|
Italian's Car Carried WMDs?
Harry wrote:
White House Denies It Fired Upon Italian Journalist ********** Seems logical to me. The White House is in Washington DC, while the journalist was wounded and the Italian "intelligence officer" was killed in Iraq. That would be one heck of a long, long shot. Let's see....elevation, windage,.....nah, does not compute. Anybody else think it's strange we have a talking house? :-) |
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Now we hear reports that the US military shot & killed Bulgarian soldiers. At least the US doesn't discriminate. They shoot/bomb Brits, Canadians, Italians and now Bulgarians. Gotta wonder what they're doing to innocent Iraqi civilians who happen to twitch at the wrong time. |
|
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... snip Reminds of the days of 2-1/4" cameras, where you had 12 shots on a roll of film, the advance was mechanical, and you had to make each shot count. I still have a Yashica like that. |
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... White House Denies It Fired Upon Italian Journalist Politics: 7 March 2005, Monday. The White House denied charges that US military forces may have deliberately targeted the car carrying former Italian hostage Giuliana Sgrena after she was freed. Hell I glad I was not their I would shoot so many hole in the dam thing you would know it was a car. I think they needed to take her out and a few more with her. Oh and some of the CNN reporters also. |
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... There were good cameras, YashicaMats, no? And the large neg size made it easy to produce large prints without grain. Mine is a Yashica-D. I traded half a load of gravel for it 20 years ago. Last year I found a manual on the internet for this model. Probably should buy some 120 film and run it through before I forget how to use the thing. |
On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 20:46:36 -0600, "Bill" wrote:
Hell I glad I was not their I would shoot so many hole in the dam thing you would know it was a car. I think they needed to take her out and a few more with her. Oh and some of the CNN reporters also. Ouch, those are some nasty looking scrapes you have on your knuckles there dude. bb |
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Bill wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... White House Denies It Fired Upon Italian Journalist Politics: 7 March 2005, Monday. The White House denied charges that US military forces may have deliberately targeted the car carrying former Italian hostage Giuliana Sgrena after she was freed. Hell I glad I was not their I would shoot so many hole in the dam thing you would know it was a car. I think they needed to take her out and a few more with her. Oh and some of the CNN reporters also. You da man, eh? The only good communist is a dead communist. This goes for socialists too! |
Bert wrote:
The only good communist is a dead communist. This goes for socialists too! *********** Careful. Without communists, you wouldn't have the earliest decades of the Christian church. Without the earliest decades, what would you have today? Without socialists, you wouldn't have the Pledge of Allegiance. (pledge was written by a socialist) Now what would you righties do all day if you couldn't yak on about the US being a "Christian nation" or repeat the Pledge of Allegiance like a rosary? Without socialism, you wouldn't have social security. Nobody drawing a government SS benefit has the moral right to complain about socialism, unless they send their monthly socialist proceeds back to the treasury. I have a mental image of you as well up into your senior years. If I'm correct, have you sent your socialist proceeds back yet? |
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Bert Robbins wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Bill wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... White House Denies It Fired Upon Italian Journalist Politics: 7 March 2005, Monday. The White House denied charges that US military forces may have deliberately targeted the car carrying former Italian hostage Giuliana Sgrena after she was freed. Hell I glad I was not their I would shoot so many hole in the dam thing you would know it was a car. I think they needed to take her out and a few more with her. Oh and some of the CNN reporters also. You da man, eh? The only good communist is a dead communist. This goes for socialists too! I suppose you really believe that. Yes, I do believe it! Communism is a very bad form of government which has been proven time and time again in this world. If you do, why are you not speaking out against Wal-Mart, which transfers more than $100 billion a hear in hard currency to the PRC and thereby directly supports the largest and most dangerous communist government on earth? The ChiCom's are communist in name only, in reality they are an Oligarchy. |
Hell I glad I was not their I would shoot so many hole in the dam thing
you would know it was a car. I think they needed to take her out and a few more with her. Oh and some of the CNN reporters also. You da man, eh? The only good communist is a dead communist. This goes for socialists too! I suppose you really believe that. If you do, why are you not speaking out against Wal-Mart, which transfers more than $100 billion a hear in hard currency to the PRC and thereby directly supports the largest and most dangerous communist government on earth? Yea and I bet you shop at wal-mart too ... |
