Wednesday - March 17, 2010

ON YOUR KNEES IN AMERICA AND KISS THE GROUND FOR YOUR GOOD FORTUNE. BE THANKFUL EVRY DAY.

They wouldn’t dare try this crap in the USA. Or would they?  I wish the heck they would.  It might be interesting to see what the reaction, and action, would be.
Perhaps it could trigger the final confrontation needed to rid ourselves of this virus in our own back yard. But it won’t.
Meanwhile, DO NOT place the blame on the muzzies. No,no.  They’ll go as far as the powers that be allow them to go. That’s the nature of the beast.  If there’s any fault, it’s with the BS diversity, left wing libtard, muslim apologists and sympathizers.  Do not blame the muslims.

Blame creeps like this bastard, this filthy lying SOB, this traitor and fugitive from a fetid swamp crawling with slime and disease. Blame ppl like this.

‘I’d rather employ a paedophile than a hero’: Company boss compares British troops to child molesters in rant at job agency

RANT SOURCE

I can’t wish enough bad things on that perv. I can’t even come up with swear words that fit the anger. I’d like to feed him to a pack of rabid wild dogs. No, that’s way too easy.  His comments are way beyond freedom of speech and expression.  It’s life forms like that, that in turn allow things like the following.

Defamation case over Prophet Mohammed cartoons ‘to be held’ in Britain

A Saudi Arabian lawyer has threatened to use British courts to overturn a Danish free speech ruling by bringing a defamation case over cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed that depicted Islam’s founder as a terrorist.

By Bruno Waterfield in Brussels

Faisal Yamani, a Jeddah based lawyer, is planning to take a case to London’s libel courts on behalf of over 90,000 descendants of Mohammed who have claimed that the drawings have defamed them and the Islamic faith.

Cartoon caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed were published in Danish newspapers in 2006 triggering violent protests across the Muslim world and riots which claimed the lives of over 50 people.

According to Danish press reports, the case can be heard in the Britain because the images, including a caricature of Mohammed with a bomb shaped turban, have been freely accessible via the internet.

Danish politicians and publishers are furious that European Union rules reward “libel tourism” by enforcing British defamation rulings across Europe.

Ebbe Dal, managing director of Danske Dagblades Forening, the Danish national newspaper association, is concerned that Britain’s tough libel laws could be used to restrict free speech in liberal countries such as Denmark.

“The Danish courts have decided that the case is not actionable and that we are allowed to print the drawings in Danish newspapers and websites,” he said.

“It would be very odd if a civilised country like Britain could go against that. If this succeeded we would have to pay a lot of money to Saudi Arabians misusing the British courts to make it difficult for freedom of speech.”

Mr Yamani demanded last year that 11 Danish newspapers remove all cartoon images of Mohammed from their websites and issue front page apologies along with promises that the images would never be printed again.

Only one newspaper, Politiken, agreed to the demand leading to the new threat of an expensive British court action backed by wealthy Saudi Muslims.

Lars Barfoed, the Danish justice minister, has complained to the European Commission that EU rules forcing Denmark to enact British court rulings would damage freedom of expression.

“It’s fundamentally reasonable that judgments in the EU can often be exercised across borders. But it would be taking it to the extreme if a UK court could rule against the Danish media and then require compensation and court costs to be paid,” he said.

EU officials have acknowledged that libel judgements in the British courts have become a major issue since “Rome II” rules on mutual recognition of European court rulings entered into force last year.

“We are well aware that there is a problem with libel and defamation tourism involving Britain, where judges can be sympathetic and damages awards are high. There will be a review next year,” said an official.

A British Ministry of Justice working group on libel law is expected to publish a report calling for reform later this month.

“The government is concerned about any potential chilling effect that our libel laws are having on freedom of speech,” said a spokesman.

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 03/17/2010 at 12:50 PM   
Filed Under: • Arabs • Insanity • International • Judges-Courts • Lawyers • Muslims • Outrageous • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Tuesday - February 23, 2010

the face of Britain’s criminal system ……..  see how it doesn’t work ….

Another great example of the Labour promise.
Tough on crime. Tough on the causes of crime.  Uh huh.  Maybe the PM should be reading this. BTW ... why hasn’t this worthless creep been made graveyard dead after all this?  Surely someone could have accidently run him down with their car.  This creepy-crawly is for sure more trouble in the future. 
Take a look.  100 convictions?  What’s it take to convince authorities that some criminals (most in fact) choose that way of life. And it is always the law abiding taxpayer who has to pay their way.  I refuse to believe that euthanasia doesn’t have a very good place in the modern world. IT DOES! And the sooner used the safer and better off society would be.  In fact, had this one been hung at age 10 or 11, there would have been a few thousand (count em) a few thousand FEWER crimes caused by this useless bastard.  So then, what’s he get now?  Read on.

Teenager with more than 100 convictions turned town into ‘UK break-in capital’
By JAMES TOZER

Michael Craig has been blamed by police for turning his hometown of Burnley into the burglary capital of Britain

Their town has been burdened with the unfortunate tag of the burglary capital of Britain.

But the residents of Burnley are likely to sleep more soundly after a serial offender responsible for a large chunk of the crimes was locked up yesterday.

Michael Craig has committed 101 break-ins and other offences. Police say the 19-year-old is a key reason for the town’s unwanted title - and could be behind many more unsolved crimes.

Burnley has more burglaries per head of population than any other town or city in the country, with 2,154 in only a year, the Home Office revealed earlier this month.

Craig has regularly been committing crimes since stealing a car when he was just ten.
His record ranges from theft to public order offences as well as shoplifting, breach of an Asbo, affray, criminal damage, attempted robbery and common assault.

The latest string of offences began only four weeks after he was freed 12 months early from a two-and-a-half year jail term for what a judge described as a ‘frightening’ campaign of burglaries.

He soon broke into an 88-year-old woman’s home and stole her television as she slept, and later slashed the tyres of a witness after she called the police.

