Secret Squirrel, never being one to ignore his financial and economic researches, found, on the OMRLP site, hardly surprisingly,the Official Monster Raving Loony site, that being http://www.omrlp.com/ a readily plausible and highly understandable, and simple, (even the most utterly ignorant of all frenchmen, their politicians,could understand this), explanation, on how economic bailout packages work, specificly that involving Greece and Italy,but Squirrel believes it highly applicable and self- explanatory with respect to other nations of Europe, and also the U.K. itself.
Herewith I share with you the wise MRL explanation of bailout packages, how they work, the very mechanics of the thing,a thing most definitly not to be missed...........here peruse the explanation.........
Here commences the economic explanational epistle...........
HOW THE GREEK & ITALIAN BAILOUT WILL WORK IN VERY SIMPLE TERMS:
It is a slow day in a little Greek Village.
The rain is beating down and the streets are deserted.
Times are tough, everybody is in debt, and everybody lives on credit.
On this particular day a rich German tourist is driving through the village, stops at the local hotel and lays a €100 note on the desk, telling the hotel owner he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs in order to pick one to spend the night.
The owner gives him some keys and as soon as the visitor has walked upstairs, the hotelier grabs the €100 note and runs next door to pay his debt to the butcher.
The butcher takes the €100 note and runs down the street to repay his debt to the pig farmer. The pig farmer takes the €100 note and heads off to pay his bill at the supplier of feed and fuel.
The guy at the Farmers’ Co-op takes the €100 note and runs to pay his drinks and food bill at the taverna.
The taverna owner slips the money along to the local prostitute drinking at the bar, who has also been facing hard times and has had to offer him “services” on credit.
The hooker then rushes to the hotel and pays off her room bill to the hotel owner with the €100 note.
The hotel proprietor then places the €100 note back on the counter so the rich traveller will not suspect anything. At that moment the traveller comes down the stairs, picks up the €100 note, states that the rooms are not satisfactory, pockets the money, and leaves town.
No one produced anything. No one earned anything. However, the whole village is now out of debt and looking to the future with a lot more optimism.
And that, Ladies and Gentlemen, is how the bailout package works!!
Here doth end the wisdom of the MRL epistle.
Secret Squirrel,
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering,
MP,MRL,(Dunny On The Wold),
MRL.
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Secret Squirrel On Nazism Being Introduced By The U.S. Senate.
Secret Squirrel has discovered an amazing development in America, a development quietly,hidden by, ignored by, the
press,the media, a media and press pulling the blinders over the eyes of Americans, a media covering the ears of the American people, a media muzzling the mouths of Americans, such that they did not, could not, see,nor hear nor comment on a very dangerous development in America, the introduction of a bill through the Senate of America, a development which is clearly and most certainly a development of Nazism in America.
The American Senate is to vote on a bill generated by the
likes of the militarist Senator John McCain,and the likes of the fascisti Carl Levin..a bill to allow American military
personnel to arrest Americans, in America,on the streets, in the bars, in the homes,in their gardens, and also yet further round and about the world.Imagine that,and yet the media has virtually ignored this development in it's entirety,even yet we hear no press,no media outcry against this bill.Strange, and also, for American, perhaps the saddest thing in their lives.
Yes indeed here see the headlines, at least, on the internet,as a matter of fact it was on the internet that Secret Squirrel's attention was attracted to these headlines.take a look for yourself.........
http://ascendingstarseed.wordpress.com/tag/national-defense-authorization-act-bil/
Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial Saturday, Nov 26 2011
Emerging Police State and News and Politics and Rise of Fascism, National Defense Authorization Act bill, police state, Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial, Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.)
and at............
http://destructionist.wordpress.com/tag/national-defens... /
The Senate is set to vote on a bill next week that would define the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allow the U.S. Military to arrest American citizens in their own back yard without charge or trial.
and at....
http://www.skyvalleychronicle.com/FEATURE-NEWS/AN-EGYPTIAN-MILITARY-MODEL-IN-THE-U-S-BR-I-Could-U-S-military-emboldened-with
-impunity-of-new-law-up-for-Senate-vote-arrest-any-American-anywhere-anytime-and-for-anything-I-834822
AN EGYPTIAN MILITARY MODEL IN THE U.S.?
Could U.S. military, emboldened with impunity of new law up for Senate vote, arrest any American anywhere, anytime
and for anything?NDAA detention provision would turn America into a “battlefield”.
It's no joke,it's not a hoax, it's real,very real, Nazism,Fascism in America, martial law, military rule,military law enacted on a civilian population besides their usual corruption within the Senate, now there rises the evil stench of militaristic Nazism.Imagine a militaristic rule,martial law, a rule by and of those not only uniformed, but non uniformed as well, a secret police bound by no laws themselves,the rule of the military,the policing of the people by the military, much as now occurs in Syria,Egypt and other stenchlike nations.
This bill was written in secret and approved by committee without
a single hearing. Senate Republicans support the bill and enough Democrats support it to give it a great chance of passing. This provision does have opponents. President Obama has threatened to veto the bill and even Ron Paul is concerned enough to bring it up during one of the GOP debates. An amendment called the Udall Amendment has been offered by Democratic Senator Mark Udall that would delete the dangerous provision.Amazingly,though, the bill has escaped mention in the media,all of the media.The U.S. Senate is getting set to vote on Monday or Tuesday on what critics refer to as a “worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial power for the military”One of the things Senators will be voting on in this bill is this: whether Congress will give President Obama and every future president the power to order the military to pick up and imprison - without charge or trial - American civilians anywhere in the world.The bill would define the whole of the United
States as a “battlefield” and allow the U.S. Military to arrest American citizens in their own back yard without charge or trial,it gives the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself,” writes Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office all under the ‘worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial’ provision of S.1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill.
Clearly this bill is most definately unconstitutional,The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the United States of America,yet the Senate would defy that supreme law,just as many Senators have abused,defied, defiled, and broken many of theh laws the American people are subject to. As a metter of fact they are quite clear in their nature............and should be to each and every Senator...assuming there are any left who respect and abide by the laws and constitution of America.........
Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
and also these...........
Amendment 8 - Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment 9 - Construction of Constitution. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
All of those would quite clearly be suspended,revoked,removed from the people of American by this bill.It is pointed out that the provisions of the bill most certainly and most definately raise serious questions as to who Americans are as a society and what the Constitution seeks to protect. One section of these provisions, section 1031, would be interpreted as allowing the military to capture and indefinitely detain American citizens on U.S. soil. Section 1031 essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 by authorizing the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions on American soil.
This means Americans could be declared domestic terrorists and thrown in a military brig with no recourse whatsoever. Given
that the Department of Homeland Security has characterized behavior such as buying gold, owning guns, using a watch or
binoculars, donating to charity, using the telephone or email to find information, using cash, and all manner of mundane behaviors as potential indicators of domestic terrorism, such a provision would be wide open to abuse.
“American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?” asks Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.We have been warning for over a decade that Americans would become the target of laws supposedly aimed at terrorists and enemy combatants. Alex Jones personally documented how U.S. troops were being trained to arrest U.S. citizens in the event of martial law during urban warfare training drills back in the 90′s. Under the the National Defense Authorization Act bill, no declaration of martial law is necessary since Americans would now be subject to the same treatment as suspected insurgents in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.
If you thought that the executive assassination of American citizens abroad was bad enough, now similar powers will be
extended to the “homeland,” in other words, your town, your community, your back yard.This is a sad and deplorable time for
Americans, being ruled by a Senate that is sad and deplorable.It's America, one man, one vote, and soon that vote will be
decided for each and everyone,and they'll be told who they voted for before the fact.
press,the media, a media and press pulling the blinders over the eyes of Americans, a media covering the ears of the American people, a media muzzling the mouths of Americans, such that they did not, could not, see,nor hear nor comment on a very dangerous development in America, the introduction of a bill through the Senate of America, a development which is clearly and most certainly a development of Nazism in America.
The American Senate is to vote on a bill generated by the
likes of the militarist Senator John McCain,and the likes of the fascisti Carl Levin..a bill to allow American military
personnel to arrest Americans, in America,on the streets, in the bars, in the homes,in their gardens, and also yet further round and about the world.Imagine that,and yet the media has virtually ignored this development in it's entirety,even yet we hear no press,no media outcry against this bill.Strange, and also, for American, perhaps the saddest thing in their lives.
Yes indeed here see the headlines, at least, on the internet,as a matter of fact it was on the internet that Secret Squirrel's attention was attracted to these headlines.take a look for yourself.........
http://ascendingstarseed.wordpress.com/tag/national-defense-authorization-act-bil/
Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial Saturday, Nov 26 2011
Emerging Police State and News and Politics and Rise of Fascism, National Defense Authorization Act bill, police state, Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial, Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.)
and at............
http://destructionist.wordpress.com/tag/national-defens... /
The Senate is set to vote on a bill next week that would define the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allow the U.S. Military to arrest American citizens in their own back yard without charge or trial.
and at....
http://www.skyvalleychronicle.com/FEATURE-NEWS/AN-EGYPTIAN-MILITARY-MODEL-IN-THE-U-S-BR-I-Could-U-S-military-emboldened-with
-impunity-of-new-law-up-for-Senate-vote-arrest-any-American-anywhere-anytime-and-for-anything-I-834822
AN EGYPTIAN MILITARY MODEL IN THE U.S.?
Could U.S. military, emboldened with impunity of new law up for Senate vote, arrest any American anywhere, anytime
and for anything?NDAA detention provision would turn America into a “battlefield”.
It's no joke,it's not a hoax, it's real,very real, Nazism,Fascism in America, martial law, military rule,military law enacted on a civilian population besides their usual corruption within the Senate, now there rises the evil stench of militaristic Nazism.Imagine a militaristic rule,martial law, a rule by and of those not only uniformed, but non uniformed as well, a secret police bound by no laws themselves,the rule of the military,the policing of the people by the military, much as now occurs in Syria,Egypt and other stenchlike nations.
This bill was written in secret and approved by committee without
a single hearing. Senate Republicans support the bill and enough Democrats support it to give it a great chance of passing. This provision does have opponents. President Obama has threatened to veto the bill and even Ron Paul is concerned enough to bring it up during one of the GOP debates. An amendment called the Udall Amendment has been offered by Democratic Senator Mark Udall that would delete the dangerous provision.Amazingly,though, the bill has escaped mention in the media,all of the media.The U.S. Senate is getting set to vote on Monday or Tuesday on what critics refer to as a “worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial power for the military”One of the things Senators will be voting on in this bill is this: whether Congress will give President Obama and every future president the power to order the military to pick up and imprison - without charge or trial - American civilians anywhere in the world.The bill would define the whole of the United
States as a “battlefield” and allow the U.S. Military to arrest American citizens in their own back yard without charge or trial,it gives the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself,” writes Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office all under the ‘worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial’ provision of S.1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill.
Clearly this bill is most definately unconstitutional,The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the United States of America,yet the Senate would defy that supreme law,just as many Senators have abused,defied, defiled, and broken many of theh laws the American people are subject to. As a metter of fact they are quite clear in their nature............and should be to each and every Senator...assuming there are any left who respect and abide by the laws and constitution of America.........
Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
and also these...........
Amendment 8 - Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment 9 - Construction of Constitution. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
All of those would quite clearly be suspended,revoked,removed from the people of American by this bill.It is pointed out that the provisions of the bill most certainly and most definately raise serious questions as to who Americans are as a society and what the Constitution seeks to protect. One section of these provisions, section 1031, would be interpreted as allowing the military to capture and indefinitely detain American citizens on U.S. soil. Section 1031 essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 by authorizing the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions on American soil.
This means Americans could be declared domestic terrorists and thrown in a military brig with no recourse whatsoever. Given
that the Department of Homeland Security has characterized behavior such as buying gold, owning guns, using a watch or
binoculars, donating to charity, using the telephone or email to find information, using cash, and all manner of mundane behaviors as potential indicators of domestic terrorism, such a provision would be wide open to abuse.
“American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?” asks Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.We have been warning for over a decade that Americans would become the target of laws supposedly aimed at terrorists and enemy combatants. Alex Jones personally documented how U.S. troops were being trained to arrest U.S. citizens in the event of martial law during urban warfare training drills back in the 90′s. Under the the National Defense Authorization Act bill, no declaration of martial law is necessary since Americans would now be subject to the same treatment as suspected insurgents in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.
If you thought that the executive assassination of American citizens abroad was bad enough, now similar powers will be
extended to the “homeland,” in other words, your town, your community, your back yard.This is a sad and deplorable time for
Americans, being ruled by a Senate that is sad and deplorable.It's America, one man, one vote, and soon that vote will be
decided for each and everyone,and they'll be told who they voted for before the fact.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Secret Squirrel Comments On Britain's Economic Stimulus Payment.
Secret Squirrel comments, suggesting a UK Tax Guidance plan with respect to the British Tax Economic Stimulus Payment.
UK Tax Guidance
Sometime this year, we, the British taxpayers, will again receive another 'Economic Stimulus' payment..
This is indeed a very exciting program, and I'll explain it by using a Q & A format:
Q. What is an 'Economic Stimulus' payment ?
A. It is money that the government will send to taxpayers.
Q.. Where will the government get this money ?
A. From taxpayers.
Q. So the government is giving me back my own money ?
A. Only a smidgen of it.
Q. What is the purpose of this payment ?
A. The plan is for you to use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.
Q.. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China ?
A. Shut up.
Below is some helpful advice on how to best help the U.K. Economy by spending your stimulus cheque wisely:
* If you spend the stimulus money at Asda or Tesco, the money will go to China , Taiwan or Sri Lanka ...
* If you spend it on petrol, your money will go to the Arabs.
* If you purchase a computer, it will go to India , Taiwan or China ...
* If you purchase fruit and vegetables, it will go to Mexico , Honduras and Guatemala ....
* If you buy an efficient car, it will go to Japan or Korea ....
* If you purchase useless stuff, it will go to Taiwan ...
* If you pay your credit cards off, or buy shares, it will go to management bonuses and they will hide it offshore.
Instead, keep the money in the UK by:
1) Spending it at car boot sales,
or
2) Going to night clubs, or
3) Spending it on
prostitutes,
or
4) Buying beer or whisky, or
5) Get yourself a Tattoo
or
6) Visit a bookie.
(These are the only UK owned domestic businesses still operating in the U.K. )
Conclusion:
Be patriotic - go to a night club with a tattooed prostitute that you met at a car boot sale and drink beer day and night !
No need to thank me, I'm just glad I could be of help.
Secret Squirrel,
MRL,Dunny On The Wold,(MP),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.
UK Tax Guidance
Sometime this year, we, the British taxpayers, will again receive another 'Economic Stimulus' payment..
This is indeed a very exciting program, and I'll explain it by using a Q & A format:
Q. What is an 'Economic Stimulus' payment ?
A. It is money that the government will send to taxpayers.
Q.. Where will the government get this money ?
A. From taxpayers.
Q. So the government is giving me back my own money ?
A. Only a smidgen of it.
Q. What is the purpose of this payment ?
A. The plan is for you to use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.
Q.. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China ?
A. Shut up.
Below is some helpful advice on how to best help the U.K. Economy by spending your stimulus cheque wisely:
* If you spend the stimulus money at Asda or Tesco, the money will go to China , Taiwan or Sri Lanka ...
* If you spend it on petrol, your money will go to the Arabs.
* If you purchase a computer, it will go to India , Taiwan or China ...
* If you purchase fruit and vegetables, it will go to Mexico , Honduras and Guatemala ....
* If you buy an efficient car, it will go to Japan or Korea ....
* If you purchase useless stuff, it will go to Taiwan ...
* If you pay your credit cards off, or buy shares, it will go to management bonuses and they will hide it offshore.
Instead, keep the money in the UK by:
1) Spending it at car boot sales,
or
2) Going to night clubs, or
3) Spending it on
prostitutes,
or
4) Buying beer or whisky, or
5) Get yourself a Tattoo
or
6) Visit a bookie.
