Sunday - November 02, 2008

Evolution of the Government schools 1957-2007

I probably should have titled this the Devolution of the government schools. I got this in an email from my buddy flapjawman.

Scenario: Jack goes quail hunting before school, pulls into school parking lot with shotgun in gun rack.

1957 - Vice Principal comes over, looks at Jack’s shotgun, goes to his car and gets his shotgun to show Jack.

2007 - School goes into lock down, FBI called, Jack hauled off to jail and never sees his truck or gun again. Counselors called in for traumatized students and teachers.

Scenario: Johnny and Mark get into a fist fight after school.

1957 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up buddies.

2007 - Police called, SWAT team arrives, arrests Johnny and Mark. Charge them with assault, both expelled even though Johnny started it.

Scenario: Jeffrey won’t be still in class, disrupts other students.

1957 - Jeffrey sent to office and given a good paddling by the Principal. Returns to class, sits still and does not disrupt class again.

2007 - Jeffrey given huge doses of Ritalin. Becomes a zombie. Tested for ADD. School gets extra money from state because Jeffrey has a disability.

Scenario: Billy breaks a window in his neighbor’s car and his Dad gives him a whipping with his belt.

1957 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college, and becomes a successful businessman.

2007 - Billy’s dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy removed to foster care and joins a gang. State psychologist tells Billy’s sister that she remembers being abused herself and their dad goes to prison. Billy’s mom has affair with psychologist.

Scenario: Mark gets a headache and takes some aspirin to school.

1957 - Mark shares aspirin with Principal out on the smoking dock.

2007 - Police called, Mark expelled from school for drug violations. Car searched for drugs and weapons.

Scenario: Johnny takes apart leftover firecrackers from 4th of July, puts them in a model airplane paint bottle, blows up a red ant bed.

1957 - Ants die.

2007- BATF, Homeland Security, FBI called. Johnny charged with domestic terrorism, FBI investigates parents, siblings removed from home, computers confiscated, Johnny’s Dad goes on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again.

Scenario: Johnny falls while running during recess and scrapes his knee. He is found crying by his teacher, Mary. Mary hugs him to comfort him.

1957 - In a short time, Johnny feels better and goes on playing.

2007 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces 3 years in State Prison. Johnny undergoes 5 years of therapy.

I know, this is a fictional email that’s doing the rounds. But I can recall similar stories to every single one of these scenarios. Stuff I did back in the 60’s and 70’s would get me arrested and/or drugged. I disrupted class, got into fights, took guns to school (my bolt-action .22 for the shooting club), carried aspirin, broke windows (not car windows, and not on purpose.). I got paddled at school AND again when I got home.

I think I turned out fairly well.

Stupid government schools.

Posted by Christopher     on 11/02/2008 at 12:33 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Education • Nanny State • Outrageous •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - October 28, 2008

Elf ‘n’ safety stormtroopers raid Teddy Bears’ picnic.  (you’ll enjoy the nonsense)

I hope you people do read this. Funny? Sure. But in a sick kind of way. Or maybe more sad then sick.
Health and Safety comrades are making a mockery of the words and strangling this country.  I came across the first story here a couple of days ago and hesitated posting it. Although I should have.  But the Teddy Bear thing is new to me.  Well anyway, I think if nothing else you will be amused to see what he’s done with, “A TEDDY BEAR’S PICNIC.”

A note to Lyndon. I know you aren’t a fan of the Mail, but surely Littlejohn is worth reading. No?

Elf ‘n’ safety stormtroopers raid Teddy Bears’ picnic

Last updated at 12:37 AM on 28th October 2008

If you go down to the woods today, forget about disguise - you’d better wear a hard hat and a hi-viz jacket.

Dingly Dell has fallen to the elf ‘n’ safety nazis. For the past 12 years, retired builder Mike Kamp has been collecting firewood from the forest near his home at Betws-y-Coed, North Wales.

It’s a right enshrined in the Magna Carta of 1215, the template for democracies around the world. Free men down the centuries have been granted the liberty to gather dead wood from common land to fuel their stoves, repair their homes and make charcoal.

Now it has imposed an outright ban, stating: ‘This is an area where we are subject to increasing constraints in terms of health and safety. We have a duty of care to people in our wood.’

Note the use of the possessive our wood. It isn’t their wood. It’s common land and it belongs to everyone.

As Mr Kamp said: ‘They are claiming there are health and safety issues. But people have walked through the woods collecting firewood for hundreds of years without too many safety problems.’

Precisely. I doubt there is one recorded incident of a firewood-related fatality in North Wales.

This, as usual, is about bureaucrats justifying their own sad existence and protecting their backs in the event of someone turning their ankle in a rabbit hole, ringing Blame Direct, and suing for com-pensayshun.

It’s the same warped thinking which led to plans for an open-air ice rink in Bath this Christmas being abandoned because council officials feared it could be a magnet for paedophiles.

How sick do you have to be to reach that conclusion?

And a school in Colchester has banned children from bringing in broomsticks for Halloween in case they get hurt. In fairness, they were only following official advice on the NHS website:

‘Be careful with witches’ brooms made from sticks. If the sticks get dislodged, they are a choking hazard. These brooms should be labelled For Adult Use Only.’

You couldn’t make it up. Where is it all going to end? We take you over now to a briefing at the multi-million pound headquarters of the government’s Firewood Prevention, Elf ‘n’ Safety and Child Protection Joint Task Force.

‘Listen up, team. We’ve had a tip-off that a number of teddy bears are going down to the woods today and we want to maintain the element of surprise. So you’d better go in disguise.’

‘Why’s that, guv?’ ‘For every bear that ever there was will gather there for certain because today’s the day the teddy bears have their picnic.

‘Every teddy bear who’s been good is sure of a treat today. There’s lots of marvellous things to eat and wonderful games to play.

‘But they don’t have a catering licence or a safety certificate. If anything goes wrong we could have carnage on our hands. Food poisoning, sprained ankles, it doesn’t bear thinking about, if you’ll pardon the pun.’

