Mood:  spacey

Climate change hits Mars

Mars is being hit by rapid climate change and it is happening so fast that the red planet could lose its southern ice cap, writes Jonathan Leake.

Scientists from Nasa say that Mars has warmed by about 0.5C since the 1970s. This is similar to the warming experienced on Earth over approximately the same period.

Since there is no known life on Mars it suggests rapid changes in planetary climates could be natural phenomena.

The mechanism at work on Mars appears, however, to be different from that on Earth. One of the researchers, Lori Fenton, believes variations in radiation and temperature across the surface of the Red Planet are generating strong winds.

In a paper published in the journal Nature, she suggests that such winds can stir up giant dust storms, trapping heat and raising the planet’s temperature.

Fenton’s team unearthed heat maps of the Martian surface from Nasa’s Viking mission in the 1970s and compared them with maps gathered more than two decades later by Mars Global Surveyor. They found there had been widespread changes, with some areas becoming darker.

When a surface darkens it absorbs more heat, eventually radiating that heat back to warm the thin Martian atmosphere: lighter surfaces have the opposite effect. The temperature differences between the two are thought to be stirring up more winds, and dust, creating a cycle that is warming the planet.

Comments
UK Times Online ~ UK Sunday Times ** Climate change hits Mars
Related: Hurricane forecaster: Oceans, not CO2, cause global warming

Posted by yaahoo_ at 12:01 AM EDT

Updated: Wednesday, 2 May 2007 11:30 AM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  spacey

SMILE: 1 CAMERA FOR EVERY 14 PEOPLE IN UK

Britain becoming a Big Brother society, says data watchdog

Britain is in danger of "committing slow social suicide" as such Big Brother techniques as surveillance cameras and recording equipment spread into every aspect of our lives, the nation's information watchdog will warn this week.

A new report from Richard Thomas, the information commissioner, will say that the public needs to be made more aware of the "creeping encroachment" on civil liberties created by email monitoring, CCTV and computer tracking of our buying habits.

It is understood that one of the concerns in Mr Thomas's report is the use of special listening devices which can be placed in lamp posts, street furniture and offices. These are already widely used in the Netherlands to combat crime and anti-social behaviour.

More than 300 of the cameras with built-in microphones have been fitted in benefit offices and city centres. The equipment can pick up aggressive tones on the basis of decibel level, pitch and speed at which words are spoken.

Westminster council has already started piloting the listening devices, but experts say the use of these microphones raises questions about how surveillance can be used to intrude into the private lives of citizens.

He will also call for greater regulation of companies that supply surveillance technology which provides "convenience or safety for the more affluent majority", but not for the vulnerable such as children, immigrants and the elderly.

His warning comes as MPs launch their first inquiry into the impact of surveillance in Britain. The Home Affairs Select Committee will investigate the use of video cameras to monitor high streets and residential areas as well as the holding of personal information on both government and commercial databases.

On Tuesday, Mr Thomas, who last year warned that Britain was "sleepwalking into a surveillance society", will tell the committee at its first hearing that new safeguards must be introduced to protect the public from the increasing intrusion of surveillance into their daily lives.

Civil liberty campaigners have already warned that Britain is becoming a Big Brother society where its citizens are increasingly being watched. There are more than four million CCTV cameras in this country, one for every 14 people, and the national DNA database which was set up by police to combat crime now holds 3.5 million profiles.

UK Independent ~ Sophie Goodchild ** Britain becoming a Big Brother society, says data watchdog

Posted by yaahoo_ at 3:13 AM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  crushed out

I just had to blog some pics of the latest, greatest,

sweetest Fox News hottie... ♥ ♥ Julia Allison ♥ ♥

Posted by yaahoo_ at 3:36 AM EDT

Updated: Saturday, 28 April 2007 7:33 AM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  chatty

WASTE NOT! Dem Candidates Private Jet to Debate: 'No one pooled, no one took commercial flights to save money, fuel or emissions'

2008 Candidates Rely on Private Jets

WASHINGTON -- A flock of small jets took flight from Washington Thursday, each carrying a Democratic presidential candidate to South Carolina for the first debate of the political season.

For Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, it was wheels up shortly after they voted in favor of legislation requiring that U.S. troops begin returning home from Iraq in the fall.

No one jet pooled, no one took commercial flights to save money, fuel or emissions.

All but Biden, who flew on a private jet, chartered their flights -- a campaign expense of between $7,500 and $9,000.

Federal Election Commission rules allow candidates to pay only the equivalent of first-class fare to fly on private jets owned by corporations or other special interests. But a Senate ethics bill approved earlier this year would require senators flying on corporate jets to pay full charter rates. The legislation must still be reconciled with a House bill and has yet to become law.

Several senators running for president are abiding by it anyway, either paying charter cost or avoiding corporate jets altogether, as Obama and Republican Sen. John McCain have done. Dodd pays full charter rates when he flies on private planes. The Clinton and Biden campaigns did not immediately explain their policies.

Candidates who follow the more lenient FEC rules have a financial advantage.

Democrat John Edwards, for example, regularly uses a jet owned by Dallas trial lawyer Fred Baron, who is also the finance chairman of his presidential campaign. His campaign pays first-class rate for those flights. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney also flies on corporate jets and pays first-class rates.

Under FEC reimbursement regulations, a candidate flying in a corporate or union jet must pay the first-class rate unless the flight's destination does not have scheduled commercial service. In that case, the candidate must pay the cost of chartering the plane.

For candidates who are now eschewing corporate jets, the cost difference can be significant.

For example, a one-way first class ticket on United Airlines with four days advance notice is $694 per person. A typical one-way charter flight on a small Lear jet seating six people would cost about $9,000.

Critics of corporate jet flights for politicians say the difference in cost makes a private jet an extraordinary special benefit and can give corporate executives or union leaders unusual access to a candidate.

Thursday's debate, set on the campus of South Carolina State University in Orangeburg, S.C., made for some whirlwind scheduling. Clinton, for instance, was scheduled to return to Washington Friday morning for an 8 a.m. address to the New York State United Teachers 35th Annual Representative Assembly, then fly back to South Carolina for an 11 a.m. event in Greenville.

Newsday ~ Associated Press - Jim Kuhnhenn ** 2008 Candidates Rely on Private Jets

Posted by yaahoo_ at 1:44 AM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  d'oh

Fraud probe sought after carbon offset industry found to suffer 'serious credibility concerns'

Industry caught in carbon ‘smokescreen’

Companies and individuals rushing to go green have been spending millions on “carbon credit” projects that yield few if any environmental benefits.

A Financial Times investigation has uncovered widespread failings in the new markets for greenhouse gases, suggesting some organisations are paying for emissions reductions that do not take place.

Others are meanwhile making big profits from carbon trading for very small expenditure and in some cases for clean-ups that they would have made anyway.

The growing political salience of environmental politics has sparked a “green gold rush”, which has seen a dramatic expansion in the number of businesses offering both companies and individuals the chance to go “carbon neutral”, offsetting their own energy use by buying carbon credits that cancel out their contribution to global warming.

The burgeoning regulated market for carbon credits is expected to more than double in size to about $68.2bn by 2010, with the unregulated voluntary sector rising to $4bn in the same period.

The FT investigation found:

Industrial companies profiting from doing very little – or from gaining carbon credits on the basis of efficiency gains from which they have already benefited substantially.

Brokers providing services of questionable or no value.

A shortage of verification, making it difficult for buyers to assess the true value of carbon credits.

Companies and individuals being charged over the odds for the private purchase of European Union carbon permits that have plummeted in value because they do not result in emissions cuts.

Francis Sullivan, environment adviser at HSBC, the UK’s biggest bank that went carbon-neutral in 2005, said he found “serious credibility concerns” in the offsetting market after evaluating it for several months.

“The police, the fraud squad and trading standards need to be looking into this. Otherwise people will lose faith in it,” he said.

These concerns led the bank to ignore the market and fund its own carbon reduction projects directly.

Some companies are benefiting by asking “green” consumers to pay them for cleaning up their own pollution. For instance, DuPont, the chemicals company, invites consumers to pay $4 to eliminate a tonne of carbon dioxide from its plant in Kentucky that produces a potent greenhouse gas called HFC-23. But the equipment required to reduce such gases is relatively cheap. DuPont refused to comment and declined to specify its earnings from the project, saying it was at too early a stage to discuss.

The FT has also found examples of companies setting up as carbon offsetters without appearing to have a clear idea of how the markets operate. In response to FT inquiries about its sourcing of carbon credits, one company, carbonvoucher.com, said it had not taken payments for offsets.

Blue Source, a US offsetting company, invites consumers to offset carbon emissions by investing in enhanced oil recovery, which pumps carbon dioxide into depleted oil wells to bring up the remaining oil. However, Blue Source said that because of the high price of oil, this process was often profitable in itself, meaning operators were making extra revenues from selling “carbon credits” for burying the carbon.

There is nothing illegal in these practices. However, some companies that are offsetting their emissions have avoided such projects because customers may find them controversial.

BP said it would not buy credits resulting from improvements in industrial efficiency or from most renewable energy projects in developed countries.

Additional reporting by Rebecca Bream
Financial Times ~ Fiona Harvey and Stephen Fidler in London ** Industry caught in carbon ‘smokescreen’

Posted by yaahoo_ at 8:23 AM EDT

Updated: Thursday, 26 April 2007 8:32 AM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  chatty

Libtards have to hide their agenda from the media (and the American people)...

Coward Deanpeace: Bar Media and Candidates Will Talk

The head of the Democratic Party said Wednesday that the best way to get presidential candidates to talk frankly about issues is to lock out the media.

During the Mortgage Bankers Association conference, a banker expressed frustration with candidates who only talk in sound bites and wondered how that could be changed. Howard Dean, once a presidential candidate, offered a simple solution.

"I suggest you have candidates in to meetings like this and bar the press," Dean said.

The Democratic National Committee chairman criticized media coverage, arguing that networks such as CBS used to put content first and didn't mind losing money for the prestige of delivering a quality news report. Dean said the days of Walter Cronkite are gone and the corporatization of the media has led to a desire to boost profits.

"The media has been reduced to info-tainment," Dean said. "Info-tainment sells, the problem is they reach the lowest common denominator instead of forcing a little education down our throats, which we are probably in need of from time to time."

Dean was considered a strong contender for the 2004 Democratic nomination, but after finishing third in the Iowa caucuses, he gave a speech that included a rant punctuated by a scream. The clip was shown repeatedly on television and became the subject of late-night jokes.

Dean said politicians live in fear that their words will be twisted for the sake of headlines.

"Politicians are incredibly careful not to say anything if they can possibly help it, except if it is exactly scripted. And if you want to hear anybody's true views, you cannot do it in the same room as the press," Dean said. "If you want to hear the truth from them, you have to exclude the press."

Yahoo Asia News ~ Associated Press ** Dean: Bar Media and Candidates Will Talk

Posted by yaahoo_ at 8:05 AM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  spacey

NOW THEY DON'T EVEN CHANGE THE SHEETS IN HOSPITAL

Hospital sheets are not being changed to save money

Cleaners at a failing NHS hospital criticised for its record on fighting superbugs have been told to keep used sheets on beds to save cash.

Horrified housekeeping staff were ordered to turn dirty bed sheets over, rather than use clean linen at Birmingham’s Good Hope Hospital.

Managers advised staff to “top and tail” sheets and pillow cases in a bid to slash the £500,000 laundry bill.

Posters plastered across the back of the linen cupboards and on doors leading into the Accident and Emergency and Maternity department asked staff not to swap sheets if they could avoid it.

It means new patients have been getting into beds with the same sheets as the previous sick occupant, it was claimed yesterday.

The revelations were branded “absolutely scandalous” by patients’ groups and “tantamount to murder”.

Katherine Murphy, spokeswoman for the Patients Association said finances were being put before the care of patients and their safety.

“Why do sick people have to suffer further when they have paid for the NHS?” she said. “It should be there for them when they need it.

“When somebody is admitted into hospital they don’t only need clean sheets but the whole bed should be washed down as well. This is doing nothing for infection-control.

“It is absolutely scandalous and down to financial mismanagement.”

An anonymous whistleblower leaked a photograph of the poster to expose the practice, which he claimed had been enforced over the past three years.

In bright red letters across the top, it says “Linen Costs!”. It is then followed by a notice that reads: “We spend over half a million a year. Every item including the pillowcase is 0.275p each!” Stacks of cash are lined up to show the cost of maintaining the high standards expected in NHS hospitals.

The whistleblower who smuggled the picture refused to be named but added: “This sign has been on the clean linen cupboard in A&E at Good Hope for at least 12 months. I am not sure how much this practice is going on, but it is clear the trust is encouraging staff to top and tail used sheets instead of replacing them between patients.”

Despite drafting in a Government hit squad to tackle the superbugs, Good Hope has seen an increase in  C.diff and MRSA. In less than a year, cases of deadly C.diff have more than doubled to 327 at the hospital.

Good Hope also recorded 36 cases of MRSA between April last year and January – more than double its target.

Tony Field, of charity MRSA Support, said: “Is that all the safety of a patient’s life is worth, 0.275p?

“It is utterly disgraceful. Hygiene – like changing sheets – is essential to protect patients. Their thinking on this is diabolical. Every sneeze and turn, which leaves skin scales on the sheets, leaves the risk of infection.

“There is an age old tradition among nurses that it is basic law to clean and re-make beds daily. For this to stop to save money and time is atrocious.” A spokesman for Good Hope said the posters will be pulled down immediately.

She also stressed that while bed sheets may not be changed every day for patients who have not soiled them, they are “categorically changed” between patients.

She said: “This member of staff has got things very confused. There is absolutely no way we would have the same sheets used on a bed from one patient to another. It just would not have happened. The posters were made two or three years ago and should have been taken down now.

“Any that have been seen recently will be removed as Good Hope takes infection control very seriously.”

Hospital Director Barbara Beal  insisted: “Good Hope has never undertaken such a practice for different patients.

“After taking appropriate advice from our Infection Control team and senior microbiologists, it was agreed that where the sheets were unsoiled and it was the same patient in the bed, it was acceptable practice to top and tail, and this of course had a beneficial effect on the cost of laundry.”

In a statement, Ms Beal added: “It has never been the practice at Good Hope for any patient, either on the ward or in A&E, to use the same sheets as another.”

Nationwide, C.diff claims more than 1,000 lives a year and is endemic throughout the NHS, with cases rising by 17 per cent in 2005.

Comments
Daily Express ~ Sarah Westcott ** Now They Don't Even Change the Sheets in Hospital
Related: New Zealand Herald ~ Reuters ** Morale 'Terrible" Among UK Doctors - Survey

Posted by yaahoo_ at 7:21 AM EDT

Updated: Wednesday, 18 April 2007 7:26 AM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  don't ask

My beloved, crippled IBM Thinkpad laptop was officially pronounced dead on Tuesday, March 27, 2007. It succumbed after a long, hard fought battle with "won't turn/stay onney" disease.

It left behind a microphone, and old mouse, and a power cord as it slipped from the surly bonds of this world (wide web).

Flowers, condolences, and charitable donations can be sent to my latest business address:

carbon_credits4sale@yahoo.com

Another "blog vacation" in full effect, indefinitely. I need to take time offline to mourn the loss.

Posted by yaahoo_ at 3:50 AM EDT

Updated: Saturday, 31 March 2007 7:24 AM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  chatty

Conservatives create own wiki site: Conservapedia

The mainstream media, or MSM, has been a favorite target of conservatives, but it is not alone.

Welcome to the Web site Conservapedia.com, founded by Andrew Schlafly, son of conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly. The site describes itself as "a much-needed alternative to Wikipedia, which is increasingly anti-Christian and anti-American."

Even when the heart of the definition is the same, Wikipedia and Conservapedia differ on the delivery.

On each other
Wikipedia: Conservapedia is a wiki project to construct an encyclopedia with articles that are pro-American, socially conservative and supportive of conservative Christianity.

Conservapedia: Some users feel that despite the site's claims of a "neutral point of view," there is a consistent anti-American and anti-Christian bias in Wikipedia entries (going beyond a mere absence of pro-American and pro-Christian bias). There are many examples of bias in Wikipedia because it is edited primarily by liberal atheists who lack basic understanding of logic.

On evolution
Wikipedia: Evolution has left numerous signs of the histories of different species. Fossils, along with the comparative anatomy of present-day organisms, constitute the morphological, or anatomical, record.

Conservapedia: The current scientific community consensus is no guarantee of truth. The history of science shows many examples where the scientific community consensus was in error or currently has little or no empirical basis.

On global warming
Wikipedia: Global warming is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth's near surface air and oceans in recent decades and its projected continuation.

Conservapedia: Global warming is a phrase which commonly refers to a scientific theory and to political proposals that follow if the theory is accepted. The scientific theory is widely but not universally accepted within the scientific community.

On the Democratic Party
Wikipedia: The Democratic Party is divided on the subject of same-sex marriage.

Conservapedia: Many Americans are also wary of the Democratic support for the homosexual agenda, including forcing gays to marry thereby weakening the institution of marriage. The Republican Party has been a strong defender of marriage, with President Bush trying to rewrite the Constitution to defend marriage.

On the Scopes trial
Wikipedia: After eight days of trial, it took the jury only nine minutes to deliberate. Scopes was found guilty on July 21 and ordered to pay a $100 fine. Bryan offered to pay it.

Conservapedia: Thanks to Bryan's victory in the Scopes trial, Tennessee voters have been educated without oppressive evolution theory for 75 years. Free from the liberal indoctrination, Tennessee voted against native son Al Gore in the 2000 Presidential election probably the only time a candidate has lost the Presidency due to losing his home state.

On the missing link
Wikipedia: In 1912, the Piltdown man was believed to be the "missing link" between apes and humans by the majority of the scientific community. ... Eventually, more advanced dating technologies scientifically proved that this skull was actually a fraud.

Conservapedia: The Piltdown Man was one of many frauds perpetrated by promoters of the theory of evolution.

If evolutionists knew that there were problems with the Piltdown Man, why did they keep it secret from the public until 1953? Such silence begs more questions than it answers. How many scientists today recognize the theory of evolution to be fraudulent but keep quiet about it?

On kangaroos
Wikipedia: A kangaroo is any of several large animals of the Macropodidae, a marsupial family that also includes the wallabies, tree-kangaroos, wallaroos, pademelons and the Quokka, some 63 living species in all.

Conservapedia: According to the origins model used by creation scientists, modern kangaroos, like all modern animals, originated in the Middle East and are the descendants of the two founding members of the modern kangaroo baramin that were taken aboard Noah's Ark prior to the Great Flood.

On dinosaurs
Wikipedia: Dinosaurs were vertebrate animals that dominated terrestrial ecosystems for over 160-million years, first appearing approximately 230-million years ago.

Conservapedia: Of those Christians who reject evolution, the Young Earth Creationists believe, based primarily on Biblical sources, but also drawing on archeological and fossil evidence, that dinosaurs were created on the 6th day of the Creation Week approximately 6,000 years ago; that they lived in the Garden of Eden in harmony with other animals, eating only plants; that pairs of various dinosaur baramins were taken onto Noah's Ark during the Great Flood and were preserved from drowning; that fossilized dinosaur bones originated during the mass killing of the Flood; and that some descendants of those dinosaurs taken aboard the Ark still roam the earth today.

On the Gospels
Wikipedia: The Gospel of John is the fourth gospel in the canon of the New Testament, traditionally ascribed to John the Evangelist. Like the three synoptic gospels, it contains an account of some of the actions and sayings of Jesus, but differs from them in ethos and theological emphases.

Conservapedia: The greatest writing in the history of the world is the Gospel of John, the Apostle whom Jesus loved the most.

On the net: Conservapedia --- Wikipedia

Contra Costa Times ~ St. Petersburg Times - John Cotey ** Conservatives create own wiki site

FYI, in the current issue of Fast Company magazine, Wikipedia founder Jim Wales counts Jimmy Carter as one of his "buddies".

Posted by yaahoo_ at 1:37 AM EDT

Updated: Monday, 26 March 2007 12:42 PM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  d'oh

I've been typing and voicing in chat for a while now, the new politically correct term for "lesbian" is, "vagina-tarian"...

Lesbian Asks Court to Ban Gay Adoptions

ATLANTA -- Sara Wheeler's life has become a contradiction. Once a proud lesbian, she's now a pariah in the gay community. Once in a committed relationship with a female partner, she's rethinking her sexuality.

And now she's doing something she once would have considered unthinkable -- arguing that gays don't have the legal right to adopt children.

Wheeler is coming to grips with the fact that she's become an outcast for taking this step in a custody fight for her child. But she says that isn't what her fight is about: "It's about motherly rights."

Wheeler, 36, and her partner, Missy, decided to start a family together and share the Wheeler last name. In 2000, Sara Wheeler gave birth to a son, Gavin, through artificial insemination. Two years later, they decided Missy Wheeler should adopt the child and legally become his second parent.

Georgia law doesn't specifically say whether gay parents can adopt a child, so the decision was up to a judge in the Atlanta area's DeKalb County. After an adoption investigator determined that both partners wanted it, the judge cleared the request.

The couple's relationship later soured. Missy Wheeler wouldn't comment for this story, but her attorney, Nora Bushfield, said Sara became involved with someone else and wouldn't let Missy and Gavin see each other.

Sara Wheeler acknowledged the other relationship, saying "regardless of my action, it doesn't make me a bad mother."

Sara and Missy Wheeler had split by July 2004, and Missy was fighting for joint custody of the boy.

The two sides do agree about one thing: The case is about a mother's rights.

"Everybody seems to forget we're not talking about lesbian rights," Missy Wheeler's attorney says. "We're talking about a child who's been bonded with a mother."

Sara Wheeler made the legal argument that, since nothing in Georgia law specifically allowed gay adoption, the adoption should be tossed out.

Her first lawyers warned her the case could set gay rights back a century.

She hired a new attorney and asked the DeKalb County court to toss the adoption that she had previously pushed for, claiming it should never have been approved because it runs afoul of state law.

News of the tactic whipped up Atlanta's gay community, one of the largest in the South. Lambda Legal, a gay rights group, made a legal filing with the Georgia Supreme Court supporting Missy Wheeler. "There's something about this case that's just tragic," said Greg Nevins, a lawyer for the group.

Laura Douglas-Brown, editor of Southern Voice, the city's main gay newspaper, penned a column accusing Sara Wheeler of "self-hating."

"We owe it to each other not to lash out in ways that damage the entire gay community," she wrote. "Your own family may be destroyed, but don't destroy ours, too."

Sara said she felt like she had no choice.

"I'm not doing anything else a mother wouldn't do to fight for her son," she said. "Some people may think it's the unthinkable, but if they were put in my shoes, they'd do the same thing."

It didn't go so well. Her lawsuit seeking to throw out the adoption was rejected by the DeKalb County judge and then the state Court of Appeals.

Then the Georgia Supreme Court, in a 4-3 vote in February, declined to hear the case. Only months earlier the court had upheld the state's constitutional ban on gay marriage, which Georgia voters overwhelmingly approved in 2004.

Justice George H. Carley, who voted with the minority in the gay adoption case, declared he was "at a loss to comprehend" why the court refused to consider a case of such "great concern, gravity and public importance."

Sara Wheeler is asking the state Supreme Court to reconsider her case. Such a request rarely succeeds, but the narrow vote gives her hope that one justice might be swayed.

"There's nothing that states this is an acceptable adoption," she said. "If Georgia wants to allow it, it needs to make proper laws."

As the legal motions flew back and forth, the two women established a workable routine. The 7-year-old boy goes to Missy Wheeler's place every other weekend and on Tuesday nights. The rest of the time Sara Wheeler ferries him to karate practice, plays tag with him outside her apartment and takes him out for pizza every Friday.

The case has taken a toll on Sara.

Aside from a few gay friends, she has turned away from the gay community. She no longer dates, and doesn't go to gay clubs or events any more. She said she is rethinking whether she is still a lesbian or whether she should abandon dating for good.

"I just don't feel comfortable in that scene," she says. "I'm just trying to figure it all out."

She knows she's seen as a betrayer; but in a sense, she feels she was the one betrayed.

"Before I'm anything -- gay or lesbian -- I'm a mother," she says. "And the most important thing is to make sure my son has a relationship with his biological mother."

Breitbart.com ~ Associated Press - Greg Bluestein ** Lesbian Asks Court to Ban Gay Adoptions

Posted by yaahoo_ at 12:01 AM EDT

Updated: Monday, 26 March 2007 1:21 AM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink