government, the Iraqi
government, and Coalition governments, and encourages the active involvement
of the United Nations, other international organizations, and supportive
regional states.
- Our strategy involves three integrated tracks --
political, security, and economic -- each with separate objectives, but
together helping Iraqis to defeat the terrorists, Saddamists, and
rejectionists, and secure a new democratic state in Iraq.
The Political Track
(Isolate, Engage, Build)
- Objective: To help the Iraqi people forge a broadly
supported national compact for democratic government, thereby isolating
enemy elements from the broader public.
- To achieve this objective, we are helping the Iraqi government:
- Isolate hardened enemy elements from
those who can be won over to a peaceful political process by
countering false propaganda and demonstrating to the Iraqi people
that they have a stake in a viable, democratic Iraq.
- Engage those outside the political
process and invite in those willing to turn away from violence
through ever-expanding avenues of peaceful participation.
- Build stable, pluralistic, and
effective national institutions that can protect the interests of
all Iraqis, and facilitate Iraq's full integration into the
international community.
The Security Track
(Clear, Hold, Build)
- Objective: To develop the Iraqis' capacity to
secure their country while carrying out a campaign to defeat the
terrorists and neutralize the insurgency.
- To achieve this objective, we are helping the Iraqi government:
- Clear areas of enemy control by
remaining on the offensive, killing and capturing enemy fighters and
denying them safe-haven.
- Hold areas freed from enemy control by
ensuring that they remain under the control of a peaceful Iraqi
government with an adequate Iraqi security force presence.
- Build Iraqi Security Forces and the
capacity of local institutions to deliver services, advance the rule
of law, and nurture civil society.
The Economic Track
(Restore, Reform, Build)
- Objective: To assist the Iraqi government in
establishing the foundations for a sound economy with the capacity to
deliver essential services.
- To achieve this objective, we are helping the Iraqi government:
- Restore Iraq's neglected
infrastructure so it can meet increasing demand and the needs of a
growing economy.
- Reform Iraq's economy, which has been
shaped by war, dictatorship, and sanctions, so that it can be
self-sustaining in the future.
- Build the capacity of Iraqi
institutions to maintain infrastructure, rejoin the international
economic community, and improve the general welfare of all Iraqis.
THIS STRATEGY IS INTEGRATED, AND ITS ELEMENTS ARE
MUTUALLY REINFORCING
- Progress along one of the political, security, and economic tracks
reinforces progress along the other tracks. For
example:
- As the political process has moved
forward, terrorists have become more isolated, leading to more
intelligence on their leadership and hideouts from Iraqi citizens, which
has led to better security in previously
violent areas, a more stable infrastructure, the prospect of
economic progress, and expanding
political participation.
- As security operations in Fallujah, Mosul,
Tal Afar, and elsewhere have killed or led to the capture of high-level
terrorists and insurgents, residents in those areas have come forward to
participate in the political process,
registering and turning out to vote in vast numbers, and providing local
residents a meaningful voice in the new Iraq.
- As economic activities have progressed,
ordinary citizens have returned to normal life and developed a stake in
a peaceful Iraq and thus become motivated to support the
political process and cooperate with security
forces,
- Part II of this paper will discuss the three tracks -- political,
security, and economic -- in more detail, so Americans can better understand
the elements of our vital mission, the nature of our strategy, why we
believe this strategy will succeed, the progress we are making, and how our
government is organized to help Iraqis ensure lasting victory in Iraq.
VICTORY WILL TAKE TIME
- Our Strategy Is Working. Much has been accomplished in
Iraq, including the removal of Saddam's tyranny, negotiation of an interim
constitution, restoration of full sovereignty, holding of free national
elections, formation of an elected government, drafting of a permanent
constitution, ratification of that constitution, introduction of a sound
currency, gradual restoration of Iraq's neglected infrastructure, and the
ongoing training and equipping of Iraq's security forces.
- Yet many challenges remain:
- Iraq is overcoming decades of a vicious tyranny, under which
governmental authority stemmed solely from fear, terror, and brutality.
Saddam Hussein devastated Iraq, wrecked its economy, ruined its
infrastructure, and destroyed its human capital. It is not realistic to
expect a fully functioning democracy, able to defeat its enemies and
peacefully reconcile generational grievances, to be in place less than
three years after Saddam was finally removed from power.
- We and the Iraqi people are fighting a ruthless enemy, which is
multi-headed, with competing ambitions and differing networks. Getting
an accurate picture of this enemy, understanding its makeup and
weaknesses, and defeating it, requires patience, persistence, and
determined effort along all three strategic tracks.
- Terrorism and insurgencies historically take many years to defeat,
through a combination of political, economic, and military tools. Iraq's
violence is different from other such conflicts, where insurgents often
had unified command and control or mounted a successful campaign to win
the hearts and minds of the population. Nonetheless, Iraq is likely to
struggle with some level of violence for many years to come.
- The neighborhood is inhospitable. Iran and Syria have failed to
provide support to Iraq's new government and have in many ways actively
undermined it. The region, while including some cooperative actors, has
only recently mobilized to support the emergence of a democratic and
stable Iraq.
- The Sunni community is still searching for strong, reliable
leadership. Although many Sunnis also suffered under Saddam, leaders
from their community generally associated with the Ba'ath Party, not the
opposition to the regime. The Sunni religious community, moreover, is
less hierarchical and more dispersed, which is reflected in Sunni
politics. As a result of these realities, few Sunni leaders have spoken
for the larger Sunni community in Iraq. Elections in December will
produce elected Sunni leaders who can represent their community with
legitimate authority.
- Many Sunnis are also coming to terms with the reality that their
community no longer monopolizes power in Iraq. They are grappling with
their role in a democratic country in which they are a minority, albeit
with constitutional protections for minority rights and interests.
- Many of Iraq's communities remain skeptical of the central
government and nervous about the creation of an Iraqi state where power
is concentrated in Baghdad. Their allegiance to a united Iraqi
government will depend upon the central government demonstrating the
will and capability to govern effectively and fairly on behalf of all
Iraqis.
- Earlier efforts to correct past wrongs have sometimes alienated
Sunnis who were not complicit with Saddam's crimes. Iraq's leaders need
to find a middle ground -- between pursuing justice for every past wrong
and leaving the past unexamined.
- With democratization has come the emergence of new groups, not all
of whom have shared the goal of a free, pluralistic, and democratic
Iraq. Some groups -- like members of the Mahdi Militia -- have sought to
maximize discontent with the Coalition presence and have at times
clashed violently with other parties.
- The continued existence and influence of militias and armed groups,
often affiliated with political parties, hamper the rule of law in some
parts of Iraq. These groups have also infiltrated the police forces and
sparked violent exchanges in areas of the country that are otherwise
peaceful.
- Iraq's economy is still shackled with many vestiges of a highly
centralized economy and stagnant and corrupt institutions. Creating new
institutions, reforming old ones, and developing new policies will be
necessary to encourage economic growth. The prosperity of average Iraqis
will be enhanced only if Iraq reduces the massive subsidy programs that
burden its economy.
WHY OUR STRATEGY IS (AND MUST BE) CONDITIONS-BASED
- Success in the short, medium, and long run will depend on progress in
overcoming these challenges and on the conditions on the ground
in Iraq. Our strategy -- along the political, security, and
economic tracks -- is establishing the conditions for victory. These
conditions include:
- Progress in the Iraqi political process and the increasing
willingness of Iraqis to forge political compromises;
- Consolidation of gains in the training of Iraqi Security Forces (ISF);
- Commitment to and implementation of economic reforms by Iraqi
leaders;
- Increased cooperation of Iraq's neighbors;
- Expanded support from the international community;
- Continued support of the American people.
- Although we are confident of victory in Iraq, we will not
put a date certain on when each stage of success will be reached
-- because the timing of success depends upon meeting certain conditions,
not arbitrary timetables.
- Arbitrary deadlines or timetables for withdrawal of Coalition forces
-- divorced from conditions on the ground -- would be
irresponsible and deadly, as they would suggest to the
terrorists, Saddamists, and rejectionists that they can simply wait to
win.
- No war has ever been won on a timetable -- and neither will
this one.
- Lack of a timetable, however, does not mean that the Coalition's posture
in Iraq (both military and political) is static. On the contrary,
we continually adjust our posture and approaches as conditions
evolve and Iraqi capabilities grow.
- Coalition troop levels, for example, will increase
where necessary to defeat the enemy or provide additional security for
key events like the referendum and elections. But troop levels will
decrease over time, as Iraqis continue to take on more
of the security and civilian responsibilities themselves.
- We expect, but cannot guarantee, that our force posture will change
over the next year, as the political process consolidates and as Iraqi
Security Forces grow and gain experience.
- As Iraqis take on more responsibility for security, Coalition
forces will increasingly move to supporting roles in most areas. The
mission of our forces will change -- from conducting operations and
keeping the peace, to more specialized operations targeted at the
most vicious terrorists and leadership networks.
- As security conditions improve and as Iraqi Security Forces
become increasingly capable of securing their own country, our
forces will increasingly move out of the cities, reduce the number
of bases from which we operate, and conduct fewer patrols and convoy
missions.
- While our military presence may become less visible, it will
remain lethal and decisive, able to confront the enemy wherever it
may gather and organize.
- As our posture changes over time, so too will the posture of our
Coalition partners. We and the Iraqis must work with them to coordinate
our efforts, helping Iraq to consolidate and secure its gains on many
different fronts.
OUR STRATEGY TRACKS AND MEASURES PROGRESS
- We track numerous indicators to map the progress of our strategy and
change our tactics whenever necessary. Detailed reports -- both classified
and unclassified -- are issued weekly, monthly, and quarterly by relevant
agencies and military units.
- Many of these reports with detailed metrics are released to the
public, and are readily accessible. For example:
- Some of the most important metrics we track are:
- Political: The political benchmarks set
forth in U.N. Security Council Resolution 1546 and the Transitional
Administrative Law; the number of Iraqis from all areas willing to
participate in the political process as evidenced by voter registration
and turnout.
- Security: The quantity and quality of Iraqi
units; the number of actionable intelligence tips received from Iraqis;
the percentage of operations conducted by Iraqis alone or with minor
Coalition assistance; the number of car bombs intercepted and defused;
offensive operations conducted by Iraqi and Coalition forces; and the
number of contacts initiated by Coalition forces, as opposed to the
enemy.
- Economic: GDP; per capita GDP; inflation;
electricity generated and delivered; barrels of oil produced and
exported; and numbers of businesses opened.
- Other indicators are also important to success, but less subject to
precise measurement, such as the extent to which principles of transparency,
trust in government institutions, and acceptance of the rule of law are
taking hold amongst a population that has never known them.
- These indicators have more strategic significance than
the metrics that the terrorists and insurgents want the world to use as a
measure of progress or failure: number of bombings.
- The following pages break down the three tracks of our strategy --
political, security, economic -- and explain the logic behind them in
more detail.
"The only way our enemies can succeed is if we forget the lessons of
September the 11th, if we abandon the Iraqi people to men like Zarqawi, and
if we yield the future of the Middle East to men like Bin Laden. For the
sake of our nation's security, this will not happen on my watch."
-- President George W. Bush
June 28, 2005
Index |
Summary |
Part I |
Part II |
8 Pillars
|
Pocket Lint
There are just two rules of governance in a free society: Mind your own business. Keep your hands to yourself.
-- P.J. O'Rourke
In the Cuff
Pocket Books
Categories Menu
Freshly Pressed
|