Wednesday - July 12, 2006

Zombie Dogs… Your dog wants brains…

U.S. scientists have apparently discovered a way to reanimate dogs that have been clinically dead for three hours, a process intended for future human trials.

I don’t know which is scarier… zombie dogs or zombie humans.

A new scientific approach tested at the Safar Centre for Resuscitation Research, based in Pittsburgh, drains some of the animal’s blood and replaces it with an ice-cold salt solution. The dog--considered technically dead without a heartbeat or brain waves--is then revived with a blood transfusion and electric shock up to three hours later. The process, called “suspended animation with delayed resuscitation,” is ultimately designed to help suspend and revive emergency victims, such as casualties of war or car accidents, who have experienced an otherwise lethal hemorrhage.

Predictably, animal-rights whackos weighed in…

But the animal rights community must have had a hemorrhage over the Safar Centre’s tests. Last week, it issued a statement clarifying its research tactics and outlining its compliance with standards for the ethical treatment of animals.

Human trials? Are these voluntary? Yikes! If voluntary, when do you volunteer? After they revive you? Then you get the bill and have a heart attack…

Posted by Christopher     on 07/12/2006 at 07:10 PM   
Filed Under: • Animals • Health-Medicine • Odd-Strange •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Awesome!

Posted by The Skipper     on 07/12/2006 at 03:53 PM   
Filed Under: • Science-Technology •  
• Comments (8) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Sign Of The Times?

Posted by The Skipper     on 07/12/2006 at 03:40 PM   
Filed Under: • Fun-Stuff •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Strongly Deplore

Protesting Missile Tests

A South Korean protester burns a picture of North Korean leader Kim Jong Il and North’s flags during an anti-North Korea rally in Seoul, on July 5.

North Korea test-launched six missiles including a long-range Taepodong in an early morning barrage, defying stern international warnings of retaliation and prompting concerns that it could follow with more tests. (AP/ Lee Jin-man)

China, Russia Float Own Plan on N. Korea
—_{UNITED NATIONS (AP) - July 12, 2006, 1:57 PM EDT}

China and Russia introduced a resolution Wednesday deploring North Korea’s missile tests but dropping language from a rival proposal that could have led to military action against Pyongyang. The draft, obtained by The Associated Press, “strongly deplores” North Korea’s missile tests last week and urges Pyongyang to re-establish a moratorium on such launches.

It requests—but does not demand—that all U.N. members “exercise vigilance in preventing supply of items, materials, goods and technologies that could contribute” to North Korea’s missile program. The resolution also calls on member nations “not to procure missiles or missile-related items” or technology from the North.

Chinese Ambassador Wang Guangya said he had been instructed to veto a much- stronger Japanese resolution, which is supported by the United States, Britain, France and four other countries. Wang previously said Beijing objected to three key elements in the Japanese draft: the determination that the missile tests threatened international peace and security; authorizing action under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which can be enforced militarily; and mandatory sanctions aimed at curbing North Korea’s missile and nuclear programs.

The Chinese-Russian draft resolution drops those three elements, which Japan and the United States consider crucial. Japanese Ambassador Kenzo Oshima and U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said they were still prepared to put their resolution to a vote—even with the prospect of a Chinese veto. Oshima called the Chinese-Russian draft “a move in the right direction” but said “a quick glance shows that there are very serious gaps on very important issues.”

“I think it will be very difficult for us to accept that as it is,” Oshima said. Bolton also cited “deficiencies,” notably the Chinese-Russian draft’s elimination of the reference to the tests as a threat to international peace and its use of the weaker word “calls” rather than “decides” in the Japanese text.

Posted by The Skipper     on 07/12/2006 at 02:41 PM   
Filed Under: • Stoopid-People • United-Nations •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Powder Keg

They didn’t learn their lesson in 1948. They still hadn’t been able to get a clue even after 1956, 1967 or 1973. Now they’re back at it again. Hamas, Hizbollah, Al Aqsa, Ali Baba and all the rest of the neolithic barbarians are pounding on Israel’s doors all over again. Every time they do this, they lose more land, people and credibility. Why do they persist? Because they’re freaking stupid.

