Wednesday, February 02, 2011

Sarshar's Incredible Expanding Story

Sibel Edmonds gives us what Behrooz Sarshar supposedly told to the 9-11 Commission. Taken at face value it's a pretty explosive story:

1. Reasonably specific warnings of the terrorist attacks of 9-11, including mention of specific US cities:
‘According to my guys, Bin Laden’s group is planning a massive terrorist attack in the United States. The order has been issued. They are targeting major cities, big metropolitan cities; they think four or five cities; New York City, Chicago, Washington DC, and San Francisco; possibly Los Angeles or Las Vegas. They will use airplanes to carry out the attacks. They said that some of the individuals involved in carrying this out are already in the United States. They are here in the U.S.; living among us, and I believe some in US government already know about all of this (I assumed he meant the CIA or the White House).’


2. Mention of tall buildings possibly as targets:
‘I’ve been thinking about this; trying to make more sense out of it myself. The source mumbled something about tall buildings. Maybe they will blow up the plane over some tall buildings; I don’t know.


3. That the attack was imminent (as of the Spring of 2001):
‘No specific dates; not any that they were aware of. However, they said the general timeframe was characterized as ‘very soon.’ They think within the next two or three months.’


There's just one little problem with the above; Sarshar has already discussed much of what he had to say with the Chicago Tribune way back in 2004 (around the time of his testimony) and none of those allegations appeared in that story.

Specific US cities? Nope:
According to the law enforcement official, "there was talk about terrorists and planes," but no mention of when or where the attacks might take place.

It was the FBI agents' impression, the official said, that the target of the attacks could be "possibly here, but more probably overseas." The Asset also reported having heard a rumor that a plane would be hijacked to Afghanistan, the official said.

The FBI's translator, a former Iranian police colonel named Behrooz Sarshar, does not recall any mention of a hijacking to Afghanistan. But Sarshar, then a career FBI employee assigned to the translation section of the bureau's Washington field office, does remember the Asset saying the attacks might take place in the U.S. or Europe, and also that the terrorist-pilots were "under training."

Note that the current article does not mention Europe at all as a possible target; Texas sharpshooter fallacy, anybody? The 2004 article does not mention tall buildings at all, although obviously this would have been a spectacular revelation. And the specific time frame mentioned in the current article? The Tribune piece is quite adamant about that:
According to the law enforcement official, "there was talk about terrorists and planes," but no mention of when or where the attacks might take place.


Note as well the dramatic point in the piece on Sibel's site:
Now the informant had our full attention; the agents seemed very alarmed, since their main unit of operation was under the WFO Counterterrorism division. They asked the guy to stop, asked him to repeat that again, and ordered me to take verbatim notes as I translated.

But that's not what Sarshar himself reported in 2004
According to Sarshar, the two FBI agents who interviewed the Asset were not visibly surprised by his report. It was his impression, Sarshar said, that the agents weren't sure whether to believe their informant, and that even the Asset wasn't convinced his information was true.

Note as well that in the current article, Sarshar names the two FBI agents who were with him as "Tony and John". But in one of the few unredacted portions of Sarshar's interview:

He couldn't remember the name of one of the agents.

I would love to see Sarshar's testimony unredacted; based on what we already know there is no real good reason for keeping it secret. But I'm guessing that it bears little resemblance to the account at Sibel Edmonds' site.

Labels: , ,

65 Comments:

At 03 February, 2011 07:00, Blogger Bill said...

Is this surprising? In 9/11 Truth the true evidence takes years to develop. Wil-Rod, Kevin McPadden...all tell the truth, yet their experiences shift according to what will get them attention.

 
At 03 February, 2011 13:17, Blogger Track said...

Frields 9/11 Commission MFR

Frields repeatedly says the reporting was routine while Sarshar's statement reads:

They submitted the warning report to SAC Frields; with a note, a yellow stick-up, on the top saying ‘VERY URGENT: Kamikaze Pilots'

 
At 03 February, 2011 23:14, Blogger snug.bug said...

The claim made by former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds is explosive: two FBI agents were warned by a credible informant in April 2001 that attacks against the US using airliners, were upcoming, and the operatives were already in the US. They were warned in June that the attacks would involve tall buildings.

