Mrs. Simpson Miller has finally conceded victory to the Jamaica Labour Party. Most people thought she should have done so from Monday evening, but this was not to be. She claims she would address the nation once there was a recount, which so far has brought the JLP further victory. (32-28). Personally I think she should have just conceded on Monday evening.
Now the next thing on the PNP’s agenda is pursuing the JLP candidates who allegedly have US citizenship and are now about to be sworn in.
Here is where the problem is:
Under the Jamaican Constitution (1962) 40 (2 a) it states that:
No person shall be qualified to be appointed as a Senator or elected as a member of the House of Representatives who-
is, by virtue of his own act, under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign Power or State;
There has been much talk about this and it has been explained by the legal eagles that once you are a citizen of a Commonwealth state, you would be somewhat exempt from this if you are resident in Jamaica for at least one year. Based on this, there could be a problem in the formation of the next administration.
I shall form no opinion until the matter is sorted in the courts, but in the interim I ask, what’s your view?
Todays Daily Observer Editorial has written a stinging condemnation of Portia Simpson-Miller’s post-election ramblings. I think that they have been slightly harsh in their analysis. I have included a few excerpts below:
” If we had any doubt that Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller was not fit for the job, we no longer do. Her ungracious speech Monday night after her party’s defeat at the polls was shocking, to say the least.
Conceding defeat, especially after a bruising contest, is the patriotic duty of great leaders who know that they must send the right signal to a nation that would have been divided by a long and often bitter rivalry.
Although there was only sporadic gunfire in parts of the country, Mrs Simpson Miller’s stance could easily have incited greater mayhem, had angry and despondent supporters taken encouragement from her intemperate remarks and run amok.”
For more see: http://jamaicaobserver.com/editorial/html/20070904T230000-0500_127021_OBS_MRS_SIMPSON_MILLER_WAS_OUT_OF_HER_DEPTH.asp
Well the thing is this….she should have done the right thing. It’s almost as if they had to take her out kicking and screaming. I am curious about the outcome of the constitutional violation…..that will be very interesting.
Let me just say that I think politics is really an ungrateful past time. I just saw the poll question on TVJ and it asked “Should Portia Simpson Miller resign as PNP President?”. Wow..to think that a week ago she was on top of Jamaica….how the mighty have fallen…
Farewell to ” PORTIAISM. “
If madam Portia had only called the general elections shortly after obtaining her PMship i am 100% certain that the PNP would have have won…now not even her own party want her…sigh…
to your question JG i think that laws created in 1962 need to to ratified. The fact that you have dual citizenship shouldn’t stop you from running for senate. the fact that one has put himself/herself up for a position with (hopefully) the countries best interest at heart is grounds enough for one to be elected rightfully under the laws of the nation.
Take Mr. Arnold Schwarzenegger for example, an Austrian by birth is governor or the state of California http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Schwarzenegger
Thats my take
It is now at 33-27 witha possible 34-26 to be decided by tomorrow …and the phinnish results continues.
The recount that was demanded by Portia not working for her so far.
Shonari I hear you but unfortunately it is the law currently and so maybe they can ammend it in the future. But we have to observe the current law.
Bobby…a recount never usually works out for an incumbent party….likewise a hurricane.
[...] a Presiding Officer in Polling Station number 62 of the Kingston Central constituency”, while Jamaican Lifestyle says: “Mrs. Simpson Miller has finally conceded victory to the Jamaica Labour Party.” [...]
JG – what about Section (c). Hehehehehehe…..how dat part going….
I mean……..Section 40 (2c)
If im not mistaken Mr. Seaga is/was a US citizen (by birth)…how did that work?
Shonari…Seaga renounced his citizenship in 1959 I think…he wrote about it a few weeks ago when all of this started…
I heard that Harry Douglas was vexed with Portia for calling a recount, as he lost his seat. The PNP should quit their yapping and abide with the wishes of the Jamaican people.
Dutch Pot…you mean this part?
is a party to, or a partner in a firm or a director or manager of a company which to his knowledge is a party to, any contract with the Government of Jamaica for or on account of the public service, and has not-
in the case of appointment as a Senator, by informing the Governor-General; or
in the case of election as a member of the House of Representatives, by publishing a notice in the Gazette within one month before the day of election, previously disclosed the nature of such contract and his interest or the interest of such firm or company therein;
Leon…that is so funny but surprising. Harry had told the constituents he was not returning…so his winning in the first place was a huge surprise to me. I can’t imagine him cussing Portia about it….or anyone cussing Portia for that matter…..and getting away with it.
Yes that part. The Contractor General has pointed out that the said consequences apply for this violation. So names we want now – NAMES!!! LOL Anywhere they must come from – ROPE DEM OUT!!!!!
I wonder who that could be Dutch Pot? Who you suspect?lol
The paradox of Jamaican politics, and to some extent a form of poetic justice.This could or may involve a large number of the KLEPTOCRATS in the PNP.They controlled the government coffers for eighteen and a half years and were in essence doling out contracts to all and sundry including themselves,the geneticially connected,the politically connected, and the tribally connected .Keep the fire to their feet Mr. Christe. Be extremely vigilant and aggressive in this regard and let the chips fall where they may.Inquiring minds are interested in names. How interesting ?
The running of a country requires more than just a love for the coveted position. There has to a total control of the challenges that are inevitable and the composure to effectively deal with harsh criticism.
One cannot omit to state too that a comprehensive knowledge of issues that affect the country is paramount and Mama P has, unfortunately, proven to be lacking in these aspects. Her attitude towards the results of the election is another proof that she is devoid of attributes that define a stateswoman.
[...] a Presiding Officer in Polling Station number 62 of the Kingston Central constituency”, while Jamaican Lifestyle says: “Mrs. Simpson Miller has finally conceded victory to the Jamaica Labour [...]
recounts just dont always work out
Jdid you are so right…..next step is the constitutional stuff.
It was sad that she chose to go out in such a fashion. But I suspect that she would have had a very hard time managing her cabinet if the PNP had actually won.
Remember that no one likes to see a party in power cracking at the seams. And when rumours start to fly that people boxing other people in Cabinet meeting “ahem!) and that this party member calling that party leader “Bitch”, the outcome can not be good.
I do hope though that the PNP will pull together now as we will need a strong and effective Opposition.
Indeed a strong opposition will be needed and quickly,as sadly a PNP loss did’nt really mean a JLP victory.So close a result, meant that for some PNP diehards ,4 terms was just enough and the only other choice is the JLP so they gave them the vote.The others however decided that though the change is needed for basically the same reasons and even the fact that Portia was not really their choice,they could not bring themselves to ring that bell.So they stayed home.
It is alledged by credible sources that the JLP bought votes in the crucial areas up to the night before the election,so don’t be fooled ,corruption is everywhere
. We need to lay off being so critical about Portia and begin to turn our attention to the one that matters and all the hiddden and open promises that were madeduring the election.
On the election platform we were promised that school fees were going to be paid for those who had’nt paid and refunds made to those who had.Suddenly now it’s tuition that is being banded about.School fees comprises ,tuition and auxiliary expenses(which incidentally is more than the tuition in most schools) So parents are now being asked to fund the higher portion which works out in most cases to the same or more than what parents were asked to pay in the cost sharing scenario..(check this morning Herald).What is the difference? MORE EXPENSES?
While the tear down crusade of Portia continues,the important issues of broken promises so early in the day, are being allowed to pass unnoticed.
The Election is over ,so turn the flashlights in the new direction to make sure we were not being fooled by a JLP screensaver.
The PNP needs to unite and keep them on their toes for our sake.
It’s funny though how the one who never supported unity,who opposed just for the sake of opposing . now,in his first speech is begging for unity.
This is soo intersting!
Let’s be honest y’all. If you were born in Jamaica, how do you lose your citizenship? I can understand if there are technical requirements like living in the country for at least 1 calander year or something like that. However, I just can’t wrap my mind around the fact that a large segment of the population who went overseas for education opportunities would be shut out of the political process. I don’t think that we are in a position as a nation to put a whole lot of restrictions on Jamaican born people with the talent & skill who happened to have moved away for opportunities to advance themselves & their families. Don’t blame the diaspora for the country’s problems….Let’s move beyond that. The fact of the matter is that it takes quite alot of energy to run Jamaica and maybe this is one way to change the stagnation that we can all agree that we have been facing for a long time.