Capturing an Israeli soldier just outside Gaza wasn’t enough. They just started launching rockets from within the West Bank and now terrorist groups have made incursions across the border with Lebanon, capturing two more Israeli soldiers. Of course, Iran and Syria are backing all this from behind the scenes. That’s a given. What can the US do? Probably not much for the time being, however the Sixth Fleet might just decide to wander across the Mediterranean and stand by just in case. This powder keg is going to blow wide open any day now. Stay tuned ...

Israel Calls Hizbollah Capture
Of Soldiers Act Of War
_{Wed Jul 12, 2006 9:51am ET10}

QASMIYEH, Lebanon (Reuters) - Hizbollah guerrillas captured two Israeli soldiers and killed up to seven Israelis on Wednesday, in what Israel described as an act of war by Lebanon that would draw a “very painful” response. Israel mobilized a reserve infantry division and Hizbollah declared an all-out military alert.

Two Lebanese civilians were killed in an Israeli air strike on a coastal bridge at Qasmiyeh. Four other bridges in the south were hit and five Lebanese were wounded, security sources said. The sources said the Israeli soldiers had been seized at around 9 a.m. (0600 GMT) across the border from Aita al-Shaab, some 15 km (nine miles) from the Mediterranean coast.

The Israeli army confirmed that two Israeli soldiers had been captured on the Lebanese frontier. Israeli ground forces crossed into Lebanon to hunt for the missing soldiers, Israeli Army Radio said. Hizbollah and the Lebanese authorities said there was no major incursion.

Traffic was thin on roads in the south amid sporadic Israeli shelling of border areas. An Israeli rocket hit a car carrying a crew from Lebanese New Television, wounding all three. Israeli troops have not struck deep into Lebanon since they withdrew from a southern border strip in 2000 after Hizbollah’s Shi’ite fighters waged an 18-year war of attrition against them.

“It is an act of war by the state of Lebanon against the state of Israel in its sovereign territory,” Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said of Hizbollah’s action, threatening a “very painful and far-reaching” response. Israel is already engaged in an expanding military offensive in the Gaza Strip launched after Palestinian militants captured a soldier in a cross-border raid on June 25.

“Fulfilling its pledge to liberate the (Arab) prisoners and detainees, the Islamic Resistance ... captured two Israeli soldiers at the border with occupied Palestine,” the Syrian- and Iranian-backed Hizbollah said in a statement. “The two captives were transferred to a safe place,” it said, without stating what condition the captives were in.

A Lebanese political source said Hizbollah was willing to discuss swapping them for prisoners held in Israel. A Hizbollah spokesman refused comment. The group’s leader, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, called a news conference for 5 p.m. (1400 GMT). In 2004 Hizbollah exchanged a kidnapped Israeli businessman and the bodies of three Israeli troops for more than 420 Arab prisoners. Israel now holds at least three Lebanese prisoners.

Hizbollah said it had destroyed an Israeli tank that had entered Lebanon. Al Jazeera television said a total of seven Israelis had been killed in Wednesday’s border violence. Olmert called a special cabinet session for 8 p.m. (1700 GMT) to discuss further military action.

- More on the expanding conflict from Reuters ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 07/12/2006 at 11:28 AM   
Filed Under: • Paleswine • RoPMA • Terrorists •  
• Comments (8) • Trackbacks(2)  Permalink •  

A Minor Nuisance

_{Mike Thompson - The Detroit Free Press}

Posted by The Skipper     on 07/12/2006 at 11:14 AM   
Filed Under: • North-Korea •  
• Comments (7) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Art Of War

We are going to lose the War On Terror. Why? Because the bleeding heart Liberals, the media, the Angry Left in America and especially the Democratic Party do not want to win the war. It’s all about power. Power in America. Regaining power is the target and nothing will stand in their way - not even a few thousand dead citizens, much less several more thousand dead soldiers, sailors and airmen.

I’ve been here before, you see. Over the last fifty years I’ve watched the power struggle between the Liberals and Conservatives, Democrats and Republicans and every politican in DC ebb and flow, first in one direction and then in another. One thing I have not seen until recently is the complete blindness to our nation’s needs exhibited by the Left, who are on the downswing of the current pendulum.

Here is the way it is supposed to work: some external country or force picks on us, then Congress authorizes the President to wage war. The President then proceeds to carry out his duties as Commander In Chief and orders the military to kick the crap out of the offending parties. The troops then come home, we have a celebration and go back to business as usual. That has been the formula up until recently - and it has worked quite well.

If you carefully examine the above formula, you will notice one branch of our government is missing ... the Judicial Branch. That is because the court has no business to conduct with respect to a war - none whatsoever. Justice Antonin Scalia made note of that fact in his dissent on the recent Hamdan vs Rumsfeld decision. Another group that does not figure into the formula is the press. Both the press and the Supreme Court are supposed to assume a passive role during war - to observe, report and offer mediation if necessary. Other than that, their main job is to stay out of the way.

The President defines the goal and lays out an overall strategy, then tasks the military to accomplish that goal. Congress then allocates funds to allow the military the wherewithal to do as the President orders. Congress is then supposed to also assume a passive role unless more funds are requested or a treaty is offered to end the war. What is so hard to figure out about all that? It should be a no-brainer. It has proven to be highly successful over the last two centuries. Why mess with a winning formula?

The only logical answer to that last question is that you don’t mess with a winning formula unless your intent is to lose. When the Supreme Court stepped into the war and started laying out rules of engagement for the current conflict, they overstepped their authority in clear violation of the separation of powers intent in the Constitution. They are also going to lose the war for us by agreeing to the enemy’s conditions, namely to force our military to fight a “civilized war” under Geneva Convention rules (which have no standing in American courts other than as guidelines) while the enemy is free to use whatever means necessary to accomplish his goals, including the most barbaric behavior imagineable and guerilla warfare on the lowest levels.

Not since the mid-18th century when British troops marched in formation, wearing bright red coats down the road to Concord while American patriots hid in the woods and picked them off one by one have we seen such a disparity between the rules one side fights under and the other. This is madness on a grand scale and the justices of the Supreme Court know it.

So why have they chosen to interfere in the process of waging war? Are they doing it out of purely humanitarian concerns? Do they feel that their meddling will help us win this war? The answers seem to be no and no. Before this madness continues, the Executive and Legislative branches of our government need to reassert their authority and tell the Supremes to sit down and shut up. Passing legislation to give the President authority to conduct tribunals and conduct the war without interference from senile old judges would be a good start. Failing that, all we can do is wait for one or more of the Liberal members of the court to depart this world and hope the President and Congress have the guts to put someone on the bench with a little common sense. For a change.

U.S. Shifts Policy on Geneva Conventions
Bowing to Justices, Administration Says It Will Apply Treaties to Terror Suspects
_{-- (WASHINGTON POST) - Wednesday, July 12, 2006}

The Bush administration has agreed to apply the Geneva Conventions to all terrorism suspects in U.S. custody, bowing to the Supreme Court’s recent rejection of policies that have imprisoned hundreds for years without trials.

The Pentagon announced yesterday that it has called on military officials to adhere to the conventions in dealing with al-Qaeda detainees. The administration also has decided that even prisoners held by the CIA in secret prisons abroad must be treated in accordance with international standards, an interpretation that would prohibit prisoners from being subjected to harsh treatment in interrogations, several U.S. officials said.

The developments underscored how the administration has been forced to retreat from its long-standing position that President Bush be given extensive leeway to determine how to interrogate and prosecute terrorism suspects captured in Iraq, in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Until recently, the White House and Defense Department have pursued such anti-terrorism policies with little interference from Congress and the courts, but that has begun to change.

Since 2002, the administration has contended that the Geneva Conventions would be respected as a matter of policy but that they did not apply by law to terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, or in U.S. military custody elsewhere. Administration officials have voiced concern that the conventions are too vague and could expose the military to second-guessing about appropriate treatment.

But the Supreme Court rejected that view in a 5 to 3 decision last month, ruling that a Yemeni detainee at Guantanamo Bay could not be tried by a special military commission established by the Bush administration. The court held that the commissions violate U.S. law and the Geneva Conventions.

- More on the story here ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 07/12/2006 at 09:33 AM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Military •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - July 11, 2006

America’s Forgotten War

I’d heard of the Utah War of 1857-58 but never any details. Enjoy.

America’s forgotten war: LDS raiders kept Army at bay in 1857-58
By Lee Davidson
Deseret Morning News

John Eldredge’s smile shows he loves this. Technically, he is leading a Jeep caravan into the wilds of western Wyoming, but it is more like the expedition has traveled back in time, to when Utah changed forever as the territory became the stage for what could be called America’s first civil war.