‘Oh, very good, sir.’ ‘I want the tactical support unit beneath the trees where nobody sees. They’ll hide and seek as long as they please, ‘cause that’s the way the teddy bears have their picnic.

‘And I don’t want any heroics, either. If you go down to the woods today, you better not go alone. It’s lovely down in the woods today, but safer to stay at home.’

‘What do you want us to do, guv?’ ‘Watch them, catch them unawares. See them gaily gad about, they love to play and shout, they never have any care.

‘At six o’clock their mummies and daddies will take them home to bed, because they’re tired little teddy bears. That’s when we move in.’

‘Why wait until six o’clock, guv?’ ‘We suspect a major paedophile ring is operating in the area. After all, we’ve only got their word for it that they are mummies and daddies. Remember little Maddie?

‘I want names and addresses and don’t forget to read them their rights. I’m not having any of them getting off on a technicality.

‘Social services are providing armed back-up, the helicopter is on standby and I’m bringing in the firewood squad. We believe that some of the contraband wood is being used to make offensive weapons - ie: witches’ brooms.

‘So let’s do it to them, before they do it to themselves. And, hey, hey, hey. Let’s be careful out there.’

http://tinyurl.com/6da4fd

Posted by Drew458     on 10/28/2008 at 10:33 AM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - October 26, 2008

A NEW QUIZ FOR FIVE YEAR OLDS?  (NAME THAT BODY PART) couldn’t make it up folks.

Alright it isn’t really a quiz but heck .... it is bizarre.

Some short while ago I posted this subject and then forgot about it with so much else going on.
Well, apparently the powers that be haven’t forgotten and so we re-visit the subject with a mom who also writes for the Telegraph.

She makes legitimate points.  Even as a non parent, I’m certain I would not be too comfortable with this if I were.
She’s right.  There really is something ‘creepy’ about this.

Must they know about sex at five?

By Jenny McCartney
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 26/10/2008

One thing stumps me about the news that the Government is to provide compulsory “sex and relationships” lessons for children from the age of five: how much can there really be to say?

On the subject of relationships, obviously, one could go on forever, recommending lengthy homework on everything from Jane Austen to Leonard Cohen lyrics. On sex, I would have thought there was rather less to discuss: one could surely exhaust the topics of contraception, pregnancy, abortion and sexually transmitted diseases in a matter of weeks at the age of 11, perhaps with a brief refresher course at 13. After that, in what precise style young people proceed with sex in later life is surely a matter for them: there must be some areas to which even the omnipresent hand of the nanny state does not reach.

The news that there will now be a “naming of parts” session for five-year-olds, however - in which they learn the correct words for genitals and the differences between the sexes - gives me the creeps. By the age of five, many children have their own names for their private parts, often of a friendly, silly variety that will do them perfectly well until they are older. Is there really any point in school insisting on teaching them otherwise?

If a friend or relative suddenly insisted on lecturing your five-year-old about the official name for their genitals, apropos of nothing, I imagine they would be asked to shut up pretty sharpish. I am at something of a loss as to why this interference should be thought preferable coming from a primary teacher. And yet a sex education comic - Let’s Grow With Nisha and Joe - is already being promoted to primary schools. We learned to read with Dick and Dora: I shudder to think what they would do with that pair today.

The great irony in the Government setting itself up as the supreme educator on sexual and emotional matters is that, when it is given the task of actually looking after confused and vulnerable children all by itself, it is the worst parent imaginable. Girls who have grown up in care are sexually active earlier than other teenagers, and are 2.5 times more likely to become pregnant. A quarter of girls leaving care are already mothers or pregnant.

These girls are subjected to the same sex education at school as everyone else: I would be extremely surprised if any of them did not know in theory how to avoid having a baby. The real point, surely, is that they do not greatly want to avoid it. The emotional isolation they experience during their period in the unfeeling British care system means that they gravitate towards men as a source of affection and attention. The prospect of motherhood then offers them both an acknowledged social status and perhaps a reason for continued financial support from the state. Their early pregnancy is entirely logical, for any state that cares to read its own shortcomings written in the logic.

This, to a lesser degree, holds true for very many teenage girls who “accidentally” find themselves pregnant. The phenomenon is not helped by the fact that at the moment there is a wealth of information on what it means to have sex and very little on what it means to be in sole charge of a small baby that cries round the clock.

I believe in the good sense of basic sex education at school for older children, even if my own was pretty much confined to a terrifying film of a woman giving birth, and a hilarious, crackling 1960s film about male puberty called From Boy to Man. (We never got to see From Girl to Woman, despite being primed for yet more helpless laughter: the projector broke.)

There is a danger, however, that any philosophy that mainly concentrates on the somewhat deceptive notion of “safe sex” and the judicious use of contraception is in fact misleading. If a teenager doesn’t think that he or she is ready for the life-changing complications that might arise from sex - and few are - then the best advice is not to do it at all. Otherwise, they should be warned that contraception is very far from infallible, and they would be advised to double up on their methods.

I yearn for the day when “sex and relationships” lessons actually do something to make teenage behaviour wiser, and when lessons include: “Just because he sleeps with you doesn’t mean he loves you” and “New mum Mary can’t go out for two years. It’s 3am and the baby’s screaming with colic.” Sadly, the glum news that Jim Knight, the Schools Minister, has decided instead to start badgering the nation’s five-year-olds into naming their private parts doesn’t lead me to think that will happen any time soon.

for more:
http://tinyurl.com/6kttyo

Posted by Drew458     on 10/26/2008 at 09:02 AM   
Filed Under: • Education • Nanny State • Sex • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - October 23, 2008

Banned from using Hoover or hot water under health and safety rules.  (ere we go again matey)

Well, I guess this young feller won’t ever be able to work for Drew at this tender age.  Jeesh, were she alive today, I could probably sue me own dear mum for making us help with housework on the wkends.  Elf ‘N’ Safety yer knows.

This govt. really does take cradle to grave protection quite literally.

http://tinyurl.com/5fqwcj

Boy, 16, banned from using Hoover or hot water under health and safety rules
A boy of 16 was told he could not work as a cleaner because he is too young to use a Hoover without health and safety clearance.

By Alastair Jamieson
Last Updated: 7:49AM BST 23 Oct 2008

Karl Walker was told by a cleaning firm that he is not old enough to use hot water, washing up liquid and furniture polish or to empty bins.
The AS-level student and a friend were hired by Apollo Cleaning and worked in offices in Chippenham, Wiltshire, for a week until a regional manager ordered them to stop. The firm says it is following government guidelines by insisting on safety clearance.

At 16, Karl is old enough to join the Army and fire a gun, play the lottery, have sex legally and get married, but the firm said he required special permission to use cleaning equipment, including vacuum cleaners.
Karl, who is studying for four AS levels, said: “I just don’t understand what is going on. How can I be too young to use a vacuum cleaner? It is so stupid. I want to earn a living.”

His mother Susan, 47, said: “My son is legally old enough to get married or join the Army yet these people think he is too young to be able to hoover up. The entire situation is a joke.”
Paul Lundy, boss of London-based Apollo Cleaning, said: “When an employee is only 16 we have to be very careful with the tasks we set them as their bodies are not yet fully formed.
“But I am sure once the proper checks have been completed there will be no problem in re-employing these young people.”

Posted by Drew458     on 10/23/2008 at 09:34 AM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State • Stoopid-People • UK • work and the workplace •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(1)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - October 21, 2008

To the scaffold with the rubbish Sandwich Stasi who thinks a workman’s lunch is industrial waste.

Oh people believe me.  This fellow must be read by you.  He often concerns himself with internal politics and names that would mean nothing to you, so I generally pick out the parts that would have meaning to us.  Or else as in this case, something so totally insane, so bizarre, so untotally unbelievable, so, so..
dumb?  Oh hell ... see for yourself.  This can’t all be true surely.  Even for here.  I tell ya people, this article has everything.

Below the fold, it even has muslims. Doesn’t everything these days?  Yeah. Apparently, Firemen are to take a compulsory course on, “Getting Along With Islam islam.”

RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: To the scaffold with the rubbish Sandwich Stasi who thinks a workman’s lunch is industrial waste

Last updated at 8:30 AM on 21st October 2008

The rubbish arm of the law: Bin rules are becoming a mockery of themselves

The rubbish arm of the law: Bin rules are becoming a mockery of themselves

Today’s edition of Warden Hodges’ Britain comes from Liverpool, where war has been declared on the illegal disposal of industrial waste. Every firm in the city is getting a visit from enforcement officers working for a public-private agency set up by the council.

Last week it was the turn of Frank Hughes, who runs a small scaffolding hire company. The inspector asked him how he disposes of his waste.

Frank said he doesn’t. He explained that scaffolding is a relatively simple business which doesn’t generate waste.

But you must eat lunch, the inspector retaliated. I bring sandwiches, Frank told him. And before you ask, I take the wrapping home with me.

In which case, you’re breaking the law, the jobsworth informed him. Sandwich wrappings are classified as industrial waste within the meaning of the Act. You need a licence to dispose of them.

And since you don’t have one, you are committing a criminal offence. Frank would be hearing from the litigation department in connection with this heinous crime and could expect a minimum fine of £300.

With that, the official ticked all the relevant boxes and goose-stepped his way out, another job well-done.

Frank wrote to me in despair. ‘I am not making this up,’ he assures me. I don’t think you are for a moment, guv.

It wouldn’t have surprised me if the inspector had produced a roll of CSI-style crime scene tape, cordoned off the building, declared the whole business off-limits, called for armed police back-up and ordered Frank to cease trading immediately.

‘Enviro-crime’ is the new ‘hate crime’. All must be punished, all the time.

Many councils have already hired teams of environmental crime enforcers. In Salford, they have started patrolling the streets looking for any emptied dustbins still on the pavement at 11am.

Offenders are issued with fixed-penalty fines.

This is particularly distressing for pensioners and for mothers with young children who return from shopping trips to discover they have been nicked.

How are people out at work expected to bring in their bins before 11am? Has that occurred to the morons at the Town Hall?

I shouldn’t have thought so for a moment. And even if it did, it would be considered a bonus, increasing the potential for punishment and revenue-raising.

These are just two, tiny examples of the perverted manner in which those we pay to perform straightforward duties go out of their way to persecute us. By tonight, my inbox will be full of dozens more.

Prevention of illegal dumping is a noble pursuit. No one wants chemicals poured away in suburban gutters, or asbestos casually chucked over the fence of the local children’s playground.

Too many country hedgerows and city side-streets are besmirched by fly-tipping, an unpleasant but inevitable side-effect of scrapping weekly rubbish collections in the name of saving the polar bears.

But that’s no excuse for the Sandwich Stasi. It takes a pedantry bordering on extreme mental illness to define greaseproof paper used for wrapping a round of cheese and pickle as ‘industrial waste’ - let alone demanding that someone has to possess a licence to dispose of it.

Similarly, having the pavements cluttered with empty dustbins isn’t particularly desirable. But fining people for not bringing them in by mid-morning is outrageous.

What are they supposed to do - take an hour off work or stay at home until the dustmen have been?

Of course, none of this would be necessary if councils hadn’t ended the traditional method of rubbish collection. Some of us can remember when dustmen came round to the back of your house, carried your bin to the cart, emptied it and then returned it to whence it came.

Now you are expected to wheel your own bin to the front gate - and woe betide you if you don’t leave it in exactly the place designated by the council. Even a few inches out and they’ll refuse to empty it. Then the ‘environmental crime’ wardens will come along and issue you with a fine.

Those charged with waste disposal in Britain have taken leave of their senses. They have forgotten that they are public servants. They see themselves as evangelical environmental warriors and the rest of us are their enemy.

They now exist purely to bully, fine and punish us.

It is nothing short of monstrous that hard-working, law-abiding small businessmen like Frank Hughes - the backbone of the nation - can be treated in this fashion.

