Thursday, July 31, 2008
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
RE : PREVIOUS POST 18 YEAR OLD BOTTLED
You may be interested to learn that i have it on good authority that the reason why there are 51 staples in this person's head is because he needed neuro surgery because he received brain damage from this attack, not as the writer of the previous article states that the bottle attack caused this.
Still it is a pretty horrific attack on someone who merely became seperated from his friends on a night out.
Still it is a pretty horrific attack on someone who merely became seperated from his friends on a night out.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
18 YEAR OLD BOY BOTTLED IN MANCHESTER
THESE horrific injuries are the result of an unprovoked attack on an 18-year-old boy who needed more than 50 staples to his head after he was viciously beaten with a glass bottle.
Daniel Powell from Oldham, Greater Manchester, was set upon by a gang of thugs after he became separated from his friends on a night out.
It is then believed that the gang cruelly attacked the teenager - without any provocation - with the butt of a glass bottle.
Daniel suffered a fractured skull, bleeding to his brain and needed 51 staples to his head following surgery.
The severity of the teenager's injuries means he cannot provide the police with the accurate information they need to catch his attackers, as he barely remembers the incident.
The teenager needed 51 staples to his head
The 18-year-old victim cannot remember exactly what bar he was in or provide a description of his attackers.
Police believe he was in a bar on Yorkshire Street in Oldham when he was attacked, around 2.45am on Sunday July 20th.
Daniel does remember a woman, who police want to trace, giving him first aid after he collapsed.
Det Con Jed Stubbs, from Greater Manchester Police said: “The victim was enjoying a night out with his friends when he was brutally assaulted with a glass bottle.
Monday, July 28, 2008
Chinese Olympic Football Stadium is where China paraded "traitors"
One of Beijing's Olympic stadiums was used for mass sentencing rallies where handcuffed prisoners were paraded in front of jeering mobs before being executed, it emerged today.
Crowds cheered at the Beijing Workers' Stadium as "traitors" to the Chinese Government were humiliated before being removed and shot.
The 64,000 seat venue, which will host the football tournament for the Games, has been hailed as the pride of Beijing, along with several other spectacular arenas across the city.
The venue, which was China's national stadium before the "Bird's Nest" arena was among the stadiums used for rallies during China's Cultural Revolution of 1966 - 1976. The Shows which would last for up to an hour saw prisoners - who were often human rights prisoners - handcuffed , made to bow to officials and sometimes beaten. In 1970, human rights protester Yu Luoke, 27 , was paraded in front of a screaming mob at the Workers' Stadium and executed after leaving the venue.
A West Hampstead Teacher (London) Xia Ze, 52, whose cousin died in the Tiananmen Square massacre in June 1989, said"As a child I was made to watch sentencing rallies with my school. They were awful. I remember one man who was struggling was kicked by officials"
Saturday, July 26, 2008
2 English women try to open door on plane whilst in flight
BERLIN (AP) - Two drunken British women went on a rampage on a charter plane, hitting one flight attendant with a bottle of vodka and trying to open a cabin door as the aircraft was cruising over Austria at 10,000 meters (32,800 feet), police said Saturday.
The staff on the flight from Greece to England eventually
forced the women back to their seats and the pilot made an emergency in Frankfurt on Thursday, police told The Associated Press, confirming a statement they had issued on Friday.
The identities of the women, aged 26 and 27, were not released, but police said the 26-year-old may be charged with attempted assault and interfering with air traffic.
Both women were released, police said.
The rampage occurred when a flight attendant denied the women alcohol because they were visibly intoxicated, police said. The 26-year-old took a swipe at a cabin attendant with a bottle of vodka, then attempted to open a cabin door.
«Apparently the 26-year-old wanted to catch some fresh air,» the statement said, apparently attempting to make light of the altercation.
The two women were taken into custody by police at the Frankfurt airport and given a breathalyzer test. Both were legally intoxicated.
After an hour in Frankfurt, the flight continued on to Manchester, England.
The staff on the flight from Greece to England eventually
forced the women back to their seats and the pilot made an emergency in Frankfurt on Thursday, police told The Associated Press, confirming a statement they had issued on Friday.
The identities of the women, aged 26 and 27, were not released, but police said the 26-year-old may be charged with attempted assault and interfering with air traffic.
Both women were released, police said.
The rampage occurred when a flight attendant denied the women alcohol because they were visibly intoxicated, police said. The 26-year-old took a swipe at a cabin attendant with a bottle of vodka, then attempted to open a cabin door.