Eldredge tells stories at a bleak spot called the “Camp of Death,” where a race for survival began for U.S. soldiers harassed by Mormon militia during the so-called “Utah War” of 1857-58. A flock of buzzards is perched just down the trail, almost as if, by chance, age-old events might repeat to their benefit. The wind seems to carry echoes of suffering ghost soldiers.

“It’s absolutely fascinating — and almost nobody knows about it,” historian Eldredge says about the Utah War and the sites where most hostilities occurred, in an area of Wyoming that was then still part of Utah Territory.

A state-appointed group of historians is working to publicize that often-forgotten military encounter as the war’s sesquicentennial approaches next year, and the group used a caravan to “battle” sites this past week to help.

It is a story worth telling. The Utah War showed how the American nation would deal with perceived rebellion and how an invaded people would react, foreshadowing events of the real Civil War that would follow just four years later.

Emphasis added. Continue reading or click here for the article with photos and maps.

Posted by Christopher     on 07/11/2006 at 06:49 PM   
Filed Under: • History • War-Stories •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

War Report, 1942

Midway Island Demolished - Yorktown, Destroyer Sunk
June 7, 1942

Many US planes lost

The United States Navy suffered another blow in its attempt to stem the Japanese juggernaut ravaging the Pacific Ocean. Midway Island, perhaps the most vital U.S. outpost, was pummeled by Japanese Naval aviators. The defending U.S. forces, consisting primarily of antique Buffalo fighters, were competely wiped out while the Japanese attackers suffered few, if any, losses.

In a nearby naval confrontation, the Japanese successfully attacked the Yorktown which was later sunk by a Japanese submarine. A destroyer lashed to the Yorktown was also sunk.

American forces claim to have sunk four Japanese carriers and the cruiser Mogami but those claims were vehemently denied by the Emporer’s spokeman.

The American carriers lost an entire squadron of torpedo planes when they failed to link up with fighter escorts. The dive bombers had fighter escort even though they weren’t engaged by enemy fighters. The War Dept. refused to answer when asked why the fighters were assigned to the wrong attack groups. The Hornet lost a large number of planes when they couldn’t locate the enemy task force. Despite this cavalcade of errors, Admirals Fletcher and Spruance have not been removed.

Code Broken

The failure at Midway is even more disheartening because the U.S. Navy knew the Japanese were coming. Secret documents provided to the NY Times showed that “Magic” intercepts showed the Japanese planned to attack Midway, which they called “AF”.

Obsolete Equipment

Some critics blamed the failure at Midway on the use of obsolete aircraft. The inappropriately named Devastator torpedo planes proved no match for the Japanese fighters. Even the Avengers, its schedule replacements, were riddled with bullets and rendered unflyable. Secretary of War Stimson dodged the question saying simply: “You go to war with the Navy you have, not the Navy you want or would like to have”. Critics immediately called for his resignation.

Posted by The Skipper     on 07/11/2006 at 04:50 PM   
Filed Under: • Media-Bias • Satire •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Weird Websites, Episode VI

Posted by The Skipper     on 07/11/2006 at 12:30 PM   
Filed Under: •   
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

A Dark And Stormy Night

The winner in the Bulwer-Lytton Bad Writing Contest this year needs to be shot. Below is the winning entry, as submitted by Jim Guigli. Read at your own peril ....

“Detective Bart Lasiter was in his office studying the light from his one small window falling on his super burrito when the door swung open to reveal a woman whose body said you’ve had your last burrito for a while, whose face said angels did exist, and whose eyes said she could make you dig your own grave and lick the shovel clean,”

Posted by The Skipper     on 07/11/2006 at 12:14 PM   
Filed Under: • Odd-Strange •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Pushing The Envelope

Pushing. Poking. Prodding. Always testing the envelope of sanity. Liberals, Leftists and every freaking whiner and complainer out there - including prisoners in our jails. They want the vote. They want minimum wage. They want better exercise equipment. They want their MTV. Want, want, want. Gimme, gimme, gimme. Waaaaaaahhhhhhhh!

Is it any wonder judges come up with crap rulings occasionally with the constant onslaught of frivolous lawsuits from prisoners. However, The Skipper has a solution. If an inmate files a lawsuit that is later determined to be frivolous then he or she gets an additional year tacked onto their sentence - without appeal or chance of parole for that year. Problem solved.

Texas Inmates Not Entitled to Minimum Wage
—_{HOUSTON (AP) - July 11, 2006, 9:17 AM EDT}

Texas inmates working prison jobs aren’t entitled to the federal minimum wage, an appeals court ruled in a case brought by a sex offender who works at a state prison laundry. Douglas R. Loving contended his job as a drying machine operator qualified him for protection under the Fair Labor Standards Act—meaning he should get the minimum wage of $5.15 an hour—because the act didn’t exempt prisoners.

The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed. It upheld a lower court decision’s to throw out Loving’s lawsuit as frivolous, writing that prisoners are not employees and not entitled to minimum wages. “Compelling an inmate to work without pay does not violate the Constitution,” a three-judge panel of the court said. “The failure of a state specifically to sentence an inmate to hard labor does not change this rule.”

In Texas, inmates capable of working are expected to hold jobs but aren’t paid, Texas prison spokeswoman Michelle Lyons said Monday. Loving, 54, began serving a 20-year sentence in 1992 for aggravated sexual assault of a child. He argued in his lawsuit that the state should credit his inmate trust fund with wages for his work.

The court panel noted in its decision Friday that it had ruled in similar cases where inmates working outside jails for private firms technically were employees but inmates working inside prisons for private firms were not. It also cited a recent decision from the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that ruled people “are not imprisoned for the purpose of enabling them to earn a living.”

Posted by The Skipper     on 07/11/2006 at 11:44 AM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Once Upon A Time

Are you a Democrat, Republican or a Redneck ? Here is a little test that will help you decide. The answer can be found by posing the following situation and question:

You are walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, an Islamic Terrorist with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, praises Allah, raises the knife, and charges at you. You are carrying a Glock cal 40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?

---

Democrat: “Well, that’s not enough information to answer the question! Does the man look poor! Or oppressed? Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack? Could we run away? What does my wife think? What about the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand? What does the law say about this situation? Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it? Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children? Is it possible he’d be happy with just killing me? Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me? If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me? Should I call 9-1-1? Why is this street so deserted? We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior. This is all so confusing! I need to discuss with some friends over a latte and try to come to a consensus.”

---

Republican: BANG!

---

Redneck: BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! Click .... (sounds of reloading) .... BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!BANG! click ....

    Daughter: “Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips or Hollow Points?”

    Son: “You got him Pop! Can I shoot the next one?”

    Wife: “You are not taking that to the Taxidermist!”

_{(-- thanks to sdkar for dropping this one on me --)}

Posted by The Skipper     on 07/11/2006 at 10:47 AM   
Filed Under: • Humor •  
• Comments (7) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Useless Numbnuts

Someone please tell me exactly what the UN has done for anything or anyone in the last sixty years that couldn’t have been accomplished just as easily with normal diplomacy between countries. The building on Turtle Bay in New York is a money pit and a snake pit, all rolled into one. The sooner the US gets out of the UN and kicks the buggers out of the country, the better off we’ll be.

_{Michael Ramirez - Investors Business Daily}

UN Delays Vote On Possible North Korea Sanctions
—_{(CBC NEWS - AP) - Mon, 10 Jul 2006 18:52:08 EDT}

The UN Security Council’s five permanent members and Japan agreed Monday to postpone a vote on possible sanctions against North Korea for its missile test that rattled the region last week. Jean-Marc de La Sabliere, France’s ambassador to the UN and the current council president, said there would be no vote Monday. Wang Guangya, China’s UN ambassador, said council members have agreed to continue discussions on the Tokyo-sponsored resolution.

Guangya told reporters after a meeting with envoys from Russia, the United States, Britain, France and Japan that the resolution would have to be altered for the council to approve it. “If they wish to have a resolution, they should have a modified one, not this one,” he said. China’s consideration of any resolution was considered significant, since Wang had been pressing for a weaker Security Council statement, which would not be legally binding.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said Washington would look at any Chinese suggestions for changes, and the council would re-evaluate “on a daily basis” whether to proceed with a vote. The Kyodo News agency, citing unidentified Japanese officials, reported that Japan and the United States were seeking a renewed moratorium by North Korea on missile testing, and its unconditional return to six-party talks on its nuclear program, in exchange for withholding sanctions.

- More bilgewater from the UN here ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 07/11/2006 at 09:18 AM   
Filed Under: • United-Nations •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner