I have been at a loss as of late as to what to write about.
Note the lack of an entry in well over a month. When I sit down to write, it's usually stream of conciousness. No drafts, no theme, no point really. I had a really decent article about Hurricane Katrina and FEMA and Bush and Nagin and blah, blah....but then I thought...screw it. However, donate if you can...especially since Rita is prociding even more misery on the Gulf Coast. My personal beliefs usually keep me from giving to organizations that allow people to leech off the backs (and labor) of others, but I truly feel for a lot of these people. Maybe because I live within ten miles of an ocean, and an immense bay. Even though they were well aware that they were living in a bowl surrounded by water, there's no way to prepare for that kind of loss in today's economic world for the middle class and lower. I hope someone pressures the insurance companies to actually payout for once. The "your policy doesn't cover an act of god" bullshit is already starting in a lot of these places. I hate insurance companies. Not as much as Facists or Anarchists....but close.
Oh, Rome:Total War kicks ass. Fun game. More than just strategy, it's got a bit of a RPG aspect as well. How's that for randomosity. Yep.
24 September 2005
20 July 2005
Hurricanes and the price of gas.
I've noticed lately that gas prices seem to rise no matter what the news and/or weather outlook is. Hurricane Dennis is supposed to hit the area of the gulf where the oil rigs are, and prices rise. Yep, I get that it makes sense. We may see a drop in the national reserves, and it's the middle of summer. Then the storm doesn't hit nearly as many rigs, and it's at a much reduced intensity. Prices should fall right? At least stabilize, right? WRONG. I then read that because everyone was evacuated, the prices will keep right on rising, even though they are able to get back to work a full day or more quicker than expected. I thought the pre-emptive rise in cost was to counterbalance this work stoppage! Then the next day it's "Prices rise on Hurrican Emily fears." BS. That storm is/was and always has been headed for the Yucatan peninsula then back into the gulf (nowhere near the previously mentioned rigs) and then towards northeastern Mexico/extreme southeastern Texas. What's the moral of the story? I'm not sure there are any morals when it comes to oil. I sure hope that this proclaimed alternative fuel research ol' GW is so amped about comes into play before I'm too old to care.
14 July 2005
I Hate Passive aggressive/PC Office Politics
You know those little emails you get from someone..."Is this problem still happening?" You can hear the emphasis on the word still as clear as if it were yelled from a tower using a bullhorn...but it's typed very nicely, very correctly. "Are you going to take care of that?" or "Do you need me to help you?". These would be fine if these type of people weren't raging fucktards who think they're smarter than you because they've got four to six months more seniority.
Now, you may be thinking, what if they are innocent comments? Ohhhhhh nooooo. They most definitely aren't. When they do come to you and talk AT you, you can hear the fake just dripping off their words. It's disgusting. I propose that we just say what we mean. No lift in our pitch to feign concern, no lightening our volume to seem non-threatening, no jargon, no buzzwords, and no BS. Just ask me, "Hey, you gonna do this or do I have to?", "Did you fix this yet?" or maybe "Do you even know how to do it?", even a "Hey, 'tard....Is that gonna take all week?". At least I could respect your honesty.
I also hate that everything some people do every single day of their pathetic little existence is to try to make themselves look good at the expense of others. STOP THAT. It's sad, and desperate. Let your work show off your ability. Stop relying on setting others up for failure so you can come in and shine. It's usually on the back of someone else's work because you were too busy screwing around scheming to actually get the work done. If you would have worked that hard on doing well at your job, you wouldn't need to use these tactics.
When someone figures you out, you look not only unethical and immoral, but you're exposed as a completely worthless waste of space. Good luck regaining any respect. Idiot.
You know those little emails you get from someone..."Is this problem still happening?" You can hear the emphasis on the word still as clear as if it were yelled from a tower using a bullhorn...but it's typed very nicely, very correctly. "Are you going to take care of that?" or "Do you need me to help you?". These would be fine if these type of people weren't raging fucktards who think they're smarter than you because they've got four to six months more seniority.
Now, you may be thinking, what if they are innocent comments? Ohhhhhh nooooo. They most definitely aren't. When they do come to you and talk AT you, you can hear the fake just dripping off their words. It's disgusting. I propose that we just say what we mean. No lift in our pitch to feign concern, no lightening our volume to seem non-threatening, no jargon, no buzzwords, and no BS. Just ask me, "Hey, you gonna do this or do I have to?", "Did you fix this yet?" or maybe "Do you even know how to do it?", even a "Hey, 'tard....Is that gonna take all week?". At least I could respect your honesty.
I also hate that everything some people do every single day of their pathetic little existence is to try to make themselves look good at the expense of others. STOP THAT. It's sad, and desperate. Let your work show off your ability. Stop relying on setting others up for failure so you can come in and shine. It's usually on the back of someone else's work because you were too busy screwing around scheming to actually get the work done. If you would have worked that hard on doing well at your job, you wouldn't need to use these tactics.
When someone figures you out, you look not only unethical and immoral, but you're exposed as a completely worthless waste of space. Good luck regaining any respect. Idiot.
13 July 2005
Why aren't today's young professional sports stars better citizens?
I was reading the news that The Tennessee Titans first round pick Adam "Pac Man" Jones (who BTW has the second dumbest nickname in sports ever, behind only "He Hate Me") was arrested on assault and vandalism charges. The charges were leveled after a nightclub fight. Okay, we've all been a little too rowdy in a bar once or twice. The guy is a young man, and it happens.
Then I read the reason the fight broke out. The owner of the bar testified that he asked two of Jones' friends to leave because "they were smoking drugs". WHAT?!? You were just drafted by an NFL team in the first round. That means HUGE money for playing a game that you probably love, and at the very least beats a 9-5 somewhere in the "real world". Yet you would jeopardize that by hanging out with people who would be brazen enough to smoke pot (I'm assuming it was marijuana) in a semi public place. Then instead of thanking the man for not calling the cops to arrest their dumb asses, you grab the man by the shirt and punch him and break his necklace. Wow. Just Wow. What a role model. What a citizen. What an ass.
To Mr. Jones and all the other athletes who aren't living up to the expectations placed on public figures: Please realize that you are one of a very few privileged people who get paid anywhere from hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars to play a game. With that privilege comes responsibility. You have to play that game in front of the public, and that's not a bad thing. Without that public you have no career. You have a responsibility to live better than your friends who may not be in the public eye. At the very least you owe that sports franchise, they've paid you to not only play a game to the best of your ability, but to not become a liability to them on or off the field.
Take a good look around and look at all your peers (and their are many) who are starting organizations to help children, or golf tournaments with proceeds going to charity, even simple visits to a hospital or fan event. For that matter the guys who are starting companies and employing people are being much better citizens than those who would flaunt their money and perceived position by acting like a common street thug.
I was reading the news that The Tennessee Titans first round pick Adam "Pac Man" Jones (who BTW has the second dumbest nickname in sports ever, behind only "He Hate Me") was arrested on assault and vandalism charges. The charges were leveled after a nightclub fight. Okay, we've all been a little too rowdy in a bar once or twice. The guy is a young man, and it happens.
Then I read the reason the fight broke out. The owner of the bar testified that he asked two of Jones' friends to leave because "they were smoking drugs". WHAT?!? You were just drafted by an NFL team in the first round. That means HUGE money for playing a game that you probably love, and at the very least beats a 9-5 somewhere in the "real world". Yet you would jeopardize that by hanging out with people who would be brazen enough to smoke pot (I'm assuming it was marijuana) in a semi public place. Then instead of thanking the man for not calling the cops to arrest their dumb asses, you grab the man by the shirt and punch him and break his necklace. Wow. Just Wow. What a role model. What a citizen. What an ass.
To Mr. Jones and all the other athletes who aren't living up to the expectations placed on public figures: Please realize that you are one of a very few privileged people who get paid anywhere from hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars to play a game. With that privilege comes responsibility. You have to play that game in front of the public, and that's not a bad thing. Without that public you have no career. You have a responsibility to live better than your friends who may not be in the public eye. At the very least you owe that sports franchise, they've paid you to not only play a game to the best of your ability, but to not become a liability to them on or off the field.
Take a good look around and look at all your peers (and their are many) who are starting organizations to help children, or golf tournaments with proceeds going to charity, even simple visits to a hospital or fan event. For that matter the guys who are starting companies and employing people are being much better citizens than those who would flaunt their money and perceived position by acting like a common street thug.
Everyone wants Liberty....even the Muslims. Go figure.
This article should be read to every "extremist" and "Hardline [insert religion here]" before they spout off that the people they are "defending" want the government to control every aspect of their lives.
We all want the same things out of life. The right to choose our path. Think "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." No one wants their government to become intertwined in every little thing they do, except of course the governments themselves.
From the Associated Press:
Palestinian Poet Lashes Out at Militants
By MOHAMMED DARAGHMEH, Associated Press Writer
It's been a hot summer on the Palestinian arts scene: gunmen broke up the concert of a popular West Bank singer after he refused to limit his repertoire to political songs, and a Hamas-run town banned a music festival to prevent mingling of the sexes.
Now, Palestinian national poet Mahmoud Darwish is striking back, saying fanatics have no right to deprive Palestinians of beauty in their lives. "There are Taliban-type elements in our society, and this is a very dangerous sign," Darwish told a gathering of artists and intellectuals this week.
It's not just an argument over artistic freedom, but over whether a future Palestinian state will be a theocracy or a pluralistic democracy.
Compared to other Arab societies, the Palestinians were once largely secular and tolerant of Western customs, even with Islam as the majority religion. Many Palestinians have strong ties with the West, including relatives living abroad or years spent studying in foreign universities.
However, more than four years of Israeli-Palestinian fighting have led some Palestinians to seek solace in religion or return to tradition, also a reflection of a regional trend.
Islamic fundamentalists, meanwhile, have become increasingly assertive. The militant Hamas group scored several victories in local elections in recent months, and expects to pull even with Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas' secular Fatah movement in future parliamentary elections.
In the West Bank town of Qalqiliya, Hamas won local elections earlier this year with promises of better government services, but also with assurances it would not impose its religious beliefs. However, two weeks ago, Hamas banned a one-day music festival in town, arguing that the mingling of men and women at such an event was "haram," or forbidden by Islam.
Mustafa Sabri, spokesman for the Qalqiliya municipality, said the ban was democratic because it reflected the wish of the majority.
"We are not like the Taliban," Sabri said, referring to the Islamic fundamentalists who enforced harsh religious laws during their rule of Afghanistan. "But we respect them (the Taliban) because they chose something suitable for their people."
Mohannad Ghneim, 30, an ambulance driver from Qalqiliya who had hoped to attend the concerts, said he fears Hamas will increasingly try to meddle in his life. "Today, they ban a concert. Tomorrow they might ban satellite TV," he said.
Last week, music lovers got another jolt when gunmen broke up the concert of popular singer Amar Hassan at An Najah University in the West Bank city of Nablus. Hassan shot to local fame last year after he came in second in a Lebanese TV version of "American Idol," a competition of aspiring artists in which fans vote for their favorites.
Before the Nablus show, militants from the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades came to Hassan's hotel room. They told him he must sing only political songs, and cut love songs from his repertoire. The Al Aqsa gunmen, who have ties to Fatah, told Hassan that light-hearted entertainment is forbidden as long as Israel occupies the West Bank.
Hassan said he ignored the demands, and started his concert before a crowd of 6,000. During his show, dozens of gunmen and hundreds of protesters rallied outside the university's walls. Gunmen fired in the air and threw stun grenades, eventually forcing Hassan to break off the performance. As concertgoers left the campus, the protesters barged in, throwing chairs and scuffling with those leaving.
Hassan said in an interview Tuesday that he would not be silenced. "These people (the militants) don't want us to be happy.They want us to sit in the ruins and cry," he said. "We will wage a creative war against them, with more poems, more art, more singing."
A local Al Aqsa leader, Ahmed Al-Taki, said the group will continue to ban concerts.
On Monday, Darwish, a Palestinian cultural icon who has eloquently described his people's struggle for independence, rallied to Hassan's side, inviting him to a meeting with Palestinian intellectuals and artists in Ramallah. Darwish told participants "we all have to resist" attempts to restrict artists.
Darwish's comments were published Tuesday in the Palestinian newspaper Al Ayyam. The reclusive poet, who lives in Ramallah, was not available for comment.
The concerts in Qalqiliya and Nablus had been part of an attempt to restore a sense of normalcy after more than four years of fighting, said organizer Iman Hamouri. The summer concert series began in 1994, but was suspended during the Palestinian intefadeh.
Hassan Khader, a cultural affairs commentator for Al Ayyam, said Hamas is powerful enough now to impose its beliefs, but that he believes such attempts will eventually backfire at the polling booth. "If Hamas wants to be a political power, it can't force people to adopt its ideology," he said.
This article should be read to every "extremist" and "Hardline [insert religion here]" before they spout off that the people they are "defending" want the government to control every aspect of their lives.
We all want the same things out of life. The right to choose our path. Think "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." No one wants their government to become intertwined in every little thing they do, except of course the governments themselves.
From the Associated Press:
Palestinian Poet Lashes Out at Militants
By MOHAMMED DARAGHMEH, Associated Press Writer
It's been a hot summer on the Palestinian arts scene: gunmen broke up the concert of a popular West Bank singer after he refused to limit his repertoire to political songs, and a Hamas-run town banned a music festival to prevent mingling of the sexes.
Now, Palestinian national poet Mahmoud Darwish is striking back, saying fanatics have no right to deprive Palestinians of beauty in their lives. "There are Taliban-type elements in our society, and this is a very dangerous sign," Darwish told a gathering of artists and intellectuals this week.
It's not just an argument over artistic freedom, but over whether a future Palestinian state will be a theocracy or a pluralistic democracy.
Compared to other Arab societies, the Palestinians were once largely secular and tolerant of Western customs, even with Islam as the majority religion. Many Palestinians have strong ties with the West, including relatives living abroad or years spent studying in foreign universities.
However, more than four years of Israeli-Palestinian fighting have led some Palestinians to seek solace in religion or return to tradition, also a reflection of a regional trend.
Islamic fundamentalists, meanwhile, have become increasingly assertive. The militant Hamas group scored several victories in local elections in recent months, and expects to pull even with Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas' secular Fatah movement in future parliamentary elections.
In the West Bank town of Qalqiliya, Hamas won local elections earlier this year with promises of better government services, but also with assurances it would not impose its religious beliefs. However, two weeks ago, Hamas banned a one-day music festival in town, arguing that the mingling of men and women at such an event was "haram," or forbidden by Islam.
Mustafa Sabri, spokesman for the Qalqiliya municipality, said the ban was democratic because it reflected the wish of the majority.
"We are not like the Taliban," Sabri said, referring to the Islamic fundamentalists who enforced harsh religious laws during their rule of Afghanistan. "But we respect them (the Taliban) because they chose something suitable for their people."
Mohannad Ghneim, 30, an ambulance driver from Qalqiliya who had hoped to attend the concerts, said he fears Hamas will increasingly try to meddle in his life. "Today, they ban a concert. Tomorrow they might ban satellite TV," he said.
Last week, music lovers got another jolt when gunmen broke up the concert of popular singer Amar Hassan at An Najah University in the West Bank city of Nablus. Hassan shot to local fame last year after he came in second in a Lebanese TV version of "American Idol," a competition of aspiring artists in which fans vote for their favorites.
Before the Nablus show, militants from the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades came to Hassan's hotel room. They told him he must sing only political songs, and cut love songs from his repertoire. The Al Aqsa gunmen, who have ties to Fatah, told Hassan that light-hearted entertainment is forbidden as long as Israel occupies the West Bank.
Hassan said he ignored the demands, and started his concert before a crowd of 6,000. During his show, dozens of gunmen and hundreds of protesters rallied outside the university's walls. Gunmen fired in the air and threw stun grenades, eventually forcing Hassan to break off the performance. As concertgoers left the campus, the protesters barged in, throwing chairs and scuffling with those leaving.
Hassan said in an interview Tuesday that he would not be silenced. "These people (the militants) don't want us to be happy.They want us to sit in the ruins and cry," he said. "We will wage a creative war against them, with more poems, more art, more singing."
A local Al Aqsa leader, Ahmed Al-Taki, said the group will continue to ban concerts.
On Monday, Darwish, a Palestinian cultural icon who has eloquently described his people's struggle for independence, rallied to Hassan's side, inviting him to a meeting with Palestinian intellectuals and artists in Ramallah. Darwish told participants "we all have to resist" attempts to restrict artists.
Darwish's comments were published Tuesday in the Palestinian newspaper Al Ayyam. The reclusive poet, who lives in Ramallah, was not available for comment.
The concerts in Qalqiliya and Nablus had been part of an attempt to restore a sense of normalcy after more than four years of fighting, said organizer Iman Hamouri. The summer concert series began in 1994, but was suspended during the Palestinian intefadeh.
Hassan Khader, a cultural affairs commentator for Al Ayyam, said Hamas is powerful enough now to impose its beliefs, but that he believes such attempts will eventually backfire at the polling booth. "If Hamas wants to be a political power, it can't force people to adopt its ideology," he said.
29 June 2005
Bush Creates More Security Agencies
I was wondering what the reasons behind this were, when I read this article and it became clearer to me. This is an attempt to brush the Downing Street memo under the carpet and out of sight. It's not like this is getting a ton of attention anyway, but it must really have some potential to do damage.
The section that stood out for me was, "Bush asked for the Robb-Silberman review in early 2004 after it became clear that prewar intelligence on Iraq was flawed. After a 13-month investigation, the commission concluded the intelligence community was "dead wrong" in almost all of its prewar findings on Iraq's arsenal" This is the same intelligence that the Bush administration has been defending since day one. I remember hearing about the commission being formed, but really didn't expect anything to come of it.
While I'm glad that something is being done in what amounts to an admission that Iraq was invaded under false pretenses, what is worrisome is that more government is being created instead of cutting fat. It also seems that this will be the penance for lying to the global community, let alone the American people, over and over again. There really should be something more done. The fact that we invaded a country under the cover of lies and deceit is not being dealt with here at home, yet Congress will try and impeach a President for perjury that in no way shape or form caused any global conflicts. Maybe we should have has Bush, or Rumsfeld, or Ashcroft swear on a bible before they addressed anyone on the war in Iraq.
It's no wonder that in the eyes of the world we have so little credibility.
I was wondering what the reasons behind this were, when I read this article and it became clearer to me. This is an attempt to brush the Downing Street memo under the carpet and out of sight. It's not like this is getting a ton of attention anyway, but it must really have some potential to do damage.
The section that stood out for me was, "Bush asked for the Robb-Silberman review in early 2004 after it became clear that prewar intelligence on Iraq was flawed. After a 13-month investigation, the commission concluded the intelligence community was "dead wrong" in almost all of its prewar findings on Iraq's arsenal" This is the same intelligence that the Bush administration has been defending since day one. I remember hearing about the commission being formed, but really didn't expect anything to come of it.
While I'm glad that something is being done in what amounts to an admission that Iraq was invaded under false pretenses, what is worrisome is that more government is being created instead of cutting fat. It also seems that this will be the penance for lying to the global community, let alone the American people, over and over again. There really should be something more done. The fact that we invaded a country under the cover of lies and deceit is not being dealt with here at home, yet Congress will try and impeach a President for perjury that in no way shape or form caused any global conflicts. Maybe we should have has Bush, or Rumsfeld, or Ashcroft swear on a bible before they addressed anyone on the war in Iraq.
It's no wonder that in the eyes of the world we have so little credibility.
23 June 2005
Do we really need to Amend the Constitution for Flag burning?
So someone burns a flag? WHO CARES? What if someone torched one of those garden flags that litter the porches of so many homes? It is a piece of nylon or synthetic blend.
I know people will say, "It's a symbol of our country!". Yes, I'm quite aware of that. Think of it this way, would you get bent out of shape if someone burned a map of the US? It is a "symbol" of our country and conveys the same message. Well, I suppose some would. But really, some people are hypersensitive.
The flag should be treated with respect, in my opinion. That certainly doesn't stop a thousand and three people from wearing flag bandanas, hats, shirts, jackets, and boxer shorts because they want to show off their "patriotism". Guess what Bubba, that's just as disrespectful as burning the flag. It's against the US Flag Code. Where is the amendment for the protection of the flag against bad fashion choices? As a matter of fact, the code of the flag actually states that if a flag is in disrepair it should be burned rather than discarded as trash.
See this web page for more complete rules of respecting the Flag
Before anyone flames me (pun intended) and says "People died to protect that flag", please let me state....no they didn't. They died to protect the ideals the flag represents. One of those ideals being people should be able to state their beliefs and protest without violence in the way they choose. Providing they don't infringe on the rights of others. That is the issue at heart and is more important to me than cracking down on pyromaniacs who choose the flag as thier victim.
At the end of the day, someone burning a flag is simply trying to convey an emotion or make a statement. It certainly isn't worth amending the Constitution over. Don't we have much bigger fish to fry in Congress? Have we really solved all the other issues?
So someone burns a flag? WHO CARES? What if someone torched one of those garden flags that litter the porches of so many homes? It is a piece of nylon or synthetic blend.
I know people will say, "It's a symbol of our country!". Yes, I'm quite aware of that. Think of it this way, would you get bent out of shape if someone burned a map of the US? It is a "symbol" of our country and conveys the same message. Well, I suppose some would. But really, some people are hypersensitive.
The flag should be treated with respect, in my opinion. That certainly doesn't stop a thousand and three people from wearing flag bandanas, hats, shirts, jackets, and boxer shorts because they want to show off their "patriotism". Guess what Bubba, that's just as disrespectful as burning the flag. It's against the US Flag Code. Where is the amendment for the protection of the flag against bad fashion choices? As a matter of fact, the code of the flag actually states that if a flag is in disrepair it should be burned rather than discarded as trash.
See this web page for more complete rules of respecting the Flag
Before anyone flames me (pun intended) and says "People died to protect that flag", please let me state....no they didn't. They died to protect the ideals the flag represents. One of those ideals being people should be able to state their beliefs and protest without violence in the way they choose. Providing they don't infringe on the rights of others. That is the issue at heart and is more important to me than cracking down on pyromaniacs who choose the flag as thier victim.
At the end of the day, someone burning a flag is simply trying to convey an emotion or make a statement. It certainly isn't worth amending the Constitution over. Don't we have much bigger fish to fry in Congress? Have we really solved all the other issues?
17 June 2005
From good news to stupid news....
Own a telephone? You're still paying for the Spanish-American War.
Article
It's alarming that not only are we still paying into a fund for a war a century gone, but that certain members of Congress want to "expand" the tax to wireless and internet usage.
Some members of Congress voted to repeal the tax, and it passed both the House and the Senate. Clinton vetoed the bill. I can't imagine why as there was no reason to keep the tax. Unless the 3% tax was being figured into his budget. Cutting that 3% from the general fund would have made his balanced budget, not quite as balanced. Good luck in getting the current President to repeal it either. Dubya's got a "war" on terrorism to fund.
If you disagree with this, or any other tax, law, or bill please, write your congressmen. They are in their positions as your representative. They are your proxy. Make your decisions, don't let them decide for you. For the people, by the people only works if the people get involved.
Own a telephone? You're still paying for the Spanish-American War.
Article
It's alarming that not only are we still paying into a fund for a war a century gone, but that certain members of Congress want to "expand" the tax to wireless and internet usage.
Some members of Congress voted to repeal the tax, and it passed both the House and the Senate. Clinton vetoed the bill. I can't imagine why as there was no reason to keep the tax. Unless the 3% tax was being figured into his budget. Cutting that 3% from the general fund would have made his balanced budget, not quite as balanced. Good luck in getting the current President to repeal it either. Dubya's got a "war" on terrorism to fund.
If you disagree with this, or any other tax, law, or bill please, write your congressmen. They are in their positions as your representative. They are your proxy. Make your decisions, don't let them decide for you. For the people, by the people only works if the people get involved.
16 June 2005
The House of Delegates votes to repeal a peice of the 'Patriot Act'
Read more about it Here
True, it only covers library searches.
True, it's a baby step.
But it's a step in the right direction, and the ultra-conservatives are pissy.
Good.
From the files of 'It's probably just me':
In what's hopefully the last chapter on the 1964 murders of three civil right's advocates in Mississippi, the defendants name is Killen and the lead prosecuting attorney's name is Hood. It's either a strange twisted justice, or incredible coincidence.
Read more about it Here
True, it only covers library searches.
True, it's a baby step.
But it's a step in the right direction, and the ultra-conservatives are pissy.
Good.
From the files of 'It's probably just me':
In what's hopefully the last chapter on the 1964 murders of three civil right's advocates in Mississippi, the defendants name is Killen and the lead prosecuting attorney's name is Hood. It's either a strange twisted justice, or incredible coincidence.
15 June 2005
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)