Secret Squirrel On Quebec's Proposed Anti Religion Charter

It has come to Squirrel's attention that the government of the province of Quebec, a province within the nation known as Canada,has decided that it wishes to propose and introduce a law such that it will not allow public servants to wear Muslim headscarves, Jewish skullcaps or other obvious religious symbols under a new charter,more over it will also impose a strange hard to define limit on the size of religious symbols displayed,usually such as neck chains.Official documents give the nod to discreet religious symbols, such as a small crucifix or a ring with the Star of David, but not to veils, large crucifixes or turbans.The enormous crucifix protruding from the public property above Montreal’s Mount Royal will be spared.So while politicians continue to enact laws underneath a giant cross, low-level public employees would have to tuck their Christian symbolism away, as would Muslims, Sikhs and Jews with their religious headwear.

The Quebec government,presently a ruling minority government,claims that the presentation and enforcement of such a Charter Of Quebec Values will cement a secular society,that it will help create a distinct identity for it's 8 million people.The rest of the nation of Canada,however,also takes a secular approach,a multicultural approach, which encourages different communities to keep their faiths and traditions.One Harvey Levine, president of the Quebec branch of the Jewish organization B'nai Brith,said "They're trying to remove religious freedoms. They're trying to impose rules on religious values," and there he's unquestionably correct. It is an attempt at repression,suppression of the many mutlicultural values and rights of the peoples of Quebec, to display those,regardless of faith. Indeed it is purely and simply a broad spectrum religious intolerance imposed, or  at least to be imposed,by the Quebec minority government.Bernard Drainville, the Quebec minister of democratic institutions,said a large crucifix in the National Assembly would stay in place, since it was part of Quebec's history. Christmas trees would be allowed in offices because they reflected the province's culture, he added.But then that's hardly democratic, indeed allDrainville grappled with questions about other inconsistencies.What about courtroom witnesses and elected politicians who, in this staunchly secular state, still swear an oath on that decidedly non-secular document, the Bible? Drainville appeared caught off-guard by the question: “Oh, my God,” he replied, slowly, “we’ll get back to you.”

And how about city council meetings which begin with prayers, in places like Saguenay? Would this secularism policy allow that? Drainville declined to answer the question.Would elected officials be subject to these rules? No, he replied, arguing that voters have a right to choose their representative. That means Quebecers could, in theory, elect a cabinet minister or premier with a hijab — who would then force her employees to remove theirs. should be so allowed to display their religious
symbols, symbols they are each like and in kind,rightly and justifyably proud of of,proud to wear and display.The new plan would ban overt religious symbols to be worn by “judges, police, prosecutors, public daycare workers, teachers, school employees, hospital workers and municipal personnel.” These symbols would include large crosses or crucifixes, turbans, hijab, and kippas. Smaller jewelry (such as Star of David earrings) would be allowed.There were reactions of course, to the proposal, here are some found at

http://blog.acton.org/archives/59857-quebec-ponders-banning-public-employees-wearing-overt-religious-symbols.html

Quote........

This proposal has caused uproar, both in the Quebec government and in the public. Here are a few reactions:

    As a Canadian-Muslim woman, I proudly wear my hijab, a choice that is completely my own and not influenced by others. Wearing my hijab does not cause any physical or psychological harm to anyone so than why should I be forced to remove it, if I want a good job working in Quebec? Have we really become so intolerant and insecure of ourselves that even the sight of a religious symbol has become unbearable and strikes fear in our society? The proposed charter is an infringement on my basic rights as a human. What I choose to wear is my personal choice; a freedom I thought I had as a Canadian citizen by birth.

    –

    I think the proposed charter is excellent. I’m a high-school teacher and I find it very insulting to see a teacher that teaches science or ethics (the French course teaches common values and is an introduction to different religions in the world) wearing a hijab, for example. A teacher has to be neutral in front of their students, has to be equal with his or her co-workers, and more specifically has to respect the dress code of the institution he or she works for. If somebody believes in God, great, but they don’t have to show it, especially when in a position of authority.

    –

    I am Buddhist and wear Mala beads during specific days of the year. It is important for me to feel free to present myself freely in the workplace, and my religious faith is a big part of whom I am. I find that it is important that my workplace reflects the multiculturalism of the society that we live in. It also helps to create a discussion in which we are able to get rid of prejudice and ignorance toward people and their faith.

Most of the hatred in the world is based on ignorance of the other person we are in conflict with, we need to understand each other if we are to live in a truly free society. The proposed charter is one of exclusion that will make certain people feel attacked. I also think that it is a diversion tactic to make people forget about the current government’s poor record with jobs, education and other important infrastructures.

Christian Lépine, the Catholic archbishop of Montreal, says the charter is “excessive”, adding that it
attempts to control people’s freedom of expression.  When you want to contain the visibility of faith, you are saying to people: ‘You cannot be all you are,” he said in an interview with Global News. Lépine said that the charter’s proposal for religious neutrality and secularism is simply another name for non-religious values that would be imposed by a few on everyone. Such a move would not be respectful nor democratic, he said.  “Normally if you talk about a charter, it’s about a charter of rights that gives space to different belief systems, so in that sense I don’t see this as a charter, it’s more of a credo,” he said to CBC News.

Unquote.

Unquestionably this also means no Christmas Trees, no Easter Bunny, no dreidels or menorahs, no crosses. The symbols don't hurt anybody, regardless of how much politicians think they do. Religious freedom is one of the main basses that Canada and Quebec was founded on. Being able to come here and be publicly Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Islamic, Buddhist, etc. is one of the biggest freedoms in. The Quebec government people who argue "Separation of Church and State" clearly either don't understand the question, or don't understand what separates church from state. The STATE (meaning the government) should not use the CHURCH (meaning religion) to justify any actions,any Church, it should not support one Church(religion),over another.
 Jefferson made it clear in his letter to the Danbury Congregation that the separation of church and state was to be that government would not establish a national religion or dictate to men how to worship God.Pauline Marois has a different definition of the seperation of church and state,a far different one.Government was never meant to be our master as in a ruthless monarchy or dictatorship. Instead, it was to be our servant.Now the "Religious Right",the religious right of the people, is just a straw-man to hide a REAL and very active movement - the very much anti-religious form of of the present minority government,of Quebec,that of Pauline Marois,"the Athiest Left!"

"Separation of Church and State" is just a myth.  But it's a myth that if allowed to continue will continue to daily chip away our religious freedoms.  We just cannot keep quiet about it any longer.  Christians must be taught on this subject now - before it becomes illegal to do even that!  All evil needs to flourish is for good men - to do (and say) nothing!    

When Adolph Hitler took power in Germany, he recognized immediately that the major threat to his tyrannical designs would come from the church(s),[the religions present in Germany]. If he could neutralize the voice of the church, he correctly reasoned, there would be no one else to stand in his way,there would be no opposition to his thoughts,statements, and policies,he reasoned that he must weaken the underpinings of the churchs(the religions), the religious beliefs of the people of Germany.

Consequently, he immediately cranked up the Nazi propaganda machine to develop slogans designed to silence the voice of the church, slogans which were then relentlessly hammered into the minds of gullible Germans of all religions, and their pastors, who meekly complied.

Hitler crafted two slogans in particular,and here they are, straight from the mind of Adolph Hitler:

"Politics do not belong in the Church."

"The Church must be separate from the State."

If they sound eerily familiar, it will only be because you instinctively recognize in these words the voice of tyranny and repression.And so today's church is still paying the price for this small-minded politician's petty and vengeful ability to use the power of the federal government to punish his adversaries.

“Do you know, where does this phrase ‘separation of church and state’ come from?”American
Tea Partier Glen Urquhart asked at a campaign event last April. “It was not in Jefferson’s letter to the
Danbury Baptists. … The exact phrase ‘separation of Church and State’ came out of Adolph Hitler’s mouth, that’s where it comes from. So the next time your liberal friends talk about the separation of Church and State ask them why they’re Nazis.”

Why is a cross, a Maguen David, or a head scarf a problem in society?Besides jewellery never annoyed anyone before. It doesn't force their beliefs on anyone, therefore no atheists or other believers from different faiths should force their non beliefs or different beliefs on anyone else. The European Court of Human Rights has found in favour of BA employee Nadia Eweida being able to wear and display a Christian symbol at work, is it not about time that Quebec accept that any person has the right to wear and display any religious symbol wherever they like?Clearly it infringes on civil liberties in a part of Canada that has already seen years of tension over accommodation for religious minorities, particularly those from immigrant communities."They're trying to remove religious freedoms. They're trying to impose rules on religious values," said Harvey Levine,
president of the Quebec branch of the Jewish organization B'nai Brith.Quebec would become the only
jurisdiction in North America to impose a sweeping ban on religious clothing for public employees including at schools, hospitals and courthouses, under a “Charter of Values”.It once was taken for granted that religious expression went hand-in-hand with the preservation of our society’s values and culture. Standing up for religions rights in Canada,and Quebec, these days  means upholding the rights of Muslims, Jews and Sikhs to wear specialized religious garb at work, in court, or in a voting booth.In Quebec the Commission des droits de la personne and des droits de la jeunesse sent out a reminder that individual rights, including the right to freedom of religion, is protected under the Quebec Charter of Rights,meaning such that Marois proposed Charter is in direct violation of an enshrined right of the people of Quebec.The right to freedom of religion is guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, adopted in 1982, as well as by the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — ratified by Canada in 1976 in consultation with the provinces.

Article 18 of the covenant reads: “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.”
Quebec's governing Parti Quebecois (PQ) is trailing in the polls and, with only a minority of seats in the legislature, needs support from other parties to pass bills, casting doubt on whether the charter will survive in its current form.Jason Kenney, a federal government minister, said he was “very concerned” by the proposed legislation and said the federal government will challenge any law in courts if they deem it unconstitutional.The federal Canadian government announced that it will seek the advice of the Department of Justice and then head to court if the proposal is deemed to violate fundamental rights. Lawyers say the law may infringe constitutional rights on freedom of religion and expression.Canada's Supreme Court gave an indication of its view of religious symbols
in a 2006 decision that allowed orthodox Sikh students to carry kirpans, traditional daggers, to school.The early reaction suggests the plan will not pass in the current legislature, in its present form, which leaves two likely outcomes: it will either be watered down for adoption now, or be kept intact for later use as an election issue when the Parti Quebecois seeks a majority government.Multiculturalism Minister Jason Kenney said Justice Department lawyers will be consulted and, if the plan is found to violate fundamental freedoms, “we will defend those rights vigorously.” Montreal mayoral candidates Denis Coderre and Marcel Cote were also
unsparing in their criticism.

The NDP and Liberals also denounced the idea. Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau did so during a visit to Montreal, where he was opening his party’s byelection office in one of Quebec’s most multiethnic ridings.Perhaps the most important reaction came from the Quebec legislature’s third party, which appears to hold the swing vote on the issue.

The Coalition Avenir Quebec called the PQ plan “far too radical” and demanded that it be scaled back to apply only to those public servants, like police and judges, in authority positions.To illustrate one of the party’s main criticisms of the plan, the CAQ critic at a news conference held up a tiny crucifix necklace next to a larger one.Who would go about measuring these crosses, she asked, before warning of an impending bureaucratic boondogle where the $1.9 million ad campaign is just the beginning.“Will this require a religious police?” said the Coalition’s Nathalie Roy.“This will be hell to apply.”

Fortunately the Parti Quebecquois government of Pauline Marois is in a minority, the proposed legislation can be voted on and rejected entirely from outside of her own party and of her dictates to her party.It also,for Pauline Marois, opens a door whereby an election can be forced, and a new legitimate government installed and a government of sanity once again restored to the province of Quebec.

Secret Squirrel Examines The Spanish Train Derail.

Secret Squirrel has turned his attention to the Spanish rail disaster, the Spanish derail, the worst train disaster in Spain's history.Well,the
most common reasons for a derailment are problems with the track or rail and equipment,then left are vehicle train collisions, and,of course,
sabotage. what do we see and know? To commence with we know that the Spain Train Crash Driver, Francisco Jose Garzon Amo, Ignored 3 Signals To Slow Down,from there it just gets worse.

Here at view an excerpt of a news article with respect to the Spanish derailment..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/02/spain-train-driver-ignored-signals_n_3696053.html

"MADRID -- The driver of a Spanish train that derailed, killing 79 people, ignored three warnings to reduce speed in the two minutes before the
train hurtled off the tracks on a treacherous curve, crash investigators said Friday.

A court statement said the driver was talking on the phone to a colleague when he received the first automatic warning in his cabin of a sharply reduced speed zone ahead. The statement said the warning was by means of an audible sound but provided no further detail.

Police forensic tests on the train's black box data recorders showed the last warning came just 250 meters (yards) before a dangerous curve where the accident occurred last week in Santiago de Compostela, Spain.

At that point, the train was going 121 mph (195 kph) when the speed limit was set at 50 mph (80 kph). Four seconds later the driver applied
emergency brakes.

By the time Francisco Jose Garzon Amo applied the brakes, the train was already beginning to lose contact with the rails, the statement said. The total derailment occurred at 111 mph (179 kph)."

Garzon has admitted in court that he was traveling too fast but could not explain to an investigating judge why he didn't slow down earlier.

Spain train crash: Video shows moment of deadly derailment.Video footage from a security camera showed the train, with 247 people on board, hurtling into a concrete wall at the side of the track as carriages jack-knifed and the engine overturned.

Here one can see the derailment as it occurs, via a video on the following site link...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-25/video-shows-moment-of-deadly-train-derailment-in-spain/4844594

The eight-carriage train came off the tracks, hit a wall and caught fire just outside the pilgrimage destination Santiago de Compostela in
northwestern Spain on Wednesday night. It was one of Europe's worst rail disasters.Around 94 people were injured, 35 of them, including four
children, in a serious condition, the deputy head of the regional government said.Seventy-nine people died in the derailment.Newspaper accounts cited witnesses as saying the driver, Francisco Jose Garzon, who had helped rescue victims, shouted into a phone: "I've derailed! What do I do?".

The 52-year-old had been a train driver for 30 years, said a spokeswoman for Renfe, the state train company.The disaster stirred memories of a train bombing in Madrid in 2004, carried out by Islamist militants, that killed 191 people, although officials do not suspect an attack this time.
There were 218 train accidents in Spain between 2008-2011, well below the EU average of 426 for the same period.

Indeed the nature of the event is utterly and completely horrific,and some have stated, and it is so, preventable, it need not have happened at all. Indeed the cause was, most definately and entirely due to,shall we say,human error. However there is much to learn from this disaster,much
improvement can be and should be made. Let us examine the rail event from all possible angles.

Firstly,let us take a positive viewpoint revealed by the event.Take the time to visit each link to view the photos,and videos as they will
certainly serve to enlighten you.

The image below shows the derail site from above, note the remarkably intact rails.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/26/article-2378756-1AFCF536000005DC-898_634x509.jpg

Here we see the aftermath,basically cleaned up, engine set still at the scene, but again note the remarkably intact condition of the rails.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/26/article-2378756-1B01E529000005DC-599_634x458.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/25/article-2377113-1AFE1DD6000005DC-786_634x418.jpg

Quite clearly we see that the Spanish system of rails themselves, are remarkably,and noteably, strong,solid,showing massive strength.Indeed they are a system of tracks to be the envy of many nation's rail systems.

Now we'll take a negative view of the event,in the hopes of further improving things.

So how did the derail itself occur? Well, we note the first car to loose the rails, was not the engine itself,nor was it the rail carriages themselves, rather it was the train set support car attached to the engine.We note that left the rails and was,in fact, the actual cause of the derail, but yes due to the excessive speed. The car is quite obviously,top heavy,the center of gravity of the car is such that the momentum,inertia,supplied by the excessive speed, caused the car to shift off the rails,and then take everything with it.Here, one improvement would be to perhaps add some weight to the car below it's main chassis,in an effort to correct this happening again, to,bring that support car more in to balance.But there's more to come,the net result of the derail,what occured, and why.


Now let's look at the condition of the rail cars...

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/26/article-2378756-1AFEAF36000005DC-186_634x423.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/26/article-2378756-1AFD8605000005DC-526_634x505.jpg

http://vipmedia.globalnews.ca/2013/07/spain-train-disaster_5.jpg?w=670&h=473&crop=1

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/image/756240/1374754556000/large16x9/768/432/spain-train-crash.jpg

http://dm62zza9c93u.cloudfront.net/styles/overlay_image_1280_or_1024/s3/000_ARP3598655.jpg?itok=iiiWI5Yb

http://darkroom.baltimoresun.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/REU-SPAIN-TRAIN-7-760x496.jpg

http://bdnpull.bangorpublishing.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/10005301_H10916407-600x399.jpg

http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/Wires/Online/2013-07-26/AP/Images/Spain%20Train%20%20Derailment.JPEG-0f7e3.jpg

We note frail,weak construction.We note, utterly gutted interiors, we note there are no seats in the interiors.no seats. Yes, the seats all came
dislodged from their mountings, and crashed about the carriages, with the passengers,in to the passengers,causing most definatly the massive
casualties and deaths involved. Seats that came loose, off the mountings.Who bult the train carriages? Indeed the condition of the seats, as in not being in their mountings, does most clearly indicate frail,weak construction and general lack of any kind of solidity, and a lack of train carriage,design,engineering,construction and quite clearly the use of weak inadequate materials in the construction of any kind, and indeed high speed, train carriages.

Could the derail have been prevented? Most certainly, there were warnings of excessive speed, clearly the driver who was well aware of the route,did not function properly, was travelling at excessive speed,quite clearly yes. Could things be improved further? Indeed yes, progression to the installation of automatic braking system for the rail system, also it would not hurt to also have huge speed signs similar to those found on highways.But it will not prevent a future derail on the lines due to other causes, and also when and should these derails occur in future the casualties will be equally and possibly greater yet even, due to the improper rail carriage construction techniques prevalent and practised in the Spanish rail system of today.There, in Spain, with the weak and improperly constructed train carriages, there are massive train rail derail,and collision, casualties waiting,waiting,waiting, to once again occur.

Secret Squirrel On The Removal Of Wrestling As An Olympic Sport.

Secret Squirrel finds, as do you, that the IOC, the International Olympic Committee,has REMOVED wrestling, as an Olympic sport.In what's already been deemed a regrettable decision, and an unnecessary one at that, the IOC has opted to remove wrestling from the 2020 Olympics.WRESTLING, a sport which for every and all reasons should be forever enshrined,guarenteed and held in the most high regard as an OLYPMIC sport,wrestling the SECOND Olympic sport, added after running.....imagine that, remove WRESTLING from the Olympics as a
sport........ridiculous,idiot,retarded,such are the words to describe the decision and hence also the IOC itself..

The news came down from IOC headquarters in Switzerland early Tuesday and is certainly a surprise. Wrestling is among the oldest sports known to man. It's mentioned in the Bible. It has connections to the ancient games, centuries ago held in Greece. But it's on its way out, at least for 2020, barring a miracle.That's right,WRESTLING.I just can't see any reason why the IOC decided to remove wrestling from 2020 Games. Wrestling is a popular sport.Wrestling, imagine, wrestling, the second ORIGINAL Olympic sport, right up to the present day no less, all those years, all those Olympics, for well over 2700 years, imagine.Why, and how wrestling has been removed by the IOC one cannot really comprehend nor imagine. Consider now, the joke sports of
golf,table tennis,badminton,canoeing.The IOC considers these magnificent and important sports of man and humanity, but not it seems, wrestling.That's right, wrestling.Wrestling which,right behind running was the second OLYMPIC ORIGINAL sport.
Right there from the very beginnings, there it was,and is, a sport THAT GREAT, a sport of THAT IMPORT........Table tennis only originated as a sport, in Britain, in 1880,thereabouts,roundabouts,badminton in the
1700's by the British army, in India,golf in the 1400's in Scotland.......the origin of canoeing as a recreation and sport is often attributed to Scottish explorer John MacGregor (1825–1892,note wrestling from the beginnings of the Olympics,like 2700 years ago.Caneoing began with the 1936 Hitler Olympics,Berlin.Badminton since 1992,table tennis
since 1988,golf in 1900 and 1904 only, to appear 2016 and 2020...the IOC is not sparing us their idiocy.
Consider now that the Olympic Games began over 2,700 years ago in Olympia, in southwest Greece.The earliest myths regarding the origin of the games are recounted by the Greek historian, Pausanias,and others who have differing versions, but just as the IOC doesn't like wrestling, I don't like the other Olympic origin tales,so I'm going with this version. According to the story, the dactyl Herakles (not to be confused with the son of Zeus) and four of his brothers, Paeonaeus, Epimedes, Iasius and Idas, raced at Olympia to entertain the newborn Zeus. He crowned the victor with an olive tree wreath, (which thus became a peace symbol) which also explains the four year interval, bringing the games around every fifth year (counting inclusively).The other Olympian gods (so named because they lived permanently on Mount Olympus), would also engage in wrestling, jumping and running contests.The Olympic Games,the Olympia, the Olympics, were a series of athletic competitions among representatives of city-states of Ancient Greece. They were held in honor of Zeus, and the Greeks gave them a mythological origin.
Historical records indicate that they began in 776 BC in Olympia. They continued to be celebrated when Greece came under Roman rule, until the emperor Theodosius I suppressed them in 394 AD as part of the campaign to impose Christianity as the state religion of Rome. The games were usually held every four years, or olympiad, which became a unit of time in historical chronologies. During the celebration of the games, an Olympic Truce was enacted so that athletes could travel from their countries to the games in safety. The prizes for the victors were wreaths of laurel leaves. The games became a political tool used by city-states to assert dominance over their rivals. Politicians would announce political alliances at the games, and in times of war, priests would offer sacrifices to the gods for victory.At first, the Olympic Games lasted only one day, but eventually grew to five days. The Olympic Games originally contained one event: the stadion (or "stade") race, a short sprint measuring between 180 and 240 metres (590 and 790
ft), or the length of the stadium. The length of the race is uncertain, since tracks found at archeological sites, as well as literary evidence, provide conflicting measurements. Runners had to pass five stakes that divided the lanes: one stake at the start, another at the finish, and three stakes in between.
The diaulos, or two-stade race, was introduced in 724 BC, during the 14th Olympic games. The race was a single lap of the stadium, approximately 400 metres (1,300 ft), and scholars debate whether or not the runners had individual "turning" posts for the return leg of the race, or whether all the runners approached a common post, turned, and
then raced back to the starting line.

A third foot race, the dolichos, was introduced in 720 BC. Accounts of the race present conflicting evidence as to the length of the dolichos; however, the length of the race was 18–24 laps, or about three miles (5 km). The runners would begin and end their event in the stadium proper, but the race course would wind its way through the Olympic grounds. The course often would flank important shrines and statues in the sanctuary, passing by the Nike statue by the temple of Zeus before returning to the stadium.

The last running event added to the Olympic program was the hoplitodromos, or "Hoplite race", introduced in 520 BC and traditionally run as the last race of the Olympic Games. The runners would run either a single or double diaulos (approximately 400 or 800 yards) in full or partial armour, carrying a shield and additionally equipped either with
greaves or a helmet. The course they used for these runs were made out of clay, with sand over the clay.

Over the years, more events were added: boxing (pygme/pygmachia), wrestling (pale) in 708 BC, and pankration, a fighting competition combining both elements. Wrestling was also the final decisive event in the ancient pentathlon.

 Boxing became increasingly brutal over the centuries. Initially, soft leather covered their fingers, but eventually, hard leather with metal sometimes was used. The fights had no rest periods and no rules against hitting a man while he was down. Bouts continued until one man either surrendered or died- however, killing an opponent wasn't a good thing, as the dead boxer was automatically declared the winner.

Other events include chariot racing, as well as a pentathlon, consisting of wrestling, stadion, long jump, javelin throw, and discus throw (the latter three were not separate events).In the chariot racing event, it was not the rider, but the owner of the chariot and team who was considered to be the competitor, so one owner could win more than one of the top spots.Contested in the first modern Olympics in 1896 and part of the ancient Games in Olympia, wrestling will now join seven other candidate sports battling for one spot in a revamped programme.Wrestling joins
baseball and softball, making a joint bid, martial arts karate and wushu, rollersports, wakeboarding, squash and sports climbing as candidates for the one open spot.Russian wrestling federation chief Mikhail Mamiashvili was shocked by the decision but was confident his sport would remain in the Games.

"I'm absolutely convinced this ancient sport will retain its status," Mamiashvili, who won an Olympic gold medal in 1988, told Reuters. The International Olympic Committee is dropping wrestling from competition after the 2016 Games in Rio de Janeiro, the result of some elaborate secret ballot it holds every so often to determine its 25 "core sports."

In part because golf and rugby are coming to the Olympics, something had to go. This time it was wrestling, apparently edged out by the modern pentathlon for survival.As such, both freestyle (somewhat similar to what you see in American high schools and colleges) and Greco Roman, each of which dated back to the 1896 Games in Greece, will soon be history. Wrestling can try to get back in, but the odds are long.

It's golf,table tennis,badminton,canoeing that should never have been granted access in the first place.Forget arguing the various strengths and weaknesses of each sport. That's often a cultural opinion. This is a global event and tastes vary. In the United States, badminton is considered a joke, something played at backyard barbeques, even occasionally while sober. In the overcrowded cities of third-world countries, however, it's a way to play tennis – basically street tennis for the non-wealthy. They don't have a lot of All-Lawn Tennis Clubs in Malaysia. Millions take badminton seriously and consider watching it at the highest level a sight to behold.And that's part of why badminton is a fine Olympic sport.Badminton also plays to another Olympic strength – winning the gold medal is a huge deal to those athletes, the pinnacle for most. So is winning a gold medal in modern pentathlon. Same for wrestling.
That's not at all the case for golf, where a gold medal isn't a green jacket. However, it could still feature in 2020 should the IOC include it as an additional sport when it meets in Buenos Aires in September. Wrestling will compete with baseball/softball, roller sports, rock climbing, squash, wakeboarding and wushu, a Chinese martial art, for the remaining place, with each presenting their case for inclusion to the executive board in May.The 25 core sports the IOC guards............The 25 sports are: athletics, rowing, badminton, basketball, boxing, canoeing, cycling, equestrian, fencing, football, gymnastics, weightlifting, handball, hockey, judo, aquatics, modern pentathlon, taekwondo, tennis, table tennis, shooting, archery, triathlon, sailing and volleyball.What's wrong with this list.........well..................badminton, how utterly ridiculous as a sport........canoeing...........oh please there's just no sparing us is there........table tennis...............the favorite sport of mental patients
in mental institutions without a doubt. Then there's also golf, which they have added as a sport in Rio and there for will be in the 202 Olympics as well.....golf, you know, where these lads take hours for a few of them to hit a tiny white ball around the course,and see how many can (and they do), land the ball BEHIND the golf hole, and have it bounce up and backwards and land, lo and behold, in the cup.Golf will be an Olympic sport in 2016. Ridiculous.

Golf. How it came to be that it's worthy/necessary for Olympic inclusion is typically hilarious/nonsensical.So they want to remove one of the original sports of the Olympics in favor of..........badminton,table tennis,canoeing,golf.........how utterly and completely..idiotic...........retarded...........weak minded.........chaotic..........confused...........and..................quite plainly and utterly...................................lacking in intelligence, but then the IOC has rarely been noted for being much more than that in the first place. It has been said that one can talk to the IOC but it is a body compeletly
devoid of reasoning abilities.But what we will see,now, is many nations, supporting the retention of wrestling,contrary to the IOC,and the IOC will see and be made to understand, that the OLYMPICS is and are those
nations, the nations of the world, THEY are the OLYMPICS, and NOT the IOC.Why can’t IOC just add another sport and keep wrestling, you ask? Because the organization values exclusivity and clubbiness and self-importance. There are 26 sports now. Would it hurt anyone or compromise the Olympics or be a huge economic burden to have 27 sports on the summer program? No.

Instead, wrestling — quite possibly the world’s oldest sport, a sport with an Olympic tradition going back to ancient times — gets the boot. Going into this executive board vote, modern pentathlon, the eccentric sport that combines swimming, fencing, running, equestrian and shooting, seemed most at risk. But political connections may save modern pentathlon.Why should not political connections save wrestling.Why should not ALL the nations who support wrestling save wrestling? Why should NOT sports such as table tennis,badminton, canoeing,and the utterly and completely idiot golf not even yet ALL go out in it's place? Such is the IOC, a joke, a really bad joke, a collection of ridiculous clowns all proceeding from bad to worse in their decisions with respect to the Olympics.

Of the decision,most have echoed these comments.....“I can’t imagine an Olympic games without wrestling,” says Penn State wrestling coach Cael Sanderson, who won four national championships at Iowa State and an Olympic gold medal in 2004. “That’s not an option. We have time here to show the IOC they made the wrong decision. It’s up to us and the
Iranians and Russians and everyone else to help them know this.”This includes the Japanese,Australian,British,French
German,Turkish,Arab nations etc etc etc..........imagine, THE NATIONS which make up the Olympics, don't support the
decision, and DEMAND it's reversal...................and the IOC should recant,repent,apologize AND place wrestling back where it belongs.If they want to remove something, let them remove something idiot,such as golf,table tennis,badminton and or canoeing.The IOC is about to learn that the nations of the world prefer to eat bread,the bread of wrestling, not the bitter cake of the removal of wrestling as an olympic sport.

Secret Squirrel Comments On Paying Off America's National Debt In Coin.

 It has come to Secret Squirrel's attention, that there has been a rather intriguing and interesting solution proposed to solving the great American debt crisis.Indeed it has been revealed, that there is another course of action, other than simply printing up Treasury Certificates for a required sum, presenting those to the Treasury Department, which takes said stated certificates, places them away, and then prints up and provides the stated sum the certificates are for, in short an
i.o.u. to oneself,one's own nation, which,never gets paid off,really in point of fact.
A legal loophole allows the U.S. Treasury to mint platinum coins in whatever denomination it chooses - even $1 trillion.Speaking to the BBC's Today
program, Mr Roche, founder of Orcam Financial Group and blogger at Pragmatic Capitalism, said the idea was being taken "somewhat seriously" in Washington."I know it’s been spoken about at the White House and a number of prominent people, including congressman, are talking about it," he said.
Mr Roche said the idea was an "accounting gimmick", but noted it was just "one really silly idea being used to fight another silly idea".

"The idea of the US willingly defaulting on debt is beyond crazy," he said."We started kicking the idea around a year ago and it was really a joke and the fact it’s become something sort of serious, well it’s a sad state of affairs that it’s become so dysfunctional in Congress that this is something we’re having to resort to."

Writing in his New York Times blog, economist Paul Krugman, said that while he did not expect the Treasury to go ahead with this "gimmick", there could be a case for it."This is all a gimmick — but since the debt ceiling itself is crazy, allowing Congress to tell the president to spend money then tell him that he can’t raise the money he’s supposed to spend, there’s a pretty good case for using whatever gimmicks come to hand," he said.

To mint or not to mint,that is question,will they mint or won't they mint is another question.U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has the authority to mint platinum coins in the denomination of his choosing, and experts have said the
idea is being taken seriously in Washington.Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner (left with President Obama in Oct. 2010) could mint a $1 trillion coin,said to be pondered to be an actual 1 ounce Platinum coin,which would in actual fact be valued in
it's metal content at about $1,600 thereabout roundabouts. And, of course, intrinsicly valued at it's stamped value of 1 Trillion Dollars. We won't consider here that in ancient times, a coin's value was appraised upwards if and due to a very
fine etched stamping or whatever was done to manufacture it.A White House petition advocating for the coin has garnered more than 5,000 supporters.Minting such high-value coins to pay the government's bills would allow President Obama to
sidestep a showdown with Republicans over the federal debt ceiling.The proposal would involve the Treasury minting the coin and depositing it into its own account at the Federal Reserve, allowing the government to write down or cancel $1 trillion
of its $16.4 trillion debt.On the other hand, stamping say 17 or so would result in going past the zero debt level to a surplus!!The mind boggles here pondering yet greater numbers of these coins.Ever to poop a party, however,Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) said on Monday he will introduce a bill to prevent that maneuver.Walden, it turns out, has written legislation that would bar the executive branch from minting coins of any denomination. That would include the much-talked-about trillion dollar coin.Walden stated,“My wife and I have owned and operated a small business since 1986.

When it came time to pay the bills, we couldn’t just mint a coin to create more money out of thin air,” Walden said.Clearly there is much personal jealousy in his words,directed at the government of the people of America deligently trying to clear the national debt problem.BUT......take careful note, that by introducing legislation to ban such a maneuver, Walden is implicitly acknowledging that under current law, the trillion dollar coin is a perfectly legal and workable way to get
around the debt limit,and also as such, the actual entire national debt problem.Interesting an actual solution to America's national debt and there are politicians willing not to allow it,clearly these aren't lads to invite to your parties, nor to allow to use your toilet,by no means.So there you have it, a debt solution for all seasons, a debt solution for all the right reasons. However,you know and I know, politicians being what they are....they'll then spend all their time for the
next century arguing over what designs should be stamped on the coin.


Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP(Dunny On The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.

Secret Squirrel And The Weird Scenes Inside The Fat Farm

Secret Squirrel has discovered a great many uses for fat people, for their fat, and at the same time, Squirrel has discovered ways to get them thin again, something they should be wanting to do and become, and all the while they'll be making themselves useful to their society, to their fellow man, to their nation,and once thin, they'll cost society a lot less, and perhaps more importantly to them, they'll be able to get fat again, fat to the extent that they can once again enter in to Squirrel's Fat Farm System,where they will once again be recycled in to that system.....hence, they'll have become,useful to society and at the self same time, environmentally friendly.Consider now that there are actually many little known,hardly advertised,uses for the liposuction fat garnered from fat people.

Here consider that "Liposuction Fat Can Be Turned Into Stem Cells",so a  Study Says,
Using leftovers from liposuction patients, scientists have turned human fat into stem cells, a new study says.The new method is much more efficient than a previous practice that used skin cells, researchers say.Human fat is "an abundant natural resource and a renewable one," said Stanford University plastic surgeon Michael Longaker, whose liposuction patients donated the fat for the study.
Longaker envisions a future in which doctors will be able to use fat from a patient to grow, in a lab, new tissues and organs for that patient.
The reprogrammed cells, called induced pluripotent stem cells, or iPS cells, are capable of turning into most types of cells in the body.Scientists are keen to obtain these cells to study disease and, one day, use them to grow new tissue and replacement organs.Previously, researchers had shown that they could derive this type of stem cell from ordinary skin cells.But the fat technique is about twice as fast and 20 times more efficient, said Joseph Wu, the study's senior author.


Now there's Breast Augmentation Using Fat Injection and Liposuction - An Alternative to Traditional Breast Implants,New Advances in Fat Grafting for Cosmetic Surgery Allow San Diego Plastic Surgeon Dr. Steven Cohen to Perform Breast Augmentation through Fat Injection Under Local Anesthesia
The use of a patient’s fat, and ultimately their fat derived stem and regenerative cells as filler for cosmetic surgery such as breast reconstruction and augmentation, may present a healthier, safer option for breast enhancement in some women. The application of fat also has potential benefits for other areas of aesthetic plastic surgery like breast implant salvage, facial rejuvenation and body contour deformities.Using a new dialysis/filtration technology called PureGraft, a physician can clean and process the fat in a sterile environment without motorized methods. Once fat has been carefully removed by specialized liposuction, done carefully to preserve the stem and regenerative cells, PureGraft technology filters everything but the pure fat tissue.
Some plastic surgeons also use liposuction fat on a limited basis for other types of cosmetic procedures such as breast augmentation, face wrinkle filling, or lip injections; these are also known as fat transfer procedures. Good candidates for fat transfer injections are those with areas of the face or body that could be improved by being significantly filled out in volume. Due to the natural composition of human fat cells, some doctors prefer to use liposuction fat over synthetic injection fillers.

Also Blood Vessels Made From Liposuction Fat Stem Cells From Fat Used to Make Blood Vessels to Repair Damaged Hearts.

Your own fat,or the fat of others, can be used to fill in furrows, lips, acne scarring and hollowed out areas on the face. This procedure has the advantage of being very soft and natural appearing as well as the ability to permanently correct the area it is placed in. Fat is a “filling” substance that can be used in small volumes to fill in most depressions as long as the skin above it can stretch to accommodate it. For example, lips can be made fuller by this technique. This is a procedure done while you are awake using only local anesthesia. Fat is a perfect filler — it is soft and natural feeling by itself. There is no allergic reaction to it, since it comes from your own body. There is even a chance that it will become permanent in the new location!

The Fat Harvest and Transfer procedure takes approximately 1 1/2 hours, and is done under local anesthesia. Excess fat taken out can be frozen for up to 6 months. Injections of frozen fat take a 15 minute appointment.

Recall now a fat powered boat........Eco-boat powered by human fat attempts round the world speed record.
The fastest eco boat on the planet will attempted to break the round the world speed record using fuel made from human fat.

Record breaking attempt: Earthrace  attempted to circumnavigate the globe running 100 per cent biodiesel, and with a net zero carbon-footprint.
Earthrace is a 78 foot alternative fuel powered wave-piercing trimaran, it can carry 3,000 gallons of fuel, and weighs 23 tonnes when fully fuelled. Demonstrating further commitment to the cause, Bethune underwent liposuction and donated enough to produce 100ml of biofuel, while two other, larger volunteers also had the procedure, making a total of 10 litres of human fat.
This in turn produced seven litres of biofuel, which could help the boat travel about 15km.
Earthrace is fuelled on 100 per cent biodiesel and has a net zero carbon footprint.
Pete Bethune, the New Zealand skipper of Earthrace, believes the boat can help advance biodiesel as a genuinely viable alternative to petroleum diesel.

Also now recall how a Liposuction Doctor Used Fat from Patients to Power His Car.
It sounds like a great idea, actually: Take the excess body fat from liposuction patients and use it to power your car. That's what a Beverly Hills doctor figured, and he even bragged about it on his website LipoDiesel.com (now shut down). It even sounds like a California trend: Get thin and reduce America's dependence on foreign oil all at the same time!
So now Dr. Alan Bittner's clinic is closed, and liposuction patients have to get their fat sucked out somewhere else. So where, exactly, does all that excess body fat go from liposuction clinics? If you saw Fight Club, you might recall the main characters rendering the body fat into high explosives. I like the Lipodiesel idea better, because it puts the excess body fuel towards a more productive use.
Instead of shutting down this operation, the state of California should embrace it. Why not do a joint venture with McDonalds? "Eat a Big Mac. You'll get a smile, and your car goes another mile!"
Besides, a nation full of fat people could serve as a reserve oil supply. If the Arab nations stop shipping us barrels oil, we can just start tapping into the population to power our cars with liposuction fat. And if we run out of body fat to process into diesel fuel, we can always eat more, right? Eating more junk food might actually become patriotic: "Snarf down some burgers and fries for your nation's energy independence!" Talk about Freedom Fries, huh?

Don't laugh, because I'm not making this up, but the human body stores so much energy that the town of Helsingborg, Sweden, uses the heat from local crematoriums to generate about 10 percent of the heat used its homes. Technically speaking, it would be a very simple matter for crematoriums to power steam turbines that generate electricity.


Think about it:

* Biofuel from human fat cells can power cars, trucks, even power plants themselves
* Free Liposuction! Mass liposuction at a given weight for the entire population
* These "biological fuel stores" will be "sheared like sheep" at a given interval to keep energy supplies up
* "Fatties" will no longer be a negative term; the obese will be regarded as patriotic as they fuel our nation and become an essential part of our nation's infrastructure
* Obesity "Epidemic" coverage would disappear as people would be proud of their bulkier humankind
* Fast Food would be encouraged
* Clothes industry would expand, making dual sizes - full and empty
* Diet pyramid schemes would disappear overnight

Now, If one weighed about 200lbs. It would only take about 4 months to get  up to 300. If they sucked out a third of the body fat at 300 pounds, he could be back at 200 in about the same time. Considering the fact that  body fat would be used for energy, it seems like a great trade-off.
Besides, with that kind of energy return, who wouldn't want the U.S. government to invest in such a bold plan,what of the U.K. government,would they realize the sense and sensibility in such a plan as I propose,or would they cover and retreat to their ink and incapability?

After all, America IS the land of opportunity,why then not too the U.K.?

Now how to do it,concentrate large numbers of fat people in one place, a fat camp, using abandoned refurbed British nut houses and in America, abandoned US prisons.Imagine what I,errr we, could offer An All-Inclusive Fat Farm Summer Package for example, and for the more burgeoise of Fat Men, year round stays possible.Now we offer an attractive all-inclusive package to fat camp this summer. We can even yet charge them,say just $3,000 per person, for four wonderful weeks in serene paradise, while they focus on improving their body,by liposuction. We'll let them know that their packages are not your typical hamster wheel fat farms,where the fatties work treadmills turning electrical energy generators, no siree. If you want to loose a few pounds this camp is all about packing on as much extra lard as possible,and then having it liposuctioned off,for free.The Fat Farm's motto.........?"Know Fat! Know Good!Now Fat!Now Good!No Fat! No Good! The package includes a money-back guarantee.

After a complimentary welcome party and a twelve course "getting to know each other" meal, you will be assigned a personal chef/waiter/maid/masseuse. These sexy boys/girls,dependent on your inclination,in America we can even yet throw in some learning Senatorial interns.
Instead of canoeing or playing volleyball, you'll be lounging in front of a wide screen TV, eating all the buffalo wings, buttered popcorn, enchiladas, and guacamole you can handle. All-Inclusive means unlimited beverages, so feel free to order a tub of double thick chocolate milkshakes or a barrel of Margaritas.

While most places offer an arts and crafts tent,ours stocks a dessert room,a free buffet,all you really can eat. No need to make an appointment, just stop by and stuff your face whenever you feel like it. If you have a craving for chocolate mousse topped with double-stuffed Mallows at four o'clock in the morning, don't worry, the dessert room will be there for you.

If you do feel like exercising, lumber on over to the Olympic-sized swimming pool. The pool is refilled each day with a different tasty treat. Some days you'll be doing laps through butterscotch pudding, and other days you'll be in dog paddle heaven, swimming through lemon meringue.

 The counselors are there to help; they want you to reach your full potential and be as huge as you can be,we will even yet use the french method of feeding you, just as they feed geese and ducks they fatten for pate de fois gras, of which you will also be happily supplied with free a la carte,buffet at no charge what so ever,force feeding is always an option.

During your stay you will be treated to a series of motivational speakers, each telling their personal body stretching story. These stories of drive and determination will make you go for the gold, or at least for another platter of extra cheesy lasagna.
Here we have an interesting video of a typical dining room scene, they will be shown this and told it could be you...........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXH_12QWWg8

And they will be told that early and frequent early liposuction prevents this from happening.......
Of course, if the fat people just won't come around to being made useful members of society,and certainly useful they have proven to be by the many modern uses of liposuction, well, then perhaps we'll just have to construct railways to the places, and simply........round'em up.

Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP,(Dunny On The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.

Secret Squirrel Says,In The 60's It Was Flower Power, Consider Now....FAT POWER!!

If you have ever been curious about how much power can be generated while running on a treadmill, you will now easily find out. Power is defined as the rate at which you burn energy. As long as you know how much energy you burn in a given amount of time--something most modern treadmills can estimate for you--you can calculate your average power output during your workout. The calculation will require a few steps and unit conversions, but is relatively simple overall.

Firstly set up your treadmill to count the calories you burn during your workout. Usually, you will be asked to enter your age, height and weight to enhance the accuracy of the calorie counter. Consult your treadmill's manual for detailed instructions on how to do this.

Now complete the workout for which you want to calculate your power output. For example, consider a half-hour workout during which you burn 800 calories.

Next convert the calories to joules, the scientific unit of energy that will be required to calculate power in watts. Keep in mind that the capitalized "Calories" displayed on your treadmill--and on the nutrition labels of foods for that matter--are actually kilocalories. There are 4,186 joules in a kilocalorie, so the calculation to convert 800 kilocalories to joules would look like this:

800 kilocalories x 4186 joules / kilocalorie = 3,348,800 joules

Calculate your power output by dividing the energy you burned by the amount of time, in seconds, it took you to burn it. There are 1800 seconds in your half-hour workout, so:3,348,800 joules / 1800 seconds = 1860.4 joules per second = 1860.4 watts.Your average power output during your half-hour workout was 1860.4 watts, or 1860.4 joules per second.

Now Convert watts to horsepower, if you like, by dividing the wattage by 745.8, the number of watts in a horsepower. For example:1860.4 watts / (745.8 watts per horsepower) = 2.5 horsepower

Pretty good isn't that. Imagine if the fatman was converted to farmwork to pull a plow, he would be only really asked to do the work of either a one horse plow, or at worst case sceneario, a two horse team........conceiveably they,the fat people,the obese,the lards or whatever you would,could and do call them, could be employed on farms as a much cheaper alternative to a tractor,Mennonites,The Amish, The Pennsylvania Dutch could be rented these lards to apply them to plowing the fields by a completely acceptable, non mechanical means of plowing.........in exchange for room and board...........and...............food.

But there's more to things than that, on said treadmill each fatman could have their treadmill hooked such as to power an electrical generator and so contribute to the electrical Grid,creating electrical energy,electricity.

A large amount of fatties in a local gym scenario could provide a vast amount of electrical generated energy to contribute to the local power grids a specific workout times.A specific comic strip,Dilbert mentioned something in the scenario of.....

"Scientists will eventually stop flailing around with solar power and focus their efforts on harnessing the only truly unlimited source of energy on the planet: stupidity. I predict that energy companies will place huge hamster wheels outside of convenience stores and offer free lottery tickets to people who spend five minutes running in them. The hamster wheels will be connected to power generators.
        - The Dilbert Future "

Well they're somewhat in the ball park as to a working idea, just their idea of using lottery tickets to attract those to turn the hamster wheel treadmills.........rather t'is better to use the fatman, nicht whar.......indeed even yet to legislate that those above a certain BMI must report to local hamsterwheel or treadmill fat generating stations at specific times of the day, the time and time on a
treadmill determined by specific BMI mass being at a certain point above normal levels.Indeed local Health Centers could be employed as such for their treadmiils, everybody else continuing to exercise as normal on other apparatus at their leisure(they are also referred to as leisure centers as so would most definitly be in that regard.),but the local certers would become readily online energy adding
stations to a local power grid, making fat people useful members of society.
I realized there was a great use and need for fat people,in modern society, uses such that they would be employed properly, without actually abusing them, helping them,as it were?Yes, indeed, and this is an idea that occurred to me as I visited the local "fat" farm, the exercise,den of iniquity, at least from the point of view of the fat, which was strangely visited only by the thin,the lean, the slim, who
wished to stay so. Consider now, a power plant with water wheels and the people run in them like hamsters---> benefits= loss of weight and power saving, people dont get mad...pay them to loose weight whilst adding energy to the world.these people them supplying America with free energy. How much energy? A lot of free energy! There are 3,500 calories in 1 pound of bodyweight. An average obese man weighing at a modest 300lbs. will contain 1,050,000 calories. Since there are 14,644 Joules in 3500 calories, a 300lbs person can provide over 4,393,200 Joules(4,393.2 KJ) of pure energy. One kilo-joule per second equates to one kilo-watt. The average U.S. household uses one kilo-watt of energy every second. Therefore, 4,393.2 KJ/60 seconds amounts to over 73.22 minutes of power for the average U.S. household. So that fat guy you see eating a sandwich at work can potentially power your whole house for over an hour.HEALTH and energy chiefs need to consider Squirrel's plan to make fat people power turbines by forcing them to run in giant hamster wheels,turning suitable electrical generators, thus contributing to any particular city's power grid!!
Now in Denmark, ponder this........Danish Hotel Pays Its Guests to Generate Electricity on Exercise Bikes
Just 15 minutes of cycling can produce 10 watt-hours of electricity, and earn you a free meal.Bored guests at a certain Crowne Plaza hotel can now skip the pricey mini-bar and hop on an exercise bike, generate some electricity, and earn some meal vouchers. The hotel in Copenhagen started the free meal idea as a way to boost guests' fitness and shrink their carbon footprint, according to the BBC.
The bikes are hooked up to generators that require guests of average fitness to pedal for about 15 minutes to create 10 watt-hours of electricity. iPhones attached to the handlebars display the amount of power being generated.

Hitting the 15-minute mark earns lucky exercisers a $36 meal voucher, and that's presumably on a repeatable reward system.Now what about making tha manditory for Fatties, yes, indeed, making them work to generate electricity, making them literally pimp themselves, to work for food they actually earn whilst generating energy for elecricty to be added to the naytion's power grid! This can be adapted to the Helath Center Eergy Generating Sections, such that the Fat People so "employed" to generate electricity, will also have to generate electricity to EARN their keep, to pay for their food at mealtime.A capital idea eh whot! Don't feel sorry for them, no...consider the famous words........“Inside some of us is a thin person struggling to get out, but they can usually be sedated with a few pieces of
chocolate cake.”
- Anonymous

Yes, an all round jolly good show! Fat people at work for society! Loosing weight contributing to society!Generating lost of free elecrictity! Whilst helping themsleves and loosing wieght! Yes, and the generating electricity so that they can eat,and KEEP they fat they so desire! Amazingly and interestingly and useful vicious cycle!
Remember the words of Mike Meyers FAT BASTARD.....
"I eat because I'm unhappy, and I'm unhappy because I eat. It's a vicious cycle."
That'll change to
"I generate electrcity because I'm fat, to loose weight, I generate electricity to gain money to eat, to keep me fat.It's a vicious cycle."
But..................society benefits.


Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP,(Dunny On The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.

Secret Squirrel Dances With Fat.

Secret Squirrel here enters the great quandry of the fat of the lands. The issue of these has arisen in
America, where the New York mayor has banned large soft drink sales as creating fat people, in that he believes that they have made Americans fat, particularly New Yorkers, so he wishes to, and has,banned these large soft drinks in efforts to prevent more American getting fat(some use the term obese,but
it's all the same really). Now, this has been further amplified by Michelle Obama who has decided that candy bars(chocos or whatever), are too large, and the large size ones are making American fat so she has been after the candy bar companies to eliminate the king size bars, the large size bars, and so produce only small sized bars. Well face it, they have seen the problem of fat people. Clearly there is a problem,take airline seats, fat people spill over in to the next seats, and so most require two seats, and the airlines responded by charging the obese for the two seats they take up.  Recently, MOST U.S. air carriers have announced new or newly-enforced policies that apply to what they discreetly call “passengers of size” or “passengers requiring extra space.” The terminology is polite, but the policies are, for the most part, straightforward. If, when you sit down in your airplane seat, you need a seatbelt extender (or a second one, in at least one case) or you can’t lower both armrests, you will be asked to pay for a second seat unless extra space is available somewhere onboard the aircraft.

There is still a problem, however,on emergency evacuation of an aircraft,imagine being behind such a fatty, and said fatty trying to squeeze through the wing window evacuation exit..........face it, they'll just never make it, nor will you.Some airlines have vetted some fat people, and simply deemed them too fat to fly,with a view towards the safety of said aircraft and passengers.Note also it costs considerably more to fly fat people about, they cost in terms of precious and expensive aviation fuels.

Now consider costs, at $42/passenger in a 137 seat SWA 737, for example, would be $5754 in jet fuel. At your $2.10/gal figure that's 2740 gallons or 18,358 pounds. That's enough fuel to fly a 737 for over 3½ hours including flying the weight of the airplane, bags, cargo, etc.This article reports that airlines average 49 revenue-passenger-miles per gallon of jet fuel. That's about 20 gallons per 1K miles/pax. Jet juel is about $2.10/gallon recently, so $42/pax/1K miles.If the average pax + bags weighs 200 lbs, that's 21 cents per pound/1K miles.

The last 20,000 pounds of payload requires an extra 5,000 pounds of fuel to maintain a constant range of 3,300 nautical miles. (In other words, starting from a 100,000 pound payload, we add 20,000 more pounds to get the marginal difference for the 120,000 pound maximum payload. The chart shows that the extra 20,000 pound payload adds 25,000 pounds to the gross weight, therefore an extra 5,000 pounds of fuel was required.)

So, if a passenger has a total weight of 200 pounds, including baggage, that would require 50 pounds of extra fuel. Roughly.Oh, by the way, my calculation neglected to mention that it takes a little under 100,000 pounds of fuel to fly the plane with no payload. So each passenger is also reponsible for their
share of that 100,000 pounds.If we convert the nautical miles to real miles we get about 3,800 miles. Jet fuel weighs 5.2 pounds per gallon, which I'l calculate at 5 pounds per gallon.

So it takes 10 gallons of fuel to transport 200 pounds 3,800 miles. It takes 1.3 gallons of fuel to transport 100 pounds 1,000 miles. By my calculation, it takes 1.664 ounces, more or less, to transport 1 pound of weight 1,000 miles. If we calculate the cost of jet fuel at $2.50 per gallon, then the cost to carry one pound 1,000 miles is 4.16 cents, at least on a 777.

I did a little research  regarding the fuel cost of flying to LAX (one way). Note that the cost will vary from aircraft type to type, so I have included the different equipment that AA flies (though you might be hard pressed to get on a 767-200 from DFW to LAX (you could from JFK or Boston) or an Airbus A300 to fly to LAX period). The assumptions are as follows:

*All flights are 185 minutes (this is pretty much true per Sabre, our reservations software). Note that some equipment are much faster, but the scheduled (block) times are the same. (777 is about 555MPH, and MD80 is about 490 MPH).
*The carried weight is 200 lbs (this would be a 170# person with a 30# carryon bag). Of course, you can scale up or down, but that is "typical".
*The data I used is to compute the benefit of taking off x#; and I assume sufficiently straight slope to apply in negative direction.
*Today, Jet fuel is $90.30 per barrel. At 30 gallons per BBL, that works out to $3.01/gallon.

(B=Boeing, A=Airbus, PAX = number of passengers, Max)

Code:

Equipment  Gallons      Cost          4oz              PAX   Everybody
B777        17.76        $53.47        6.7 cents       245    $16.38
B767-300    19.88        $59.82        7.5             225     16.83
B767-200    20.74        $62.43        7.8             167     13.03
B757TW*     21.86        $65.80        8.2             188     15.46
B757**      21.94        $66.03        8.3             188     15.52
A300        22.78        $68.56        8.6             268     22.97
B737-800    23.13        $69.61        8.7             148     12.88
MD80        32.84        $98.85       12.4             140     17.30


You'll note that it only costs $53.50 to fly you to LAX on a 777, whereas it costs nearly twice as much ($99) to fly you there on an MD80!!!

If a person went to the bathroom before boarding the flight, he or she might lose 4 oz (average). The 4 oz column is the savings of just one person going to the bathroom. If everyone went to the bathroom we could save up to $23 on that one flight (actually, it would be more if I added the crew). If everyone went to the bathroom before each flight, American would save $3.1 million annually, based upon 85% full planes. So, the next time you prepare to board a flight, ask yourself, "Can I go to the bathroom first?",at home, or in the terminal.It doesn't count to piss in the aircraft toilet,nor,as Gerard Depardieu does, on aircraft floors.  In short consider this, having airline fares calucated .

1) According to the space they take up, as in if they require two or three seats they must pay per seat occupied.

Also, consider this, have the pay an additional fee, bassed on their BMI, the body mass index,charging them more for their overwieght, this would be fair to all those passengers all round, the thinner,those there for carrying less weight, costing less aviation fuel, far less.conversely anorexics could fly for half price under Squirrel's new set of recommendations............What about the people who pay more in spite of their size? Who will step up to defend the rights of the small and the shrimpy? The pipsqueaks? The runts?The transportation industry is also a bastion of slim discrimination, with planes, trains and busses seemingly forgetting that e=mc2: it takes twice as much fuel to transport a 200-pound person than it does a 100-pound person, yet the smaller person must always pay the same ticket price.Changing how we pay for airfare could improve the lives of everyone who travels by air. Let me propose one big improvement. Instead of the flat per-seat fare (plus extra fees for checked baggage), charge each passenger for the total weight he/she contributes to the weight of the plane. That's body weight plus luggage weight.

Charge by the pound. UPS and FedEx do it, and so do professional moving companies. Airlines should do it too. Charging by the pound is not a crazy idea. In fact, if you want to see something crazy, just watch chaos at the TSA screening for a couple of minutes. Aside from being what moving companies do, there are plenty of other reasons to charge per passenger-pound.

Why would this improve the way we fly?

Airlines started charging for bags to save on fuel costs. All those bags weigh a lot, and they cost quite a bit to move. Therefore, it makes sense that they should try to put a price on weighing the plane down. It's expensive! But, does charging for bags really put a price on the right thing?

Take an example. A 230-pound person with a 10-pound bag (240 pounds) burns more fuel than a 120-pound person with 60-pounds of luggage (180 pounds). By the fuel-saving logic, the airlines should charge the big person more, but if you have flown lately, you know that the second person pays more. In other words, if the airlines are trying to price the weight of the plane, they're doing it wrong.

In my per-passenger-pound pricing scheme, the airline can still change the price over time to respond to demand and supply for flights. They could even incorporate the estimated weight of passengers who already booked their tickets on the flight. That's new and useful information that the airlines do not have under the current scheme.

Moreover, the airline that is first to adopt this strategy can push the pounds (and therefore, fuel costs) onto the other airlines. The 150-pound light packers are going to fly with the per-passenger-pound airline, but the 300-pound people with big bags will fly where their weight doesn't cost them. At least before the other airlines switch to per-passenger pound pricing, this means big cost savings for the first airline to switch. And, some of those savings can be passed onto the passengers in the form of lower fares.

Not everyone will benefit, but that's not all bad.

If you are overweight, I have little sympathy. A 300-pound person requires twice as much fuel to move from New York to Denver as a 150-pound person. On the basis of resources used, they should pay almost twice as much for the flight. Doesn't that make the status quo seem unfair?The bus trips, train tickets and flight coupons of small people always cost as much as those of larger people despite the fact that we requires less fuel and energy to transportsmaller mass almost always requires fewer materials than people who have a larger mass, but this is rarely accounted for. Like most small people, my entire life I have had to pay the same prices for goods and services as everyone else, even though my needs require less space, less time and fewer resources.Some airlines will charge you an extra fee if you’re over a certain weight, and it may surprise you to know that I agree with it. They will charge if you have extra heavy bags or one too many, and no one squawks about discrimination then. Weight is weight, and if you’re really, really heavy and want to fly, then you have to be prepared for more discomfort (and possibly costs) than others. It is not the norm, and it’s your own responsibility to let the airline know it might be an issue. It sucks, but there it is, so you deal. Seat prices are based on a constantly changing average amount of costs, and that includes passenger size.

Now let's be accomodating,let's consider a new policy, Dances With Fat. Let's create and design NEW airliners, airliners to accomodate fat people, in their own section of the airplane,away from everybody else.Indeed,yes, FAT CLASS. Seats specially large to accomodate various sizes of FAT people, and only fat people, in their own entirely isolated FAT SECTION,FAT CLASS........and they'll have their own emergency exit and chutes as well, albeit that will necessitate actual cargo doors in the sides of their speical isolated compartment.Adding this to all of the above, makes this safe for thin people,for slim people,the anorexics as well.

Some airlines, such as Ryan air, have pondered new ways to move many passengers cheaply about.Ryan has suggested it might try strap hanger passengers, the passengers would simply stand and hold on to straps for the entire flight. Well, consider, say, the ridiculous flying fat man, Gerard Depardieu,imagine him as a strap hanger. Imagine now the airplane encounteriung turbulence, why the lad would swing wildly about like a huge wrecking ball,smashing to pieces everyone round and about his pendulous circumference.If Ryan air would ever go to such a system, they would most definately have to ban such as those from the aircraft.Indeed the Air Ministry would have to step in an impose such a ban.They also envisaged passengers sitting not in seats, but on benchs either configured as airline seats presently are, or sideways as most military jets have. Why here there would be a problem as the fat man would not be contained as he would be buy an airline seat, and he would fall backwards or forwards crushing those in crash situations, or turbluence, or do the same to either side of him in the sideways seat scenario.

Mostly positively our exampled fat man, would be a dangerous threat to the safety of his fellow passengers would he be ever allowed to board such an aircraft. Kevin Smith, famous Hollywood director (he directed Clerks and Chasing Amy) is a very large man, and he was thrown off a Southwest flight from Oakland to Burbank because the crew decided he was too big.But why single out that unpleasantness to punish? Why would being seated next to a fat person worse than sitting next to someone who obviously has not bathed in several days, or hasn't brushed his teeth in what smells like a week? Or someone who talks constantly while you are trying to read or sleep?

I think that overweight people receive a special opprobrium, because we regard their obesity as a moral failing, evidence of lack of self-control. We're a culture that doesn't particularly like any visible sign of appetite.

On the buses the fatties are a problem as well.....they simply don't fit you know.There also there is a cost of transport problem, they cost much more to move their bulk about than do the thin people,most assuredly, but there are other costly problems developing.In the country that invented obesity along with their fat-saturated fast food, the US Federal Transit Authority proposes raising the assumed average weight per bus passenger from 68 kilos to 80 kilos which will result in fewer people being allowed on each city transit bus.

They say the average American bus rider is now tipping the scale at more than 90 kilos but current federal guidelines on average bus passenger weight are based on surveys in 1960-62 of what Americans weighed then.The transit authority, which regulates how much weight a bus can carry, also proposes adding an 12 centimetres of floor space per passenger “to acknowledge the expanding girth of the average passenger.”

One result is that bus design companies are also going to have to study how the problem could alter bus designs,which means costlier buses.They say that with such heavier people using the buses, one of their safety concerns is the increased possibility of the bus rolling over on sharp turns.

The price of gas in the US has seen increases in bus use – but very fat people also have problems fitting behind the car wheel so may opt for a bus instead.It’s not just passengers getting too fat. Fat bus drivers are also under scrutiny.In some parts of the UK, for example, overweight bus drivers have been asked to get fit amid fears they are so fat they will break their seats.

Some ideas to help solve the problem
    - instead of bike racks on the fronts of buses, have fat people cages
    - have a set of scales at the front of the bus, and your fare is weight dependant
    - have a set of scales at the front of the bus, and an alarm to go off, alarm goes off.too fat to board.Face it even horseback ride shave weight limits for the safety and protection of the horses, it's humane you know,even PETA deamnds it.

So far these fatties have been molly coddled.It is almost as if society is rewarding people for gluttony and self-indulgence and people who look after their health and weight have to pay for that. Hospitals are now required to purchase larger beds at an exorbitant cost to accommodate the obese, to the detriment of normal sized citizens who are missing out on health care because of the cost of providing health care to the obese. The attitude of the overweight is one where they believe they should have the comfortable seat when at a party, the food has to be in reaching distance of them, they think airlines should provide larger seats at the same price as economy, they think that others should get up and wait on them and fetch things for them because it’s too inconvenient for them to get off their butt, huge people have taken up more than one seat on boat rides to the detriment of other paying customers, and obese people on planes take up the seat space of the person next to them (who have paid the same price for their seat) and now are missing out on their own comfort and are required to accommodate the obese with no choice in the matter.


Now are there uses for fat people, uses such that they would be employed properly, without actually abusing them, helping them,as it were?Yes, indeed, and this is an idea that occured to me as I vistied the local "fat" farm, the exercise,den of iniquity, at least from the point of view of the fat, which was strangely visited only by the thin,the lean, the slim, who wished to stay so. Consider now, a power plant with water wheels and the people run in them like hamsters---> benefits= loss of weight and power saving (people dont get mad.... this is how satire works).pay them to loose weoight whilst adding energy to the world.these people them supplying America with free energy. How much energy? A lot of free energy! There are 3,500 calories in 1 pound of bodyweight. An average obese man weighing at a modest 300lbs. will contain 1,050,000 calories. Since there are 14,644 Joules in 3500 calories, a 300lbs person can provide over 4,393,200 Joules(4,393.2 KJ) of pure energy. One kilo-joule per second equates to one kilo-watt. The average U.S. household uses one kilo-watt of energy every second. Therefore, 4,393.2 KJ/60 seconds amounts to over 73.22 minutes of power for the average U.S. household. So that fat guy you see eating a sandwich at work can potentially power your whole house for over an hour.HEALTH and energy chiefs need to consider Squirrel's plan  to make fat people power turbines by forcing them to run in giant hamster wheels,turning suitable electrical generators, thus contributing to any particular city's power grid!!Fat people do contribute, in other ways though, to the economy as it were, providing jobs as it were.In the U.S, nearly 9.7 out of every 10 people are considered obese,who have never met a doughnut they’ve never liked.Traditionally, obesity has been a sign of wealth and power.Obesity, money, and power go hand in hand. If you have all three, you’re definitely living the American dream,that although obesity, and its catastrophic effects put a strain,for example, on the Health budget, this figure paled into insignificance when it was taken into account that the yearly consumption of delicious candy and choco Bars alone, generates  revenue for the sweet shop industry.

The Health sector, itself, benefits from the services of  members of staff employed specifically to operate on, and subsequently provide aftercare for, porkers who have undergone major stapling surgery,liposuctions and various other fat reducing surgeries.Companies like McDonalds and Burger King could not function without the gluttonous patronage of the weightily-challenged, and more  people in Britain eke out a living serving fast food to fat fools.Companies like McDonalds and Burger King could not function without the gluttonous patronage of the weightily-challenged, and more than 50,000 people in Britain eke out a living serving fast food to fat fools."These human circus tents are the mainstay of our economy. They are what makes nations great. Without them, the country would be a poorer, not to mention thinner, place. We should be proud of them and feed them whenever they look hungry - a bit like throwing a bun to an elephant at the zoo."

Obesity has become one of the number one causes of death in the United States. In the last 20 years alone there has been a dramatic increase. Nearly 64% of adults in the U.S. are either overweight or obese. This is just ridiculous,  one of the fattest countries in the world,yet the fat is not being taken advantage of quite sufficiently.

An obese Michigan man, was seen transporting a large volume of food across a busy Cloverdale street last week. It was unclear why he  would require additional food, since his bloated body already carried enough stored fat to easily sustain him for months,yet he persisted in buying and consuming more food, than using what he'd already stored up.clearly gluttony.

Scientists were shocked to discover that fat persons often eat more than thinner persons.
 Do large people eat more to support their massive bodies or does eating make you large. It's a puzzle."

But one thing that isn't a puzzle, the government(s),don't approve of fat and wish people to reduce their fat, their obesity.Well,they can't succeed in introducing and obesity prohibition, really, but they can ,for the good of society,and the rest of it, tax it.Yes, also intrdouce a FAT TAX, a FAT INCOME TAX, a surcharge on income tax, introduce a FAT TAX based on the BMI, the Body Mass Index, those being fatter than their recommended BMI, must pay a tax proportional to their actual in excess of BMI.Thus all of the rest of us, through the government taxing FAT,and thence employing and spending that tax for the good of society,in social services and whatever else,(in the case of America, that would be spent on wars directed at foreign lands), can thence be said to, finally, be living off the fat of the land.


Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP,(Dunny On The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.