The pensioner, who lived alone, had been badly shaken up, felt vulnerable and had told police it would take her a long time to recover, prosecutor Sarah Statham told Burnley Crown Court.

Craig also broke into a local college three times to steal equipment including overhead projectors.

Finally he was arrested hiding in the roof space of a house and admitted a catalogue of crimes to fund a drug habit.

A police source said: ‘It’s very pleasing to see Craig get locked up but I’m sure it won’t be long before he’s reoffending again when he gets out.

‘The fact is he an absolute menace who has been a blight on the town for years. Even though he had over 100 convictions at the age of 19 it wouldn’t surprise if it was just the tip of the iceberg.

‘When the Home Office burglary figures came out a few people did wonder whether Craig had a hand in it. The figures certainly went down dramatically when we arrested him.’

Craig admitted two charges of burglary, one of criminal damage and asked for 14 further offences to be considered.

This took his total number of convictions to the staggering 101.

The judge, Recorder Andrew Long, told him he had an ‘appalling’ criminal record and jailed him for three years.

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 02/23/2010 at 04:48 PM   
Filed Under: • Crime • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Judges-Courts • Justice - LACK OF • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Tuesday - February 16, 2010

PAT CONDELL ON THE GEERT WILDERS TRIAL. TRIAL? NO. KANGAROO COURT

I’ll leave it to other to comment. Condell speaks for all of us on this subject.

As many already know, Geert Wilders is on trial in the freedom smashing suck up to muzzies home of the Dutch. RIP Netherlands.

Posted by peiper     on 02/16/2010 at 03:59 PM   
Filed Under: • Editorials • International • Jack Booted Thugs • Judges-Courts • Religion • Scary Stuff • Terrorists • Tyrants and Dictators •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Friday - February 12, 2010

I guess we can score one for the good guys except the gremlin is still breathing. Damn!

Another one of those articles that caught my eye and so I’m posting it before the things I had planned.

Here come de judge who in this case tells the AG, you got it wrong lady.
She, Baroness Scotland (Scotland is her real name, it’s not the country) wanted to prosecute persecute the homeowner and hand down a stiffer jail term.
Here’s a little background on her just so you’ll know who the heck is being referred to here.
Anyway, score one for the good guy although I’m sorry they managed to save the gremlin’s life as it’s useless and worthless anyway.

Attorney General Baroness Scotland has seen her career in law and politics thrown into the spotlight by her admission that she mistakenly employed an illegal immigrant as a housekeeper.

She has been fined £5,000 for breaking laws brought in when she was a Home Office minister.
The tenth of 12 children, she was born Patricia Scotland on the Caribbean island of Dominica in 1955. Her family moved to England, when she was three years old.

Maybe just maybe and time alone will tell, the tide may be turning in favor of the law abiding homeowner.  Of course, when you still have AGs like this fat assed Baroness Scotland that’s still gonna be an uphill climb.  Scandal around her (illegal immigrant she hired) has died down.  She was fined but is still in office.
You or I would be in jail most likely but apparently there are same laws but different punishments depending on who you are. 
Here’s part of the article. The rest at the link below as always.  (well, almost always)

Oh btw ... the judges name?  It’s really Judge. Kid you not.  Judge, Igor Judge.

Decent middle-aged man’ spared jail after stabbing teenager who attacked him in his own home

By Daily Mail Reporter

A ‘mild-natured’ middle-aged man who stabbed a teenager in the throat after being attacked by the axe-wielding youth in his own home, has been spared jail by the nation’s most senior judge.

Kenneth Blight, 51, who left 19-year-old Andrew Nelson with life-threatening injuries after the drink and drug-fuelled teenager attacked him with the axe, was described today by Lord Judge, the Lord Chief Justice, as ‘a decent middle-aged man in his own home, goaded beyond endurance’. 

Blight was handed a two-year suspended sentence by a judge at Teesside Crown Court on October 19 last year after pleading guilty to wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.

Attorney General, Baroness Scotland QC, asked London’s Appeal Court to put him behind bars, because she felt the sentence was ‘unduly lenient’.

But her application has now been refused by Lord Judge who called the decision to let Blight walk free ‘humane and justifiably merciful’.

Blight of Thornaby, Teesside, had rowed with Mr Nelson - the son of his partner - over his attempt to use the family home as a hideaway from local drug dealers, who were hunting him for a debt, said the judge, sitting with Mr Justice Irwin and Mr Justice Penry Davey. 

He confronted the teenager after the youth had been drinking and smoking cannabis at Blight’s home on May 30 last year, telling him that he wanted him out if he wasn’t going to pay off the debt, as he didn’t want drug dealers paying threatening visits to his door.

Mr Nelson’s reaction was to snatch up an axe that Blight had loaned him for a camping trip and to strike him twice on the leg with the blunt side, causing the older man ‘massive bruising’. 

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 02/12/2010 at 09:29 AM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts • UK •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Tuesday - February 09, 2010

HEY THERE BMEWS …. THINK THIS JOKE IS FUNNY?

“A man walked into a Dublin bar and saw a friend sitting with an empty glass.

‘Paddy can I buy you another’, he asked, to which Paddy replied - ‘now what would I be wanting with another empty glass?”

IF YOU THINK IT’S FUNNY AND YOU TELL THAT JOKE TO SOME IRISHMEN HERE ON THIS SIDE OF THE ATLANTIC .....

Councillor ordered to pay compensation for ‘racist’ joke

A Conservative councillor has been ordered to pay compensation to a union rep after telling a “racist” joke about a dim-witted Irishman.

By Nick Britten

Cllr Ken Bamber, who sits on Medway Council in Kent, was chatting with Brian Kelly, a Unison rep, when he made the joke.

He told Mr Kelly: “A man walked into a Dublin bar and saw a friend sitting with an empty glass. ‘Paddy can I buy you another’, he asked, to which Paddy replied - ‘now what would I be wanting with another empty glass?”