(These are the only UK owned domestic businesses still operating in the U.K. )
Conclusion:
Be patriotic - go to a night club with a tattooed prostitute that you met at a car boot sale and drink beer day and night !
No need to thank me, I'm just glad I could be of help.
Secret Squirrel,
MRL,Dunny On The Wold,(MP),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Secret Squirrel Encourages The Banning Of Ownership Of Exotic Wild Animals.
Lions & Tigers & Bear,Lions & Tigers & Bears...it ain't Kansas, Dorothy.Secret Squirrel has noticed that it really isn't Kansas, and not the land of Oz either, but there are, in Ohio,lions and tigers and bears on the loose, and this has resulted in interesting headlines here as evidenced at...........
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/10/19/lions-tigers-and-bears-escape-from-ohio-animal-farm-as-cops-are-told-shoot-to-kill-115875-23499057/
and
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/19/us/ohio-animals-on-loose/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
and,of course, others.
One Terence(Terry) Thompson,had evidently let loose the animals he'd owned, and then killed himself,in his inhumanity,he let'em loose on humanity, on the human race, on Americans, on his fellow Americans, wild animals........lions and tiger and bear and whatever else all..........loose, out of their cages......so now the entire city is on lock down as police have to hunt and kill the animals, wild, animals a direct threat to ever man woman and child, as well, of course, their pets,lest we forget,and forget we not, as they search for...........FOOD, people are their food, lots of people, meat sacks running about, and their pets,of course. So now we have to question US laws which don't ban such things as the keeping a wild animals, classed as exotic or whatever they refer them to. Is there a reason to keep such animals, and so many.No there isn't it makes no sense.The Federal government in it's inadequacy doesn't act.Lions and tigers and bears.Lions and Tigers and Bears. All loose........loose because somebody was allowed,by law, to keep lions and tigers and bears.Lions and tigers and bears. Mind you the ridiculousness extends to all wild animals as such doesn't it, cheetahs,cougars,wolves,foxes whatever et all..and this occurrence is the epitome of the idiocy of the lack of laws banning the keeping of any exotic wild animal.Do you think for one minute the Federal government sees the sense in such a ban, or the State governments, or the local governments?No, idiots all,Americans, ruled by idiots, Americans live in the midst of an idiocracy, idiocratic governments,governments of ignorance and idiocy, making laws,all sorts of laws, laws for everything, but not sane laws such as banning the keeping of exotic wild animals,lions and tigers and bears,lions and tigers and bears,the lot of them.Of course we acknowledge that the local constabulary did a magnificent job, totally,utterly ,completely, and fortunate all round and for the people it was so, magnificent.But they should not have had to do that,they would not have had to do that should there be a law banning exclusively all exotic wild animals.
But,sadly, it is not so.Of course there are some who will not support and do not support such a law, those who keep or would keep such wild animals, but here we see the hazards,the dangers of keeping such wild animals.Interestingly he had complied with permits et ceterra as required for those animals, however, there should NOT have been any permits for such animals as it should never have been permitted to own such animals.As of November 2010, most US states forbid the possession of exotic pets, but 9 states have no license or permit requirements, and quite obviously these states are in dire need of such laws, especially Ohio.To commence with, local areas such as counties,cities and towns and whatever,in states lacking such laws, must initiate such laws at the earliest for their areas, enact and enforce them, whilst they wait for their state to follow the lead of the other states.Also it is for the Federal government to also enact and enforce their own ban on the keeping of such exotic wilds animals, and see to it that the states toe the line on those laws,for the good and safety of the American Citizen,there is a clear and present danger.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/10/19/lions-tigers-and-bears-escape-from-ohio-animal-farm-as-cops-are-told-shoot-to-kill-115875-23499057/
and
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/19/us/ohio-animals-on-loose/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
and,of course, others.
One Terence(Terry) Thompson,had evidently let loose the animals he'd owned, and then killed himself,in his inhumanity,he let'em loose on humanity, on the human race, on Americans, on his fellow Americans, wild animals........lions and tiger and bear and whatever else all..........loose, out of their cages......so now the entire city is on lock down as police have to hunt and kill the animals, wild, animals a direct threat to ever man woman and child, as well, of course, their pets,lest we forget,and forget we not, as they search for...........FOOD, people are their food, lots of people, meat sacks running about, and their pets,of course. So now we have to question US laws which don't ban such things as the keeping a wild animals, classed as exotic or whatever they refer them to. Is there a reason to keep such animals, and so many.No there isn't it makes no sense.The Federal government in it's inadequacy doesn't act.Lions and tigers and bears.Lions and Tigers and Bears. All loose........loose because somebody was allowed,by law, to keep lions and tigers and bears.Lions and tigers and bears. Mind you the ridiculousness extends to all wild animals as such doesn't it, cheetahs,cougars,wolves,foxes whatever et all..and this occurrence is the epitome of the idiocy of the lack of laws banning the keeping of any exotic wild animal.Do you think for one minute the Federal government sees the sense in such a ban, or the State governments, or the local governments?No, idiots all,Americans, ruled by idiots, Americans live in the midst of an idiocracy, idiocratic governments,governments of ignorance and idiocy, making laws,all sorts of laws, laws for everything, but not sane laws such as banning the keeping of exotic wild animals,lions and tigers and bears,lions and tigers and bears,the lot of them.Of course we acknowledge that the local constabulary did a magnificent job, totally,utterly ,completely, and fortunate all round and for the people it was so, magnificent.But they should not have had to do that,they would not have had to do that should there be a law banning exclusively all exotic wild animals.
But,sadly, it is not so.Of course there are some who will not support and do not support such a law, those who keep or would keep such wild animals, but here we see the hazards,the dangers of keeping such wild animals.Interestingly he had complied with permits et ceterra as required for those animals, however, there should NOT have been any permits for such animals as it should never have been permitted to own such animals.As of November 2010, most US states forbid the possession of exotic pets, but 9 states have no license or permit requirements, and quite obviously these states are in dire need of such laws, especially Ohio.To commence with, local areas such as counties,cities and towns and whatever,in states lacking such laws, must initiate such laws at the earliest for their areas, enact and enforce them, whilst they wait for their state to follow the lead of the other states.Also it is for the Federal government to also enact and enforce their own ban on the keeping of such exotic wilds animals, and see to it that the states toe the line on those laws,for the good and safety of the American Citizen,there is a clear and present danger.
Monday, October 3, 2011
Secret Squirrel Ponders A Probable Invasion Of Mexico.
Secret Squirrel has had his attention brought to Mexico,the sad and sorry state it is in at the present,a touch worse and worsening than it is most of the time and has ever been historically.Indeed Mexicans have always been portrayed in US films as mostly criminals,drunks,drugged out and poor,and so it seems at present it is across so very many levels, especially in the areas of the border near to America.It
seems,strangely, the populations there are really ruled,over ruled, and controlled by crime lords, much as in Somalia,who seem to be inundated with weapons of all sorts.The difference between Mexico and Somalia in that area, are that the Somali crime lords are visible, whilst the ones in Mexico remain invisible, but in all cases the crime lords rule they areas they are in.The Americans are becoming concerned and worried by the situation,and Mexico is in high visibility of US government view.
Look here at http://www.military.com/news/article...-collapse.html
Mexico is one of two countries that "bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse," according to a report by the U.S. Joint Forces Command on worldwide security threats.The command's "Joint Operating Environment (JOE 2008)" report, which contains projections of global threats and potential next wars, puts Pakistan on the same level as Mexico. "In terms of worse-case scenarios for the Joint Force and indeed the world, two large and important states bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse: Pakistan and Mexico."The Mexican possibility may seem less likely, but the government, its politicians, police and judicial infrastructure are all under sustained assault and pressure by criminal gangs and drug cartels. How that internal conflict turns out over the next several years will have a major impact on the stability of the Mexican state. Any descent by Mexico into chaos would demand an American response based on the serious implications for homeland security alone."
So at high levels this state of affairs was seen as developing.
A retired CIA operative,one Sylvia Longmire,has written and informative, enlightening, and perhaps predictable book,inflammatory in title, "Cartel: The Coming Invasion of Mexico's Drug Wars".
At http://www.talkingdrugs.org/a-retired-us-major-general-has-proposed-a-us-invasion-of-mexico
"A retired US Major General has proposed a US invasion of Mexico “to protect and secure the American people.” Major General Paul E. Vallely’s blinkered response to the increase in violence in Mexico, fuelled by US demands for illegal drugs, seems to overlook the failure that a military response has had to curb drug use in the past. He states “now if I were the Commander-in-Chief, I would be on a war-footing and I would have my military commanders planning and executing a strategy that will defeat swiftly and decisively these cancerous enemies.”
He further details, in an article written for the right-wing blog Family Security Matters, how he would conduct his military strategy to protect the USA. He states that the best strategy would be to position three “Border Task Force Groups” of 5000 “warriors” each on the US side of the border. These forces will “conduct offensive and defensive operations on the Mexican side of the border.” Interestingly the retired general does not think that these military incursions into Mexican territory would be in violation of any law and he cites the Posse Comitatus Act of 1848.General Vallely compares the violence in the northern states of Mexico to the lawlessness of 1846 and states “therefore, it is in the National interest of the United States to invade, and restore order because of this clear and present danger to US Citizens and our economy.” So clearly a military invasion of Mexico is in the mind and thoughts of the military."
Gov. Rick Perry,of Texas,as far back as 2010,said he would support sending U.S. troops into Mexico to fight the drug war.He also repeated,at THAT TIME his frequent statement that he doesn't want to be president. Asked if his refusal was "Shermanesque," Perry didn't seem to understand."Shermanesque? Help me on that one," Perry said.The reporter explained it meant if nominated he wouldn't run, if
elected he wouldn't serve."How about Perryesque?" the governor said. "The fact of the matter is I'm not running for the presidency of the United States - don't want to be the president of the United States."Well It seemed it was Perryesque Shermanesque,or Shermanesque Perryesque as you will have it as he has entered his candidacy for the Office Of The President of The United States.Texas Gov. Rick Perry said Saturday,October 1st,2011 that he would consider sending U.S. troops into Mexico to combat drug-related violence and stop it from spilling into the southern United States.“It may require our military in Mexico,” Perry said in answer to a question about the growing threat of drug violence along the southern border. Perry offered no details, and a spokesman, Robert Black, said afterward that sending troops to Mexico would be merely one way of putting an end to the exploding cartel-related violence in the region.
Mexico has been invaded before by America and vast tracts of it's territory were removed from it, and profiftable ares they were at that,perhaps now they consdier going in for it all? Well Let's look at what set the American precedances for invasions of Mexico.
The Mexican–American War, also known as the First American Intervention, the Mexican War, or the U.S.–Mexican War, was an armed conflict between the United States and Mexico from 1846 to 1848 in the wake of the 1845 U.S. annexation of Texas, which Mexico considered part of its territory despite the 1836 Texas Revolution.American forces invaded New Mexico, the California Republic, and parts of what is currently northern Mexico; meanwhile, the American Navy conducted a blockade, and took control of several garrisons on the Pacific coast of Alta California, but also further south in Baja California.
Another American army captured Mexico City, and forced Mexico to agree to the cession of its northern territories to the U.S.The major consequence of the war was the forced Mexican Cession of the territories of Alta California and New Mexico to the U.S. in exchange for $18 million. In addition, the United States forgave debt owed by the Mexican government to U.S. citizens. Mexico accepted the Rio Grande as its national border, and the loss of Texas. Meanwhile gold was discovered in California, which immediately became an international magnet for the California Gold Rush.Quite a profitable undertaking,and it was, as casualties were enormous, but what with the gain, as always, were swept under the rug.
The idea of incorporating Mexico as several new states of the United States has existed ever since the Mexican–American War of 1846–1848, when the All Mexico Movement proposed annexing Mexico by force. Today this idea stresses the strong economic and political connections between Mexico and the United States and the high recurring cost of defending a 2,000-mile (3,200 km) border. In 1913 during border skirmishes between the United States and Mexico, it was proposed by some that the U.S. annex Chihuahua.Incorporating Mexico would add over 100million to the United Satates population, of a mostly subsistance living near starving extremely poor people,heavily equipped with guns of various varities,which have strangely multiplied greatly in recent years.
There have been various break away republics formed within Mexico,but they have been short lived as they were not supported,nor annexed.
The northeast region, consisting of the states of Tamaulipas, Coahuila, and Nuevo León (where claims about federal taxes and water usage are similar to the proposed U.S. states complaints) is frequently alleged to be more alike in general mentality to Texas than to the rest of
Mexico. These three states formed the core of the short-lived 19th century Republic of the Rio Grande.
In 1853, filibuster William Walker conquered the Mexican states of Baja California and Sonora with the intent of adding new slave states to the Union. Within three months he had incorporated both states into the independent Republic of Sonora, but a lack of support from the US Government and increasing pressure from the Mexican Government forced him to retreat.
Mexico could be invaded and annexed of sorts,and split in to states, thence admitted in whole or in part, in to the United States,but there are rules,it seesm they do have them for such doings.Following the precedent established by the Enabling Act of 1802, an Enabling Act must be passed by Congress as a prerequisite to admission. The act authorizes the people of a territory to frame a constitution, and lays down the requirements that must be met prior to consideration for statehood.In light of modern times and American designs, one can easily see the sudden emergence of several constitutions of the required nature, similar in required nature,appearing with great and mysterious speed and rapiditty.
Why would this occur, why ever would America attempt to absorb Mexico? Well Mexico, in spite of it's people being poor, is rather like the Arab states, great in resources.Mexico, America's southern neighbor, has been for centuries and continues to be a hellhole of political corruption, poverty and despair. It is indeed remarkable that a nation this vast, with great resources such as an abundance of oil (Mexico is a major petroleum producer), can be worse off than most Third World countries. It's no secret that Mexico is routinely ranked as the most corrupt
country in the world, even surpassing Nigeria.Mexico is of a much greater vital interest to America than, say, Libya. And, ironically, Mexico also has large oil reserves,(need I mention this again?)and vast natural resources,resources such as petroleum, silver, copper, gold, lead, zinc, natural gas, timber.
Well.........timberrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr,there's oil there, lots and lots of oil and so very close to the USA as well, just admirable for pipelines to suck the oil to the American oil companies,and if it's one thing American oil companies like, and send the USA to wars of acquisition for, and control of, it's oil. Well, let's see the effects of invading Mexico, the possibilities,the probablities,the mechanics of the thing.
First. America has all along denied any purpose to interfere in the internal affairs of Mexico and the St. Louis platform declares against it. Intervention conveys the idea of such interference.And modern blow hard politicians no advocate such intervention,and should they achieve power can and will do it, indeed even yet Obama might.
Second. Intervention would be humiliating to many Mexicans whose pride and sense of national honor would resent severe terms of peace in case of being defeated in a war,which is what the interevention would be.Occupied or defeated, the Mexicans are heavily armed, even yet more heavily armed and spread out and in far greater numbers than were and are the Arabs of Iraq.
Third. American intervention in Mexico is extremely distasteful to all Latin America and might have a very bad effect upon Americas Pan-American program, of peace love and amistad and whatever they call not invading any iof them at any particular moment,for the time being,they'll just have to be placated by telling them, "It won't happen to you,Amistad lad!".That'll do it for sure, and it will too since there's nothing they can do about it in either and all cases.
Fourth. Intervention, which suggests a definite purpose to “clean up” the country, would bind America to certain accomplishments,such as occupation, which circumstances might make extremely difficult or inadvisable,there being so very mandy weapons no round and about and in the hands of Mexicans at large,Mexicans who are wisely ,and ever increasingly,arming themselves with what ever they can get their hands on.
Fifth. Intervention also implies that the war,of intervention would be made primarily in the interest of the Mexican people,it being billed as such, while the fact is it would be an intervention America forces onthe Mexican Government, and, if we term it intervention, we will have considerable difficulty in explaining why we had not intervened before but waited until attacked.
Sixth. Intervention with America's favorite attack group,the Coalition,the NATO Alliance attacking a nation for it's own good, as in all the NATO partners, as in for the oil, share and share alike,which suits all of them just fine,and especially the oil companies who are the huge driving force between all of the present wars of acquisitional intervention(for.............oil).
Will there be an intervention, and invasion of Mexico? Yes I see it in the cards.An acquisitional war of intervention of Mexico? Ye,s but for control and acquisition of natural resources, especially the oil.Will there be an entire absorptive acquistion of Mexico? No,I see that as being far too expensive and a drain an America,a simple less costly occupation is the most likely course of events accomplishing, but at high cost in lives, yes, the control and acquistional farming of Mexico's resources,especially of course, the oil,after all one simply just must make them pay for themselves for having necessitated the military intervention so indicated.I see that as the future of and for Mexico and Mexicans.
Friday, September 30, 2011
Secret Squirrel Examines Aircraft Cost Overruns.
Secret Squirrel looks at the recent F35 purchase costs, and ponders
the ever increasing costs of an aircraft regarded as being barely
sufficient to the needs of nations such as Australia,an aircraft many
regard as inadequate yet one they are purchasing,having made the decision to,an aircraft whose costs have magically ballooned to twice the signed for costs.
THE Rudd government gave the green light to Australia's largest ever defence purchase, approving a buy of 14 F-35 joint strike fighters at a cost of $3.2 billion. What do we find, and di we find, after a year or two,that the price Zooms from $50 Mil Original Cost Per Aircraft to $80-95 Mil in 2002.
In 2003 the Current terms did not require foreign partners to pay for cost overruns, and the Pentagon has not asked its partners to cover any such,but as you know that ALWAYS changes when the Americans are involved.The other eight nations participating in the program - Australia, Canada, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Turkey and the U.K. - aren't going to be happy about the cost increases either. I suspect some sweetheart deal will be made to make them less unhappy.
But the fact remains, that cost overruns,are always present in American programs,and anyone you're involved in, sweet deal, then, more cost added, of course, cost over run.America itself,what with maintanance figured in etc etc etc for THEIRS, is at a cost of over a trillion, about equal to Canada's GDP,and they claim it costs more than Australia's GDP,with respect to America's purchase and maintenance of it's purchase of this type of aircraft,albeit in much larger numbers,so no wonder America has huge unpayable debts....but does America worry, not really it just prints up more money to cover it, other
nations..........can't do that.Canada, which has agreed to buy 65 planes at an official program cost of $14.7 billion,($20 billion on 72 F-35.)the cost over the next 30 years would be $29.3 billion twice the official estimate of $14.7 billion. The F-35 does not have the stealth, power (supercruise ability), or range to engage SU-30 as a fighter aircraft,Su-30 out performs it but the F-35 has a larger weapons load, 42 aircraft being procured by Indonesia, By August 2010,they cost $4.3 billion or $102 million each,far less than the F35.Now, not to argue who's getting a better deal in a superior aircraft, we do see substantial savings in the Soviet aircraft, as a final cost.
So we do have to consider that Australia would have been much better off in the first place buying from the Soviets,at enormous savings, not withstanding the American cost overruns, but we do have to look on America with great suspicion with respect to stated purchase,sale ,cost of the aircraft.A cost overrun, also known as a cost increase or budget overrun, is an unexpected cost incurred in excess of a budgeted amount due to an under-estimation of the actual cost during budgeting. Cost overrun should be distinguished from cost escalation, which is used to express an anticipated growth in a budgeted cost due to factors such as inflation.So cost overrun is common in infrastructure, building, and technology projects,it is profitable, and increases profitability,in short, it is an influencable form of profit fraud,contract fraud,as all nations let the developing nation off the hook as it were,over the initial signed and price stated contract,final cost contract,or a stated, final cost.
However, in all such cases, there is no binding litigations with respect to final cost, no abilities for lawsuit, utterly no abilities to hold anyone, to the stated contract cost.However all round we must consider that a cost overrun results in increased final costs, and in all cases at levels at least twice those of stated contracts,and we really do have to recommend and consider that it would be better for Austrailia, as one nation,or perhaps any other nation, not purchase a selected aircraft until the final cost emerges, and so consider purchase at a final off the shelf cost, and then knowingly,regardless, not have a crippled aircraft, but a fully developed and working one,purchased at a clearly stated and final cost.
THE Rudd government gave the green light to Australia's largest ever defence purchase, approving a buy of 14 F-35 joint strike fighters at a cost of $3.2 billion. What do we find, and di we find, after a year or two,that the price Zooms from $50 Mil Original Cost Per Aircraft to $80-95 Mil in 2002.
In 2003 the Current terms did not require foreign partners to pay for cost overruns, and the Pentagon has not asked its partners to cover any such,but as you know that ALWAYS changes when the Americans are involved.The other eight nations participating in the program - Australia, Canada, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Turkey and the U.K. - aren't going to be happy about the cost increases either. I suspect some sweetheart deal will be made to make them less unhappy.
But the fact remains, that cost overruns,are always present in American programs,and anyone you're involved in, sweet deal, then, more cost added, of course, cost over run.America itself,what with maintanance figured in etc etc etc for THEIRS, is at a cost of over a trillion, about equal to Canada's GDP,and they claim it costs more than Australia's GDP,with respect to America's purchase and maintenance of it's purchase of this type of aircraft,albeit in much larger numbers,so no wonder America has huge unpayable debts....but does America worry, not really it just prints up more money to cover it, other
nations..........can't do that.Canada, which has agreed to buy 65 planes at an official program cost of $14.7 billion,($20 billion on 72 F-35.)the cost over the next 30 years would be $29.3 billion twice the official estimate of $14.7 billion. The F-35 does not have the stealth, power (supercruise ability), or range to engage SU-30 as a fighter aircraft,Su-30 out performs it but the F-35 has a larger weapons load, 42 aircraft being procured by Indonesia, By August 2010,they cost $4.3 billion or $102 million each,far less than the F35.Now, not to argue who's getting a better deal in a superior aircraft, we do see substantial savings in the Soviet aircraft, as a final cost.
So we do have to consider that Australia would have been much better off in the first place buying from the Soviets,at enormous savings, not withstanding the American cost overruns, but we do have to look on America with great suspicion with respect to stated purchase,sale ,cost of the aircraft.A cost overrun, also known as a cost increase or budget overrun, is an unexpected cost incurred in excess of a budgeted amount due to an under-estimation of the actual cost during budgeting. Cost overrun should be distinguished from cost escalation, which is used to express an anticipated growth in a budgeted cost due to factors such as inflation.So cost overrun is common in infrastructure, building, and technology projects,it is profitable, and increases profitability,in short, it is an influencable form of profit fraud,contract fraud,as all nations let the developing nation off the hook as it were,over the initial signed and price stated contract,final cost contract,or a stated, final cost.
However, in all such cases, there is no binding litigations with respect to final cost, no abilities for lawsuit, utterly no abilities to hold anyone, to the stated contract cost.However all round we must consider that a cost overrun results in increased final costs, and in all cases at levels at least twice those of stated contracts,and we really do have to recommend and consider that it would be better for Austrailia, as one nation,or perhaps any other nation, not purchase a selected aircraft until the final cost emerges, and so consider purchase at a final off the shelf cost, and then knowingly,regardless, not have a crippled aircraft, but a fully developed and working one,purchased at a clearly stated and final cost.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Secret Squirrel Comments On The United Nations Veto.
Secret Squirrel's attention has been recently drawn to the ridiculous and improper United Nations veto, as one was presently cast by The United States of America, in efforts to see to it that a free nation, a new nation, the nation of a free Palestine coming about, in and after the very self-same fashion that Israel came about.Squirrel will not comment here on that putrescent and sad fact, that of the United States casting a veto preventing the nation of Palestine coming in to being, but rather here will comment on the United Nations veto itself.
Veto power circumvents the power and rule of the majority and subjects to nations to the slavery and idiocy, of the few, or given, one of the few at any given time.It subjects the majority to the will of a minority,it binds, it enslaves.It removes rights, and freedoms.The putrescence of the veto, is in the same fashion as the presentation of The Noble Peace Prize, to war mongers at any given time.It is subjectively imprisoning in its effects. It enforces the will of the one,over the will of the many, the belief of the one, over the belief of the many,Veto Power, we need to eliminate it. This was created more than half a century ago.Ambassador Charles W. Yost cast the first U.S. veto in 1970, regarding a crisis in Rhodesia, and the U.S. cast a lone veto in 1972, to prevent a resolution relating to Israel. Since that time, it has become by far the most frequent user of the veto, mainly on resolutions criticizing Israel; since 2002 the Negroponte doctrine has been applied for the use of a veto on resolutions relating to the ongoing Israel-Palestinian conflict. This has been a constant cause of friction between the General Assembly and the Security Council. On 18 February 2011, the Obama administration vetoed resolutions condemning Israeli settlements.and used mostly by the US to veto resolutions involving Israel starting in the 1970's, "(and the U.S. cast a lone veto in 1972, to prevent a resolution relating to Israel)".
Regard the comments here found at..
http://www.centerforunreform.org/node/394
Reform of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) encompasses five key issues: categories of membership, the question of the veto held by the five permanent members, regional representation, the size of an enlarged Council and its working methods, and the Security Council-General Assembly relationship. Member States, regional groups and other Member State interest groupings developed different positions and proposals on how to move forward on this contested issue.
The reform of the Security Council requires the agreement of at least two-thirds of UN member states and that of all the permanent members of the UNSC, enjoying the veto right
Member States met on 16 and 17 March,2009 to discuss the veto in the second of five meetings devoted to different substantive issues connected to Security Council reform.The Philippines noted that “...even in the face of this extreme difficulty to remove the veto power, we may yet consider the need to curtail its exercise or use. There is a big chance for that,” ambassador Hilario G. Davide pointed out. To address this issue, the ambassador not only supported disallowing or denying the use of the veto power in certain grave cases, he also reiterated a Philippine proposal for a veto to be set aside or overturned by an absolute majority of the General Assembly, or by a vote of two-thirds of the Security Council itself.Reportedly, almost half of all Member States took the floor during the almost two-day long meeting. According to several delegates present, a number of African countries stated - in accordance with the common African position - that they are against the veto in principle.Italy's Ambassador Giulio Terzi said that even when not used, the veto can alter or block the discussion of urgent issues. "Again and again the 'hidden veto' has prevented substantial discussions of questions that are crucial to international peace and security," he said. German Ambassador Thomas Matussek apparently stated that the veto was "an anachronism and should be abolished." But hopes of scrapping or giving it to new council members were unrealistic and should not be used as a pretext to halt reform, he added.Apparently China, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States, permanent members of the Security Council, all signaled unwillingness to give up, change or reform the current veto structure.
Here ends the epistle .
The United Nations Security Council "power of veto" refers to the veto power wielded solely by the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, and United States), enabling them to prevent the adoption of any "substantive" draft Council resolution, regardless of the level of international support for the draft. The veto does not apply to procedural votes, which is significant in that the Security Council's permanent membership can vote against a "procedural" draft resolution, without necessarily blocking its adoption by the Council.
The veto is exercised when any permanent member — the so-called "P5" — casts a "negative" vote on a "substantive" draft resolution.However The idea of states having a veto over the actions of international organizations was not new in 1945. From the foundation of the League of Nations in 1920, each member of the League Council, whether permanent or non-permanent, had a veto on any non-procedural issue.[1] From 1920 there were 4 permanent and 4 non-permanent members, but by 1936 the number of non-permanent members had increased to 11. Thus there were in effect 15 vetoes. This was one of several defects of the League that made action on many issues impossible.The idea of states having a veto over the actions of international organizations was not new in 1945. From the foundation of the League of Nations in 1920, each member of the League Council, whether permanent or non-permanent, had a veto on any non-procedural issue.[1] From 1920 there were 4 permanent and 4 non-permanent members, but by 1936 the number of non-permanent members had increased to 11. Thus there were in effect 15 vetoes. This was one of several defects of the League that made action on many issues impossible.
The UN Charter provision for unanimity among the Permanent Members of the Security Council (the veto) was the result of extensive discussion, including at Dumbarton Oaks (August–October 1944) and Yalta (February 1945). The evidence is that the UK, US, USSR, and France all favoured the principle of unanimity, and that they were motivated in this not only by a belief in the desirability of the major powers acting together, but also by a hard-headed concern to protect their own sovereign rights and national interest. Truman, who became President of the US in April 1945, went so far as to write in his memoirs: "All our experts, civil and military, favoured it, and without such a veto no arrangement would have passed the Senate."
The UNSC veto system was established in order to prohibit the UN from taking any future action directly against its principal founding members. One of the lessons of the League of Nations (1919–46) had been that an international organization cannot work if all the major powers are not members.It had already been decided at the UN's founding conference in 1944, that Britain, China, the Soviet Union, the United States and, "in due course" France, should be the permanent members of any newly formed Council. However,they all wanted control over issues, plurality, will of the majority,rule of the majority, was not and is not for either of them,nor shall it ever really be.The veto, is a representation of injustice,a mockery of any forms of democratic prinicples the United Nations is supposed to uphold and represent.Removal of veto would address the lack of meaningful action in the face of atrocities and other urgent crises.The presence of veto allows those possessing same, to rule the roost.A former Pakistani Ambassador to the UN, Ahmad Kamal, states that in a democracy no one can be more equal than others and he terms the veto anachronistic and undemocratic, a sentiment echoed by many African countries. Abolishing the veto altogether seems to appeal to quite a few member states.Among those who oppose abolishing the veto—and the P5 are the most prominent in that group—references are made to the League of Nations, which many believe ended up in demise because major powers such as the US refused to join. This, they argue, is exactly what would happen if the veto was abolished: the major powers of the world would either leave the UN or disregard or refuse to pay for UN actions they oppose.I either case, what the veto is is the enslavement of the member nations of the United Nations, enslavement of an entire group of United Nations, to the will of a single one,the dominating one, the enslaving one,the democracy destroying one,the nation which casts the Veto.If the United Nations is ever to be a free and democratic institution devoted to world rule,world self-rule, world democracy,world peace,global stability,the veto must be removed in its entirety.However,the domintating nations holding the veto being what they in reality are,sadly this will never,ever come about.
Friday, September 9, 2011
Secret Squirrel Ponders Various Prison Solutions.
Secret Squirrel has turned his attention to Britain's problems with
those who belong in Her Majesty's Prison For The Extremely Naughty.Quite
frankly, they're expensive, but necessary to house.Let's have a look at
a recently built facility those lads given to naughtynees.H.M. Prison
Magilligan, near Coleraine,450 prisoners cost 200 m pounds to
build(319.62 million U.S dollars),that's 444444.444 pounds per
prisoner(in US dollars that's $709333.333,matter of fact we'll switch to
dollars,much easier,the Americans print it all up, we could too, and
would they ever notice?I think not. So to dollars it is,US
dollars).Other housing would in fact be very much cheaper.
Take for example a cruise ship, let's look at Oasis of the Seas Luxury Cruise Liner. The 16-deck ship, which has an estimated build cost of $1.24bn,(1,240,000,000) is the largest cruise ship afloat with a tonnage of 220000gt (43% more than the Freedom Class Cruise ships),compares somewhat with the Titanic.It has a personage capacity of 5400 at double occupancy (2700 personages at single occupancy. For our purposes we'll go with double ocupancy, no use making things for our naughty inmates a true paradise. Now at Billion $ 1.24, that's $229629.63 per prisoner isn't it.By heavens it's much cheaper than H.M. Prison Magilligan isn't it,and we're accomodating 12 times the number of prisoners!!( If we splurged at single occupancy we'd be at $459259.259,rather the same cost as the prison then, be no saving you know). But in either and all cases, such a ship puts those given to mad dogginess,or dodginess if you prefer,at sea,surrounded by water, unable to escape really,a natural moat. Now the cost is certainly attractive per prisoner isn't it!They could hardly complain, even yet they'd be living in abject luxury at cheap rate cost to Her Majesty too wouldn't they. But hey, we can further reduce costs to Her Majesty and even yet increase the accomodation of those who have misbehaved in a manner displeasing to Her Majesty.
Consider now Edith Maersk,a container ship and the sister ship of Emma Maersk, thus the world's largest cargo ship,a construction cost US of$145,000,000,. It has capacity for 13500 containers.Consider modification of a container to housing,
including kitchen and toilet, double occupancy, that'd give a capacity of 27,000 prisoners, a cost per prisoner of only,yes,only,$5370.37037,and house more than 60 time H.M. Prison Magilligan. The ship has a length of 397.00 m (1,302.49 ft) and a beam of 56.00 m (183.73 ft). The depth of the vessel is 30.00 m (98.43 ft) and while fully loaded the ship can reach a draft of 17.5 m (57 ft). The deadweight of the container ship is 156,907 metric tons, while the gross tonnage is 170,794 gross
tons.You see a ship is less expensive to build,far less.............plus there would be no escape from there surrounded by a safe sea moat.Consider the size of the container rooms,20 by 8 container at 8ft 6 inch height,living area 170 square feet
l,studio 12 x 8 for 6 x8 kitchen,toilet 5 by 8 bathroom.Not bad.
Now consider the size of the vessel that the containers are stacked on in terms of Length x Breadth: 398 m X 56 m,giving 22288 square meters for containers,generally speaking. But consider now another idea, surrounded by the sea, an island as it were, specifically an abandoned and otherwise useless island, surrounded by the sea, an island such as Diego Garcia. One sectional island of it has a fully useable space of 173529203 square metres for Diego Garcia, this works to a collassal multiplier of 7785.76826,in terms of available space for containers, yes that times the containers in the same space aboard the ship, that works to 13500 containers aboard ship in the land area times that figure,gives 105097500 prisoners to be accomodated in that area,single occupancy,double occupancy twice that to 210195000.......wow! I'm not even yet going to figure the cost per
prisoner, but cargo containers can be had for $1500.Cheap, Effective.However in all of the above sceanarios, we do have to heat their facilities,provide them with air conditioning,provide them with prepared foods, provide them with hot water and sanitation facilities, and also recreational facitlities and whatever the where with all and have it all that intails incarceration in Britain in what ever facility of Her Majesty's Prisons For The Extremely Naughty.Cheap, Effective.Job done. But then consider is there a far far cheaper way? Yes,there certainly is.Consider.
Conrad Black is British, a citizen of Britain,just Britain. He wants the Americans to deport him, when he serves his time in the American prisons,to Canada.Well he isn't Canadian, he isn't from Canada.BUT if the USA can deport him to Canada, then we can deport all of our naughty miscreants to there also,for simply the cost of one way air fare, Heathrow To Montreal.......$1000.That's it, no further costs what so ever per prisoner,and, we're rid of them.It all hinges on the Canadians taking a deported Conrad Black.
Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP(Dunny on The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.
Take for example a cruise ship, let's look at Oasis of the Seas Luxury Cruise Liner. The 16-deck ship, which has an estimated build cost of $1.24bn,(1,240,000,000) is the largest cruise ship afloat with a tonnage of 220000gt (43% more than the Freedom Class Cruise ships),compares somewhat with the Titanic.It has a personage capacity of 5400 at double occupancy (2700 personages at single occupancy. For our purposes we'll go with double ocupancy, no use making things for our naughty inmates a true paradise. Now at Billion $ 1.24, that's $229629.63 per prisoner isn't it.By heavens it's much cheaper than H.M. Prison Magilligan isn't it,and we're accomodating 12 times the number of prisoners!!( If we splurged at single occupancy we'd be at $459259.259,rather the same cost as the prison then, be no saving you know). But in either and all cases, such a ship puts those given to mad dogginess,or dodginess if you prefer,at sea,surrounded by water, unable to escape really,a natural moat. Now the cost is certainly attractive per prisoner isn't it!They could hardly complain, even yet they'd be living in abject luxury at cheap rate cost to Her Majesty too wouldn't they. But hey, we can further reduce costs to Her Majesty and even yet increase the accomodation of those who have misbehaved in a manner displeasing to Her Majesty.
Consider now Edith Maersk,a container ship and the sister ship of Emma Maersk, thus the world's largest cargo ship,a construction cost US of$145,000,000,. It has capacity for 13500 containers.Consider modification of a container to housing,
including kitchen and toilet, double occupancy, that'd give a capacity of 27,000 prisoners, a cost per prisoner of only,yes,only,$5370.37037,and house more than 60 time H.M. Prison Magilligan. The ship has a length of 397.00 m (1,302.49 ft) and a beam of 56.00 m (183.73 ft). The depth of the vessel is 30.00 m (98.43 ft) and while fully loaded the ship can reach a draft of 17.5 m (57 ft). The deadweight of the container ship is 156,907 metric tons, while the gross tonnage is 170,794 gross
tons.You see a ship is less expensive to build,far less.............plus there would be no escape from there surrounded by a safe sea moat.Consider the size of the container rooms,20 by 8 container at 8ft 6 inch height,living area 170 square feet
l,studio 12 x 8 for 6 x8 kitchen,toilet 5 by 8 bathroom.Not bad.
Now consider the size of the vessel that the containers are stacked on in terms of Length x Breadth: 398 m X 56 m,giving 22288 square meters for containers,generally speaking. But consider now another idea, surrounded by the sea, an island as it were, specifically an abandoned and otherwise useless island, surrounded by the sea, an island such as Diego Garcia. One sectional island of it has a fully useable space of 173529203 square metres for Diego Garcia, this works to a collassal multiplier of 7785.76826,in terms of available space for containers, yes that times the containers in the same space aboard the ship, that works to 13500 containers aboard ship in the land area times that figure,gives 105097500 prisoners to be accomodated in that area,single occupancy,double occupancy twice that to 210195000.......wow! I'm not even yet going to figure the cost per
prisoner, but cargo containers can be had for $1500.Cheap, Effective.However in all of the above sceanarios, we do have to heat their facilities,provide them with air conditioning,provide them with prepared foods, provide them with hot water and sanitation facilities, and also recreational facitlities and whatever the where with all and have it all that intails incarceration in Britain in what ever facility of Her Majesty's Prisons For The Extremely Naughty.Cheap, Effective.Job done. But then consider is there a far far cheaper way? Yes,there certainly is.Consider.
Conrad Black is British, a citizen of Britain,just Britain. He wants the Americans to deport him, when he serves his time in the American prisons,to Canada.Well he isn't Canadian, he isn't from Canada.BUT if the USA can deport him to Canada, then we can deport all of our naughty miscreants to there also,for simply the cost of one way air fare, Heathrow To Montreal.......$1000.That's it, no further costs what so ever per prisoner,and, we're rid of them.It all hinges on the Canadians taking a deported Conrad Black.
Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP(Dunny on The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Secret Squirrel Considers Alarming Aircraft Problems.
Secret Squirrel has noticed the Airbus A380 has almost repeated what
it did in Brazil, this time out of Venezuela when it encountered extreme
turbulence as did the Brazilian crash A380.........and...the same thing
happened.........almost.But Secret Squirrel has discovered a link
between the two, and also a link involving yet many other airliner
problems with speed,autopilots, and automated flight controls and
instrumentation.Strangely,as things will be expounded on, they're
actually not uncommon, but alarmingly common. But firstly let's have a
look at the Brazilian crash.Some experts have blamed the speed monitors –
called Pitot tubes – for fatally misleading the crew of Flight 447 that
crashed in the ocean off the coast of Brazil on May 31, killing all 228
people on board.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1191929/Air-France-rushes-refit-speed-sensors-caused-crash-Flight-447.html
"Air France pledged to immediately re-fit the entire fleet of 35 long-haul Air France Airbus jets came after unions urged pilots not to fly them until the key sensors were updated. Investigators believe the sensors may have iced over during a fierce thunderstorm and delivered dangerously false information to the plane’s computers which caused the pilot to slow down so much the plane stalled and pitched into a
deadly tailspin.There was pondering that the the tail section of the plane, which includes the rudder and the vertical stabilizer - which keeps the nose from swinging back and forth – was sheared off by turbulence.The Airbus 330 has a ‘rudder-limiter' which constricts how much the rudder can move at high speeds. If it were to move too far while travelling fast, it could break off and take the tail section with it, said flight safety analysts.Asked if the rudder or stabilizer being sheared off could have brought the jet down, he said: ‘Absolutely. You need a rudder. And you need the rudder limiter on there to make sure the rudder doesn't get torn off or cause havoc with the plane's aerodynamics.’ ‘If you had a wrong speed being fed to the computer by the Pitot tube, it might allow the rudder to over travel,’ said Peter Goelz, a former managing director of the National Transportation Safety Board in Brazil.
The speed sensors need to be ultra-sensitive because the safety margin for a plane's speed at high altitude is so narrow that pilots call it 'coffin corner'. Either 70mph too fast or too slow and a jet can either stall or nosedive.One Air France pilot wrote on an Internet forum for airline professionals:
‘If the pitot tube is unreliable in bad weather and at high altitude, the plane becomes an airborne death trap. We need to know exactly how fast we are going or the plane will simply fall out of the sky.
'Another Airbus captain wrote: 'I have never been taught unusual altitude recovery in the simulator because I was told the plane has so many
in built protections. This sounds like very similar reasoning to what happened with the Titanic.'
Erick Derivry, spokesman of the main SNPL pilots union, said a threat to ask all pilots to stop flying the Airbus A330 and A340 jets elicited a 'very swift and positive' response from Air France.He said: 'Air France has provided us with an extremely pro-active and very accelerated replacement programme. From today, all Air France A330 and A340 flights will use planes equipped with at least two new sensors out of three on board.'"
Here from...
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/editors/26821/
"What causes a passenger jet to suddenly plunge intact--with engines and wing surfaces working just fine--from cruising altitude into the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, killing everyone aboard?The full report on Air France Flight 447 in 2009, in which 228 people died, is still in the works. But one expert told me that preliminary
data suggest a role for human confusion, and a failure to focus on the plane's "attitude" or position in the sky: nose up or down, wings tilting left or right.
"You have a perfectly good airplane, other than not having airspeed data," R. John Hansman, aeronautics professor at MIT, mentioned to me today after we discussed the release of preliminary data on the accident, recovered from "black boxes" fetched from 12,000 feet below the surface of the ocean. "They clearly lost situational awareness. If they'd had it, they would have been able to regain control of the airplane."French investigators have said that the plane was entering an area of turbulence, possibly severe. They've also said the plane suffered a failure of its airspeed indicators, possibly because of icing on a sensors known as a pitot tubes.The aircraft climbed from 37,500 feet to 38,000 feet, and "stall warning" was triggered.This meant they were in danger of losing "lift." Why those warnings were sounding---whether they were valid, or based on inaccurate speed data--or whether the pilots ignored the stall warning because they saw high speeds that were inaccurate, is unclear.
It was late at night, more than four hours into the flight. Stall warnings were sounding. Speed indicators were going haywire. The captain had been called to the cockpit by an alarmed co-pilot. It took only about three minutes for the plane to plunge 38,000 feet to crash, belly first, on the surface of the ocean."
Air France Flight 447 slammed into the Atlantic Ocean, intact and belly first, at such a high speed that the 228 people aboard probably had no time to even inflate their life jackets, French investigators said Thursday in their first report into the June 1 accident."
More comes from......
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/item_MNTYiMvhUX0vyhMe8ZTb7N#ixzz1XJUslNuh
"The aircraft sent out automated messages starting At 11:10 p.m., a cascade of horrific problems began.Automatic messages relayed by the jetliner indicate the autopilot had disengaged, suggesting Dubois and his two co-pilots were trying to
thread their way through the dangerous clouds manually.A key computer system had switched to alternative power and controls needed to keep the plane stable had been damaged.An alarm sounded, indicating the deterioration of flight systems.
At 11:13 p.m., more automatic messages reported the failure of systems to monitor air speed, altitude and direction. Control of the main flight computer and wing spoilers also failed.The last automatic message, at 11:14 p.m., indicated complete electrical failure and a massive loss of cabin pressure -- catastrophic events, indicating that the plane was breaking apart and plunging toward the ocean."
Now,what happened to another Air France A380 when it encountered extreme turbalance on a flight from Venezuela to Paris?'When it encountered extreme turbulence, the Air France jet almost stalled and went into a nose-dive after hitting a storm.In the latest drama, the autopilot shut down as the plane hit a storm at 35,000 feet while flying from Venezuelan capital Caracas to Paris.The high-altitude alert in July chillingly echoed the cockpit chaos that preceded the fatal crash of an Air France Rio-Paris flight two years earlier, in which all 228 passengers died.
French daily Le Figaro said it had seen a report into the alert and Air France had launched a full investigation into the cause of the malfunction.The paper said the drama was 'comparable in every way' with the crash of doomed flight AF447 on June 1, 2009.It added: 'Only this time there were no victims, only two of the crew who were slightly hurt.'According to the report, the A340 Airbus was at its cruising altitude of 35,000ft, just as flight AF447 was before the accident, when it
hit extreme turbulence.'The plane hit a strong variation in wind speed and found itself going too fast - a situation which set off the "overspeed alarm".(With the ill fated A380 the incorrect airspeed data was the apparent cause of the disengagement of the autopilot, the reason the pilots lost control of the aircraft remains a mystery, in particular because pilots would normally try to lower the nose in case of a stall.)'At this point, the autopilot disconnected. It went into a steep climb and began losing speed.'The plane then slowed drastically to just 205
knots, with an Air France pilot telling Le Figaro: 'This was just three knots away from stalling and from probable catastrophe.'"
Now we're getting somewhere.What happened...."false" speed readings? The autopilot disconnects,perhaps, yes it did, it is indicated it did, the pilots had to fly the aircraft, but not the speed loss, the attitude of the aircraft.Clearly there is a problem, turbulance encountered, auto pilot disconnects but aircraft doesn't fly straight and level, and at speed, instead it goes in to a steep climb, begins to loose speed,the engines don't power up to compensate....clearly then there is a major problem, it centers about the autopilot AND flight computer problems (Airbus A380 is HEAVILY automated, and it makes it difficult for the pilots to fly manually, there is a joystick on either side for them to use when flying manually, a joystick.Here we can see the actula flight deck itself......
http://www.futurastudios.com/airbus-380-flight-deck/airbus-380-flight-deck-front.jpg
The Flight 447 accident may have some relevant similarities to other A330 incidents with other carriers. Three similar reports are on file at the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB), with two incidents relating to Airbus A330s with flight computer problems, plus one which involved a Boeing 777. In the October 2008 accident, this fault caused injuries to passengers and damage to the aircraft on Qantas Flight 72, en route from Singapore to Perth, Western Australia, which was forced into a dive by a malfunctioning ADIRU. These incidents often started with the automatic pilot's disengaging and sending out ADIRU failure messages. Incorrect speed indications were also observed.The airframe and ADIRU involved in the Qantas Flight 72 accident were also previously involved in another incident on Qantas Flight 68, 2006. The Qantas aircraft were equipped with ADIRUs manufactured by Northrop Grumman, while Flight 447 was equipped with an ADIRU manufactured by Honeywell. A memo leaked from Airbus suggests that there was no evidence that the Flight 447 ADIRU malfunction was similar to the failure in
the Qantas incidents.
An Air Data Inertial Reference Unit (ADIRU) is a key component of the integrated Air Data Inertial Reference System (ADIRS), that supplies air data (airspeed, angle of attack and altitude) and inertial reference (position and attitude) information to the pilots' Electronic Flight Instrument System displays as well as other systems on the aircraft such as the engines, autopilot, flight control and landing gear
systems. An ADIRU acts as a single, fault tolerant source of navigational data for both pilots of an aircraft.The ADR component of an ADIRU provides airspeed, Mach, angle of attack, temperature and barometric altitude data. Ram air pressure and static pressures used in calculating airspeed are measured by small Air data modules (ADM) located as close as possible to the respective pitot and static pressure sensors. The ADMs transmit their pressures to the ADIRUs through ARINC 429 data buses.The IR component of an ADIRU gives attitude, flight path vector, ground speed and positional data.The ring laser gyroscope is a core enabling technology in the system, and is used together with accelerometers, GPS and other sensors to provide raw data. The primary benefits of a ring laser over older mechanical gyroscopes are that there are no moving parts, it is rugged and lightweight, frictionless and does not resist a change in precession.
