Tuesday - March 13, 2007

Moving Out

Fact #1: Companies move their corporate offices offshore to places like Bermuda every day to escape US taxes and allow them to compete with international companies who pay no US tax; Fact#2: Halliburton is moving where their clients are, not offshore to Bermuda so taxes are probably not their main reason for moving if they could just move to Bermuda which is much closer; Fact #3: Democrats have mercilessly harassed Halliburton from the day they found out Dick Cheney used to work there; Fact #4: What we really need to do is convince the bloviating Blotards in Congress to pack up and move themselves offshore - and slam the door behind them when they leave.

The Donks are at it again, pitching a hissy fit because their favorite whipping boy is packing up and moving out. Who will they harass now? No wonder they’re upset. The fact is that only about 10% of government revenue comes from corporate taxes, according to GAO figures. Nearly 80% comes from individual income taxes so unless the Halliburton employees decide to renounce their citizenship the tax revenue reduction will be negligible if even noticed at all in the giant $2 trillion bucket of money the government collects each year.

So what we have here is a tempest in a teapot, manufactured in whole by a political party that is totally bankrupt of ideas, divided and angry at everyone who refuses to accept them as overlords and masters. That would be Democrats. Of course they won’t stop Halliburton from moving out and they shouldn’t even try but their insane base expects them to bash anything associated with Bush/Cheney and so they scream, rant and yell at the EEEEVIL company and make all kinds of threats. Ain’t it sad to watch these alleged grownups behave like this ... ?

Halliburton’s Dubai Move Sparks US Political Ire
_{WASHINGTON (AFP) - Mon Mar 12, 5:44 PM ET}

Halliburton’s decision to move its base from Texas to Dubai sparked a political firestorm Monday as Senator Hillary Clinton and other top Democrats expressed outrage at the oil services giant. Halliburton, headed by Dick Cheney from 1995 to 2000 before he became vice president, said Sunday it was relocating to the United Arab Emirates to capitalize on the Gulf region’s booming energy market.

“Does this mean they are going to quit paying taxes in America?” asked Clinton, a US presidential candidate. “They get a lot of government contracts, is this going to affect the investigations that are going on? Because we have a lot of evidence of misuse of government contracts and how they have cheated the American soldier and cheated the American taxpayer,” Clinton, speaking in New York, said of Halliburton.

The firm and its former KBR subsidiary, which is being spun off, have endured several contracting controversies and investigations since Halliburton was awarded a no-bid 2.4 billion dollar contract to supply the US military on the eve of the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

KBR agreed last year to pay the US government eight million dollars to settle fraud claims related to an Army supply contract. Halliburton’s Nigerian operations have also come under US government scrutiny in recent years. “It’s an example of corporate greed at its worst,” said Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“At the same time they’ll be avoiding US taxes, I’m sure they won’t stop insisting on taking their profits in cold hard US cash,” Leahy charged. Halliburton spokeswoman Melissa Norcross said, however, that Halliburton would still remain incorporated in the United States and that there would be no layoffs as a result of its move.

“As such, we anticipate absolutely no tax benefits from this decision,” Norcross said. Halliburton’s chief executive, Dave Lesar, will move his office from Houston, Texas, to Dubai, but Norcross said other top officers would remain situated in Houston.

Halliburton said it was relocating to Dubai for business reasons and that Lesar would oversee a ramped-up effort to win regional oil services contracts and related business.

Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan said he would seek a congressional review of Halliburton’s announcement. “I want to know, is Halliburton trying to run away from bad publicity on their contracts? Or are they trying to set up a corporate presence in Dubai so that they can avoid the restrictions that currently exist on doing business with prohibited countries like Iran?” Dorgan questioned.

Karen Lightfoot, a spokeswoman for Democratic Congressman Henry Waxman, said the lawmaker might seek a hearing in the House of Representatives. “This is a surprising development. I want to understand the ramifications for the US taxpayer and national security,” Waxman, the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said.

- More ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/13/2007 at 08:06 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Middle-East •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - March 12, 2007

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/12/2007 at 06:08 PM   
Filed Under: • Personal •  
• Comments (17) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Lost!

OK, Zoomies! I’m lost again and it’s up to you to find me. I’m about to land at a USAF base below. Here are your hints: (1) I’m way out West over CONUS and (2) the base below used to be a very important SAC (Strategic Air Command) base.

Oh yeah, almost forgot ... if you look closely at the larger popup image you’ll see that black spot close to the end of the runway is actually a Lockheed U-2 Dragon Lady on takeoff about to go spy on Kim Jung Il from waaaay up high over NoKo ....

_{(Note: No, I didn’t photoshop that U-2 in. Google Earth just happened to capture this image at just the right time.)}

_{(Click image for larger 1065x915 in popup window)
(Photo from Google Earth Desktop)}

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/12/2007 at 05:48 PM   
Filed Under: • Fun-Stuff •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Motivational Poster Of The Day

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/12/2007 at 02:45 PM   
Filed Under: • Motorvators •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Quote Of The Day

“The First Amendment requires the state to be a neutral in its relations with groups of religious believers and non-believers; it does not require the state to be their adversary. State power is no more to be used so as to handicap religions, than it is to favor them.”

-- Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, Everson v. Board of Education, February 1947

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/12/2007 at 01:27 PM   
Filed Under: • Religion •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Witch Caliber?

I’m wondering which caliber I would need to take care of these?

LiveLeak

Posted by Drew458     on 03/12/2007 at 10:30 AM   
Filed Under: • Odd-Strange •  
• Comments (12) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Be Still, My Bleeding Heart

Boo-hoo! Cry me a river. The NY TIMES woke up this morning and decided to start feeling sorry for the Paleswinian “lost generation” ... those poor, downtrodden youths who are scarred by war and violence and are perpetually being oppressed by the EVIL JOOZ.

Horse-shiite! Did it ever occur to the TIMES that if the Paleswinians would just stop trying to pick a fight with everyone that they might be allowed to live in peace and eventually prosper? No, I don’t think they understand - just like the Paleswinians.

I’ll be damned if I can work up even a single drop of sympathy for these morons. They brought all this on themselves and they can stop at any time. But NO, they’d rather blow themselves up along with anyone standing nearby. They’d rather live on hate and starve to death. They are the scum of the earth and violence is the only thing they know.

So why does the TIMES feel sorry enough for this filthy scum that they have to try to make me have sympathy for their “plight”? You already know the answer. Liberals are like that. They are as illogical as the human rejects they defend.

Meanwhile in Darfur, millions of black African Christians are being methodically wiped out by another group of Muslim morons. What would be the TIMES’ reaction if the Bush Administration sent in troops to Sudan to stop the genocide? I’d be willing to bet $10 they would have a fit and complain about “unilateral intervention” and “angering the Arab street”. Any takers ... ?

Years of Strife and Lost Hope Scar Young Palestinians
_{NABLUS, West Bank (NY TIMES) - Marc 12, 2007}

Their worried parents call them the lost generation of Palestine: its most radical, most accepting of violence and most despairing. They are the children of the second intifada that began in 2000, growing up in a territory riven by infighting, seared by violence, occupied by Israel, largely cut off from the world and segmented by barriers and checkpoints.

To hear these young people talk is to listen in on budding nihilism and a loss of hope. “Ever since we were little, we see guns and tanks, and little kids wanting little guns to fight against Israel,” said Raed Debie, 24, a student at An Najah University here.

Issa Khalil, 25, broke in, agitated. “We never see anything good in our lives,” he said. He was arrested for throwing stones in the first intifada, the civil disobedience that began in the late 1980s and led to the 1993 Oslo accords with Israel. He was arrested again in the second uprising as the agreement faltered.

“And for what?” he asked. “I wasted 14 years of my life. We all did. For five years I haven’t left Nablus. Here there’s unemployment and no peace; it retreats, we go backward.” While generations of young Palestinians have grown up stateless, seething at Israel as the visible agent of oppression, this generation is uniquely stymied.

Israeli checkpoints, barriers and closures, installed to protect Israelis from Palestinian suicide bombers, have lowered these young people’s horizons, shrunk their notion of Palestine and taken away virtually any informal interaction with outsiders, let alone with ordinary Israelis. The security measures have become even tighter since the election to power a year ago of the Islamist group Hamas, which preaches eternal “resistance” to Israeli occupation and rejects Israel’s right to permanent existence on this land.

During most of the 1980s and ’90s, as many as 150,000 Palestinians came into Israel daily to work, study and shop. While they were not treated as equals, many learned Hebrew and established relationships.

Now, the only Israelis whom Palestinians see are armed — soldiers and settlers. The West Bank is cut into three parts by checkpoints; Gazan men under 30 are virtually unable to leave their tiny, poor and overcrowded territory. Few talk of peace, only of a lifetime of “resistance.”

Many Israelis agree that the current generation of young Palestinians has been thoroughly radicalized, but say that is the product of Palestinian political and religious leaders who have sanctioned and promoted violence and terrorism against Israel.

The Palestinian territories are an overwhelmingly youthful place — 56.4 percent of Palestinians are under 19, and in Gaza, 75.6 percent of the population is under 30, according to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics.

Opinion polls show a generation more supportive of armed struggle and terrorism than their parents, according to Waleed Ladadweh of the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research. The violence is directed not only toward Israel, but also toward one another.

“We’re pushed all the time to be more political, more militant, more religious, more extreme,” said Shadi el-Haj, a 20-year-old student at An Najah. “We want to be Palestinians, like the generation of the first intifada. But people push you, ‘Are you Fatah or Hamas?’ All our problems start with, ‘I’m Fatah, I’m Hamas.’ It wasn’t like that before.”

During the first intifada the young were a symbol of the struggle for statehood, leaders of a popular uprising. But in the brutal struggle of the second intifada, which has been taken over by the militias, many of them controlled from leaders outside the territories, “now the youth are irrelevant,” said Nader Said, a political scientist at Birzeit University in Ramallah.

More importantly, this generation has lost faith in political solutions. “They haven’t lived one moment in a period of real hope for a real state,” he said. “And with this internal fighting, there is more and more a feeling that we don’t deserve a state, that we’re inadequate, which kills the morale of the young.”

Some 58 percent of those under 30, the center’s polls show, expect a more violent struggle with Israel over the next 5 to 10 years, and only 22 percent believe that there will be a peaceful negotiated solution between Israel and the Palestinians. About 48 percent believe such an agreement is impossible, and 20 percent more believe it will only come “in a few generations.”

- More ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/12/2007 at 08:48 AM   
Filed Under: • Paleswine •  
• Comments (10) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Time Check

I’m sure you’re all wide awake this fine Monday morning and you know what time it is. It’s time to check all of your electronic devices to see if they made the transition to the new Daylight Saving Time hours that started two weeks earlier this year thanks to several hundred bloviating retards in Congress. Here are the results of a time check from your three favorite desktop operating systems ...

“Like ... dude, it’s seven-ish. Where’s my latte?”	4739.833.01Z-22.43 Standard Galactic Time	January 1, 1980 00:00 Abort, Retry, Ignore?

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/12/2007 at 08:16 AM   
Filed Under: •   
• Comments (7) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - March 11, 2007

Calling Their Bluff

Is it just me or does anyone else get the feeling that Dubya is playing a mean hand of Texas Holdem with the Democrats in Congress? I sense the mysterious hand of Darth Rove in this.

The Donks already have their backs against the wall with their moronic base screaming “PULL OUT!” and foaming at the mouth. They know they don’t have the votes and cutting off funds would be political suicide.

And Dubya just sits across the table with that poker face on and quietly raises the ante by requesting more troops. Nancy Pelosi is about to burst a blood vessel and John Murtha is in the cellar tied up in a straight jacket.

I have a real funny feeling that Darth Rove is about to raise the stakes even more while the Donks sit across the table and sweat bood and their maniacal base stands behind them and screams threats at them to see Bush’s raise while the Donks are holding an empty hand and Dubya has all the aces.

Talk about “between a rock and a hard place” .... I need some more popcorn. This show is starting to get good ....

Additional Troop Increase Approved
President Agrees To Send 8,200 More To Iraq, Afghanistan
_{(WASHINGTON POST) - Sunday, March 11, 2007}

President Bush approved 8,200 more U.S. troops for Iraq and Afghanistan on top of reinforcements already ordered to those two countries, the White House said Saturday, a move that comes amid a fiery debate in Washington over the Iraq war.

The president agreed to send 4,700 troops to Iraq in addition to the 21,500 he ordered to go in January, mainly to provide support for those combat forces and to handle more anticipated Iraqi prisoners. He also decided to send a 3,500-member brigade to Afghanistan to accelerate training of local forces, doubling his previous troop increase to fight a resurgent Taliban.

Although officials had foreshadowed the additional forces for Iraq in recent days, the latest troop increase in Afghanistan had not been known and will bring U.S. forces there to an all-time high. The deployments underscore the challenges facing the United States in both countries and further stretch an already strained military. In Iraq particularly, the moves could fuel suspicions that a troop increase initially described as a temporary “surge” may grow larger and last longer than predicted.

Bush did not comment on his decision during the second day of a six-day Latin America tour. But aides released a letter he signed Friday night aboard Air Force One as he flew to Uruguay from Brazil, asking House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) for $3.2 billion in emergency funding to pay for the additional units. He proposed cuts in other spending to offset the cost.

“This revised request would better align resources based on the assessment of military commanders to achieve the goal of establishing Iraq and Afghanistan as democratic and secure nations that are free of terrorism,” Bush said in the letter.

The president’s decision came as congressional Democrats are struggling to find a way to reverse direction in Iraq. Bush aides said this week that the president would veto a House Democratic spending plan that would require him to certify that the Iraqi government has met certain benchmarks by certain dates to keep U.S. forces in the country. The plan would require, under any circumstance, that troop withdrawals begin March 1, 2008, and that remaining troops be out of combat roles by Aug. 31, 2008.

Pelosi blasted Bush on Saturday. “With his veto threat,” she said, “the president offers only an open-ended commitment to a war without end that dangerously ignores the repeated warnings of military leaders, including the commander in Iraq, General [David H.] Petraeus, who declared in Baghdad this week that the conflict cannot be resolved militarily.”

- More ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/11/2007 at 05:29 PM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Iraq • Politics •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Sick Call

“Symptomatic" -by- Cox & Forkum

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/11/2007 at 10:30 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Home On The Range

Last week’s visit to the range with the new AR-15 was satisfactory except for one thing .... 58-year-old eyes. By the time I got the piece sighted in my eyes were worn out. Evidently the vision is still there but the stamina is lacking - which means I can’t afford to wait around when I spot a deer breaking into my house late at night. If you know what I mean.

So ... I hustled myself on down to my local gunsmith and came out with a new pair of $600 eyes. I also mysteriously adopted a brand-new Glock 30 for no other good reason than it was on sale ($539). The new “eyes” are the EOTech 553 Military Holographic Red-Dot Sights and as you can see below, it clipped right onto the Weaver Mount with two little clamp arms that quickly and easily lock it into place. I figure if the EOTech 553 is good enough for our Special Ops guys, it’s good enough for me. Mheh-heh.

The red-dot holographic display is sweet and should give me pinpoint accuracy out to 100 yards easily. I really don’t need to hit anything farther out than that with the AR-15. I have a Winchester SXR with a Leupold VX-III 6.5-20x50mm scope on top for critters that somehow manage to get a good running start and are half a mile away.

Now all I gotta do is be patient until the range opens up tomorrow .... 

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/11/2007 at 08:38 AM   
Filed Under: •   
• Comments (24) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Neo-Libs?

Every once in a while it helps to look at the world through your opponent’s eyes. This is a necessary evil that must be endured if we are to understand why they’re so damned insane. And they are.

For years now, I’ve been called a “neo-con” to denote some evil association with a secret, overpowering group called Neo-Conservatives, as in “new” conservatives. Not true. I’m an old conservative.

The following editorial is in today’s NY TIMES (the “Newspaper Of Record” - 45RPM version) and concerns Liberals, Neo-Liberals and the death of the “Neo-Liberal Movement” at the hands of strident, angry Neo-Neo-Liberal bloggers like Kos and others of that ilk.

The editorial is in the TIMES SELECT section and requires a subscription. This editorial is so eye-opening that I feel all my neo-con peeps out there need to read this and learn. Yes, even Yellow Dawg (he’s our official DINO) needs to read it.

There are several key points in this editorial and I won’t spoil it for you. Just try to remember that Mr. Brooks is lamenting the end of what he perceives as some great movement that invaded the mainstream media and took it over in the 1980’s (his words, not mine - see below) and is now being subverted by the Angry Left.

If the “Neo-Liberal Movement” was the birth of liberals assuming control of the media then the current crop of angry, radical Leftist bloggers is the inevitable afterbirth. If ever there was a need for an abortion, this would have been the time.

Do you need any further proof that Liberals wandered off in the totally wrong direction sometime in the early 1970’s? The Neo-Liberals were the child of George McGovern, Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale. The Neo-Neo-Liberals are the child of Satan. The Old-Neo-Liberals are just now finding out about Rosemary’s Baby ...

The Vanishing Neoliberal
-- By DAVID BROOKS
_{(NY TIMES EDITORIAL) - March 11, 2007}

On July 25, 1981, Michael Kinsley published an essay in The New Republic called “The Shame of the Democrats.” The Democratic Party, the young Kinsley wrote, is viewed “with growing indifference.” It is run “by lawyer-operators with no commitment to any particular political values.” It is filled “with politicians who will do or say anything for a word or a dollar of support.” It represents “a dwindling collection of special interest groups whose interests are less and less those of either the general populus or the tired and poor.” In short, Kinsley wrote, “the Democratic Party has collapsed not just politically but morally.”

And so began the era of neoliberalism, a movement which, at least temporarily, remade the Democratic Party, redefined American journalism and didn’t really die until now.

In the early days, the neoliberals coalesced around two small magazines, The New Republic and The Washington Monthly. They represented, first of all, a change in intellectual tone. While the old liberals could be earnest and self-righteous, the neoliberals were sprightly and lampooning. While the old liberals valued solidarity, the neoliberals loved to argue among themselves, showing off the rhetorical skills many had honed in Harvard dining halls.

On policy matters, the neoliberals were liberal but not too liberal. They rejected interest-group politics and were suspicious of brain-dead unions. They tended to be hawkish on foreign policy, positive about capitalism, reformist when it came to the welfare state, and urbane but not militant on feminism and other social issues.

The neoliberal movement begat politicians like Paul Tsongas, Al Gore (the 1980s and ’90s version) and Bill Clinton. It also set the tone for mainstream American journalism. Today, you can’t swing an ax in a major American newsroom without hitting six people who used to work at The New Republic or The Washington Monthly. Influenced by their sensibility, many major news organizations became neoliberal institutions, whether they knew it or not.

Neoliberals often have an air of perpetual youthfulness about them, but they are now in their 40s, 50s and even their 60s, and a younger generation of bloggers set off a backlash. If you surf the Web these days, for example, you find that a horde of thousands have declared war on the Time magazine columnist Joe Klein.

Kevin Drum, who is actually older than most bloggers, says the difference is generational. Klein’s mind-set, he says, was formed in the 1970s and 1980s, but “like most lefty bloggers, I only started following politics in a serious way in the late ’90s.” Drum says he’s reacting to Ken Starr, the Florida ballot fight, the Bush tax cuts, the K Street Project and the war in Iraq.

Drum and his cohort don’t want a neoliberal movement that moderates and reforms. They want a Democratic Party that fights. Their tone is much more confrontational. They want to read articles that affirm their anger. They are also further to the left, driven there by Iraq on foreign policy matters and by wage stagnation on economic matters.

For the past few years, The New Republic has tried to keep the neoliberal flame alive, under editors like Peter Beinart. But there is no longer a readership for that. The longtime owner, Marty Peretz, has sold his remaining interests and, starting this month, the magazine will go biweekly.

The new format is partly a response to the Web. The forthcoming issue has a lot of good, long, nonideological reports. (Ryan Lizza has a fascinating piece on Barack Obama’s Chicago years.) But it’s also a shift leftward. As the new editor, Frank Foer, says, there’s a generation gap within the magazine, with young interns further to the left. That’s where the future lies. Foer is hiring the Ph.D. neopopulist Thomas Frank to write essays on the presidential campaign. Recent editorials have called for tax increases to finance universal health care. The magazine now habitually calls on Democrats to take bold action on things like the war and global warming, but it’s still a little fuzzy on what that bold action should be.

Over all, what’s happening is this: The left, which has the momentum, is growing more uniform and coming to look more like its old, pre-neoliberal self. The right is growing more fractious. And many of those who were semiaffiliated with one party or another are drifting off to independent-land. (The Economist, their magazine, now has over 500,000 American readers — more than all the major liberal magazines combined.)

Neoliberalism had a good, interesting run — while it lasted.

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/11/2007 at 06:43 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists •  
• Comments (8) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Sunday Funnies

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/11/2007 at 04:29 AM   
Filed Under: • Humor •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Spring Forward!

Just for grins, I originally set this post to appear at 2:00AM (I can set time-delays on these posts so they appear whenever I want). Unfortunately, the Gods Of The Ethernet laughed at me and the post refused to appear. In fact, it disappeared from cyberspace entirely. I tried to change the post time to make it appear and it still refused to show its silly ass in spite of anything I tried. I finally had to delete the post and re-publish the exact same post with a 3:01AM timestamp.

It seems that there is a Temporal Black Hole between 2:00AM and 2:59AM on today’s calendar and anything put into that region disappears over the event horizon, never to be seen again. So ... does this mean the hour that disappeared into the TBH will magically appear out the other side in November when we experience Groundhog Hour and are forced to live the same hour twice?

My head hurts from all this time travel silliness. I bet H.G. Wells didn’t have these problems. Good night.

-- The Skipper, Location: somewhere in time

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/11/2007 at 04:01 AM   
Filed Under: • Humor •  
• Comments (8) • 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