Mr Kelly, who was born in Ireland, said Cllr Barber had used the word “Paddy” offensively and was being “racist with intent”.

He lodged an official complaint and took the matter to an employment tribunal, which referred the case to the conciliation service Acas.

Mr Kelly is believed to have been awarded several thousand pounds compensation, some from the council and some from Cllr Bamber.

Cllr Bamber, 79, said that although the judgement had taken “a long, long time” it had not affected his job.

The councillor, who chairs the business support overview and scrutiny committee and sits on five other committees, said: “I could make a lot of comments about this case, but I can’t I’m afraid.

“The council have now decided to draw a line under the matter and it is finally over and I can get on with my job.”

Speaking previously about the case, Mr Kelly said: “I couldn’t believe my ears - we were in the midst of a racial discrimination hearing.

“If there’s ever a more inappropriate time to start telling racist jokes that would have been it.

“This man was directly responsible for deciding whether the employee in question had a racial discrimination claim and he was telling racist jokes himself.

“I am proud of my Irish heritage and family and I felt deeply offended.”

A spokesman for the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “This case has taken too long to settle and looks like it will cost a lot of money.

“It distracts staff from doing what they should be doing - providing essential services for people.

“These sorts of matters need to be resolved as quickly as possible and any cost should be borne by the offending party, not the taxpayer.”

SOURCE

I really think the guy who claims he was “offended” is a lying sack of shit!
Could not the joke be interpreted as the Irishman at the bar being clever enough and funny enough to reply he didn’t need another empty glass?
And even if not.  So what?  How bad and is that joke from a standpoint of racial insult?  What if Paddy just happened to be his real name?
Yeah I know, I know.  This crap is way outta hand.
The court should have thrown it out.

Posted by peiper     on 02/09/2010 at 09:56 AM   
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Judges-Courts • Justice - LACK OF • Lawyers • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Friday - February 05, 2010

fractured someone’s jaw?  you’re clear to go coz you’re a religious man.

A blurb of an inch or so of space was given to the village of Kings Worthy this week because ... get ready bmews, The local environmental group is launching it’s Kings Worthy Action on Climate Change (KWACC).
They are to discuss what this little village can do to combat the warming of the planet. Their words, not mine.  Meeting set for 7:30p.
LOL!  Poor,deluded, pathectic little pp.

OK so the above is pretty damn stupid. Well it is.  But they aren’t hurting anyone, yet.  They’re just good members of the church of gorebal warming is all. They’re just wasting their time and hey, it’s theirs to waste.  But this article is really off the wall.  Nothin’ religious about fracturing a person’s jaw.

Something a lot of you in the US may not know about this woman.  Cherie Blair.  Besides being the wife of Tony, the former Prime Minister here, she is also a highly successful trial lawyer.  A civil rights lawyer.  Think aclu type and you have it.  She’s also ugly and the least photogenic woman I’ve seen in awhile.
NO ... please don’t send samples of your personal favorite uglies.  I’m just sayin’ is all. OK, she’s a lawyer and she it was not long ago who went to court on behalf of a muslim girl who insisted on wearing that whole cover up dark ages thing, IN SCHOOL.  School said no way.  We have to be able to communicate and see who we’re talking to.  So, Mrs. Blair took her case (AND LOST) in the name of civil rights and whatever.  I’m telling you all this so you can get a picture of her.  Well BMEWS, she’s also as it turns out, a judge.  A part time one at that I am told.  So she has this case below as a judge ok, and , read the blurb for yourself and the rest is at the link below. Click the ugly photo.

Judges’ watchdog investigates Cherie Blair after she spares ‘devout’ man from jail

By Anny Shaw

A secularist group has made a formal complaint against Cherie Blair after she spared a violent thug from jail because he was ‘a religious man’

Cherie Blair has been reported to a judges watchdog after she spared a violent thug from jail because he was ‘a religious man’.

The National Secular Society complained to the Judicial Complaints Office after Mrs Blair - a devout Roman Catholic - suspended a six month sentence on Shamso Miah for breaking a man’s jaw.

Miah , 25, broke another customer’s jaw during the violent ‘queue rage’ attack after a row erupted about who was next.

She told him: ‘I am going to suspend this sentence for the period of two years based on the fact you are a religious person and have not been in trouble before.
‘You caused a mild fracture to the jaw of a member of the public standing in a queue at Lloyds Bank.
‘You are a religious man and you know this is not acceptable behaviour.’

TURN ON CHERIE TO LINK

Posted by peiper     on 02/05/2010 at 11:05 AM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Tuesday - January 26, 2010

On Trial for Telling the Truth: Free Speech vs Political Correctness in Holland.

Oh boy, there’s lots here on the subject of islam, the Wilders trial in freedom loving Holland, and the text for the prosecution persecution against him. (well they used to love freedom till the muslim immigrants taught em “to hell with freedom.”) Which it looks like the Dutch have taken to heart. Or at least the govt. has.

No way to post it all here, there’s so much. But ALL of it is eye opening and all of it is of interest.  Especially the official document/summons to court of Wilders for having the nerve to speak out and tell the truth as he sees it. Lets not forget, Holland is the country (I have read) that gave the world political correctness.  So it isn’t any surprise that they are going after this one man.

H/T Europe News and Chesler Chronicles from which there are links if you have the time.

On Trial for Telling the Truth: Free Speech vs Political Correctness

PajamasMedia

By Phyllis Chesler

Wilders and Levant Today, You, Me, Tomorrow

As we all know, the bravest man in Europe is on trial for telling the truth. This matter is obscene, and, according to Bruce Bawer, “surreal,” in part because Holland prides itself on its tolerance and commitment to free speech. Ah, but the Dutch do not mean “truth speech” because in the picturesque land of tulips and windmills, not all of Orwell’s pigs are equal. Truth is relative, subjective, ever-changing. Thus, if something is true but that truth offends the most reactionary Muslims — then it is not protected speech; in fact, it is criminalized.

How low can these Dutch dhimmis go?