Sorry Aurie but I don’t know where you started that comment from. Was it the Constitutional issue?
The constitution is clear. You cannot sit in Gordon House as an MP or a Senator if you are holding any other citizenship other than Jamaican citizenship. Whether we like it or not it is written in the Jamaican Constitution (1962) Section 40 (2a). The law is the law. If Jamaicans who live overseas return and wish to serve their country as an MP or a Senator then they will have to renounce their US citizenship. I gather if you are a commonwealth citizen and live in Jamaica for at least one year then you qualify to particpate in the political process in Jamaica. As a US citizen, you are violating the US constitution by taking an oath of allegiance to a foreign power.
See Below:
The following is the text of the Oath of Allegiance:
I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen;
that I will support and defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law;
that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law;
that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and
that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.
And the following as well:
The U.S. Code does, however, see some acts as creating the possibility of a loss of nationality. When you lose your U.S. nationality, you are no longer under the protection or jurisdiction of the United States. When the United States considers you to no longer be of U.S. nationality, it in effect considers you to no longer be a citizen. Note that these are things you can do that may force you to lose your citizenship. The law also says that these acts must be voluntary and with the intent of losing U.S. citizenship. The ways to lose citizenship are detailed in 8 USC 1481:
Becoming naturalized in another country
Swearing an oath of allegiance to another country
Serving in the armed forces of a nation at war with the U.S., or if you are an officer in that force
Working for the government of another nation if doing so requires that you become naturalized or that you swear an oath of allegiance
Formally renouncing citizenship at a U.S. consular office
Formally renouncing citizenship to the U.S. Attorney General
By being convicted of committing treason
So you see this issue is not a “Jamaica sour grapes” issue. If one has so much faith in the Jamaican system and wish to serve in government in Jamaica then why not lose the foreign citizenship?? The law is the law…may need modifying but right now it is the law.
This is absoultely true jamaicangirl, becoming a citizen of the us you have revoke all previous citizenship held. If thats the case, then these MP and others shouldn’t have run then cuz what thats cause is foriegners ruling our lands kinds something of the past. I strongly believe that if your want any part in the government of Jamaica then you have become soley a Jamaican citizen. Are our politicians familiar with the Jamaican constitution? where is the US embassy in all of this?
Dalton…where the US Embassy is in all of this I have no idea. My concern is with the Jamaican side of the constitution…if they are allowed to violate the US constitution I do not think there is much the Jamaican govt can do….but let’s say there are interesting times ahead of us….lol
If Portria had called the election at the time her popularity was at it highest i doubt she would have been the prime minister after the victory cause a lot of MPs were smelling blood ..her blood at the time and she knew this.
Bobby if she had even called it at the end of Jul 07 she would have won same way. It was only in the last few days that there was a break from the 40 – 40 tie to a 38 (pnp) to a 42 (jlp).
Percentage points that is.
Mention is made of Schwarzenegger being born in Austria and yet is able to become the Governor of California,this is supposed to say why could not the same be true in Jamaica.But the writer skillfully (or dishonestly) did not say the US constitution prohibits him from becoming President! Will his supporter seek to amend the US CONSTITUTION?
I am aware of EF that indeed Schwarzenegger cannot become president of the united states, but the US constitution does make leeway for an individual to hold other state positions regardless of birth, race or creed. the question you should ask is ” can a US citizen by birth who has dual citizenship, by virtue of swearing allegiance to a foreign country or by parentage become US president” (removing all variables such as votes and public preference of course)
It is rather sad that the country cannot see that some laws to date are outdated and need to be ratified. Plus i am sure that both parties have candidates who hold dual citizenship and a ruling will not be favorable for both parties so this whole thing is futile. A mere “grasping at straws” on the PNP’s part.
Holding dual citizenship does not mean you cannot serve your country, for whatever reason it may be beneficial to do just that. Not to mention as Aurie had said, to pursue an education abroad and by chance become naturalized can only benefit the nation.
Shonari, I am almost willing to beleive that the PNP would have had their house in order in terms of citzenship issues since they are the ones with the megaphone broadcasting the issue. What sense would it make to be doing so when your house is not in order? It would be very stupid.
Nobody is saying that the law doesn’t require modifictation because indeed something which applied in 1962 clearly may not be as relevant in 2007 due to issues like Globalisation. However, right now it is the law and until then we can only say “if only…”. I beleive that if someone wants to rule me they must know the law.
Jamaican Girl oh Jamaican girl where have you gone? i see no new posts
New dawn ! New dispensation ! New beginning ! Congratulations to Prime Minister Bruce Golding. Excellent speech !
Well the PNP are known to do stupid things…
There must be some loophole they can use but enough with my speculations…ill just wait and see what the outcome is…until then lets stay on the NEW course.
A man died and went to Heaven. As he stood in front of the Pearly Gates, he saw a huge wall of clocks behind him. He asked St. Peter, ‘Wah dem clock deh fah?’ St. Peter answered, ‘Those are Lie-Clocks. Everyone’s Lie-Clocks. Every time you tell a lie the hands on your clock move.’ ‘Oh ho’, said the man. ‘So who fah clock dat?’ he asked pointing to a gold clock on the wall. ‘That’s Mother Teresa’s’, replied St. Peter. ‘The hands have never moved, indicating that she never told a lie. ”Eh heh?’, said the man. ‘And who fah clock is dat one?’ he asked again, pointing to a huge silver clock on the wall. St. Peter responded, ‘That’s Abraham Lincoln’s clock. The hands have moved twice, telling us that Abraham told only two lies in his entire life.
”So wheh Portia Simpson clock deh?’ asked the man. ‘Simpson’s clock is in Jesus’ office. He’s using it as a ceiling fan.’
Shonari, Jesus is using Ms. Simpson Miller’s clock as a ceiling fan.Extremely hilarious ! ! ! One wonders what Mr. Danny Buchanan’s (Bagdad Bob ) clock is being utilized for. A LIE DEM LIE !!!
Wow…I really started a firestorm here. Noice!! It was just something to think about. I’ve been mulling over the idea and at the end of the day, I know that the law is the law. Sometimes, that same law is what doesn’t allow certain things to happen to bring the country forward. England has had to ammend so many of their citizenship statues as well as Europe in general. I have no aspirations of revoking my dual citizenship in America & Jamaica. I pay taxes in both places and I think that I should certainly have a say in some way or other. Maybe holding political office is going too far, but at the end of the day, if people have great ideas, I’d hate to see the law get in the way of true progress. But then again, this is why we can be so divided at times. I’ll try to effect change in Jamaica through other channels that keeps me away from the issues of the politics.
Aurie….remember that the JLP is proposing constitutional reform(which I support) but until then…..is suh it guh….
‘jamaicangirl2007′ – I’m aware that ’tis late in the day to be adding to this thread, but I’ve only just found this place and read your very interesting posts.
However I am saddened by the idea of politics and politicians being influenced by the media, who are given credit for being able to influence the people. When really the only thing that should influence policies is the people. Organisations like BFP can get hold of facts from the inside and inform the people, seemingly with little bias, but only armed with truth and knowledge are people empowered to make decisions as important as deciding whom you allow to rule over you. As you say they should know the law if they are to rule me, but also if I am to be ruled I must know even more about the laws under which I am to be ruled, no?
Any changes to the constitution should be aimed at improving the lives of the people and as such should be clearly supported by the people. Politics always seems to be overly complicated and shrouded in corruption, when will we get to the point where we as people realise that the only power is that which will give, political parties have their own agenda too much I think, and they should be merely a tool for the people to wield, they separate us, like any alliances and can cause conflict, but we all want the same thing for our country don’t we? Too much I see the many oppressed and down trodden, for the fortunes of the few. I am naive and under-informed, but I am inspired by your blogs and views.
aurie
the previous (PNP) govt set up commiteees in the diaspora to allow persons like yourself to contribute.
i believe the Constitution should be upheld until both parties decide that it should be changed
ignorance of the law is no defence
what i want to know is how will the outcome affect the new government will the pnp win… what will happen?
Did someone say something about committees in disapora??!!!!! DONT MAKE ME LAUGH!!!!! Because from my own expereince of these committees – THEY ARE EXTENSIONS OF THE CORRUPTTION that serve as a facade. Don’t even start me and the DIASPORA on that one. Please – nuh badda start. LOLLOL. Totally useless until they stop being political social clubs!!!!!!!!! A dat mi seh!!!
It is not true that you have to renounce all other citizenship to become a US Citizen, I had to do no such thing. By getting my citizenship after being born in Jamaica, I have neither “become naturalized in another country” or “sworn an oath of allegiance to another country” (and the rest definitely don’t apply in my case.
As for the laws of the land, while I may disagree, they are to be upheld, ALL of them, including Section 40 (2c) – no more selective justice.
Lastly, the USA does not seem to have a problem with dual-citizens holding public office but I could be proven wrong – the ‘Governator’ may have been born in Austria but he could have renounced his citizenship for that country and is now only a US citizen.
I didn’t say that you would have to renounce your Jamaican citizenship once you became a US citizen. What I have said is that if you want to be a part of the Jamaican political process as a Senator or MP, you would have to renounce your US citzenship (if you have one) based on the Jamaican constitution. This is what the likes of Bert Samuels and Dr. Lloyd Barnett have said and I don’t doubt them because I view those 2, in particular Lloyd Barnett as constitutional experts. I am sure this applies to Shahine Robinson and/or Daryl Vaz.
Also, while section 2C is on the books as well, I believe that issue requires a hell of a lot of court costs which will span anywhere between now and the next elections….I am sure that 2C may be harder to prove than 2A which is staring us in the face.
Possible Loss of U.S. Citizenship and Dual Nationality
ADVICE ABOUT POSSIBLE LOSS OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND DUAL NATIONALITY
The Department of State is responsible for determining the citizenship status of a person located outside the United States or in connection with the application for a U.S. passport while in the United States.
POTENTIALLY EXPATRIATING STATUTES
Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include:
(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (1) INA);
(2) taking an oath, affirmation or other formal declaration to a foreign state or its political subdivisions (Sec. 349 (a) (2) INA);
(3) entering or serving in the armed forces of a foreign state engaged in hostilities against the U.S. or serving as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the armed forces of a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (3) INA);
(4) accepting employment with a foreign government if (a) one has the nationality of that foreign state or (b) a declaration of allegiance is required in accepting the position (Sec. 349 (a) (4) INA);
(5) formally renouncing U.S. citizenship before a U.S. consular officer outside the United States (sec. 349 (a) (5) INA);
(6) formally renouncing U.S. citizenship within the U.S. (but only “in time of war”) (Sec. 349 (a) (6) INA);
(7) conviction for an act of treason (Sec. 349 (a) (7) INA).
ADMINISTRATIVE STANDARD OF EVIDENCE
As already noted, the actions listed above can cause loss of U.S. citizenship only if performed voluntarily and with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship.The Department has a uniform administrative standard of evidence based on the premise that U.S. citizens intend to retain United States citizenship when they obtain naturalization in a foreign state, subscribe to routine declarations of allegiance to a foreign state, or accept non-policy level employment with a foreign government.
DISPOSITION OF CASES WHEN ADMINISTRATIVE PREMISE IS APPLICABLE
In light of the administrative premise discussed above, a person who:
(1) is naturalized in a foreign country;
(2) takes a routine oath of allegiance or
(3) accepts non-policy level employment with a foreign government
and in so doing wishes to retain U.S. citizenship need not submit prior to the commission of a potentially expatriating act a statement or evidence of his or her intent to retain U.S. citizenship since such an intent will be presumed.
When, as the result of an individual’s inquiry or an individual’s application for registration or a passport it comes to the attention of a U.S. consular officer that a U.S. citizen has performed an act made potentially expatriating by Sections 349(a)(1), 349(a)(2), 349(a)(3) or 349(a)(4), the consular officer will simply ask the applicant if there was intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship when performing the act. If the answer is no, the consular officer will certify that it was not the person’s intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship and, consequently, find that the person has retained U.S. citizenship.
PERSONS WHO WISH TO RELINQUISH U.S. CITIZENSHIP
If the answer to the question regarding intent to relinquish citizenship is yes , the person concerned will be asked to complete a questionnaire to ascertain his or her intent toward U.S. citizenship. When the questionnaire is completed and the voluntary relinquishment statement is signed by the expatriate, the consular officer will proceed to prepare a certificate of loss of nationality. The certificate will be forwarded to the Department of State for consideration and, if appropriate, approval.
An individual who has performed any of the acts made potentially expatriating by statute who wishes to lose U.S. citizenship may do so by affirming in writing to a U.S. consular officer that the act was performed with an intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Of course, a person always has the option of seeking to formally renounce U.S. citizenship in accordance with Section 349 (a) (5) INA.
DISPOSITION OF CASES WHEN ADMINISTRATIVE PREMISE IS INAPPLICABLE
The premise that a person intends to retain U.S. citizenship is not applicable when the individual:
(1) formally renounces U.S. citizenship before a consular officer;
(2) takes a policy level position in a foreign state;
(3) is convicted of treason; or
(4) performs an act made potentially expatriating by statute accompanied by conduct which is so inconsistent with retention of U.S. citizenship that it compels a conclusion that the individual intended to relinquish U.S. citizenship. (Such cases are very rare.)
Cases in categories 2, 3, and 4 will be developed carefully by U.S. consular officers to ascertain the individual’s intent toward U.S. citizenship.
APPLICABILITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE PREMISE TO PAST CASES
The premise established by the administrative standard of evidence is applicable to cases adjudicated previously. Persons who previously lost U.S. citizenship may wish to have their cases reconsidered in light of this policy.
A person may initiate such a reconsideration by submitting a request to the nearest U.S. consular office or by writing directly to:
Director
Office of American Citizens Services
(CA/OCS/ACS)
Room 4817 NS
Department of State
2201 C Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20520
Each case will be reviewed on its own merits taking into consideration, for example, statements made by the person at the time of the potentially expatriating act.
LOSS OF NATIONALITY AND TAXATION
P.L. 104-191 contains changes in the taxation of U.S. citizens who renounce or otherwise lose U.S. citizenship. In general, any person who lost U.S. citizenship within 10 years immediately preceding the close of the taxable year, whose principle purpose in losing citizenship was to avoid taxation, will be subject to continued taxation. For the purposes of this statute, persons are presumed to have a principle purpose of avoiding taxation if 1) their average annual net income tax for a five year period before the date of loss of citizenship is greater than $100,000, or 2) their net worth on the date of the loss of U.S. nationality is $500,000 or more (subject to cost of living adjustments). The effective date of the law is retroactive to February 6, 1995. Copies of approved Certificates of Loss of Nationality are provided by the Department of State to the Internal Revenue Service pursuant to P.L. 104-191. Questions regarding United States taxation consequences upon loss of U.S. nationality, should be addressed to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service.
DUAL NATIONALITY
Dual nationality can occur as the result of a variety of circumstances. The automatic acquisition or retention of a foreign nationality, acquired, for example, by birth in a foreign country or through an alien parent, does not affect U.S. citizenship. It is prudent, however, to check with authorities of the other country to see if dual nationality is permissible under local law. Dual nationality can also occur when a person is naturalized in a foreign state without intending to relinquish U.S. nationality and is thereafter found not to have lost U.S. citizenship the individual consequently may possess dual nationality. While recognizing the existence of dual nationality and permitting Americans to have other nationalities, the U.S. Government does not endorse dual nationality as a matter of policy because of the problems which it may cause. Claims of other countries upon dual-national U.S. citizens often place them in situations where their obligation to one country are in conflict with the laws of the other. In addition, their dual nationality may hamper efforts to provide U.S. diplomatic and consular protection to them when they are abroad
was wondering what happen to you…. ow yu jus disappear suh… cho
lol…I get that all the time but I don’t publish all of those comments. All the one name Gordon Swaby (smile) write blog saying that he is CONCERNED that I have not written anything..lol. Check this out from him:
http://www.gordonswaby.com/2007/09/16/damn-bloggers-block/