LONDON: Queen Elizabeth II, who turns 80 on Friday, is to stop using central London's iconic Buckingham Palace as her principal residence, The Times newspaper said Saturday. Though the palace would remain the royal headquarters, the queen was to make Windsor Castle, west of London, her primary residence and cut back her crammed schedule of engagements to reflect her age, the daily said. Paul Wybrew, the queen's most senior page for three decades, is set to move to the ancient castle, where the queen spends her weekends and is known to consider as home, The Times said.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/16/2006 00:52 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Members of the royal household were heard to say that the Queen was mumbling something about Versaille. If the French government is surrendering to the students today, could there be a better time to once again lay a claim to vacant French throne?
British Kings from Edward III to George III (who relinquished the title) were titled King of France
James I was styled
"King of England, Scotland, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith."
Posted by: john ||
04/16/2006 10:09 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Yeah, and the Mexican government signed the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. It doesn't seem to bother them now in making claims upon 'the lost lands' of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas, in rationalizing their actions.
Phil is wearing an England football shirt. He lives in a quiet crescent in central Dagenham. Hes shaven-headed and has two small children. He regrets voting for Margaret Thatcher: She lost me my business, she did. In 1997 Mark moved to Tony Blair. Next month he will switch again, with immense enthusiasm, to the British National Party.
I want to make a statement about whats going on, he states. Half the world is getting dumped round here. Im a retailer. I work 50 to 60 hours a week. Im working my guts out. And I see people from nowhere getting a Mercedes cheap. I live here and I dont want this. My daughter was ill and it took us ten days to get to see my GP. People come in from Eastern Europe and get seen straight up.
I went canvassing with the British National Party last Friday night, and Id say half the doors we knocked on, all chosen by me, at random, revealed actual or potential BNP voters. Several cars always carrying the England flag hooted or waved their approval as we went about our business.
Dagenham isnt what it used to be, said a travel-broker who works in Romford. Id certainly consider voting BNP. Were working class. Weve got two little kids. They go to the school next door. Theres been a big influx. Big time.
Hes a dark-haired family man standing in front of his nice comfortable home. Its a decent area, very little graffiti. Youd feel safe walking the streets at night in Dagenham, and the locals are what used to be called salt of the earth. Surveys show that the typical BNP member is respectable working class or lower-middle class, some distance from the bottom of the heap.
I dont know how I will vote. I havent really considered. My personal opinion, he continues, is that family tax credits are no use to us whatsoever. Id certainly consider giving you my vote.
Across the road theres a man clipping a hedge. We stride across. The man from the BNP stretches out a hand.
Labour wouldnt know a socialist view if it bit them on the backside, says the man, putting down his clippers, and I believe in the working class. The BNP canvasser notes that there are a lot of foreigners coming into the area. Not just here. All over the country, replies his new friend.
White working-class families feel so neglected by the Government and angered by immigration that they are deserting Labour and flocking to the British National Party, a minister admitted yesterday.
In a sensational claim, Margaret Hodge, one of Tony Blair's closest allies, said that eight out of 10 white people in her east London constituency of Barking are threatening to vote for the far-Right party in next month's local elections. Once traditional Labour supporters are angry at a lack of affordable housing - and blame immigration, and Labour, for the changes.
"They can't get a home for their children, they see black and ethnic minority communities moving in and they are angry," said Mrs Hodge, the employment minister. "When I knock on doors I say to people, 'are you tempted to vote BNP?' and many, many, many - eight out of 10 of the white families - say 'yes'. That's something we have never seen before, in all my years. Even when people voted BNP, they used to be ashamed to vote BNP. Now they are not." Mrs Hodge said the pace of ethnic change in her area had frightened people. "What has happened in Barking and Dagenham is the most rapid transformation of a community we have ever witnessed.
"Nowhere else has changed so fast. When I arrived in 1994, it was a predominantly white, working class area. Now, go through the middle of Barking and you could be in Camden or Brixton. That is the key thing that has created the environment the BNP has sought to exploit." Mrs Hodge claimed the anger is not down to racism. "It is a fear of change. It is gobsmacking change."
She also complained about a "lack of leadership" from her party on race, and said the "political class", including Labour, was frightened of the issue. "The Labour Party hasn't talked to these people. This is a traditional Labour area but they are not used to engaging with us because all we do is put leaflets through doors. Part of the reason they switch to the BNP is they feel no one else is listening to them."
Mrs Hodge said white families are angry at the lack of housing since immigrants began arriving in the area, and because asylum seekers have been housed there by inner London councils. "There was nowhere for the local people to move to and we did not reinvest in social housing, nor did the Tories. Neither of us have done enough of that.
"It isn't that we have done nothing. But where we haven't done enough is affordable housing for families and the quality of life for families. Were we to blame for the change? No, it happened on the back of Right To Buy. But we could have built more affordable housing. We must do that. It isn't happening yet."
She also blamed inadequate action to clean up estates. "What we haven't significantly addressed are these issues that are the quality of life on council estates. It is the poorest whites who feel the greatest anger because there is no way out for them."
While she rejected talk of the far-Right being on the verge of a major breakthrough, Mrs Hodge conceded that they were likely to win seats from Labour on May 4. "I think we could lose one or two [seats].
"It's an incredibly serious issue. It's the big issue. We need very much stronger leadership nationally to promote the benefits of the multi-cultural society. We have got to do it, the Labour leadership have got to do it. All the political parties have got to do it.
"I think if we are not careful and we don't respond and learn the lessons from Barking and Dagenham we could see that same fear of change trickle out elsewhere."
Mrs Hodge's assessment of white, working-class anger was backed up by Phil Woolas, the local government minister and MP for Oldham East, where there were race riots five years ago. Dozens of BNP candidates stood in previous elections there, but this time there are only two.
Mr Woolas said: "We are winning the fight up here by acknowledging that anti-white racism exists, by being fair and being seen to be fair on housing and schooling. We took the white, working-class vote back."
Phoenix officials spent at least $309,000 to ensure public safety during the immigration march Monday that drew more than 100,000 people to downtown Phoenix. That's about $3 per person.As a former City of Phoenix employee, I just wonder how many municipal workers the city could have hired with all this money....most departments are understaffed and have been for a while.
"We invested the appropriate resources we believed were needed to provide for a safe and orderly event for the participants, the motorists and the general public," said David Ramirez, a city spokesman.
The marchers rallied in support of breaking the law and jumping ahead of people following the process legalization for millions of undocumented immigrants.
There were no arrests or major incidents during the peaceful march that took participants from the state fairgrounds to the state Capitol, but police officers and firefighters were on standby. Which is a good thing, otherwise it would have cost even more.
A bulk of the money, at least $256,124, covered overtime costs for public safety crews and support staff, including eight temporary workers who answered more than 360 calls to the city's traffic information line. Even the Suns and the Diamondbacks have to pay the costs for traffic control and police presence. But these guys are *special*.
The city also paid about $25,000 for barricades to close streets throughout the day of the march. Again, another cost that is normally assessed on whoever is holding the event. "We had to keep traffic moving around the march, and keep people from parking in neighborhoods," said Mike Frisbie, a city traffic engineering supervisor.
The cost of $3 per person was $3 too much for some residents. "Any other group or organization would have to pay for their barricades and for the police overtime," said Donna Neill, a community activist. "You can't take my tax dollar and use it when our community are in such need in other areas like parks or senior centers. That money is gone. It didn't produce anything tangible."
Other costs related to the march:
About $22,000 to serve 6,000 meals to public safety crews from the city and outside police agencies working the event. Wonder how many calls for service were put off so that they could deal with this instead? Sure hope there weren't a lot of burglary or stolen vehicle reports that day....
About $6,500 to print and distribute 30,000 fliers several days before the march to inform residents and businesses along the march route about the event and related street closures. Another way they saved money for the organizers and took it out of the taxpayers' pockets....
"It's our duty to provide public safety at every level," Assistant Fire Chief Bob Khan said. "And the city did that seamlessly."
#1
For my part, I heard several mumbled curses from working Mexican citizens about the demonstration. Just two generations living here and a lot of them want nothing to do with the recent arrivals.
The ironic part is the political split of around 50/50 in AZ. It's almost identical to the overall State political split. Though conservative Mexican-Americans tend to be further to the right than most other conservatives.
China has issued a ban on ships entering an area of the East China Sea near a disputed maritime border with Japan while it works on an offshore gas field, Japanese media reported.
Citing an unidentified Web site of the Chinese maritime authorities, Kyodo news agency said China would ban ships from the area while it laid pipelines and cables on the sea floor as part of an expansion of the Pinghu gas field.
The work will last until Sept. 30 this year, it said.
The area straddles the disputed median line separating the two countries' 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zones and covers some waters Japan regards as in its exclusive area, Kyodo said late on Saturday, citing unidentified Japanese embassy sources in Beijing.
NHK television on Sunday quoted Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso as saying he had not heard of the Chinese move and could not comment.
Japan and China are involved in a stand-off over developing gas fields in the disputed area, one of a range of issues, including Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visits to a Tokyo war shrine that China sees as a symbol of Tokyo's past militarism, that have hurt bilateral ties.
The two sides disagree over the position of the border between their exclusive economic zones in the East China Sea, and Tokyo fears energy-hungry China's exploitation of the area could tap into resources in its own zone.
Kyodo said Japan is expected to make a formal protest to China over the shipping ban.
#1
This could prove interesting. One more arrogant pin-prick from China. Just imagine the caterwauling from the super-sensitive Chinese were Japan to make such a unilateral announcement.
For those actually paying attention, the actions of the Chinese and the Arabs are doing a nice job of demolishing the idea that white people are somehow uniquely racist.
#1
Just two - three years ago you could count a hundred stories dripping in smugness about how wonderful this new currency was and how it represented a threat against the international dominance of the US dollar. IIRC there were some Arab countries that were going to start doing oil trades exclusively in the Euro.
Guess you should start working on switching back to the $ Plan B now, eh, gov'nr?
#2
The only questions are when the Euro is abandoned and whether the abandonment is accompanied by violence. I suspect the answers are not soon and therefor yes, respectively.
#4
2b - I thought the same thing when I saw Krugman's name. He was once a serious economist,and yes, now he's just a hack / Bush Basher. Check out Don Luskin's blog, a one-man Krugman Killer (a few years ago Krugman accused Luskin of 'cyber-stalking' and stalking him personally when Luskin asked him to autograph a book).
#3
For some reason, I have a problem caring about this. And on Easter no less. Sigh. I'm going to go to church, sing happy songs and pray that these sad souls will find joy in life and that they won't even need a clinic like this and they will all go out of business. There! I feel better. I hope they do too.
A gang of right-wing extremists clashed with left-wing anti-fascists at Sankt Eriksplan in central Stockholm on Friday.
"Hrarrr! Take that, commie!"
"Arrr! Take that, fascist!"
"Peanuts! Popcorn! Crackerjacks! Get 'em right here!"
Several people were injured, but according to Stockholm police, none of them required hospital treatment.
That's really too bad.
Police were called to the scene at around 2pm after a group of around 20 young people began brawling in an ICA supermarket. Nazi sympathisers were congregating throughout the afternoon for a demonstration and ceremony at the Norra cemetery in Solna. As a group of the right-wing activists were on their way there, the groups clashed. Police said that nobody was arrested following the fight. Around 20 police units were in attendance at the demonstration, which began at 3pm.
Of course no one was arrested: this is Sweden. You can murder a government minister and nothing much will happen to you.
Twenty police units? For a fight involving twenty tuff guyz?
#1
Govenor Bill Richardson, Democrat - New Mexico, has put through the legislature an income tax cut in each of his terms of office. That included a special session in 2005 which not only cut rates but also sent out rebates. Shock and awe.
Yeah, yeah, they probably trot this one out every year...
By Diane Lim Rogers | April 16, 2006
WITH TAX-FILING upon us, many people, ordinary citizens and politicians alike, complain of how high Americans' tax burdens are. President Bush recently used his radio address to say that, as Americans are finishing up their tax returns, they should be reminded of the need to make the 2001-03 tax cuts permanent. Like you need reminding when you're mailing The Man 2 or three large?
Left unsaid, though, is that even with our imperfect tax system, the revenues provided by taxes strengthen, not weaken, our nation's economy. They fund essential public goods and services, they contribute positively to national saving, and many of the things that they fund -- from highways and schools to biomedical research and national parks -- indirectly create private wealth as well. As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes put it in 1927, ''Taxes are what we pay for a civilized society." If you define private wealth as 'many government employees', then I agree with that.
Policy makers who argue that taxes are too high are typically not just in favor of low taxes; they are also in favor of smaller government. They ignore the fact that the recent tax cuts have not shrunk government spending. The recent tax cuts instead have increased the budget deficit, reduced national saving, and made it more likely that our children and grandchildren will face a weaker economy and lower standard of living than would otherwise be possible. Just as unemploment numbers have shrunk recently? That's a 'weaker economy'?
Since President Bush took office, everything has sucked the 10-year budget outlook has deteriorated from a $5.6 trillion surplus to a nearly $3 trillion deficit, according to the official ''baseline" estimates of the Congressional Budget Office. That $8 trillion turnaround actually understates the fiscal damage associated with current policies, because the CBO baseline assumes that the 2001 tax cuts expire at the end of 2010 and the 2003 dividend and capital gains tax cuts expire at the end of 2008. That's the cost of 'compassionate conservatism'.
Those who have supported the tax cuts typically deny that the tax cuts have had anything to do with this deteriorating budget outlook. In fact, many have argued that revenues would have been lower without the tax cuts, i.e., that the tax cuts more than pay for themselves. Reagan proved it, and so did Bush. Facts are inconvenient things...
But the facts show that the tax cuts already enacted will cost more than $3 trillion just through 2016. Thus, contrary to the view that the tax cuts were neutral or even beneficial, the tax cuts have been a huge factor in the deterioration of the 10-year outlook and our currently high and rising deficits. Only in the mind of a big government liberal is a tax cut considered a 'cost' to the government. Let me ask you this, lady - is it fair to say that taxes I pay to the government should be considered a 'cost' to me?
Making the 2001-03 tax cuts permanent, as the president is calling for, would bring the total cost through 2016 to $6 trillion, including interest. Yet the president says this is the way to ''stay on track to meet our goal of cutting the budget deficit in half by 2009."
Unfortunately, the goal of cutting in half the huge deficit created during this administration is a bit like a retailer marking up prices just before a sale. President Bush took office facing trillions of dollars in surpluses and said that his administration would reduce the federal debt by nearly $1 trillion in his first four years. Instead, the debt ceiling has been raised four times, by a total of more than $3 trillion.
Finally, the argument that tax cuts grow the economy, while tax increases shrink it, is incomplete and incorrect. Economists generally agree that true tax reform, where marginal tax rates are reduced while the tax base is broadened and the revenue collected stays the same, is good for economic growth. But tax cuts that diminish revenue are harmful to economic growth if they increase deficits and reduce national saving.
So as we work on our tax returns, what should we be pondering about the deeper meaning surrounding this painful and tedious task? Um, how not to pay so much?
Rather than making fiscally unsustainable tax cuts permanent, let us remember that taxes are collected for a reason: to provide my funding vital public services such as a strong defense, homeland security, healthcare, retirement and income security, education and training, and disaster relief. Excuse me? The federal government is now responsible not just for supplementing retirement but for providing "retirement and income security"? How's that model working for France, by the way? Don't you just love it when they move the goalposts?
And let us be wise when we hear politicians pitching more tax cuts, understanding that every dollar of additional tax cuts that we receive now only adds more than a dollar to the future tax bills of our children and grandchildren (so you support private Social Security accounts, right?). Our current tax burden is historically low, not high: Federal taxes were less than 17 percent of gross domestic product in 2003-04, the lowest since the 1950s. A civilized society shouldn't go on a spending spree with an unwillingness to pay sufficiently for it, only to stick the bill to future generations with no political voice. In other words, we need to increase taxes - that'll go over like a fart in a church, and that's the reason Clinton lied aout his stance on taxes in 1992.
Diane Lim Rogers is research director of the Budgeting for National Priorities Project at the Brookings Institution. Ah, the usual suspects!
#2
Damn the lot of them. They're so frigging willing to be generous with someone else's money. I just wrote both my Senators and my Congresscritter that they better wake up and get a clue about what happens when you have selective enforcement of the laws. The question I posed to them was "what happens when Americans see illegal immigrants blithely ignoring the laws and not getting caught? Do you realize that the first thing Americans are going to think is 'I don't like the laws taxing me to death. If the Mexes can ignore the immigration laws, why shouldn't I ignore the tax laws that are beggaring me?'"
I'll be interested in seeing if I get an answer to that question. I suspect I won't--from them. What I suspect I will see is some newspaper report soon that says tax noncompliance is at or approaching its highest point ever.
It's pretty straightforward--perhaps too straightforward for the Congress: if you want people to believe that the laws really pertain to everyone, the authorities damned well better be seen to be enforcing them on everyone equally. Failure to enforce the immigration laws directly equates to a failure to comply with the tax laws. If you don't believe this, look at how Rudy G. cleaned up NY. He made sure people saw the city was enforcing the small laws. That got the message across. The Feds not enforcing immigration law sends exactly the opposite message.
Posted by: mac ||
04/16/2006 11:05 Comments ||
Top||
#3
why do I suspect that Teddy pays a lower percentage than I do. Heck, he probably even pays less than I do. Wonderful!
#4
there's absolutely nothing preventing this writer, heck, even the entire Boston Globe from contributing at a MUCH higher rate, say 90%. I say they should put their money where their mouth is and go first
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/16/2006 12:18 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Funny you should mention that, Frank G - Line 22 of the Mass. state return has an option to pay income taxes at the higher rate (5.85% instead of 5.3%). Care to guess how many good liberals opted for this?
You get the picture, here are the rich and famous expressing their guilt about not paying enough in taxes. Why not let them and others in every country including Nepal pay more if they choose to. In America, in the States of Massachusetts, Arkansas and Virginia, tax payers can pay more if they so desire. How many paid more? Not many, according to the Department of Revenue. In 2001, Massachusetts cut its top income tax rate to 5.3% but let its guilty under-taxed rich pay the old rate of 5.85%. In 2003, 1,488 paid the higher optional rate, out of a total of 3,218,572 tax payers. Yes, one person in 2,163 paid the slightly higher rate. Wow! Most had expected about one in 100 to do so.
What really showed politicians double-speak was the revelation that John Kerry - with all his support for higher taxes and in spite of being married to one of Americas richest ladies too paid the States lower rate.
#7
You know, at least Massachusetts had the guts to walk the walk and pass their own program to insure those who don't have insurance. It's really a laugh to listen to states like New York and California belly ache about how the federal governmment should do this and the federal government should do that. Switzerland is far from perfect, but it's a country of 8 million people, about the 3/4 the size of the New York or LA metro areas, and it manages to fund a sophisticated public transportation system, produce streets that don't have potholes, and care for its elderly and poor.
WASHINGTON - Many lawmakers who sit on the tax-writing committees in Congress hire professional preparers to fill out their tax returns, rather than try to decipher by themselves the laws they've written. I think it should be a committee requirement that lawmakers have to prepare their own, just so they can see the same shit I have to put up with every year.
Three of the four senior lawmakers on the Senate Finance and House Ways and Means committees, the panels in charge of writing tax laws, turn to paid professionals to file their annual returns.
The exception is Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas, R-Calif., a former college professor who said he has prepared his own return "forever" and that he'd wait until close to the deadline to file. This guy's my hero...
"There's no reason for me to pay Uncle Sam pay, you heard that until I have to," he said.
According to IRS statistics, that makes these members of Congress much like the rest of the nation. More than 60 percent of taxpayers use professionals to have their returns prepared and filed. The number typically increases a little each year. E-filing will push those numbers up, too.
Some lawmakers have more complicated financial lives than the average taxpayer, making their tax returns more complicated. Some said they had a professional do the job to guarantee the return's accuracy. Good point - even if it's a stack of brokerage statements it'll take hours just for input, then you reconcile it, then it gets reviewed. I remember one return that took me 20 hours just to prepare (no reviews).
But a few prepare their tax returns themselves, including Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., who said he does it "just so I can go through the process." Ryan, however, does ask an accountant to check the return for accuracy. Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., usually prepares his own taxes using computer software. Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, prepares his and his children's returns and mails them to the IRS. Rep. Jim Ramstad, R-Minn., doesn't, but he agreed it might be a good idea to try. "I think it is important that we operate in the real world," Ramstad said.
#1
It used to be IRS policy that they would not assist directly in the completion of filings unless the individual was mentally handicapped, blind, or a Congressman. That was so appropriate.
IT LOOKS as if voters are starting to tilt toward get-tough Republicans on immigration - and those massive protest rallies by illegal aliens waving flags have backfired.
Republicans are now more trusted on immigration - 37 percent trust them on the issue, while just 31 percent trust Democrats, according to a national survey by the Rasmussen Reports Web site done April 8-9.
That marks a Democratic slide from 10 days earlier, when both parties were equally trusted on the hot issue. Thirty-eight percent said they trusted Republicans and 37 percent trusted Democrats.
"The Democrats lost ground," said pollster Scott Rasmussen. "I suspect theres backlash against the rallies, and the Democrats appear to be against enforcement. People say before we talk about reforms, we ought to enforce the law."
Rasmussen - who accurately predicted the 2004 presidential election - notes that 57 percent of Americans want a barrier built along the Mexican border, even though only 42 percent think it would really cut illegal immigration.
So maybe the conventional and politically correct media wisdom is wrong, as usual, with its focus on Republican splits over immigration and the risk that get-tough Republicans will alienate Latinos.
In the short term, Dems could be running bigger risks heading into next falls election - the risk that theyll look soft on national security in the post- 9/11 era by opposing tough border controls.
When Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada blocked a bipartisan immigration bill last week, a prime reason was that he didnt want Democrats to have to take a stand on amendments for tougher border patrols and deporting aliens who commit crimes.
Republican Rep. Peter King (R-L.I.) - who backs get-tough laws against illegal immigration - says his phone calls are 99-1 favorable and hes getting even more calls on this issue than on the failed Dubai ports deal.
"When Democrats embrace [the protesters], that drives home to the people that Democrats support illegal immigration," King claims.
For many Republicans, immigration may turn out to be like the Dubai ports deal - a chance to take a tougher line on border security than President Bush, who favors a guest worker program that Republicans like King blast as "amnesty."
#1
Now if the Republicans will just build the fence. I am at the point that if the Government won't enforce the current laws and defend our borders, then I would prefer to see us annex Mexico outright and throw the current corrupt Mexican government into prison.
#3
thank God these rallies are backfiring for them.
People say before we talk about reforms, we ought to enforce the law."
Hell yeah!
Posted by: Jan ||
04/16/2006 3:36 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Beautiful. My opinion of the average American is inching up right along with these polls. If the will to build the wall emerges soon, and we do it, then we will have taken the first giant step toward staving off one of the many potential disasters looming from anti-American interests within our borders. And since most of those are in league, all will be weakened by it - and America will be strengthened.
Is this the return of Common Sense, or is that too optimistic?
#6
Its time to take back the debate by ending the farce that these are immigrants in the traditional sense of the word. They are economic refugees. Immigrants adopt their new country and proudly display their colors. The refugees, here only for economic gain, flaunt their allegiance to a foreign nation and have to be chided by their handlers to hide their true beliefs.
Refugees dont wait for legal processing and receive differing treatment within the host country than émigrés. That is an international standard. Wonder how effective the national government would be in actual enforcement if refugee cards rather than immigrant cards were distributed and all local and state governments could charge back to the national government the expense of medical, educational, and law enforcement costs. When the federal budget suddenly would become a black hole taking millions upon millions from pet projects, pork, and other constituent demands, Id bet the issue would get serious attention.
Remember the refugees from Haiti? What was Clintons response? More military, abet the Coast Guard, between the source of the flight and Florida. Finally, military intervention.
The whole dialogue starts to change when the word refugee replaces immigrant. At least itll be a tag that will start to make the pride, of the governments south of the border, squirm.
#7
DB - exactly right. I was wondering how much the city of Boston paid for that 'rally' of ours last week (I couldn't find anything, and I'm sure the Boston Globe would bury it in the nether regions of the Metro section). Naturally, they screwed up the evening commute for thousands who likely won't be celebrating diversity anymore, lol.
#8
I'm not a big fan of polls - but this is really bad news for the Democrats since Republicans are completely ticked at their reps lack of spine on this issue. Yet, despite that fact, it still translates into a huge hit for the Dems.
That says something - none of it good for the Democrats who have been pandering to the natives on this issue.
How do you figure out whether a foam firefighting system in an air force hangar is set up correctly and works? Well you turn it on for a few seconds, to make sure it's got pressure and everything. First you set up a scaffolding so you can record the event and show the flow coming out of all nozzles.
And then you let 'er rip. After 15 seconds you can see foam is covering all areas it has to, so the test is successful. Shut 'er off.
#2
So some poor troop back in the tail of an aricraft pounding rivets will drown before he could get out of the aircraft and to an exit. Just what is it they are trying to save?
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
04/16/2006 17:41 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Oh my god, can you imagine the smell. (If that foam is what I think it is)
#5
Aircraft have lots of flammable fuel, and military aircraft can also have big explosive things hanging off of them. Fire is a very, very bad thing in that situation, so the goal is to stop it ASAP.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/16/2006 21:08 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Got that, but there are many different, directionalized systems, that will not kill the maintenance crews if there is a fire. The reason to stop it asap is to limit death, not induce it.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
04/16/2006 22:05 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Used to mind a Cyber 73/74 deep in the bowels of the Love Building (really) at FSU. The halon system was so fast I figured I only had a 50/50 chance to get out before I succumbed to oxygen starvation. Of course I was easily replaceable.
#8
6,
I had to deal with a Halon system in a missile (AGM-69 and -86) assembly building - we figure we had just enough time to say "Oh, sh*t" before we suffocated.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
04/16/2006 22:38 Comments ||
Top||
Dartmouth College engineering professor Victor Petrenko, has devised a way to use a burst of electricity to remove ice caked on walls or windows. For surfaces coated with a special film, the jolt gets rid of ice in less than a second, far less time than it takes to hack at it with an ice scraper.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
LONDON: Queen Elizabeth II, who turns 80 on Friday, is to stop using central London's iconic Buckingham Palace as her principal residence, The Times newspaper said Saturday. Though the palace would remain the royal headquarters, the queen was to make Windsor Castle, west of London, her primary residence and cut back her crammed schedule of engagements to reflect her age, the daily said. Paul Wybrew, the queen's most senior page for three decades, is set to move to the ancient castle, where the queen spends her weekends and is known to consider as home, The Times said.
A gang of right-wing extremists clashed with 
Dartmouth College engineering professor Victor Petrenko, has devised a way to use a burst of electricity to remove ice caked on walls or windows. For surfaces coated with a special film, the jolt gets rid of ice in less than a second, far less time than it takes to hack at it with an ice scraper.
