Wednesday, August 15, 2007

Reading list

Here is a chronological list, with links, of the some of the interviews with Kubaysi and Baath party people, from 2002 to date, referred to in recent posts and comments. All links fully guaranteed. Readers of the comments will note there are a number of apparent disagreements about things like the Baath role, and the history and meaning of the IPA-Baath relationship. For my part I'm more interested in what the spokespeople have to say about other aspects of the resistance, including the nationalist/Islamic relationship. Anyway here is the initial reading list.

(1) December 2002 interview with Jabbar al-Kubaysi, in which he talks about Iraqi Patriotic Alliance, which included an anti-Saddam wing of the Baath party and various left-nationalist groups. The group had a meeting in 2002 in Baghdad with senior Saddam people, to talk about not only the need for political opening, but also the need to prepare resistance on the assumption of an American invasion. The link is here.

(2) February 2004 interview with Kubaysi by a US group called the St Louis InsteadOfWar Coalition. Asked about the recent capture of Saddam, Kubaysi said this was having the effect of making the various Baath groups more flexible, and also of increasing the degree of cooperation by the Islamist groups. He describes the Iraqi Patriotic Alliance as the core of the resistance. The link is here.

(3) Interview posted in English by the Baath-related site with former Baath functionary and Saddam confidante Salah al-Mukhtar. He says by 2002 Baath party leadership had completed preparations for a long war of resistance including weapons-storage, training and so on. "After the occupation of Iraq thousands of people have joined the armed resistance: some of them joined Baath party organizations, some others formulated their own organizations. For the time being, we have many different groups fighting against American colonial occupation, and these organizations have different ideological characters, including progressive forces, religious groups, nationalists, but the main organization is the Baathist one. As for the connection among these organizations, I can say that there is a strong coordination and cooperation". The link is here.

(4) October 11 2004 interview in the Jordanian newspaper al-Majd with an unnamed Baath party leader (translated into English by al-Moharer and posted on a French website). He says the leadership and main components of the resistance are Baath, but also that this is complemented by a broad front of others people and groups "who entered the Resistance battlefield through the gateway of the Baath". Here is the link.

(5) October 31 2004 interview with the same paper by a Baath field commander called Abu Mu'atassim, translated by the same people and posted on the same site as the preceding item. He talks about a unified military command by Baath people, coordinating "all the Resistance factions and their Mujahideen in the area, be they Baathist, Islamist, or other honorable patriots...", and he claims there is political unification as well via the Baath party. The link.

(6) December 2005 interview of al-Mukhtar [not Kubaysi, as I originally wrote] by Robert Dreyfuss. Al-Mukhtar here repeats his] assertions about pre-invasion resistance planning by the Baath. It is clear that his main point is that the Americans need to talk, not to minor players, but "to negotiate with the Baath party and the resistance leadership, and not to any other party (this was just after the 2005 Iraqi-parliamentary elections, and there were reports of Khalilzad-Allawi attempts to talk to some resistance groups during this period). The link.

(7) July 2007 interview with Kubaysi published by InformationClearinghouse. Kubaysi says the original proliferation of resistance groups has now reorganized into eight main groups, with a high degree of operational coordination on a local basis, but he concedes that "what has so far not been achieved is a unified political command, which remains one of the main tasks ahead." He says: "The entire environment is Islamic. By Marxist or nationalist calls you will not attract young people..." (And this brings us chronologically up to the recent news about the creation of a Political Office for the resistance, and the aborted Damascus Conference). Here is the link.

ADDED NOTE: A commenter notes there is also a vast amount of material relating to Kubaysi and the Iraqi Patriotic Alliance on the website, major items appearing in German Italian and Spanish in addition to English, also extending from 2002 to date. You can access these by going to the website and typing Kubaysi in their search-box. For instance there is an interesting Dec 18 2003 interview with Kubaysi which includes comments on the ambiguous and uncertain position of Moqtada al-Sadr, indicating talks between him and the IPA were still going on, and including this exchange:

AC: What about the group of Muqtada al Sader? Did he capitulate?

JK: No, capitulation is too strong. The tremendous Iranian pressure makes him hesitate. I do not only speak about the political pressure exerted by Tehran but also about the direct presence of thousands and thousands Iranian agents mainly in the East and the South of the country. We had two meetings with Muqtada and he claimed that he will resist the occupation peacefully. That means that he opposes the military resistance. But nobody can believe that the US can be convinced without armed self-defense. What does legal means mean in a situation of illegal occupation? Our armed resistance is entirely legal according to international law and the UN charter, and also to Islamic law and our national values. We will never accept orders to disarm ourselves and to limit us to toothless peaceful action as Muqtada claims. However, we will go on trying to convince him.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

A few observations:

1) (6) December 2005 interview of Kubaysi by Robert Dreyfuss. Kubaysi here repeats
al-Mukhtar's assertions about pre-invasion resistance planning by the Baath.

Badger, Robert Dreyfuss interviewed Salah al-Mukhtar , not Kubaysi!
Of course al-Mukthar repeats al-Mukhtar's assertions ;-)

2) all the interviews of Kubaysi have been done by an Italian group (Campo Antimperialista – anti-imperialist camp). The other websites have simply re-posted them. But now the Campo Antimperialista’s website has deleted the interviews dated 2003-2004 (those interviews dated before the alliance Baath-IPA)

3) In may opinion, the 18 December 2003 interview is really very important. So, I post again the most important excerpt:

[Anti-imperialist camp] Will the arrest of Saddam Hussein result in a setback for the

[Jabbar Kubaysi] : No, on the contrary already within a few weeks you will see a
further strengthening of the resistance movement. For some Baathists it
might be a temporary disappointment. Although Saddam did not exert any
command function he still represented the one man rule and the dominance
of his family clan. Many party members who until now remained passive
for that reason now will join the resistance. As the fragmentation of
the Baath party reached its final stage, everyone decides upon his one
without waiting for the command chain which anyway was no more operative
since the collapse of the regime*.
Is the Baath party also inside the [resistance] front?
JK: There is no official representation of the party as they are all
occupied by hiding themselves
. But many members joined the front or
support it.

Of course, after the alliance IPA-Baath (summer 2005) , this interview has been removed from the Anti-imperialist camp's website, but it may still be read on these webpages:

The interview proves definitely that in 2003 and beginning 2004 there couldn’t be any relation (let alone an alliance) between Kubaysi and the Baath party

4) Even more important: Awni al-Qalemji (spokesperson for Kubaysi
and the IPA) in December 2003 gave an interview to an Italian newspaper where he said, “We wento to Baghdad in December 2002, to open a dialogue with the power, to talk about a democratic system. I went as a member of the Iraqi Patriotic Alliance. BUT WE DIDN'T FIND AN AGREEMENT (Ma non trovammo un accordo)”. In the same interview Qalemji talks very bad of Saddam.

Now the "Baath Party" ( and maybe the IPA, i don't know) is telling the story that in 2002 kubaysi and Qalemji would have "repented" and their return would have been accepted by the B a'ath a. Moreover, the "baath party" adds that Saddam in person would have endorsed and blessed an alliance with IPA . All this is false: Saddam has never met with Kubaysi and there has never been any agreement between the Iraqi government and the IPA: just a few inconclusive talks. Saddam of course can’t deny anything anymore, but we can still read what Kubaysi and Qalemji said before they allied with the Baath Party. The Baath Party has never mentioned IPA before the summer 2005, when they joined with Kubaysi’s group.

5) One more important point. Kubaysi lives peacefully in Paris and Qalemji peacefully in Denmark. Hardly they can lead the Iraqi resistance. As far as I know there has never been any independent source (I mean, a source that is not the "Baath Party" and the IPA) that has mentioned even the most insignificant presence of IPA within the Iraqi resistance, let alone a link between the IPA and some kind of military action. Is the IPA part of the Iraqi resistance or it’s just a group of former opponents to Saddam ( pro-Syrian Baathists ) that support the real Iraqi resistance from without and from abroad?

5:55 AM  
Blogger badger said...

thanks for the comments. I corrected the gaffe about who Dreyfuss interviewed.

But I can't agree with you that the Sept 18 03 Kubaysi interview was removed from the website, because that's where I found it, and in fact I quoted from in the additional note at the end of the post. You can navigate to it by typing Kubaysi in the website's search-box.

I understand you are saying there wasn't any Saddamist/Baath IPA tieup until 2005, and any pre-2005 agreement is something the IPA people made up after the fact. But I don't see where any of the materials really support Kubaysi or Qalamji having made that kind of a claim. K said he met with "officials" in Baghdad in 02, and that Izzat headed up a follow-up committee. But his main point, as I understand it, was to show how his coalition was willing to put traditional animosities aside in the interests of a common aim, as opposed, for instance, to the US-supported exile groups. But where, according to you, do Q and K claim they actually had a tieup agreement? And besides, what difference does it make? From the Baathist interviews we have both linked to, it's clear that until probably 2005, the Baath was claiming full leadership of the resistance, so there isn't much room for doubt who was claiming what in that period. So I really don't see what you're getting at there.

On your final point, Kubaysi is a politician, trying to help bring the resistance factions together politically, something that obviously hasn't come about yet, and might come about with their input, and maybe without it. Neither one of them claims to be part of the Iraqi armed resistance. (But as you know, the US thought highly enough of Kubaysi to keep him locked up for about a year I think it was after they "arrested" him in Baghdad in December 04).

8:01 AM  
Blogger badger said...

(and thanks for the explanation about those Kubaysi interviews all being originally from I hadn't even been aware of that interesting site until you called it to my attention).

8:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yesterday and the day before the links to Kubaysi’s interviews till 2005 (on Campo Antimperialista’s website) didn’t work. Of course it was a simple technical problem, but i thought they deleted them. (Some of them however still don’t work, at least on my pc. ).

I wrote, "the Baath (and maybe the IPA, I don't know)" is saying that the alliance with Kubaysi goes back before the war. As far as I know it’s the Baath to say that, not the IPA. But Kubaysi claims to know Saddam’s movements before the capture; this is impossible. And the version that he now gives of facts happened in 2003 and beginning 2004 is very different from the one he was telling then.

What I mean I think is obvious.

In 2003-2004 the descriptions of the Iraqi resistance given by the Baath and Kubaysi were not different; they were absolutely the opposite one from the other. The Baath claimed it led the resistance, under Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri’s command while Kubaysi used to say that the Baath didn’t exist anymore and that anyway it was not part of the resistance but there were just some baathists who joined the resistance as single people and on personal account. In December 2003 Kubaysi welcomed Saddam’s capture as a positive event for the Iraqi resistance.

After the occupation, Kubaysi went back to Iraq and lived at his home in Baghdad where he gave many interviews where he claimed a (non-existent) leadership of the Iraqi resistance. Already in the December 2003 interview, he said, "After months of intensive talks we will be able to proclaim the resistance front within a few weeks." (Obviously the Baath couldn’t be part of this “front” because according to Kubaysi the Baath didn’t exist anymore).

One month later Kubaysi is a little more tolerant on the times to proclaim that “front”:
"Thus the front will be proclaimed soon. When the US will try to pass some power to their puppets scheduled for the mid of the year, it might be already able to function as an alternative."
He again claimed that the Baath was dissolved. Mind you; he says all this while living at his Baghdad home while tens of thousands of Iraqi were being arrested, tortured and slaughtered just for the most little suspicion to have some sympathy for the Iraqi resistance.

The time goes by and four years later of that “front” nobody knows anything (at least of a “front” where IPA is part of it) besides the numerous, foggy Kubaysi’s statements. The only alliance that he’s done was with that Baath party that he had said it didn’t even exist anymore.
Kubaysi tried even to claim a role in the kidnapping of some Italian mercenaries, giving by telephone the conditions for the negotiation and release.
Of course, nothing was true and the hostages were freed when the Italian government dealt with the mediation of another Kubaysi, Abdel Salam Kubaysi, a member of the Ulema association and just homonym of our Jabbar Kubaysi.

Kubaysi was arrested in 2004 – after he had been screaming to be working to unify the resistance and to be in contact with the kidnapping groups for more than a year. After those kidnapped Italian mercenaries, Kubaysi tried also to intervene into the kidnapping of the French journalists and this provoked his arrest. , ,

The following year he was released and cleared of any accusations and the next week after that he was in France – but before he participated in Iraq, in a couple of days, “dozens of meetings and happenings” I imagine always to unify the resistance.

Today this gentleman lives in Paris, even though I believe he went back to Iraq at least once. He travels freely in Europe participating to conferences where he gives speeches in name of the Iraqi resistance. He claims to be in contact with Izzat al Duri whose letters he mails around the world. ( ).
Last November IPA claimed that al Duri refused an offer from the Yemen’s president to have talks between al Douri and the US. (. ). More “news” that didn’t find any confirm.
Is it possible that nobody in the world may want to ask Kubaysi where al-Douri is, if nothing else, for the rich bounty of $ 25,000,000 ???
At his place in Paris, Kubaysi keep working to unify the resistance.

I repeat myself: IPA was the protagonist of the false story last October of the Unified Command of the resistance - (October 2006): first IPA spread this “news” then, after the outraged denial by 1920 revolution Brigades and Islamic army in Iraq, and after some members of the so-called command knew about it reading the al-Quds al-arabi, IPA said that that news wasn’t true. In March 2007, Awni al-Qalamji, spokesperson for the IPA, said that the news of that unified commando wasn’t correct.
Very strange, since Qalamji had confirmed some months before every details to the Italian News Agency Adnkronos.
The Antiimperialist camp (unofficial mouthpiece for the IPA) even wrote recently (in December) that the news of the unified commando of Iraqi resistance was a conspiracy by a Bassora newspaper and from “the newspaper pro-Saudi al-Quds al-arabi" with “the criminal intent” to discredit the iraqi resistance and expose all (and in particular Kubaysi and Qalamji) to the risk of American retaliations.
To be precise al-Quds al-arabi is the newspaper where used to write at the time and still now writes Qalamji.

What do I mean? I mean that Kubaysi is not a credible character (to say the least); I believe he’s nothing to do with the real armed Iraqi resistance. I also believe that his numerous and contradictory claims surely don’t help the Iraqi resistance. In his latest interview Kubaysi claimed that al-qaeda is the main group of the Iraqi resistance ("Today maybe we can say that al Qaeda is the first organisation of the resistance."). Only Kubaysi and Bush say this.

More than this I can’t say. Maybe he’s simply a pathological mythomaniac or affected by an ego bigger than himself. But trying to understand what the Iraqi resistance is with Kubaysi’s claims means only wasting one’s time. Furthermore, you wrote several times, "The Iraqi Patriotic (or "National") Alliance , [which ] is the umbrella group for for the domestic, mostly Sunni resistance, including its Baath wing and many others" . I don’t question your good faith – they say so, why shouldn’t we believe them? – but it’s not true. IPA is just a minuscule group of former opponents of Saddam, most of them living in Europe and since 2005 allied with the Baath. But in Iraq they are completely unknown and IPA’s website is not that popular either, since it’s number 1,370,000 for number of visits (alexa traffic rank) . My little cousin has a much more popular blog…

1:50 PM  
Blogger badger said...

I couple of comments:

(1) The involvement of Kubaysi in trying to free the two French journalists, the trigger for his arrest by the US, was not reported by the sources you cite as reflecting in any way negatively on Kubaysi, contrary to the innuendo in your remark about his "trying to intervene into the kidnapping..."

(2) Re your comments about the October 06 announcement of the IPA in Al-Quds al-Arabi, which turned out to be in fact a fiasco, the allegation of a "criminal intent" that you refer to was directed by againsts not the IPA or Kubaysi or Qalamji, but against Al-Quds al-Arabi, for allegedly endangering them by naming them, calling Al-Quds a pro-Saudi newspaper, a ridiculous allegation.

For my part I should have been more critical about the IPA announcement, and if I had been aware of a lot of the European coverage of Kubaysi and Qalamji and their movement, which you have kindly provided us with links to, I would certainly have been in a better position to put the thing in context.

To me, just speaking personally, I think criticism is much more effective if you avoid innuendo involving "criminal intent" and "getting involved in a kidnapping", and so on, when there isn't any basis for that kind of suggestion.

Finally, I have linked to a lot of the Kubaysi interviews not because of his "claims" as you call them, but for his interpretation of recent Iraqi history, and anyone who scrolls through some of the relevant material on and other European sites you mention, will see that I am in pretty good company.

6:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for providing links to the interviews with Al-Mukhtar and other Ba’ath figures that I recommended, Badger.

I also recommend:

‘The Political Program of the Baath and its National Resistance: the Program of Liberation and Independence’, referred to in the 2004 interviews. It was first published in September 2003 and subsequently revised.

Here is the url of the latest version (October 2006):

With regard to Al-Kubaysi and the IPA, a certain anonymous commenter has been doing his level best to muddy the water! I continue to regard Al-Kubaysi as an honourable man, though – like many political activists – he is inclined to magnify the importance of his own group and put different slants on his stance according to the audience he is addressing.

It is important to point out that Al-Kubaysi (and Al-Kalemji) – and the heads of other opposition Iraqi groups did not travel to Baghdad in November 2002 on their own initiative, but at the invitation of Saddam Hussein!! The move was part of Saddam Hussein’s strategy to bury the hatchet with opposition groups and put together the widest coalition possible in case of an attack from the United States. After the visit to Baghdad the IPA held a conference in Paris pledging to combat American imperialist aggression. Kubaysi returned to Baghdad for more talks in February 2003.

Given the secrecy surrounding preparations for prolonged resistance to the looming invasion, I very much doubt that such matters were discussed in any detail in 2002. However, there can be no doubt that Kubaysi, who returned to or remained in Iraq after the invasion, was in contact with Saddam between April and December 2003 as were representatives of the Iraqi Communist Party cadre.

In his recent interview (July 2007) Kubasyi emphasises that “Saddam personally played an important role to push his people into resistance. He did not try to save himself by hiding as was being reported. No, he went from city to city, from Tikrit to Samarra, Anbar and also Baghdad. He contacted Sheikhs, officers and so on. He said that they should resist not for him as a president, but for the nation and for Islam. He asked them even to not use any more his picture as a rallying symbol. Only in the following months could the Baath reorganise as a party and join as such the resistance. From the point of view of the resistance it was a great luck that they could not arrest him [Saddam] for a long time.” Although Kubaysi was critical of many aspects of Saddam’s rule, he valued his nationalist stance and his selfless and tireless devotion to the cause of the Resistance which was not centred on his own person. What Kubaysi underplays is the fact that while the reorganisation of the Baath took time to implement, the essential groundwork had been laid before the invasion.

As I have already mentioned, Kubaysi provides more details of Saddam’s underground activities in his tribute to him, posted on in the first half of February 2007. (The text is based on an oral presentation given by Kubaysi at a memorial gathering to mark the end of the 40 day mourning period for Saddam.) Although he acknowledges that many details need to be kept secret for security reasons for the time being, he refers to the fact that Saddam “was behind the establishment of solid rules for the Resistance in many parts of Iraq”. He refers to “hundreds or even thousands of letters written by Saddam” to his comrades in the Party, to army officers, tribal chieftains and many national figures. “In letters to officials in the Party he was always recommending that that priority be given to the question of ideological work and the establishment of unit combatants. He asked them to offer money and weapons to the other national factions and the Islamic movement…He instructed them to share all their provisions with the other resistance factions, emphasing in all his communications that the Resistance under all its flags and titles is ONE movement…He was permanently on the move from one town to another, sometimes on horseback….”

A curious report published in the Sunday Times in November 2003, which I cut out and kept, also sheds a ray of light on one aspect of Saddam’s activities in the months before his capture. Here are key passages:

“There were no warning when Saddam Hussein arrived at a small mud house in a village north of Baghdad. A white Peugeot car pulled up outside the home of some relatives of the local Sheikh early one morning last month [October 2003]. Two men entered and said a guest wished to visit.

As is the Arab tradition, they were told that the guest was welcome. Three other men came in, surrounding the guest, who was instantly recognized as Saddam.

The villagers…gave details of the visit on the understanding that the precise location would not be identified.

“He was in good condition” said one. “His face was the same. There was no fear in him, just a little sadness in his eyes.”

Saddam sat on an old bed and asked what the people in the village thought of the Americans…

Saddam then asked them to fetch the Sheikh. They woke the Sheikh and offered Saddam breakfast. He took a small cup of tea, a piece of bread and a few dates with buffalo cream.

Saddam talked. He said he had been betrayed by those closest to him [some of the Republican Guard generals?], then he added that Iraqis did not realize that the Americans were in the country to pursue their own interests…

A small boy came and asked Saddam to have a photograph taken with him… “Not now,” a villager recalled Saddam saying. “Listen, dear, I want to tell you, maybe Saddam will die, but there are many Saddams here in our land who refuse to see those dogs (Americans) here.”

Saddam joked that the Sheikh could turn him in and earn a $25m reward. Everyone got a bit nervous, but the Sheikh knew what to say: “I will give my life and my family’s life and the life of anyone if we even think about that.”

To the relief of everyone present, Saddam smiled and said: “Okay, we need you and all the people like you. Arrange yourselves for the big battle.”

Saddam asked the men in the room to attend a BA’ATH PARTY meeting later that week. He said the meeting was important because SECRET CELLS were reorganizing and that was the key to fighting the Americans.

The story the villagers tell might have seemed incredible, except for their threats to anyone who revealed the name of their village. They attended the meeting as instructed, but would not say what happened.”

3:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can't believe alison and badger latching on to some Kubayssi!
kubayssi represents syrian baathism and has nothing to do with saddam hussein. kubayssi can claim whatever he wants to claim, but kubayssi was not made privy to any resistance organisation.
if there is one thing saddam hated more than the safawees, it was syrian baathism. for he knew that it was the cloak of pan arabism under which the syrian regime would deal blows to resistance movements.
alison is also totally ignorant of the iraqi communist party. the iraqi communist party was the first to welcome the overthrow of saddam hussein and voted for allawi.get real allison.
no one can make any claims on the iraqi resistance's back except the iraqi resistance itself.

5:29 PM  
Blogger badger said...

No one can make any claims on the Iraqi resistance's back except the Iraqi resistance itself

That is exactly what all these writers including Kubaysi have been saying.

(But apparently anonymous can speak for the late Saddam). Anyway, you have had your say.

7:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would say to Anonymous: A little knowledge is a very dangerous thing!!

Not only that, but you are doing a grave disservice to the martyred President Saddam Hussein (may God have mercy on his soul), to the Ba’ath and to the cause of the Iraqi National Resistance by digging up hatchets that have been deliberately buried in the service of a greater common cause – the struggle against the US occupation of Iraq.

You don’t even know that the Iraqi Communist Party has several wings. Of course I was not referring to the collaborators who entered Iraq riding on American tanks and who subsequently threw in their lot with Allawi. I was referring to the patriotic wing of the Communist Party (ICP Cadre): (By the way, there is a link to the ICP Cadre website on the Ba’athist / pro-Saddam blog

With regard to Kubaysi, I am not latching on to him and I have no desire to magnify his importance. Both he and some other representatives of the IPA told fibs about the Ba’ath - claiming it had been dissolved etc - in 2003-2004, when their rapprochement with the Ba’ath was incomplete and they were courting other (former) opposition groups. ( I think the IPA people were also too embarrassed to acknowledge their links with Saddam in interviews with the European and US media.) However, as it turned out, they found that the other groups were unreliable, and they eventually acknowledged that only the (reconstituted) Ba’ath, the spearhead of the Iraqi Resistance, shared their principles. I am glad that Kubaysi and other representatives of the IPA now acknowledge the absolutely central role played by President Saddam and the Ba’ath. And I very much appreciate Kubaysi’s moving tribute to Saddam given at a memorial gathering in his honour in Beirut in February.

What is important NOW is not that Kubaysi was ONCE a “pro-Syrian Ba’athist”, but that he and the IPA have come out strongly against the current Syrian conspiracy against the Iraqi Ba’ath led by Mohammed Younis Al-Ahmed!! While that renegade is doing his level best to sabotage the Iraqi National Resistance, the IPA has stood shoulder to shoulder with the official Ba’ath Party currently led by Izzat Ibrahim Al-Douri. That is what matters!!

3:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

December 2002 interview with Jabbar al-Kubaysi, in which he talks about Iraqi Patriotic Alliance, which included an anti-Saddam wing of the Baath party and various left-nationalist groups.
blank hooded sweatshirts wholesale
heavy t shirts wholesale

1:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

jordan 4
kd shoes
kyrie irving shoes
kyrie 7
curry 6 shoes
birkin bag
off white
michael jordan shoes
kd shoes

10:29 PM  
Blogger NFL Game said...

Get the latest NCAA college football news, scores, stats, standings, and more from ESPN.For more info visit our site: watch texas longhorns football 2023

11:59 PM  
Blogger NFL Game said...

The Packers are coming off a 13-3 season in which first-year coach Matt LaFleur guided the franchise back to the NFC championship game.For more info visit our site: Watch Packers Game Live Online

6:57 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home