Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SANDY BERGER: I LIED, I DELIBERATELY DESTROYED DOCUMENTS ON TERRORISM POLICY
National Review ^ | April 1, 2005 | Jim Geraghty

Posted on 04/02/2005 6:17:05 AM PST by conservativecorner

The Powerliners are not happy with the Sandy Berger plea deal. But I'm a little surprised that Burglar - I mean, Berger - admitted so much. From today's Post:

Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, a former White House national security adviser, plans to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, and will acknowledge intentionally removing and destroying copies of a classified document about the Clinton administration's record on terrorism. ...

The deal's terms make clear that Berger spoke falsely last summer in public claims that in 2003 he twice inadvertently walked off with copies of a classified document during visits to the National Archives, then later lost them.

He described the episode last summer as "an honest mistake." Yesterday, a Berger associate who declined to be identified by name but was speaking with Berger's permission said: "He recognizes what he did was wrong. . . . It was not inadvertent."

That all sounds pretty damning. But then you read the actual consequences:

Under terms negotiated by Berger's attorneys and the Justice Department, he has agreed to pay a $10,000 fine and accept a three-year suspension of his national security clearance. These terms must be accepted by a judge before they are final, but Berger's associates said yesterday he believes that closure is near on what has been an embarrassing episode during which he repeatedly misled people about what happened during two visits to the National Archives in September and October 2003. What? Just what do you have to do to get your clearance pulled permanently? Start the clock, he can go back and start deleting memos that make him and his colleagues look bad starting in 2008 or so!

The details of this story are even more damning:

Rather than misplacing or unintentionally throwing away three of the five copies he took from the archives, as the former national security adviser earlier maintained, he shredded them with a pair of scissors late one evening at the downtown offices of his international consulting business. The document, written by former National Security Council terrorism expert Richard A. Clarke, was an "after-action review" prepared in early 2000 detailing the administration's actions to thwart terrorist attacks during the millennium celebration. It contained considerable discussion about the administration's awareness of the rising threat of attacks on U.S. soil.

Although one element of this story apparently is a bit of an urban legend:

On Sept. 2, 2003, the associate said, Berger put a copy of the Clarke report in his suit jacket. He did not put it in his socks or underwear, as was alleged by some Republicans last summer. Now... what about this deafening silence that we have heard on this from Berger's associates, since this story first surfaced? Will we be seeing any criticism of him from former President Clinton, Madeline Albright, Hillary, John Kerry, or any other prominent Democrat? Is the perception that this is no big deal, standard operating procedure for that White House, and is something to be swept under the rug?

Do any Democrats want to confront the unpleasant truths of how the Clinton White House handled terrorism?

Because there were some facts out there that were so damning, Sandy Berger was willing to break the law to make sure the public never saw them.

[Posted 04/01 04:38 AM]


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: berger; coverup; sandyberger; whitewash
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-146 next last
Burgler should be doing time.
1 posted on 04/02/2005 6:17:05 AM PST by conservativecorner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

Now if his name was Nixon he would be a crook.


2 posted on 04/02/2005 6:19:27 AM PST by gathersnomoss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

Fat chance. He has Democratic immunity.


3 posted on 04/02/2005 6:20:03 AM PST by ArmedNReady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

Any mere citizen would be thrown in jail for life after they were prosecuted under the Patriot Act.

Bush looses more creditability by letting the Justice Department cut this deal with this thief.


4 posted on 04/02/2005 6:20:17 AM PST by Pylot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

I was dismayed that his security clearance will be suspended for only three years. If they're not going to give him jail time, they should at least (fer cryin' out loud) refuse to ever let him near sensitive material again! The man is a menace.

(And I'm sure everyone is here is, like me, simply SHOCKED that it wasn't "inadvertant"--NOT!)


5 posted on 04/02/2005 6:20:27 AM PST by MizSterious (First, the journalists, THEN the lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gathersnomoss
Now if his name was Nixon he would be a crook.

He's a crook no matter what his name.

6 posted on 04/02/2005 6:20:49 AM PST by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kristinn; Doctor Raoul

7 posted on 04/02/2005 6:21:09 AM PST by BillF (Fight terrorists in Iraq & elsewhere, instead of waiting for them to come to America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gathersnomoss

Sandy Berger-Burglar was a key beneficiary of "Gorelick’s Wall"
TIME, "The Ubiquitous Mr. Fix-It", Adam Cohen


John Kerry was a key beneficiary of Berger's Burglaries
Rescued: Data the Kerry/Edwards Campaign Tried to DELETE from its site! (grandpa dave found cache)


Berger purloined all draft revisions of a key critique of the government's response
to the millennium terrorism threat, a document that detailed Administration knowledge
– and inaction – regarding al Qaeda presence in the U.S. in 1999
and 2000. Stolen were crucial notes in the margins of these drafts
which reveal the thinking and agendas of the
Clinton Administration relating to the mounting terrorist threat.
Washington Post, "Berger Quits as Advisor to Kerry", Susan Schmidt


Berger was not qualified as NSA.
He was a millionaire lawyer and lobbyist with a career centered on expanding trade with China.
Tom Laughlin, http://www.billyjack.com/jung/08_politics/articles/990515_spy.html


Former FBI Director Louis Freeh opined that
Burger “was a public-relations hack, interested in how something would play in the press” .
The New Yorker, per http://www.nationalreview.com/lowry/lowry200311030753.asp


Dick Morris noted Berger “seemed to work overtime
at opposing tough measures against terror”,
advising vetoes of legislation aimed at crippling Iranian terror funding
and working to block antiterror sanctions.
Wall Street Journal, "While Clinton Fiddled", Dick Morris, http://www.opinionjournal.com/forms/printThis.html?id=95001824


Berger repeatedly rebuffed Sudanese offers to hand Osama bin Laden
to the United States in a deal brokered by a $900,000 contributor to Democrat campaigns.
Source 1 - National Review, "Clinton & Khobar", Rich Lowry


Source 2 - Washington Times, "Miniter Responds", Richard Miniter


Berger allowed bin Laden and his top lieutenants to escape to Afghanistan.
NewsMax, "Aide: Clinton Unleashed bin Laden", Chuck Noe


Berger was singled-out by UN Inspector Scott Ritter for the collapse of UN inspections efforts in Iraq].
"Endgame: Solving the Iraq Problem - Once and for All" by Scott Ritter


Berger admitted that the Clinton Administration failed to develop a war plan to fight al Qaeda
National Review, "Warning B.S.", Rich Lowry


Berger was the "go-to" man regarding China policy
when Communist Chinese money was being funneled into Democrat Party coffers
in exchange for policy concessions, strategic nuclear technology,
and all pending patent applications at the US Patent Office.
The Hill, "Fundraiser resurfaces from 1996", Sam Dealey


Berger stonewalled the Energy Department about Chinese spying in Los Alamos for three years.

8 posted on 04/02/2005 6:22:53 AM PST by Diogenesis (Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pylot

Hey, it only took 4 posts to hook a Bush-blamer!


9 posted on 04/02/2005 6:23:16 AM PST by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
I'm surprised the Burglar King admitted to ANYTHING. He still would have been let off easy by our co-opted judicial system.

Well, maybe in addition to the slap on the wrist he received, he would have had to wear an ankle bracelet for 10 days if he hadn't fessed up to at least something.

That is, if they could fit one around his ankle.

Leni

10 posted on 04/02/2005 6:24:15 AM PST by MinuteGal ("The Marines keep coming. We are shooting, but the Marines won't stop !" (Fallujah Terrorists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
His admission kept him out of jail.

This way he cannot be pleading his innocence.

11 posted on 04/02/2005 6:24:48 AM PST by OldFriend ( MAJ. TAMMY DUCKWORTH .......AWESOME)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: OldFriend
His admission kept him out of jail.

The problem is, it wouldn't keep you or me out of jail,
and his "punishment" is a joke.

13 posted on 04/02/2005 6:28:12 AM PST by MamaLucci (Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
His admission kept him out of jail.

And keep him out of the government.

14 posted on 04/02/2005 6:28:35 AM PST by Semper Paratus (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

I wonder which TV Network will be the first to interview this lying "Clinton devotee and protector" S-- for his view and opinion on the next US foreign affair or event.


15 posted on 04/02/2005 6:30:36 AM PST by WmShirerAdmirer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
Pres. Bush's "prosecutors": "Don't worry Sandy, will make sure it's only a misdemeanor it you cop a plea, would not want to ruin the integrity of the Executive Branch".
16 posted on 04/02/2005 6:31:42 AM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

The prAna Recon Stretch Pant begs to be worn to the crag on cool days. The robust Recon Stretch Pant's heavyweight 11 oz. Bedford corduroy construction is blended with 2% lycra to give it a slight stretch, plenty for a scramble approach or a tricky move. Ergonomic front and lower leg panels and an asymmetrical rear pocket add style, while a zip fly, brass rivets, and quick-release belt system finish it off.

17 posted on 04/02/2005 6:32:12 AM PST by frithguild (Defining hypocrisy - Liberals fear liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

What happened to all of the Watergate burglars? What were some of their sentences?

Sandy Burglar should be doing hard time as well! His crimes could have affected an election, too. If prison time was good enough for Watergater's, then it's good enough for him as well. WHEN IS OUR SIDE GOING TO STAND UP? (Sorry for shouting, but this angers me!) This was more than saving Clinton's legacy. This was a serious crime!!!!!


18 posted on 04/02/2005 6:33:06 AM PST by LRS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
My lord, that's a frightening picture!!

She had to have been pregnant.

There's no other way anyone would have married her looking like that (especially not a skirt-chasing swine like him).

She was probably already headed towards "default*" lesbianism (*in my experience, most real-life lesbians [as opposed to Playboy Channel lesbians] are so ugly and nasty that they had to default because no man will have them).

Bill certainly looks like his "gin blossom" nose is already developing.

As to Sandy Berger.

He was always a marginally qualified sycophant, who would do anything of BC's bidding.

That he would knowingly destroy classified documents only serves to reinforce Gary Aldrich's longstanding assertions of the whole lot of them.

That he would now admit it leads one to the reasonable belief that he knew in advance that if caught, certain influential people would cover for him.

That certainly sounds like conspiracy to me.

Soldier of Fortune magazine did a very nice expose on Mr. Berger while they were still in office. If you can find the old back-issue, it makes for some enlightening reading.

Berger is the embodiment of a "C-student" in a Grade-A job.
19 posted on 04/02/2005 6:33:50 AM PST by conservativeharleyguy (Democrats: Over 60 million fooled daily!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rollo tomasi

Researchers who work the National Archives are perfectly aware of the penalties that can be prescribed in case of theft. With this slap on the wrist autography hunters are going to have a field day purloining archived material.


20 posted on 04/02/2005 6:33:54 AM PST by gaspar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

Martha Stewart goes to the slammer for telling a lie about a crime for which she was not charged, prosecutors having lacked sufficient evidence. Berger walks for stealing classified documents, evidence of his crimes being plentiful and airtight. Something ain't right.


21 posted on 04/02/2005 6:35:09 AM PST by catpuppy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

In earlier posts here a number of posters thought that such a deal signified the fact that Berger rolled over on someone else. I think that's wrong. This is just another example of the Bush administration not wanting to stir up the pot for some reason. Drives me crazy.


22 posted on 04/02/2005 6:35:40 AM PST by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BillF

Love the pic.


23 posted on 04/02/2005 6:38:23 AM PST by WmShirerAdmirer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LRS
WHEN IS OUR SIDE GOING TO STAND UP?

I feel and share your frustration.
There is no way he'd be getting off this easily were he
a Republican,and the rats were in power.....and he shouldn't!

24 posted on 04/02/2005 6:38:42 AM PST by MamaLucci (Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

My gut tells me he sang like a canary.
Bush will get anything he wants this session, cuz he got the goods on folks up for re-election in '06 and folks with White House aspirations in '08.


25 posted on 04/02/2005 6:39:11 AM PST by mabelkitty (Friends don't let friends Opus!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRS
WHEN IS OUR SIDE GOING TO STAND UP?