The FBI agents wrote a memo to their superior advising him of these warnings, the memo was entitled "Kamikaze Pilots", and their superior's response was to tell them they never got any warnings and nothing happened.

 
At 04 February, 2011 05:41, Blogger Bill said...

" The claim made by former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds is explosive:"

Why would a translator be privy to information which would have no reason to be in the language she trained in?

 
At 04 February, 2011 06:11, Blogger Ian G. said...

The claim made by former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds is explosive: two FBI agents were warned by a credible informant in April 2001 that attacks against the US using airliners, were upcoming, and the operatives were already in the US. They were warned in June that the attacks would involve tall buildings.

The FBI agents wrote a memo to their superior advising him of these warnings, the memo was entitled "Kamikaze Pilots", and their superior's response was to tell them they never got any warnings and nothing happened.


So Brian, can you tell me how thermite planted by Dick Cheney fits into this?

One of these days, you're going to have to decide if the Bush administration destroyed the WTC in a controlled demolition or not.

 
At 04 February, 2011 06:51, Blogger Garry said...

'The claim made by former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds is explosive'.

It would be if it were true.

 
At 04 February, 2011 09:18, Blogger Pat said...

Read it carefully, Brian. The claim is made by Sibel that this is the claim made by Sarshar.

 
At 04 February, 2011 13:56, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

Brian can't read anything carefully.

It is the root of his many problems.

 
At 04 February, 2011 18:10, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The goat molester can read--sorta.

Here's how the Goat Molesterian reading process works: He reads selectively, cherry picking the document for information that supports his cockamamie ideas, while systematically ignoring any information that contradicts his idiotic ideas, and then lies about everything he reads.

The Goat Molesterian reading process is as simple as it is breathtaking in its intellectual dishonesty.

 
At 05 February, 2011 10:02, Blogger snug.bug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 05 February, 2011 10:03, Blogger snug.bug said...

I read it carefully, which is why I noted that it was Sibel's claim, not Sarshar's--though it is Sarshar's story.

Interesting that the thread on this explosive story gets so little comment--because the Nat'l Enquirer "Cosmos is Andy Bernstein" claims takes priority.

I also note that you guys had nothing to say about Jonathan Cole's video showing how quickly he was able to create thermite charges that make cuts on vertical columns.

 
At 05 February, 2011 18:58, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

Problem with the thermite is that they didn't find any steel at the Freshkills site that had been cut by thermite, nano or otherwise.

The other problem is that none of the thousands of steel workers, FDNY, NYPD, FBI, ATF and other investigators didn't find any evidence of thermite use at Ground Zero either.

So who cares that Zippy did in hit neat-o video?

 
At 06 February, 2011 07:58, Blogger snug.bug said...

MGF, I guess it escaped your notice that 250 tons of steel was diverted from the Fresh Kills stream to go to mafia-controlled scrap yards.

Since you can't find any FDNY people now who will testify to the explosions that they testified to in the oral history interviews, it seems that no one is talking about what they saw at Ground Zero. Except Captain Philip Ruvolo, FDNY, testified to "molten steel running down the channel rails" like a foundry, like a volcano, like lava.

For a long time debunkers have claimed that thermite can not cut in vertical steel, and Jonathan Cole has shown that it can. MythBusters did an amazingly silly test where they failed to cut through the roof of a minivan because of their inept use of thermite. It's like proving that a hacksaw can not cut copper pipe.

 
At 06 February, 2011 08:01, Blogger Triterope said...

250 tons of steel was diverted from the Fresh Kills stream to go to mafia-controlled scrap yards.

Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo!

 
At 06 February, 2011 08:24, Blogger snug.bug said...

See "250 Tons of Steel Stolen from Ruins" by David Sapstead, Daily Telegraph 9/29/01.

"THE theft of more than 250 tons of steel from the ruins of the World Trade Centre is being investigated by the FBI and New York police who believe that it was organised by one of the city's Mafia families.

"Material from the scene of the September 11 terrorist attack, consisting mainly of steel girders, was discovered earlier this week at three scrapyards, two in New Jersey and one on Long Island.

"It appears that the scrap was hauled away by trucks involved in the clear-up operation. But instead of being taken to the FBI-controlled dump on Staten Island where all the material is being stored and sifted it was driven directly to the independently-owned scrapyards."

 
At 06 February, 2011 08:36, Blogger Ian G. said...

So the "mafia" was in on it too, huh petgoat?

I'm beginning to wonder if there was any organization that wasn't part of the 9/11 conspiracy in Brian's mind. I'm sure we'll soon hear about how Major League Baseball was in on it too.

Oh right, there's one organization that had nothing to do with it: al Qaeda.

 
At 06 February, 2011 08:42, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, I never said al Qaeda had nothing to do with it. The Telegraph said the mafia was involved. I haven't investigated it beyond that. It doesn't matter. The point is that 250 tons of steel was diverted from the Fresh Kills stream, which refutes the claims of MGF and TR.

 
At 06 February, 2011 08:46, Blogger Ian G. said...

Ian, I never said al Qaeda had nothing to do with it.

So what's with the babbling about thermite? Either al Qaeda did it or they didn't. If they did it, then babbling about thermite just makes you look like an obsessed lunatic.

The Telegraph said the mafia was involved. I haven't investigated it beyond that.

Of course you haven't investigated it. You found your piece of innuendo, and that's enough for you. Investigating it too much might plant seeds of doubt in your mind about whether 9/11 was an inside job, and we can't have that!

It doesn't matter. The point is that 250 tons of steel was diverted from the Fresh Kills stream, which refutes the claims of MGF and TR.

Nobody cares.

 
At 06 February, 2011 08:55, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, how do you know al Qaeda didn't do the thermite?

Ian, unlike the denizens of this board, I have no need to protect myself from the truth. I don't know if 9/11 was an inside job or not, and it's no skin off my nose one way or the other. I do know that the official reports are dishonest, incomplete, and unbelievable and that a democracy needs better reports than that.

MGF and TR certainly cared about the Fresh Kills steel enough to make audacious claims based on it--and when I provided mainstream news evidence that they were wrong, now nobody cares.

 
At 06 February, 2011 09:00, Blogger Ian G. said...

Ian, how do you know al Qaeda didn't do the thermite?

How do you know modified attack baboons didn't plant micro-nukes?

I don't know if 9/11 was an inside job or not, and it's no skin off my nose one way or the other.

False. You believe 9/11 truth with religious certainty. You're obsessed with it. It's the only thing that gives your life meaning. Without 9/11 truth, you'd be forced to confront the fact that you're an aging man with no job, no friends, no future, etc. It's much better to be part of a lunatic religious cult.

I do know that the official reports are dishonest, incomplete, and unbelievable and that a democracy needs better reports than that.

See what I mean?

MGF and TR certainly cared about the Fresh Kills steel enough to make audacious claims based on it--and when I provided mainstream news evidence that they were wrong, now nobody cares.

Nobody cares.

 
At 06 February, 2011 09:30, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, I was only pointing out your false dichotomy between "al Qaeda did it" and thermite. Attack baboons have nothing to do with it.
Don't tell me what I believe. You're not logically competent to explain your own beliefs.

You seem determined to cover over important substantive information with dumbspam. Why is that?

 
At 06 February, 2011 10:38, Blogger Triterope said...

Ian, how do you know al Qaeda didn't do the thermite?

Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo!

 
At 06 February, 2011 10:56, Blogger snug.bug said...

TR, how do YOU know al Qaeda didn't do the thermite?

I guess you've never heard of the "toxic tenant" hypothesis put forward by Dr. Hugo Bachmann, professor of structural engineering from the swiss Institute for Structural Engineering?

You guys have very rigid and brittle opinions about 9/11 and you know almost nothing about it.

 
At 06 February, 2011 11:47, Blogger Triterope said...

Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo!

 
At 06 February, 2011 12:26, Blogger snug.bug said...

So Dr. Hugo Bachmann, professor of structural engineering from the swiss Institute for Structural Engineering is cuckoo? Thank you for your brilliant, elegant, and stunning technical rebuttal!

So what exactly about the idea of a toxic tenant planting explosives in the twin towers strikes you as implausible?

 
At 06 February, 2011 12:57, Blogger Triterope said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 06 February, 2011 13:14, Blogger Triterope said...

So what exactly about the idea of a toxic tenant planting explosives in the twin towers strikes you as implausible?

Fuck you, Brian. We've played your stupid DURR ELEVATOR SHAFTS DURR SPRAY ON THERMITE DURRRRRRRR game enough times already.

If you can't see what's implausible about this argument... never mind, there's no point in even finishing this sentence.

 
At 06 February, 2011 13:34, Blogger snug.bug said...

Dr. Hugo Bachmann doesn't seem to find it implausible, but hey, some anonymous internet posters (ATP's) say it's implausible and everyone knows ATP's are always right!

 
At 06 February, 2011 16:41, Blogger paul w said...

I have no need to protect myself from the truth

Bwahahahahaahaha!!!!!

That's more like it!
Bwian's been very boring lately, this is a big improvement.

 
At 06 February, 2011 17:16, Blogger snug.bug said...

Gosh paulie, somebody who didn't know better would almost think you said something there!

 
At 06 February, 2011 17:47, Blogger paul w said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 06 February, 2011 17:50, Blogger paul w said...

...and then straight back to predictable, boring and
Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious

 
At 06 February, 2011 19:28, Blogger snug.bug said...

But you can't maintain the pretense for long, can you?

 
At 06 February, 2011 22:02, Blogger paul w said...

A man whose social life is blogging on SLC, who was thrown out from the truthers, and is an expert on physics, Newtown's Third Law, and concrete, is now taking the moral high ground on pretense.

Beyond parody.

 
At 06 February, 2011 22:17, Blogger Ian G. said...

I was only pointing out your false dichotomy between "al Qaeda did it" and thermite.

False. You're an obsessed lunatic who doesn't know the meaning of the word "dichotomy".

Attack baboons have nothing to do with it.

How do you know? You have never shown a shred of evidence that attack baboons weren't behind the attack.

Don't tell me what I believe. You're not logically competent to explain your own beliefs.

Does anyone else find it as hilarious as I do how much Brian squeals when we point out his obsessed beliefs that 9/11 was an inside job?

Brian, if you didn't believe 9/11 was an inside job, you wouldn't need to lie about it and post constant pointless innuendo.

So what exactly about the idea of a toxic tenant planting explosives in the twin towers strikes you as implausible?

See what I mean?

 
At 06 February, 2011 22:20, Blogger Ian G. said...

Dr. Hugo Bachmann doesn't seem to find it implausible, but hey, some anonymous internet posters (ATP's) say it's implausible and everyone knows ATP's are always right!

Poor Brian. He's been squealing and babbling and calling people "girls" here for 2 years, and has accomplished nothing. Everyone just laughs at him.

Meanwhile, the lover who jilted him, Willie Rodriguez, is a famous international celebrity with speaking engagements and people who admire him.

Life's just not fair sometimes.

You guys have very rigid and brittle opinions about 9/11 and you know almost nothing about it.

My, such squealing!

 
At 07 February, 2011 03:33, Blogger Triterope said...

anonymous internet posters (ATP's)

Uh... wouldn't that be AIPs?

 
At 07 February, 2011 11:23, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

For a long time debunkers have claimed that thermite can not cut in vertical steel, and Jonathan Cole has shown that it can. MythBusters did an amazingly silly test where they failed to cut through the roof of a minivan because of their inept use of thermite. It's like proving that a hacksaw can not cut copper pipe.

If 1,000 lbs of thermite can't destroy a family minivan, why do you think it "can" destroy a 110 story office building?

Answer the question Brain!

 
At 07 February, 2011 23:23, Blogger snug.bug said...

WAQo, did you see how those lamebrains deployed their 1,000 pounds of thermite? Obviously the stuff just ran down the windshield so it never cut through the roof. They didn't even try to contain it.
I might as well demonstrate that a welding torch can't cut a minivan--if I forget to turn on the oxygen.

For a view of what contained thermite can do (even cut vertical columns) see Jonathan Cole
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g

 
At 08 February, 2011 05:41, Blogger Ian G. said...

For a view of what contained thermite can do (even cut vertical columns) see Jonathan Cole
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g


Brian, you still haven't told us why anyone should care about Cole's experiments.

 
At 08 February, 2011 08:51, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, most intelligent people can read WAQo's claim that Mythbusters showed thermite to be an ineffectual cutting agent, and infer that Cole's experiments showing the power of contained thermite--even deployed on vertical surfaces--quite effectively refute the Mythbusters' lame show.

You're clearly not cut out for this business. Might I suggest that you seek a creative outlet working with your hands? With practice, any reasonably-determined person can become quite skilled, and enjoy the sense of contributing and having one's work valued that is so essential to mental health.

 
At 08 February, 2011 10:04, Blogger Ian G. said...

Ian, most intelligent people can read WAQo's claim that Mythbusters showed thermite to be an ineffectual cutting agent, and infer that Cole's experiments showing the power of contained thermite--even deployed on vertical surfaces--quite effectively refute the Mythbusters' lame show.

Nobody cares. We're talking about 9/11, remember? It would be nice if you could make a point related to 9/11, Brian.

Poor Brian, it's not easy being a failed janitor and liar who joins a crackpot cult only to have the crackpot cult throw him out of the group. All he has left is babbling at this blog while normal people laugh at him.

Visiting a psychiatrist could do wonders for you, Brian.

 
At 08 February, 2011 10:27, Blogger snug.bug said...

No, Ian, WE are talking about 9/11. You are almost invariably talking about me. One would suspect that you have a homosexual infatuation. I would suggest that you turn your attentions on someone more local, and less unavailable.

 
At 08 February, 2011 11:10, Blogger Ian G. said...

No, Ian, WE are talking about 9/11.

Right, that's what I said. You need to tell us why Cole's thermite videos are relevant to the question of whether 9/11 was an inside job. I think they're totally irrelevant.

You are almost invariably talking about me.

Well, you're constantly here babbling about magic thermite elves and imaginary widows. What am I supposed to talk about? There's nobody else left to talk about.

One would suspect that you have a homosexual infatuation. I would suggest that you turn your attentions on someone more local, and less unavailable.

Nope, I'm not gay. I also have a nice girlfriend who isn't a stalker, isn't a liar, doesn't believe in modified attack baboons, and isn't unemployed and living with her parents.

And you wonder why Willie Rodriguez rejected you. Get a job and a makeover, and maybe he'll come crawling back to you...

 
At 08 February, 2011 11:43, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, "inside job" is YOUR imaginary goalpost. IMHO there is NO connection between "inside job" and Mr. Cole's thermite demonstration because thermite charges could have been installed by almost anybody who had a motive.

I am not babbling about any elves except your Uncle Steve. Your claim that the widows do not exist is offensive and reflects a major alienation on your part from reality. You'd better not let your imaginary girlfriend find out about your obsession with me or she's likely to find someone more attentive.

 
At 08 February, 2011 12:03, Blogger Ian G. said...

Ian, "inside job" is YOUR imaginary goalpost. IMHO there is NO connection between "inside job" and Mr. Cole's thermite demonstration because thermite charges could have been installed by almost anybody who had a motive.

Sorry, Brian, but you're the one babbling about an inside job constantly, not me. You're the one who believes in it with fanatical certainty, not me. I mean, you start talking about "thermite charges" without a shred of evidence that any were planted in the WTC. That's because you believe in "inside job" and go back looking for anything that might support it.

I am not babbling about any elves except your Uncle Steve.

He's not an elf, Brian. He's an independent engineer who endorses the NIST report.

Your claim that the widows do not exist is offensive and reflects a major alienation on your part from reality.

Oh, Laurie Van Auken exists, it's just that I wouldn't presume to call her a "widow" without evidence that she wasn't the one who planted the thermite charges in the towers.

You'd better not let your imaginary girlfriend find out about your obsession with me or she's likely to find someone more attentive.

Wow, Brian. You're quite obsessed with my romantic life! Why is that?

 
At 08 February, 2011 12:07, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Thermite can't cut steel!

Mythbusters already proved that with 1,000 lbs. of the stuff on a vehicule.

Case closed!

 
At 08 February, 2011 15:14, Blogger snug.bug said...

WAQo, oh you guys are really rich. Thermite can't cut steel, the 9/11 Commission was not an investigatory commission, there are no widows. The debunkers are imploding, wandering off into the night nattering and muttering and shaking their heads.

 
At 08 February, 2011 16:13, Blogger Ian G. said...

The debunkers are imploding, wandering off into the night nattering and muttering and shaking their heads.

Uh, no. We're just poking you to make you babble and squeal. I mean, do you really think any of us care about a liar and failed janitor who was thrown out of the truth movement?

 
At 08 February, 2011 16:19, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, I was talking about 9/11 denial amongst the debunkers: thermite, the 9/11 Commission, the widows.

You're talking about me. Buzz off, okay? Shoo, fly.

 
At 08 February, 2011 16:25, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

WAQo, oh you guys are really rich. Thermite can't cut steel, the 9/11 Commission was not an investigatory commission, there are no widows. The debunkers are imploding, wandering off into the night nattering and muttering and shaking their heads.

Brian,

Do you want me to take your personal info (full name, address, phone number) and give it to Kevin Barrett and Willie Rodriguez?

All I have to do is find out where you live at WhitePages.com.

Now, how about those sources?

 
At 08 February, 2011 16:58, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Hey Brian,

Check it out, I've got something about you on my blog:

http://911truthersexposed.blogspot.com/2009/10/911-truthers-exposed.html

Produce the sources & I'll take it off, if not it'll remain on there.

Deal?!

 
At 08 February, 2011 17:07, Blogger Ian G. said...

Ian, I was talking about 9/11 denial amongst the debunkers: thermite, the 9/11 Commission, the widows.

What denial? Thermite was not used to destroy the towers, the 9/11 commission did its job, and the "widows" have no questions.

The only reason you think otherwise is because you're a delusional liar. Jesus, Brian, you're so pathetic that the truth movement threw you out of the group.

You're talking about me. Buzz off, okay? Shoo, fly.

Right, because you're a babbling liar who can't stop posting nonsense at this blog. Plus, you got thrown out of the truth movement. Petgoat told me so.

 
At 08 February, 2011 17:07, Blogger snug.bug said...

Pffffffffft.

 
At 08 February, 2011 17:10, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Brian's days are numbered.

 
At 08 February, 2011 17:22, Blogger snug.bug said...

Is that a threat?

 
At 08 February, 2011 17:24, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Just produce your sources Brian.

 
At 08 February, 2011 17:32, Blogger snug.bug said...

There's no point in sourcing anything on a blog that allows an anonymous poster to cite his "Uncle Steve" as evidence and allows him to claim the 9/11 widows are not widows.

 
At 08 February, 2011 17:34, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

There's no point in sourcing anything...

Because you're a liar Brian. You can't source anything because you have nothing. Which is why the Truth Movement threw your dumbass out.

 
At 08 February, 2011 17:41, Blogger Ian G. said...

There's no point in sourcing anything on a blog that allows an anonymous poster to cite his "Uncle Steve" as evidence and allows him to claim the 9/11 widows are not widows.

Brian, you still haven't showed any evidence that Laurie Van Auken and the other "Jersey Widows" didn't plant the thermite charges in the WTC.

 
At 08 February, 2011 18:05, Blogger snug.bug said...

See what I mean?

 
At 08 February, 2011 20:10, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

See what I mean?

No Brian, we don't see what you mean because you mean nothing!

 
At 08 February, 2011 21:09, Blogger Ian G. said...

See what I mean?

You're still squealing, Brian?

 
At 09 February, 2011 00:14, Blogger snug.bug said...

Me squeal, no never. That must be your Uncle Steve.

 
At 09 February, 2011 06:19, Blogger Ian G. said...

Me squeal, no never. That must be your Uncle Steve.

See what I mean?

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home