«Apparently the 26-year-old wanted to catch some fresh air,» the statement said, apparently attempting to make light of the altercation.
The two women were taken into custody by police at the Frankfurt airport and given a breathalyzer test. Both were legally intoxicated.
After an hour in Frankfurt, the flight continued on to Manchester, England.
The Biggest Foreign Aid Recipient is ....
Originally published 09:08 p.m., May 9, 2006, updated 12:00 a.m., May 10, 2006
Which country receives the most in total foreign aid from all donors? The official numbers show Iraq at the top with $3 to $18 billion in aid (depending on how you define "aid") and all the other recipient nations of the world at less than $3 billion per year. However, if you look at which nation benefits most from foreign subsidies, the U.S. would come out on top by a very wide margin.
Yes, I did just say that the U.S. is the world's largest recipient of foreign assistance. Other countries are not sending official government "aid" dollars to help the U.S. but are doing things that have the same effect. For instance, China provides the biggest single subsidy to the U.S.
Many experts argue the Chinese currency is 10 percent to 20 percent undervalued, which means the U.S. consumer is able to purchase Chinese-made goods at a lower price than if the currency traded at its true market value to the U.S. dollar. If an American can buy a Chinese-made product at Wal-Mart for an artificially low price, it means the American consumer has an increase in real income (he or she can buy more with the same income).
In 2005, the U.S. bought (imported) $243 billion worth of goods from China. If these goods were only 10 percent underpriced because of the artificially low Chinese currency, U.S. consumers received a subsidy of about $24 billion.
Other countries' consumers also received the Chinese subsidy to the extent they bought Chinese goods, but the U.S., as China's biggest customer, received the greatest subsidy. The Chinese underprice their currency because they are trying to increase exports to obtain U.S. dollars and other foreign currencies. In turn, China's government uses many of the dollars to buy U.S. government bonds to serve as the reserve for its banking system. If the Chinese had a more efficient banking and capital market structure, they would not need so many dollars.
For now, foreign ownership of U.S. government debt equals about 45 percent of that held by the public (not including U.S. government agencies). Of the little more than $2 trillion held by non-Americans, the Japanese hold about a third and the Chinese about 12 percent. If non-Americans did not buy much U.S. government debt, Americans would need to both save more and consume less to make up the deficit.
To the extent non-Americans are willing to invest in U.S. government debt and other U.S. financial instruments at less than normal market returns because they need a safe haven for their funds, they provide an implicit subsidy to American producers and consumers. Since it costs less for American businesses to borrow money because of the foreign investment, they can expand more rapidly and hire more workers. If American consumers can borrow at lower rates, they can buy bigger houses and more new cars.
There are various approaches to try measuring the size of the implicit foreign subsidy. At a minimum, it would be the difference between the normal rate of interest (approximately 3 percent plus inflation) and what foreign bond holders have been receiving in recent years, which is at least 1 percent to 2 percent below the expected normal rate.
Thus on the U.S. government debt alone, Americans have been receiving a subsidy from non-Americans in the range of $20 billion to $40 billion yearly. This does not count all the feedback effects from the higher investment in productive activities by foreigners in America because of currency flight.
Many commentators and politicians decry the size of the U.S. trade deficit and the level of foreign ownership of U.S. financial assets. Rather than bashing the Chinese, U.S. politicians should thank them for making Americans richer.
In fact, if the U.S. did not serve as safe haven for the world's capital, the world would be far more unstable, and the total global capital stock would be lower. The correct way to look at the situation is that U.S. citizens are getting paid by the rest of the world for providing stronger, more secure, and more transparent capital markets.
The correct "solution" for the problem is for the other nations to strengthen protection of property rights, reduce corruption, stop punishing capital accumulation through excessive taxation and regulation and improve their own capital markets. If this is done, the U.S. trade and capital imbalances automatically will gradually decline.
The IMF has just been given the task to work on trade and capital imbalances. It will be interesting to see if it focuses its energy on helping the capital-flight countries improve their economic policies (by lowering taxes and regulations and improving property-rights protection) or if it tries to force lower tax jurisdictions to adopt capital-destroying tax and regulatory policies.
In the meantime, the lesson is clear: Any economic jurisdiction can obtain "foreign aid," no matter how rich it is, just by providing the rule of law, secure property rights, low taxation and regulation of productive activities, and well-functioning capital markets.
Richard W. Rahn is director general of the Center for Global Economic Growth, a project of the FreedomWorks Foundation.
Which country receives the most in total foreign aid from all donors? The official numbers show Iraq at the top with $3 to $18 billion in aid (depending on how you define "aid") and all the other recipient nations of the world at less than $3 billion per year. However, if you look at which nation benefits most from foreign subsidies, the U.S. would come out on top by a very wide margin.
Yes, I did just say that the U.S. is the world's largest recipient of foreign assistance. Other countries are not sending official government "aid" dollars to help the U.S. but are doing things that have the same effect. For instance, China provides the biggest single subsidy to the U.S.
Many experts argue the Chinese currency is 10 percent to 20 percent undervalued, which means the U.S. consumer is able to purchase Chinese-made goods at a lower price than if the currency traded at its true market value to the U.S. dollar. If an American can buy a Chinese-made product at Wal-Mart for an artificially low price, it means the American consumer has an increase in real income (he or she can buy more with the same income).
In 2005, the U.S. bought (imported) $243 billion worth of goods from China. If these goods were only 10 percent underpriced because of the artificially low Chinese currency, U.S. consumers received a subsidy of about $24 billion.
Other countries' consumers also received the Chinese subsidy to the extent they bought Chinese goods, but the U.S., as China's biggest customer, received the greatest subsidy. The Chinese underprice their currency because they are trying to increase exports to obtain U.S. dollars and other foreign currencies. In turn, China's government uses many of the dollars to buy U.S. government bonds to serve as the reserve for its banking system. If the Chinese had a more efficient banking and capital market structure, they would not need so many dollars.
For now, foreign ownership of U.S. government debt equals about 45 percent of that held by the public (not including U.S. government agencies). Of the little more than $2 trillion held by non-Americans, the Japanese hold about a third and the Chinese about 12 percent. If non-Americans did not buy much U.S. government debt, Americans would need to both save more and consume less to make up the deficit.
To the extent non-Americans are willing to invest in U.S. government debt and other U.S. financial instruments at less than normal market returns because they need a safe haven for their funds, they provide an implicit subsidy to American producers and consumers. Since it costs less for American businesses to borrow money because of the foreign investment, they can expand more rapidly and hire more workers. If American consumers can borrow at lower rates, they can buy bigger houses and more new cars.
There are various approaches to try measuring the size of the implicit foreign subsidy. At a minimum, it would be the difference between the normal rate of interest (approximately 3 percent plus inflation) and what foreign bond holders have been receiving in recent years, which is at least 1 percent to 2 percent below the expected normal rate.
Thus on the U.S. government debt alone, Americans have been receiving a subsidy from non-Americans in the range of $20 billion to $40 billion yearly. This does not count all the feedback effects from the higher investment in productive activities by foreigners in America because of currency flight.
Many commentators and politicians decry the size of the U.S. trade deficit and the level of foreign ownership of U.S. financial assets. Rather than bashing the Chinese, U.S. politicians should thank them for making Americans richer.
In fact, if the U.S. did not serve as safe haven for the world's capital, the world would be far more unstable, and the total global capital stock would be lower. The correct way to look at the situation is that U.S. citizens are getting paid by the rest of the world for providing stronger, more secure, and more transparent capital markets.
The correct "solution" for the problem is for the other nations to strengthen protection of property rights, reduce corruption, stop punishing capital accumulation through excessive taxation and regulation and improve their own capital markets. If this is done, the U.S. trade and capital imbalances automatically will gradually decline.
The IMF has just been given the task to work on trade and capital imbalances. It will be interesting to see if it focuses its energy on helping the capital-flight countries improve their economic policies (by lowering taxes and regulations and improving property-rights protection) or if it tries to force lower tax jurisdictions to adopt capital-destroying tax and regulatory policies.
In the meantime, the lesson is clear: Any economic jurisdiction can obtain "foreign aid," no matter how rich it is, just by providing the rule of law, secure property rights, low taxation and regulation of productive activities, and well-functioning capital markets.
Richard W. Rahn is director general of the Center for Global Economic Growth, a project of the FreedomWorks Foundation.
Friday, July 25, 2008
PICTURES OF MOD AQUILA
Returning to the cold interiors of the block we were nosing around, it was a little sobering to discover a decontamination shower at the back of the building. Obviously for quick emergencies, such showers would’ve been lifesavers; and we’d find evidence of the sort of chemicals being used on the site in the next couple of rooms.
More photos can be seen by clicking this link:Simon Cornwell Photos Of MOD Aquila
The Threat of Pandemic - How will London Cope?
The House of Lords Intergovernmental Organisations Committee’s report on the threat posed by a pandemic acknowledges expert opinion that claims up to 75,000 people in the UK could die when the next pandemic hits, causing severe disruption to everything from medical and social services to travel and policing. The country’s busy capital could be one of the worst hit.
Brett Lovegrove, head of the Advisory Council for the International Security and National Resilience event, ISNR London, and former Head of Counter-Terrorism for the City of London Police, believes the impact on London could be more devastating than other areas of the UK. He said: “London would be particularly hard hit because the rate of mobility within the residential and business communities alike would spread the virus quite quickly, although it wouldn’t be long before the rest of the UK would feel the effects.
“Whilst government and non-government agencies are preparing early warning and surveillance systems abroad, much can be done in London in fast-time. It is still not too late to develop business continuity plans that embrace the fact that potentially a large part of company workforces may not be able to make it into work. Indeed, the infrastructure that transports the daily commute may not be working to capacity and this will require rapid thinking around fallback arrangements. If the threat of a major event such as a pandemic leading to loss of life does not focus the mind on solutions, very little else will.”
Brett Lovegrove, head of the Advisory Council for the International Security and National Resilience event, ISNR London, and former Head of Counter-Terrorism for the City of London Police, believes the impact on London could be more devastating than other areas of the UK. He said: “London would be particularly hard hit because the rate of mobility within the residential and business communities alike would spread the virus quite quickly, although it wouldn’t be long before the rest of the UK would feel the effects.
“Whilst government and non-government agencies are preparing early warning and surveillance systems abroad, much can be done in London in fast-time. It is still not too late to develop business continuity plans that embrace the fact that potentially a large part of company workforces may not be able to make it into work. Indeed, the infrastructure that transports the daily commute may not be working to capacity and this will require rapid thinking around fallback arrangements. If the threat of a major event such as a pandemic leading to loss of life does not focus the mind on solutions, very little else will.”
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Monday, July 21, 2008
RE: Previous blog (Rage)
I m not going to make sweeping accusations / statements here or anything but the person who attacked me on Sunday lives in the Chinbrook estate South London - i met another resident of the Chinbrook Estate recently and he was constantly looking for a fight - he nearly caused a mini riot one night - Enclosed in this blog are two maps of a river that ones straight through this estate - until recently there used to be a Top Secret Ministry of Defence Installation called Aquilla (in between Petts Wood and Chislehurst Train Station - it has now been cleverly dismantled and turned into a housing estate !!!!
Say for sake of argument this installation had been producing biochemical weapons for use in countries such as Iraq, would it be possible that some of the bi products leaked and managed to get in to the water table and maybe seaped through the limestone (Chislehurst Caves)and into the river?
And if you look at this map you can see the course of another river (The River Beck) which happens to go through Eden Park where there once used to be An Animal Testing Laboratory (yet again now built into a housing estate)- the housing estate has suffered regularly from flooding so presumably any effluent from the labs could again get into the water table etc etc - the labs themselves are still there (as 8 months ago - the are surrounded by CCTV and Alarmed fences and very large sirens - the question one has to pose were they trying to keep people out or keep something in?)
Say for sake of argument this installation had been producing biochemical weapons for use in countries such as Iraq, would it be possible that some of the bi products leaked and managed to get in to the water table and maybe seaped through the limestone (Chislehurst Caves)and into the river?
And if you look at this map you can see the course of another river (The River Beck) which happens to go through Eden Park where there once used to be An Animal Testing Laboratory (yet again now built into a housing estate)- the housing estate has suffered regularly from flooding so presumably any effluent from the labs could again get into the water table etc etc - the labs themselves are still there (as 8 months ago - the are surrounded by CCTV and Alarmed fences and very large sirens - the question one has to pose were they trying to keep people out or keep something in?)
HAS THE RAGE VIRUS STARTED TO REAR ITS UGLY HEAD IN THE UK?
Last week it was reported that 2 police officers were viciously attacked by 30 youths in the town of Croydon after asking one girl to pick up her litter.
On Saturday evening I was also attacked for no reason - fortunately I got away with a few scratches - all night long now where I live all you can hear is the constant police sirens - i live in a reasonably safe area but how long will it be before it is also over run?
On Saturday evening I was also attacked for no reason - fortunately I got away with a few scratches - all night long now where I live all you can hear is the constant police sirens - i live in a reasonably safe area but how long will it be before it is also over run?
Monday, July 07, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