I have been privileged to meet and hear Dutch Parliamentarian and possible future Prime Minister, Geert Wilders, speak in New York City. Together, with other invited guests of the Hudson Institute, we watched Wilders’ short film, Fitna, which shows terrorist scenes of devastation around the world — we have all seen them on the nightly news. Fitna also has real mullahs reading aloud from the Qu’ran — reading passages that in all truth are contained there. The film, accompanied by a brilliant musical soundtrack, allows us to connect the dots. It does not preach so much as “show.”

READ IT ALL HERE AT CHESLER CHRONICLES

Her piece isn’t too long.

Now then .... go here >> http://www.rights.no/filer2/wilders_summons.pdf, for the rest from the nasty prosecutor persecutor in this case against Geert Wilders.  I’m not able to copy/paste any of the document so check out that link.
Any critical remark about the ROP is race hate, apparently.

Check this out too while you’re out there surfin.

http://www.fivefeetoffury.com/

Posted by peiper     on 01/26/2010 at 12:52 PM   
Filed Under: • Jack Booted Thugs • Judges-Courts • Muslims • Terrorists •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Wednesday - January 20, 2010

UPDATE: Arrested for beating up a burglar, homeowner wins appeal as common sense wins

Wins for this one time anyway.  The country at large was outraged when he and his brother were convicted.  So this is happy news.
Score one for the good guys for a change. Now if only a habit could be made of this.

UPDATE

Judge frees millionaire jailed for attacking knife-wielding burglar saying he was ‘a peaceful man who feared for his family’

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 6:28 PM on 20th January 2010

A millionaire businessman jailed for attacking a career criminal who kidnapped his family and held them at knife-point has walked free from prison today.

Munir Hussain’s 30-month sentence was reduced to a ‘merciful’ term of two years suspended by the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, and two other judges at the Court of Appeal in London.

Munir was met by his son Awais as he was released from Bullingdon Prison in Oxfordshire.

Lord Judge said the ‘plain, simple reality’ was that Munir was a peaceful man who was acting as a response to the ‘dreadful and terrifying ordeal’ while fearing for the lives of his wife and daughter.

Munir’s brother Tokeer Hussain, 35, had his 39-month jail term reduced to two years.

The brothers, described as family men at the heart of the local community, were sentenced after being found guilty of causing grievous bodily harm with intent.

Neither man was present in court for the ruling.

The decision to free Munir was made by Lord Judge, Mrs Justice Swift and Mr Justice Sweeney. Lord Judge said the case was one of ‘true exceptionality’.

A sentence of two years was in itself ‘merciful’, but he added: ‘We have come to the conclusion that we have ample justification for ordering that it should be suspended.’

Lord Judge added: ‘The plain, simple reality is that Munir Hussain was acting under the continuing influence of extreme provocation.

‘Involvement in this serious violence can only be understood as a response to the dreadful and terrifying ordeal and the emotional anguish which he had undergone.’

He was a peaceful man who acted ‘totally out of character, in hot blood… and without detached reasoning’, Lord Judge said.

‘He feared for their lives and the honour of his wife and daughter.’

Referring to the attack on Salem, Lord Judge said: ‘In the overwhelming majority of cases where public violence by a gang produces injury as serious as this, very long prison sentences are required.’

Cases of ‘mob violence’ caused great public concern, he said, but this was ‘not an ordinary or normal case or one that falls within the overwhelming majority of cases, not least because of the character of the two appellants’.

Munir was a hard-working family man, who makes a ‘positive contribution to the general community’.

The judge said: ‘It is rare to see men of the quality of the two appellants in court for offences of serious violence.’

Reducing Tokeer’s sentence, but not suspending it, Lord Judge said: ‘He himself was not the victim of any crime.

‘He will not have to live with the consequences of the crime.’

Millionaire Munir was jailed in December last year for attacking a burglar who held his family hostage at knifepoint while masked robbers threatened to kill them.

His case provoked a public outcry when he and Tokeer - who live near each other in High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire - were jailed for injuring career criminal Walid Salem, while the convicted burglar walked free.

Munir and his wife and children returned from their local mosque during Ramadan to find three intruders wearing balaclavas in their home.

He feared for their lives as their hands were tied behind their backs and they were forced to crawl from room to room.

SOURCE AND MORE

Posted by peiper     on 01/20/2010 at 04:46 PM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts • Miscellaneous • UK •  
• Comments (7) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

More Good News

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama’s choice to lead the Transportation Security Administration withdrew his name Wednesday, a blow to an administration trying to explain how a man could attempt to blow up a commercial airliner on Christmas Day.

Erroll Southers said he was pulling out because his nomination had become a lightning rod for those with a political agenda. Obama had tapped Southers, a former FBI agent, to lead the TSA in September but his confirmation has been blocked by Republican Sen. Jim DeMint, who says he was worried that Southers would allow TSA employees to have collective bargaining rights.

In an e-mail to friends and colleagues, Southers said, “It is unfortunate that we are residing in such contentious political times, that exceptional, ‘apolitical’ candidates have to seriously consider their willingness to participate in public service.”

Questions have also been raised about a reprimand that Southers received for running background checks on his then-estranged wife’s boyfriend two decades ago. Southers wrote a letter to lawmakers earlier this month acknowledging that he had given inconsistent answers to Congress on that issue.

In an October affidavit for the Senate Homeland Security committee, Southers initially said he asked a San Diego police employee to run a background check on his then-estranged wife’s boyfriend and was censured by his FBI superiors 20 years ago for what he said was an isolated instance.

But a day after the committee approved his nomination and sent it to the full Senate, he wrote to the senators and told them that he was incorrect, that he had twice run background checks himself.

Southers may not have been a crook, but he is a schnook. The background check thing while at the FBI was blatant abuse of power. Lying about it to the committee was proof that his morals hadn’t improved any in the intervening years. The same guy who says that pro-lifers are terrorists. Who feels that the USA deserves to be a terrorism target because we are allied with France and Israel.  Not the kind of person we want running a quasi-law enforcement agency. Buh bye, Mr. Nutcase.

