CIA Wants Its Narrative Back, Live-Tweets bin Laden Raid Five Years Later

On Meet the Press, CIA Director John Brennan disputes the alleged Saudi-9/11 connection in the "28 pages" of congressional inquiry.

To commemorate the fifth anniversary of former al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden's assassination, the CIA went on a public relations-offensive, including a sustained retroactive live-tweet session of the events which led to Navy SEAL Team Six taking out the world's most wanted terrorist, and handing the Obama administration its most prominent foreign policy victory.

3:30 pm EDT - @POTUS watches situation on ground in Abbottabad live in Situation Room#UBLRaid pic.twitter.com/59KPF7eUTr

— CIA (@CIA) May 1, 2016

Ever since the CIA took its brand to the 140 characters-or-less social medium known for its acidic snark and self-promotion, it has tried to fit in with the cool Twitter kids by making jokes about Tupac Shakur conspiracy theories or cat pictures.

But the decision to live-tweet the #UBLRaid, using only the sparest of details to further entrench the legend of Top Men and Women in Washington, DC making big decisions carried out by strong and fearless warriors on a creepy compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, struck many as a tone-deaf and unprofessional use of the platform. 

The football-spiking over killing bin Laden also appeared like a Zero Dark Thirty-

Flickr/thespeakernews

eqsue attempt to distract from the fact that bin Laden's death did essentially nothing to win the "War on Terror," which rages well into its second decade as al-Qaeda's rival and progeny ISIS controls significant portions of several countries. These include Iraq, a country we "liberated" as a direct consequence of 9/11 and which we continue to send troops to despite the war being "over," and Libya, which we "helped" to liberate in 2011 and has since descended into a failed state that is flypaper for jihadists. It's always worth noting that the US intervention in Libya has been variously described as "smart power" by Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the "worst mistake" of his presidency by President Obama.

The CIA may also not be appreciating the fact that 9/11's re-emergence into the news cycle — via the recent attention given to the "28 pages" of a congressional inquiry which several sitting and former congresspeople claim contains evidence that the 9/11 hijackers received significant support from officials in the Saudi government— draws attention to the agency's many intelligence failures leading up to the atrocities which killed over 2,800 people.

On Meet the Press yesterday, CIA Director John Brennan told host Chuck Todd that he was "puzzled" by people like Fmr. Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fl.)'s characterization of the "28 pages." Brennan added that the pages contain both accurate and inaccurate information, much of it uncorroborated, and some deemed too "sensitive" by the 9/11 Commission to include in its official report. Brennan also said he was "worried" that the release of the pages could damage the US' "very strong relationship" with Saudi Arabia. 

At the start of the interview, Brennan recalled standing outside the White House on the night of bin Laden's killing in 2011, and hearing not only chants of "USA! USA!" but "CIA! CIA!", a claim which Todd left unchallenged.

Comments

[Juvenile Bluster]

So, which CIA drone was lucky enough to get the paid twitter propaganda watch on a Sunday?

[Krapulent Kristen]

Some recent GW grad in skinny pants with a Nazi haircut.

[Citizen X]

You're gonna have to narrow it down.

[Krapulent Kristen]

Named Tanner. Or Ethan.

[Hugh Akston]

Maybe they got Pajama Boy on loan from HHS.

[Citizen X]

"Bin Laden's beard game was totes on fleek. But that robe? Ugh, so problematic."

[Krapulent Kristen]

And he got his training from Bloghdad Bob over at TSA.

[R C Dean]

Take a look at Hillary in these pics (or others from five years ago), and her current pics, and tell me there aren't significant health issues.

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

Mental?

[creech]

She's sacrificed years of her life fighting for the poor, the downtrodden women, the children, the oppressed, the
under paid and unemployed, the bankers. She cares only about us, the little people, and we should reward her sacrifice by electing her to the most powerful job in the world.

[The Other Libertarian]

If elected she WILL die in office of a heart attack. Speaking of which, I wonder who her running mate will be? Honestly, this makes me want to bring back the practice of the the Vice Pres being the runner up in the general - that might be the only reality TV show I'd ever watch.

[ipsum]

I literally have tears in my eyes from laughing.

[R C Dean]

If there's any truth to this, then we truly are looking at Queen Hillary if the wins:

The source also recalled that Clinton would often snap her fingers at Abedin requesting items from her loyal aide.

"A lot of times, Hillary would snap her fingers and go, 'Gum.' And Huma would fetch it," Newsweek's source said.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/04.....r-own-bag/

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

Selina Meyers.

[Chipwooder]

So Huma is Gary? Where's her bag, then?

[wFt]

I've seen the "oh how beautiful" comment before; Mrs. Huma Abedin-Weiner is just the sort to get along with the Clintons. Unquestioning loyalty all the way to being thrown off the train and under the bus, and loving every minute of it.

[wFt]

IN other words, Doug Stamper.

[PapayaSF]

There were also numerous requests in her emails for "lemonade," which sure sounds like a code word for alcohol.

[Ron]

or the other lemonade?

[Inigo Montoya, Micro-Aggressor]

"Take a look at Hillary in these pics (or others from five years ago), and her current pics, and tell me there aren't significant health issues."

Yeah? You go spend a few years vigorously wiping an illicit server hidden in your basement with a dust cloth, all the while worrying that your flouting of the law and the contracts you signed swearing to abide by secrecy rules will catch up with you and then let's see how YOU look.

[Soave the Last Dance for Me]

Maybe she'll be our first Bionic Woman president.

Hillary's going to live to be a supercentenarian. Because God has a sense of humor far more sassy and gallowsy than anything you guys exhibit.

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

I'm pretty sure it was "FDA! FDA! FDA!" Or maybe "EPA! EPA! EPA!". A third possibility, "NEA! NEA! NEA!" was briefly considered but eventually nixed.

[Loki]

I supposed it could have also been "CYA."

[Loki]

Also, I doubt there really people chanting "USA!" given the infamous USA! chant fail in NY.

[dajjal]

People are disgusted with the Saudis. They are funding the extremist madrassas from where ISIS draws many fighters. With oil prices so low, we no longer need to bow down to them. I suspect his defense of our "very strong relationship" with them is hiding mischief beyond 9/11. Keep an eye on who is sweating the most on this.

[DEATFBIRSECIA]

Brennan also said he was "worried" that the release of the pages could damage the US' "very strong relationship" with Saudi Arabia.

My sister was in a situation you could call a "very strong relationship" where her husband beat her, and did everything he could to brainwash her into believing she couldn't live without him. She eventually figured it out and left him.

What's our excuse for remaining allied with a despotic blasphemer-beheading regime, which may have had a significant role in one of the worst beatings we ever took?

[Krapulent Kristen]

Black gold. Texas Tea.

[DEATFBIRSECIA]

We're fracking the fuck out of that shit now. Try again.

[Krapulent Kristen]

Pretty sure OPEC still plays a big part in our oil economy. Their threatened decrease in prod immediately sent gas prices up a few months ago. Now that they seem to be outputting as much as they ever were, prices are sliding dow again. This is even despite U.S. production going down.

So, again. Black gold, Texas Tea.

[dajjal]

I agree - Obama is concerned that oil prices will go up and threaten his re-election bid. Oh.... wait....

[R C Dean]

Fracking has lowered the effective ceiling on oil prices. In 2008-09, it peaked at over $90/barrel. Fracking breaks even at around $50/barrel (last I looked, and its coming down). We also have fracked wells being capped right now.

Oil can try to make a run above $50, but in the absence of very strong demand (which doesn't seem on the horizon), its not going to get very far.

That's a huge change. The price will float around, sure, but it won't run very high for quite some time.

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

The price will float around, sure, but it won't run very high for quite some time.

Not in this economy.

[R C Dean]

Not, I suspect, in any economy we are likely to see for quite some time. You'd need massive global growth to crack the de facto fracking price ceiling, in my uneducated opinion.

[Restoras]

Not sure how much is OPEC but the US does not get as big a portion of the oil we use from Saudi Arabia as does Europe and Japan. I wonder how much that has an influence on our 'alliance' with them.

[WTF]

Yes, the US gets most of its oil from domestic production, Canada, and Mexico; very little from the middle east. Europe on the other hand gets alot of oil from the middle east. But that's their fucking problem. My guess is that the Saudis know what skeletons are in the closets of US officials.

[Marshall Gill]

The Saudis are also very well known to be quite generous to former politicians.

[BYODB]

Considering the only other major source over there is Russia I suppose you just need to pick your poison.

[DEATFBIRSECIA]

I guess my point is: Is it worth burning people jumping out of 90 story windows, multiple endless wars and the entrenchment of the police and surveillance state?

[Restoras]

I'd go with no - but you have to consider the environmental issues at play. I mean, obviously our own, locally sourced oil is inferior to the imported kind in minimizing pollution, right? What other reason would there be to not using our own oil and instead having to make nice with an authoritarian theocracy?

[WTF]

I would guess most politicians think that the entrenchment of the police and surveillance state is worth burning people jumping out of 90 story windows and multiple endless wars.

[Ron]

OPEC is pumping as fast as they can to put Frackers out of the fields until their paid lackies the environmentalist can pass anti fracking laws then watch the price of oil shoot up

[dajjal]

It disturbs me that we agree on something. Now I gotta figure out where I've gone wrong....

[CatoTheChipper]

Saudi Arabia is one of the world's largest importers of advanced weaponry, and the US is its #1 supplier. So there's that.

[CatoTheChipper]

The US government also owes the Saudis around $750 billion.

The borrower is servant to the lender.

[Soave the Last Dance for Me]

The borrower is servant to the lender.

Is that necessarily true? What if the lender has no means by which to hold the borrower's feet to the fire?

[BYODB]

Uhh...pretty sure the Saudi's are well versed in blackmail and have plenty of dirt to use for that purpose.

[Rich]

Brennan added that the pages contain both accurate and inaccurate information, much of it uncorroborated, and some deemed too "sensitive" by the 9/11 Commission to include in its official report.

Unlike the non-28 pages.

[Ken Shultz]

"The football-spiking over killing bin Laden also appeared like a Zero Dark Thirty-#UBLRaidFlickr/thespeakernewseqsue attempt to distract from the fact that bin Laden's death did essentially nothing to win the "War on Terror," which rages well into its second decade as al-Qaeda's rival and progeny ISIS controls significant portions of several countries."

Let's not miss the forest for the trees.

Killing bin Laden may not have won the "War on Terror", but it's a better reason to throw a party than Cinco de Mayo.

I get happy all over again every time I think about it. No cave deep enough, no border politically sensitive enough to save mass murderers like bin Laden from the wrath of the American people.

Bin Laden's death is a good reason to throw a party, and it would have made an excellent excuse to sunset the AUMF five years ago, too. Maybe that's a good reason for libertarians to mark the anniversary of bin Laden's death: even after the bastard had been dead for years, the Obama administration was still using the AUMF as an excuse to do all manner of evil--from assassinating American citizens to tracking our phone calls.

[GILMORE?]

Did you ever read Sy Hersch's piece claiming that the Pakistanis were effectively "holding OBL prisoner" in that compound, and the SEAL operation was so much of a staged Turkey Shoot?

While there are parts of his story that seem to go further than known-facts support... much of it lines up entirely with what can be validated.

I'm not suggesting there's any clear-cut argument either way. But i do think there's nothing in the "official" narrative that suitably explains how and why OBL was located exactly where he was, and for how long he was there, and who else knew.

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

I think it's perfectly reasonable that the Pakistanis had sequestered him in that compound. By staged turkeyshoot, I presume the suggestion is the Paki's allowed us in there with knowledge beforehand? Seems a little far fetched. I think it's much easier to believe that the Pakistani's simply knew he was there and had they known we knew, they'd have moved him post haste.

[GILMORE?]

By staged turkeyshoot, I presume the suggestion is the Paki's allowed us in there with knowledge beforehand? Seems a little far fetched.

The explanation (as best as i can remember/summarize it) is the following =

- OBL had been captured by ISI soon after Tora Bora (2002-2003).
- They didn't share this info with Musharraf because ... well, he wasn't a 'Team Player'
- At some point someone from ISI leaked to the US that "they had him". It was also clear that Pakistani leadership remained mostly in the dark.
- CIA initially didn't believe them.
- Over the course of 3 years they were spoonfed intel so that CIA could conduct their own "parallel construction"/investigation that would lead to the Abbottabad location
- as for what Pakistanis actually did on the night of the killing? there's no real detailed claim, but the implication is that "Guards walked off", and someone conveniently shut down their northern radar for an hour or two.

I don't know how 'far fetched' that is. I do know that there is no even quasi-semi-remotely plausible argument ever even attempted to explain how OBL happened to be located in a "prison-like" compound literally across the street from Pakistani's West Point... when he got there, why, and who else knew.

[R C Dean]

how OBL happened to be located in a "prison-like" compound literally across the street from Pakistani's West Point

From what I understand, "prison-like compounds" are not unusual in that part of the world, mostly for the security of the residents. That doesn't really ping my radar.

Near Paki West Point is kind of odd, though. Although, if I was planning to basically stay holed up for fear of being spotted, I could see doing it in a town that would be hard for the Americans to assault.

[GILMORE?]

From what I understand, "prison-like compounds" are not unusual in that part of the world

Actually no. From everything i've read (and most are not any attempt to 'bust a conspiracy' but just straight reporting) that building was a sore thumb which was super-fucking odd. It was a "upper middle class area" where giant walls and barred gates and slit-windows were not the architectural norm.

And I don't really think the proximity to Paki military installations presented any security 'benefits' from the POV of the most wanted terrorist on earth. He had a long history of preferring being holed up in remote mountain redoubts surrounded by his personal army. Suddenly he decides he wants to go all Urban chic? sorry.

Read "Manhunt" *(which is the closest thing to an 'Official' account done by a 3rd party)... and then read Hersch's piece

[Ken Shultz]

Yeah, some of the nicest housing developments in Merida, where I lived in the Yucatan, have 30 foot walls surrounding them. The cartel wives and children needed to live somewhere, and kidnapping is a serious threat.

[GILMORE?]

Yeah, some of the nicest housing developments in Merida, where I lived in the Yucatan, have 30 foot walls surrounding them.

Still, barbed wire is not necessarily the norm in a residential community within spitting distance of a major military base.

as noted, even by 'developing world' standards the location was exceptional and 'stood out' to all the local residents as a place to be avoided. Not exactly the low-key hiding place of a International Mastermind.

[R C Dean]

Interesting. Thanks, G.

[R C Dean]

If the Pakis had him buttoned up themselves and wanted to get rid of him, why not just grease him themselves? "Nobody knew" he was there, and you can't tell me the Pakis would balk at killing a secret prisoner and disposing of his body.

Maybe there were internal political dynamics, etc., but the elaborate story about leading the US by the nose until we greased him has Occam's Razor problems.

[GILMORE?]

why not just grease him themselves?

All the questions you raise are topics in Hersch's piece.

[Ron]

the Pakis if they had had hime would probably of handed him over to the U.S. in order to get something back and its possible they did but Obama wanted a show. who really knows.

[Ken Shultz]

bin Laden's compound was down the street from ISI's headquarters in Islamabad. The ISI was responsible for creating, organizing, training, and supplying the mujahideen--not to mention the Taliban. Their ties to bin Laden went back that far--and it isn't surprising that he would be under their protection.

The difference between protection and imprisonment might be a matter of perspective. The ISI could have turned bin Laden over to the United States at any time and chose not to do so. In that sense, they were surely protecting him. I suppose it's also possible that they were keeping him there against his will in case he was useful. Why would you let a potential asset or bargaining chip walk out the door?

It should also be noted that the ISI isn't necessarily under the control of the Pakistani government. If the Pakistani prime minister or even the junta told ISI to withdraw its operations from Kashmir and Afghanistan, that leader would much sooner be assassinated than the ISI would be to withdraw. They're like a government unto themselves. Getting Musharraf and the military to attack the Taliban and their supporters in Northern Pakistan was like getting the U.S. Army to attack the CIA. There were and are all sorts of mixed loyalties in that kind of conflict.

