Monday, September 08, 2008

Terror/Torture on the Campaign Trail - Guest Post by Karima Bennoune

{Note from Mike Dorf: Below is a guest post by Karima Bennoune, who is a Visiting Professor at the University of Michigan Law School. She is also a Professor of Law and the Arthur L. Dickson Scholar at the Rutgers Law SchoolNewark. The post below draws on Professor Bennoune's most recent article, Terror/Torture, published in the Berkeley Journal of International Law.}


I am the daughter of a former prisoner of war and torture survivor. Similar to the experience of Senator John McCain, my late father spent about 4 and 1/2 years of his youth behind bars for involvement in one of the terrible conflicts of the second half of the 20th Century. As a member of Algeria’s independence movement, he knew the hardship of France’s colonial jails from 1957 until independence in 1962. Anyone who has seen “The Battle of Algiers” knows the rest of his story. The torture of my father has colored my life in the way that it often does with the children of those who have known it. It led me to a career as a professor of international human rights law, a topic I am teaching this year at the University of Michigan Law School. Due to my father’s legacy, I have great respect for Senator McCain’s history of personal courage in the face of the atrocity known as torture, and for his strength in facing down the horror of severe suffering deliberately inflicted on the powerless. Moreover, Senator McCain’s stirring words against torture several years ago – and earlier in his campaign – inspired me.


However, I find myself confused by the Republican Convention’s torture narrative. Many of those who graphically assert Senator McCain’s suffering as a credential for the presidency are not themselves opponents of torture. Sarah Palin scornfully jokes about Barack Obama wanting to give legal rights to terrorists. Mitt Romney paints those who believe in decent treatment for enemy combatants as “liberal” or “politically correct.” In their worldview, seemingly, terrorists (and presumably those easily confused with them) deserve mistreatment. Senator McCain’s initial attempts to speak out against inhuman treatment were not supported by these same politicians who are now so eager to parlay his personal odyssey of torture into election victory. The administration of President Bush – who addressed the convention from the White House - allowed torture to happen at Abu Ghraib, torture which has perhaps forever shaped the view of the United States in the Muslim world. And it has sought to carve out exceptions in U.S. law to allow more torture and ill treatment in the “war on terror,” or to shield the practice by exporting detainees to be tortured elsewhere.


The selectivity in the Republicans’ moral outrage about attacks on human dignity is striking. I wonder if my students are confused too. What precisely are the Republicans saying? Is torture wrong? Are its victims heroes because of their suffering or does it prove they are villains as Justice Scalia seemed to suggest to the BBC last year– the same way in which a “witch’s” drowning proved her damnation? Or does it depend on the color of the victim’s skin or his religion? Is the mistreatment of enemy fighters acceptable if their cause is wrong and their own tactics horrible? When we as a nation have not decided definitively whether we consider waterboarding to be torture – remember Mitt Romney simply could not make a call about this during earlier debates with McCain – how can we be the beacon of morality in the world that Republicans invoke? If the torture of John McCain was so terribly wrong, does that not make Barack Obama’s defense of the basic rights of detainees right? On the other hand, if experience of torture and ill-treatment qualify one for leadership roles, are we today, in the way we treat them, writing the equivalent of campaign speeches for detainees in the “war on terror” when they return home to their communities and countries? That should give us pause.


As for terrorism, another form of deliberately inflicted and instrumentalized severe suffering which I actively oppose, how will we be able to combat it if we accept inhuman treatment as a concept? Those who justify torture in the name of fighting terror undermine the very respect for human dignity we need to build and sustain a global consensus against terrorism. I am a staunch opponent of Muslim fundamentalist groups, a set of movements that targeted my secular Algerian father later in his life. These movements must be taken seriously by conservatives and liberals alike and they should be both criticized and thwarted. The many brave men and women in the Muslim world and Diaspora populations who speak out against extremism at great peril should be heeded and supported. Such objectives can only be achieved by those with a more complex worldview than the one espoused by Sarah Palin who cannot pronounce the names of I-ran and I-raq and who reportedly thinks we have been doing God’s work in the latter country. When Rudy Giuliani – who knows as well as anyone what is at stake here – speaks broadly of “Islamic” terrorism and Mitt Romney talks of “radical violent Islam,” without carefully delineating between a set of bloodthirsty extreme right wing political movements and a vast and diverse human population of more than one billion Muslims in the world, I know that under the leadership of their party we will never develop the sophisticated and thoughtful strategy we must have to defeat these real and dangerous fundamentalist networks.

21 comments:

M said...

From my time living in Belfast, Northern Ireland, I came to look at terrorists from a very different perspective. They were people who felt they had no other alternative and while they were labeled by the world as the Terrorists (IRA/Catholics/Nationalists/Republicans), in their undermined society, those in charge were the real terrorists. So it's all perspective isn't it? To the United States, I would say that in order to be the "best country in the world" as so many of us claim, we must hold ourselves to a higher standard no matter how difficult or galling that might seem.

Rhonda said...

I am very grateful for Karima Benoune's post and also for her voice against torture but also against terrorisim in the name of fundamentalist politicized religion of which there are many-Christian, Hindu, Jewish and Muslim,for example.


I would add an additional point to her critique of the Republicans and that is to critique McCain. Though a torture victim and a seeming "maverick" or "independent" on the issue of torture, what he does as a Senator speaks louder than what he says. In the run up to the Military Commission Act, he sounded like a breath of anti-torture and anti-cruel, inhuman or degrading teatment, but then he ultimately supported an Act that eliminated the constitutional and international right to habeas corpus--one of the most essential guarantees against torture--and he accepted watered down definitions. More recently, he voted to permit the CIA to torture.

So, I am angry about the exploitation of a torture story by a person who does not stand firmly against torture which is never permissible, not for terrorism, nor national security, etc. He argues now that he is the party of change but his policies, even about torture, differ only in degree from the administration that has ruthlessly and carelessly put our young people and the Iraqi people as a whole in harm's way, has threatened the separation of powers, stacked the Supreme Court with two of the worst possible justices bringing us to the brink of loss of the rule of law, and has fiddled and filled its cronies' pockets while threatening the livelihoods and shelter of millions of working people.

Paul said...

I think it is nothing other than gamesmanship to object to "terror" but not reject the use of force, outright.

Terrorism is merely a means of combat. It can (but does not necessarily) cause harm to "civilians" in greater relative proportion to "conventional" armed conflict, but both do substantial damage to "civilian" populations. Frankly, I am not sure that distinction is even relevant, but I would concede it, factually.

The objection to "terrorism" (as it is so very narrowly defined by those in power) is largely an attempt to silence the expression of those with no other reasonable means of violence at their disposal.

I won't object at all to anyone who puts forth that violence against nations is never acceptable, but I will object to any *moral* distinction between war (or other military aggressions) and terrorism.

Carl said...

Paul said"

"I won't object at all to anyone who puts forth that violence against nations is never acceptable, but I will object to any *moral* distinction between war (or other military aggressions) and terrorism."

I suppose then you wouldn't have any particularly strong objection if the US began targeting commercial airliners or methodically wiping out the civilian populations of Iraq or Afghanistan and maybe opening up some gas chambers to implement a "final solution" then? Or are such tactics only okay on your view when the perpetrators have "no other reasonable means of violence at their disposal." But if I'm reading you correctly here, then I fail to see how you are unable to draw a meaningful distinction between the use of traditional military force and "terrorism," seeing as how you seem here to be doing just that (despite your bizarre but frighteningly commonplace notion that if some use of force is okay then any use of force is okay)

Paul said...

No Carl, what I am saying, is that the distinctions being used to describe terrorism are very convenient (not quite as convenient as the Europe/not-Europe distinction of the Bush administration used to determine whether or not is is ok to invade a sovereignty in the 21st Century) for those asserting the claim. I really do not see any moral difference between a State (or their agents) hijacking commercial airlines and colliding them into buildings on one hand and military invasion or bombings on the other.

If you are going to treat 9/11 as an attack on the United States then it is bad because someone attacked us, not the means used. If you are going to treat 9/11 as merely a crime, then that is also fine and then law enforcement (not the military invasion of a country) should be handling it.

To me, the relevant distinction (if one is to be made) between "terrorism" and "war" (or other forms of military aggression) is the actor, not the act. 9/11 was treated as some sort of hybrid. We did not want to blame the country most reasonably credited with an attack, so we labeled it a criminal act of a non-affiliated group. Our response, however, was not a criminal response, but was instead a military response against a country not, in fact, associated with the crime.

So, to me, you either say "murder is bad" - and you treat terrorism like murder. In this case you can draw a reasonable distinction between "terrorism" and "war" (and "war-like" acts) based on the actor. This distinction, however, does not lead to a "War on Terror" involving military invasions, abductions and "trials." I am in this camp. "Terrorism" committed by individuals is criminal but on its face not dissimilar to acts committed against GB (by our founders in olden times and by the IRA in more modern times), South Africa, Israel, etc. It is a criminal act of violence committed for a political cause the morality of which will likely be judged the victorious.

Alternatively, you treat the act itself as somehow reprehensible, irrespective of the actor. This is where I am lost. I see no reason that, on its face alone, an act of "terrorism" is so different from a military act (say Reagan's bombing of Lybia or Clinton's attacks in Somalia.

As an aside, the acts you are trying to drawn upon as "terrorism" appear (perhaps intentionally, perhaps not) to be genocide, not terrorism. I think we are all in agreement the genocide (regardless of the actor, though realistically for something as grand as genocide, only a State could reasonably be the actor) is immoral.

Carl said...

Alternatively, you treat the act itself as somehow reprehensible, irrespective of the actor. This is where I am lost. I see no reason that, on its face alone, an act of "terrorism" is so different from a military act (say Reagan's bombing of Lybia or Clinton's attacks in Somalia.

Or Truman's horrific attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, for that matter. But it's exactly the kind of agent-centered view that you are proposing here that fails to capture this important equivalence from the start. While the standard distinction between war and terror is susceptible to being opportunistically abused and misused, this works precisely because there is a genuine normative distinction between destroying a stockpile of nuclear weapons in some hostile nation and blowing up an airliner full of its civilians. The advantage of the standard view's focusing on the acts or intentions of the perpetrators rather than on whether the agent happens to acting under the auspices of a sovereign nation is that, as you rightly point out, sovereign nations can and do commit outrageous acts of terror, and the standard distinction provides both a means of criticizing them for it and, we'd hope, as a prior constraint on their doing it again. It is, of course, also true that war can take a serious toll on a nation's civilian population. But I shiver to think how much greater that toll would be if we came to believe, as you are arguing, that attacks on civilians are no worse than attacks on enemy combatants. That reason alone, I would submit, gives us strong reason to preserve what otherwise might seem an imperfect distinction.

Paul said...

/shrug. Maybe if war was more horrific and if the average citizen - including those deciding to go to war and their families - was just as likely as its soldiers to have to face that horror, such acts would be far less prevalent.

sexy said...

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,按摩棒,跳蛋,充氣娃娃,情境坊歡愉用品,情趣用品,情人節禮物,情惑用品性易購

免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,免費AV,色情網站,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人影片,成人網站,A片,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,情色網,日本A片,免費A片下載,性愛

A片,色情,成人,做愛,情色文學,A片下載,色情遊戲,色情影片,色情聊天室,情色電影,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,一葉情貼圖片區,情色,情色視訊,免費成人影片,視訊交友,視訊聊天,視訊聊天室,言情小說,愛情小說,AIO,AV片,A漫,av dvd,聊天室,自拍,情色論壇,視訊美女,AV成人網,色情A片,SEX

情趣用品,A片,免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,色情網站,免費AV,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人網站,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,成人影片,情色網


情趣用品,A片,免費A片,日本A片,A片下載,線上A片,成人電影,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,微風成人區,成人文章,成人影城,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,臺灣情色網,色情,情色電影,色情遊戲,嘟嘟情人色網,麗的色遊戲,情色論壇,色情網站,一葉情貼圖片區,做愛,性愛,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,美女交友,做愛影片

av,情趣用品,a片,成人電影,微風成人,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,成人文章,成人影城,愛情公寓,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,aio,av女優,AV,免費A片,日本a片,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,聊天室,美女交友,成人光碟

情趣用品.A片,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,色情遊戲,色情網站,聊天室,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,免費A片,日本a片,a片下載,線上a片,av女優,av,成人電影,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,成人文章,成人影城,成人網站,自拍,尋夢園聊天室

美姬 said...

美姬情趣網..情趣風情..中部人情趣網台北情趣用品..情人節禮物..成人情趣用品
一夜情趣用品情趣..情境坊歡愉用品..情人視訊網..美姬成人用品..情人花束..按摩棒
情人歡愉用品成人視訊交友愛情用品館..視訊交友..情人視訊網..成人視訊交友..情趣交友..美姬用品專賣...
高雄轉角情趣用品情趣用品辣妹視訊..情色論壇..情惑用品性易購..紅煙論壇..高雄轉角情趣用品<性感睡衣
免費視訊聊天..視訊交友網..美姬圖影...紅煙論壇...交友聊天室..海角七號..美姬圖影..紅煙論壇..
成人視訊交友..上班族聊天室情人節禮物高雄轉角情趣用品同志聊天室情書..聊天室交友中部人聊天室
情惑用品性易購..紅煙論壇..高雄轉角情趣用品<性感睡衣免費視訊聊天..視訊交友網..美姬圖影...

情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品

花美姬情趣用品,A片,免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,色情網站,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人網站,H漫,18成人,
成人圖片,成人漫畫,成人影片,情色,情趣,情趣用品,情色文學
,色情小說,情色小說,
臺灣情色網 ,色情 ,情色電影 ,色情遊戲
嘟嘟情人色網,麗的色遊戲 ,情色論壇,
色情網站,一葉情貼圖片區 ,做愛 ,性愛
,美女視訊,辣妹視訊 ,視訊聊天室
,視訊交友網 ,免費視訊聊天 ,美女交友,做愛影片,
情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品

美姬 said...

美姬情趣網..情趣風情..中部人情趣網台北情趣用品..情人節禮物..成人情趣用品
一夜情趣用品情趣..情境坊歡愉用品..情人視訊網..美姬成人用品..情人花束..按摩棒
情人歡愉用品成人視訊交友愛情用品館..視訊交友..情人視訊網..成人視訊交友..情趣交友..美姬用品專賣...
高雄轉角情趣用品情趣用品辣妹視訊..情色論壇..情惑用品性易購..紅煙論壇..高雄轉角情趣用品<性感睡衣
免費視訊聊天..視訊交友網..美姬圖影...紅煙論壇...交友聊天室..海角七號..美姬圖影..紅煙論壇..
成人視訊交友..上班族聊天室情人節禮物高雄轉角情趣用品同志聊天室情書..聊天室交友中部人聊天室
情惑用品性易購..紅煙論壇..高雄轉角情趣用品<性感睡衣免費視訊聊天..視訊交友網..美姬圖影...

情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品

花美姬情趣用品,A片,免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,色情網站,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人網站,H漫,18成人,
成人圖片,成人漫畫,成人影片,情色,情趣,情趣用品,情色文學
,色情小說,情色小說,
臺灣情色網 ,色情 ,情色電影 ,色情遊戲
嘟嘟情人色網,麗的色遊戲 ,情色論壇,
色情網站,一葉情貼圖片區 ,做愛 ,性愛
,美女視訊,辣妹視訊 ,視訊聊天室
,視訊交友網 ,免費視訊聊天 ,美女交友,做愛影片,
情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品,情境坊歡愉用品

sex999 said...

A片,A片,情色,情色,A片,A片,情色,情色,A片,A片,A片下載,做愛,成人電影,.18成人,日本A片,情色小說,情色電影,成人影城,自拍,情色論壇,成人論壇,情色貼圖,情色,免費A片,成人,成人網站,成人圖片,AV女優,成人光碟,色情,色情影片,免費A片下載,SEX,AV,色情網站,本土自拍,性愛,成人影片,情色文學,成人文章,成人圖片區,成人貼圖

美女交友,AIO交友愛情館,AIO,成人交友,視訊交友網,視訊交友,拓網交友,PC交友,視訊交友90739,交友,情色交友,聊天室交友,辣妹視訊,視訊辣妹,美女視訊,視訊美女,情色視訊,日本AV,免費視訊聊天,視訊聊天,AV女優,AV,視訊聊天室,視訊,免費視訊,情人視訊網,本土自拍,自拍,AVDVD,SEX,微風成人,微風論壇,微風成人區,成人網站,成人,成人電影,嘟嘟成人網,成人貼圖,成人影片,成人圖片區,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人影城,成人文章,成人論壇,愛情公寓,情色論壇,情色,色情聊天室,色情,情色貼圖,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,寄情築園小遊戲,色情遊戲,情色電影,情色網,做愛,UT聊天室,聊天室,聊天,哈拉聊天室,豆豆聊天室,尋夢園聊天室,聊天室尋夢園,080苗栗人聊天室,苗栗人聊天室,080中部人聊天室,080聊天室,中部人聊天室,柔情聊天網,6K聊天室,小高聊天室,上班族聊天室,免費A片,A片,成人聊天室,一夜情聊天室,情色聊天室,色色網,免費AV

路傑 said...

免費A片, ut聊天室, AV女優, 美女視訊, 免費成人影片, 成人論壇, 情色交友, 免費AV, 線上a片, 日本美女寫真集, 同志聊天室, 聊天室交友, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 色情網站, 辣妹視訊, 美女交友, 微風成人區, 色美媚部落格, 色情影片, 成人影片, 成人網站, 免費A片, 上班族聊天室, A片,H漫, 18成人, a漫, av dvd, 一夜情聊天室, 微風成人, 成人圖片, 成人漫畫, 情色網, 日本A片, 免費A片下載, 性愛, 成人交友, 嘟嘟成人網, 嘟嘟成人網, 成人貼圖, 成人電影, 成人, 中部人聊天室, 080中部人聊天室, 成人貼圖, 成人小說, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人遊戲, 微風成人, 愛情公寓, 成人電影, A片, 情色, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 做愛, 成人遊戲, 成人影城, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 寄情築園小遊戲, 色情遊戲, 成人網站, 麗的色遊戲, 色情網站, 成人論壇, 情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 言情小說, 愛情小說, 色情A片, 情色論壇, 自拍, 癡漢, , 俱樂部, 豆豆聊天室, 聊天室, 色情影片, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊交友90739 情人視訊網影音視訊聊天室 免費視訊聊天室 視訊聊天 視訊交友 美女視訊 視訊美女 視訊 免費視訊 免費視訊聊天 視訊聊天室 辣妹視訊 一夜情 色情a片 aio交友愛情館 情色電影 情色視訊 色情遊戲 色情 情色小說 一葉情貼圖片區 色情小說 色情聊天室 情色交友 成人論壇 成人網站 色情網站 情色論壇 小高聊天室 女同志聊天室 6K聊天室 080苗栗人聊天室 080聊天室 聊天室尋夢園 UT男同志聊天室 男同志聊天室 尋夢園聊天室 UT聊天室 聊天室 豆豆聊天室 A片 成人電影 成人貼圖 嘟嘟成人網 美女交友 本土自拍 成人交友 成人影片http://ssff01.3b8mm.com/

在職進修專欄 said...

看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,美髮儀器,美髮,儀器,髮型,EMBA,MBA,學位,EMBA,專業認證,認證課程,博士學位,DBA,PHD,在職進修,碩士學位,推廣教育,DBA,進修課程,碩士學位,網路廣告,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,廣告,課程介紹,學分班,文憑,牛樟芝,段木,牛樟菇,日式料理, 台北居酒屋,燒肉,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,造型系列,學位,牛樟芝,腦磷脂,磷脂絲胺酸,SEO,婚宴,捷運,學區,美髮,儀器,髮型,牛樟芝,腦磷脂,磷脂絲胺酸,看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,房子,捷運,學區,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,學位,碩士學位,進修,在職進修, 課程,教育,學位,證照,mba,文憑,學分班,網路廣告,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,SEO,关键词,网络广告,关键词广告,SEO,关键词,网络广告,关键词广告,SEO,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,居酒屋,燒烤,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型

kutyhgvd said...

I am so happy to get some kal geons and the kal gold is given by my close friend who tells me that the kal online geons is the basis to enter into the game. Therefore, I should kal online gold with the spare money and I gain some kalonline Geons from other players.

. said...

酒店喝酒,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,制服店,便服店,鋼琴酒吧,兼差,酒店兼差,酒店打工,伴唱小姐,暑假打工,酒店上班,日式酒店,舞廳,ktv酒店,酒店,酒店公關,酒店小姐,理容院,日領,龍亨,學生兼差,酒店兼差,酒店上班,酒店打工,禮服酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,經紀 彩色爆米花,經紀人 彩色爆米花,酒店傳播,酒店經紀 彩色爆米花,爆米花,童裝,童裝拍賣,童裝大盤,童裝寄賣,童裝批貨,酒店,酒店,童裝切貨,酒店,GAP童裝,酒店,酒店 ,禮服店 , 酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工

wsty said...

www.eshooes.com .
www.pumafr.com.
www.myshoess.com.
[url=http://www.pumafr.com]puma shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.eshooes.com]chaussures puma[/url]
[url=http://www.myshoess.com]nike air max ltd[/url]

琪琪 said...

we have the highest quality but the lowest price fashion products wholesale from China.Here are the most popular China Wholesale products for all of you.You can visit
...................................................................

琪琪 said...

And if we are talking specifics, here, then make it a waist 33, length 30 to crease nicely over my square tipped Kenneth Cole Reaction vintage nubuck loafers. I also would like a 1.8" wide Gucci horsebit ring buckle belt the same color as the loafers.

............................................................................

琪琪 said...

Enjoy your shopping experience on mensclothingus.com.You can find the father who desire fashionable, intellectual mens clothing simultaneouslyGod bless you!I really agree with your opinions.
..............................................................

酒店經紀ㄚ君姐姐 said...

,,姐.,便服/,,

freefun0616 said...

酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店經紀, 酒店打工經紀, 制服酒店工作, 專業酒店經紀, 合法酒店經紀, 酒店暑假打工, 酒店寒假打工, 酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店工作, 酒店打工經紀, 制服酒店經紀, 專業酒店經紀, 合法酒店經紀, 酒店暑假打工, 酒店寒假打工, 酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店工作, 酒店打工經紀, 制服酒店經紀,,