Analysis of complex systems is itself so difficult as to be subject to errors in the certification process. Complex interactions between flight computers and ADIRU's can lead to counter-intuitive behaviour for the crew in the event of a failure. In the case of Qantas Flight 72, the captain switched the source of IR data from ADIRU1 to ADIRU3 following a failure of ADIRU1; however ADIRU1 continued to supply ADR data to the captain's primary flight display. In addition, the master flight control computer (PRIM1) was switched from PRIM1 to PRIM2, then PRIM2 back to PRIM1, thereby creating a situation of uncertainty for the crew who did not know which redundant systems they were relying upon.
Take note of this......
http://www.routesonline.com/news/24/atw/6975/qantas-suffers-second-a330-adiru-failure/
Qantas suffers second A330 ADIRU failure
by Geoffrey Thomas
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau said it was advised on Dec. 27 of an occurrence that day involving a QF A330-300 cruising at 36,000 ft. on its way from Perth to Singapore. Some 260 nm. northwest of Perth the autopilot disconnected and the crew received an Electronic Centralized Aircraft Monitor message (NAV IR 1 fault) indicating a problem with ADIRU No. 1.The crew implemented the new Airbus Operations Engineering Bulletin procedure by selecting the IR 1 and ADR 1 pushbuttons to off (ATWOnline, Oct. 15, 2008). The aircraft returned to Perth.
ATSB said the incident "appears to be a similar event to a previous event involving an A330 aircraft." In the October incident, 70 of the 313 people onboard the A330 flying from SIN to PER were injured when the aircraft pitched up and then dove twice after a failure of ADIRU 1. An ATSB preliminary report issued in November suggested the possibility that transmissions from a naval communications station interfered with onboard systems.
Now note this also, involving ADIRU and autopilot, and note what happened.........
http://www.airlinesafety.com/faq/777DataFailure.htm
On August 1, 2005, a Boeing 777-200, which had departed from Perth, received an EICAS (Engine Indication and Crew Alerting System) warning of low airspeed, as the plane was climbing through FL (flight level) 380. Simultaneously, the aircraft's slip/skid indication moved full right, on the PFD (Primary Flight Display). The PFD speed tape also displayed contradictory information: that the plane was approaching both the high speed limit and the low speed (stall) limit. The aircraft, still connected to the autopilot, pitched up and climbed to approximately FL410 as the airspeed decreased from 270 kts to 158 kts. The stall warning devices also activated.The PIC (pilot in command) "disconnected the autopilot and lowered the nose of the aircraft. The autothrottle commanded an increase in thrust which the PIC countered by manually moving the thrust levers to the idle position. The aircraft pitched up again and climbed 2,000 ft." The PIC advised ATC "that they could not maintain altitude and requested a descent and radar assistance. The crew was able to verify with ATC the aircraft speed and altitude."The PFD indications became accurate again as they were descending through FL200. The PIC attempted to use both the left and right autopilots, but had to turn them off after each one produced undesired command responses. "There were no control difficulties experienced when the aircraft was flown manually, but the autothrottle 'arm' switches remained in the 'armed' position."ATC radar vectors put the plane in position to conduct an ILS to R 03 at Perth. When they reached 3,000 ft, the PFD again began indicating erroneous low airspeed information. The autothrottle again responded by advancing the thrust levers. Since the pilot can override that
command, simply by manually adjusting those thrust levers, the plane was able to land safely at Perth. The FDR (flight data recorder), the CVR (cockpit voice recorder) and the ADIRU (air data inertial reference unit) were removed from the
plane, for a detailed examination. Under the supervision of the American NTSB, the ADIRU was shipped to its manufacturer for detailed analysis.The FDR data confirmed the erroneous acceleration values had been displayed on the PFDs, as the pilots reported. The ADIRU produced those erroneous acceleration values and they were used by the PFC (primary flight computer). As it was designed to do, the PFC compared the information from the ADIRU, to the information coming from the SAARU (Standby Air Data and Attitude Reference Unit). That comparison ability
enabled the PFC to reduce the severity of the initial pitching motion of the aircraft.
Have a look at this,or rather ALL OF THESE..........
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Data_Inertial_Reference_Unit#Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_124
Alitalia A-320
On 25 June 2005, an Alitalia Airbus A320-200 registered as I-BIKE departed Milan with a defective ADIRU as permitted by the Minimum Equipment List. While approaching London Heathrow Airport during deteriorating weather another ADIRU failed, leaving only one operable. In the subsequent confusion the third was inadvertently reset, losing its reference heading and disabling several automatic functions. The crew was able to effect a safe landing after declaring a Pan-pan.
Malaysia Airlines Flight 124
On 1 August 2005 a serious incident involving Malaysia Airlines Flight 124, occurred when a Boeing 777-2H6ER (9M-MRG) flying from Perth to Kuala Lumpur also involved an ADIRU fault resulting in uncommanded manoeuvres by the aircraft acting on false indications. In that incident the incorrect data impacted all planes of movement while the aircraft was climbing through 38,000 feet (11,600 m). The aircraft pitched up and climbed to around 41,000 feet (12,500 m), with the stall warning activated. The pilots recovered the aircraft with the autopilot disengaged and requested a return to Perth. During the return to Perth, both the left and right autopilots were briefly activated by the crew, but in both instances the aircraft pitched down and banked to the right. The aircraft was flown manually for the remainder of the flight and landed safely in Perth.
Qantas Flight 68
On 12 September 2006, Qantas Flight 68, Airbus A330 registration VH-QPA, from Hong Kong to Perth exhibited ADIRU problems but without causing any disruption to the flight. At 41,000 feet (12,000 m) and estimated position 530 nautical miles (980 km) north of Learmonth, Western Australia, NAV IR1 FAULT then, 30 minutes later, NAV ADR 1 FAULT notifications were received on the ECAM identifying navigation system faults in Inertial Reference Unit 1, then in ADR 1 respectively. The crew reported to the later Qantas Flight 72 investigation involving the same airframe and ADIRU that they had received numerous warning and caution messages which changed too quickly to be dealt with. While investigating the problem, the crew noticed a weak and intermittent ADR 1 FAULT light and elected to switch off ADR 1, after which they experienced no further problems. There was no impact on the flight controls throughout the event. The ADIRU manufacturer's
recommended maintenance procedures were carried out after the flight and system testing found no further fault.
Jetstar Flight 7
On 7 February 2008, a similar aircraft (VH-EBC) operated by Qantas subsidiary Jetstar Airways was involved in a similar occurrence while conducting the JQ7 service from Sydney to Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. In this event - which occurred 1,760 nautical miles (3,260 km) east of Learmonth - many of the same errors occurred in the ADIRU unit. The crew followed the relevant procedure applicable at the time and the flight continued without problems.
Qantas Flight 72
On 7 October 2008, Qantas Flight 72, an Airbus A330, departed Singapore for Perth. Some time into the flight, while cruising at 37,000 ft, a failure in the No.1 ADIRU led to the autopilot automatically disengaging followed by two sudden uncommanded pitch down manoeuvres, according to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB). The accident injured up to 74 passengers and crew, ranging from minor to serious injuries. The aircraft was able to make an emergency landing without further injuries. The aircraft was equipped with a Northrop Grumman made ADIRS, which investigators sent to the manufacturer for further testing.
Qantas Flight 71
On 27 December 2008, Qantas Flight 71 from Perth to Singapore, the same A330-300 registration VH-QPA and the same ADIRU as involved in the Qantas Flight 68 incident, was involved in an incident at 36,000 feet approximately 260 nautical miles (480 km) north-west of Perth and 350 nautical miles (650 km) south of Learmonth Airport at 1729 WST. The autopilot disconnected and the crew received an alert indicating a problem with ADIRU Number 1.
Air France Flight 447
On 1 June 2009, Air France Flight 447, an Airbus A330 en route from Rio de Janeiro to Paris, disappeared over the Atlantic Ocean after transmitting automated messages indicating faults with various equipment, including the ADIRU. While examining possibly related events of weather-related loss of ADIRS, the NTSB decided to investigate two similar cases on cruising A330s.
TAM Flight 8091
On a 21 May 2009 Miami-Sao Paulo TAM Flight 8091 registered as PT-MVB, and on a 23 June 2009 Hong Kong-Tokyo Northwest Airlines Flight 8 registered as N805NW each saw sudden loss of airspeed data at cruise altitude and consequent loss of ADIRS control.
Now isn't it wonderful with the degree of automation we have,with the technical skill of the systems designers,the computer programmers,remember!Remember when you board your ADIRU/Autopilot equipped aircraft,and you hear your welcoming announcement, "Welcome aboard your flight where nothing can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong........"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1191929/Air-France-rushes-refit-speed-sensors-caused-crash-Flight-447.html
"Air France pledged to immediately re-fit the entire fleet of 35 long-haul Air France Airbus jets came after unions urged pilots not to fly them until the key sensors were updated. Investigators believe the sensors may have iced over during a fierce thunderstorm and delivered dangerously false information to the plane’s computers which caused the pilot to slow down so much the plane stalled and pitched into a
deadly tailspin.There was pondering that the the tail section of the plane, which includes the rudder and the vertical stabilizer - which keeps the nose from swinging back and forth – was sheared off by turbulence.The Airbus 330 has a ‘rudder-limiter' which constricts how much the rudder can move at high speeds. If it were to move too far while travelling fast, it could break off and take the tail section with it, said flight safety analysts.Asked if the rudder or stabilizer being sheared off could have brought the jet down, he said: ‘Absolutely. You need a rudder. And you need the rudder limiter on there to make sure the rudder doesn't get torn off or cause havoc with the plane's aerodynamics.’ ‘If you had a wrong speed being fed to the computer by the Pitot tube, it might allow the rudder to over travel,’ said Peter Goelz, a former managing director of the National Transportation Safety Board in Brazil.
The speed sensors need to be ultra-sensitive because the safety margin for a plane's speed at high altitude is so narrow that pilots call it 'coffin corner'. Either 70mph too fast or too slow and a jet can either stall or nosedive.One Air France pilot wrote on an Internet forum for airline professionals:
‘If the pitot tube is unreliable in bad weather and at high altitude, the plane becomes an airborne death trap. We need to know exactly how fast we are going or the plane will simply fall out of the sky.
'Another Airbus captain wrote: 'I have never been taught unusual altitude recovery in the simulator because I was told the plane has so many
in built protections. This sounds like very similar reasoning to what happened with the Titanic.'
Erick Derivry, spokesman of the main SNPL pilots union, said a threat to ask all pilots to stop flying the Airbus A330 and A340 jets elicited a 'very swift and positive' response from Air France.He said: 'Air France has provided us with an extremely pro-active and very accelerated replacement programme. From today, all Air France A330 and A340 flights will use planes equipped with at least two new sensors out of three on board.'"
Here from...
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/editors/26821/
"What causes a passenger jet to suddenly plunge intact--with engines and wing surfaces working just fine--from cruising altitude into the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, killing everyone aboard?The full report on Air France Flight 447 in 2009, in which 228 people died, is still in the works. But one expert told me that preliminary
data suggest a role for human confusion, and a failure to focus on the plane's "attitude" or position in the sky: nose up or down, wings tilting left or right.
"You have a perfectly good airplane, other than not having airspeed data," R. John Hansman, aeronautics professor at MIT, mentioned to me today after we discussed the release of preliminary data on the accident, recovered from "black boxes" fetched from 12,000 feet below the surface of the ocean. "They clearly lost situational awareness. If they'd had it, they would have been able to regain control of the airplane."French investigators have said that the plane was entering an area of turbulence, possibly severe. They've also said the plane suffered a failure of its airspeed indicators, possibly because of icing on a sensors known as a pitot tubes.The aircraft climbed from 37,500 feet to 38,000 feet, and "stall warning" was triggered.This meant they were in danger of losing "lift." Why those warnings were sounding---whether they were valid, or based on inaccurate speed data--or whether the pilots ignored the stall warning because they saw high speeds that were inaccurate, is unclear.
It was late at night, more than four hours into the flight. Stall warnings were sounding. Speed indicators were going haywire. The captain had been called to the cockpit by an alarmed co-pilot. It took only about three minutes for the plane to plunge 38,000 feet to crash, belly first, on the surface of the ocean."
Air France Flight 447 slammed into the Atlantic Ocean, intact and belly first, at such a high speed that the 228 people aboard probably had no time to even inflate their life jackets, French investigators said Thursday in their first report into the June 1 accident."
More comes from......
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/item_MNTYiMvhUX0vyhMe8ZTb7N#ixzz1XJUslNuh
"The aircraft sent out automated messages starting At 11:10 p.m., a cascade of horrific problems began.Automatic messages relayed by the jetliner indicate the autopilot had disengaged, suggesting Dubois and his two co-pilots were trying to
thread their way through the dangerous clouds manually.A key computer system had switched to alternative power and controls needed to keep the plane stable had been damaged.An alarm sounded, indicating the deterioration of flight systems.
At 11:13 p.m., more automatic messages reported the failure of systems to monitor air speed, altitude and direction. Control of the main flight computer and wing spoilers also failed.The last automatic message, at 11:14 p.m., indicated complete electrical failure and a massive loss of cabin pressure -- catastrophic events, indicating that the plane was breaking apart and plunging toward the ocean."
Now,what happened to another Air France A380 when it encountered extreme turbalance on a flight from Venezuela to Paris?'When it encountered extreme turbulence, the Air France jet almost stalled and went into a nose-dive after hitting a storm.In the latest drama, the autopilot shut down as the plane hit a storm at 35,000 feet while flying from Venezuelan capital Caracas to Paris.The high-altitude alert in July chillingly echoed the cockpit chaos that preceded the fatal crash of an Air France Rio-Paris flight two years earlier, in which all 228 passengers died.
French daily Le Figaro said it had seen a report into the alert and Air France had launched a full investigation into the cause of the malfunction.The paper said the drama was 'comparable in every way' with the crash of doomed flight AF447 on June 1, 2009.It added: 'Only this time there were no victims, only two of the crew who were slightly hurt.'According to the report, the A340 Airbus was at its cruising altitude of 35,000ft, just as flight AF447 was before the accident, when it
hit extreme turbulence.'The plane hit a strong variation in wind speed and found itself going too fast - a situation which set off the "overspeed alarm".(With the ill fated A380 the incorrect airspeed data was the apparent cause of the disengagement of the autopilot, the reason the pilots lost control of the aircraft remains a mystery, in particular because pilots would normally try to lower the nose in case of a stall.)'At this point, the autopilot disconnected. It went into a steep climb and began losing speed.'The plane then slowed drastically to just 205
knots, with an Air France pilot telling Le Figaro: 'This was just three knots away from stalling and from probable catastrophe.'"
Now we're getting somewhere.What happened...."false" speed readings? The autopilot disconnects,perhaps, yes it did, it is indicated it did, the pilots had to fly the aircraft, but not the speed loss, the attitude of the aircraft.Clearly there is a problem, turbulance encountered, auto pilot disconnects but aircraft doesn't fly straight and level, and at speed, instead it goes in to a steep climb, begins to loose speed,the engines don't power up to compensate....clearly then there is a major problem, it centers about the autopilot AND flight computer problems (Airbus A380 is HEAVILY automated, and it makes it difficult for the pilots to fly manually, there is a joystick on either side for them to use when flying manually, a joystick.Here we can see the actula flight deck itself......
http://www.futurastudios.com/airbus-380-flight-deck/airbus-380-flight-deck-front.jpg
The Flight 447 accident may have some relevant similarities to other A330 incidents with other carriers. Three similar reports are on file at the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB), with two incidents relating to Airbus A330s with flight computer problems, plus one which involved a Boeing 777. In the October 2008 accident, this fault caused injuries to passengers and damage to the aircraft on Qantas Flight 72, en route from Singapore to Perth, Western Australia, which was forced into a dive by a malfunctioning ADIRU. These incidents often started with the automatic pilot's disengaging and sending out ADIRU failure messages. Incorrect speed indications were also observed.The airframe and ADIRU involved in the Qantas Flight 72 accident were also previously involved in another incident on Qantas Flight 68, 2006. The Qantas aircraft were equipped with ADIRUs manufactured by Northrop Grumman, while Flight 447 was equipped with an ADIRU manufactured by Honeywell. A memo leaked from Airbus suggests that there was no evidence that the Flight 447 ADIRU malfunction was similar to the failure in
the Qantas incidents.
An Air Data Inertial Reference Unit (ADIRU) is a key component of the integrated Air Data Inertial Reference System (ADIRS), that supplies air data (airspeed, angle of attack and altitude) and inertial reference (position and attitude) information to the pilots' Electronic Flight Instrument System displays as well as other systems on the aircraft such as the engines, autopilot, flight control and landing gear
systems. An ADIRU acts as a single, fault tolerant source of navigational data for both pilots of an aircraft.The ADR component of an ADIRU provides airspeed, Mach, angle of attack, temperature and barometric altitude data. Ram air pressure and static pressures used in calculating airspeed are measured by small Air data modules (ADM) located as close as possible to the respective pitot and static pressure sensors. The ADMs transmit their pressures to the ADIRUs through ARINC 429 data buses.The IR component of an ADIRU gives attitude, flight path vector, ground speed and positional data.The ring laser gyroscope is a core enabling technology in the system, and is used together with accelerometers, GPS and other sensors to provide raw data. The primary benefits of a ring laser over older mechanical gyroscopes are that there are no moving parts, it is rugged and lightweight, frictionless and does not resist a change in precession.
Analysis of complex systems is itself so difficult as to be subject to errors in the certification process. Complex interactions between flight computers and ADIRU's can lead to counter-intuitive behaviour for the crew in the event of a failure. In the case of Qantas Flight 72, the captain switched the source of IR data from ADIRU1 to ADIRU3 following a failure of ADIRU1; however ADIRU1 continued to supply ADR data to the captain's primary flight display. In addition, the master flight control computer (PRIM1) was switched from PRIM1 to PRIM2, then PRIM2 back to PRIM1, thereby creating a situation of uncertainty for the crew who did not know which redundant systems they were relying upon.
Take note of this......
http://www.routesonline.com/news/24/atw/6975/qantas-suffers-second-a330-adiru-failure/
Qantas suffers second A330 ADIRU failure
by Geoffrey Thomas
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau said it was advised on Dec. 27 of an occurrence that day involving a QF A330-300 cruising at 36,000 ft. on its way from Perth to Singapore. Some 260 nm. northwest of Perth the autopilot disconnected and the crew received an Electronic Centralized Aircraft Monitor message (NAV IR 1 fault) indicating a problem with ADIRU No. 1.The crew implemented the new Airbus Operations Engineering Bulletin procedure by selecting the IR 1 and ADR 1 pushbuttons to off (ATWOnline, Oct. 15, 2008). The aircraft returned to Perth.
ATSB said the incident "appears to be a similar event to a previous event involving an A330 aircraft." In the October incident, 70 of the 313 people onboard the A330 flying from SIN to PER were injured when the aircraft pitched up and then dove twice after a failure of ADIRU 1. An ATSB preliminary report issued in November suggested the possibility that transmissions from a naval communications station interfered with onboard systems.
Now note this also, involving ADIRU and autopilot, and note what happened.........
http://www.airlinesafety.com/faq/777DataFailure.htm
On August 1, 2005, a Boeing 777-200, which had departed from Perth, received an EICAS (Engine Indication and Crew Alerting System) warning of low airspeed, as the plane was climbing through FL (flight level) 380. Simultaneously, the aircraft's slip/skid indication moved full right, on the PFD (Primary Flight Display). The PFD speed tape also displayed contradictory information: that the plane was approaching both the high speed limit and the low speed (stall) limit. The aircraft, still connected to the autopilot, pitched up and climbed to approximately FL410 as the airspeed decreased from 270 kts to 158 kts. The stall warning devices also activated.The PIC (pilot in command) "disconnected the autopilot and lowered the nose of the aircraft. The autothrottle commanded an increase in thrust which the PIC countered by manually moving the thrust levers to the idle position. The aircraft pitched up again and climbed 2,000 ft." The PIC advised ATC "that they could not maintain altitude and requested a descent and radar assistance. The crew was able to verify with ATC the aircraft speed and altitude."The PFD indications became accurate again as they were descending through FL200. The PIC attempted to use both the left and right autopilots, but had to turn them off after each one produced undesired command responses. "There were no control difficulties experienced when the aircraft was flown manually, but the autothrottle 'arm' switches remained in the 'armed' position."ATC radar vectors put the plane in position to conduct an ILS to R 03 at Perth. When they reached 3,000 ft, the PFD again began indicating erroneous low airspeed information. The autothrottle again responded by advancing the thrust levers. Since the pilot can override that
command, simply by manually adjusting those thrust levers, the plane was able to land safely at Perth. The FDR (flight data recorder), the CVR (cockpit voice recorder) and the ADIRU (air data inertial reference unit) were removed from the
plane, for a detailed examination. Under the supervision of the American NTSB, the ADIRU was shipped to its manufacturer for detailed analysis.The FDR data confirmed the erroneous acceleration values had been displayed on the PFDs, as the pilots reported. The ADIRU produced those erroneous acceleration values and they were used by the PFC (primary flight computer). As it was designed to do, the PFC compared the information from the ADIRU, to the information coming from the SAARU (Standby Air Data and Attitude Reference Unit). That comparison ability
enabled the PFC to reduce the severity of the initial pitching motion of the aircraft.
Have a look at this,or rather ALL OF THESE..........
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Data_Inertial_Reference_Unit#Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_124
Alitalia A-320
On 25 June 2005, an Alitalia Airbus A320-200 registered as I-BIKE departed Milan with a defective ADIRU as permitted by the Minimum Equipment List. While approaching London Heathrow Airport during deteriorating weather another ADIRU failed, leaving only one operable. In the subsequent confusion the third was inadvertently reset, losing its reference heading and disabling several automatic functions. The crew was able to effect a safe landing after declaring a Pan-pan.
Malaysia Airlines Flight 124
On 1 August 2005 a serious incident involving Malaysia Airlines Flight 124, occurred when a Boeing 777-2H6ER (9M-MRG) flying from Perth to Kuala Lumpur also involved an ADIRU fault resulting in uncommanded manoeuvres by the aircraft acting on false indications. In that incident the incorrect data impacted all planes of movement while the aircraft was climbing through 38,000 feet (11,600 m). The aircraft pitched up and climbed to around 41,000 feet (12,500 m), with the stall warning activated. The pilots recovered the aircraft with the autopilot disengaged and requested a return to Perth. During the return to Perth, both the left and right autopilots were briefly activated by the crew, but in both instances the aircraft pitched down and banked to the right. The aircraft was flown manually for the remainder of the flight and landed safely in Perth.
Qantas Flight 68
On 12 September 2006, Qantas Flight 68, Airbus A330 registration VH-QPA, from Hong Kong to Perth exhibited ADIRU problems but without causing any disruption to the flight. At 41,000 feet (12,000 m) and estimated position 530 nautical miles (980 km) north of Learmonth, Western Australia, NAV IR1 FAULT then, 30 minutes later, NAV ADR 1 FAULT notifications were received on the ECAM identifying navigation system faults in Inertial Reference Unit 1, then in ADR 1 respectively. The crew reported to the later Qantas Flight 72 investigation involving the same airframe and ADIRU that they had received numerous warning and caution messages which changed too quickly to be dealt with. While investigating the problem, the crew noticed a weak and intermittent ADR 1 FAULT light and elected to switch off ADR 1, after which they experienced no further problems. There was no impact on the flight controls throughout the event. The ADIRU manufacturer's
recommended maintenance procedures were carried out after the flight and system testing found no further fault.
Jetstar Flight 7
On 7 February 2008, a similar aircraft (VH-EBC) operated by Qantas subsidiary Jetstar Airways was involved in a similar occurrence while conducting the JQ7 service from Sydney to Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. In this event - which occurred 1,760 nautical miles (3,260 km) east of Learmonth - many of the same errors occurred in the ADIRU unit. The crew followed the relevant procedure applicable at the time and the flight continued without problems.
Qantas Flight 72
On 7 October 2008, Qantas Flight 72, an Airbus A330, departed Singapore for Perth. Some time into the flight, while cruising at 37,000 ft, a failure in the No.1 ADIRU led to the autopilot automatically disengaging followed by two sudden uncommanded pitch down manoeuvres, according to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB). The accident injured up to 74 passengers and crew, ranging from minor to serious injuries. The aircraft was able to make an emergency landing without further injuries. The aircraft was equipped with a Northrop Grumman made ADIRS, which investigators sent to the manufacturer for further testing.
Qantas Flight 71
On 27 December 2008, Qantas Flight 71 from Perth to Singapore, the same A330-300 registration VH-QPA and the same ADIRU as involved in the Qantas Flight 68 incident, was involved in an incident at 36,000 feet approximately 260 nautical miles (480 km) north-west of Perth and 350 nautical miles (650 km) south of Learmonth Airport at 1729 WST. The autopilot disconnected and the crew received an alert indicating a problem with ADIRU Number 1.
Air France Flight 447
On 1 June 2009, Air France Flight 447, an Airbus A330 en route from Rio de Janeiro to Paris, disappeared over the Atlantic Ocean after transmitting automated messages indicating faults with various equipment, including the ADIRU. While examining possibly related events of weather-related loss of ADIRS, the NTSB decided to investigate two similar cases on cruising A330s.
TAM Flight 8091
On a 21 May 2009 Miami-Sao Paulo TAM Flight 8091 registered as PT-MVB, and on a 23 June 2009 Hong Kong-Tokyo Northwest Airlines Flight 8 registered as N805NW each saw sudden loss of airspeed data at cruise altitude and consequent loss of ADIRS control.
Now isn't it wonderful with the degree of automation we have,with the technical skill of the systems designers,the computer programmers,remember!Remember when you board your ADIRU/Autopilot equipped aircraft,and you hear your welcoming announcement, "Welcome aboard your flight where nothing can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong,can go wrong........"
Secret Squirrel Suggests How To Save The US Post Office
Secret Squirrel has seen the headlines, the writting in and on the media,such that the USPS, the U.S. Postal Service, is one the very verge, on the brink or, bankruptcy, indeed the headlines read..........
"Postal chief to testify on Capitol Hill as USPS could face default
Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe will insist a retiree health benefits fund be rescaled, a spokeswoman says.
The hearing is called "U.S. Postal Service In Crisis: Proposals to Prevent a Postal Shutdown"
The U.S. Postal Service might miss a September 30 payment to a retiree fund
Officials vow no interruption in payroll, mail or payments to suppliers
Spokeswoman: "We've overpaid into our retirement funds" after a 2006 reform act."
Well things are interesting, the USPS is operating under the direction of The Congress, and can only act and make changes if Congress, in it's long winded and elephantine speedy sessions, legislates it so, approves it, passes the necessary bills.The United States Postal Service (also known as USPS, the Post Office or U.S. Mail) is an independent agency of the United States government responsible for providing postal service in the United States. It is one of the few government agencies explicitly authorized by the United States Constitution.The USPS traces its roots to 1775 during the Second Continental Congress, where Benjamin Franklin was appointed the first postmaster general. The cabinet-level Post Office Department was created in 1792 from Franklin's operation and transformed into its current form in 1971 under the Postal Reorganization Act.
The USPS cannot act like a private company and adapt to changes in the market with great rapidity,rather it acts with the elephantine lumberings,encumbered by the government, the Congress specifically. Th USPS started with and by Ben Franklin, one of the many great doings of the be speckled balding lad,that and in between had time to attends meetings in England of The Naughty Hell Fire Club(they did have one girl member you know).In either case the USPS evolved and changed, but in recent times, it has changed for the worse, and so too has and did it's regulation.
There have been cuts in the labor force, presently down by 260,000 for a high of 900,000.But problems arise in funding the mail system, a system which relies on
Congress to set things, like the price of postage stamps, parcel delivery costs.In short the USPS, is at,near,or going under,bankruptcy,short of being saved by Congress coming up with the required funds, as the USPS is incapable of generating such funds as it is at present.
Curious it all is, that President Obama, and other Presidents, have mentioned to other nations,America's USPS being a government run and regulated entity, that, what with their problems in the Post Office, THEY should privatize their similarly government owned Postal Systems, those two major ones being, specifically, Great Britain, and Canada. Interesting, though that they are not quite as badly off as is the USPS US government run entity. BUT they have viable solutions to their
problems and implement them. Noticeably both Canada and Great Britain,in their solutions to things,
They made staffing cuts (some have suggested a further 120,000 job cuts to the US one),
They have shut down extremely expensive to run,keep, and maintain,low level, or redundant post offices,those specifically government owned,run operated.
They have farmed out mini post offices to such places as pharmacies(chemists), and other locations, even yet heavily traveled groceries in their wisdom, in efforts to increase utility and availability to their public.The USA could do the same.
They have removed,or are in the process of removing, Saturday mail deliveries,(indeed worse to worse, one could consider a MWF system, deliveries of mail on Monday,Wednesday, and Friday).
They have reduced postal processing plants, and enlarged existing ones to a more centralized,efficient,stream lined, lower cost structure.
They have added and increased post offices as retail outlets for certain commodities,generating increased revenues.
They have increased the costs of their stamps, as in cost to deliver mail, first class and otherwise.Indeed the USA could increase such stamps to 25% above the present sale level, and still not be at their level of stamp/mail delivery/handling
cost. This is also true of parcel postage costs as well,in broad spectrum over the entire system.
Yes, the USPS is a good deal compared with theirs, but then theirs are not quite facing the problem that the USPS faces, that of the real threat of obvious bankruptcy.In short, they figured out how to stream line,render cost effective,their postal systems. The USPS must go down the same road. It is also evident their manners of operation are different, they are much more run in the model of a business, than is the US lumbering elephantine system of evident mismanagement starting with a weak minded and slow US Congress as it's actual head.The USA must adapt and change the actual day to day running of the post office, and actually model it after that of Canada and Great Britain,for as imperfect as theirs are, theirs are in much better shape than a USPS run by Congress, quite obviously.It has problems all the way down the line.
Let's look at the facts and figures......
The USPS employs over 574,000 workers(presently) and over 218,000 vehicles, and if it were a civilian company, it would be the second-largest employer in the United States after Wal-Mart, and the operator of the largest vehicle fleet in the
world.The USPS operates the largest civilian vehicle fleet in the world, with an estimated 218,684 vehicles, the majority of which are the easily identified Chevrolet/Grumman LLV (Long-Life Vehicle), and the newer Ford/Utilimaster FFV (Flex-Fuel Vehicle), originally also referred to as the "CRV" (Carrier Route Vehicle). In an interview on NPR, a USPS official stated that for every penny increase in the national average price of gasoline, the USPS spends an extra $8 million per year to
fuel its fleet.The number of gallons of fuel used in 2009 was 444 million, at a cost of US$1.1 billion.
Strangely enough, it appears that the USPS pays federal gasoline tax,18.4 cents per gallon,but should the Federal government exempt the USPS vehicles from such tax, that would a a relief expense to the USPS.
The USPS is obligated to serve all Americans, regardless of geography, at uniform price and quality. The USPS has exclusive access to letter boxes marked "U.S. Mail" and personal letterboxes in the United States, but still competes against private
package delivery services, such as UPS and FedEx.
Domestic US first-class mail costs 44¢ for envelopes (29¢ for post cards)
Canada domestic .59(inc postcards) 1.03 to USA, international 1.75......obviously the US can and should increase postal rates for letters to say 25% to match Canadian levels,that in the very least. Parcel rates are approximatily half of the
Canadian rates.......The U.S.P.S. has never taken any tax payer money . All revenue is self generated.
The USPS obviously, being on the brink of bankruptcy, is NOT being properly run, the proper steps are not being taken to make it properly run.
One can only make suggestions as to how to save the post office. Obama and other Presidents have suggested to other nations with struggling Post Office systems, system STILL YET running far better than America's that THEY should privatize their Post Office systems. Well, if that was and is such a good idea, and not the creative suggestions I have made above, then perhaps, yes, President Obama, should take the step and take his own advice to those with Post Offices in far better financial conditions than his, then,ipso facto, President Obama should follow his own advice, for the good of America and the USPS and should PRIVATIZE THE USPS?
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Secret Squirrel Comments On Fish Stocks And The Seal Hunt.
Whilst happily munching of Fish 'n Chips,Secret Squirrel realized that there are those who do not approve of the seal hunts.Squirrel has heavily pondered this issue as well, and has decided to comment on that issue as it directly affects
Squirrel's munching of fish 'n chips of any particular variety of fish that makes his fish n' chips, and also, notes that the seals,sadly, affect and impact heavily, on the fish stocks of mankind, in short Squirrel is all for you as well having any particular type of fish you choose to eat. Unfortunately, there is one thing between you and doing so......the seals you see.Yes, the seals. Ponder this, each seal,eats,what Canada est. of a population (locally to Canada) of 6 million seals, eat aprox. 35 pounds of fish per seal per day and that equals about 77 billion pounds of fish.Further it is widely known that seals eat between 6%-8% of their body weight in fish per day.How much fish will 10,000 seals eat in a day? Well, if those 10,000 seals weigh 500 pounds each, they would consume 350,000 lbs. of fish per day or 2.45 million pounds of fish per week.Both grey and common seals eat a variety of prey - fish, shellfish, squid and octopus,and assorteds including cod, herring, flounder, sculpin, salmon, mackerel, sandeel, shrimp and whelk.They are opportunistic feeders,while they have preferences, they will and do eat whatever is available.And eat they have, they eat so much they have adversely impacted the fish stocks,of Canada, and other regions and nations of the world as well. Canada has great problems within it's fisheries, a shortage of the commodity of fish.
Particularly any NewFoundlander can tell you this, and explain things to you. One recalls their hardship, still continuing of the sad necessity of the shutting down,basically, of the fisheries of Newfoundland,due to the exceptionally low fish stocks."A sustainable fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador is vital to our economy and to those who make their living from the sea,"said Minister Peter Penashue, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Regional Minister for Newfoundland and Labrador."Our government recognises the importance of this key industry in Newfoundland and Labrador and we are committed to maintaining a strong connection with those communities for which the fishery is so important."
The industry collapsed entirely by 1993 six cod populations had collapsed, forcing a belated moratorium on fishing. Spawning biomass had decreased by at least 75% in all stocks, by 90% in three of the six stocks, and by 99% in the case of 'northern' cod, previously the largest cod fishery in the world.The waters now appear to be dominated by crab and shrimp rather than fish. After a 10 year moratorium on fishing the cod had still not returned.The devestating collapse of the cod stocks off the east coast of Newfoundland forced the Canadian government to take drastic measures and close the fishery. Over 40,000 people lost there jobs. The communities are still struggling to recover. The marine ecosystem is still in a state of collapse.
The collapse of this vital and important fishery sounded a warning bell to governments around the world who were shocked that a relatively sophisticated, scientifically-based fisheries management program. A major way to rebuild fish stocks are to actually increase sealing.The principal groundfish species of Atlantic Canada are cod, small flatfishes (plaice and flounder), redfish, haddock, pollock, turbot, halibut and silver hake. Of these, haddock on the Scotian Shelf, northern cod and northern Gulf cod are in need of rebuilding,these are fish seals consume.In 1996, Tobin announced a massive federal subsidy, literally paying fishermen per pound of seal they killed. Hunt numbers exceeded 240,000 seals that year, and have remained high since. The following year in a controversial move, Fred Mifflin (Brian Tobin's successor as Fisheries Minister) announced the reopening of cod fisheries off Newfoundland's south coast and in the northern Gulf of St. Lawrence.Sealing must continue, and must increase, as the seal population decreases, fish stocks replenish, increase,re establish themsleves such that Canada and it's fisherman can once again enjoy a livelihood in the tradiational fisheries, and we, the people, are free to eat the cod and other fish the seals would have massively consumed.
One must look at the issues at hand in a sane manner, perhaps a cold manner, but a logical one. Mankind comes before seals our food supply comes before seals we come before seals.One must remeber as an added bonus the seals give fur for warm clothing,regardless, and also that seal meat can also be a viable food stock as well and shuld also be taken in to account.These are the added pluses of the seal hunt. Mankind wins all round and about, and, of course, seals loose, but asthe
french say, C'est la vie, and the emphasiss is on vie, life, the life of mankind.
There are negative impacts of grey seal predation on fish populations, particularly Atlantic cod. Over the last 30 years, the grey seal population off the coast of Atlantic Canada has grown rapidly - from 30,000 in the 1970s to over 350,000 today and it continues to grow.Scientific research suggests that grey seal predation could account for much of the high natural mortality of cod in the
southern Gulf of St Lawrence. At current rates of natural mortality, stock growth is not likely unless productivity increases well above levels observed in the past decade.
A Zonal Advisory Process (ZAP) on the impacts of grey seals on fish populations in eastern Canada concluded October 8, 2010. Science advice from the ZAP will inform DFO on the extent to which management decisions regarding grey seal population control are likely to achieve measurable increases in cod productivity and biomass. The current harp seal harvest is conducted as an economically sustainable activity. It can make an important contribution to the annual income of people living in rural coastal communities where other economic opportunities are limited, which may reduce outmigration to large urban centres. The loss of
economic opportunities would have an important impact on people in these small communities.The seal harvest provides direct employment for over six thousand people per year on a part-time basis. Some sealers have stated that their income from sealing can represent a significant amount of their total annual income.
There are also many secondary economic benefits derived from the seal industry. Seals have been harvested for food, fuel, clothing and other products for hundreds of years. Seal products consist of leather, oil, handicrafts, and meat for human and
animal consumption as well as seal oil capsules rich in Omega-3. New product development such as for specialized seal food products and research into the use of harp seal heart valves in human heart surgery is ongoing.Estimates from DFO and the province of Newfoundland and Labrador find that between 5,000 and 6,000 individuals derive some income from sealing. This is approximately 1 per cent of the total provincial population, and 2 per cent of the labour force. This is a substantial number of individuals in the context of small rural communities.
The Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) regulates the seal hunt in Canada. It sets quotas (total allowable catch-TAC), monitors the hunt, studies the seal population, works with the Canadian Sealing Association to train sealers on new regulations, and promotes sealing through its website and spokespeople.
The DFO set kill quotas of 270,000 seals in 2007, 275,000 in 2008, 280,000 in 2009, and 330,000 in 2010. The actual kills in recent years have been less than the quotas: 82,800 in 2007, 217,800 in 2008, 72,400 in 2009, and 67,000 in 2010. In 2007, Norway claimed that 29,000 harp seals were killed in its seal hunt, and Russia and Greenland claimed that 5,476 and 90,000 seals were killed in 2007, respectively.
The hunt remains highly controversial, attracting significant media coverage and protests each year.Numerous celebrities have opposed the commercial seal hunt. Rex Murphy has reported celebrities have been used by antihunt activists since the mid-20th century; Yvette Mimieux and Loretta Swit were recruited to attract the attention of international gossip magazines.Other celebrities who have aligned themselves against the hunt include Richard Dean Anderson, Kim Basinger, Juliette Binoche, Sir Paul McCartney, Heather Mills, Pamela Anderson, Martin Sheen, Pierce Brosnan, Morrissey, Paris Hilton, Robert Kennedy, Jr., Rutger Hauer,Brigitte Bardot, Ed Begley, Jr., Farley Mowat, Linda Blair, and the Red Hot Chili Peppers.Yes, seals are cute, they clap their flippers together,bark, and get tossed fish at Marinelands, and in circus',but they are voracious breeders, and voracious eaters,consumers, of fish stock.Jacques Cousteau, renowned worldwide as a pioneer of marine conservation, criticized the seal hunt protests,and wisely and sanely supported the hunting of seals.
Sealing also in itself is an intergral part of Canada's trade and economy. Canada's biggest market for seal pelts is Norway. Canada sold pelts to eleven countries in 2004. The next largest were Germany, Greenland, and China/Hong Kong.In recent years, China has become a market for seal fur. Other importers were Finland, Denmark, France, Greece, South Korea, and Russia. Asia remains the principal market for seal meat exports.One of Canada's market access priorities for 2002 was to "continue to press Korean authorities to obtain the necessary approvals for the sale of seal meat for human consumption in Korea." Canadian and Korean officials agreed in 2003 on specific Korean import requirements for seal meat.For 2004, only Taiwan and South Korea purchased seal meat from Canada.Canadian seal product exports reached C$18 million in 2006. Of this, C$5.4 million went to the EU.
Other nations hunt seals,the more the merrier,for every seal killed, there's 35 pounds of fish that is available for mankind,each day, and there's 35 pounds of fish per day more to breed yet more fish, and increase the sadly depleted fish stocks.Other nations with seal hunts are Norway, Namibia, Russia, Greenland(Denmark), Sweden,also Japan(Japanese economy is boosted by seal hunting giving leather, oil, meat, gelatin, and fertilizer.
Between 1995 and 2005, an average 160,000 seals have been reported landed every year in Greenland. This makes Greenland the second largest sealing range state in the world, after Canada. Five species of seal are found and traditionally hunted in Greenlandic waters: the ringed, harp, hooded, bearded and harbour seals2. Regarding harp seals, between 65,000 and 90,000 animals are landed every year and for every seal landed, another is estimated to be struck and lost at sea1, bringing the total kill of Greenland’s harp seals to some 130,000 – 180,000 animals per year. Greenland has a total population of about 56,000 people of whom 88% are Inuit or mixed Danish and Inuit. Traditionally, sealing contributed to the subsistence of the people and has been an important part of the cultural identity.Harp and ringed seals are the main hunted species (98% of the reported catch for all seals in 20051). Previously, the ringed seal was the main species for subsistence (food and income) but the subsidies from the fur industry made it more attractive to hunt harp seals as hunters are offered a better price for harp skins.
According to the authorities, sealing still provides basic food supply to most Greenlandic communities, both for human consumption and feed for sled dogs.
annual catch of seals in Greenland:
Years Harp Ringed Hooded Seal
1995 63,263 79,105 7,179
1996 74,676 89,938 9,891
1997 69,567 80,207 7,492
1998 82,217 78,747 6,335
1999 50,017 83,343 7,455
2000 99,801 80,293 5,844
2001 86,763 78,432 6,503
2002 67,725 82,491 4,806
2003 67,607 80,645 6,336
2004 72,169 77,374 5,853
2005 90,351 89,773 4,096
Seals can be hunted year round by any Greenlandic citizen with a licence. Hunting licences are either “commercial” or “recreational”. Hunters with a commercial licence are “full-time” hunters2,5, while hunters with a recreational licence are
“free time” or “part-time” hunters. The majority (66%) of commercial hunters claim they have no additional occupation besides fishing and hunting while 24% state that they have additional occupation(s).The hunting of seals in Greenland is monitored each year by observers from NAMMCO, the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission, who inspect the hunting from vessels or from land.
The NAMMCO Committee on Hunting Methods provides advice on hunting and NAMMCO has implemented a Joint Control Scheme
for the Hunting of Marine Mammals which includes international observation of sealing to monitor whether legislation is respected in the four member countries (Norway, Iceland, Faroe Islands and Greenland, which currently holds the
chairmanship).The organisation notably defends the “rights and needs of coastal communities to make a sustainable living from what the sea can provide”. Seal hunting, or sealing, is most necessary to all nations, and in the best interests of all nations.
In fact sealing quotas should in fact be raised from their present levels to replenish the sadly dwindling and reduced fish stocks so necessary to nations,to mankind. We must put aside the fact that seals are cute, that they are circu performers, that they are marineland performers, rather they are in fact rodents, sea rodents, rodents who have a voracious appetite for fish, who have contributed heavily to the depletion of fish stocks in the world.There must be sense and sensibility,sealing is in the best interests of mankind,and must not only be condoned, encouraged, continued, but also increased,for the good of our fish stocks.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Secret Squirrel Comments On Ever Rising Gasoline Prices.
Secret Squirrel has noticed the ever increasing price of gasoline and commences to consider what is the actual reason for such an increase......it's the oil companies,they're calling the shots,they're pulling the strings, in Congress, in The Senate, those of the President.Whenever they increase the price of gasoline, they increase their profits taken from a finite captive audience, in the hippee terms of the Sixties, "It's a corporate rip off!"Price gouging and it's relative price fixing have
unquestionably been applied successfully in concert with each other and in concert with The Oil Companies, and The "President(read also an influenced and lobbied Congress/Senate).The biggest oil companies have stifled competition to raise
prices and make record profits,and unquestionably they have knowingly, and with the collusion of members of Government,through various forms of influence and influential ,shall we say, lobbying,affected a price gouging,price fixing regimen of function,the status quo.
Whenever gas prices spike, calls mount to increase oil production in the United States. Then experts point out that this won't make a dent in gasoline prices. And politicians ignore them and keep calling for more oil drilling. Today President Obama went along with these calls by announcing plans to expand drilling in Alaska, and speed new exploration offshore,which doesn't have much relevance as,face it, gas consumption,yours, is basically fixed isn't it.....you only need and use so much,not more than you need,or use. Obama agrees to speed drilling, but don't expect it to help gas prices,it means nothing. ... Increasing drilling won't decrease gas prices for reasons mentioned,gas prices rise,profits rise, gas prices drop,profits drop. Yes there has been a steady rise of gasoline prices.When it's noticed, and mentioned, it drops a few cents and sits a bit..........then it increases again repeating the pattern, so in 1997 it was $1.23 per gallon, and now is about $3.05,in 2011.
Well there is supposed to be the law,the economic laws,the law of supply and demand, increased demand lowers prices for a commodity, but noticeably, America doesn't follow this LAW, indeed what with the oil companies the reverse is really true. You see, as gas consumption is really fixed in America, i.e. there is as much use as there is.there is a set market of consumption for a commodity such as gas, it's basically, face it, determined by the amount of cars on the road consuming you
know.If there is an increase it is a fixed calculable increase in consumption and only by that fashion. Increasing price then increase further sales, hence profits. A decrease would lower profits, but if determinable and increase in price would offset. Increase increase increase. One can't fail to notice, as well, that prices rise in virtual concert with all companies,within days of each other, upwards, narry does one keep the price lower to increase profits by increasing sales in quantity...no indeed,it just wouldn't be sporting nor fair to the other companies who raised their prices would it now?
One also sees that when there is a drop in oil prices, the price at the pump remains, and further yet,increases.Obama increasing oil production within the United States has absolutely no bearing on price of gas at the pump in America, it
is set, by the oil companies,and one suspects with governmental collusion. You see the oil companies didn't increase said increases in drilling,the oil companies did, really, and if oil companies had to ask, could he, would he say no........ hhmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,speed drilling,drill more, doesn't the oil belong to these oil companies........................or thence it IS the US government controlling things, hence profits,hence price of gas in America.You see if increased production occurs, this has no bearing on increased consumption, as the increased production implies shortage, and there is and are no shortages of gas, there never are.Increasing production of gas does not have bearing on consumption either as you cannot and never ever do consume more than you need.
Let me explain it like this, the seasonal summer drought means I cut my grass less times, I consumed only 2 1/2 gallons of gas this summer, because that's as much as was needed, given a bad summer when I have to cut more, it could be 5 gallons, hence that is my consumption, only what I need..........this is true for all who cut their grass, but as always with actual figures on grass cutting it will vary and level out including ALL of America, hence constant fixed consumption of necessity regardless of available quantity of said gas.The same is true of cars, increase gas prices and some may drive less, yes, consume less, not more, due to cost, then make available more gas, and so what, the price is there,they're not running to consume more since there's more available, they're consuming only what they need,what they actually need.Increasing gas prices will not increase gas consumption, nor will making more gas available cause increased gas consumption since gas consumption is fixed.
In 1978, U.S. gasoline consumption was about 7.4 million barrels per day
http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?product=gasoline&graph=consumption
Source: United States Energy Information Administration
Consumption Thousands of Barrels per Day...(42 US gallons per barrel)
year consumption change
1997 18,666.60 1.82 %
1998 19,097.87 2.31 %
1999 19,403.20 1.60 %
2000 19,883.51 2.48 %
2001 20,077.91 0.98 %
2002 20,186.03 0.54 %
2003 20,404.55 1.08 %
2004 20,867.42 2.27 %
2005 21,166.90 1.44 %
2006 21,472.00 1.44 %
2007 21,642.91 0.80 %
Present day, 2011, consumption is about 22,000.00 so there's been a 4,000 per rise 1997 to present.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption
Motor Gasoline Consumption by Country
Rank Country consumption (Thousand Barrels per Day)
1 United States 9,285.67
2 China 1,285.53
3 Japan 1,023.96
4 Mexico 744.94
5 Canada 724.81
6 Russian Federation 672.05
7 Germany 492.92
8 United Kingdom 410.05
9 Iran, Islamic Republic Of 403.29
10 Saudi Arabia 347.16
11 Australia 331.26
12 Brazil 331.18
13 Indonesia 321.52
14 Italy 288.25
15 Venezuela 269.29
From........
http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?country=us&product=gasoline&graph=consumption
and at
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo_pop-people-population&date=1997
US Gasoline Consuption Per Year, in Thousand Barrels per Day
Year Gas TB/D Change Population
1997 8,016.84 1.60 % 272,657,000 $1.23/us gallon
1998 8,253.42 2.95 % 275,854,000
1999 8,430.80 2.15 % 279,040,000
2000 8,472.06 0.49 % 282,224,000 $1.60/us gallon
2001 8,610.03 1.63 % 285,318,000
2002 8,847.83 2.76 % 288,369,000
2003 8,934.90 0.98 % 290,810,000
2004 9,105.41 1.91 % 293,655,400 $2.01/us gallon
2005 9,159.26 0.59 % 296,410,400
2006 9,252.53 1.02 % 298,988,100
2007 9,285.67 0.36 % 301,139,947 $2.80/us gallon
2010 312,090,000 $3.05/us gallon
2011 $3.63/us gallon
So from 1997 to present the price per gallon at the pump has tripled,though population rose only 12.6% Public Citizen estimates that Big Oil has taken in a quarter of a trillion in profits under the Bushes. Two-thirds of adults in a recent poll said gas prices had caused them "financial hardship."It just gets worse.
And in 2011...........
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/economy-and-business/Oil-Company-Profits-Surge-120870129.html
Major oil companies like ExxonMobil and Shell are reporting a surge in profits as crude oil prices rise and energy demand grows.ExxonMobil said Thursday that the firm made nearly $11 billion in the first three months of this year, a 69 percent improvement over the same period a year ago.Shell reported more than $6 billion net income for the quarter, a 22 percent gain over the same three month period last year.In the United States, higher energy costs are blamed for slowing economic growth as drivers cope with sharply higher gasoline prices. That is why higher energy prices are becoming a key issue for voters and politicians.
Of course, we realize,don't we, that increases in sales of a quantity of a commodity,such as gasoline, increases profits, but in cases where sales of a given commodity are limited but purchase quantity/necessity,increases in price of sold
commodity,such as gasoline, increases the profits as well.If they now decrease the cost of gasoline, their profits will drop accordingly,something they're loath to do having discovered that by increasing the price of gasoline,say from 1997 levels of
$1.23 per gallon, they're making much more in 2011 selling the same gallon at $3.63. It's been done slowly, but the effect of what they have presented as nickle and dimeing, has had a major effect on your pocket book and also on THEIR profit levels.
Some have woken up to fact that 74% of Americans regard the gasoline price rises as being gouging/price fixing......
http://rt.com/usa/news/gas-price-fixing-investigation/
Here commences the informative informational news content epistle,,,,,,,
US Senate Democratic leaders set a letter to the Federal Trade Commission requesting a formal investigation into whether oil companies have intentionally restricted the supply of gasoline to manipulate consumer prices.Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill made the push for the letter following a meeting on Capitol Hill where executives from America’s major oil companies testified and were questioned on why major oil companies received large tax benefits and subsidies. Many Democrats feel the hand-outs to big oil need to stop, but the industry is defiant.
“At a time when major refiners and oil companies are making record profits and American families continue to struggle with gasoline at record prices the idea that refiners may be manipulating the market to keep prices artificially high goes beyond reproach," said a statement released by Democratic leaders. "It is incumbent upon the Commission to ensure that the American
people are protected from this type of manipulation. Accordingly, we request that the Commission open a full investigation into these allegations of wrongdoing and to determine the impact this behavior, if confirmed, has on regional and national gasoline prices." McCaskill, in her push for FTC intervention, cites a report that shows oil companies are only using 81.7 percent of their overall capacity – a 7 percent decline for last year.“The rise in the price of oil is certainly a driving factor behind the recent rise in gasoline prices, but concerns have been raised that while gasoline use is declining, US gasoline inventories remain below average and refining margins continue to rise. According to information posted by the Energy Information Administration US refiners are using only 81.7 percent of
their capacity, a decline of 7 percent from the same time last year. Moreover, since the beginning of 2011 U.S. refiners have
seen over a ninety percent increase in their refining margins. While some have argued that this increase is due to potential impacts from recent flooding along the Mississippi River, this cannot justify the steady increases in their margins since January of this year,” said the letter to the FTC.
here ends the epistle....
Politicians have realized the price of gasoline is becoming a contentious issue, and offer manipulating prices downwards for electoral gains,recall that 2012 is an election year,but it is the epitome of low-hanging fruit,and once elected, it won't occur, for in doing so, it merely confirms the price gouging,price fixing collusion of members of The House Of
Representatives,The Presidency,and, of course, Big Oil.Sarah Palin wrote a post March 15 headlined the “$4-Per-Gallon President.”,Obama, of course. In her blog, she blamed the president,but actually it is The President, AND The Oil Companies, as it has ever been in the past,so is it now, and ever shall be,and is and would be and also even if she were the President ,everybody's been getting the business......... it's BIG BUSINESS.
unquestionably been applied successfully in concert with each other and in concert with The Oil Companies, and The "President(read also an influenced and lobbied Congress/Senate).The biggest oil companies have stifled competition to raise
prices and make record profits,and unquestionably they have knowingly, and with the collusion of members of Government,through various forms of influence and influential ,shall we say, lobbying,affected a price gouging,price fixing regimen of function,the status quo.
Whenever gas prices spike, calls mount to increase oil production in the United States. Then experts point out that this won't make a dent in gasoline prices. And politicians ignore them and keep calling for more oil drilling. Today President Obama went along with these calls by announcing plans to expand drilling in Alaska, and speed new exploration offshore,which doesn't have much relevance as,face it, gas consumption,yours, is basically fixed isn't it.....you only need and use so much,not more than you need,or use. Obama agrees to speed drilling, but don't expect it to help gas prices,it means nothing. ... Increasing drilling won't decrease gas prices for reasons mentioned,gas prices rise,profits rise, gas prices drop,profits drop. Yes there has been a steady rise of gasoline prices.When it's noticed, and mentioned, it drops a few cents and sits a bit..........then it increases again repeating the pattern, so in 1997 it was $1.23 per gallon, and now is about $3.05,in 2011.
Well there is supposed to be the law,the economic laws,the law of supply and demand, increased demand lowers prices for a commodity, but noticeably, America doesn't follow this LAW, indeed what with the oil companies the reverse is really true. You see, as gas consumption is really fixed in America, i.e. there is as much use as there is.there is a set market of consumption for a commodity such as gas, it's basically, face it, determined by the amount of cars on the road consuming you
know.If there is an increase it is a fixed calculable increase in consumption and only by that fashion. Increasing price then increase further sales, hence profits. A decrease would lower profits, but if determinable and increase in price would offset. Increase increase increase. One can't fail to notice, as well, that prices rise in virtual concert with all companies,within days of each other, upwards, narry does one keep the price lower to increase profits by increasing sales in quantity...no indeed,it just wouldn't be sporting nor fair to the other companies who raised their prices would it now?
One also sees that when there is a drop in oil prices, the price at the pump remains, and further yet,increases.Obama increasing oil production within the United States has absolutely no bearing on price of gas at the pump in America, it
is set, by the oil companies,and one suspects with governmental collusion. You see the oil companies didn't increase said increases in drilling,the oil companies did, really, and if oil companies had to ask, could he, would he say no........ hhmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,speed drilling,drill more, doesn't the oil belong to these oil companies........................or thence it IS the US government controlling things, hence profits,hence price of gas in America.You see if increased production occurs, this has no bearing on increased consumption, as the increased production implies shortage, and there is and are no shortages of gas, there never are.Increasing production of gas does not have bearing on consumption either as you cannot and never ever do consume more than you need.
Let me explain it like this, the seasonal summer drought means I cut my grass less times, I consumed only 2 1/2 gallons of gas this summer, because that's as much as was needed, given a bad summer when I have to cut more, it could be 5 gallons, hence that is my consumption, only what I need..........this is true for all who cut their grass, but as always with actual figures on grass cutting it will vary and level out including ALL of America, hence constant fixed consumption of necessity regardless of available quantity of said gas.The same is true of cars, increase gas prices and some may drive less, yes, consume less, not more, due to cost, then make available more gas, and so what, the price is there,they're not running to consume more since there's more available, they're consuming only what they need,what they actually need.Increasing gas prices will not increase gas consumption, nor will making more gas available cause increased gas consumption since gas consumption is fixed.
In 1978, U.S. gasoline consumption was about 7.4 million barrels per day
http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?product=gasoline&graph=consumption
Source: United States Energy Information Administration
Consumption Thousands of Barrels per Day...(42 US gallons per barrel)
year consumption change
1997 18,666.60 1.82 %
1998 19,097.87 2.31 %
1999 19,403.20 1.60 %
2000 19,883.51 2.48 %
2001 20,077.91 0.98 %
2002 20,186.03 0.54 %
2003 20,404.55 1.08 %
2004 20,867.42 2.27 %
2005 21,166.90 1.44 %
2006 21,472.00 1.44 %
2007 21,642.91 0.80 %
Present day, 2011, consumption is about 22,000.00 so there's been a 4,000 per rise 1997 to present.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption
Motor Gasoline Consumption by Country
Rank Country consumption (Thousand Barrels per Day)
1 United States 9,285.67
2 China 1,285.53
3 Japan 1,023.96
4 Mexico 744.94
5 Canada 724.81
6 Russian Federation 672.05
7 Germany 492.92
8 United Kingdom 410.05
9 Iran, Islamic Republic Of 403.29
10 Saudi Arabia 347.16
11 Australia 331.26
12 Brazil 331.18
13 Indonesia 321.52
14 Italy 288.25
15 Venezuela 269.29
From........
http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?country=us&product=gasoline&graph=consumption
and at
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo_pop-people-population&date=1997
US Gasoline Consuption Per Year, in Thousand Barrels per Day
Year Gas TB/D Change Population
1997 8,016.84 1.60 % 272,657,000 $1.23/us gallon
1998 8,253.42 2.95 % 275,854,000
1999 8,430.80 2.15 % 279,040,000
2000 8,472.06 0.49 % 282,224,000 $1.60/us gallon
2001 8,610.03 1.63 % 285,318,000
2002 8,847.83 2.76 % 288,369,000
2003 8,934.90 0.98 % 290,810,000
2004 9,105.41 1.91 % 293,655,400 $2.01/us gallon
2005 9,159.26 0.59 % 296,410,400
2006 9,252.53 1.02 % 298,988,100
2007 9,285.67 0.36 % 301,139,947 $2.80/us gallon
2010 312,090,000 $3.05/us gallon
2011 $3.63/us gallon
So from 1997 to present the price per gallon at the pump has tripled,though population rose only 12.6% Public Citizen estimates that Big Oil has taken in a quarter of a trillion in profits under the Bushes. Two-thirds of adults in a recent poll said gas prices had caused them "financial hardship."It just gets worse.
And in 2011...........
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/economy-and-business/Oil-Company-Profits-Surge-120870129.html
Major oil companies like ExxonMobil and Shell are reporting a surge in profits as crude oil prices rise and energy demand grows.ExxonMobil said Thursday that the firm made nearly $11 billion in the first three months of this year, a 69 percent improvement over the same period a year ago.Shell reported more than $6 billion net income for the quarter, a 22 percent gain over the same three month period last year.In the United States, higher energy costs are blamed for slowing economic growth as drivers cope with sharply higher gasoline prices. That is why higher energy prices are becoming a key issue for voters and politicians.
Of course, we realize,don't we, that increases in sales of a quantity of a commodity,such as gasoline, increases profits, but in cases where sales of a given commodity are limited but purchase quantity/necessity,increases in price of sold
commodity,such as gasoline, increases the profits as well.If they now decrease the cost of gasoline, their profits will drop accordingly,something they're loath to do having discovered that by increasing the price of gasoline,say from 1997 levels of
$1.23 per gallon, they're making much more in 2011 selling the same gallon at $3.63. It's been done slowly, but the effect of what they have presented as nickle and dimeing, has had a major effect on your pocket book and also on THEIR profit levels.
Some have woken up to fact that 74% of Americans regard the gasoline price rises as being gouging/price fixing......
http://rt.com/usa/news/gas-price-fixing-investigation/
Here commences the informative informational news content epistle,,,,,,,
US Senate Democratic leaders set a letter to the Federal Trade Commission requesting a formal investigation into whether oil companies have intentionally restricted the supply of gasoline to manipulate consumer prices.Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill made the push for the letter following a meeting on Capitol Hill where executives from America’s major oil companies testified and were questioned on why major oil companies received large tax benefits and subsidies. Many Democrats feel the hand-outs to big oil need to stop, but the industry is defiant.
“At a time when major refiners and oil companies are making record profits and American families continue to struggle with gasoline at record prices the idea that refiners may be manipulating the market to keep prices artificially high goes beyond reproach," said a statement released by Democratic leaders. "It is incumbent upon the Commission to ensure that the American
people are protected from this type of manipulation. Accordingly, we request that the Commission open a full investigation into these allegations of wrongdoing and to determine the impact this behavior, if confirmed, has on regional and national gasoline prices." McCaskill, in her push for FTC intervention, cites a report that shows oil companies are only using 81.7 percent of their overall capacity – a 7 percent decline for last year.“The rise in the price of oil is certainly a driving factor behind the recent rise in gasoline prices, but concerns have been raised that while gasoline use is declining, US gasoline inventories remain below average and refining margins continue to rise. According to information posted by the Energy Information Administration US refiners are using only 81.7 percent of
their capacity, a decline of 7 percent from the same time last year. Moreover, since the beginning of 2011 U.S. refiners have
seen over a ninety percent increase in their refining margins. While some have argued that this increase is due to potential impacts from recent flooding along the Mississippi River, this cannot justify the steady increases in their margins since January of this year,” said the letter to the FTC.
here ends the epistle....
Politicians have realized the price of gasoline is becoming a contentious issue, and offer manipulating prices downwards for electoral gains,recall that 2012 is an election year,but it is the epitome of low-hanging fruit,and once elected, it won't occur, for in doing so, it merely confirms the price gouging,price fixing collusion of members of The House Of
Representatives,The Presidency,and, of course, Big Oil.Sarah Palin wrote a post March 15 headlined the “$4-Per-Gallon President.”,Obama, of course. In her blog, she blamed the president,but actually it is The President, AND The Oil Companies, as it has ever been in the past,so is it now, and ever shall be,and is and would be and also even if she were the President ,everybody's been getting the business......... it's BIG BUSINESS.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)