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Bert Robbins wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Bert Robbins wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Bill wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... White House Denies It Fired Upon Italian Journalist Politics: 7 March 2005, Monday. The White House denied charges that US military forces may have deliberately targeted the car carrying former Italian hostage Giuliana Sgrena after she was freed. Hell I glad I was not their I would shoot so many hole in the dam thing you would know it was a car. I think they needed to take her out and a few more with her. Oh and some of the CNN reporters also. You da man, eh? The only good communist is a dead communist. This goes for socialists too! I suppose you really believe that. Yes, I do believe it! Communism is a very bad form of government which has been proven time and time again in this world. If you do, why are you not speaking out against Wal-Mart, which transfers more than $100 billion a hear in hard currency to the PRC and thereby directly supports the largest and most dangerous communist government on earth? The ChiCom's are communist in name only, in reality they are an Oligarchy. Political systems are not binary, Bert. The shades of gray argument again. Didn't I read in the Washington Post this morning that your friends at the AFL-CIO have decided, or was it Sweeney only, that money recruiting new union members would be better spent on buying political influence? The AFL-CIO's logic is faulty or realistic, they may know they are dying. The AARP has it right, increase the membership of your organization and then state that the membership will vote one way or the other to influence elections. Still, a good commie is a dead commie! |
|
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... White House Denies It Fired Upon Italian Journalist Politics: 7 March 2005, Monday. The White House denied charges that US military forces may have deliberately targeted the car carrying former Italian hostage Giuliana Sgrena after she was freed. An Italian intelligence officer in the car was shot and killed in the incident. White House press secretary Scott McClellan said it was "absurd" for a former hostage in Iraq to throw such charges and noted that the car was traveling on one of the most dangerous roads in Iraq when it was fired upon. - - - Maybe the troops thought the car was full of those WMDs the White House claimed were in Iraq? Why? Did the trip originate in the Bekaa Valley of Lebanon? |
Do lefties not say the Pledge? This is a new concept for me - that
saying the Pledge is a 'righties' thing. ************ Lefties say it when appropriate, and mean it. The difference is that most on the left don't view the POA as a stalking horse to try to get everybody in the country to acknowledge God. Nor do we "repeat it endlessly, like a rosary". |
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message ... elections. Still, a good commie is a dead commie! Bert...most of us have left the 50's far behind. We don't mind a little '50s rock & roll on occasion...but that's it! |
Fits wrote:
Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism.......AND 'proceeds'...........a 2% return on the stolen money....and chuck wants to call it proceeds? He is really giving the current "king" a run for his money. *************** Today's standard: "Socialism is OK when it directly benefits me. I will justify my suck on the government teat by pointing out that I was forced, through taxation, to contribute to the government during my working years and that because I am special I now deserve to get my money back. Socialism in not OK when it benefits somebody else. The only good Socialist is a dead socialist, but hands off the socialist who signs the monthly check for my little piece of the socialist security system, please." |
Fits wrote:
Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism....... Sure it does. Accepting a Social Security benefits check... which is socialism... while complaining about socialism, especially saying that socialists ought to be killed... is just outright hypocrisy. Hey Bert Robo-tard, if you want to kill a Socialist maybe you should start with P.Fritz? ... AND 'proceeds'...........a 2% return on the stolen money....and chuck wants to call it proceeds? You're right, it's not "proceeds", it's money taken from those that are currently working. You are confusing Social Security with an investment plan. wrote: Today's standard: "Socialism is OK when it directly benefits me. I will justify my suck on the government teat by pointing out that I was forced, through taxation, to contribute to the government during my working years and that because I am special I now deserve to get my money back. Socialism in not OK when it benefits somebody else. The only good Socialist is a dead socialist, but hands off the socialist who signs the monthly check for my little piece of the socialist security system, please." Too many words, Chuck. DSK |
"DSK" wrote in message .. . Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism....... Sure it does. Accepting a Social Security benefits check... which is socialism... while complaining about socialism, especially saying that socialists ought to be killed... is just outright hypocrisy. I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. |
NOYB wrote:
I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. Same here, and I'm a lot closer to collecting than you are. If Bush & Cheney were seriously interested in reforming or fixing Social Security (instead of their plan being a subterfuge to harvest campaign contributions from Wall St), they'd offer that option. However, you're forgetting the other half of the equation. The SS Trust is the biggest under writer of the U.S. deficit, which Bush/Cheney have increased enormously. By bowing out of the SS plan, you'd be effectively voting with your dollars. DSK |
"NOYB" wrote in message ink.net... "DSK" wrote in message .. . Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism....... Sure it does. Accepting a Social Security benefits check... which is socialism... while complaining about socialism, especially saying that socialists ought to be killed... is just outright hypocrisy. I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. Exactly...... In the mean time, I consider it getting stolen money back, not accepting socialism, nor is it hypocrisy. I could retire years ahead, or pass money on to others, if it were not being stolen from me. |
"DSK" wrote in message .. . NOYB wrote: I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. Same here, and I'm a lot closer to collecting than you are. If Bush & Cheney were seriously interested in reforming or fixing Social Security (instead of their plan being a subterfuge to harvest campaign contributions from Wall St), they'd offer that option. They can't. That's the fundamental flaw of the system. We're not putting money away for our retirement. We're paying for the retirement of those who are now retired. |
"NOYB" wrote in message ink.net... "DSK" wrote in message .. . NOYB wrote: I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. Same here, and I'm a lot closer to collecting than you are. If Bush & Cheney were seriously interested in reforming or fixing Social Security (instead of their plan being a subterfuge to harvest campaign contributions from Wall St), they'd offer that option. They can't. That's the fundamental flaw of the system. We're not putting money away for our retirement. We're paying for the retirement of those who are now retired. And the surplus is being spent by congress on every social program you can imgine. The proper thing to do would be to eliminate it entirely, take the 15% that is being contributed and channel it into a personally retirement account out of which you would be allowed to buy disability and life insurance. Hopefully, what Bush is doing is the first step in weaning the clueless off the guvmint dole. |
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "DSK" wrote in message .. . NOYB wrote: I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. Same here, and I'm a lot closer to collecting than you are. If Bush & Cheney were seriously interested in reforming or fixing Social Security (instead of their plan being a subterfuge to harvest campaign contributions from Wall St), they'd offer that option. They can't. That's the fundamental flaw of the system. We're not putting money away for our retirement. We're paying for the retirement of those who are now retired. Those who are now retired made it possible for you. Some of them. |
I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am
exempt from paying FICA today. P.Fritz wrote: Exactly...... In the mean time, I consider it getting stolen money back, not accepting socialism, nor is it hypocrisy. Well, whatever you "consider" it, you are accepting benefits from a socialist program. I could retire years ahead, or pass money on to others, if it were not being stolen from me. Nah, you'd have frittered it away like you did your take-home pay. If you weren't already saving & investing wisely, increasing your take-home by the amount taken for Social Security would not have changed your financial status. DSK |
NOYB wrote:
"DSK" wrote in message .. . Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism....... Sure it does. Accepting a Social Security benefits check... which is socialism... while complaining about socialism, especially saying that socialists ought to be killed... is just outright hypocrisy. I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. Remember that SS is for more than retirement. Should you get hit by a truck tomorrow, and are unable to work, you get to collect. If the truck kills you, your wife and kids (assuming you have any) also collect. |
Jim, wrote:
Remember that SS is for more than retirement. Should you get hit by a truck tomorrow, and are unable to work, you get to collect. If the truck kills you, your wife and kids (assuming you have any) also collect. A big part of Bush & Cheney's strategy is to create a public perception of what Social Security is *not*, so they can attack it (sort of like they did with Kerry). The Bush-Cheney cheerleaders here will not acknowledge any of this, since their "knowledge" of Social Security (hey, if you're collecting, it's not even socialistic!) is based on this spin-meistering (which of course depends on ignorance). Besides, this newfangled Social Darwinism (disguised as 'compassionate conservatism') assumes that any worker stupid enough to be in a low wage job, thus unable to afford good insurance, and dies young, deserves to have his family suffer in poverty. DSK |
"Jim," wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "DSK" wrote in message .. . Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism....... Sure it does. Accepting a Social Security benefits check... which is socialism... while complaining about socialism, especially saying that socialists ought to be killed... is just outright hypocrisy. I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. Remember that SS is for more than retirement. Should you get hit by a truck tomorrow, and are unable to work, you get to collect. I buy personal disability insurance for that kind of thing. If the truck kills you, your wife and kids (assuming you have any) also collect. That's why my life policy is for. |
wrote in message oups.com... Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism.......AND 'proceeds'...........a 2% return on the stolen money....and chuck wants to call it proceeds? He is really giving the current "king" a run for his money. *************** Today's standard: "Socialism is OK when it directly benefits me. I will justify my suck on the government teat by pointing out that I was forced, through taxation, to contribute to the government during my working years and that because I am special I now deserve to get my money back. Socialism in not OK when it benefits somebody else. The only good Socialist is a dead socialist, but hands off the socialist who signs the monthly check for my little piece of the socialist security system, please." Actually it is a -0.3% return on your SS contributions. |
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "DSK" wrote in message .. . NOYB wrote: I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. Same here, and I'm a lot closer to collecting than you are. If Bush & Cheney were seriously interested in reforming or fixing Social Security (instead of their plan being a subterfuge to harvest campaign contributions from Wall St), they'd offer that option. They can't. That's the fundamental flaw of the system. We're not putting money away for our retirement. We're paying for the retirement of those who are now retired. Those who are now retired made it possible for you. No, we have a "Trust Fund" of money. It is a "lock box" of money. |
"Calif Bill" wrote in message ink.net... wrote in message oups.com... Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism.......AND 'proceeds'...........a 2% return on the stolen money....and chuck wants to call it proceeds? He is really giving the current "king" a run for his money. *************** Today's standard: "Socialism is OK when it directly benefits me. I will justify my suck on the government teat by pointing out that I was forced, through taxation, to contribute to the government during my working years and that because I am special I now deserve to get my money back. Socialism in not OK when it benefits somebody else. The only good Socialist is a dead socialist, but hands off the socialist who signs the monthly check for my little piece of the socialist security system, please." Actually it is a -0.3% return on your SS contributions. And if it is so good, why is Congress exempt? |
NOYB wrote:
"Jim," wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "DSK" wrote in message t... Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism....... Sure it does. Accepting a Social Security benefits check... which is socialism... while complaining about socialism, especially saying that socialists ought to be killed... is just outright hypocrisy. I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. Remember that SS is for more than retirement. Should you get hit by a truck tomorrow, and are unable to work, you get to collect. I buy personal disability insurance for that kind of thing. If the truck kills you, your wife and kids (assuming you have any) also collect. That's why my life policy is for. And I'll bet you have less coverage, and pay more than SS. Max SS for 1995 is $1939/month -- indexed to cost of living. Go price an annuity that will give you that, then price life insurance that will give you the cost of the annuity. Then do the same for disability, and add the 2 -- unless you can find a policy that covers both. |
"Jim," wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "Jim," wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "DSK" wrote in message et... Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism....... Sure it does. Accepting a Social Security benefits check... which is socialism... while complaining about socialism, especially saying that socialists ought to be killed... is just outright hypocrisy. I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. Remember that SS is for more than retirement. Should you get hit by a truck tomorrow, and are unable to work, you get to collect. I buy personal disability insurance for that kind of thing. If the truck kills you, your wife and kids (assuming you have any) also collect. That's why my life policy is for. And I'll bet you have less coverage, and pay more than SS. Max SS for 1995 is $1939/month -- indexed to cost of living My policy is $8400/month, tax-free, payable to age 65, and also indexed to cost of living. It ain't cheap, but I know it will be there when I need it. And I don't have to worry about the government monkeying around with it and paying me a few cents on the dollar because they mismanaged it. |
"Calif Bill" wrote in message ink.net... wrote in message oups.com... Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism.......AND 'proceeds'...........a 2% return on the stolen money....and chuck wants to call it proceeds? He is really giving the current "king" a run for his money. *************** Today's standard: "Socialism is OK when it directly benefits me. I will justify my suck on the government teat by pointing out that I was forced, through taxation, to contribute to the government during my working years and that because I am special I now deserve to get my money back. Socialism in not OK when it benefits somebody else. The only good Socialist is a dead socialist, but hands off the socialist who signs the monthly check for my little piece of the socialist security system, please." Actually it is a -0.3% return on your SS contributions. The warped liebral mindset........................getting your own stolen money back is accepting 'socialism' |
"NOYB" wrote in message ink.net... "Jim," wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "DSK" wrote in message .. . Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism....... Sure it does. Accepting a Social Security benefits check... which is socialism... while complaining about socialism, especially saying that socialists ought to be killed... is just outright hypocrisy. I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. Remember that SS is for more than retirement. Should you get hit by a truck tomorrow, and are unable to work, you get to collect. I buy personal disability insurance for that kind of thing. Remember, jim is from the "the guvmint has to do it for you, you are to dumb to take care of yourself" liebral mindset. If the truck kills you, your wife and kids (assuming you have any) also collect. That's why my life policy is for. |
"P.Fritz" wrote in message ... "Calif Bill" wrote in message ink.net... wrote in message oups.com... Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism.......AND 'proceeds'...........a 2% return on the stolen money....and chuck wants to call it proceeds? He is really giving the current "king" a run for his money. *************** Today's standard: "Socialism is OK when it directly benefits me. I will justify my suck on the government teat by pointing out that I was forced, through taxation, to contribute to the government during my working years and that because I am special I now deserve to get my money back. Socialism in not OK when it benefits somebody else. The only good Socialist is a dead socialist, but hands off the socialist who signs the monthly check for my little piece of the socialist security system, please." Actually it is a -0.3% return on your SS contributions. The warped liebral mindset........................getting your own stolen money back is accepting 'socialism' ....and a tax write-off is a subsidy. |
"NOYB" wrote in message ink.net... "Jim," wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "Jim," wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "DSK" wrote in message . net... Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism....... Sure it does. Accepting a Social Security benefits check... which is socialism... while complaining about socialism, especially saying that socialists ought to be killed... is just outright hypocrisy. I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. Remember that SS is for more than retirement. Should you get hit by a truck tomorrow, and are unable to work, you get to collect. I buy personal disability insurance for that kind of thing. If the truck kills you, your wife and kids (assuming you have any) also collect. That's why my life policy is for. And I'll bet you have less coverage, and pay more than SS. Max SS for 1995 is $1939/month -- indexed to cost of living My policy is $8400/month, tax-free, payable to age 65, and also indexed to cost of living. It ain't cheap, but I know it will be there when I need it. And I don't have to worry about the government monkeying around with it and paying me a few cents on the dollar because they mismanaged it. Yes, and that contract is a guarantee......unlike the SS which is at the whim of the guvmint. |
"NOYB" wrote in message ink.net... "P.Fritz" wrote in message ... "Calif Bill" wrote in message ink.net... wrote in message oups.com... Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism.......AND 'proceeds'...........a 2% return on the stolen money....and chuck wants to call it proceeds? He is really giving the current "king" a run for his money. *************** Today's standard: "Socialism is OK when it directly benefits me. I will justify my suck on the government teat by pointing out that I was forced, through taxation, to contribute to the government during my working years and that because I am special I now deserve to get my money back. Socialism in not OK when it benefits somebody else. The only good Socialist is a dead socialist, but hands off the socialist who signs the monthly check for my little piece of the socialist security system, please." Actually it is a -0.3% return on your SS contributions. The warped liebral mindset........................getting your own stolen money back is accepting 'socialism' ...and a tax write-off is a subsidy. And your primary residence is not a investment. |
NOYB wrote:
"Jim," wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "Jim," wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "DSK" wrote in message . net... Fits wrote: Accepting the guvmint check returning the money that has essentially been stolen from you every year of your working life....more or less at gun point.......does NOT negate the complaint against socialism....... Sure it does. Accepting a Social Security benefits check... which is socialism... while complaining about socialism, especially saying that socialists ought to be killed... is just outright hypocrisy. I'd happily forgo my Social Security check later in life as long as I am exempt from paying FICA today. Remember that SS is for more than retirement. Should you get hit by a truck tomorrow, and are unable to work, you get to collect. I buy personal disability insurance for that kind of thing. If the truck kills you, your wife and kids (assuming you have any) also collect. That's why my life policy is for. And I'll bet you have less coverage, and pay more than SS. Max SS for 1995 is $1939/month -- indexed to cost of living My policy is $8400/month, tax-free, payable to age 65, and also indexed to cost of living. It ain't cheap, but I know it will be there when I need it. And I don't have to worry about the government monkeying around with it and paying me a few cents on the dollar because they mismanaged it. May I ask who is your policy with, and what is the cost (compared to SS) |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:42 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com