LawTalkers

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes. (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=661)

Spanky 03-17-2005 06:30 PM

When I was living in Japan, new clubs in Roppongi (place full of night clubs where all the gaijin hung out) would always hire Japanese body guards. Despite the influence of video games and movies, there is not much violence in Japan. Most Japanese males have never been in a fight. These bouncers were always trained in martial arts and had "security" certificates. In most of the clubs in Japan, they have sections where girls can sit and guys are not allowed. To make it so the girls don't have to be harassed. There was always some drunk Marine or Australian that didn't like to be told to leave the "grils" section and they would hospitalize the poor Japanese body guard who told them to leave. Then the club would hire some Yakuza (Japanese gangsters who are supposed to be tough) and then the Yakusa would get pummeled also. Finally the club would hire some large american servicemen in their off hours and order would be restored. But in the three years I was there I must have seen fifteen clubs go through this evolution.

Tyrone Slothrop 03-17-2005 06:44 PM

This Should be Fun
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Not Bob
And, I don't speak for Ty, but I think that his comment may have been in response to Ann Coulter's cheap and factually inaccurate throw-away charge laying fault at the feet of the feminists.
Aw, hell, on this issue you can speak for me.

Tyrone Slothrop 03-17-2005 06:46 PM

This Should be Fun
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I've heard stories that if we didn't have so many chick soldiers we would have gotten to Baghdad BEFORE they moved the WMDs.
POTD. Bravo!

Replaced_Texan 03-17-2005 06:46 PM

This should be fun.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Two days ago, Texas Children's Hospital in Houston removed a baby from life support contrary to the mom's wishes. The baby was born with a type of dwarfism where his lungs and heart weren't going to grow, and he was on artificial breathing for six months. According to the hospital, his death was only a matter of time, and there was nothing anyone could do for him. Everything was done in accordance with Texas law (finding that treatment is inappropriate by a physician, careful review and agreement by the facility ethics committee), and the mom had ten days to find alternate care for him. Apparently she contacted 40 neonatal units and no one would take him.

The case brought a lot of attention to local media, but I didn't really see any national coverage, which sort of surprised me in light of the Shavio case. Poor baby.

ETA: I always find an interesting dichotomy between the right-to-life and right-to-healthcare. No one ever talks about how much it costs to keep the life support systems going, and yet losing the cuts on Medicaid was a major hit to the Republicans today.
More on the Texas law and this particular case by one of the bill's drafters.

Tyrone Slothrop 03-17-2005 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
When I was living in Japan, new clubs in Roppongi (place full of night clubs where all the gaijin hung out) would always hire Japanese body guards. Despite the influence of video games and movies, there is not much violence in Japan. Most Japanese males have never been in a fight. These bouncers were always trained in martial arts and had "security" certificates. In most of the clubs in Japan, they have sections where girls can sit and guys are not allowed. To make it so the girls don't have to be harassed. There was always some drunk Marine or Australian that didn't like to be told to leave the "grils" section and they would hospitalize the poor Japanese body guard who told them to leave. Then the club would hire some Yakuza (Japanese gangsters who are supposed to be tough) and then the Yakusa would get pummeled also. Finally the club would hire some large american servicemen in their off hours and order would be restored. But in the three years I was there I must have seen fifteen clubs go through this evolution.
Hank is pretty sure those clubs were just created that way. It's a Shinto thing; you wouldn't understand.

SlaveNoMore 03-17-2005 06:48 PM

Quote:

Spanky
... Yakuza (Japanese gangsters who are supposed to be tough)...
Supposed to be?

Have you never seen a Takashi Miike film? Beat Tikano?

Hank Chinaski 03-17-2005 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Hank is pretty sure those clubs were just created that way. It's a Shinto thing; you wouldn't understand.
Zen actually- What is the sound of one big meaty marine's hand clapping the head of a Japanese bouncer?

Spanky 03-17-2005 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Supposed to be?

Have you never seen a Takashi Miike film? Beat Tikano?
What the hell are you doing posting right now? I was told you were finding us a place to get Green Beer in the very very near future.

Gattigap 03-17-2005 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
What the hell are you doing posting right now? I was told you were finding us a place to get Green Beer in the very very near future.
It'll be easy enough to find. Listen for the sound of heels on concrete, followed by the screams.

Secret_Agent_Man 03-17-2005 07:11 PM

This Should be Fun
 
Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
I think I know what you're saying, but I'm worried that someone will now read it as saying that the 4'9" woman can do the guard/prisoner-control job as well as the 6' guy, as long as we perceive her to be as able. 'Taint so. (Likewise for the 4'9" guy, of course.)
I would have thought that reading the rest of my post should have cleared up that concern.

As I noted, women and (non-huge) men would not be able to do the strip-club bouncer job as well as the huge men by definition -- because of the needs of the job -- which include the need to be sufficiently impressive to scare off challenges.

I would say that, IF the prisoners _thought_ a tiny woman was as intimidating as a large male guard, AND that particular woman was freakishly strong and/or otherwise able to actually perform just as well as a large male guard -- THEN she _could_ do the job as well.

Your post seemed directed to the absence of the first criteria -- whcih I agreed was important and legitimate.

S_A_M

SlaveNoMore 03-17-2005 07:14 PM

Quote:

Spanky
What the hell are you doing posting right now? I was told you were finding us a place to get Green Beer in the very very near future.
Taking a breather. See you in an hour.

Spanky 03-17-2005 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Zen actually- What is the sound of one big meaty marine's hand clapping the head of a Japanese bouncer?
I remember going to a new club called Gas Panic III (don't even try to figure out how they name things in Tokyo) and I saw this Japanese bouncer walking up to a guy I knew was a SEAL. He was new in Japan, so I had just bought this guy two or three shots of tequila to make this American hero feel welcome in this strange land. He was in the "no guy" area talking to a very attractive Japanese girl, and you could tell it was just a matter of time before they were going home together (it was not very diffiult to pick up Japanese girls in Japan). The SEAL knew he was about to score and we all know that is when the male of the species is most dangerous. Being a veteran of the scene, I saw what was coming, and felt kind of responsible for what was about to happen because of the tequila shots (and teaching the Seal a few good lines in Japanese). While I was trying to make my way to the impending disaster, I saw the SEAL push the Japanese bouncer away, then the Japanes bouncer got in some Martial Art stance and threw a Karate punch at the SEAL that bounced of his back like a nickle hitting an Army Tank. The SEAL turned around, threw a right hook and I don't think the poor Japanese guy touched the ground for at least two yards. Five Japanese bouncers were laid out before me and two other Gaijin convinced him to leave the bar. Lambs to the slaughter.

Tyrone Slothrop 03-17-2005 07:19 PM

Wonkette gets her hands on a Homeland Defense threat chart.
 
Just a draft:

http://www.wonkette.com/politics/threatchart.gif

(I'd put up a link, but they forgot to include one for this post.)

ltl/fb 03-17-2005 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
I remember going to a new club called Gas Panic III (don't even try to figure out how they name things in Tokyo) and I saw this Japanese bouncer walking up to a guy I knew was a SEAL. He was new in Japan, so I had just bought this guy two or three shots of tequila to make this American hero feel welcome in this strange land. He was in the "no guy" area talking to a very attractive Japanese girl, and you could tell it was just a matter of time before they were going home together (it was not very diffiult to pick up Japanese girls in Japan). The SEAL knew he was about to score and we all know that is when the male of the species is most dangerous. Being a veteran of the scene, I saw what was coming, and felt kind of responsible for what was about to happen because of the tequila shots (and teaching the Seal a few good lines in Japanese). While I was trying to make my way to the impending disaster, I saw the SEAL push the Japanese bouncer away, then the Japanes bouncer got in some Martial Art stance and threw a Karate punch at the SEAL that bounced of his back like a nickle hitting an Army Tank. The SEAL turned around, threw a right hook and I don't think the poor Japanese guy touched the ground for at least two yards. Five Japanese bouncers were laid out before me and two other Gaijin convinced him to leave the bar. Lambs to the slaughter.
Why on earth didn't you make an effort to keep him out of the no-guy area? And why didn't the girl take him out of that area if she was so into him?

Gattigap 03-17-2005 07:54 PM

Volokh goes hard core
 
Eugene Volokh is aurguing in favor of allowing victim's families to participate in the torture and killing of criminals, presumably ones that are sentenced to death.

Really.
  • I am being perfectly serious, by the way. I like civilization, but some forms of savagery deserve to be met not just with cold, bloodless justice but with the deliberate infliction of pain, with cruel vengeance rather than with supposed humaneness or squeamishness. I think it slights the burning injustice of the murders, and the pain of the families, to react in any other way.

    And, yes, I know this aligns me in this instance with the Iranian government — but even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and in this instance the Iranians are quite correct.

    UPDATE: I should mention that such a punishment would probably violate the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause. I'm not an expert on the history of the clause, but my point is that the punishment is proper because it's cruel (i.e., because it involves the deliberate infliction of pain as part of the punishment), so it may well be unconstitutional. I would therefore endorse amending the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause to expressly exclude punishment for some sorts of mass murders.

Me, I just think Eugene is just angling for one of those judgeships coming up.

Hank Chinaski 03-17-2005 08:51 PM

Islam- a Religion that appreciates a good Hank Post
 
http://www.moroccotimes.com/news/article.asp?id=4815

Al-Azhar – The Vatican
Official apologies demanded

Morocco TIMES 3/17/2005 | 10:36 am


Egyptian highest religious authority Al-Azhar has requested the Vatican to present official apologies on Christian crusades carried out against Muslims seven centuries ago.

Sheikh Fawzi Zafzaf, President of the Interfaith Dialogue Committee of Al-Azhar, said during a press conference that his committee has sent a request to the Pope last February, demanding an official apology on Christian crusades against the Muslim world, following the example of the Jews.

The principle of demanding apology from the Vatican germinated following Pope Jean Paul II's visit to Syria and Egypt a few years ago, and the apologies the Catholic Church presented to the Jewish and some other Christian doctrines, explained Sheikh Zafzaf. “Al-Azhar is only asking for a similar treatment,” he added.

The Vatican's ambassador to Egypt has abstained from commenting, saying that Al-Azhar's request is now being considered by the Holy See.

bilmore 03-17-2005 11:15 PM

Volokh goes hard core
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Gattigap
Me, I just think Eugene is just angling for one of those judgeships coming up.
No, Ty, this was the POTD.

Shape Shifter 03-18-2005 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Why on earth didn't you make an effort to keep him out of the no-guy area? And why didn't the girl take him out of that area if she was so into him?
He was trying to boost his Libertarian Purity score.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 03-18-2005 10:54 AM

a new low
 
Just when you thought the Senate had already stooped to new lows of meaningless hearings called to use baseball players as an excuse for their own tv exposure, they now have called Terry Schiavo, yes the brain dead one, to testify before Congress.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...maged_woman_21

If I'm the husband, I'm sore tempted to wheel her into the hearing room, and let her "answer" all the questions. "I think my wife should answer that" "I would have to defer to my wife" "really, she should have the last word on that".

bilmore 03-18-2005 11:06 AM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Just when you thought the Senate had already stooped to new lows of meaningless hearings called to use baseball players as an excuse for their own tv exposure, they now have called Terry Schiavo, yes the brain dead one, to testify before Congress.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...maged_woman_21

If I'm the husband, I'm sore tempted to wheel her into the hearing room, and let her "answer" all the questions. "I think my wife should answer that" "I would have to defer to my wife" "really, she should have the last word on that".
I thought it was brilliant. They'd tried everything they could think of to stop the disconnect, and kept getting shot down. Now, they subpoena her for some unspecified future day of testimony, and federal law makes it a crime to interfere with the ability of the person to appear in response.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 03-18-2005 11:09 AM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
I thought it was brilliant. They'd tried everything they could think of to stop the disconnect, and kept getting shot down. Now, they subpoena her for some unspecified future day of testimony, and federal law makes it a crime to interfere with the ability of the person to appear in response.
Brilliantly evil?

For a party that rails against the interference by a minority with judicial selection, perhaps the fact that they can't get a bill passed with a simple majority should be a lesson.

taxwonk 03-18-2005 11:22 AM

This Should be Fun
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
From my girl Ann:
  • How many people have to die before the country stops humoring feminists? Last week, a defendant in a rape case, Brian Nichols, wrested a gun from a female deputy in an Atlanta courthouse and went on a murderous rampage. Liberals have proffered every possible explanation for this breakdown in security except the giant elephant in the room – who undoubtedly has an eating disorder and would appreciate a little support vis-ΰ-vis her negative body image.

    The New York Times said the problem was not enough government spending on courthouse security ("Budgets Can Affect Safety Inside Many Courthouses"). Yes, it was tax-cuts-for-the-rich that somehow enabled a 200-pound former linebacker to take a gun from a 5-foot-tall grandmother.

    Atlanta court officials dispensed with any spending issues the next time Nichols entered the courtroom when he was escorted by 17 guards and two police helicopters. He looked like P. Diddy showing up for a casual dinner party.

    I think I have an idea that would save money and lives: Have large men escort violent criminals. Admittedly, this approach would risk another wave of nausea and vomiting by female professors at Harvard. But there are also advantages to not pretending women are as strong as men, such as fewer dead people. Even a female math professor at Harvard should be able to run the numbers on this one.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/a...20050317.shtml
I think perhaps the problem was more likely the grandma was unwilling to use the weapon herself on a timely basis. It would have been nondiscriminatory, saved lives, and remarkably efficient administration of justice given the circumstances.

Tyrone Slothrop 03-18-2005 11:22 AM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Just when you thought the Senate had already stooped to new lows of meaningless hearings called to use baseball players as an excuse for their own tv exposure, they now have called Terry Schiavo, yes the brain dead one, to testify before Congress.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...maged_woman_21

If I'm the husband, I'm sore tempted to wheel her into the hearing room, and let her "answer" all the questions. "I think my wife should answer that" "I would have to defer to my wife" "really, she should have the last word on that".
Will she make a better witness than Mark McGwire did?

taxwonk 03-18-2005 11:26 AM

This Should be Fun
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Not Bob
And, I don't speak for Ty, but I think that his comment may have been in response to Ann Coulter's cheap and factually inaccurate throw-away charge laying fault at the feet of the feminists. She obviously didn't want any of those pesky facts (like the fact that the guard didn't carry a gun) to get in the way of her larger truths. Big shock.
One of Ann's biggest flaws is that she seldom lets the facts get in the way of her opinion.

taxwonk 03-18-2005 11:29 AM

This Should be Fun
 
Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
Answering both posts - best example is the firefighter situation. Strength and speed requirements were in place for years - which excluded almost all women. Court rulings started to say, requirements are thus invalid. Too much of an outcry, (because they were job-related requirements), so subsequent rulings began to change the scope and harshness of the requirements, to the point where a large percentage of the women taking the test could pass.

So, basically, there still are tests, but they pretty much just exclude the halt.
They also used to exclude the lame, but then COngress passed the ADA.

bilmore 03-18-2005 11:30 AM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Brilliantly evil?

For a party that rails against the interference by a minority with judicial selection, perhaps the fact that they can't get a bill passed with a simple majority should be a lesson.
Well, I know little about the substance of this one, so I've avoided it quite well, but it does strike me that, stopping a death, if you truly think an injustice is about to occur, might be an inappropriate time to worry about minority status.

sgtclub 03-18-2005 11:32 AM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
I thought it was brilliant. They'd tried everything they could think of to stop the disconnect, and kept getting shot down. Now, they subpoena her for some unspecified future day of testimony, and federal law makes it a crime to interfere with the ability of the person to appear in response.
Brilliant, yet. Hypocritical, absolutely. What fucking business does the federal government have in this matter?

sgtclub 03-18-2005 11:33 AM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Will she make a better witness than Mark McGwire did?
Did you see that? I thought it was total grandstanding.

eta:
  • We're at war in Iraq, at war in Afghanistan, threatened by Al Qaeda, mired in budget deficits, faced with gargantuan liabilities in Social Security and Medicare, struggling to sustain the fighting capacity of our military forces--and what does this committee think warrants its urgent attention? Whether a handful of overpaid entertainers are taking forbidden pills to improve their performance.

    The hearing rests on two well-worn premises that ought to offend the conservative sensibilities of Republicans, who control this committee and Congress. The first is that absolutely everything is a federal responsibility. The second is that the private sector needs incessant guidance from government.

http://www.instapundit.com


taxwonk 03-18-2005 11:36 AM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
I thought it was brilliant. They'd tried everything they could think of to stop the disconnect, and kept getting shot down. Now, they subpoena her for some unspecified future day of testimony, and federal law makes it a crime to interfere with the ability of the person to appear in response.
How brilliant can it be? I defy any lawyer to come up with even a scintilla of evidence that she could have responded to the subpoena.

taxwonk 03-18-2005 11:39 AM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
Well, I know little about the substance of this one, so I've avoided it quite well, but it does strike me that, stopping a death, if you truly think an injustice is about to occur, might be an inappropriate time to worry about minority status.
I think you may be overstating the case here, Bilmore. I don't recall Congress being granted the power to bestow immortality in the Constitution, and short of that, I fail to see how they can prevent a death.

sgtclub 03-18-2005 11:41 AM

The Truth Comes Out
 
  • The dumbest member of the United States Senate, California's very own Barbara Boxer, took to the podium next, and did something remarkable. She forgot to keep up the lie. She told the truth about the strategy of the Democrats. She let what their view of the Constitution truly is. If Rose Woods, Richard Nixon's legendary secretary, worked at either MoveOn or C-span, the following part of the tape would be missing:

    "Why would we give lifetime appointments to people who earn up to $200,000 a year, with absolutely a great retirement system, and all the things all Americans wish for, with absolutely no check and balance except that one confirmation vote. So we're saying we think you ought to get nine votes over the 51 required. That isn't too much to ask for such a super important position. There ought to be a super vote. Don't you think so? It's the only check and balance on these people. They're in for life. They don't stand for election like we do, which is scary."
http://www.radioblogger.com/#000539

Sexual Harassment Panda 03-18-2005 11:42 AM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
I thought it was brilliant. They'd tried everything they could think of to stop the disconnect, and kept getting shot down. Now, they subpoena her for some unspecified future day of testimony, and federal law makes it a crime to interfere with the ability of the person to appear in response.
I hope everyone who voted for this one day finds themselves immobile in a hospital bed, unable to communicate and in searing, blinding, unending pain. Fucking Pharisees.

Tyrone Slothrop 03-18-2005 11:54 AM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
Did you see that? I thought it was total grandstanding.

eta:
  • We're at war in Iraq, at war in Afghanistan, threatened by Al Qaeda, mired in budget deficits, faced with gargantuan liabilities in Social Security and Medicare, struggling to sustain the fighting capacity of our military forces--and what does this committee think warrants its urgent attention? Whether a handful of overpaid entertainers are taking forbidden pills to improve their performance.

    The hearing rests on two well-worn premises that ought to offend the conservative sensibilities of Republicans, who control this committee and Congress. The first is that absolutely everything is a federal responsibility. The second is that the private sector needs incessant guidance from government.

http://www.instapundit.com
I saw some of the questions asked by Christopher Shays, and was appalled. It's not the place of private business or a union to enforce the laws against drug abuse. I mean, MLB probably should try to do something about it, since it affects the integrity of the game, but that's a business decision. It's not like they're deputized to prosecute drug offenders.

sgtclub 03-18-2005 12:04 PM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I saw some of the questions asked by Christopher Shays, and was appalled. It's not the place of private business or a union to enforce the laws against drug abuse. I mean, MLB probably should try to do something about it, since it affects the integrity of the game, but that's a business decision. It's not like they're deputized to prosecute drug offenders.
MLB and the players union have handled this poorly as well. I actually stopped watching baseball after the 94 strike, and part of the reason was roids. When Brady Anderson comes in 30 pounds heavier and hits 50 HRs, you know juicing is running rampant.

But there are far more important things for Congress to focus on than roids in baseball.

Tyrone Slothrop 03-18-2005 12:06 PM

The Truth Comes Out
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
  • The dumbest member of the United States Senate, California's very own Barbara Boxer, took to the podium next, and did something remarkable. She forgot to keep up the lie. She told the truth about the strategy of the Democrats. She let what their view of the Constitution truly is. If Rose Woods, Richard Nixon's legendary secretary, worked at either MoveOn or C-span, the following part of the tape would be missing:

    "Why would we give lifetime appointments to people who earn up to $200,000 a year, with absolutely a great retirement system, and all the things all Americans wish for, with absolutely no check and balance except that one confirmation vote. So we're saying we think you ought to get nine votes over the 51 required. That isn't too much to ask for such a super important position. There ought to be a super vote. Don't you think so? It's the only check and balance on these people. They're in for life. They don't stand for election like we do, which is scary."
http://www.radioblogger.com/#000539
Since you can't deny that Republicans used various procedural devices to prevent Clinton nominees from getting an up-or-down vote, why do you marvel at the notion that Boxer wants judges to be approved by 60 votes?

Shape Shifter 03-18-2005 12:09 PM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I saw some of the questions asked by Christopher Shays, and was appalled. It's not the place of private business or a union to enforce the laws against drug abuse. I mean, MLB probably should try to do something about it, since it affects the integrity of the game, but that's a business decision. It's not like they're deputized to prosecute drug offenders.
Dunno, I see your point, but they're also creating conditions that encourage and foster abuse. Kind of like they own a crack house, but with a different smell.

Tyrone Slothrop 03-18-2005 12:09 PM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
But there are far more important things for Congress to focus on than roids in baseball.
I'm waiting for hearings on steroid use by professional wrestlers.

Replaced_Texan 03-18-2005 12:11 PM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Brilliantly evil?

For a party that rails against the interference by a minority with judicial selection, perhaps the fact that they can't get a bill passed with a simple majority should be a lesson.
Same people that wanted to cut Medicaid want to keep her alive. I don't understand these people.

bilmore 03-18-2005 12:13 PM

a new low
 
Quote:

Originally posted by taxwonk
I think you may be overstating the case here, Bilmore. I don't recall Congress being granted the power to bestow immortality in the Constitution, and short of that, I fail to see how they can prevent a death.
Well, keep in mind that I'm not commenting on the substance of their efforts. I have no ideas how alive she is or not. Lacking that, I'm not going there.

sgtclub 03-18-2005 12:14 PM

The Truth Comes Out
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Since you can't deny that Republicans used various procedural devices to prevent Clinton nominees from getting an up-or-down vote, why do you marvel at the notion that Boxer wants judges to be approved by 60 votes?
I'm vaguely familiar with the GOP stunts pulled during the Clinton term, and I think both practices are unconstitutional.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:37 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com