While he is doing everything he can to battle through a recession not of his making, his taxes are going towards paying the salary and pension of a jumped-up, otherwise-unemployable twerp who proposes to fine him £300 for ‘illegal disposal’ of a sandwich wrapping.

For two decades, this column has made a career out of exposing the unbending lunacy and sheer bloody-mindedness of British bureaucrats, but the monster marches ravenously on.

At a time when we can least afford it, we are being bled white to finance the Sandwich Stasi and hundreds of thousands of index-linked, spiteful, self-righteous parasites.

In another life, these are the very people who would have been loading the cattle trucks to the concentration camps.

To the scaffold with the lot of them.

OH SO, YA THINK THE ABOVE IS A TAD OVER THE TOP?  YOU THINK THEY’VE FINALLY REACHED THE END OF THE DUMB LINE?
HA!  TAKE ANOTHER THUNK AND SEE THIS IN THE EXTENDED TEXT.  YOU MIGHT FALL DOWN SO PLEASE BE SEATED.

Posted by Drew458     on 10/21/2008 at 09:41 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Insanity • Nanny State • RoPMA • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - October 16, 2008

PEOPLE, AS LONG AS BIG BROTHER KEEPS DOING STUPID THINGS I’M COMPELLED TO SHARE THE LUNACY.

NOW WHAT DO YA MAKE OF THIS LATEST BIT OF MOONBATTERY?

Council bans man from tending his front garden - because it is too tidy
By DAILY MAIL REPORTER
Last updated at 12:21 PM on 16th October 2008

Brian Hubbard has been banned from gardening by his local council because his lawn is too tidy

A dedicated gardener has been banned from trimming the grass outside his house - because it is TOO tidy.

Brian Hubbard, 72, has been mowing, weeding and edging the verge outside his home for the past eight years.

But now Herefordshire Council have ordered him to stop because he is encroaching on council-owned grass.

Mr Hubbard, who worked as a civil servant for 40 years, has served as a parish councillor in his home district of Belmont, Hereford, with special responsibility for green surroundings.

Mr Hubbard was sent a letter from the council’s parks, countryside and leisure development service, giving him 28 days to return the area to its original state.

The letter ordered the removal of garden tools and furnishings, path and bed covering material, and all vegetation not in keeping with the surrounding area.

It warned if there was still a problem after that period, works would be carried out and re-charged to him.

Mr Hubbard branded the council’s warning as absurd. ‘The council said it sent me this letter after noticing that my grass verge was tidier than the other ones on the street’ he said.

‘All I have done is cut the grass and keep it as tidy as possible.

‘I was told to stop doing it and somebody from the council said it was because that if it was too tidy people might not feel they could walk over it.

‘It is absolutely ridiculous, I am just trying to help the council with what their job is.

‘If I was a timid or nervous type of person I might feel rather threatened by the letter, which I think is utter nonsense.
‘The contractors that cut the grass verges use heavy duty sit on lawn mowers.

‘I’m going to ignore the letter - they won’t stop me.’

Belmont district councillors have reacted with disbelief at the council’s actions.

Independent councillor Glenda Powell believes that the pensioner should have been praised for his work. ‘I think it’s absolutely ridiculous’ she said. ‘Whether it’s a piece of council ground or not if it’s a bit untidy we should be commending people who help clear it up.

Mr Hubbard, whose local council has banned him from gardening, says he will ignore the warning

‘It is barmy, I think it’s absurd and I don’t understand the logic to what they have said to Brian.
‘I have been to his home many times and his role on the council was actually to look after all the trees and bushes in the community.
‘I know Brian well and he used to be a parish councillor and has a great reputation.’

Councillor Heather Davies said Mr Hubbard and his wife should be congratulated for taking pride in the area.

She said: ‘When I was on my way to see them, the road looked a mess because the grass had been cut but the cuttings left.

Local councillors are shocked at Herefordshire council’s treatment of Mr Hubbard

‘Mr Hubbard should be thanked for picking his cuttings up.

‘If more people were like that, the area would look really nice. We should be supporting him because its brilliant what he does - not sending him letters like this.’

A spokesman for Herefordshire Council said it apologised if Mr Hubbard thought the letter was too strongly worded.

He said: ‘We are aware of Mr Hubbard’s endeavours to tend the land next to his home in Dorchester Way and commend him for his public spiritedness.

‘Public open spaces are there for everyone to enjoy and in Herefordshire we have 1,400 which are maintained by the council’s contractors.

‘These contractors are paid out of the public purse and have a responsibility to meet standards laid out in the contracts which govern their work.

‘If anyone feels a public open space is not being cared for as it should, please contact the council and we will speak to our contractors.

‘We apologise if Mr Hubbard feels the letter he received from us is heavy-handed. We are happy to meet Mr Hubbard to discuss the issue.’

http://tinyurl.com/4szycm

Posted by Drew458     on 10/16/2008 at 11:17 AM   
Filed Under: • Miscellaneous • Nanny State • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - October 09, 2008

WELCOME COMRADES …. THE WEEK THAT WAS PREDICTS THE FUTURE …. YA NEVER KNOW.

IT’S REALLY CLEVER AND THE VERY END IS MOST TELLING.

NOT VERY LONG.

HAVE FUN. 

lets see what Drew will do with this.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1378314933/bclid1399216957/bctid1845378317

Posted by Drew458     on 10/09/2008 at 03:19 PM   
Filed Under: • Commies • Nanny State • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Not so fast Agent Powers

Basil Exposition: Austin, the Cold War is over!
Austin Powers: Finally those capitalist pigs will pay for their crimes, eh? Eh comrades? Eh?
Basil Exposition: Austin… we won.
Austin Powers: Oh, smashing, groovy, yay capitalism!

Um, sorry Basil. It appears that you may have lost after all.

A quarter of a century ago, in the era of the Labour manifesto that was dubbed (by a member of the Labour shadow cabinet) “the longest suicide note in history”, when one wanted to depict the absurdity of the view of the world advanced by Tony Benn and Michael Foot one simply had to say: “They want to nationalise the banks!” People fell about laughing.

Today, it is all considerably less funny. We are all socialists now.

For the Government to take stakes in our leading banks in order to re-capitalise them is not quite the sovietisation of Britain, but it is a pretty good start. Given the instinctively socialistic leanings of our Prime Minister, it may well have been a move he undertook calmly and, quite possibly, with a little excitement.

Perhaps the consequences of his not having socialised our financial system in this way could have been catastrophic - a view taken not just by his closest Cabinet colleagues but also by the main opposition parties. Equally, the consequences of his having done so could be catastrophic, too, because the socialist experiment rarely ends up with people feeling happier, richer and more free until it has ended.

Anyone over the age of 40 will recall the abiding result of the days when we had a socialist economy in this country: poverty.

Well, fine. Do you think it’s any different over here? In a million years, you’d never guess what our government wants to do with our banks. Land of the Free, Home of the Brave, Free Markets and Caveat Emptor:

US Treasury May Capitalize Banks by End of Month
The U.S. Treasury Department plans to start directly injecting capital in U.S. banks as soon as the end of October in exchange for passive investment stakes, according to a financial policy source familiar with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s thinking.

Under authority granted to it by last week’s $700 billion market rescue legislation, Treasury would get common or preferred shares from the banks it capitalizes, the source told Reuters Thursday. The government does not intend to seek board seats in the voluntary capitalization program.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said later Thursday that Paulson is “actively considering” capital injections into troubled U.S. banks.
“Secretary Paulson is looking at all the different tools to figure out which ones should be used at what time and how robustly and how much money to put into each,” she said.

Treasury’s plan to inject capital would follow action by the British government Wednesday in which it pledged billions of dollars to shore up banks’ capital in exchange for preference shares. The source familiar with Paulson’s thinking said Treasury was working “extremely fast” to put together a capital injection plan. The injections would get at the credit crisis by giving banks more capacity to lend, complementing the bailout bill’s objective of removing soured mortgage-backed assets weighing down banks’ balance sheets.

This will be the perfect opportunity for our new Socialist Overlord Messiah to come to power. Handed to him on a silver platter. Give it two years and we’ll be part of the North American Union. Then part of the One. World. Order. With one currency, just like fwance is already pushing for. And we’ll go to it eagerly. Because Change is Good!

The very best chains are the ones the slaves make themselves and willingly put on.

Posted by Drew458     on 10/09/2008 at 01:44 PM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State • Tyrants and Dictators •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - October 03, 2008

THE NEW FRENCH CAR LAW ….  couldn’t make this up although the story isn’t brand new.

A new piece of motoring law has been introduced in France, which could catch holidaymakers driving in the country off guard.

It is now compulsory for motorists to have a reflective jacket in any vehicle with four wheels or more in France, says the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM).

With nine million tourists expected to reach the nation by car this year the change in legislation is something that could affect a large number of holidaymakers.

Neil Greig, director of the IAM, said: “Its worth investing in [a reflective jacket], before you leave, to ensure you don’t end up with a nasty fine when you’re on holiday.”

He added that when travelling abroad people tend to go into “holiday mode” and think that they are safeguarded from break downs or run ins with the law, which is a fallacy.
http://tinyurl.com/46989l

OK, that little blurb appeared back in July in a P & O Ferries newsletter.  But that isn’t exactly what I caught in today’s paper.
Of course, being the Telegraph, I couldn’t find any link to the Telegraph story which is still close enough. But, here’s the way The Telegraph reported it today.

NEW FRENCH CAR LAW

Motorists who drive in France without a reflective jacket or a red warning triangle in their car could be fined by police from today. (03 Oct.08)
Under new laws any driver not traveling with either piece of safety equipment could be fined $140 to $200.

I guess it isn’t any big deal in the overall scheme of things, but it just smacks of another nanny like thing the public now has to endure.
Yeah, I guess safety gear is a pretty good idea. Better then pretty good then. But should it not be up to the individual driver? Maybe not.

It’s like here in the UK, and it either started yesterday or today, 40% of the surface on the backside of a cigarette pack now has to show gruesome
photos of cancer victims.  Black diseased lungs and autopsy photos. Mouth cancer etc. GAK. Totally gross. I’m not a smoker anymore but if I were, I’d simply paste something else over the photos.  Hey, bet ya when smokers start doing that on their own packs, a new law will be passed to prohibit that.

Of course, no photos of bad liver and kidney stuff on booze bottles.  That industry is NOT an easy target.  The health commies only go after the soft targets where they will get their way.  Like bullies in a schoolyard.

Posted by Drew458     on 10/03/2008 at 12:21 PM   
Filed Under: • EUro-peons • Nanny State • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - September 27, 2008

Now councils tell us what to eat.  (now I ask you. how could I ignore this one?) for real? yup.

Ain’t this stupid?  See where tree hugging left wing PC leads?
I don’t have time to make the MANY comments running through my head at the moment. Or the questions.

Like most ppl have the time for this stupidity.  Sure, many folks grow their own veggies and such. But this goes way beyond that and anyway, you’d need to involve the whole country to get anywhere.  Fat chance of that.

Have to go off line for some hours.  Just couldn’t save this for later.  Duh! 

Bin collections row: Now councils tell us what to eat
Householders are being told what to eat by councils in the latest controversial plan to cut down on domestic waste.

By Christopher Hope, Home Affairs Editor
Last Updated: 2:06PM BST 26 Sep 2008

Local authorities have devised a “council cook book” featuring such culinary delights as beans and egg on toast, lentil salad and home-made muesli, which can be made without buying anything in throwaway packaging.

It has been produced as part of Zero Waste Challenge Week, in which four councils in the West Country are challenging residents to go for a seven days without producing any rubbish.

But critics claim it is yet more evidence of a sustained assault on people’s rights to weekly bin collections, as well as being patronising.

Among the tips contained in leaflets produced by the councils are that people should make their own food, such as yogurt, and take resealable boxes to the butcher so meat does not have to be put in plastic bags.

Recipes contained in the leaflets are made up of ingredients which can all be bought either in paper bags, cardboard boxes, tins or jars, which can all be recycled.

Zero Waste Challenge Week, which has been devised by Bristol City Council, Bath and North East Somerset Council, South Gloucestershire Council and North Somerset Council, starts on Monday.

The councils want community groups, schools and residents to sign up to the challenge not to throw anything away in the dustbin by only using products that can be reused or recycled.

A leaflet says: “That way we’re left with nothing else to throw away in the bin.”

The leaflet adds: “We believe that if you make enough changes, it is possible to achieve a Zero Waste Week. However, the aim of the challenge is to see how close you can go.

“Circumstances are different for everyone and even if you don’t quite manage to achieve Zero Waste, you’ll find you can have a dramatic effect on the amount you throw away.”

The results will be used by the councils to advise on future recycling and rubbish collection strategies.

The councils say: “Completing and returning your record sheet will allow us to assess the success of the scheme and help us to find ways to tackle waste minimisation in the future.”

Crucially, commercial waste – such as rubbish thrown away at work – is not included in the project.

Last night the Conservatives criticised the plans.

Eric Pickles, the shadow local government secretary, said: “We are entering a brave new world of fortnightly rubbish collections that we all know is going to fuel a surge in fly-tipping and backyard burning.

“This is not a responsible or practical way of encouraging recycling but merely a cleverly disguised form of propaganda attempting to peddle the benefits of fortnightly rubbish collections for town halls. This is bureaucratic convenience, without any public benefit.

“Recycling rates are going up which begs the question why do we need this. We want people to be environmentally responsible but employing the heavy hand of the state is not the solution.”
Top Tips for Zero Waste Week

* Avoid food contained in packaging that cannot be recycled, like crisps

* Try making your own food, like yogurt

* Take your own plastic boxes to the local butcher or green grocer to cut back on packaging

* Plan ahead so that you are not caught out throwing something away.

* Buy bread wrapped in paper, rather than plastic packaging

http://tinyurl.com/3ut5qc

Posted by Drew458     on 09/27/2008 at 03:30 AM   
Filed Under: • Environment • Nanny State • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - September 16, 2008

College bans ‘Christmas’ and ‘Easter’ from calendar for fear of offending ethnic students.

More lunacy from the pc crowd that today control England.  I’m not gonna add anything to this.  Isn’t that I wouldn’t like to. I would.
I just can not find the words.

College bans ‘Christmas’ and ‘Easter’ from calendar for fear of offending ethnic students

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 4:26 PM on 16th September 2008

Yorkshire Coast College has re-branded Christmas and Easter as ‘end of term breaks’

A college has renamed the traditional Christmas and Easter breaks in a bid to avoid offending students from other religions.

The college’s new calendar shows that both of the traditional holiday periods have now been re-branded as ‘end of term breaks’.

Critics have complained that the decision by Yorkshire Coast College is nothing more than ‘political correctness’.

Tory MP Robert Goodwill said: ‘I have heard that some people refer to the Christmas period as the Winterval, which is worse. This is absolutely barmy.

‘We are a Christian country and, to be honest, religious tolerance in this country is about respecting other people’s religious beliefs.’

‘We live in a country where there is a mutual respect for religious beliefs.

‘School terms are traditionally separated by Christmas and Easter and they should be referred to as such.

‘They are petrified that they offend the minority but what they are doing is offending the majority.

‘It’s political correctness gone mad and I am disappointed that it’s from an edict from Ofsted.’

The college, based in Scarborough, North Yorkshire offers a range of courses concentrating on training for ‘life skills’ such as Engineering, Motor Vehicle Training and IT.

The college insists that the decision is in line with Ofsted guidelines and has been made to ‘increase inclusion and diversity’.

It circulates the internal year planner annually to 150 teaching staff and up to 50 other workers to inform them of important dates such as term times and training days.

A spokeswoman for the college said: ‘Every school and college, wherever located, is responsible for educating its learners who will live and work in a country which is diverse in terms of cultures, religions or beliefs, ethnicities and social backgrounds.

‘All employees at Yorkshire Coast College are encouraged to closely follow guidelines set out by Ofsted for the promotion of equality and diversity.

‘We constantly review the ways in which we communicate, to ensure that we do not discriminate, and part of those reviews means that we have stopped referring to the Christmas Break and Easter Break and we now have End of Term Break.’

However, Ofsted today denied this. A spokesperson said: ‘Ofsted inspection guidance for colleges makes no reference whatsoever to the observance of religious festivals; there is no ‘edict’ from Ofsted.’

http://tinyurl.com/5oazny

Posted by Drew458     on 09/16/2008 at 11:30 AM   
Filed Under: • Insanity • Nanny State • Outrageous • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - September 07, 2008

Children aged eight enlisted as council snoopers and report petty offences such as littering.

Yes I know my fellow Americans won’t understand and even then will not approve of this sort of thing.
But you simply don’t understand the joys and entitlements and thrill of the chase as these kids will no doubt be doing “their bit” to save the world from litter. And this little island will lead the way and bring India and China and wasteful Americans into the fold to save zeverld mine furher.  Oh wait, different movie. hahahaha!
I can’t help it. Gotta laff. It really is twistedly funny.  These folks are sooooooooooooooooooooooo serious about the globe getting warm and following eu dictates TO THE LETTER while the rest of europe ignores what isn’t convenient to them.  But the Brits bless em do as they’re told by their masters in Brussels and by their lefty labour govt.  And there’s a damn serious war going on here and it’s against waste and plastic bags and ppl not putting their trash bins the required distance from the kerb (that’s how it’s spelled here).  Markets trying to limit the plastic bags they hand out to their customers and everyone wanting to be seen as Gween.

Used to be during the cold war, being seen as a commie wasn’t too cool for anyone outside the unions and labour party.  Now it’s not cool to be seen as not green.

Maybe this isn’t so funny after all.  Oh btw .. they’re called “enviro-crimes.” Sets the blood boiling that does. EnviroCrime!

Children aged eight enlisted as council snoopers
Children as young as eight have been recruited by councils to “snoop” on their neighbours and report petty offences such as littering, the Daily Telegraph can disclose.

By Martin Beckford, Sarah Graham and Betsy Mead
Last Updated: 1:00PM BST 06 Sep 2008

The youngsters are among almost 5,000 residents who in some cases are being offered £500 rewards if they provide evidence of minor infractions.

One in six councils contacted by the Telegraph said they had signed up teams of “environment volunteers” who are being encouraged to photograph or video neighbours guilty of dog fouling, littering or “bin crimes”.

The “covert human intelligence sources”, as some local authorities describe them, are also being asked to pass on the names of neighbours they believe to be responsible, or take down their number-plates.

Ealing Council in West London said: “There are hundreds of Junior Streetwatchers, aged 8-10 years old, who are trained to identify and report enviro-crime issues such as graffiti and fly-tipping.”

Harlow Council in Essex said: “We currently have 25 Street Scene Champions who work with the council. They are all aged between 11 to 14. They are encouraged to report the aftermath of enviro-crimes such as vandalism to bus shelters, graffiti, abandoned vehicles, fly-tipping etc. They do this via telephone or email direct to the council.”

Other local authorities recruit adult volunteers through advertisements in local newspapers, with at least 4,841 people already patrolling the streets in their spare time.

Some are assigned James Bond-style code numbers, which they use instead of their real names when they ring a special informer’s hotline.

This escalation in Britain’s growing surveillance state follows an outcry about the way councils are using powers originally designed to combat terrorism and organised crime to spy on residents. In one case, a family was followed by council staff for almost three weeks after being wrongly accused of breaking rules on school catchment areas.

It also emerged last month that around 1,400 security guards, car park attendants and town hall staff have been given police-style powers including the right to issue on-the-spot fines for littering, cycling on the pavement and other offences.

Matthew Sinclair, of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, described the recruitment of children as “downright sinister”.

He said: “We are deeply troubled by these developments – they are straight out of the Stasi copybook. There is a combination of ever-stricter rules and ever more Draconian attempts to control people.

“Councils are using anti-terrorist legislation for the tiniest of things, like the people who put out their bins early, and the threats of fines and prosecutions combine to constitute fleecing the people the councils are meant to be serving.”

The increase in surveillance comes at a time when an estimated 169 councils have dropped weekly rubbish collections.

Some local authorities are refusing to collect bins which are placed too far from the kerb, while others are issuing £100 fines to people who fail to comply with recycling rules.

Critics have claimed that councils have stopped prosecuting people for flytipping in favour of pursuing easy targets such as fining people for dropping bits of food and cigarette butts.

In April, Hull council officials fined a young mother £75 for dropping a piece of sausage roll while trying to feed her four-year-old daughter. Sarah Davies, 20, refused to pay and the matter when to magistrates court where it was dismissed.

Doretta Cocks, founder of the Campaign for Weekly Waste Collection, said the use of children by councils was “shocking”.

She said: “What sort of world are we bringing them up in? I think it’s dreadful for neighbour to spy upon neighbour in that way.”

The Daily Telegraph contacted more than 240 councils across England and Wales to ask if they had recruited environmental volunteers.

Of those, 36 or just under one in six, said they had. They included Luton, with 600 volunteers, the highest of any council; Southwark, south London (400) Birmingham (370) Blaenau Gwent (300) and Congleton in Cheshire (300).

Among the “environmental crimes” which the snoopers are asked to report, which vary from council to council, are failure to recycle rubbish, vandalism, graffiti, dog fouling, fly-tipping and abandoned vehicles.

Some councils merely ask recruits to keep an eye out for problems, while others are sent out on patrols. Several of the councils which do not yet use volunteers said they were considering doing so in future.

Many of the town halls said they did not encourage their volunteers to confront offenders or collect evidence, for their own safety.

But Bromley Council in Kent offers up to £500 for information that leads to a conviction.

Crawley Borough Council in West Sussex said its 150 Streetcare Champions were asked to “report on individuals if known”. Bolton Council said its Green Inspectors must “note any relevant information such as registration numbers” if they see criminal activity.

Others, including Fareham in Hampshire and Waltham Forest in east London encourage their volunteers to take photographs of rubbish to help investigations.

Liz Henthorn, 66, a retired nurse who is one of 120 “Street Hawk” volunteers in Enfield, north London, openly describes herself as a “curtain twitcher” but insists she is not snooping on anyone.

She said: “If there is a problem with fly-tipping, general bad behaviour, graffiti etcetera then I ring the Street Hawk person and when I do it is cleared. Enfield has become a lot cleaner because of us curtain twitchers having a look around.

“If you can you report an individual but nobody is going to give their name and address. If you know where that person lives you can say you know who it is but other than that you don’t.”

A spokesman for the Local Government Association, which represents town halls across the country, insisted: “Environment volunteers are people who care passionately about their local area and want to protect it from vandals, graffitists and fly tippers.

“These residents are not snoopers. They will help councils cut crime and make places cleaner, greener and safer.”

Dominic Grieve, the shadow home secretary, said: “In any civilised society the community will engage with the police but it would be plain wrong for young children to be recruited and trained for reward. People want to see the police and other appropriate agencies on our streets catching and deterring offenders.”

Councillor Sue Emment, Ealing Council’s cabinet member for environment and street services, said: “Ealing Council works with participating schools so Junior Streetwatchers can learn how to help our local environment, take pride in their community and have a sense of civic responsibility.

“Organisations like the TaxPayers’ Alliance are fast becoming parodies of themselves and ought to find out about Council schemes before making comments. We feel it is sad that the valuable time these young people are spending on improving the community should be criticised in any way.”

A spokesman for Harlow Council said: “We need to encourage more people to care for their community. If we can encourage people at a young age to do this then they will grow up to respect the environment. Our Street Champions, which is an entirely voluntary scheme naturally, has the backing and support of parents for children to take part in the scheme. The scheme is highly regarded.

“The scheme isn’t just about them reporting environmental problems, they also take part in projects to help them learn new skills and in a wider context, about citizenship.”

http://tinyurl.com/6ptr25

Posted by Drew458     on 09/07/2008 at 12:45 PM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Environment • Nanny State • UK •  
• Comments (10) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - August 26, 2008

Police officers told to mind their language.  (an oooold story from 2001. but still current)

Gee, this story was three years before we moved here to the wife’s native country to look after her aged and decrepit mom. And that was just her brain at the time.
Now then people, I have very much edited this before posting so do not simply go with my edited version.  Use the link for the whole story.  I’m simply posting it here because it was listed as related to a previous Moonbat post I have.  There may be some fraction, some little justification for rules with regard to
offensive language and behavior.  I do not dispute that and I very much doubt the “man in the street” does either.  However, as one officer has said, they’re
afraid to open their mouths in case they offend someone.  And you just know in this politically correct nightmare the left has been allowed to construct, anything at all can be found to offend someone, somewhere.

Not too long ago and I believe I mentioned it, our milkman went on vacation for a week.  We received a notice informing us that our “MILKPERSON”
was going to be away for a week.  Milkperson. Imagine that.  How fraken stupid!

Stay Tuned and lots-a-luck not getting yourself sued by someone you might offend.

http://tinyurl.com/6mu9ay

Story from:
Paul Stokes
The Telegraph, June 2001.

The 16-page document drawn up by Greater Manchester Police sets out words and phrases deemed unsuitable and likely to offend. In his foreword to The Power of Language David Wilmot, the Chief Constable of Manchester, draws attention to the importance of using appropriate language. He says the aim is to protect the 6,900 officers, 3,240 civilian employees and 685 special constables from making unintentional mistakes and help them interact within the community.

He said: “We want everyone to respect the views and feelings of others, and to use language that doesn’t offend.”

The term “deaf and dumb” will be replaced by “deaf without speech” and people will no longer be “wheelchair bound” but “wheelchair users”. Political correctness extends to policemen becoming known only as police officers, a spokesman as a spokesperson, foreman as a supervisor and workmen as workers.

Officers are warned against using obviously offensive words such as cretin, spastic, cripple or mongol or even “people with special needs” in relation to the disabled. Pejorative expressions such as happy clappy, bible basher, God botherer and God Squad are also outlawed when describing people with religious convictions.

It is pointed out that homophobic words like queer, poofter, fag, dyke and butch cause offence to gays and lesbians as do phrases such as “gays often do those types of jobs”, “a woman with lesbian tendencies”, “a person of the other persuasion” or “he or she bats for the other side”.

Officers are urged to be extra sensitive when dealing with cross dressers, transsexuals and transvestites in case they cause offence and to try to understand the differences between them. A senior officer with more than 20 years’ police experience in Manchester said: “This document is a waste of time. Police have enough on their plates these days without adding to the problems.

“This document makes out that we are all idiots who need to be told how to address people. We are human beings who are trained to deal with tricky situations, this report makes a mockery of that. We’re scared to open our mouths in case we offend anybody.”

Posted by Drew458     on 08/26/2008 at 05:28 AM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State • Outrageous • Politically-Incorrect • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

‘Man on the street’ is offensive to women.  MAJOR MOONBAT STUFF HERE. OH BOY. can I say boy?

I ONCE ASKED WHERE THIS SILLY CRAP IS GONNA END. AND WHEN?  WELL, I GUESS NEVER, EVER.  AND THE BRITS WILL LEAD THE WAY IT SEEMS.
ACTUALLY, THE POWERS THAT BE AT ANY TIME THINK UP THIS OUTRAGIOUS CRAP.  I VERY MUCH DOUBT THE AVERAGE “MAN ON THE STREET” EVER THINKS ABOUT THIS.  I MEAN, IN ORDER TO BE OFFENDED THEY (PTBs) HAVE TO TELL PPL THEY ARE BEING OFFENDED.  EVEN IF THEY NEVER KNEW IT.
AND IF ANY FEMALE ANYWHERE IS OFFENDED BY THIS VERY OLD PHRASE, PLEASE.  STOP BREATHING NOW. RIGHT THIS MINUTE.  JERKS!

The phrase “man on the street” should not be used in case it offends women, according to a politically-correct language guide for council staff.
By Jessica Salter
Last Updated: 6:56AM BST 26 Aug 2008

The document claims the popular saying is based on the assumption that the world is male and makes the views or work of women invisible.

It suggests that town hall officers should use “general public” a positive and less offensive alternative.

The guide also kills off the phrase “manning the switchboard” and suggests “staffing” or “running the switchboard” instead.

The suggestions, put forward by Chichester District Council, West Sussex, have been criticised as an example of “repulsive” political correctness.

Tony Colpoys, chairman of Ebernoe parish council, West Sussex, said: “This kind of thing really gets my goat - it’s not as though anybody in their right mind would believe that the “man in the street” referred solely to the male sex. It’s just stupid, I’ve never heard anything like it.

“I think political correctness is one of the most ghastly things about our society - it’s one of the most repulsive things ever to be invented.”

The council said that the document, which is distributed to all staff and council members, is not a rulebook but a guide to help staff and members find the correct words.

A spokesman said: “We introduced the guide because as community leaders we must be aware of what modern society requires of the public sector. This includes the sensitivity of various individuals and groups, and current thinking in society in general.

“It is easy to make fun of individual phrases or words but what we are seeking to do is to be more sensitive and responsive to the needs of others in our society.”

The seven-page guide offers other suggestions, including avoiding phrases like “old woman”, “old fool” and “old codger”, which, the council said, make old people seem fussy, stupid and dependent. It suggests simply using the phrase “old person” instead.

Have Your Say: Is the phrase ‘man on the street’ offensive to women?

http://tinyurl.com/6c5qr2

ah-ah-ah.  Don’t touch that dial. Stay Tuned for more !  Coming up after the break .....  Moonbats Galore.

Posted by Drew458     on 08/26/2008 at 05:11 AM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State • Outrageous • Stoopid-People • Typical White People: Stupid, Evil, Willfully Blind • UK •  
• Comments (0) • 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