Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I don't get my information from a calendar.
That's just a calculating machine. One of the best in the world.
I got my information from the source.
The most ancient of written chronicles and the oral traditions of many cultures.
As long as you think this is all you are, you WILL die.<<
Does this mean IxCimi is immortal? I knew there was a high risk that Ron Paul followers were cult members!
Superstitious nonsense?
LMAO! This coming from someone that is getting his feelings from Mayan calendars! Give me a break! You are the epitome of superstitious!
No.
I just say RELIGION SUX....
It's primative and superstitious nonsense.
If people could honestly take a look at how religion came about, they'd really be disappointed.
Oh .. perhaps I have you confused with someone who does ride others about their religious beliefs ... and pokes fun at them ... and calls them names in attempts to insult their intelligence..
sorry.
I don't need ALL the answers.
I just have the one I need.
No one even has to agree.
I really don't give people too much shit about their beliefs.
It's just the here in the internet, you can seed new thoughts, new ideas and other possibilities...
IxCimi - but you still refuse to even consider why .... while admitting you don't have all the answers.
Not that I am religious, or even close to it.
But I harbor no fear or disdain for anyone simply because he or she IS religious.
You seem to ....
Actually you harbor some pretty strong opinons about something you can't really even explain ... and remember .. denial is not explaning.
I have no innate fear of something that is completely nonsensical.
Religion has the same validity as the shadow monster in the closet; Death.
But religion doesn't free you from death.
It IS death.
As long as you think this is all you are, you WILL die.
Putting another man (priest, preacher, or whatever) between you and your inner most understanding is a false path.
At best, you get a "feel good" sensation.
Ain't the same thing as direct knowing.
Start with "Who are you?"
You can not answer this question adequately.
IxCimi - If you read your last post .. and your continuing denials over the past years of harboring some sort of innate fear in relation to religion ...... and can't see the possibility of a conflict between them ... I don't think I can explain it to you.
I've put the question to you, in various forms, several times. You deny it. Yet your posts just seem to be written from a basis of some sort of fear of religion.
Maybe it's just that I am not capable of communicating on the same high plane as you ...
Flawed?
Make mistakes?
Of course I do. I don't even understand this line of reasoning.
I live a with a woman. They have an amazing propensity for highlighting one's flaws and mistakes. ; )
Actually, I have no misgivings there, but sounds good, huh?
But how does that get into the mix?
And of course, your words mean so much more than your actions ...
Are you really so insecure you can not admit you have even a single flaw, or ever make a mistake?
Not a damn thing.
It's just silly and primative minded.
Religion isn't the acknowledgement of the highest aspects of being.
That's spirituality and they are 180° apart in intention.
Religion seeks to harness. Spirituality seeks to break the bounds.
Man doesn't need to reach out beyond himself to some percieved being.
He need to reach within and find his OWN higher Being.
It's just more direct and less ritualized.
We don't need all the gobbledegook.
Your mind is not found within your body.
You can not point it out, say "Here it is."
But you can control it, direct it and utilize it far more powerfully than we do.
People miss the subtle and obvious.
IxCimi - anyone who even faintly recognizes the possible presence of any sort of "God" is, to you , a religious quack.
Now tell me again .. just what is it about religion that scares the hell out of you?
I'd rather save it from itself.
But thanks.
; ) Quite little convergence!
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/09/0909_040909_earthmagfield.html
In particular, read about the Magentic Shield.
You might also want to look up "South Atlantic Anomaly" before you go making too much fun of me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Atlantic_Anomaly
I know of what I speak.
This and a whole lot more are coming your way!
The biggest Solar Maximum in centuries peaks 2012.
And the heliosphere is full of cosmic dust that shouldn't be there, suggesting we are moving into a highly charged stellar cloud.
That could lead to plasma charges hitting the Earth.
Remember Thor's Hammer?
http://www.thunderbolts.info/webnews/072107worldend.htm
Enjoy the show!
Sorry that they didn't replace him
with an astrologist, astronomer that is seeking the end of time in Mayan Calendars! You have quite the crudentials of a quack yourself!
Didn't think you could answer the simple question.
Iran and the true fascists are waiting for your fine meals! Enjoy the freedom that Iran offers! Maybe they'll let you post negativity about Iran in Iran? Try it out when you move out of this "fascist" country!
You probably missed this part.
KGO Operations Director Jack Swanson said the station is for the time replacing Ward with a substitute on his two shows - a nighttime 10 p.m. to 1 a.m. show Monday through Friday and a Sunday morning show called Godtalk.
He's a religious quack...
"Really? Who's speaking in the video?"
In context of this discussion, who cares? Is he calling the USA a fascist nation, or is it you?
Really? Who's speaking in the video?
Great example of liberal Bay-Area values
http://www.examiner.com/a-1090907~Talk_show_host_indicted_for_child_porn.html
as if you haven't seen their barbaric, idiotic, porno parades down the streets of San Fransyphillis.
http://www.zombietime.com
His agent blamed Bush for this child porn investigation. Yeah, Bush made him do it!
http://podcast.kcbs.com/kcbs/788881.mp3
I wonder why liberals love to justify such behavior while conservatives distance and disown those that engage in such. Honestly, what the hell is it with this hypocritical "culture of corruption" cheesy slogan crap that the left spews? Go ahead, defend a kiddie pornster and Gerry Studds, only if he is a demoncrap! LMAO!
Liberalism is a disease!
Your tag of "fascism" is quite over-the-top.
Do you live near a holocaust-in-progress or suicide bombing training center? Ron Paul would love to surrender to either.
Over the top????
You really watched, correct?
I sure couldn't say it's over the top!
"Fascist Utopia"
A bit over-the-top, but the dems want guns and the army disbanded so we have nothing left to fight the terrorists. It's a different world after 9/11, and the Ron Paul kooks still love exhonerating the terrorists. That's scarey!
You are most welcome.
Try this to get a idea of your system's weaknesses.
http://pcpitstop.com/
thanks ix , i'll check ...i'm a computer dummy lol
Your .mpeg software maybe outdated, an older version and your RAM memory may be weak probably.
no, i stay away from utube..it does weird things to my puter
Did you watch it?
If you didn't, you really should.
What you do doesn't affect me directly.
But for your own sake, get informed.
please return to your communist utopia
Just goes to show how warped the left is...
The mentally shallow minions don't know which way is up. Hitler was a socialist.
the only outrage is directed at the right wing
Where is the liberal outrage?
Oh, those folks in Venezuela that are disenfranchising voters ARE liberal socialists!
Chavez Loses Constitutional Vote
Dec 3 02:13 AM US/Eastern
By IAN JAMES
Associated Press Writer 9 Comments
Chavez Said He Would Respect Vote Outcome
CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) - President Hugo Chavez suffered a stunning defeat Monday in a referendum that would have let him run for re-election indefinitely and impose a socialist system in this major U.S. oil provider.
Voters defeated the sweeping measures Sunday by a vote of 51 percent to 49 percent, said Tibisay Lucena, chief of the National Electoral Council, with voter turnout at just 56 percent.
She said that with 88 percent of the votes counted, the trend was irreversible.
Opposition supporters shouted with joy as Lucena announced the results on national television early Monday, their first victory against Chavez after nine years of electoral defeats.
Some broke down in tears. Others began chanting "And now he's going away!"
"This was a photo finish," Chavez told reporters at the presidential palace, adding that unlike past Venezuelan governments, his respects the people's will.
Exactly a year ago, Chavez won re-election with 63 percent of the vote.
"Don't feel sad," Chavez urged supporters, especially given the "microscopic differences" between the "yes" and "no" options in a referendum that opponents feared could have meant a plunge toward dictatorship.
Chavez's supporters said he would have used the reforms to deepen grass-roots democracy and more equitably spread Venezuela's oil wealth.
The changes would have created new forms of communal property, let Chavez handpick local leaders under a redrawn political map, permit civil liberties to be suspended under extended states of emergency and allow Chavez to seek re-election indefinitely. Now, Chavez will be barred from running again in 2012.
Other changes would have shortened the workday from eight hours to six, created a social security fund for millions of informal laborers and promoted communal councils where residents decide how to spend government funds. The reforms also would have granted Chavez control over the Central Bank and extended presidential terms from six to seven years.
"To those who voted against my proposal, I thank them and congratulate them," Chavez said.
But he also urged calm and restraint. "I ask all of you to go home, know how to handle your victory," Chavez said. "You won it. I wouldn't have wanted that Pyrrhic victory."
Yet he made it clear he would remain a formidable foe.
Echoing words he spoke when as an army officer he was captured and jailed for leading a failed 1992 coup, he said: "For now, we couldn't."
The ever combative Chavez had warned opponents ahead of the vote he would not tolerate attempts to incite violence, and threatened to cut off oil exports to the U.S. if Washington interfered.
All was reported calm during Sunday's voting but 45 people were detained, most for committing ballot-related crimes like "destroying electoral materials," said Gen. Jesus Gonzalez, chief of a military command overseeing security.
At a polling station in one politically divided Caracas neighborhood, Chavez supporters shouted "Get out of here!" to opposition backers who stood nearby aiming to monitor the vote count. A few dozen Chavistas rode by on motorcycles with bandanas and hats covering their faces, some throwing firecrackers.
Opponents—including Roman Catholic leaders, press freedom groups, human rights groups and prominent business leaders—feared the reforms would have granted Chavez unchecked power and threatened basic rights.
Cecilia Goldberger, a 56-year-old voting in affluent eastern Caracas, said Venezuelans did not really understand how Chavez's power grab would affect them. She resented pre-dawn, get-out-the-vote tactics by Chavistas, including fireworks and reveille blaring from speakers mounted on cruising trucks.
"I refuse to be treated like cattle and I refuse to be part of a communist regime," the Israeli-born Goldberger said, adding that she and her businessman husband hope to leave the country.
Chavez, 53, is seen by many as a champion of the poor who has redistributed more oil wealth than any other leader in memory.
Tensions have surged in recent weeks as university students led protests and occasionally clashed with police and Chavista groups.
Lucena called the vote "the calmest we've had in the last 10 years."
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8T9PU500&show_article=1
What do they call leaders that want
their own country defeated by a true enemy? I wonder what Washington, Lincoln, and Patton would have called them?
lets hope it costs them during the election
"The Democratic Party has become emotionally invested in a narrative of defeat and retreat in Iraq - reluctant to acknowledge the progress our troops are now achieving,"
Sadly very true
WIll the War Matter to Voters?
Associated Press | November 24, 2007
WASHINGTON - Now that violence in Iraq is abating and other issues are consuming more of the presidential debates, political activists are wondering if the war will prove to be the defining issue that Democrats have long assumed.
Some Democrats say frustrated voters have given up on altering President Bush's handling of the war, and will make Republicans pay in 2008. Others say Democratic candidates are stubbornly and dangerously out of step with an improving situation, and their most promising campaign issue may prove far less potent by next November.
Polls show clearly that most Americans have soured on the war, causing Bush's second-term approval ratings to plummet as congressional Republicans anxiously eye the next election. But it's less clear how many voters are so unalterably angry that they cannot be influenced by other campaign issues, assuming Iraq does not take another dramatic turn for the worse.
While the Iraq situation is somewhat fluid, the top Democratic presidential contenders are locked in their Iraq-is-a-disaster message because anti-war voters play such a huge role in the party's primaries, several politicians said. It's possible the message will sound a bit off-key by mid-2008.
"The Democratic Party has become emotionally invested in a narrative of defeat and retreat in Iraq - reluctant to acknowledge the progress our troops are now achieving," said Sen. Joe Lieberman, a hawkish independent from Connecticut who was the Democrats' vice presidential nominee in 2000. "If Democrats don't take off their ideological and partisan blinders," he said, "they risk compromising our national security and losing next year's election."
Many Democrats reject that notion. It is highly unlikely that Iraq will be significantly more stable next fall, they say, and millions of voters have made their final judgments about Bush and the war.
"The American people are more negative about Iraq than ever before and want a change," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., one of his party's top strategists. "They've concluded what they've concluded about Iraq. They're done."
Moreover, he said, voters will take out their anger on Republicans next year because the great majority of GOP lawmakers and presidential candidates have supported the administration's main war policies.
"George Bush is on the ballot in 2008," Emanuel said.
By many measures, violence in Iraq has dropped in recent months, largely because the administration dispatched 30,000 more troops this year and placed a new emphasis on civil order in Baghdad. U.S. combat deaths in Iraq stood at 38 last month, down from 126 in May, 101 in June and 65 in September. It was the lowest monthly total since March 2006, and second lowest since March 2005. Suicide bombings in Iraq fell to 16 in October, about half the number from last summer, and well below March's high of 59.
Violence returned Friday with the bombing of a pet market pet market in central Baghdad and a police checkpoint in the northern city of Mosul, killing 28 people. But those events could be seen as anomalous against the backdrop of a generally improving security environment there.
Democratic officials are quick to note that the overall trend toward less violence has not resulted in the type of Iraqi political reconciliation that might lead to a stable government after most U.S. troops leave.
"The purpose of the surge was to create a secure environment in which the Iraqi government would have the opportunity to make the political change" needed to stabilize the country, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., recently told reporters. "They have not taken advantage of that opportunity."
Recent polling by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center found that "news about the Iraq war does not dominate the public's consciousness nearly as much as it did last winter." House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, cites such reports as evidence of his long-held view that the Iraq war will not be nearly the issue in 2008 that many Democrats anticipate.
Circumstances in Iraq, he said, are out of sync with the Democrats' "all-is-lost message, which is exactly why it's not resonating with the public."
Not so, says Matt Bennett, who tracks the war for Third Way, a Washington-based advocacy group for political "progressives."
"The level of anger has gone down a little - from a roiling boil to a high simmer," Bennett said.
Congress has seemed oddly static, revisiting the same arguments month after month. GOP loyalty to Bush has kept Democrats from forcing a scheduled troop drawdown, even as Republicans note the administration is starting to bring some troops home on its own terms.
Democrats respond that Bush approved the gradual drawdown in September, and at its proposed conclusion next summer the U.S. presence will merely return to its pre-escalation level.
Democratic lawmakers' inability to force Bush's hand, and the administration's need to draw down troops to maintain a severely strained military, leave Congress with few true choices but plenty of hot debate.
"The difference between what Democrats want, and what Republicans are going to have to do, is pretty small," Bennett said.
Among those rejecting claims that huge numbers of Americans have closed their minds about the war is Brookings Institution military scholar Michael O'Hanlon.
"If Iraq was going to be the overwhelming determinant of the 2008 presidential race, and the country had a clear preference for a changed policy, we would hear about it a lot more right now," said O'Hanlon, who co-authored a widely discussed article in late July about improved conditions in Iraq.
It's more likely, he said, "that Americans know all our choices in Iraq now are bad," even as they "gradually realize that the situation there is improving at least somewhat."
The result, O'Hanlon said, is a muddled political picture in which people make predictions about the Iraq war's impact on the next election at their peril.
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,156903,00.html
Asia's space tigers bare their teeth
By Nicola Casarini
Asia's main powers are warming up for a big space race. China launched its first lunar orbiter, the Chang'e-1, on a Long March 3A rocket last week. Japan had sent its Kaguya lunar probe a month earlier. India, South Korea and Taiwan are preparing to join in.
This race is largely driven by what scholars call "techno-nationalism". Successful space missions generate pride domestically and demonstrate prowess internationally.
Ouyang Ziyuan, chief scientist for China's moon program, declared in an interview with the official People's Daily that the
lunar exploration "is a reflection of a country's comprehensive national power and is significant for raising our international prestige and increasing our people's cohesion". In a region riddled with competing nationalisms, the development of indigenous space programs could well turn the race into serious disputes. But space also contains the seeds for regional cooperation.
Chang'e-1 completed its about 2 million kilometer journey to the moon this week and entered its working orbit about 200 kilometers above the surface, where it will conduct scientific exploration.
"The probe's precise entry into the [working] orbit has laid a solid foundation for its future work, and we are confident that Chang'e-1 will continue to fulfill the aims step by step," the official Chinese media said.
The dragon's long march into space
China has made dramatic achievements in space. Compared to the US, Chinese space technology is not state-of-the-art. However, compared to other Asian countries, China has a well-developed commercial satellite launch industry and its space program is also notable for the exchange of personnel and technology between the civilian and military sectors.
China's space missions aim to foster both the economic and military sectors. Since the first Gulf War in 1991, Chinese policy-makers have emphasized the link between the space and information fields as well as the need for China to modernize its space forces to counter the technologically advanced US military. The killing of one of its own satellites in January demonstrated China's new assertiveness and capacity to seriously affect US space assets in the area.
Space programs also boost high-tech skills. According to Zhang Wei, a senior official with the Chinese National Space Administration, "China needs its lunar and manned flight projects to nurture the aerospace industry." In October 2005, China launched its second manned rocket, the Shenzhou-6, and plans are underway for the Shenzhou-7, which will involve a space walk.
Space touches to the heart of national development. China's lunar mission in October coincided with the end of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) 17th National Congress. The event was widely broadcast to show China's current achievements under the CCP regime. The national anthem and 31 patriotic songs were uploaded onto the satellite so that it could send the music back to Earth and prove Beijing's greatness.
Great powers in contest
Japan is the Asian country that seeks more strongly to balance China's rise. In September, Tokyo succeeded in putting its first satellite into orbit around the moon, thus outpacing China.
Officials at the Japan Aerospace Exploration Center claim that the US$279 million lunar probe - the Selenological and Engineering Explorer (SELENE) launched aboard a H-2A rocket from Tanegashima island - is the largest lunar mission since the US Apollo program in terms of overall scope and ambition. Japan launched a moon probe in 1990, but it was a fly-by mission. It had to cancel a moon shot in 2004, the LUNAR-A, after repeated mechanical and budgetary problems. With the SELENE mission, Japan has re-entered the moon race.
In February, with the launch of the fourth and final satellite, Tokyo succeeded in establishing a network of spy satellites - the Daichi - that can peer at any point of the globe. This will boost Japan's ability to independently gather intelligence on trouble spots anywhere as well as lessen its reliance on the US.
It will also challenge the Chinese satellite network. The same month, Beijing launched a Long March 3-A rocket that sent a navigation satellite into orbit as part of its effort to build a global positioning system. The satellite is the fourth of the Compass navigation system that is expected to be operational in 2008. While China and Japan race head-to-head, India is warming up to join in.
New Delhi is working on a lunar orbiter, the Chandrayaan-1, to be launched next spring and plans are under way to send a manned spacecraft to low-Earth orbit by 2014 and a mission to the moon by 2020. India is committed to increasing its space assets and capabilities. At the beginning of February, India's chief of air staff, Air Chief Marshall Shashi P Tyagi, declared that the "Indian air force is in the process of establishing an aerospace command to exploit outer space."