Good question!


The Bush administration continues to treat these felons with kid gloves....why?
26 posted on 04/02/2005 6:39:21 AM PST by dagoofyfoot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
We are no longer a government of and by the people. Both sides of the aisle think the laws are only for the "little people".

There is a character flaw in MOST people in elected office in that they believe they know better what is good for us and therefore they are exempt from many of our laws.

3 years???? Get real. Who would trust this person to ever handle sensitive documents?

27 posted on 04/02/2005 6:39:58 AM PST by Wurlitzer (I have the biggest organ in my town {;o))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
As long as his "motives remain some what of a myestry" a quote from the NY Times story reporting the plea deal, he should get the maxium sentence.

The silence of the democrats on this will be deafening to be sure but as long as the Pope dies soon no one will notice.

28 posted on 04/02/2005 6:41:09 AM PST by Phlap (REDNECK@LIBARTS.EDU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
These terms must be accepted by a judge before they are final...

This has been turning out so well lately. A judge gets to approve the terms. How nice.
29 posted on 04/02/2005 6:43:29 AM PST by AD from SpringBay (We have the government we allow and deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinuteGal

I'm surprised the Burglar King admitted to ANYTHING.

For a slap on the wrist? He's be stupid not too. Whatever else he is he's not stupid. He gets his security clearance back just in time to help a certain junior senator from NY run for president.


30 posted on 04/02/2005 6:44:30 AM PST by Valin (DARE to be average!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
Because there were some facts out there that were so damning, Sandy Berger was willing to break the law to make sure the public never saw them.

Repeated for emphasis. clintbilly and company sold out this country.

We reap what we sow - I hope to see their crop come in.

31 posted on 04/02/2005 6:45:33 AM PST by mombonn (¡Viva Bush/Cheney!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: digger48
Prosecutors reached a deal, hmmm why? Thought a trial would cost too much?

Politicians have been covering each others behinds for a long time, protecting the integrity don't you know. This is another example. Even if Sandy did talk like a parrot do you think anything would be done to *cough* Clinton *cough cough* who was his boss. And what kind of punishment is this? The guy did not observe he acted and should be punished even if he squealed.

Get real, Bush could have told his subordinates to go full force but instead embraced the integrity angle. Do you honestly think Presidents never speak and "influence" the Attorney Generals?
32 posted on 04/02/2005 6:45:52 AM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
A 3 year SUSPENSION of his security clearance??

"SUSPENSION"?

And Martha Stewart went to jail for telling a lie.

33 posted on 04/02/2005 6:47:41 AM PST by DCPatriot (Charter member in the WPPFF and Class of 98.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

The plea bargain is not only a bargain for the Burglar, it also means that there will be no trial that might raise questions about, I don't know -- maybe the Clintons. Now no troublesome questions will be asked and the whole affair can disappear. That is some slick justice.


34 posted on 04/02/2005 6:48:51 AM PST by Wilhelm Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRS

I agree. Not to get you more angry, had Berger been a Republican and/or in any of the Bush Cabinets, what do you think the punishment would have been?


35 posted on 04/02/2005 6:50:08 AM PST by WmShirerAdmirer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

>...plead guilty to a misdemeanor, and will acknowledge intentionally removing and destroying copies of a classified document...<

"misdemeanor"!?!?!
If I did that I would be in prison for AT LEAST 10 years!


36 posted on 04/02/2005 6:51:01 AM PST by G Larry (Aggressively promote conservative judges!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mabelkitty

Hope you're right!


37 posted on 04/02/2005 6:52:13 AM PST by WmShirerAdmirer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

As I stated on another thread yesterday.....

Someone's gotta' continually check Burgler's bank account!

There ain't no way that he's going to take the fall for the rest of his life for removing stuff that would damage Bubba's legacy.

He's being paid off, for sure! BIG TIME!


38 posted on 04/02/2005 6:52:33 AM PST by aShepard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner; Liz
...he shredded them with a pair of scissors late one evening at the downtown offices of his international consulting business.

Martha Stewart did time for less...

39 posted on 04/02/2005 6:53:12 AM PST by Libloather (Start Hillary's recount now - just to get it out of the way...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: catpuppy

"Martha Stewart goes to the slammer for telling a lie about a crime for which she was not charged, prosecutors having lacked sufficient evidence. Berger walks for stealing classified documents, evidence of his crimes being plentiful and airtight. Something ain't right."


Ain't that the truth - and how the hell did the MSM come to make Martha Stewart, a polish-american female, the poster boy for Enronesque corporae scandal?

A variation of the polack joke?


40 posted on 04/02/2005 6:54:37 AM PST by spanalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: WmShirerAdmirer
had Berger been a Republican and/or in any of the Bush Cabinets, what do you think the punishment would have been?

Don't know, but judging from the punishment Rpublicans have endured for Watergate, ie, over 30 years of constant "Watergate; Watergate; Watergate" reminders, a Republican version of Sandy Burglar seeing the light of day again, would be measured in decades...

41 posted on 04/02/2005 6:56:24 AM PST by LRS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Wilhelm Tell
Yeppers, there's something REALLY fishy about this plea agreement. It's just TOO pat, TOO generous. In fact, it's off the wall.

The new Justice Dept. head honcho should read the Donald's "The Art of the Deal".

Or maybe the consequences of NOT making a deal was the better option for the Bush administration. If so, WHY?

Maybe we're not supposed to reason why, ours is just to move on or die.

Leni

42 posted on 04/02/2005 6:57:04 AM PST by MinuteGal ("The Marines keep coming. We are shooting, but the Marines won't stop !" (Fallujah Terrorists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: WmShirerAdmirer

Berger is an opportunistic mafioso.
He doesn't take the fall for anybody.
Clintons got a little too over-confident siding up to him, cuz he'd stab his own mother if she got in the way. It's is nature.


43 posted on 04/02/2005 6:58:42 AM PST by mabelkitty (Friends don't let friends Opus!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner

You are right, but his handlers, Zipperless Bill and file loser Hillary should be the two others that are charged and imprisoned for their blatant illegal activities that would fill an Encyclopedia Britannica.


44 posted on 04/02/2005 6:59:38 AM PST by hgro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spanalot
"Something ain't right."

Who runs two branches? Who appointed the current and previous AGs. If the story ends with Sandy, who is the only Party to blame for letting him go so easily?

This seems like a case of the government doing what is best in order to not alarm 'the people' about how security breaches are no big deal.
45 posted on 04/02/2005 7:01:22 AM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: dagoofyfoot
The Bush administration continues to treat these felons with kid gloves....why?

The ex-presidents' club...preserve the dignity of the office by shoving the dirt under the carpet.

46 posted on 04/02/2005 7:02:40 AM PST by peyton randolph (Warning! It is illegal to fatwah a camel in all 50 states)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MinuteGal

...I'm surprised the Burglar King admitted to ANYTHING....

Me too, but the fact there is an admission means there was a tradeoff and surely there was something obtained better than just saving the expense of a trial.

There was the thought of Web Hubble expressed that he would roll over one more time but I wonder. Maybe Sandy did not roll.

He is now on a death watch.


47 posted on 04/02/2005 7:04:57 AM PST by bert (Peace is only halftime !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mabelkitty

So what do you think was the deal made with him, do you think he gave them lots of dirt on the Clintons (and hopefully Hil). And if so, do you think the Bush WH or especially the DOJ would use it (especially any implications in regards to Senator Clinton) in the near future or before the 2008 election?


48 posted on 04/02/2005 7:05:07 AM PST by WmShirerAdmirer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: mabelkitty

We will see if Sandy gets immunity. I predict hell will freeze over before that happens. Of course my hopes are roused with the opportunity to get Bill 'The Oval Office sink master and supreme overlord' Clinton but 90% of me is thinking it ends with Sandy.


49 posted on 04/02/2005 7:06:09 AM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
Has there been any determination on the key issue in this case:

Did Berger manage to destroy THE ORIGINAL AND ALL COPIES of any of the documents?

That was clearly his intention.

50 posted on 04/02/2005 7:09:10 AM PST by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-146 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson