* My Profile My Galleries My Networks

US Army: AP Photographer Captured with Al Qaeda Leader

US Army: AP Photographer Captured with Al Qaeda Leader
Arrested Pulitzer Prize winning Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein, who took the infamous pictures of a terrorist execution on Haifa Street in Baghdad, and is notorious in the blogosphere for his collusion with jihadis as they tried to kill Americans, is the subject of a very lengthy attempt by the AP to whitewash his acts: U.S. holds AP photographer in Iraq 5 mos.


by Russell Gordon at 2006-09-17 22:21:17 UTC (ed. Mar 12 2008 ) Belgrade , Serbia | Bookmark | | Report spam→

here’s a link to an AP article on the NY Daily news site. This is scary… and once again it shows that people must have the right to a trial. it is quite possible that this gentleman was in collusion with insurgents, but is just as likely that he wasn’t. Without a transparent, open trial, how can we ever know for sure?


by | 17 Sep 2006 23:09 | Brooklyn,NY, United States | | Report spam→
How is asking for a trial an attempt by AP to whitewash Bilal Hussein’s acts?

by Barry Milyovsky | 17 Sep 2006 23:09 | NYC, United States | | Report spam→
“If your pictures aren’t good enough, you aren’t close enough”.
Too close for US Army

by [former member] | 18 Sep 2006 00:09 | Santiago, Chile | | Report spam→
“If your pictures aren’t good enough, you aren’t close enough”.
Too close for the US Army

by [former member] | 18 Sep 2006 00:09 | Santiago, Chile | | Report spam→
Of course this begs the question: what the hell does the US government consider a “legitmate” activity? Isn’t that a little subjective?

“The information available establishes that he has relationships with insurgents and is afforded access to insurgent activities outside the normal scope afforded to journalists conducting legitimate activities,” Gardner wrote to AP International Editor John Daniszewski.

by Bill Putnam | 18 Sep 2006 03:09 | Portland, Oregon, United States | | Report spam→
Well, I guess Gardner just legitimized the kidnapping of all journalists embedded with the US forces… Every time you lower the bar, this administration just limbos right under it.

by Dave Yoder | 18 Sep 2006 07:09 | Milan, Italy | | Report spam→
Under the criteria he just laid out, I should’ve been detained in Mosul last October.

by Bill Putnam | 18 Sep 2006 07:09 | Portland, Oregon, United States | | Report spam→
Does not make any sense to me.

If he has taken part as a terrorist or helping terrorists in any way – take him to court as terrorist.

If as a journalist he got close to his subject – Isn’t that his job ?

by Eyal Dor Ofer | 18 Sep 2006 20:09 | Israel, Israel | | Report spam→
Can you please explain what you mean by ‘whitewash his acts’?

by Keith Dannemiller | 18 Sep 2006 22:09 | Mexico City, Mexico | | Report spam→
Proving he was actually a terrorist will be difficult because of the charges are so subjective. It is his (our) job to get close. But what’s too close? Obviously proving he was there during a gunfight will be easy. But proving he triggered a roadside bomb or shot an AK will be more difficult.

But what exactly is the AP doing to whitewash this episode?

Then again, now that I think about this, does this mean embeds with Americans can be charged by the insurgents?

by Bill Putnam | 19 Sep 2006 02:09 | Portland, Oregon, United States | | Report spam→
This was LGF’s original post, available by scrolling down on upper left side of page:

Sunday, September 17, 2006
US Army: AP Photographer Captured with Al Qaeda Leader
Arrested Pulitzer Prize winning Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein, who took the infamous pictures of a terrorist execution on Haifa Street in Baghdad, and is notorious in the blogosphere for his collusion with jihadis as they tried to kill Americans, is the subject of a very lengthy attempt by the AP to whitewash his acts: U.S. holds AP photographer in Iraq 5 mos. (Hat tip: Michelle Malkin.)

The AP spins furiously and buries it in the middle, but here’s some interesting information from the US Army:

The military said Hussein was captured with two insurgents, including Hamid Hamad Motib, an alleged leader of al-Qaida in Iraq. “He has close relationships with persons known to be responsible for kidnappings, smuggling, improvised explosive device (IED) attacks and other attacks on coalition forces,” according to a May 7 e-mail from U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Jack Gardner, who oversees all coalition detainees in Iraq.

“The information available establishes that he has relationships with insurgents and is afforded access to insurgent activities outside the normal scope afforded to journalists conducting legitimate activities,” Gardner wrote to AP International Editor John Daniszewski.

Hussein proclaims his innocence, according to his Iraqi lawyer, Badie Arief Izzat, and believes he has been unfairly targeted because his photos from Ramadi and Fallujah were deemed unwelcome by the coalition forces.

That Hussein was captured at the same time as insurgents doesn’t make him one of them, said Kathleen Carroll, AP’s executive editor. “Journalists have always had relationships with people that others might find unsavory,” she said. “We’re not in this to choose sides, we’re to report what’s going on from all sides.”

Notice: the Associated Press received this information from the Army four months ago in May, but did not reveal it until now.

UPDATE at 9/17/06 10:14:22 am:

Correction: I’ve just received an email from the Associated Press (that was quick) saying that Bilal Hussein did not take the photos of the execution on Haifa Street. (They didn’t dispute anything else in my post.)

9:42 AM PDT
digg this | del.icio.us | email this article

Comments are open and unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Little Green Footballs. Obscene, abusive, silly, or annoying remarks may be deleted, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their views by Little Green Footballs.

by Russell Gordon | 19 Sep 2006 04:09 | Belgrade, Serbia | | Report spam→
since LGF and Malkin blogs, both paragons of accuracy, say that this fellow is in collusion with the ‘jihadis’, then it must be true…ie what’s called these days ‘a slam dunk’.

by [former member] | 19 Sep 2006 13:09 | New York, United States | | Report spam→
i find it a bit confusing that the same blogs who criticize photographers for not getting close enough to hezbollah are now attacking a photographer for doing exactly that.(if you substitute hezbollah for iraquis opposed to their invaders)this suggests to me that the principle aim of some of these blogs is not to actually discuss the role of the press in any real or constructive manner, but mainly to discredit any form of journalism that disagrees with their views..
i also find it pretty strange that put themselves up as defenders of truth while at the same time claiming the best way to achieve this is through censorship.this is the conclusion of the jawa report blog.
“When the story of the Iraq war is finally written we will learn that many lives would have been spared had we simply not allowed a free press. You cannot have a free press in a war zone.”.so,for some of these blogs at least their agenda is becoming crystal clear.how anyone can equate democracy ,freedom of speech and liberty with censorship is beyond me.in the future will fair and balanced reporting be represented only by the views of the ‘good guys’.does this mean for instance that an interview,lets say of saddam hussein be acceptable if made at the time he was being supported by the americans,but unacceptable now? George Orwell wrote 1984 as a warning,and a prescient one at that.unfortunately there seem to be growing numbers of people all around the world who see the nightmarish future he evoked,and think its actually a pretty good idea.

by Michael Bowring | 19 Sep 2006 14:09 | Belgrade, Serbia | | Report spam→

I agree with you that any photographer should get as close as possible to the subject.

The problem is those staged executions: If the media will not transmit them they are nearly worse less for the people doing them. So the presence of a photographer there maybe the catalyist for such excutions.

So clearly the critics who say that with so many photographers there are no photos of Hizbulla in action ((well Bruno has one Hizbulla person next to dump of burning tires) – those critics have a very valid point and I don’t think connecting this the issue of an AP photographer who may have filmed an execution of an hostage has any merit.

by Eyal Dor Ofer | 19 Sep 2006 15:09 | Israel, Israel | | Report spam→
“The information available establishes……."

What information? And a defense of a journalist is automatically a “whitewash”?

We call it “embedding”, more like “in bedding”, but if a journalist can follow around “the other guys”, whomever they be, he is a terrorist? People, this is very, very, bad news. “You are with us or you are with the terrorists”. The US government has established time ande time again, if you don’t get with the program you will be punished or killed.

by bob brown | 19 Sep 2006 20:09 | dallas, tx, United States | | Report spam→
“The information available establishes……."

What information? And a defense of a journalist is automatically a “whitewash”?

We call it “embedding”, more like “in bedding”, but if a journalist can follow around “the other guys”, whomever they be, he is a terrorist? People, this is very, very, bad news. “You are with us or you are with the terrorists”. The US government has established time ande time again, if you don’t get with the program you will be punished or killed.

by bob brown | 19 Sep 2006 20:09 | dallas, tx, United States | | Report spam→
Bilal Hussein just wants to please his AP editors. There’s a saying: “If you want blood … you got it!”

by Joe Galvez | 05 Oct 2006 11:10 | Makati City, Philippines | | Report spam→
I don’t know Bilal Hussein, but there is important context that many people who don’t do conflict journalism may not be aware of.

1. Simply being in the company of a bad guy is not, in itself, incriminating. All of us who cover conflict will find ourselves in the company of bad guys a lot. Goes with the job. We’re not soldiers or spies. We’re journalists, and we seep into as many corners as possible to try to provide valuable wide coverage of events.

2. Testing positive for explosives is not, in itself, incriminating. Soldiers guarding the Green Zone know this about journalists. It is not uncommon for a journalist who has been at the scene of a car bomb in the morning to set off the explosives detection devices at the entrance to the green zone when they try to enter later in the afternoon. The guards know this and will not immediately shuffle a journalist off to Guantanamo just because they test positive for explosives.

This is the thing that bothers me about all this 2-bit amateur gumshoe detective work you find at LGF and Malkinite blogs. They ignore basic context that any working journalist would know and don’t bother to ask any people who actually have real experience before they start calling for heads to roll.

by Thorne Anderson | 06 Oct 2006 16:10 | Amsterdam, Netherlands | | Report spam→

you’re absolutely right.

why should bloggers such as LGF and malkin check their facts? the ‘facts’ and opinions they ‘publish’ are aimed to please a certain category of the so-called reading public…Bilal Hussein is an iraqi imprisoned by the US army…and therefore is a terrorist-insurgent. it’s a simple as that and it’s their starting premise… they then from the comfort of their homes spin their stuff around that. total drivel and irrelevant.

by [former member] | 06 Oct 2006 18:10 | New York, United States | | Report spam→
I don’t know enough to form an opinion regarding this particular photojournalist, but here is what has been bothering me.

After looking at some of these blogs in the last few days, I find it troublesome that they and their readers seem to be so coldly detached from the context and subjects in the photos that they armchair analyze. It disturbs me how callous and removed they appear in their comments of photos of civilians, (regardless of their race or religion), having to find and remove bodies of their children and family from neighborhood buildings that have just been bombed.

I don’t understand how anyone can be so jaded, be so smug to roll their eyes, so-to-speak, while making sarcastic comments about how a dead baby can be used as a prop for propaganda purposes or presume that it is witty to call a man “the Lebanon pieta” or “dead man walking” while he lays injured after a rescue operation on a pile of rubble that use to be someone’s home or workplace. To ignore the obvious trauma of civilian survivors crowded into that small room for the sake of arguing if the man’s head in the corner of the shot has been photoshopped over a woman’s ….well I find that rather strange and amoral.

I do not understand where their priorities are. Are they just so immature and selfish that they have an inability to empathize with victims of war? Their comments sound as if they are looking for gaffes on a movie set and that the silly civilians involved are inexperienced extras that really for the sake of the movie, need to be replaced with properly trained actors. Or that this is the “Survivor: Lebanon” version of the reality show and when these people are killed or executed that must mean that they got voted off the island, right?. To make a statement like “this woman must be the most unlucky home owner in Lebanon to be bombed once on two different days” like she is some property investor with insurance in Malibu that got hit by a bad storm and to get a laugh from that as if the woman only plays a civilian on Television.

How can these bloggers continue to think that they are so clever as to make a judgment about these civilians when they are completely missing the whole point that these images are historical records of a war that came to these people’s homes and backyards?

I believe there is something fundamentally inbalanced with people who amuse themselves by making a sport of war.

by Gayle Hegland | 06 Oct 2006 23:10 (ed. Oct 6 2006) | Montana, United States | | Report spam→
that was eloquent….thank you gayle. I have been and remain too angry to properly write a reaction to the idiotic cruelty that spilled out of certain bloggers during the recent war in Lebanon. I mean, all the debate about if the man was “shaking the baby for PR”….it’s like. hello. the baby is fucking dead. can anybody talk about that?

but you wrote it beautifully.

by [former member] | 07 Oct 2006 05:10 | Orlando, United States | | Report spam→
I want to understand why humanity becomes reckless. This post-modern culture has created a generation that does not want to see the reality.
This generation experiences the censorship over mass media. Especially, after first gulf war, journalism changed a lot since legendary correspondent Christiane Amanpour as we all faced the faked news from her.
Whatever happens in blog sites in these days all come from her doctrine that injected her by big brothers. I also believe that bloggers are against the censorship and I think they achieve their purposes. Ok, it is tricky now. They got it from her and against to censorship? There is a censorship in media for both sides of war supporters.
I want to ask that why self-censorship becomes a major reason to ignore reality. My problem is mostly with self-censorship on new generation. No need to talk about mass media.
War is everywhere as we can see. People fight on the web to boycott Israeli goods or consecrate Israel, people fight over religion, and people fight for something that they don’t even know sometimes as this happens on LS world sometimes in very stupid circumstances.
How do people use dead baby as propaganda? Hezbollah did manage it well over Israeli and western propaganda tools. Didn’t western big brothers use same ways to create impact on people?
It is a shame that holding a dead baby for PJs and media. It is also hard to understand the Lebanese people in that situation. It is a shame to see some PJs who use their advantage for money and propaganda from one side.
Where do people learn it? People learn it from big brothers and mass media. The new war is a propaganda war on media. People believe what to be projected on TV screen in next ten minutes. These bloggers find that mass media is not enough to learn news. How to promote the ideologies? Where is the alternative media then? They are on the web, in small bookstores, and sometimes on TV. I don’t mean leftist media with alternative media; I mean the media that left or right wing supporters use, muslims or jews use, and etc…. The past invasion only has helped the Hezbollah, Israel, western companies, holy bloggers, some PJs and crap UN officials. Civilians got dead bodies, internally displacement, they experienced the war for next one, children have had traumas, and mothers will miss their children. Actually, it is redundant to explain it here, because it is a long process.
So, what did you get from past war?
I can talk about dead civilians but first of all I want to talk about “photojournalists” and myself as some practices in media annoy me.
I want to interrogate myself as a person.
And I think, Gayle, we will see the worst scenarios in next ten years. And, you still will ask same questions to yourself and not understand them. It is fragile, isn’t it?

Please remember RACHEL CORRIE
and read this

by | 07 Oct 2006 07:10 (ed. Oct 7 2006) | east-west coast, Canada | | Report spam→
Ocean, Gayle,

I suggest you take a good look at this: http://tinyurl.com/r85fr

Best, Eyal

by Eyal Dor Ofer | 07 Oct 2006 10:10 | Israel, Israel | | Report spam→
In reply to Thorne and a few others:

Why do we pay any attention to these bloggers, especially when they don’t seem to have one iota of what they are writing about, harping on as they do about places and situations they have no first-hand experience of?

Secondly, why don’t we return the favor by speculating and making uninformed comments about them and what they do for a living.
Fight fire with fire.

All’s fair in love and war, the former they seem to have been denied by the population at large and the latter they appear to have absolutely no experience of.

by Mikethehack | 07 Oct 2006 11:10 | Cloud Cuckoo Land, Holy See | | Report spam→
“Cloud Cukoo Land”, “Ocean” – I wonder why anyone of the latest posters here bother to stand behind what they have to say. Please sign with you real name, show us a link to your photographic work.


by Eyal Dor Ofer | 07 Oct 2006 11:10 | Israel, Israel | | Report spam→
Eyal, I heard of a few people with names like Stalin, Liberace and John Wayne and they weren’t photographers.

by Jeff McIntyre | 07 Oct 2006 12:10 | Sydney, Australia | | Report spam→

I never even knew about LGF and Malkin until I started getting ugly (and sometimes threatening) emails from people who read them.

I don’t get all bent out of shape about the blogs, and I’m not going to throw myself headlong into a Quixotic charge against those wind(bags)mills. But I think they’re actually interesting to read sometimes as a study of abberations in political dialogue. Kind of the way it’s interesting to see white blood cells fighting nasty bacteria (and vice-versa) under a microscope.

I do think it’s a shame that the viral cross-postings on those blogs clog the google searches of hard-working journalists with smears of their integrity.

by Thorne Anderson | 07 Oct 2006 12:10 (ed. Oct 7 2006) | Amsterdam, Netherlands | | Report spam→

Just saw your photos for the first time.
Really great work from Iraq.
The RPG repair photo is amazing, other great stuff, Chapeaux !


by Eyal Dor Ofer | 07 Oct 2006 12:10 | Israel, Israel | | Report spam→
in the documentary “The fog of war” R. McNamara makes a rather interesting admission. He quotes General Curtis LeMay, with whom he served in the period of the firebombings of Japanese cities in the WWII, as saying. “if we’d lost the war we’d all have been prosecuted as war criminals”. Then McNamara says, " I think he’s right… But what makes it immoral if you lose and not immoral if you win?"

i have been following the issue for a while now and sincerely i’ve been expecting that sooner or later our industry would have begun to heavily suffer from the US government agenda.
Bush was screaming 5 years ago, " eather you re with us, or you re with the terrorists". and its starting to work for journalists as well.

I’ve been reading on blogs about this episode and a few times the insurgency was referred as “the enemy” or “our enemy”. The problem is that a lot of bloggers are not journalists, at least not what we think that journalist are.

Once a famous photojournalist said: " if you do a good thing I ll take a picture, if you do a bad thing i ll take a picture". he has sacrificed his life by following what he believed in.

what kind of sacrifice most of these bloggers put in? missing their half day starbucks break to write their last 5000 characters?
these people would never even be able to come close to such understanding. I am starting to be tired of reading about well known shooters that have worked for many years and are fully respected in the industry have mud thrown at them. one for all tyler Hicks that had to even write on PDN about his captions after bloggers attacked him.

I think Thorne Anderson is fully right when he writes that all of this is really hard to understand for who is not in the industry.

in my brief career as a conflict photographer, if this incriminating system would have been applied world wide then i would have been imprisoned or killed, many times.
i actually got in serious trouble in eastern DRC with MONUC partially because of this problem.

I’m in eastern Sri Lanka right now, and if both sides would have applied american standards i would have been killed or imprisoned already a few times.
i think that here we all agree on the fact the we are journalists, and our job is as well to report atrocities world wide. discussing about this on lightstalkers is necessary but i challenge all of us to try to make understand these basic principles to the american people ( not your buddies in NYC ). quite impossible i reckon.
for the last two years i spent almost half of my time embedded with US mil in iraq and afghanistan. i think i understand their attitude. we are screaming because a journalist has been charged of terrorism but how many people are suffering for the same reason?
What can we do about it? I don’t know. maybe keep on working and proving that there are some people that actually want to put their lives on the line to show the world what’s going on.
In an ideal war coverage there should be reporters on the three sides, the two belligerents and the civilian population. very brave wire photographers are still working the streets in iraq for very little money.

I think this is a good topic for further discussions. maybe we ll be finally able to stop continuously talking about the ethics of the so called embedded work and we ll begin to ask ourselves what will happen in the next ten years to our access to conflicts or crimes.

so what are the US generals expecting from us? i would never compromise my subjects. its not my job and its not the reason because i became a photojournalist.
would they like if once out of an embed we would be arrested by by the other side and asked about logistics, strategies, numbers of the US mil. i would never do that. we do not take sides. any side. the US military already has photographers working for them, that carry guns and nikon cameras. our reasons to be there are different.

I don’t know Hussein but i think he deserves a fair trial, and if he was reporting on the events he should be free to continue his job.
the US is putting all of us at risk in many countries. is it going to be: " Oh, Mr Calaf, we saw that you have worked alongside the american military, I am sorry but either you tell us all you know or we will kill you on the spot". or even worse, after a quick check, for most of us its as simple as googling our names to find out what we do, we would just be executed as spies.
this is all very sad.

im afraid they want to turn our industry into high tech unaware propaganda. “either you re with us, or you re with the terrorists”. and if it would apply for this situation then there is no reason for not having the same principle universally applied. then it would be the end of our job, way before TV would kill it. we are the last who really get close to people.

by [former member] | 19 Oct 2006 13:10 | Trincomalee, Sri Lanka | | Report spam→
I thought is was common practice for journalists to “cross over to the other side” without getting arrested for it.

by Sivert Almvik | 29 Oct 2006 08:10 | Trondheim, Norway | | Report spam→

by Gayle Hegland | 08 Aug 2007 03:08 | Montana, United States | | Report spam→
this guy russell gordon who started this thread also thinks that slobodan milosevic was a hero, and lots of other eccentric ideas. check out his contributions to this contentious post last year:


if you agree with him, more power to you.

if you don’t, don’t waste your time arguing with him (as I did, you’ll also see that on the bruno thread). thorne, you’ve got better things to do. i know you do. i know i do.

by [former member] | 08 Aug 2007 09:08 | New York, NY, United States | | Report spam→
Oh hell I just read that Bruno01 post again. It was really mad.

Waiting for a train with nothing else to do!

by [former member] | 08 Aug 2007 10:08 | Geneva, Switzerland | | Report spam→
An exclamation by David Farragut, an officer in the Union navy in the Civil War. Warned of mines,
called torpedoes, in the water ahead, Farragut said,
“Damn the torpedoes! Captain Drayton, go ahead! Jouett, full speed!”

OK! So, lets “Damn the torpedoes, and FULL SPEED AHEAD!"

Everybody get on board, because NOW is the time to go pick up Bilal and get him on the Freedom Train.


by Gayle Hegland | 08 Aug 2007 13:08 (ed. Aug 8 2007) | Montana, United States | | Report spam→
The Freedom Train

Freedom Rider: Bilal Hussein and Bill Kristol


Glenn Greenwald


The growing link between the U.S. military and right-wing media and blogs

Glenn Greenwald

SUNDAY OCTOBER 28, 2007 07:18 EST

A bizarre, unsolicited e-mail from Gen. Petraeus’ spokesman

Glenn Greenwald


Only America hating traitors believe in due process for journalists



U.S. Seeks to Prosecute Pulitzer Prize-Winning A.P. Photographer

BY Scott Horton

PUBLISHED November 21, 2007

*Reports out since Monday note that the United States Department of Defense will seek to have criminal charges brought against Bilal Hussein, an Associated Press photographer who belonged to a team that won the 2005 Pulitzer Prize for photographs of the war in Iraq. Hussein’s contribution to the package included a series of arresting photographs of close up fighting from the assault on Falluja.

The story was first broken by a right-wing blogger who has has been used as a regular dissemination point for information about the case by senior Pentagon figures. That fact is one of the dead give-aways of the case. This blogger and several of her associates published histrionic attacks on Hussein before he was arrested, claiming that his photographs showed that he was associated with insurgent organizations and attacking the Pulitzer Committee for its decision to honor the A.P.’s submission of war photographs. In the end, the order to arrest Hussein came from very high up, and the reason for the arrest was unmistakable: he was the man who took those damned photographs!…*

….The source also stated that the Pentagon’s public affairs division, now headed by Dorrance Smith, had been deeply engaged in the matter from the outset. He said that the Pentagon would say that all decisions were made on the ground in Baghdad. “In a formal sense that is true, but Baghdad is dancing to the Pentagon’s tune.” The source also stated that using right-wing bloggers as a means of disseminating the story was a strategy formally embraced by Pentagon public affairs at a very high level. “They’re natural allies. Our message is their message. And they have no particular interest in fact-checking. It drives the mainstream media nuts.” He likened the right-wing blogosphere to sheep dogs who would keep the American mainstream media in line….

by Gayle Hegland | 04 Jan 2008 07:01 (ed. Jan 5 2008) | Montana, United States | | Report spam→

Get notified when someone replies to this thread:
Feed-icon-10x10 via RSS
Icon_email via email
You can unsubscribe later.

More about sponsorship→


Russell Gordon, Journalist, Photographer Russell Gordon
Journalist, Photographer
Belgrade , Serbia
Brooklyn,Ny , United States
Barry Milyovsky, totally unprofessional Barry Milyovsky
totally unprofessional
(emperor of ice cream )
New York , United States
Bill Putnam, Producer. Bill Putnam
Washington, D.C. , United States
Dave Yoder, Dave Yoder
Milan , Italy
Eyal Dor Ofer, Eyal Dor Ofer
Israel , Israel
Keith Dannemiller, Photographer/Photojournal Keith Dannemiller
Mexico City , Mexico
Michael Bowring, photographer Michael Bowring
Belgrade , Serbia
bob brown, bob brown
Dallas, Tx , United States
Joe Galvez, Photographer Joe Galvez
(Joe Galvez)
Manila , Philippines
Thorne Anderson, Photojournalist Thorne Anderson
Dallas, Tx , United States
Gayle Hegland, Editorial Artist Gayle Hegland
Editorial Artist
Montana , United States
West , Belize
Mikethehack, Freelance thril performer Mikethehack
Freelance thril performer
Way Up My Own Ass , United Kingdom
Jeff McIntyre, Retired Jeff McIntyre
Sydney , Australia
Sivert Almvik, Student Sivert Almvik
Trondheim , Norway ( OSL )


Top↑ | RSS/XML | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | support@lightstalkers.org / ©2004-2015 November Eleven