The establishment of a military command alongside the Indian Space Research Organization indicates New Delhi's interest in the commercial and military uses of space technology. However, India's technological prowess and space budget remain well behind its ambitions. It is also challenged by a new breed of space tigers.
Space tigers grow
South Korea aims to be among the world's top 10 space powerhouses. The country is expected to launch the Korea Space Launch Vehicle-1 (KSLV-1) along with an experimental satellite in December 2007 and prepare for a moon orbiter in the near future. The first South Korean astronaut is expected to travel into space next April, on board a rocket made jointly by Russia and South Korea.
So far, Seoul has relied on foreign boosters to launch its satellites. The country has sent 10 communications and multipurpose satellites into space, with the latest, the Arirang-2, being put into orbit in July 2006. South Korea plans to become completely self-sufficient in this sector, thanks to Russian technology.
In October 2006, Seoul and Moscow signed the Technology Safeguard Agreement (TSA) that will allow South Korea to access the needed technology to achieve self-reliance. However, the Russian Duma (parliament) has not yet ratified the TSA, due to US pressure. Washington fears that with an enhanced satellite-launch program that could be adapted to produce long-range ballistic missiles, Seoul would gain leverage against surrounding nations and be able to hit not only North Korea, but also large areas of China and Japan, thus threatening the balance of power in Northeast Asia and escalating the region's space race.
Notwithstanding Washington's concerns, South Korea is actively working on its first space center. The 300 billion won (US$323 million) Naro Space Center on Naro island in Goheung, scheduled for completion in 2008, is intended to boost South Korea's indigenous space program. This year, the director of the center, Min Kyung-ju, said in an interview that "once the facility is fully operational, the country will be able to achieve its goal of building a satellite and rocket with local technology and launching it into space from its own launch center".
After the KSLV-1, South Korea plans to start development of the KSLV-2, which will utilize indigenous technology exclusively. A successful launch of the KSLV-2 will make Seoul the eighth country in the world to be able to build its own satellites and rockets and send them into space. And it could soon be joined by another space tiger.
Taiwan's National Space Organization (NSPO) has recently drawn up the nation's second 15-year Space Technology Development Plan (STDP). With a budget of T$27 billion (US$833 million), it calls for the development of indigenous satellite launch capability to be able to put the first micro-satellite into orbit by 2010. The previous 15-year STDP, which aimed at developing rockets capable of launching satellites, was abandoned due to US opposition.
Taiwan currently has three satellites in orbit (FORMOSAT 1, 2 and 3), developed in collaboration with foreign contractors and launched by US providers. The latest development is a joint Taiwan-US FORMOSAT-3/COSMIC which is a constellation of six micro-satellites, and plans are underway for the FORMOSAT-4.
The NSPO also succeeded in launching its sixth sounding rocket (a suborbital rocket in the thermosphere). However, Taiwan's ultimate objective remains the same: indigenous satellite design and launch capability, with all the security and strategic implications that this may entail for cross-strait relations and, more generally, Northeast Asia's strategic balance.
As above ... not so below? Asian nations' buoyant space programs reflect the region's rise and its new assertiveness. Space missions bring along commercial and scientific benefits. They boost patriotic sentiment at home and prowess abroad.
Space nationalism also has the potential to trigger regional tensions. But space could also become, if used wisely by Asian leaders, a powerful symbol for boosting regional identity. For instance, the creation of a pan-Asian space agency could well contribute to promote in orbit the kind of reconciliation and cooperative behavior that seems sometimes so difficult to achieve on Earth.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/IK09Ad02.html
Alberta's loss could be B.C., Saskatchewan's gain...
B.C., Saskatchewan eye the polo-ticz royalty decision -
Two provinces stand to gain if they keep the bolshovikz taxes,
royalties intact while Alberta boosts its 666takez? -
Financial Post
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost.com/story.html?id=66465c0e-4849-428b-b9bb-2aae4939824f
CALGARY -- Alberta's loss could be Saskatchewan's and British
Columbia's gain if the two provinces keep their taxes and
royalties intact while Alberta boosts its take.
Richard Neufeld, B.C.'s Energy Minister, Maynard Sonntag,
Saskatchewan's Minister of Industry and Resources and Brad Wall,
leader of the main opposition Saskatchewan Party, said Tuesday
they're watching closely Alberta's fiery royalty debate.
Premier Ed Stelmach will outline Wednesday night in a television
address the highlights of a new royalty deal, expected to
involve a large increase in government take from oilsands
projects and moderate increases from the conventional business.
Details of the strategy will be made public Thursday after
markets close.
Several large energy companies have threatened to reduce their
spending in Alberta and boost their programs in Saskatchewan and
B.C. if they feel Alberta goes too far.
Mr. Sonntag said if Saskatchewan re-elects an NDP government
it will continue to promote energy investment and not boost
its royalties and taxes to keep up with any changes in Alberta.
"We have worked extremely hard in our province to strike the
right balance," he said.
"We think we have achieved that now.
We are certainly not looking to change anything."
Brad Wall, leader of the business-friendly Saskatchewan Party,
said he'll strive to make his province competitive and where
possible the most competitive jurisdiction in investment in
all sectors of the economy.
"Should we form the government, we want to have as competitive an economic and investment environment as we possibly can have," Mr. Wall said. "We see significant potential for further development of our oil and gas sector, to the extent that we are able to keep a competitive edge with respect to other jurisdictions, we want to be in a position to do that to attract investment."
Saskatchewan's oil-prone industry is booming as producers step up programs in big plays like the Bakken to cash in from soaring crude prices. Activity has slumped in natural-gas prone Alberta and British Columbia because gas prices have been weak. Saskatchewan is also enjoying a surge in activity from the recent discovery of oilsands deposits across the border from the Fort McMurray-centred Athabasca basin.
Fiscal terms for the oil and gas sector in the three Western provinces are either competitive or slightly more advantageous in B.C. and Saskatchewan, where governments have tried to lure more energy activity.
Mr. Neufeld said B.C. reviews royalties on a regular basis and will watch Alberta's strategy before deciding what to do. Still, the province wants to promote continued investment and its residents welcome industry activity, focused in the province's Northeast.
"Most people understand that it is a huge provider of monetary resources to fund health care and education across the province," he said. "Are we going to take advantage of [Alberta's new policy]? No. What we need to do is make sure that our royalties are set, and our programs are set, to encourage the things, the goals that we have in the province of B.C."