Regardless, the ISI could have given us bin Laden at any time. In that sense, surely they were protecting him.

[GILMORE?]

ISI could have given us bin Laden at any time.

Did you read Hersch's story or not? because that was exactly the (claimed) problem. They *wanted to*, but there were multiple problems related to the fact that "pakistani leadership was kept in the dark", and no one wanted to admit how long they'd had him, etc. which would result in Pakistan being seen as "aiding the Enemy"

I think its very plausible that everyone would prefer that "The US 'Catch' Him" versus the Pakistani's sheepishly coughing him up with a bunch of mea culpas.

[GILMORE?]

...also, i'm generalizing a bit - if you're interested, read his piece. The point that "They" (ISI) wanted to hand Osama over was much more complex than that.

From what i recall, there were different factions in ISI with different opinions on what to do with him. And the "leaker" simply wanted to shortcut these political debates internally by making US knowledge a fait d'accompli. Once the US "knew", it was simply a matter of then negotiating the resolution. And its places like that where the Hersch story obviously gets fuzzy because much is just speculation about the motives and the plans.

If i recall correctly (Hersch) claimed some wanted to either kill him first, and let the US find his body elsewhere, but that they resolved that the US would do the deed very quietly and covertly, then subsequently CLAIM they'd killed him "in the middle of nowhere-FATA provinces" or something.

But that the helicopter crash fucked all that up.

One of the more-compelling aspects of Hersch's argument is how well it explains the immediate behavior of Obama & the Military etc. in the wake of the event. They all had their stories mixed up. It all suggested that there was a "cover story" which had gotten blown, and they consequently had to make shit up on the fly and just roll with it. Just that part of this story by itself is very interesting.

[Ken Shultz]

It's sort of like Israel negotiating with Arafat in regards to the PLO. Who said the PLO is going to do what Arafat tells them to do?

It's sort of like that in the United States, too.. Nixon tried to merge the Customs Department with the INS--both of which had the same mandates and redundant personnel in the same locations. Every President since Nixon tried to merge them.

It wasn't until the INS issued visa extensions to the 9/11 hijackers--months after 9/11--that the impetus to merge them overcame the internal resistance. Elected politicians come and go. They can increase the power of various bureaucracies, but if they want to decrease their power, they have to ask them for permission.

One doesn't simply walk into Mordor and tell the ISI what to do. We can talk to the Pakistani government all we want, but even when the Pakistani government is run by a military junta, the Pakistani military can't walk into Mordor and simply tell the ISI to release bin Laden to the U.S.

I don't think the Pakistani government could have forced the ISI to cough him up unless the ISI wanted to cough him up. Meanwhile, seeing the U.S. military come into the country and completely ignore Pakistan's sovereignty didn't do the Pakistani government any favors with public opinion. Pakistan has been an ally of the U.S. since the Cold War (the USSR backed India against China, specifically), and that has been a thorn in the side of Pakistani leaders for a long time.

[Ken Shultz]

Hersch sounds like he's talking about Pakistan like it's a single entity with a single leadership all the way down. You can't talk about "the Pakistanis" or the Pakistani government as a single entity--not when you're talking about the ISI. It's just not under the control of the government. Maybe the government gave bin Laden up and ISI didn't, but I'm not sure what difference that makes. It's like that with governments all over the world. Civilian control of the military is unusual.

[GILMORE?]

Hersch sounds like he's talking about Pakistan like it's a single entity with a single leadership all the way down.

Not in the slightest.

he doesn't even talk about the ISI that way. He specifically points out that there were competing factions even within that org.

I don't know where you got that impression.

[Ken Shultz]

"Did you ever read Sy Hersch's piece claiming that the Pakistanis were effectively "holding OBL prisoner" in that compound, and the SEAL operation was so much of a staged Turkey Shoot?"

That made it sound to me like he thinks there's one entity involved--and they were imprisoning him.

Calling it "protective custody" wouldn't be right. They could have handed him over to the U.S. at any time.

And, again, the Pakistani government took a lot of heat for the U.S. ignoring their sovereignty. I'm sure the locals think the government sold their sovereignty down the river for aid. You certainly wouldn't expect something like that to go over well with the Pakistani people.

So, giving up bin Laden didn't come without cost. Maybe we threatened to start withholding aid?

By wiki, we've given the Pakistani government $18 billion since 9/11. Spreading that kind of wealth around probably helps keep the government in power.

[GILMORE?]

the Pakistani government took a lot of heat for the U.S. ignoring their sovereignty. I'm sure the locals think the government sold their sovereignty down the river for aid. You certainly wouldn't expect something like that to go over well with the Pakistani people.

It didn't. and, according to Hersch's piece, that wasn't what was actually planned.

More than half Hersch's story is actually about the political fallout "after" the event (both in pakistan and in the US), and its actually there that much of the details get very interesting.

[GILMORE?]

I don't think the Pakistani government could have forced the ISI to cough him up unless the ISI wanted to cough him up.

You seem to have glossed over the point made above that a) the leadership (which changed twice over the period) wasn't entirely aware, and b) that there were different opinions within ISI about "what to do".

Again, i'm not sure there's any point to talking about this with me; either read the piece or don't. I'd be curious to see what people think *after* reading it, because as already noted, i think most of it lines up fairly well with the "known facts"

[GILMORE?]

If i were going to summarize what i actually think of Hersch's argument?

I'd guess 30-40% of it is 'closer to truth' than the official narrative.

There's probably a lot wrong with his specific details; but the general thrust of it i think is closer to an accurate understanding of what really went down.

The key detail is that OBL wasnt in that location on his own recognizance. he was there because he was being kept there. We didn't "track him down"; he was given to us. Beyond that its all a big mess of unknowns.

[grrizzly]

Thanks Gilmore for pointing to Hersh's article. I should have read when it was published, but I'm glad I did it now.

[Ken Shultz]

I'll look at it later.

Frankly, Hersh gives me a Michael Moore vibe.

I have more respect for what you have to say than I do for Hersh.

Our views are openly subject to perspective and uncertainty.

Hersh's are too, but he doesn't seem to realize it.

[GILMORE?]

Frankly, Hersh gives me a Michael Moore vibe.

He's a complete asshole from what i can tell. And he's published other things in the past that have been enormous whoppers of complex multilayered bullshit.

That said, his case adds up far better than Peter Bergen's book did.

[GILMORE?]

an interesting post-script to Hersch's piece

Regarding Seymour Hersh's story, the facts are these (LRB, 21 May):

1. Osama bin Laden orchestrated the 9/11 terrorist attacks on America.

2. The CIA found out where he was living.

3. US Navy Seals killed him.

End of story. Most Americans don't give a flying f**k about the details of the venture.

Francis X. Archibald
Hilton Head, South Carolina

Interesting, because all of those things are still true however much or little anyone believes about Hersch's account

the important point is that the "truth" really doesn't matter much in the end. There's no real sea-change in our relations with Pakistan either way. It doesn't pass the "So What" test. Which is pretty much why i think no one in the media was the slightest bit interested in popularizing any 'alternative view'. Why bother? no one benefits, nothing is changed.

[R C Dean]

I'd be curious to see what people think *after* reading it,

Shyeah, like that's gonna happen.

[GILMORE?]

bin Laden's compound was down the street from ISI's headquarters in Islamabad.

Technically a) the Pakistani Military Academy, not the ISI HQ, and b) Abbottabad, not Islamabad

[Ken Shultz]

Thank you.

[Crusty Juggler]

There are an awful lot of white people in that first photo. #problematic?

[Lee G]

Who has confidence in the CIA? Outside of the movies, their track record of predicting (and participating in) world events is abysmal.

[Crusty Juggler]

Lee, with all due respect you are out of your element. The CIA has done a lot of good. They are on the front lines while you just sit there and judge them from your computer, a freedom they have helped preserve. They have protected this nation again and again. But, um, all of the good stuff that they have done, and currently do, is um, classified, so unless you have the clearance, then, um, I am afraid they cannot share that information with you.

[R C Dean]

Trust us! We're spies, in the business of lying, stealing and killing!

[Crusty Juggler]

We're spies, in the business of lying, stealing and killing!

It is called national security.

[WTF]

Millions of terrorist attacks thwarted!

[R C Dean]

Or, if you're the FBI, its dozens of terrorist attacks created or saved!

[Steve G]

Since that's my new boss at the head of the table, I shall hold my comments...this time

[Bra Ket]

Ok you hate the CIA more than Bin Laden. I get that.

But some of their past tweets are just fucking hilarious, I don't care who you are (I just googled them to see what "acidic snark" could possibly be). If you're going to let politics get in the way of appreciating comedy, then you're just as bad as the SJW's. Ok that's a hyperbole but still. Don't be such a vagina.

[mildredawilliams]

$89 an hour! Seriously I don't know why more people haven't tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening?And i get surly a chek of $1260......0 whats awesome is Im working from home so I get more time with my kids.
Here is what i did
?????? http://www.worknow88.com

[mildredawilliams]

$89 an hour! Seriously I don't know why more people haven't tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening?And i get surly a chek of $1260......0 whats awesome is Im working from home so I get more time with my kids.
Here is what i did
?????? http://www.worknow88.com

[TruthInAction]

Here we are some fifteen years down the road, billions of dollars to fund the CIA, supposedly, the best spies in the universe, and they still don't know what statements in those twenty-eight pages are true?

Bull crap. Fire all of 'em.

[The Other Libertarian]

Is it just me that thinks the people in the back (particularly the guy in the blue shirt) look photoshopped in?

[Sammy Mason]

my co-worker's aunt makes $84 an hour on the computer . She has been fired from work for nine months but last month her pay was $19262 just working on the computer for a few hours. learn this here now

??? http://www.ReportMax90.com

[Sammy Mason]

my co-worker's aunt makes $84 an hour on the computer . She has been fired from work for nine months but last month her pay was $19262 just working on the computer for a few hours. learn this here now

??? http://www.ReportMax90.com

[BarbaraStep]

I am making $89/hour working from home. I never thought that it was legitimate but my best friend is earning $10 thousand a month by working online, that was really surprising for me, she recommended me to try it. just try it out on the following website.

??? http://www.NetNote70.com

[Holly Ray]

I quit myy office job and now I am getting paid 56 Dollars hourly. How? I work-over internet! My old work was making me miserable, so I was to try-something different. 1 years after...I can say my life is changed completely for the better! Check it out what i do...UI2

========== http://www.reportmax90.com

[vepiwaic]

til I looked at the check 4 $4775 , I did not believe ...that...my mother in law actualy taking home money in there spare time on their apple labtop. . there uncle has been doing this for only about 16 months and just cleared the mortgage on there apartment and purchased opel .
Check This Out??????? http://www.ny-reports.com

[AD-RtR/OS!]

Brennan has been "in the bag" for the al-Sauds for at least two decades.

[Lillian307]

Start working at home with Google! It's by-far the best job I've had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this - 4 weeks past. I began this 10-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $85 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.social36.com

[annakelly335]

I've made $76,000 so far this year working online and I'm a full time student.I'm using an online business opportunity I heard about and I've made such great money.It's really user friendly and I'm just so happy that I found out about it.

Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

??????? http://www.selfcash10.com

[kevewirix]

I'm making over $9k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do.... Go to tech tab for work detail..

CLICK THIS LINK===== http://www.cashapp24.com/

[lazuburulo]

I'm making over $9k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do.... Go to tech tab for work detail..

CLICK THIS LINK===== http://www.cashapp24.com/

[ammythomas6666]

Most of us want to have good income but don't know how to do thaat on Internet there are a lot of methods to earn money at home, so I thought to share with you a genuine and guaranteed method for free to earn huge sum of money at home anyone of you interested should visit the site. More than sure that you will get best result.OI3..

====== http://www.CashPost7.com

[woodcarol752]

til I saw the draft which was of $6881 , I didnt believe that my mother in law had been realy taking home money part-time on their laptop. . there best friend has done this 4 only twelve months and at present took care of the mortgage on there condo and got a top of the range Subaru Impreza . Learn More ....

Click This Link inYour Browser....

?????? http://www.Reportmax20.com