So another Obama pick goes under the bus and into the dustbin of history.

And don’t buy into this “his nomination was blocked by that evil Republican DeMint”. It was sitting around for 273 days and nobody did a thing about it; that shows exactly how important homeland security is to Fearless Reader. Leave the agency headless for 2/3 of a year, then get your minions to blame somebody else that the position is vacant.

Keep up the pressure on all fronts. Never retreat, never surrender. Get those emails and letters flowing.

Now let’s see if SCOTUS can make the right decision on McDonald v. Chicago and incorporate the 14^th. Arguments are scheduled for March 2. Do that, and the snowball will become an avalanche.

Posted by Drew458     on 01/20/2010 at 10:17 AM   
Filed Under: • FREEDOM • Judges-Courts • Liberals •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Wednesday - December 23, 2009

Boy George loses court case over right to be on TV, and a justice system minus the justice.

This is not how I planned to start the blog day. I had planned on making public how Drew managed to burn a pot on the stove here in Winchester, England, while sitting at home in the USA. However as often happens when reading all the morning papers, I had to stop because I found something that (to me) just screamed ...  stop everything else and post this NOW, before you forget.  As if I could.

We often joke about loony tune law suits and how quick ppl are to insist on their day in court.  Well folks, we need to stop joking cos things stopped being funny long ago.  This post concerns a fellow who calls himself Boy George.  I don’t care that he’s queer.  It’s his life he has to live, and his life isn’t our business.  Unless he makes things public and we’re drawn in.  By drawn in in my case means, he looks totally disgusting to me. He really does. And decadent. And going to court, which is after all, very public. So naturally ppl like me are gonna make comments.

Two of the things I fail to understand are, how is it that he can’t look in the mirror and fail to see just how stupid he looks? How can he not see?
The other thing I fail to understand, is how in the world someone so bizarre looking and so creepy looking, found a large following. I also wonder about that other loony tune in the rock world, Ozzie Osborne.  Although to be honest, while I’m no fan and think he was nuts in his behavior, he has often shown a funny side in sober moments, and has managed to show a weirdly friendly side. You could even say likable, which is trying things a bit I know.  But this is all about the man who calls himself “boy.”

Apparently, he believes he has a right that none of us mortals possess.  A right that certainly no conservative would ever dream was his or hers.

Boy George thinks he has a RIGHT to be on TV, and specifically he has a RIGHT to appear on Big Brother. And so he went to court to somehow prove his case for this very human right.  He lost the case but it made the news.

His sort of people seem to find “rights” in all sorts of places. 

Boy George loses Big Brother legal battle

Boy George has been told he cannot participate in the final series of Celebrity Big Brother, a judge at the High Court has ruled.

The star’s legal team had been trying to lift a Probation Service ban on him appearing on the Channel 4 show.

The singer - real name George O’Dowd - was released on licence from prison early for imprisoning a male escort.

Mr Justice Bean said the Probation Service was within its rights to refuse the star permission to appear.

He added that somebody who is out on licence and the restrictions placed on their freedom are part of their punishment.

Public confidence

A spokesman for the Probation Service said they were “pleased” with the judgement.

“We believe we made a common sense direction and this has been endorsed by the judge.

“We expect offenders to keep to their licence conditions which are in place to protect the public, punish offenders for their crime and aid rehabilitation,” he added.

The 48-year-old former Culture Club singer and DJ went to the High Court to quash a decision by the Probation Service banning him from appearing on the show.

On Tuesday Richard Clayton QC, representing the Probation Service, said O’Dowd’s participation would pose “a high level of risk” to the service’s reputation.

The former Culture Club star is currently on licence and wears an electronic tag.

Mr Clayton argued that if he used the show to promote his status as a celebrity and earn “a lucrative sum of money” it could undermine public confidence in the criminal justice system.

I kinda think the public lost any confidence in the system a long,long time ago. For example, do you folks recall only a few days ago about a homeowner who caught one of the robbers who threatened to kill him and his family?  He and his brother chased and caught one of the gremlins, broke his jaw etc.  They were both jailed for their “assault” of the burglar, who it was claimed was now brain damaged and could not appear in court to answer to criminal charges. The public is outraged over the judge’s call to put the homeowner and his brother in jail, while setting free the gremlin.  Well BMEWS, here’s an interesting update on that one.

The brain damaged would be burglar recovered from his physical injuries it would appear, because after recovery he went on to commit a string of crimes bragging btw that the cops couldn’t touch him.  He didn’t seem to be too brain damaged to commit further crimes.

Sorry BMEWS, I can’t let it go here. One more choice example of how things don’t work.  Guy assaults his girlfriend. He’s a big bruiser and a former bouncer.
She wants to leave him and calls police to press charges.  He’s arrested threatening that if he couldn’t have her, then nobody else could either.
So he’s jailed for assault and after a short time he is released with “warning” and ordered to stay away from her, in fact, he was even banned from the town she lived in. I guess a restraining order.  One month after his EARLY release from jail, he caught up with her returning home from work, and stabbed her 13 times and killed her.  She had already told authorities she feared for her life and that he was not the sort of man to make idle threats.

So yeah.  I’d say the public has zero confidence.

But Alison MacDonald, representing O’Dowd, told the court his Probation Service licence was designed to monitor his behaviour, protect the public and rehabilitate rather than punish him.

O’Dowd’s lawyers could now take the matter further to the Court Of Appeal and ask the Lord Chief Justice if he will consider hearing the case.

It is not yet clear whether the star’s legal team will do that.

The singer was convicted of false imprisonment after admitting handcuffing Norwegian Audun Carlsen to a wall in his London home in April 2007.

Previously O’Dowd had been given permission to perform at Brighton’s Gay weirdo Pride event in August.

BBC NEWS

Posted by peiper     on 12/23/2009 at 07:36 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Judges-Courts • Justice - LACK OF • UK •  
• Comments (9) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Wednesday - December 16, 2009

Who will go in to bat for crime’s victims?  A question from a liberal?  Yup. Wonder of wonde

You may recall a story I posted yesterday, with some anger as usual, about a homeowner sent to jail after braining a gremlin who with others, broke into his home, tied up the family, threatened to kill them and then proceeded to rob them.  Homeowner chases gang, he and brother catch one and wack him with a cricket bat.  Idiot judge says he went beyond self defense once he chased the bad guys away. 

So I was reading The Times today which has the reputation of being liberal altho more and more some of their correspondents seems to be taking a somewhat conservative approach to things.  I am referring to the Times of London.  Not N.Y.
Well, what to my wandering eyes should appear, but an editorial comment from a liberal which reads as, well, reasonable.  Good gosh. Reasonable? From a liberal?  Could be.  You decide.  Although I do not agree that it may be “just” to jail anyone who beats up a burglar.  But the public sure does feel betrayed.

The majority of citizens in this country want the rope back.  Fat chance of that with the left in charge of everything.

It may be just to jail a man who beats up a burglar, but don’t be surprised if the public feel betrayed

Antonia Senior

Three masked men break into your home. They tie up your family and threaten to kill you and your children. They force you to crawl from room to room, as they rob you and ransack your house. You escape and find yourself in possession of a cricket bat. What would you do?

Munir Hussain, a businessman from High Wycombe, chased the burglars down the street with his brother, Tokeer. They caught the intruders and beat them. One, Walid Salem, was hit by a cricket bat with such ferocity that it broke in three pieces, and he was left with brain damage.

Justice was meted out. Then the law intervened. Hussain and his brother were sentenced to 30 and 39 months respectively for grievous bodily harm with intent. Salem escaped jail with a two-year supervision order. Salem, a career criminal, left hospital after two weeks, and was subsequently arrested for an alleged credit card fraud.

The law decided that it is one thing to strike when you are being struck; it is quite another to chase your attacker down the street and beat him senseless. Morally, as well as legally, the distinction looks clear. Hussein’s family were no longer in danger, and neither was he, when the cricket bat came down on Salem’s head. Justice must be measured by the thump of a gavel, not by the thwack of willow on skull.

So why, then, if law and morality agree, does this case cause such consternation?

A man we can identify with — a businessman, with a family life and no history of violence — is confronted by the criminals who stalk our middle-class nightmares. We all wonder what our reaction would be. We all know there are depths of our own soul we have never plumbed, and we are terrified and curious in equal measures.

We are attacked, and the first response is an extreme physiological reaction to our environment that cannot be faked. Charles Darwin, in describing the symptoms of fear, talks of the crouching, defensive- aggressive posture of the terrorised. Fear shakes us out of complacency; readies us for the fight. After the fear, sometimes, comes rage.

There is the absolute fear and incandescent rage of the victim, which can spill over into violence. But we all suffer from a low-level fear and a simmering rage that we are reminded of by this case. We are scared of career criminals like Salem; he is a modern bogeyman. The unfairness of his lenient sentence feeds our rage, as does the failure of the police to catch his accomplices.

But what do we do with this fear and rage? The first option is to think through the morality of vigilantism and conclude that, if a society has any aspirations to civility, the demands of the law must outweigh the desire for revenge. The second option is to think, screw the morality — Salem deserved it and Hussain is a hero.

The second option is the eye-for-eye, tit-for-tat logic that appeals to the supporters of capital punishment. It’s the old “How would you feel if your child was killed?” argument in favour of state-sponsored execution. It puts personal, individual instincts ahead of a sober, impersonal reflection on the State’s powers.

Public opinion is firmly in favour of capital punishment; a referendum would bring back the noose tomorrow. I would expect a similar public response to Hussain’s imprisonment. Put it to the public vote, just after X Factor or I’m a Celebrity . . . Get Me Out of Here! and Hussain would be free, while Salem would be subjected to a series of bushtucker-trial equivalents.

“Dial 03 now,” shouts the cheery presenter, “and watch this career criminal be hit for six! Dial 04, and watch him eat a kangaroo’s anus, to win four stars’ worth of public forgiveness.” The court of public opinion would act very differently to Reading Crown Court.

There is an increasing dissonance between the views of the majority and those of the minority who frame and police the laws. On crime and on immigration the gulf is at its widest. Many in the majority would be justified in believing themselves to be citizens, not of a democracy, but of a liberal oligarchy.

A small band of the liberal elite makes the laws, disputes them in court, writes about them in papers and chatters about them on the box. It makes me both relieved and squeamish — relieved that my nice, liberal view of the world prevails, and squeamish that its execution is so inherently illiberal and anti- democratic. It’s a “we know better” political philosophy whose only defence is a plaintive cry, “But we do!” What’s the logical, intellectual justification for our stranglehold on this democracy? There is none that I can think of; I’m just glad to be on the inside, looking out.

But those who disagree with us are, much to the bafflement of many liberals, not stupid. They recognise the gulf, and feel unrepresented, There is a belief that the criminal justice system and the police are not interested in the victims of crime.

This environment makes vigilantism more likely, not less.

If you work on the automatic assumption that the men who threatened your family will escape justice, how tempting to reach for the cricket bat. What would you do?

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 12/16/2009 at 11:42 AM   
Filed Under: • Editorials • Judges-Courts • Justice - LACK OF • UK •  
• Comments (16) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Monday - December 14, 2009

businessman who attacked armed thug for taking his family hostage is jailed.

This will more then likely be my only post for today.  Wish it were otherwise.

This HAD to be posted today.  Sure, I understand that “excessive force” was used but the idea of jail for this guy makes me see red. Yeah. RCOB again.

I suppose the fact that the homeowner is very wealthy will now be hit with a law suit. If he is, he should plan very carefully, even if it takes a couple years.
Then take out the lawyer who represents his accuser, and take out the suing family too.  But first, he should send his own family away and then go where there isn’t any extradition with the UK.  If he can still hold on to his money, he should be ok almost anywhere.

This article had been edited for space and I have not included photos.  See the link below for both.

Millionaire businessman who attacked armed thug for taking his family hostage is jailed… but the intruder walks free

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 4:09 PM on 14th December 2009

A millionaire businessman who fought off knife-wielding thugs who threatened to kill his family was jailed for 30 months today - while his attackers remain free to walk the streets.

Munir Hussain, his wife and their three children stumbled on three intruders, wearing balaclavas, in their home when they returned from their mosque during Ramadan.

The family were ordered to lie on the floor of the living room with their hands behind their backs.

As four of them were tied up, Mr Hussain’s teenage son escaped through a window.
Munir Hussain

Two of the raiders fled when they realised the youngster had gone.

Mr Hussain then threw a coffee table at the third man, 56-year-old Walid Salem, hitting him in the face.

He then enlisted his brother Tokeer in chasing the offenders down, bringing one of them to the ground in a nearby garden in the street in High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire.

What followed was described in Reading Crown Court as self-defence that went too far, leaving intruder Salem with a permanent brain injury after he was struck with a cricket bat so hard that it broke into three pieces.

Judge Reddihough noted Mr Hussain’s ‘courage’ but said he had carried out a ‘dreadful, violent attack’ on the intruder as he lay defenceless.

Salem was the only intruder caught after the incident on September 3, 2008, but his injuries meant he was not fit to plead after being charged with false imprisonment.

Salem, who has a string of 50 past convictions, was given a two-year supervision order at a court hearing in September this year.

The brothers, described as family men at the heart of the local community, were found guilty of causing grievous bodily harm with intent after a trial earlier this year.

The prosecution alleged two other men took part in the so-called ‘revenge attack’ with them.
The Hussain family home in High Wycombe

Munir Hussain was given a 30-month sentence, because Judge John Reddihough decided he had been subjected to more provocation than his brother, Tokeer, who was jailed for 39 months.

Judge Reddihough said Munir Hussain’s family had been subject to a ‘serious and wicked offence’ and praised the bravery of his teenage son who escaped to raise the alarm.

The judge told them: ‘It may be that some members of the public, or media commentators, will assert that the man Salem deserved what happened to him at the hands of you and the two others involved, and that you should not have been prosecuted and need not be punished.

‘However, if persons were permitted to take the law into their own hands and inflict their own instant and violent punishment on an apprehended offender rather than letting justice take its course, then the rule of law and our system of criminal justice hand holding , which are the hallmarks of a civilised society, would collapse.’

What the fuck is this ass wipe talking about?  It collapsed a very long time ago.  Where has he been all this time?  In some fuckin ivory tower or on another planet?  And what’s this total and absolute nonsense about justice taking its course? Huh?  As in, dragging out for years and then the gremlin gets another ASBO?  WTF ... What the hell does 50, five fuckin oh, FIFTY convictions say about justice taking its course?  Where’s the justice when some creep is still free after 25 convictions?  Well, if the gremlin is really brain dead then maybe there won’t be a 51st conviction. At least this one criminal career is at an end. And it wasn’t the “System” that brought it there.  NO.  It was one outraged home owner.  Kudos and Bravo and Well Done!

Sentencing the brothers, whose mother had died just before the incident, the judge added: ‘This case is a tragedy for you and your families.

‘Sadly, I have no doubt that my public duty requires me to impose immediate prison sentences of some length upon you.

‘This is in order to reflect the serious consequences of your violent acts and intent and to make it absolutely clear that, whatever the circumstances, persons cannot take the law into their own hands, or carry out revenge attacks upon a person who has offended them.’

The brothers, who live near each other in High Wycombe, did not react as they were sentenced, but members of their family watching from the public gallery tearfully shook their heads.

Michael Wolkind, defending, argued that his client was the ‘real victim’ in the case.

Mr Wolkind said the case had similarities to that of farmer Tony Martin, who shot a teenage intruder, noting there was public support in both cases.

He told the court: ‘The public surely do not want Munir Hussain to receive imprisonment. I don’t seek a medal, I seek justice for him.’

Munir Hussain, usually a controlled man, had simply acted in the heat of the moment in ‘extreme circumstances of stress’, he added.

The prosecution said the Hussains were not being convicted for apprehending Salem, but for the ‘excessive force’ they used on him.

Hilary Neville, prosecuting, said: ‘What started as reasonable self defence by Munir Hussain then turned into excessive force by virtue of a sustained attack by Munir, Tokeer and at least two others.’

The court heard sentencing would have an impact on the local economy, with 10 members of staff losing their jobs at Soundsorba, the company run by Munir Hussain, who employs his brother as a technical director.

The firm, which produces sound-absorbing material, has an annual turnover of £2.5m.

Munir Hussain feels he let down his wife Shaheen Begum and sons Awais, 21, Samad, 15, and 18-year-old daughter Arooj, by failing to defend them against Salem and his gang.

His wife had suffered a stroke prior to the incident, and had since had a mini stroke.

SOURCE AND PHOTOS HERE

ps: have water and all working BUT.  electrician coming tomorrow late morning to change some kind of box that should have tripped and didn’t, when my hand got a tiny tingle in the water last week.  something to do with something Drew and others mentioned. I think.  rdf? rfd? I forgot. Stay Tuned

Posted by peiper     on 12/14/2009 at 11:43 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Judges-Courts • Justice - LACK OF • UK •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Tuesday - December 08, 2009

Here’s the deal. Torture an elderly lady for two days, choke her to death, have baby, FREE at last.

This is NOT the average Brits idea of justice BUT god damn it there is something so fuckin rotten with what passes for justice here it’s appalling.
Shit!  WHT are ppl in power thinking? The victim here was 71.  Damn. I’m 72. I hardly even know what I’m trying to say. I’m just so frustrated and so angry reading this today with the morning coffee.  No doubt things as bad in USA but for now I don’t live there.  I’m beginning to wonder what living in Singapore might be like. ??  NO. I’m not trying to be funny.  I’m beginning to wonder seriously how much worse things are gonna get, and if there isn’t some place better then here and the states.  I’ll probably settle down in a few hours I guess but right now I find this absolutely impossible to deal with rationally. Wait a minute. Rationally?  How can this be dealt with that way?  Justice would demand the very same treatment be given the criminal responsible. But no.  Got to be humane even to those who by their own actions forfeit that kind of consideration.  Oh the left says, but then we sink to that level. Can’t allow that.  Oh yeah? Why not?  I’ll volunteer to sink there so libtards don’t have to.  But they won’t even allow me that pleasure.
Meanwhile ... the tortured victim remains quite dead and unavenged while the shit,scum worthless piece of garbage responsible has a baby, and will live with mommy and daddy and baby a free person with a new ID and protected by ..... who the fuck else?  The state with the compliments of the taxpayer.  Too - too much BMEWS.  Just too fuckin much.  And that isn’t even the only RCOB story making today’s headlines.

Killer with new ID who got pregnant behind bars wants to live in her old home

By Tom Kelly
Last updated at 9:40 AM on 08th December 2009

A murderess who became pregnant while a prisoner is to be given a taxpayer-funded change of identity - even though she is returning to live in her family home.

Lisa Healey, who was 15 when she tortured and killed a lonely pensioner, is due to be released on parole later this month after serving 11 years.

She gave birth to a daughter earlier this year after being seduced by an inmate from another open jail, whom she met at a Ministry of Justice forum on prison reform.

Now taxpayers face footing the bill to provide Healey and her child with new identities when the killer is freed.

But astonishingly, the 26-year-old is due to move back in with her parents - who are not changing their names - at their family home near Manchester, less than two miles away from where they lived at the time of the murder.

A prison source said: ‘It’s a crazy situation. They must be spending a fortune on this plan which won’t protect her at all because everyone in the area will know who she is.

‘Her parents are very well known around there, so it will be no secret. She’s already spent lots of time at her parents’ house during home releases from her open jail.’

Healey will follow in the footsteps of a string of other criminals who have been given new identities on their release, usually for their own protection.

Social Services rather than the Prison Service is understood to be behind the move to change Healey’s identity.

Tory MP David Davies, a member of the home affairs select committee, said: ‘The whole situation is appalling. First she was allowed to have sex and even have a child while serving a jail sentence for a brutal murder.

‘Now taxpayers’ money is to be spent giving her and her baby a new identity when they are released. It is a damning indictment of how soft the criminal justice system has become.’

Although the cost of changing Healey’s name is likely to be relatively small, social services are expected to spend public money protecting this new identity.

Healey became pregnant after meeting Michael Dent in February last year at a ‘Service User Forum’ run by the Ministry of Justice at Askham Grange open prison in York, where she is serving her sentence.

Dent, then an inmate of Moorlands Open Prison in Doncaster, had been given a four-year sentence for running a cannabis factory in his home.

The 40-year-old former public schoolboy was asked to attend the forum as a ‘prison representative’ to discuss jail reform.

Even though he and Healey were in different jails, they continued to see each other when they were on day release.
Lily Lilley

Victim Lily Lilley was tortured for two days

Their daughter was conceived in the Ibis Hotel in York city centre, where they regularly checked in during their days together.

Healey gave birth in April and is bringing up her daughter in a mother-and-baby unit of her jail.

Dent said Healey ended their relationship soon after the birth. In 1998, Healey and a friend, Sarah Davey, 14, murdered Lily Lilley at her home in Failsworth, near Manchester.

The girls befriended the lonely 71-year-old widow and, after being invited in for a cup of tea, tortured her for 48 hours before choking her to death.

They placed her body in a bin and trundled it through the streets before pushing it into a canal.

The pair were found guilty of murder and ordered to be detained indefinitely.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: ‘A change of identity facilitated by Government agencies is extremely rare and granted only when the police assess there is clear and credible evidence of a sustained threat to the offender’s life on release into the community.’

SCUM SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 12/08/2009 at 09:16 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Judges-Courts • Justice - LACK OF • UK •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Monday - December 07, 2009

Drews post, Let’s Put Air Shocks On The Bus, and Abraham Lincoln

H/T Macker for this.

Until Drew’s post yesterday, I had never heard of this guy.  It’s so totally beyond the pale, as to be almost unbelievable.  That it’s beyond reason goes without saying.  I don’t get it. I don’t understand. I don’t accept this kind of public perversion, but then why not? Look at what passes for public entertainment these days.  Look what passes for acceptable and normal behavior. Look what passes for art and talent.  Look to the left and their values.  Things are accepted today that at one time would have shamed people.  But shame doesn’t seem to play a very large roll in public life anymore.  And to be very, brutally honest, conservatives have not been able to stem the tide. Have we?  And in our own defense I should also say we never really stood a chance of doing so.  Because the enemy is, and no surprise is it? Us.

I did see the links Drew provided and he was right.  Pretty damn sick stuff.

I had been going on about what I call our 5th column for so long, that even I got sick of it.  Doesn’t make it less true though.

Which leads me to this.  I found it in the preface to a book I read only in the last week.  It is credited to Abraham Lincoln. I thought it fit.

“At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means means shall we fortify against it?  Shall we expect some trans-Atlantic military giant to step the ocean and crush us at a blow?

Never!

All the armies of Europe, Asia, and Africa combined ...  could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years.

At what point then is the appraoch of danger to be expected?

I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us.  It cannot come from abroad.  If destruction be our lot, we ourselves must be its author and finisher.  As a nation of free men, we must live through all times, or die by suicide.”

Abraham Lincoln
January 27, 1838

Posted by peiper     on 12/07/2009 at 08:29 AM   
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Homosexuality • Judges-Courts • Lawyers • Liberals • Outrageous • UK • USA •  
• Comments (1) • 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 © 2004-2008 Domain Owner