Neither province has seen demands from its population to increase their share of oil and gas revenue, the politicians said.
"The industry is welcome here," Mr. Sonntag said.
Financial Post
ccattaneo@nationalpost.com
----
Ex. of the 666polo-ticz cont. 9/11 destructionz -
Kemess North not dead yet -
(by the 666evilz bolshovikz polo-ticz?) -
By Thom Barker
Black Press
Oct 12 2007
A partisan mining crowd broke into spontaneous applause as Harold Bent, Northgate Minerals’ environmental manager, outlined his concern that a recent panel decision could have far-reaching implications for the B.C. industry.
Bent told Kevin Krueger, B.C. minister of state for mining, and the 80 industry delegates gathered at the Smithers Golf and Country Club on Thursday, that the panel’s recommendation not to approve his company’s Kemess North project has weakened confidence in B.C. mining.
“I just wanted to hear from the minister that the government is going to take a very serious look at [the panel’s] report,” Bent said, adding that, overall, the report was favourable to the company.
Krueger assured Bent and the rest of the audience the Northgate saga is not over.
“I’m concerned as well, but it is a process,” he said.
“It isn’t something ministers interfere with, the Environmental Assessment Office has its mandate and it has its authority.”
He encouraged people to be patient as the project goes through that process.
The minister also addressed concerns that the decision could set a precedent that effectively gives First Nations veto power over resource projects.
“I don’t think people should say that because it isn’t true and I think it’s destructive to say that,” Krueger said.
“I think it’s incumbent on all of us to work together,” he said, citing Galore Creek and Ruby Creek as shining examples of industry and First Nations collaboration.
Despite the preponderance of discussion surrounding Kemess, the meeting was positive overall. Krueger described a situation that can only be characterized as a massive boom.
“It is a phenomenal increase,” he said.
“We have 25 of the 52 major projects that are seeking approval across Canada right here in British Columbia.
He added that his staff is working on 30 different mines with eight more in the pre-approval phase and talked about an unprecedented investment in exploration of $265 million last year.
“This year, I’m certain we’re going to go over $300 million,” he said.
He cited a Price Waterhouse Cooper report that the B.C. mining industry is paying an average salary of almost $100,000 per year.
“Most people are pretty excited about that, especially in the area that’s been devestated by the mountain pine beetle,” he said.
Cress Farrow, Regional District of Bulkley-Nechako chair, was encouraged by Krueger’s comments regarding the Geoscience B.C. Quest project. Geoscience B.C. is an industry organization that has been conducting geophysical and geochemical surveys with government support through the Prince George area from Williams Lake to Mackenzie.
Farrow questioned Krueger as to whether the RDBN could expect funding that would extend the exploration work west to mitigate the impact of the pine beetle.
“I’m very optimistic, Farrow said.
“The money will be there.”
Peter Ogryzlo, senior geologist for Huckleberry Mines and a founding member of the Smithers Exploration Group, asked the minister for help with a rather unique issue.
“The biggest, single barrier we have found to employing more [miners] is the lack of a drivers licence, particularly among First Nations youth,” he said.
Krueger said he had not encountered that problem before, but would take it up with his colleagues.
The minister admitted that and other workforce challenges will require some innovative solutions, but said it’s a good problem to have.
http://www.pgfreepress.com/portals-code/list.cgi?paper=26&cat=23&id=1081591&more=0
IMO.
God Bless US
from the 666evilz.
Putin goes live on TV phone-in to escalate nuclear war of words
· President tells of new generation of weapons
· 'Grandiose' plan to combat US missile shield
Luke Harding in Moscow
Friday October 19, 2007
The Guardian
President Vladimir Putin said yesterday that Russia was developing a new generation of nuclear weapons as part of a "big, grandiose" plan to boost the country's defences against the US.
Speaking during his annual live question-and-answer session, Mr Putin said Russia was upgrading its nuclear arsenal, including intercontinental ballistic missiles, nuclear submarines and strategic bombers. It was also developing "completely new strategic [nuclear] complexes", he said.
"Our plans are not simply considerable, but huge. At the same time they are absolutely realistic. I have no doubts we will accomplish them," Mr Putin said, during a three-hour phone-in programme shown across Russia on state-run TV.
Mr Putin said Russia would defend itself if the US goes ahead with its plan to install elements of its missile shield in central Europe. "I can assure you that such steps are being prepared and we will take them," he said.
His comments follow unsuccessful talks last week with the US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, and the defence secretary, Robert Gates. Mr Putin began their meeting in Moscow by signalling that Russia might dump the intermediate-range nuclear missiles treaty.
Mr Putin fielded 68 questions yesterday from ordinary Russians living in nine time zones across the world's biggest country. Beginning in Vladivostok, where it was dark, he discussed the price of milk, IVF treatment, and the fate of Russia's provincial towns. One caller was so stunned to speak directly to the president she forgot her question. "Is it you?" she said. "Yes," Mr Putin said. "Is it really you?" she asked. "Yes," he repeated. "Thank you very much for everything, Vladimir Vladimirovich," she gasped. She then hung up.
Mr Putin also congratulated Russia's football team for its 2-1 win against England in Moscow on Wednesday. Mr Putin said he had been too busy to watch the game in person but had followed Russia's second-half comeback on TV.
Nobody appeared to ask about Mr Putin's personal intentions. Mr Putin is obliged to step down as president next year. He has hinted he may carry on running the country as prime minister. He confirmed merely: "In 2008, in the Kremlin there will be a different person."
Analysts said Mr Putin's latest remarks were designed to reassure his public that Russia still had an effective nuclear deterrent. But they were also a message to Washington: that its new and costly missile shield was effectively useless against the latest Russian technology. Mr Putin did not spell out details of his new weapons, which he hinted at in 2004. They are believed to be equipped with manoeuvrable warheads, which detach from the main missile during the final stage of descent.
Predictably, Mr Putin took several swipes at US foreign policy. The US-led invasion of Iraq had been a failure, he said, as was its strategy of confrontation with Iran over its alleged nuclear programme. Mr Putin, who met Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on Tuesday in Tehran, declared: "Direct dialogue with the leaders of states ... is the shortest path to success, rather than a policy of threats, sanctions, and a resolution to use force."
Yesterday's annual Q&A session is Mr Putin's sixth since becoming president in 2000. More than a million people sent questions by email, text or phone - all of them screened by the Kremlin.
The newspaper Novaya Gazeta published its own list of questions, which the president failed to answer. It wanted to know who had killed its star columnist Anna Politkovskaya. It also asked about corruption, the Beslan massacre, and why politicians from the pro-presidential United Russia party kept appearing on state TV.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,,2194707,00.html
A Hidden War Within Russia’s Security Agencies
There is a war brewing among the high ranking officials of Russia’s secret services. Unattended by Parliamentary oversight or responsibility to anyone but the president, major security agencies, including the FSB, the FSKN (the Federal Narcotics Control Service), and the Office of the Prosecutor, are fighting amongst themselves for greater powers.
The latest scandal is the arrest of four FSKN officials, including Lt. General Alexander Bulbov, by the FSB. On October 1st, the officers were detained, and held on charges of corruption and leaking secrets. The lack of any transparency in the security sector makes it impossible to guess what other personal battles have been waged in recent months.
In a public and lucid article published shortly thereafter in Kommersant, Viktor Cherkesov, the head of the FSKN, called for peace among the agencies. “A ‘war of all on all’ will result in a complete disintegration of the network,” he wrote. “We must prevent a scandal and all-out fighting.” He continued, “Whoever can help the Federal Narcotics Control Service rid itself of turncoats may always count on me… But whoever is prepared to try to turn the noble cause of doing away with corruption into something else may count on resistance from me.”
Churkesov’s statement publicly acknowledges that there is strife among the siloviki (officials in Putin’s government with military and security backgrounds). For once, it appears that the incredible in-fighting and power struggles behind the closed doors of Putin’s government are coming to light.
http://www.theotherrussia.org/2007/10/12/a-hidden-war-within-russia%E2%80%99s-security-agencies/
The Danger of Our Dependency on China
By The Editors
Let’s all keep our fingers crossed that the United States government can pat its head and rub its stomach at the same time. Otherwise, all the attention focused on terrorism and Islamofascism will leave us vulnerable to an assortment of other festering dangers worldwide. While the national security community within the United States, including the American military, is capable of phenomenal accomplishments, it cannot protect the American people without sufficient leadership. And right now, it looks like the American leadership is willing to keep busy with terrorism and the Middle East while letting the developing danger of China continue to fester.
While the Chinese government has long been in the grips of a totalitarian ideology similar to and as dangerous as that of the Soviet Union, it has never been confronted with the same hardheaded determination for victory that ultimately ended the Cold War. The United States has adopted a different policy with China, hoping that increased economic contacts would force a political liberalization. But while Gorbachev proved incapable of allowing political freedoms while maintaining economic control, the Chinese leaders are displaying a remarkable ability to accomplish the opposite. In the decades since American-Chinese business interests began, the Chinese economy has become the fastest growing in the world while the United States is increasingly dependent on Chinese production, and labor and Chinese businesses engage in unfair practices worldwide.
Yet the American government appears unwilling to confront the reality of an ascendant China. Official Chinese literature and statements as well as concrete policy objectives show an eagerness to regain the traditional hegemonic role China played in Asia, despite America’s long-term policy of encouraging a regional balance of power. China is developing unequally dependent relationships with all the countries along its borders that necessarily subvert the role of the United States in the region. It has made no effort to shy away from its “One China” policy that demands reincorporation of Taiwan into mainland China.
It denounces American efforts to promote democracy worldwide as it recognizes the inherent threat of this policy to its own regime as well as the threat of such efforts to its fragile repression of ethnic minorities in its own western regions. And it is pursuing increasingly aggressive energy policies worldwide to match the massive demand of its growing economy, policies that have contributed significantly to the rise in international oil prices in the past year. Any of these issues eventually could spark into the conflict that many observers have long predicted.
Still the American government seems to sleep. The sad reality is that the business lobby is strong enough to silence the voices of protest that occasionally arise throughout the foreign policy establishment. The economic arguments here are complex and largely reflect reality in a future of globalization. But the security argument is clear – when multinational corporations based in the United States become dependent on the cheap labor, resources, and production costs of China, they work vigorously to prevent any American efforts to encourage political liberalization or protect human rights.
Recently, some technological companies have displayed a blatant willingness to compromise American values in exchange for access to China’s untapped markets, censoring the results of their search engines to prevent Chinese citizens’ access to certain “dangerous” words, such as democracy, freedom, or human rights. One such company had previously been accused of complicity with the Chinese government when it turned over information that led to the imprisonment of a dissident journalist. Do these companies have the legal right to seek as much profit as possible? Of course. Should the United States government and the American people make their opinion of these policies known? You bet.
The disappointing point, however, is that they won’t. The American government will release occasional statements of displeasure and the occasional lawmaker or officeholder will stand up and denounce Chinese human rights oppressions, violations of international law, or subtly aggressive foreign policy. But the government as a whole faces a despicable predicament. If it stands up for American values and attempts to protect American futures, it faces the immediate condemnation of international business interests that fund campaigns and facilitate deals.
The system as a whole may be too broken to fix quickly. But Americans at least need to know that the threat to their security coming from the Middle East is not the only one they need to defend against.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/global.php?id=1384877
Hsu What?
By Richard H. Collins
Friday, August 31, 2007
Hillary Clinton is once again facing questions about inappropriate campaign contributions. Anyone with knowledge of recent history is not shocked. The Clinton’s have a long history of questionable campaign fundraising.
Many, however, will once again try to paint this history as “old news” and as irrelevant to the current campaign. But this pattern of behavior calls into question both her judgment and ethics and is directly relevant to her campaign for president.
Carl Bernstein’s recent sympathetic Hillary biography gives some insight into how this pattern developed. According to Bernstein, when her future husband Bill was running for Congress in 1974 he was approached by a lawyer representing Arkansas dairy interests and offered a contribution that would – are so it was believed - insure his victory in an important county and in turn signal his support for the dairy industry if elected.
In a very close race his advisors argued for taking the contribution, but Hillary was adamantly opposed to taking the money. Bill sided with Hillary and went on to lose by just 2 percentage points. Bernstein then concludes:
Subsequently, she would be far less committed to the high road and much more concerned with results . . .By the time her husband’s reelection as president (and a decade after that, her own preparations for running for president), she would preside over a vast fund-raising apparatus and bowed to no one in her willingness to stretch the rules of campaign finance.
The recent revelations about prominent Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu has caused the issue to resurface.
Mr. Hsu first came to light after the Wall Street Journal ran a story noting how he was suspiciously bundling large sums of money from sources with apparently modest income. The Clinton campaign defended Mr. Hsu and the donations until it was revealed that he was wanted for an outstanding warrant after being accused of defrauding millions of dollars from investors in a business scheme. Having pled guilty to grand theft, Mr. Hsu never showed up in court as he had promised.
The Clinton campaign is now promising to give the $23,000 they have received from Hsu to charity but plan on keeping the money he bundled from other sources. Meanwhile, this seems like déjà vu all over again for those with any familiarity with Clinton history.
In the mid to late 1990s the Clinton administration was rocked by scandal amid accusations of improper contributions and alleged links between the contributors and the Chinese government. Democratic fundraisers like Charlie Trie, Johnny Chung, John Huang, and James Riady illegally funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars into the Democratic campaign - and the Clinton legal defense fund - coffers in exchange for access to the White House. In many instances the First Lady was directly involved and contributions were even accepted in her office.
Her initial Senate campaign was also involved in campaign finance improprieties. Hollywood mogul Peter F. Paul organized lavish fundraisers in partnership with the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee and the New York Democratic Party. The resulting New York Senate 2000 Committee, whose chief beneficiary was Clinton, underreported the in-kind contributions from these events by over $700,000 according the FEC.
Other questionable Hillary campaign donations in recent memory:
- She accepted $63,000 from former IMClone CEO Sam Waksal who was indicted for insider trading, bank fraud and obstruction of justice.
- Prominent Clinton fundraiser and supporter Vinod Gupta has been accused of helping to bilk senior citizens out of millions of dollars and is the a target of a shareholder lawsuit accusing him of using company funds for personal and political use. He has also provided the Clintons with corporate jet usage worth over $900,000.
- She accepted at least $8,000 from a Saipan based sweatshop owner Willie Tan and his family. Tan was involved with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff’s efforts to win sweetheart trade deals.
It is unlikely that this latest campaign finance controversy is going to derail Hillary’s campaign for the Democratic nomination. The media seems to have little interest in pursuing these often complex and litigious cases.
But it is worth remembering that Hillary’s rhetoric about transparency and honesty doesn’t match up to her actions. Hillary decided a long time ago to do whatever it takes to get elected. And if it that means stretching campaign finance laws to the breaking point, so be it.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/RichardHCollins/2007/08/31/hsu_what
Turning the Screws on Iran
August 16, 2007
Author: Robert McMahon
The Bush administration’s plans to target the business dealings (IHT) of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, the largest branch of the country’s armed services, set in motion what is expected to be a lively new round of diplomacy aimed at getting Tehran to suspend its uranium enrichment program. The administration’s point man on Iran policy, Undersecretary R. Nicholas Burns, earlier this month predicted “increasingly tough" international action against Iran because they refuse to negotiate and they refuse to slow down their nuclear efforts.” The United States has been the motor behind such action through a two-pronged approach involving UN Security Council sanctions and separate initiatives by the U.S. Treasury Department to pressure (BusinessWeek) Western financial institutions to cut off dealings with Iran. Activities in both arenas are expected to intensify in the next few months.
U.S. officials reportedly are still debating (WashPost) whether to target the entire Revolutionary Guard Corps, or only the Guard’s Qods Force. The force is linked to arming Shiite militants in Iraq and Taliban fighters in Afghanistan. Top U.S. intelligence official Michael McConnell recently told CFR.org there is "overwhelming evidence" of this, though Iran denies the accusation (VOA). Since the United States has few business dealings with Iran, the effect of the terrorist designation is expected to be further pressure on foreign governments and companies to end business ties with Iran. Karim Sadjadpour, an expert on Iran at the Carnegie Endowment, tells CFR.org that a powerful hardline clique in the Revolutionary Guards is reaping billions of dollars in contracts related to the oil industry and major infrastructure projects.
The reported U.S. plans heighten the intrigue surrounding Iran at the summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which got underway in Kyrgyzstan on August 16. Formed initially to cooperate against terrorism, the organization is increasingly seen as a counterbalance to U.S. influence in Central Asia. Iran has been invited to the summit as an observer and some reports say Russia will use the occasion to push for Iran’s membership (FT). But others dismiss this. Stephen Blank of the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute tells RFE/RL the Shanghai group’s mutual-defense treaties are a chief reason Iran is unlikely to be admitted. “Iran would probably use this as an attempt to invoke the treaty charter for self-defense if an American or some other attack came against it and the Russians have already made it clear that they would be neutral,” he said.
But the mere presence of Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the summit will likely raise concern in Washington at a time when it is trying to heighten Iran’s isolation. The Power and Interest News Report, an independent analysis group, notes a number of energy deals were concluded at last year’s summit in Shanghai and group member China is intent on increasing oil imports from Iran. In the Asia Times, analyst Kaveh Afrasiabi writes closer ties with the Shanghai group could give Iran “breathing space” from pressures over its nuclear program. “After all,” he writes. “Iran can also play transit route for the Arab states of Persian Gulf seeking trade and investment in the landlocked Central Asian states.” And having the ear of veto-wielding Security Council members Russia and China doesn’t hurt either.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14043/turning_the_screws_on_iran.html?breadcrumb=%2Findex
nice links bob
Russia ahead in Arctic 'gold rush' -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/6925853.stm
Bolshevikz666 takes the lead ? -
Russia ahead in Arctic 'gold rush'
By Paul Reynolds
World Affairs correspondent, BBC News website
The Russians are leading a new "gold rush" in the high north, with a bold attempt to assert a claim to oil, gas and mineral rights over large parts of the Arctic Ocean up to the North Pole.
Russia's most famous explorer, Artur Chilingarov, complete with nautical beard, led the expedition to plant the Russian flag in a capsule on the ocean seabed under the pole itself.
"The Arctic is Russian," Chilingarov said earlier. "We must prove the North Pole is an extension of the Russian coastal shelf."
Russia is claiming that an underwater mountain known as the Lomonosov Ridge is actually an extension of the Russian landmass.
This, it argues, justifies its claim to a triangular area up to the pole, giving it rights under the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention.
Under Article 76 of the convention, a state can claim a 200 nautical mile exclusive zone and beyond that up to 150 nautical miles of rights on the seabed. The baseline from which these distances are measured depends on where the continental shelf ends.
Russia lodged a formal claim in 2001 but the UN's Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf told it to resubmit the claim. The flag-planting can be seen as a symbolic gesture in support.
At the same time, other states are acting to protect their interests in the Arctic. Canada is planning to build up to eight new patrol ships and the US Congress is considering a proposal to build two new heavy polar ships.
The rush for the Arctic has become more frenzied because of the melting of parts of the polar ice cap, which will allow easier exploration, and by the urgent need for new sources of oil and gas. A new sense of nationalism is also evident in Russia.
The ice thaw is predicted by a team of international researchers whose Arctic Climate Impact Assessment suggested in 2004 that the summer ice cap could melt completely before the end of this century because of global warming.
If the ice retreats, it could open up new shipping routes and new areas where natural resources could be exploited.
The US Geological Survey estimates that a quarter of the world's undiscovered energy resources lies in Arctic areas.
At the moment, nobody's shelf extends up to the North Pole so there is an international area around the Pole administered by the International Seabed Authority from Kingston, Jamaica.
But quite apart from the Russian claim there are multiple other disputes.
The US and Canada argue over rights in the North-west Passage, Norway and Russia differ over the Barents Sea, Canada and Denmark are competing over a small island off Greenland, the Russian parliament is refusing to ratify an agreement with the US over the Bering Sea and Denmark is claiming the North Pole itself.
North Pole solutions
The five countries involved are considering two other potential ways of sharing the region, in which all the sea would be divided between them.
The "median line method", supported by Canada and Denmark, would divide the Arctic waters between countries according to their length of nearest coastline. This would give Denmark the Pole itself but Canada would gain as well.
The "sector method" would take the North Pole as the centre and draw lines south along longitudes. This would penalise Canada but Norway and, to a lesser extent, Russia, would gain.
One major problem is that the United States has not ratified the 1982 UN convention, largely because senators did not want to have international restrictions placed on American actions.
However, in May 2007, Senator Richard Lugar, a senior Republican, pleaded for ratification in the light of the Russian moves, saying that an American voice was needed at the negotiating table.
Paul.Reynolds-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
RUSSIA'S ARCTIC CLAIM
1) North Pole: Russia leaves its flag on the seabed, 4,000m (13,100ft) beneath the surface, as part of its claims for oil and gas reserves
2) Lomonosov Ridge: Russia argues that this underwater feature is an extension of its continental territory and is looking for evidence
3) 200-nautical mile (370km) line: Shows how far countries' agreed economic area extends beyond their coastline. Often set from outlying islands
4) Russian-claimed territory: The bid to claim a vast area is being closely watched by other countries. Some could follow suit
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/in_depth/6925853.stm
Published: 2007/08/01 13:56:41 GMT
WEATHER politics -
fyi.
http://www.eastlundscience.com/WEATHER.html
http://www.eastlundscience.com/ARMAGGEDON.html
http://www.eastlundscience.com/
http://www.borderlands.com/spacewea.htm
many years ago -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1469610.stm
http://www.rense.com/political/weapons/weather.htm
http://www.rense.com/political/weapons/weapons.htm
God Bless America
‘Possible Attack on the U.S. Within Ninety Days’
By FSM Editors
Counterterrorism expert Juval Aviv met recently with reporters at Fox News and revealed information, which he believes is accurate, concerning an imminent Al Qaeda attack on five to seven American cities simultaneously.
"I predict, based primarily on information that is floating in Europe and the Middle East, that an event is imminent and around the corner here in the United States. It could happen as soon as tomorrow, or it could happen in the next few months. Ninety days at the most,” said Mr. Aviv.
Mr. Aviv knows of that which he speaks. He is a former Israeli Counterterrorism Intelligence Officer and has also served as a special consultant to the U.S. Congress on issues of terrorism and security. He is best known as the source of the 1984 book, Vengeance: The True Story of an Israeli Counter-Terrorist Team by George Jonas, on which Steven Spielberg's film Munich was based. He is also the author of The Complete Terrorism Survival Guide: How to Travel, Work and Live in Safety (2003); and Staying Safe: The Complete Guide to Protecting Yourself, Your Family, and Your Business (2004).
Currently, Aviv is the president of Interfor, Inc., a corporate investigations firm in New York City.
So it is clear that Aviv has the background and experience in global terror and its operating methods to warrant taking his current warnings seriously. It would be foolish to ignore or minimize this counterterrorism veteran’s expert prognosis. Mr. Aviv told Fox that, from what his sources have been relating, sleeper cells that already have been placed inside the continental United States are on the verge of carrying out major attacks.
“What they’re going to do," he explained, "is hit six, seven or eight cities simultaneously to show sophistication and really hit the public. This time, which is the message of the day, it will not only be big cities. They’re going to try to hit rural America. They want to send a message to rural America: "You’re not protected. If you figured out that if you just move out of New York and move to Montana or to Pittsburgh, you’re not immune. We’re going [to] get you wherever we can and it’s easier there than in New York."
While this prediction leaves most Americans feeling helpless, fearful and frustrated, Juval Aviv recommends that we at least do what we can. He suggests that for the next few months, if we are traveling by public transportation, we should equip ourselves with a bottle of water, a hand towel and a flashlight. He reminds us that many fatalities in the London tube and Madrid train attacks occurred from victims who breathed in the lethal fumes from bomb components and burning gasoline. Had these people had wet towels to cover their mouths and noses, they would have had a much better chance of survival.
Mr. Aviv is a very strong proponent of “If you See Something – Say Something” school of preparedness. He stated that a great number of potentially lethal terror attacks in Israel have been – and still are – thwarted by the intelligent actions on the part of alert, aware and watchful citizens.
Americans must do the same, he advises. The global war on terror is not “somewhere over there in the Middle East.” It is here on our own soil. If ever there were a time to be especially vigilant, the time is now.
Let us hope and pray that these vicious enemies and their depraved plans against our citizens and our country, which come out of a wicked ideological brew, will be forestalled and prevented, and the perpetrators apprehended. So far, our law enforcement, military, counter-terrorism and intelligence personnel have done a stellar job. At the same time, and as we all know, we have to be lucky 100% of the time, and the terrorists have to be lucky only once.
So stay alert…stay away from crowds…and if you see something, say something! You could save hundreds, if not thousands, of lives.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/homeland.php?id=1193902
Followers
|
3
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
406
|
Created
|
05/03/07
|
Type
|
Premium
|
Moderators iamshazzam chunga1 |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |