Consumer Homes.

Question:

The Silence Spoke Louder Than Words On CNN, Larry King just spoke to Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco. King noted that when he spoke to Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, Barbour told Bush not to come yet. Bush, apparently, said "Okey Doke." King then asked Blanco if she thinks Bush shouldn’t stay away from the area. She was gasping for words, as if Barbour’s request was a shock to her. It was painfully obvious that she was hurt and surprised that he was told to stay away. She then mustered up enough oxygen to say that it would be a huge morale boost if he at least did a flyover. Not as long as you’re a Democrat, Governor Blanco. As long as the neocons still like to make comparisons between the evil Bill Clinton and the moral George Bush, let’s put Clinton in this scenario. He’d be there as soon as a chopper could land on any high ground and would reach back to anyone reaching out to him. He’d have been there this morning. Bush wanted validation that his decision to steer clear of badness was a good one, and Barbour gave him that. Blanco wasn’t so charitable. When he finally does show up, it will be another goddamned stage show with hand-picked citizens who will be deemed decent enough for Bush to say "howdy" to. This man has absolutely zero compassion. Zero instinct. Zero ability to grasp the big picture. Zero capacity for human emotion. Randi Rhodes called this "My Pet Goat II." It’s a perfect metaphor. _____  From Hoffmania: http://www.hoffmania.com/blog/2005/08/the_silence_spo.html        Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access              >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

Response:

> The Silence Spoke Louder Than Words > On CNN, Larry King just spoke to Louisiana > Governor Kathleen Blanco. King noted that > when he spoke to Mississippi Governor Haley > Barbour, Barbour told Bush not to come yet.

(..to Mississippi, mind you). > Bush, apparently, said "Okey Doke." > King then asked Blanco if she thinks Bush > shouldn’t stay away from the area. She was > gasping for words, as if Barbour’s request > was a shock to her. It was painfully obvious > that she was hurt and surprised that he was > told to stay away.

He was not told to stay away from LA, nor was he specifically requested to come. Personally, I think Blanco and the Mayor of NO are doing just fine. She then mustered up > enough oxygen to say that it would be a huge > morale boost if he at least did a flyover.

Moral boost for whom ? Those who’s homes are flooded. The ‘people in the street’ could care less. > Not as long as you’re a Democrat, Governor > Blanco.

Who’s to say that he didn’t fly over. If he did, and announced it, you’d be bitching about THAT being a "grandstand play". Do you think he should come to N.O, wade in the water, and cuff a few looters ?

Response:

> The Silence Spoke Louder Than Words > As long as the neocons still like to make > comparisons between the evil Bill Clinton > and the moral George Bush, let’s put Clinton > in this scenario. He’d be there as soon as a > chopper could land on any high ground and > would reach back to anyone reaching out to > him. He’d have been there this morning.

Yeah Clinton never missed a photo-op.  President Bush will quietly go back to his office and beging calling up favors to help those people. If my house is flooded, I’d rather have that kind of help than a politico coming around to kiss my arse.

Response:

> Yeah Clinton never missed a photo-op.  President Bush will quietly go > back to his office and beging calling up favors to help those people. > If my house is flooded, I’d rather have that kind of help than a > politico coming around to kiss my arse.

bullshit, he’s calling up Halliburton and co to see how much more money they can rip off the taxpayers. And he’s calling his daddy to get some helyup. If he’d been at all concerned about the Gulf he woulda listend to the environmentalists about the wetlands and he woulda protected one of the most important ports in America. like the Dutch – but we, here in America don’t like in terms of 100 year plans and we don’t believe our scientists and we don’t care what happens tomorrow as long as we get a buck today. A decade ago, Dutch authorities started studying their options for dealing with not only sinking land, but rising seas, more powerful storms, and ever larger floods. Government engineers considered several strategies, including a plan to simply surrender large parts of the country to the sea. The most cost-effective plan was selected: strengthen the existing defenses and pumping stations, at a cost of $19 billion to $25 billion. "These are enormous figures if you had to spend them all at once, but we’re able to spread it out over 50 to 100 years," says John de Ronde of the National Institute for Coastal and Marine Management in The Hague, which prepared the estimates. "And it’s relatively simple for us to cope with sea-level rise because we already have [U.S. $2.5 trillion worth of] existing infrastructure." "If you really have to start from scratch and build all of this infrastructure, you’d probably have to consider giving the land to the sea," he says. It’s a situation low-lying regions from Bangladesh and the Marshall Islands to southern Louisiana and the Florida Everglades may soon be facing. The Dutch also plan to surrender hard-fought land to the water-not to the sea but to the Rhine and Meuse rivers, which end in the Netherlands after draining much of the land between here and the Alps. They call the plan "making room for water."

Response:

The Clinton style of disaster leadership http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/04/22/earth.floods/ GRAND FORKS, N.D. (AllPolitics, April 22) — President Bill Clinton, in his role as consoler-in-chief, toured the flood-ravaged upper Midwest today and declared the federal government will help people there rebuild their homes and lives. After a helicopter tour over the swollen Red River and a community meeting, Clinton told evacuees at a nearby Air Force base to keep their spirits up. (384K wav sound) "It may be hard to believe now, but you can rebuild stronger and better than ever and we’re going to help you do that, and we want you to keep your eyes on that future," Clinton said to applause. The president, who has visited disaster scenes in California, the Pacific Northwest, his home state of Arkansas and elsewhere, delivered a talk that was part nuts-and-bolts discussion of federal aid on its way and part emotional encouragement. Clinton said he has authorized the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to pay 100 percent of the cost of emergency work, instead of the normal 75 percent. He also said he has designated another 18 counties in Minnesota and 53 in South Dakota as disaster areas and asked Congress to approve another $200 million in aid for North Dakota, South Dakota and Minnesota. That brings the proposed total to $488 million. (320K wav sound) During the visit, Clinton said he was sure Congress will approve the relief aid. "The Congress has shown in the past, even when it was quite costly … that we can unite across party lines to do what has to be done." Clinton, who said he had never seen a community so inundated as Grand Forks, also warned the flood’s emotional impact may hit later. "The next few days are going to be very, very hard on a lot of people," Clinton said. "A lot of you who have been very, very brave and courageous and helped your friends and neighbors, it’s going to sink in on you what you have been through, what has been lost," Clinton said. "And I want to encourage all of you to really look out for each other in the next few days, and be sensitive to the enormous emotional pressures that some of you will feel … Understand, you don’t have to be ashamed if you’re heartbroken." Clinton said he was moved by bulletin board offers of free housing and the local newspaper’s persistence in continuing to publish through the disaster. "No matter what you have lost in this terrible flood, what you have saved and strengthened and sharpened and shown to the world is infinitely better," the president said. Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) said damage in the region could top $1 billion, and FEMA Director James Lee Witt said the damage will require a massive recovery effort. About 100,000 head of cattle have been lost, too. ‘You’re talking water-treatment plants, sewage-treatment plants, bridges and roads," Witt said. "The infrastruture is totally gone." Before he left the White House this morning, Clinton called for intensifying the research into links between global climate change and destructive weather. Clinton said it will take more research to find if there is a link between a spate of disastrous weather and global warming. "We do not know … for sure that the warming of the earth is responsible for what seems to be a substantial increase in highly disruptive weather events, but many people believe that it is," Clinton said. "And we have to keep looking into it. We have to find the best scientific evidence we have. And we have to keep searching for the answers to this." Clinton and Vice President Al Gore used the occasion to mark the 27th observance of Earth Day, also announcing an expansion of the right-to-know law that allows people to learn about toxic substances that industries release in their communities. "We’re giving them the most powerful tool in a democracy — knowledge," Clinton said. Federal authorities are expanding the 10-year-old law to cover seven new industries, including mining, electrical utilities and hazardous waste treatment. Clinton said making the information available is "one of the best things we can do in Washington to protect the environment." "In the decade that it [the law] has been on the books, citizens have joined with government and industry to reduce the release of toxic chemicals by 43 percent," the president said.

Response:

> The Clinton style of disaster leadership > http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/04/22/earth.floods/

From this very thread; "On CNN, Larry King just spoke to Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco. King noted that when he spoke to Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, Barbour told Bush not to come." Comparing the flooding of ‘97 with this is like comparing a Firecracker to Nuclear War. Just in case you missed it before,"Barbour told Bush not to come." Bye, John

Response:

yeah right, cause he’d get in the way Lake New Orleans is Bush’s Fault & I Can Prove It (Research Material) by DWCG Wed Aug 31st, 2005 at 13:32:30 PDT As we wait for the president’s Rose Garden statement, I feel it necessary to demand that we right now begin criticizing this president for his policy decisions, which have exacerbated the tragedy, his dereliction of duty as president, his overall callousness and his inert response.  The questions must be asked.  So I’ve began identifying articles that substantiate the Bush administration’s culpability to this catastrophic event. QUESTION: What did he know, and when did he know it? Via ThinkProgess, in early 2001 this article appeared in the Houston Chronicle: [In early 2001] the Federal Emergency Management Agency ranked the potential damage to New Orleans as among the three likeliest, most castastrophic disasters facing this country.  The other two?  A massive earthquake in San Francisco, and, almost prophetically, a terrorist attack on New York City. DWCG’s diary :: :: QUESTION: Did the president do all he could do to prevent the disaster? The answer is not only no, but he actually drastically cut the budget: Until recently, efforts to squeeze coastal protection money out of Washington have met with resistance. The Louisiana congressional delegation urged Congress earlier this year to dedicate a stream of federal money to Louisiana’s coast, only to be opposed by the White House. Ultimately a deal was struck to steer $540 million to the state over four years. The total coast of repair work is estimated to be $14 billion. In its budget, the Bush administration had also proposed a significant reduction in funding for southeast Louisiana’s chief hurricane protection project. Bush proposed $10.4 million, a sixth of what local officials say they need. More: In fiscal year 2006, the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is bracing for a record $71.2 million reduction in federal funding. It would be the largest single-year funding loss ever for the New Orleans district, Corps officials said. I’ve been here over 30 years and I’ve never seen this level of reduction, said Al Naomi, project manager for the New Orleans district. I think part of the problem is it’s not so much the reduction, it’s the drastic reduction in one fiscal year. It’s the immediacy of the reduction that I think is the hardest thing to adapt to. QUESTION: What was the concrete impact of these cuts? According to a July 8, 2004 article (via Josh Marshall), the project basically stopped: For the first time in 37 years, federal budget cuts have all but stopped major work on the New Orleans area’s east bank hurricane levees, a complex network of concrete walls, metal gates and giant earthen berms that won’t be finished for at least another decade. [....] "I needed $11 million this year, and I got $5.5 million," Naomi said. "I need $22.5 million next year to do everything that needs doing, and the first $4.5 million of that will go to pay four contractors who couldn’t get paid this year." QUESTION: Why were there such drastic cuts? The Army Corp of Engineers comes out and says it: The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security — coming at the same time as federal tax cuts — was the reason for the strain. At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars. QUESTION: How has the fact that 40% of the Louisiana Guard is deployed overseas impacted the response to the flooding? The major levee at the 17th street canal didn’t get patched: New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin is "very upset" that an attempt to fix the breach in the levee at the 17th Street canal has failed, and he said the challenges that the city is facing have "escalated to another level." [....] Nagin said the sandbagging was scheduled for midday, but the Blackhawk helicopters needed to help did not show up. He said the sandbags were ready and all the helicopter had to do was "show up." [....] He said he was told that the helicopters may have been diverted to rescue about 1,000 people in a church. QUESTION: How did the president respond to the catastrophe? He maintained his vacation schedule by: -Traveling thousands of miles away from the disaster area to have a good old time during a staged Medicare event: CAPTION: Myrtle Jones, 80 of Rancho Cucamonga, has a moment with President George W. Bush as he talks about Medicare at the James L. Brulte Senior Center in Rancho Cucamonga, August 29, 2005. -Having a birthday party: The president paused on the tarmac to help celebrate McCain’s 69th birthday, but on a blazing Arizona day, the cake melted before he could taste it. -Visiting a El Mirage, AZ country club to give another staged Medicare event: WHITE HOUSE CAPTION: President George W. Bush shares a laugh with 82-year-old Margaret Cantrell of Scottsdale, during a Conversation on Medicare Monday, Aug. 29, 2005, at the Pueblo El Mirage RV Resort and Country Club in nearby El Mirage, Ariz. Not everyone thought he should be there: I’m guessing that Monday, Aug. 29, 2005, will not be remembered as the day President George W. Bush stopped by a retirement community in El Mirage to discuss prescription drug benefits for seniors. -He got guitar lessons: President Bush plays a guitar presented to him by Country Singer Mark Wills, right, backstage following his visit to Naval Base Coronado, Tuesday, Aug. 30, 2005. -Via ThinkProgress he slept peacefully on his "ranch": Following his speech at the naval base to commemmorate the 60th anniversary of the Allied victory in World War II, the President will fly to his ranch in Crawford, Tx. before returning to Washington on Wednesday morning. The president must be held accountable for his near prosecutable negligence. points to the Manchester Union Leader (conservative) http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=59785 editorial calling Bush Out: AS THE EXTENT of Hurricane Katrina’s devastation became clearer on Tuesday – millions without power, tens of thousands homeless, a death toll unknowable because rescue crews can’t reach some regions – President Bush carried on with his plans to speak in San Diego, as if nothing important had happened the day before. Katrina already is measured as one of the worst storms in American history. And yet, President Bush decided that his plans to commemorate the 60th anniversary of VJ Day with a speech were more pressing than responding to the carnage. A better leader would have flown straight to the disaster zone and announced the immediate mobilization of every available resource to rescue the stranded, find and bury the dead, and keep the survivors fed, clothed, sheltered and free of disease. The goal is to get these legitimate questions and criticisms on the front page of every major newspaper in the country and on the lips of every anchor. UPDATE #2: I forgot to include this NY Times article: New Orleans has 22 pumping stations that need to work nearly continuously to discharge normal storm runoff and seepage. But they are notoriously fickle. Efforts to add backup power generators to keep them all running during blackouts have been delayed by a lack of federal money. UPDATE #3: I knew there had to be a picture of Bush with the cake. Picture is from the White House website, caption is from a Washington Post article. UPDATE #4: Added art from the El Mirage event. UPDATE #5: Below "dash" points to yesterday’s Washington Post: Which makes it all the more difficult to understand why, at this moment, the country’s premier agency for dealing with such events — FEMA — is being, in effect, systematically downgraded and all but dismantled by the Department of Homeland Security. [....] Indeed, the advent of the Bush administration in January 2001 signaled the beginning of the end for FEMA. The newly appointed leadership of the agency showed little interest in its work or in the missions pursued by the departed Witt. Then came the Sept. 11 attacks and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. Soon FEMA was being absorbed into the "homeland security borg." This year it was announced that FEMA is to "officially" lose the disaster preparedness function that it has had since its creation. The move is a death blow to an agency that was already on life support. In fact, FEMA employees have been directed not to become involved in disaster preparedness functions, since a new directorate (yet to be established) will have that mission. FEMA will be survived by state and local emergency management offices, which are confused about how they fit into the national picture. I think the effectiveness of this new system is self-evident, but just in case you want to hear directly from the horse’s mouth: "There is way too many fricking cooks in the kitchen" -Mayor Nagin And "Volvo Liberal" rightfully mentions that Josh Marshall is helping lead the call for accountability. I’ll add more information as it becomes available.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> The Clinton style of disaster leadership > http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/04/22/earth.floods/ > From this very thread; > "On CNN, Larry King just spoke to Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco. King > noted that when he spoke to Mississippi Governor Haley > Barbour, Barbour told Bush not to come." > Comparing the flooding of ‘97 with this is like comparing a Firecracker to > Nuclear War. > Just in case you missed it before,"Barbour told Bush not to come."

Good one, John. Unfortunately lost on this sea of leftist nitwits was the mess Fat Boy Billy Clinton caused when he pranced all over S. Florida after huricane Andrew looking for photo ops, his entourage of dipshits interfering with relief, all of which came late because he didn’t act. He caused more trouble than if he’d just stayed home. Although he was days late to the party, his stooges in the leftist press conveniently tried to keep quiet. However, FL folks remembered, which is the main reasons Jeb Bush got elected and Florida is now a Red, rather than Blue State.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> The Clinton style of disaster leadership > http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/04/22/earth.floods/ >From this very thread; >"On CNN, Larry King just spoke to Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco. King >noted that when he spoke to Mississippi Governor Haley >Barbour, Barbour told Bush not to come." >Comparing the flooding of ‘97 with this is like comparing a Firecracker to >Nuclear War. >Just in case you missed it before,"Barbour told Bush not to come."

That’s because Barbour is the worst kind of political hack and doesn’t understand the impact of "the bully pulpit" on a region in crisis.        Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access              >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> The Silence Spoke Louder Than Words > As long as the neocons still like to make > comparisons between the evil Bill Clinton > and the moral George Bush, let’s put Clinton > in this scenario. He’d be there as soon as a > chopper could land on any high ground and > would reach back to anyone reaching out to > him. He’d have been there this morning. >Yeah Clinton never missed a photo-op.  President Bush will quietly go >back to his office and beging calling up favors to help those people.

Yeah, let’s see him "calling up favors" from Exxon-Mobil, which has enjoying record profits on the backs of the American people.  That’ll be the day.  Presidential photo- ops — especially from two- term presidents — in crisis situations are called "leadership."  Louisiana and Mississippi need to know the rest of the country is there for them and our cold- hearted dry drunk of a president missed the opportunity to make that clear.  He sucks in every conceivable way. >If my house is flooded, I’d rather have that kind of help than a >politico coming around to kiss my arse.

You’re entirely underestimating the crisis — houses on the Gulf coast aren’t just "flooded," they’re gone, and eighty percent of a city crucial to entire country is under water.   All it takes to get "flooded" is burnt-out sump pump, not an unprecented national disaster.        Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access              >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> The Clinton style of disaster leadership >> http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/04/22/earth.floods/ > From this very thread; > "On CNN, Larry King just spoke to Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco. King > noted that when he spoke to Mississippi Governor Haley > Barbour, Barbour told Bush not to come." > Comparing the flooding of ‘97 with this is like comparing a Firecracker to > Nuclear War. > Just in case you missed it before,"Barbour told Bush not to come." > Good one, John. > Unfortunately lost on this sea of leftist nitwits was the mess Fat Boy Billy > Clinton caused when he pranced all over S. Florida after huricane Andrew > looking for photo ops, his entourage of dipshits interfering with relief, > all of which came late because he didn’t act. He caused more trouble than if > he’d just stayed home. > Although he was days late to the party, his stooges in the leftist press > conveniently tried to keep quiet. However, FL folks remembered, which is the > main reasons Jeb Bush got elected and Florida is now a Red, rather than Blue > State.

There it is again! Do you hear it?  A lone banjo, deep in the woods: " ♫ Deedle-dee dee dee dee dee dee-dee!  ♫ " It’s the mating call of the moron.    –E

Response:

>The Silence Spoke Louder Than Words >On CNN,

On CNN? So Bruce Moron saw a disaster on TV and now he thinks he speaks for the victims? Typical Bruce Moron, he’s still obsessed with Bush and has no life…

Response:

>>The Silence Spoke Louder Than Words >On CNN, >On CNN? So Bruce Moron saw a disaster on TV and now he thinks he >speaks for the victims?

Actually, neither I nor the writer made any such claim, but don’t let that stop you…. >Typical Bruce Moron, he’s still obsessed with Bush and has no life…

Let’s look at this — in my "Bruce Moron" incarnation, I’m supposedly "obsessed with Bush" and then my cowardly, anonymous accuser vomits forth *eight* consecutive semi-literate posts that demonstrate that he’s "obsessed with" *me*.   Go figure…. Looks like somebody got his buttons pushed pretty hard, and it obviously wasn’t yours truly.  The remaining "good Germans" with their noses still buried between this failed president’s blubber buns sure know how to shove their feet down their throats, don’t they?        Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access              >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

Response:

> > Yeah Clinton never missed a photo-op.  President Bush will quietly go > back to his office and beging calling up favors to help those people. > If my house is flooded, I’d rather have that kind of help than a > politico coming around to kiss my arse. > bullshit, he’s calling up Halliburton and co to see how much more money > they can rip off the taxpayers. And he’s calling his daddy to get some > helyup. > If he’d been at all concerned about the Gulf he woulda listend to the > environmentalists about the wetlands and he woulda protected one of the > most important ports in America.

You make it sound like the New Orleans situation came about since 2000. And the wetlands would have been NO protection against that hurricane, Dear. > like the Dutch – but we, here in America don’t like in terms of 100 > year plans and we don’t believe our scientists and we don’t care what > happens tomorrow as long as we get a buck today. > A decade ago, (snip)…

It’s a lot easier to manage, and protect, an entire country no bigger than the state of Louisiana. Imagine if ANY President ONLY had to devote his attention and Federal monies to managing, for example, Louisiana. The entire Federal government wakes up each morning worrying ONLY about Lousiana.

Response:

> >The Silence Spoke Louder Than Words >On CNN, > On CNN? So Bruce Moron saw a disaster on TV and now he thinks he > speaks for the victims? > Typical Bruce Moron, he’s still obsessed with Bush and has no life…

Well, he DOES occasionally consult with Bill Lawrence so that gives him SOME credibility.

Response:

hey I heard he called up Clinton AND Daddy. and he sounded his usual stupid self with Diane Sawyer Interview: Who Knew? Gas Prices? Bush Spins Disaster With Diane Sawyer, with Dan Froomkin Sawyer: "Mr. President, this morning, as we speak . . . there are people with signs saying ‘Help, come get me’. People still in the attic, waving. Nurses are phoning in saying the situation in hospitals is getting ever more dire and the nurses are getting sick because of no clean water. Some of the things they asked our correspondents to ask you is: They expected — they say to us — that the day after this hurricane that there would be a massive and visible armada of federal support. There would be boats coming in. There would be food. There would be water. It would be there within hours. They wondered: What’s taking so long?" Bush: "Well, there’s a lot of food on its way. A lot of water on the way. And there’s a lot of boats and choppers headed that way. Boats and choppers headed that way. It just takes a while to float ‘em! . . . " Sawyer: "But given the fact that everyone anticipated a hurricane five, a possible hurricane five hitting shore, are you satisfied with the pace at which this is arriving? And which it was planned to arrive?" Bush: "Well, I fully understand people wanting things to have happened yesterday. I mean, I understand the anxiety of people on the ground. I can imagine — I just can’t imagine what it is like to be waving a sign saying ‘come and get me now’. So there is frustration. But I want people to know there is a lot of help coming. "I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees. They did anticipate a serious storm. But these levees got breached. And as a result, much of New Orleans is flooded. And now we are having to deal with it and will." ***** Wrong. Just for starters, how about Sunday’s New Orleans Times-Picayune , which described a computer model run by the LSU Hurricane Center. "It indicated the metropolitan area was poised to see a repeat of Betsy’s flooding, or worse, with storm surge of as much as 16 feet moving up the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet and topping levees in Chalmette and eastern New Orleans, and pushing water into the 9th Ward and parts of Mid-City." Or Monday’s New York Times , in which New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin is quoted as saying that "Hurricane Katrina could bring 15 inches of rain and a storm surge of 20 feet or higher that would ‘most likely topple’ the network of levees and canals that normally protect the bowl-shaped city from flooding. And as Andrew C. Revkin and Christopher Drew write in today’s New York Times: "The 17th Street levee that gave way and led to the flooding of New Orleans was part of an intricate, aging system of barriers and pumps that was so chronically underfinanced that senior regional officials of the Army Corps of Engineers complained about it publicly for years. ***** Later, Sawyer asked about gas prices and oil company profits. Sawyer: "Gas prices going up at the pumps. We have seen in Atlanta the lines backing up. And some of the prices are going up to $4, $5. First of all, what do you want to say — what is the government putting in place to guard against price gouging? And also, is this a time to call on Americans simply to pull back and not use the gas? . . . " Bush: "First of all, you are right. We ought to conserve more. And I would hope Americans conserve if given a choice. Secondly, we have done some things to help on the gas prices. . . ." Sawyer: "Some people have said that the oil companies themselves should simply forfeit some of their profits in this time of national crisis. One conservative commentator, a popular one, called for a 20 percent reduction in the profits. Do you — " Bush: "Well, what I’d like to see in corporate America, is to make sure they contribute to helping these victims. . . . " Disaster In New Orleans: How About An Emergency Communications System That Works? William Fisher In the months to come we’ll learn that one of the many failures of protecting citizens during the New Orleans disaster was the lack of communications. Last Thursday we ran this story because we thought it was relevant to the present need to coordinate communications in event of a disaster. It pointed out that very little that has been done to date to correct our inadequate communications system that may have cost lives during the 9/11 disaster. For example, as Fisher notes, " On 9/11 there was no spectrum allocated to public safety – and there still isn’t." Such a system would have proved useful during the New Orleans disaster. Based on relevant new stories, it’s clear that the communications disaster in New Orleans in the 48 hours after the hurricane passed through may be found to have contributed to a loss of lives. The combination of poor, uncoordinated communications, confused survivors who were given little help to evacuate in advance of the hurricane, the sick and the handicapped who were left behind, the growing toxic stew of heat, refuse, poisons, sleeplessness, and mental derangement, and the Bush administration’s slowness to respond could lead to more loss of life. –Jerry Politex [On 9/11] when police officials concluded the twin towers were in danger of collapsing and ordered police to leave the complex, fire officials were not notified. Four years on, families of victims, policy makers, and ordinary citizens are asking: "Could it happen again"? And, according to virtually every expert, the answer is ‘yes’. Public safety agencies including first responders, such as firefighters, police officers, and ambulance services, are heavily dependent on wireless radios. Wireless technology requires radio frequency capacity, known as spectrum, in order to function, and existing wireless technology is designed to work within specified frequency ranges. On 9/11 there was no spectrum allocated to public safety – and there still isn’t.

Response:

Question:

These letters assert with eloquence that which many* think. The chips wil fall where they may. *Conservative use of the word "many" here is in the interest of diplomacy. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Link! by Umpire : 4:37 PM Comment (0) | Trackback (0)     > Military Mom: Morally Ugly > From the mailbag: > Karl, it

Question:

Contractor Causualty list here:http://icasualties.org/oif/Civ.aspx

Response:

> Army 2005 pay scale: > Private: $13,711 > Private E-2: $14,822 > Private First Class: $17,475 > Specialist/Corporal: $19,352 > Sergeant: $21,108 > Staff Sergeant: $23,040 > Sergeant First Class: $26,640

Those military salaries do not take hazard pay into account. Hazard pay, or working in a designated combat zone will add an extra $8,000 or so on top of that. Also, military personnel generally live all expenses paid. They get food and shelter provided to them, and thus have fewer living expenses.

Response:

$90,000 to $140,000 tax free ‘contractor’ jobs are available.  A friend of mine just started his 3rd year as crash/rescue at Baghdad airport. $140K tax free, two free trips home a year.  He’ll have $500,000 gaining interest by the time he’s 24. BTW, military personnel are now required to BUY a lot of their equipment, namely clothing. cheers… HJA

Response:

None dare call them "mercenaries." – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Job Posting: >Government contractor seeking applicants for overseas assignment in >KUWAIT. Excellent pay & benefits up to $60,000+. >The FPO performs duties under the direct supervision of the Shift >Sergeant and the Shift Supervisor. The FPO is responsible for >providing security, force protection and support for the U.S. Army’s >ARS (Area Support Group) assets at various U.S. Army Compounds in the >country of Kuwait. FPOs serve as team members performing individual >basic combat tactics and techniques unique to military service. They >adhere to post orders unique to individual posts that range in >function from static posts to roving patrols to escorting VIPs or >military asset convoys and other missions as assigned. They must be >able to perform as a fire team member to provide defense against >attacks and terrorist operations. The duties of the FPO are similar to >those of an Army MP. >$60,000+ >Army 2005 pay scale: >Private: $13,711 >Private E-2: $14,822 >Private First Class: $17,475 >Specialist/Corporal: $19,352 >Sergeant: $21,108 >Staff Sergeant: $23,040 >Sergeant First Class: $26,640

       Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access              >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

Response:

> None dare call them > "mercenaries."

BLACK AND WHITE AND FULL OF CRAP Lies Run Big, Facts Small in U.S. Media NEW YORK–One year ago the American media was pushing the Pat Tillman story with the heavy rotation normally reserved for living celebs like Michael Jackson. Tillman, the former NFL player who turned down a multi-million dollar football contract to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan, became a centerpiece of the right’s Hamas-style death cult when he lost his life in the mountains of southeastern Afghanistan. To supporters of the wars and to many football fans, Tillman embodied ideals of self-sacrifice and post-9/11 butt-kicking in a hard-bodied shell of chisel-chinned masculinity on steroids. Tillman’s quintessential nobility, we were told, was borne out by the story of his death–a tale that earned him a posthumous Silver Star. Whether you were for or against Bush’s wars, Americans were told, Tillman’s valor showed why you should support the troops. Young men were encouraged to emulate his praiseworthy example. Several thousand mourners gathered at Tillman’s May 3, 2004 memorial service to hear marquee names including Arizona Senator John McCain called upon all Americans to "be worthy of the sacrifices made on our behalf." "Tillman died trying to save fellow members of the 75th Ranger Regiment caught in a crush of enemy fire," the Arizona Republic quoted a fellow soldier addressing the crowd. Tillman, said his friend and comrade-at-arms, had told his fellow soldiers "to seize the tactical high ground from the enemy" to draw enemy fire away from another U.S. platoon trapped in an ambush. "He directly saved their lives with those moves. Pat sacrificed his life so that others could live." It was, as the Washington Post wrote, a "storybook personal narrative"–one recounted on hundreds of front pages and network newscasts. It was also a lie. As sharp-eyed readers learned a few months ago from single-paragraph articles buried deep inside their newspapers, Pat Tillman died pointlessly, a hapless victim of "friendly fire" who never got the chance to choose between bravery and cowardice. As if that wasn’t bad enough, the Washington Post now reports that Pentagon and White House officials knew the truth "within days" after his April 22, 2004 shooting by fellow Army Rangers but "decided not to inform Tillman’s family or the public until weeks after" the nationally televised martyr-a-thon. It gets worse. So desperate were the military brass to carry off their propaganda coup that they lied to Tillman’s brother, a fellow soldier who arrived on the scene shortly after the incident, about how he died. Writing in an army report, Brigadier General Gary Jones admits that the official cover-up even included "the destruction of evidence": the army burned Tillman’s Ranger uniform and body armor to hide the fact that he had died in a hail of American bullets, fired by troops who had "lost situational awareness to the point they had no idea where they were." "We didn’t want the world finding out what actually happened," one soldier told Jones. A perfect summary of the war on terrorism. The weapons of mass destruction turned out to be a figment of Donald Rumsfeld’s imagination. The Thanksgiving turkey Bush presented to the troops turned out to be plastic, as much of a staged photo op as the gloriously iconic and phony toppling of Saddam’s statue in Baghdad by jubilant Iraqi civilians–well, actually a few dozen marines and CIA-financed operatives. So many of the Administration’s "triumphs" have been exposed as frauds that one has to wonder whether that was really Saddam in the spider hole. We shouldn’t blame the White House for producing lies; that’s what politicians do. But we expect better from the media who disseminate them. Case study: the Washington Post’s dutiful transcription of the Jessica Lynch hoax. Played up on page one and running on for thousands of words, the fanciful Pentagon version had the pilot from West Virginia emptying her clip before finally succumbing to a gunshot wound (and possible rape) by evil Iraqi ambushers, then freed from her tormentors at a heavily-guarded POW hospital. Like the Pat Tillman story, it was pure fiction. Private Lynch, neither shot nor sexually violated, said she was injured when her vehicle crashed. She never got off a shot because her gun jammed. As she told reporters who were willing to listen, her Iraqi doctors and nurses had given her excellent care. She credited them for saving her life. In a weird sort of prequel to the shooting of an Italian journalist, they had even attempted to turn her over at a U.S. checkpoint but were forced to flee when American troops fired at them. In all of these examples, editors and producers played corrective follow-up stories with far less fanfare than the original, incorrect ones. To paraphrase "X-Files" character Fox Mulder, the truth is in there–in the paper, on TV. It’s just really, really hard to find. Readers of the American press and viewers of American radio and television are likelier to see and believe loudly repeated lies over occasionally whispered truths told once or twice. As a result of the reverse imbalance between fact and fiction, the propaganda versions of the Tillman and Lynch stories, the staged Saddam statue footage, and the claim that Iraq had WMDs are all believed by a misled citizenry that votes accordingly. For journalists supposedly dedicated to uncovering the truth and informing the public, this is exactly the opposite of how things ought to be. Corrections and expos

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>You are correct.  It would work well for retirees.  It costs the >>employer much less to have people work from home so I am not surprised >>that some employers are discovering this.  They don’t have to maintain >>offices or equipment.  Employees save commutes.  It is win/win. >    We agree on something.  I’d say it’s not only for retirees.  Your > post didn’t say it was, but I thought I should replace the omission > just so I don’t get in trouble later.  I wouldn’t want to work under > somebody else’s orders myself anymore, but most people don’t > seem as bothered by that as I was.  Getting out from under the > black cloud of working under orders is the thing that kept me > going while I was working under somebody else’s orders, and > the reason I built up a stash as fast as I could in order to get away > from that necessity. >I’ve been told the Sex Call Industry uses this method and has for years. >Maybe some senior citizens can supplement their incomes.

   I always suspected those phone sex outfits would be staffed by senior citizens.  I guess the advent of picture-phones will lead to massive unemployment in that industry.

Response:

You are correct.  It would work well for retirees.  It costs the employer much less to have people work from home so I am not surprised that some employers are discovering this.  They don’t have to maintain offices or equipment.  Employees save commutes.  It is win/win.

Response:

>You are correct.  It would work well for retirees.  It costs the >employer much less to have people work from home so I am not surprised >that some employers are discovering this.  They don’t have to maintain >offices or equipment.  Employees save commutes.  It is win/win.

   We agree on something.  I’d say it’s not only for retirees.  Your post didn’t say it was, but I thought I should replace the omission just so I don’t get in trouble later.  I wouldn’t want to work under somebody else’s orders myself anymore, but most people don’t seem as bothered by that as I was.  Getting out from under the black cloud of working under orders is the thing that kept me going while I was working under somebody else’s orders, and the reason I built up a stash as fast as I could in order to get away from that necessity.

Response:

Come to think of it, this type of call center work at home is very suitable for many retirees. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Interesting post.  Thanks. > Companies ‘homeshore’ services > ‘Call center’ workers do business from home > By Adam Geller, Associated Press > ARLINGTON, Texas – "Hello, is Jennifer there? Jennifer at extension > 43?" > Nancy Allor tilts back from the workstation at the foot of her > king-size bed, momentarily puzzling the voice on her headset. A soap > opera flickers silently on the TV behind her. Inside the otherwise > hushed suburban townhouse, Allor’s parakeet chirps. > Whoever Jennifer is, she’s not here. > "I’m sorry," Allor says, grinning. "I’m in a call center and we can’t > transfer. But I’d be happy to help you." > Americans dialing for customer service are increasingly being connected > to workers like Allor – call center agents without call centers. The > move to home-based agents, working from bedrooms and kitchen tables > across the country, started as a trickle in the late 1990s. But it is > picking up speed as a low-cost alternative to traditional call centers. > It’s not as cheap as offshoring, the shift of operations to countries > with pools of low-paid but well-educated workers. But companies bent on > cutting costs also see home agents as a way to avoid some of the > consumers complaints common to overseas call centers. > More than 100,000 U.S. workers now field customer service calls from > home, according to a recent report by consulting firm IDC. Over the > next two years, one of every 10 U.S. call centers is likely to shift at > least partly to home-based agents, according to another report by > consultant Gartner Inc. > Some dub it "homeshoring." > Call in an order to 1-800-Flowers.com Inc. for Mother’s Day, and > there’s a good chance it will be handled by a home-based agent. The > same is true for consumers calling The Vermont Teddy Bear Co. or to > book a room at a Wyndham International Inc. hotel. > Retailer Office Depot Inc. is closing 10 of its 12 U.S. call centers > this year, replacing 900 full-time agents with home-based agents. They > include Allor, an agent for Plano, Texas-based Working Solutions Inc., > one of several virtual call center firms. > Cutting costs is not the only selling point of virtual call centers, > but it’s a large part of the appeal. Getting rid of call center > buildings saves money on real estate. Most of the home-based agents > work part-time or as independent contractors, so employers don’t pay > for health insurance and benefits. Unions, which represent workers at > some large call centers, will be hard-pressed to reach workers spread > across thousands of homes, analysts say. > In addition, home-based agents for most companies pay for their own > equipment. And companies say the workers are better qualified and more > content than those at traditional call centers saving on recruitment > and training. > "We are actually realizing some pretty good double-digit savings from > this," says Julian Carter, the Office Depot executive in charge of the > call center switch. The company expects savings of $15 million a year. > It’s not just the cost savings, though. Fielding calls with home agents > "gives you the ability to staff with local people who speak the > language well, that have the same culture, the same trends, that > basically live in the same place," said Esteban Kolsky, a Gartner > analyst. > "That’s very appealing to most customers." > Some of the biggest advocates of virtual call centers are home-based > agents, who say the arrangement provides flexibility unavailable in > traditional office jobs. Customers of 1-800-Flowers.com, for example, > have no way of knowing that when agent Barbara Leeper-Zilk picks up > their call at her home in Littleton, Colo., she’s often is doing a load > of laundry between calls. > "I get up at 10 to 6, let the dogs out, grab a bottle of water, go > upstairs and turn on the computer and I’m at work," says Leeper-Zilk, > one of nearly 4,000 agents working for Alpine Access Inc., a Golden, > Colo.-based virtual call center firm. > Leeper-Zilk first signed on for extra spending money. Many other home > agents are mothers of young children who work during school hours, and > older people who want to work limited hours or pick up supplemental > income.

Response:

Interesting post.  Thanks. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Companies ‘homeshore’ services > ‘Call center’ workers do business from home > By Adam Geller, Associated Press > ARLINGTON, Texas – "Hello, is Jennifer there? Jennifer at extension > 43?" > Nancy Allor tilts back from the workstation at the foot of her > king-size bed, momentarily puzzling the voice on her headset. A soap > opera flickers silently on the TV behind her. Inside the otherwise > hushed suburban townhouse, Allor’s parakeet chirps. > Whoever Jennifer is, she’s not here. > "I’m sorry," Allor says, grinning. "I’m in a call center and we can’t > transfer. But I’d be happy to help you." > Americans dialing for customer service are increasingly being connected > to workers like Allor – call center agents without call centers. The > move to home-based agents, working from bedrooms and kitchen tables > across the country, started as a trickle in the late 1990s. But it is > picking up speed as a low-cost alternative to traditional call centers. > It’s not as cheap as offshoring, the shift of operations to countries > with pools of low-paid but well-educated workers. But companies bent on > cutting costs also see home agents as a way to avoid some of the > consumers complaints common to overseas call centers. > More than 100,000 U.S. workers now field customer service calls from > home, according to a recent report by consulting firm IDC. Over the > next two years, one of every 10 U.S. call centers is likely to shift at > least partly to home-based agents, according to another report by > consultant Gartner Inc. > Some dub it "homeshoring." > Call in an order to 1-800-Flowers.com Inc. for Mother’s Day, and > there’s a good chance it will be handled by a home-based agent. The > same is true for consumers calling The Vermont Teddy Bear Co. or to > book a room at a Wyndham International Inc. hotel. > Retailer Office Depot Inc. is closing 10 of its 12 U.S. call centers > this year, replacing 900 full-time agents with home-based agents. They > include Allor, an agent for Plano, Texas-based Working Solutions Inc., > one of several virtual call center firms. > Cutting costs is not the only selling point of virtual call centers, > but it’s a large part of the appeal. Getting rid of call center > buildings saves money on real estate. Most of the home-based agents > work part-time or as independent contractors, so employers don’t pay > for health insurance and benefits. Unions, which represent workers at > some large call centers, will be hard-pressed to reach workers spread > across thousands of homes, analysts say. > In addition, home-based agents for most companies pay for their own > equipment. And companies say the workers are better qualified and more > content than those at traditional call centers saving on recruitment > and training. > "We are actually realizing some pretty good double-digit savings from > this," says Julian Carter, the Office Depot executive in charge of the > call center switch. The company expects savings of $15 million a year. > It’s not just the cost savings, though. Fielding calls with home agents > "gives you the ability to staff with local people who speak the > language well, that have the same culture, the same trends, that > basically live in the same place," said Esteban Kolsky, a Gartner > analyst. > "That’s very appealing to most customers." > Some of the biggest advocates of virtual call centers are home-based > agents, who say the arrangement provides flexibility unavailable in > traditional office jobs. Customers of 1-800-Flowers.com, for example, > have no way of knowing that when agent Barbara Leeper-Zilk picks up > their call at her home in Littleton, Colo., she’s often is doing a load > of laundry between calls. > "I get up at 10 to 6, let the dogs out, grab a bottle of water, go > upstairs and turn on the computer and I’m at work," says Leeper-Zilk, > one of nearly 4,000 agents working for Alpine Access Inc., a Golden, > Colo.-based virtual call center firm. > Leeper-Zilk first signed on for extra spending money. Many other home > agents are mothers of young children who work during school hours, and > older people who want to work limited hours or pick up supplemental > income.

Response:

Interesting information on how call center services are changing.  Perhaps the name "call centers" is not so suitable now as these virtual "workers" are working from their homes, not at centres. John. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Companies ‘homeshore’ services > ‘Call center’ workers do business from home > By Adam Geller, Associated Press > ARLINGTON, Texas – "Hello, is Jennifer there? Jennifer at extension > 43?" > Nancy Allor tilts back from the workstation at the foot of her > king-size bed, momentarily puzzling the voice on her headset. A soap > opera flickers silently on the TV behind her. Inside the otherwise > hushed suburban townhouse, Allor’s parakeet chirps. > Whoever Jennifer is, she’s not here. > "I’m sorry," Allor says, grinning. "I’m in a call center and we can’t > transfer. But I’d be happy to help you." > Americans dialing for customer service are increasingly being connected > to workers like Allor – call center agents without call centers. The > move to home-based agents, working from bedrooms and kitchen tables > across the country, started as a trickle in the late 1990s. But it is > picking up speed as a low-cost alternative to traditional call centers. > It’s not as cheap as offshoring, the shift of operations to countries > with pools of low-paid but well-educated workers. But companies bent on > cutting costs also see home agents as a way to avoid some of the > consumers complaints common to overseas call centers. > More than 100,000 U.S. workers now field customer service calls from > home, according to a recent report by consulting firm IDC. Over the > next two years, one of every 10 U.S. call centers is likely to shift at > least partly to home-based agents, according to another report by > consultant Gartner Inc. > Some dub it "homeshoring." > Call in an order to 1-800-Flowers.com Inc. for Mother’s Day, and > there’s a good chance it will be handled by a home-based agent. The > same is true for consumers calling The Vermont Teddy Bear Co. or to > book a room at a Wyndham International Inc. hotel. > Retailer Office Depot Inc. is closing 10 of its 12 U.S. call centers > this year, replacing 900 full-time agents with home-based agents. They > include Allor, an agent for Plano, Texas-based Working Solutions Inc., > one of several virtual call center firms. > Cutting costs is not the only selling point of virtual call centers, > but it’s a large part of the appeal. Getting rid of call center > buildings saves money on real estate. Most of the home-based agents > work part-time or as independent contractors, so employers don’t pay > for health insurance and benefits. Unions, which represent workers at > some large call centers, will be hard-pressed to reach workers spread > across thousands of homes, analysts say. > In addition, home-based agents for most companies pay for their own > equipment. And companies say the workers are better qualified and more > content than those at traditional call centers saving on recruitment > and training. > "We are actually realizing some pretty good double-digit savings from > this," says Julian Carter, the Office Depot executive in charge of the > call center switch. The company expects savings of $15 million a year. > It’s not just the cost savings, though. Fielding calls with home agents > "gives you the ability to staff with local people who speak the > language well, that have the same culture, the same trends, that > basically live in the same place," said Esteban Kolsky, a Gartner > analyst. > "That’s very appealing to most customers." > Some of the biggest advocates of virtual call centers are home-based > agents, who say the arrangement provides flexibility unavailable in > traditional office jobs. Customers of 1-800-Flowers.com, for example, > have no way of knowing that when agent Barbara Leeper-Zilk picks up > their call at her home in Littleton, Colo., she’s often is doing a load > of laundry between calls. > "I get up at 10 to 6, let the dogs out, grab a bottle of water, go > upstairs and turn on the computer and I’m at work," says Leeper-Zilk, > one of nearly 4,000 agents working for Alpine Access Inc., a Golden, > Colo.-based virtual call center firm. > Leeper-Zilk first signed on for extra spending money. Many other home > agents are mothers of young children who work during school hours, and > older people who want to work limited hours or pick up supplemental > income.

Response:

Companies ‘homeshore’ services ‘Call center’ workers do business from home By Adam Geller, Associated Press ARLINGTON, Texas – "Hello, is Jennifer there? Jennifer at extension 43?" Nancy Allor tilts back from the workstation at the foot of her king-size bed, momentarily puzzling the voice on her headset. A soap opera flickers silently on the TV behind her. Inside the otherwise hushed suburban townhouse, Allor’s parakeet chirps. Whoever Jennifer is, she’s not here. "I’m sorry," Allor says, grinning. "I’m in a call center and we can’t transfer. But I’d be happy to help you." Americans dialing for customer service are increasingly being connected to workers like Allor – call center agents without call centers. The move to home-based agents, working from bedrooms and kitchen tables across the country, started as a trickle in the late 1990s. But it is picking up speed as a low-cost alternative to traditional call centers. It’s not as cheap as offshoring, the shift of operations to countries with pools of low-paid but well-educated workers. But companies bent on cutting costs also see home agents as a way to avoid some of the consumers complaints common to overseas call centers. More than 100,000 U.S. workers now field customer service calls from home, according to a recent report by consulting firm IDC. Over the next two years, one of every 10 U.S. call centers is likely to shift at least partly to home-based agents, according to another report by consultant Gartner Inc. Some dub it "homeshoring." Call in an order to 1-800-Flowers.com Inc. for Mother’s Day, and there’s a good chance it will be handled by a home-based agent. The same is true for consumers calling The Vermont Teddy Bear Co. or to book a room at a Wyndham International Inc. hotel. Retailer Office Depot Inc. is closing 10 of its 12 U.S. call centers this year, replacing 900 full-time agents with home-based agents. They include Allor, an agent for Plano, Texas-based Working Solutions Inc., one of several virtual call center firms. Cutting costs is not the only selling point of virtual call centers, but it’s a large part of the appeal. Getting rid of call center buildings saves money on real estate. Most of the home-based agents work part-time or as independent contractors, so employers don’t pay for health insurance and benefits. Unions, which represent workers at some large call centers, will be hard-pressed to reach workers spread across thousands of homes, analysts say. In addition, home-based agents for most companies pay for their own equipment. And companies say the workers are better qualified and more content than those at traditional call centers saving on recruitment and training. "We are actually realizing some pretty good double-digit savings from this," says Julian Carter, the Office Depot executive in charge of the call center switch. The company expects savings of $15 million a year. It’s not just the cost savings, though. Fielding calls with home agents "gives you the ability to staff with local people who speak the language well, that have the same culture, the same trends, that basically live in the same place," said Esteban Kolsky, a Gartner analyst. "That’s very appealing to most customers." Some of the biggest advocates of virtual call centers are home-based agents, who say the arrangement provides flexibility unavailable in traditional office jobs. Customers of 1-800-Flowers.com, for example, have no way of knowing that when agent Barbara Leeper-Zilk picks up their call at her home in Littleton, Colo., she’s often is doing a load of laundry between calls. "I get up at 10 to 6, let the dogs out, grab a bottle of water, go upstairs and turn on the computer and I’m at work," says Leeper-Zilk, one of nearly 4,000 agents working for Alpine Access Inc., a Golden, Colo.-based virtual call center firm. Leeper-Zilk first signed on for extra spending money. Many other home agents are mothers of young children who work during school hours, and older people who want to work limited hours or pick up supplemental income.

Response:

Question:

April 25, 2005 Marines From Iraq Sound Off About Want of Armor and Men By MICHAEL MOSS On May 29, 2004, a station wagon that Iraqi insurgents had packed with C-4 explosives blew up on a highway in Ramadi, killing four American marines who died for lack of a few inches of steel. The four were returning to camp in an unarmored Humvee that their unit had rigged with scrap metal, but the makeshift shields rose only as high as their shoulders, photographs of the Humvee show, and the shrapnel from the bomb shot over the top. "The steel was not high enough," said Staff Sgt. Jose S. Valerio, their motor transport chief, who along with the unit’s commanding officers said the men would have lived had their vehicle been properly armored. "Most of the shrapnel wounds were to their heads." Among those killed were Rafael Reynosa, a 28-year-old lance corporal from Santa Ana, Calif., whose wife was expecting twins, and Cody S. Calavan, a 19-year-old private first class from Lake Stevens, Wash., who had the Marine Corps motto, Semper Fidelis, tattooed across his back. They were not the only losses for Company E during its six-month stint last year in Ramadi. In all, more than one-third of the unit’s 185 troops were killed or wounded, the highest casualty rate of any company in the war, Marine Corps officials say. In returning home, the leaders and Marine infantrymen have chosen to break an institutional code of silence and tell their story, one they say was punctuated not only by a lack of armor, but also by a shortage of men and planning that further hampered their efforts in battle, destroyed morale and ruined the careers of some of their fiercest warriors. The saga of Company E, part of a lionized battalion nicknamed the Magnificent Bastards, is also one of fortitude and ingenuity. The marines, based at Camp Pendleton in southern California, had been asked to rid the provincial capital of one of the most persistent insurgencies, and in enduring 26 firefights, 90 mortar attacks and more than 90 homemade bombs, they shipped their dead home and powered on. Their tour has become legendary among other Marine units now serving in Iraq and facing some of the same problems. "As marines, we are always taught that we do more with less," said Sgt. James S. King, a platoon sergeant who lost his left leg when he was blown out of the Humvee that Saturday afternoon last May. "And get the job done no matter what it takes." The experiences of Company E’s marines, pieced together through interviews at Camp Pendleton and by phone, company records and dozens of photographs taken by the marines, show they often did just that. The unit had less than half the troops who are now doing its job in Ramadi, and resorted to making dummy marines from cardboard cutouts and camouflage shirts to place in observation posts on the highway when it ran out of men. During one of its deadliest firefights, it came up short on both vehicles and troops. Marines who were stranded at their camp tried in vain to hot-wire a dump truck to help rescue their falling brothers. That day, 10 men in the unit died. Sergeant Valerio and others had to scrounge for metal scraps to strengthen the Humvees they inherited from the National Guard, which occupied Ramadi before the marines arrived. Among other problems, the armor the marines slapped together included heavier doors that could not be latched, so they "chicken winged it" by holding them shut with their arms as they traveled. "We were sitting out in the open, an easy target for everybody," Cpl. Toby G. Winn of Centerville, Tex., said of the shortages. "We complained about it every day, to anybody we could. They told us they were listening, but we didn’t see it." The company leaders say it is impossible to know how many lives may have been saved through better protection, since the insurgents became adept at overcoming improved defenses with more powerful weapons. Likewise, Pentagon officials say they do not know how many of the more than 1,500 American troops who have died in the war had insufficient protective gear. But while most of Company E’s work in fighting insurgents was on foot, the biggest danger the men faced came in traveling to and from camp: 13 of the 21 men who were killed had been riding in Humvees that failed to deflect bullets or bombs. Toward the end of their tour when half of their fleet had become factory-armored, the armor’s worth became starkly clear. A car bomb that the unit’s commander, Capt. Kelly D. Royer, said was at least as powerful as the one on May 29 showered a fully armored Humvee with shrapnel, photographs show. The marines inside were left nearly unscathed. Captain Royer, from Orangevale, Calif., would not accompany his troops home. He was removed from his post six days before they began leaving Ramadi, accused by his superiors of being dictatorial, records show. His defenders counter that his commanding style was a necessary response to the extreme circumstances of his unit’s deployment. Company E’s experiences still resonate today both in Iraq, where two more marines were killed last week in Ramadi by the continuing insurgency, and in Washington, where Congress is still struggling to solve the Humvee problem. Just on Thursday, the Senate voted to spend an extra $213 million to buy more fully armored Humvees. The Army’s procurement system, which also supplies the Marines, has come under fierce criticism for underperforming in the war, and to this day it has only one small contractor in Ohio armoring new Humvees. Marine Corps officials disclosed last month in Congressional hearings that they were now going their own way and had undertaken a crash program to equip all of their more than 2,800 Humvees in Iraq with stronger armor. The effort went into production in November and is to be completed at the end of this year. Defense Department officials acknowledged that Company E lacked enough equipment and men, but said that those were problems experienced by many troops when the insurgency intensified last year, and that vigorous efforts had been made to improve their circumstances. Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis of Richland, Wash., who commanded the First Marine Division to which Company E belongs, said he had taken every possible step to support Company E. He added that they had received more factory-armored Humvees than any other unit in Iraq. "We could not encase men in sufficiently strong armor to deny any enemy success," General Mattis said. "The tragic loss of our men does not necessarily indicate failure – it is war." Trouble From the Start Company E’s troubles began at Camp Pendleton when, just seven days before the unit left for Iraq, it lost its first commander. The captain who led them through training was relieved for reasons his supervisor declined to discuss. "That was like losing your quarterback on game day," said First Sgt. Curtis E. Winfree. In Kuwait, where the unit stopped over, an 18-year-old private committed suicide in a chapel. Then en route to Ramadi, they lost the few armored plates they had earmarked for their vehicles when the steel was borrowed by another unit that failed to return it. Company E tracked the steel down and took it back. Even at that, the armor was mostly just scrap and thin, and they needed more for the unarmored Humvees they inherited from the Florida National Guard. "It was pitiful," said Capt. Chae J. Han, a member of a Pentagon team that surveyed the Marine camps in Iraq last year to document their condition. "Everything was just slapped on armor, just homemade, not armor that was given to us through the normal logistical system." The report they produced was classified, but Captain Royer, who took over command of the unit, and other Company E marines say they had to build barriers at the camp – a former junkyard – to block suicide drivers, improve the fencing and move the toilets under a thick roof to avoid the insurgent shelling. Even some maps they were given to plan raids were several years old, showing farmland where in fact there were homes, said a company intelligence expert, Cpl. Charles V. Lauersdorf, who later went to work for the Defense Intelligence Agency. There, he discovered up-to-date imagery that had not found its way to the front lines. Ramadi had been quiet under the National Guard, but the Marines had orders to root out an insurgency that was using the provincial capital as a way station to Falluja and Baghdad, said Lt. Col. Paul J. Kennedy, who oversaw Company E as the commander of its Second Battalion, Fourth Marine Regiment. Before the company’s first month was up, Lance Cpl. William J. Wiscowiche of Victorville, Calif., lay dead on the main highway as its first casualty. The Marine Corps issued a statement saying only that he had died in action. But for Company E, it was the first reality check on the constraints that would mark their tour. Sweeping for Bombs A British officer had taught them to sweep the roads for bombs by boxing off sections and fanning out troops into adjoining neighborhoods in hopes of scaring away insurgents poised to set off the bombs. "We didn’t have the time to do that," said Sgt. Charles R. Sheldon of Solana Beach, Calif. "We had to clear this long section of highway, and it usually took us all day." Now and then a Humvee would speed through equipped with an electronic device intended to block detonation of makeshift bombs. The battalion, which had five companies in its fold, had only a handful of the devices, Colonel Kennedy said. Company E had none, even though sweeping roads for bombs was one of its main duties. So many of the marines, like Corporal Wiscowiche, had to rely on their eyes. On duty on March 30, 2004, the 20-year-old lance corporal did not spot the telltale three-inch wires sticking out of the dust until he was a few feet away, the company’s leaders say. He died when the bomb was set off. "We had just left the base," Corporal Winn said. "He was … read more »

Response:

My mistake, Osama bin Morgen this time. As if there is one iota of difference. LV – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Keep it up, Osama.  Trumpet every difficulty.  Cheer every setback. > We’ll still win.  And you’ll hate it. > Lord Valve > American > Osama bin Pritchard pasted: > (agitprop form the New York Slimes)

Response:

Keep it up, Osama.  Trumpet every difficulty.  Cheer every setback. We’ll still win.  And you’ll hate it. Lord Valve American Osama bin Pritchard pasted: (agitprop form the New York Slimes)

Response:

(off topic garbage snipped) NI

Response:

Since you mentioned me, I’ll chime in!! This is not new news.  It has been an area that has been lacking, for far too long.  I may not support this war, but I do support our troops.   I have family over there. I think it’s a crime that a country the size of ours, with the manufacturing power we have, is seemingly not able to get proper equipment to our troops, so that they have every possible chance to not only succeed, but to also survive!  We can’t seem to get the job done (of getting more protection over there)….but at the same time, we most certainly *CAN* look the other way when companies like Haliburton (sp?) are overcharging us taxpayers.   That last part is true, as well…..but your buddy W doesn’t want you to know about it. So LV, you’re saying that we should NOT be properly equipping our troops?  I mean, it’s a fact that it’s happening, so I can only assume by your protest, that you think our soldiers have everything they need? OK, fine.  Let’s see *you* first in line to go in next!!! You just can’t stand for anything critical to be said about your pals…..especially when it’s true.   All that’s being said, is that we (our country) is doing a lousy job of getting needed protection to our soldiers, so that they may live.  But, you have a problem with that, as if it’s some commie plot. Idiot. Mike – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >My mistake, Osama bin Morgen this time. >As if there is one iota of difference. >LV >Keep it up, Osama.  Trumpet every difficulty.  Cheer every setback. >We’ll still win.  And you’ll hate it. >Lord Valve >American >Osama bin Pritchard pasted: >(agitprop form the New York Slimes)

Response:

> I think it’s a crime that a country the size of ours, with the > manufacturing power we have, is seemingly not able to get proper equipment > to our troops, so that they have every possible chance to not only > succeed, but to also survive!  We can’t seem to get the job done (of > getting more protection over there)….

With my son being active duty, I`d also like everyone to be able to be in armored vehicles any time that they`re in transport. That said, I did see an interview a few months back where they were interviewing some Manager from the plant that Armors the Humvees and he did say that they are at capacity, and are working on expanding their line. It can`t happen soon enough… See ya, John

Response:

Are you living in 1965? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->I think it’s a crime that a country the size of ours, with the >manufacturing power we have, is seemingly not able to get proper equipment >to our troops, so that they have every possible chance to not only >succeed, but to also survive!  We can’t seem to get the job done (of >getting more protection over there)….

Response:

> April 25, 2005 > Marines From Iraq Sound Off About Want of Armor and Men > By MICHAEL MOSS

Does anyone remember the Sherman "Zippo" tanks of WWII…?

Response:

>> I think it’s a crime that a country the size of ours, with the > manufacturing power we have, is seemingly not able to get proper equipment > to our troops, so that they have every possible chance to not only > succeed, but to also survive!  We can’t seem to get the job done (of > getting more protection over there)…. >With my son being active duty, I`d also like everyone to be able to be in >armored vehicles any time that they`re in transport. That said, I did see an >interview a few months back where they were interviewing some Manager from >the plant that Armors the Humvees and he did say that they are at capacity, >and are working on expanding their line. It can`t happen soon enough…

Apparently and sadly true, because for some reason we can’t see our way clear to find another capable supplier?  Detroit geared up to mass produce aircraft back in the ’40s faster than we can ramp up vehicle armoring in the 21st century?  If you really believe that, I’ve got a bridge over the East River in NYC I’d like to sell you, John — a real bargain!        Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access              >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

Response:

> Apparently and sadly true, because for some reason we > can’t see our way clear to find another capable supplier?

I read somewhere that there are contracts and patent laws would prevent that from happening. With my son at risk, no one would like this to be done any faster than I would. See ya, John

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->I think it’s a crime that a country the size of ours, with the >manufacturing power we have, is seemingly not able to get proper equipment >to our troops, so that they have every possible chance to not only >succeed, but to also survive!  We can’t seem to get the job done (of >getting more protection over there)…. >With my son being active duty, I`d also like everyone to be able to be in >armored vehicles any time that they`re in transport. That said, I did see an >interview a few months back where they were interviewing some Manager from >the plant that Armors the Humvees and he did say that they are at capacity, >and are working on expanding their line. It can`t happen soon enough… >See ya, >John

John,   I hear you. I hope he comes home safe and sound. Mike

Response:

>> April 25, 2005 > Marines From Iraq Sound Off About Want of Armor and Men > By MICHAEL MOSS > Does anyone remember the Sherman "Zippo" tanks of WWII…?

Yup, I’ve seen film of them in action. Used with Napalm fuel to torch out bunkers and caves in the South Pacific islands. John

Response:

> John, >  I hear you. I hope he comes home safe and sound. > Mike

Thanks! Fortunately, he`s at Ft Bragg at the moment. See ya, John

Response:

"We’ll" this artery-clogged obese-A-saur types. This imbecile has never served in *any* capacity with the U.S. Armed Services, yet the wannabe chicken hawk consistently types his inclusion. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->William Whitikkkre typed: >Keep it up, Osama.  Trumpet every difficulty.  Cheer every setback. > We’ll still win.  And you’ll hate it. > Leaking assValve > Amerikkkan Poser A ‘Lil Too Quick To Call Others Posers

Response:

John gets the support group going. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->John, > I hear you. I hope he comes home safe and sound. >Mike > Thanks! Fortunately, he`s at Ft Bragg at the moment. > See ya, > John

Response:

"(Life) is a tale told by an idiot; full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." (Macbeth, act5,sc.5 l.16-27). "…Matters of Great Concern should be treated LIGHTLY …Matters of small concern should be treated SERIOUSLY…" Focus, Mindfulness, and the Resultant "Flow" Experience: Among the maxims on Lord Haoshige’s wall, there was this one: "Matters of great concern should be treated lightly." Among one’s affairs there should not be more than two of three matters of what one could call great concern. If these are deliberated upon during ordinary times, they can be understood. Thinking about things previously and then handling them lightly when the time comes is what this is all about. To face an event and solve it lightly is difficult if you are not resolved beforehand, and there will always be uncertainty in hitting your mark. However, if the foundation is laid previously, you can think of the saying, "Matters of great concern should be treated lightly," as your own basis for action. – Yamamoto Tsunetomo [The Book of the Samurai] If one is but secure at the foundation, he will not be pained by departure from minor details or affairs that are contrary to expectation. But in the end, the details of a matter are important. The right and wrong of one’s way of doing things are found in trivial matters. –Yamamoto Tsunetomo [The Book of the Samurai] The best focus, is to focus on improvement — not on comparison to others, a standard, or some alleged "best practice". Improve, continuously — and let the others worry about how they compare to you. Most…organizations spend way too much time and effort on standards, benchmarking, maturity, best practice this and that — and far too little time actually improving. – Richard Zultner Ikuno Oribe said, "If a retainer will just think about what he is to do for the day at hand, he will be able to do anything. If it is a single day’s work, one should be able to put up with it. Tomorrow, too is but a single day." – Yamamoto Tsunetomo [The Book of the Samurai] Singlemindedness is all-powerful -Yamamoto Tsunetomo [The Book of the Samurai] When I dance, I dance; when I sleep, I sleep; yes, and when I walk alone in a beautiful orchard, if my thoughts drift to far-off matters for some part of the time, for some other part I lead them back again to the walk, the orchard, to the sweetness of this solitude, to myself. -Montaigne – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > "We’ll" this artery-clogged obese-A-saur types. This imbecile has > never served in *any* capacity with the U.S. Armed Services, yet > the wannabe chicken hawk consistently types his inclusion. > William Whitikkkre typed: > Keep it up, Osama.  Trumpet every difficulty.  Cheer every setback. > We’ll still win.  And you’ll hate it. > Leaking assValve > Amerikkkan Poser A ‘Lil Too Quick To Call Others Posers

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> April 25, 2005 >> Marines From Iraq Sound Off About Want of Armor and Men >> By MICHAEL MOSS > Does anyone remember the Sherman "Zippo" tanks of WWII…? > Yup, I’ve seen film of them in action. Used with Napalm fuel to torch > out bunkers and caves in the South Pacific islands. > John

Just the opposite, actually. They got the nick from the Germans. Zippo’s slogan was "Lights first time, every time", or something similar. Tiger 88s would go in one side and out the other. Bad news for the guys inside. John

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Since you mentioned me, I’ll chime in!! > This is not new news.  It has been an area that has been lacking, for far > too long.  I may not support this war, but I do support our troops.  I > have family over there. > I think it’s a crime that a country the size of ours, with the > manufacturing power we have, is seemingly not able to get proper equipment > to our troops, so that they have every possible chance to not only > succeed, but to also survive!  We can’t seem to get the job done (of > getting more protection over there)….but at the same time, we most > certainly *CAN* look the other way when companies like Haliburton (sp?) > are overcharging us taxpayers.   That last part is true, as well…..but > your buddy W doesn’t want you to know about it. > So LV, you’re saying that we should NOT be properly equipping our troops? > I mean, it’s a fact that it’s happening, so I can only assume by your > protest, that you think our soldiers have everything they need? > OK, fine.  Let’s see *you* first in line to go in next!!! > You just can’t stand for anything critical to be said about your > pals…..especially when it’s true. > All that’s being said, is that we (our country) is doing a lousy job of > getting needed protection to our soldiers, so that they may live.  But, > you have a problem with that, as if it’s some commie plot. > Idiot. > Mike >My mistake, Osama bin Morgen this time. >As if there is one iota of difference. >LV >>Keep it up, Osama.  Trumpet every difficulty.  Cheer every setback. >>We’ll still win.  And you’ll hate it. >>Lord Valve >>American >>Osama bin Pritchard pasted: >>(agitprop form the New York Slimes)

If one of our politicians in washington was riding around, the vehicle would be well protected.  You can bet your ass on that.

Response:

It’s more fun to bet yours. Fakem all; white trash. Nationalism is for the Fucktarded. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > If one of our politicians in washington was riding around, the vehicle would > be well protected.  You can bet your ass on that.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>> April 25, 2005 >>> Marines From Iraq Sound Off About Want of Armor and Men >>> By MICHAEL MOSS >> Does anyone remember the Sherman "Zippo" tanks of WWII…? > Yup, I’ve seen film of them in action. Used with Napalm fuel to torch > out bunkers and caves in the South Pacific islands. > John > Just the opposite, actually. They got the nick from the Germans. Zippo’s > slogan was "Lights first time, every time", or something similar. Tiger > 88s would go in one side and out the other. Bad news for the guys inside. > > John

Actually, both answers are correct. For different reasons in different war theaters. In Europe for notoriously catching fire when hit by enemy shells, and in the Pacific because it was used as an armored flame-throwing vehicle that was lauded as one of the most important tools available in the ‘island hoping’ campaign. John King

Response:

>Actually, both answers are correct. For different >reasons in different war theaters. In Europe for >notoriously catching fire when hit by enemy shells, >and in the Pacific because it was used as an armored >flame-throwing vehicle that was lauded as one of the >most important tools available in the ‘island hoping’ >campaign.

        Different nicknames. In North Africa, they first got the nickname "Ronsons", also from the name of a popular lighter manufacturer, due to the fire hazard from the gasoline fuel as you note. The "Zippo" was a nickname for ones that had flamethrower attachments. I don’t believe the US used tank mounted flamethrowers in Europe, only during the Pacific campaigns. The Brits had some in Europe, though.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Actually, both answers are correct. For different >reasons in different war theaters. In Europe for >notoriously catching fire when hit by enemy shells, >and in the Pacific because it was used as an armored >flame-throwing vehicle that was lauded as one of the >most important tools available in the ‘island hoping’ >campaign. >    Different nicknames. In North Africa, they first got the > nickname "Ronsons", also from the name of a popular lighter > manufacturer, due to the fire hazard from the gasoline fuel as you > note. The "Zippo" was a nickname for ones that had flamethrower > attachments. I don’t believe the US used tank mounted flamethrowers in > Europe, only during the Pacific campaigns. The Brits had some in > Europe, though.

Aargh! Ronsons! *That* is what I was trying to remember, but all I could come up with was Zippo. Thank you. John

Response:

Question:

[snip] > "It’s kind of like a flashbulb going off in your face," said Steve Luckey, > chairman of national security for the Air Line Pilots Association.

[snip] I’m a bit dubious about this statement.  I’m more than a little concerned that much ado is being made of nothing because pilots are concerned about WHY they are being designated than anything really happening optically.    But I could be wrong.

Response:

Laser Pointer Abuse Threatens Air Safety By David A. Fahrenthold and Timothy Dwyer Washington Post Staff Writers Thursday, January 27, 2005; Page A01 To astronomers, the new breed of hand-held laser pointer is a way to write in the sky, its two-mile-long beam allowing them to trace constellations and point out individual stars. To a lost hiker, the laser is a lifeline to a search and rescue team overhead. To a "Star Wars" fan, it is a prop for playing a lightsaber-wielding Jedi knight. But to a pilot in a darkened cockpit, the pointer’s bright green beam could be something very different — a disorienting and even blinding blast of color. "It’s kind of like a flashbulb going off in your face," said Steve Luckey, chairman of national security for the Air Line Pilots Association. Over the past month, pilots have reported more than 30 incidents of laser beams being trained from the ground into their aircraft, prompting warnings from federal authorities and new reporting guidelines. One of the incidents occurred in Anne Arundel County, where a man is charged with shining a laser beam at a police helicopter on New Year’s Eve. The controversy has led to a new focus on the beam machines — gizmos seemingly stolen from science fiction that recently have become both cheap and readily available in stores and on the Internet. Lasers are ubiquitous in American life. A laser tells a grocery clerk the price of a loaf of bread. Lasers are used in stores to keep track of inventory, in homes to help hang pictures straight, on automobile assembly lines for welding, in operating rooms, in the military for laser-guided weapons and in everyday electronic devices such as CD players. The government does not regulate sales of lasers, and no laws restrict their use, though laser pointers have been banned from many public places, such as sports arenas. The Food and Drug Administration regulates the manufacture of laser products and rates them in four categories based on the power of the beam. Beams in CD and DVD players are in category 1, the lowest. Laser pointers are in category 3, and industrial laser equipment is in category 4. What’s changed is the availability of powerful laser pointers. About a dozen years ago, a pointer with a red beam sold for about $600. Today, consumers can get a similar one for a key chain for $3.95 — batteries included. The popularity of red laser pointers is now being overtaken by green pointers, which are visible over a much longer range. "The human eye responds to the green light approximately 50 times better than the red laser pointer, and that is why it appears so bright," said Richard Hughes, a member of the Florida-based Laser Institute of America, who has a doctorate in physics and holds 23 patents in the field of lasers. The difference is striking: The old red pointers had a range of about a half-mile at best, experts say. The new green ones — powered only by AAA batteries and no bigger than a Sharpie marker — can send their beams more than two miles. In recent years, prices of green lasers have fallen steeply — from $400 each in 2002 to as little as $59 now. As the lasers have become less expensive, they have become far more popular, said John Mueller, president of Beam of Light Technologies in Clackamas, Ore. Mueller said he is selling 1,500 to 2,000 a month. "People are moving to green," he said. Like their predecessors, green laser pointers are sold for a variety of legitimate purposes. Businesspeople, for instance, use them in presentations; outdoor enthusiasts carry them in case they get lost. But just as red lasers were used by drug dealers to harass police helicopters and by sports fanatics to distract basketball players taking free throws, green ones have been put to ill use. And with their longer range, experts say, green lasers pose a real danger because they can render pilots temporarily blind. "You’re in an airplane, you’re on final approach and suddenly you can’t see," said Dan Kidder, a spokesman for the National Air Transportation Association, a trade group that includes charter airlines. "You can’t see your instruments. You can’t see your runway. There’s the potential for a major accident." According to federal authorities, there have been about 400 reported instances of lasers being aimed at aircraft since the early 1990s. But they started to receive national attention late last month, after a man in New Jersey allegedly aimed a laser at a plane landing at the Teterboro, N.J., airport. He has said he was pointing out a star to his 7-year-old daughter. Although the incident in Anne Arundel occurred Dec. 31, it wasn’t made public until this week. County police said their helicopter was searching for a hit-and-run suspect when a "high-intensity" green beam suffused the cockpit, distracting the officers and forcing them to change course. Police said they traced the beam to a bonfire in woods near Pasadena. Edward Pannell, 38, admitted to pointing the laser at the helicopter but said he didn’t think it was a big deal, according to police. He now faces harassment charges that carry a combined penalty of 10 years in prison and several thousand dollars in fines. Federal authorities have issued a general warning to pilots, who are now required to report encounters with lasers. Authorities say that terrorist organizations may have discussed using lasers to bring down a plane but that none of the recent incidents has been found to have a terrorism connection. Jack Hess, acting assistant special agent in charge of counter-terrorism for the FBI, said the apparent increase in incidents in the last month might be caused by the new reporting requirements. "There are more incidents being reported, but we’re not sure if there are more incidents," Hess said. The military already has taken precautions. Navy contractor Optra Inc. of Topsfield, Mass., designed a laser-detection device for Navy and Marine planes that is about the size of a matchbox and runs on AA batteries. It detects laser beams and warns pilots with a green, yellow or red light, depending on the strength of the beam. Company President James Engel said the device has a flash memory card that holds a picture of the beam’s origin and uses the Global Positioning System to find the plane’s location when the laser is detected. At companies that sell laser pointers, officials say they are concerned about the aircraft incidents and have warned customers not to point the lasers at other people. But the controversy hasn’t hurt business. In fact, John Acres, whose company, Bigha, sold the laser that was pointed at the plane in Teterboro, said the attention has brought in new customers. "We’ve got more orders. We are sold out," said Acres, whose company is in Corvallis, Ore. "The whole industry has shot up because of this." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39961-2005Jan26_2.html

Response:

Question:

> Hello again! > I’ve signed my PV system contract, and paid my deposit.  Is it ethical > to share the name of the company here?  

Why not? Should I wait until I have > learned whether I had a good experience?

You can post your experiences on the fly, and if a decision you are making is questionable, I’m sure someone will comment on it.  Maybe even when it isn’t questionable! > Is there a renewable energy equivalent to the misc.comsumers newsgroup?

Just this NG that you in plus "alt.energy.homepower" and "alt.solar.photovoltaic" principally. > Anyway, my system configuration will be grid-tie only for now.  I will > be installing 26 or 27 BP3160 panels, and two inverters.  The reason > for the ambiguity will become clear below.

I think you will be happier this way, I am. > As you may recall, I was nervous about whether the SunnyBoy Island from > SMA would ever be available in California.  William Smith reinforced my > concerns.  The Island would be a great device to have if you own SMA > inverters, since the backup will plug straight into these high-voltage > devices.  

It appears it will be per conversations I’ve had with them recently, since that is an interest of mine since I have their inverters now. > Other manufacturers’ battery-based inverters, on the other hand, > connect straight to the PV panels.  The problem, as I understand > it, is that the grid-tie inverters like high voltage and low current; > the battery inverters like the opposite.

It is my understanding that the advantage is not due to any specific aspect of the grid tie preferring high voltage, but more to the point the high voltage is a lot cheaper to wire and it is more efficient from the point of line loss getting from the panels to the inverter. In my case I would have had to mount low voltage inverters in 4 widely separated places and then run the AC to the service panel for the required disconnect,  It just didn’t work well for me!  By the way I only needed 10 AWG solid copper wire with 600 V insulation for the 100′ plus DC home runs to the 2 (2 pole) DC disconnect switches next to my 4 Sunny Boy inverters.  Much cheaper than the 48 VDC wire (4 AWG) which still had to be less than 70′ long (It takes 40′ to just get down off the roof to the back of the house). > Given that I don’t know what to expect, I’ve decided to invest in some > extra wiring.  All of the DC home runs from my PV modules will come > down to a combiner box.  The taps from the combiner box will initially > be wired in series for grid-tie inverters, providing high voltage.  If, > in the future, I need low voltage for a battery backup, the modules > themselves will not need to be rewired.  We will just add taps from the > combiner box that tie the PV modules together in parallel instead of in > series.  This extra pre-wiring is only costing me $700.

I am considering maybe using a small motor generator (5 to 7.5 kWh DC) feeding a small capacity high voltage battery pack with that in turn using the Sunny Island system to power my house in an off grid situation.  I know it will be much easier to go from the 2 DC system than to attempt synchronizing an AC motor generator with the inverter AC.  I figure the motor generator is a lot cheaper solution than solar is for the % of time it would be needed in emergencies even at night. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I’ll probably buy a third inverter, if I ever install the battery > backup.  The nice thing about this third inverter is that it would not > need to be an expensive one.  Since it would only operate off-grid, it > would not have to provide utility-grade, true sine-wave AC power. > I thought that I would be eliminating my SMA vs. non-SMA inverter > choice issue by making these decisions.  Nope!  I initially thought to > buy two SunnyBoy 2500 inverters, and to run two strings of 13 panels > each (26 total).  At signing time, the contractor offered me another > option.  He thought that I might want to consider the Xantrex GT 3.0 > inverters instead.  His reasons: > 1. Available for the same price as the Sunny Boy 2500 > 2. Slightly higher efficiency than the SunnyBoy 2500 (0.6% — Is this > even real?  Is it worth quibbling about?)

Not worth quibbling, my sunny boys are running as much as 10.125 kW occasionally and that is better than the CEC #s. > 3. Monitoring the Xantrex units is easier because they have 10BaseT > connectors (and I have a router), whereas SunnyBoy uses old-fashioned > RS232, and requires a dedicated modem for each inverter

I do not understand you here, my 4 Sunny Boy 2500s do NOT have the display units and are interconnected with a RS485 daisy chain that then runs inside the house to my Sunny Boy Control. I do use a single built in RS232 drop from that Sunny Boy Control to attach it to my PC, because it came with a nice PC Program for monitoring the entire system and it even links to the internet if you want it to. ) > 4. 3000 W capacity, allowing me to enlarge the PV array later (might be > important if I ever add batteries, as I’ve recently learned to expect > 10% to 20% efficiency loss in a battery system *even during those times > when the grid is up*???)

Yep, so why mess with the batteries at all? > Here’s the catch.  The Xantrex GT 3.0 inverters have two internal legs > of 1500 W each.  Each leg needs a minimum of nine panels in series to > boot them up.  So the contractor suggested to me that I run three > strings of nine module each, for a total of 27.  I will buy one extra > module in this configuration.

Again, why mess with the Xantrex and batteries at all?  I know that around here the local dealers all seem to prefer the SMA equipment.  The Sunny Boys have been good service for me for 1.5 years now and a neighbor replaced his Xantrex with Sunny Boys 2 years ago, but I do have to say, I understand the problems he had, have been corrected. > So, even though I sometimes feel like I’m running around in circles, > I’ll ask my question.  Does anyone have an opinion about the Xantrex GT > 3.0?  How does it compare to the SunnyBoy 2500?  As always, my biggest > concern is reliability.  But feel free to share anything you know that > would cause you to recommend one unit over another. > Thanks once again! > — > Rainforest laid low. > "Wake up and smell the ozone," > Says man with chainsaw. > John J. Ladasky Jr., Ph.D.

– Jim Baber 1350 W Mesa Ave. Fresno CA, 93711 (559) 435-9068 (559) 905-2204 (A no charge Verizon IN cellphone to other Verizon IN accounts) See our 10kW grid tied solar system at "www.baber.org"

Response:

Hello again! I’ve signed my PV system contract, and paid my deposit.  Is it ethical to share the name of the company here?  Should I wait until I have learned whether I had a good experience?  Is there a renewable energy equivalent to the misc.comsumers newsgroup? Anyway, my system configuration will be grid-tie only for now.  I will be installing 26 or 27 BP3160 panels, and two inverters.  The reason for the ambiguity will become clear below. As you may recall, I was nervous about whether the SunnyBoy Island from SMA would ever be available in California.  William Smith reinforced my concerns.  The Island would be a great device to have if you own SMA inverters, since the backup will plug straight into these high-voltage devices.  Other manufacturers’ battery-based inverters, on the other hand, connect straight to the PV panels.  The problem, as I understand it, is that the grid-tie inverters like high voltage and low current; the battery inverters like the opposite. Given that I don’t know what to expect, I’ve decided to invest in some extra wiring.  All of the DC home runs from my PV modules will come down to a combiner box.  The taps from the combiner box will initially be wired in series for grid-tie inverters, providing high voltage.  If, in the future, I need low voltage for a battery backup, the modules themselves will not need to be rewired.  We will just add taps from the combiner box that tie the PV modules together in parallel instead of in series.  This extra pre-wiring is only costing me $700. I’ll probably buy a third inverter, if I ever install the battery backup.  The nice thing about this third inverter is that it would not need to be an expensive one.  Since it would only operate off-grid, it would not have to provide utility-grade, true sine-wave AC power. I thought that I would be eliminating my SMA vs. non-SMA inverter choice issue by making these decisions.  Nope!  I initially thought to buy two SunnyBoy 2500 inverters, and to run two strings of 13 panels each (26 total).  At signing time, the contractor offered me another option.  He thought that I might want to consider the Xantrex GT 3.0 inverters instead.  His reasons: 1. Available for the same price as the Sunny Boy 2500 2. Slightly higher efficiency than the SunnyBoy 2500 (0.6% — Is this even real?  Is it worth quibbling about?) 3. Monitoring the Xantrex units is easier because they have 10BaseT connectors (and I have a router), whereas SunnyBoy uses old-fashioned RS232, and requires a dedicated modem for each inverter 4. 3000 W capacity, allowing me to enlarge the PV array later (might be important if I ever add batteries, as I’ve recently learned to expect 10% to 20% efficiency loss in a battery system *even during those times when the grid is up*???) Here’s the catch.  The Xantrex GT 3.0 inverters have two internal legs of 1500 W each.  Each leg needs a minimum of nine panels in series to boot them up.  So the contractor suggested to me that I run three strings of nine module each, for a total of 27.  I will buy one extra module in this configuration. So, even though I sometimes feel like I’m running around in circles, I’ll ask my question.  Does anyone have an opinion about the Xantrex GT 3.0?  How does it compare to the SunnyBoy 2500?  As always, my biggest concern is reliability.  But feel free to share anything you know that would cause you to recommend one unit over another. Thanks once again! — Rainforest laid low. "Wake up and smell the ozone," Says man with chainsaw. John J. Ladasky Jr., Ph.D.

Response:

Jim Baber replied directly to SQLit: You very definitely do NOT know what you are talking about…. Mr. Ladasky does so just listen and you might learn, but I doubt it. >Hello again, folks, >I checked in here about a month ago… I agree. >I’m now wavering on installing the batteries and islanding >capabilities, at least for the time being.  The reasons are several…. I agree. >Having convinced myself to forego the batteries for now, …. >I don’t like the idea of buying inverters twice,

I agree. >John J. Ladasky Jr., Ph.D. > If I understand correctly

Jim Baber replied directly to SQLit:         John said he is changing to a grid tie system! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> If you do not have an battery bank the PV sort of looses its effect. Sun up > electricity, > sun down no electricity. > When the rolling back up happens and a cloud goes by your array. How the > hell do you think the refrigerator is going to get enough power to start? > All motors can draw up to 6 times running amps for a while. A while could be > almost a second. Where are you going to get the power for this? > Grid tie is going to cost you an fortune. Forget the rebates they will never > return the expenses. You get to pay for all of the equipment for grid tie > AND maintain it. This includes the utility disconnect, metering, and > frequency control. Last time I checked into this around here that meant > separate "Utility Grade metering and controls".  Have you checked with the > serving utility about the regs your going to have to meet?  The utility will > pay you an paultry sum for the privilege of receiving the energy. Usually > 1/3 to 1/4 what you pay.

Jim Baber replied directly to SQLit: You are not at all familiar with the California program. Net metering here means that I get an equal $ credit for every kWh I put onto the grid as I am charged for when I draw from the grid. I did have to pay a $277.00 fee for a special meter ONLY because I wanted the Time Of Day rates.  These rates are to my advantage since the peak use period coincides very well with my peak solar production.  This works so well that in the past 18 months I only have had to pay PG&E about $175. (the 12 months before our bills added to $4,800) > Do you really have an understanding of what an UPS does and how big it would > need to be to run an refrigerator? Let alone and another load called an > freezer. UPS’s are not usually sized to start motors. > I am not trying to insult. Seems to me your out in an pasture some where > just grazing.

The house I refer to is 4,000 sq. ft. has 10 tons of A/C capacity, electric water heaters (2), 4 computers, 2 refrigerators, all electric kitchen, washer and electric dryer…..AND I managed to almost break even with the electric bill after 18 months on a 10kW system. By the way the system will be paid off in 4 years and 3 months at the savings I am actually seeing and the added deductions that I have on my state and federal income taxes because I refinanced the house to pay for the system. payment by the way, and the old one was variable and had 19 years to go. — Jim Baber 1350 W Mesa Ave. Fresno CA, 93711 (559) 435-9068 (559) 905-2204 (A no charge Verizon IN cellphone to other Verizon IN accounts) See our 10kW grid tied solar system at "www.baber.org"

Response:

>the battery systems are the presently the least >cost-effective part of the system, with the most room for technical >improvements.

I’d say that the most expensive part of any solar system is the panels (somewhere around $5/watt), followed by the electronics (around a buck a watt), and that batteries would be last (3 cents per KWHR). >I’m particularly dismayed that I would need to buy a >new battery bank every 4-6 years, even if my power never goes out!

That’s way too agressive.  Mediocre, poorly-maintained, offbrand golf cart batteries last 5 years in golf carts, I’d expect at least 10 years life out of a properly maintained bank of Trojan T-105 batteries, and the replacement cost is only about $500 worst-case.  [I don't know your system voltage] >Another inverter provides both grid-tie and >battery connections, but I’m told that you CAN’T RUN IT unless you >have the batteries!

But you don’t have to have a lot of expensive batteries, get a couple of cheap deep-cycle batteries or a string of T-105s and you are all set.  [Again, hard to tell without your system voltage, but Walmart has the Hawker (nee Gates) cyclon monobloc AGM deep-cycle batteries for not a whole lot of money...] >Thus, I’m leaning toward the SMA >inverters on the promise of a future upgrade path.  The only problem >is that the battery-managing device, called the Sunny Boy Island, is >apparently not yet approved for use by the California Energy >Commission.

Does the device actually exist and is it shipping to other markets? The RE market is one in which I’d take any promises of future products with a large grain of salt…

Response:

November 11, 2004 > That’s way too agressive.  Mediocre, poorly-maintained, offbrand golf > cart batteries last 5 years in golf carts, I’d expect at least 10 > years life out of a properly maintained bank of Trojan T-105

I have good luck with T-105s after they come out of the golf carts. I can usually get another few years on them with PV, and then switch them to wind, and run them until they are totally gone. Thomas Lee Elifritz http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

Response:

Jim Baber’s response to John’s project I made comments earlier, and I can see that you have come to the same conclusions that I did. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Hello again, folks, > I checked in here about a month ago.  Your input helped me to narrow > down my list of solar PV contractors to two.  I have a few more > decisions to make, and then I’ll be ready to sign on the dotted line. > Hope y’all can help! > I’ll briefly reintroduce myself and my project.  I’m installing a PV > system on a suburban house in San Jose, California.  I have been > interested in installing some off-grid, outage-proofing capabilities > as well as grid-tie.  Our earlier discussion started here: > http://groups.google.com/groups?&selm=c09b237b.0410041639.379d3020%40… > I’m now wavering on installing the batteries and islanding > capabilities, at least for the time being.  The reasons are several.

I I also originally wanted the same off line backup that you have identified, and I came to the same conclusion that the additional costs of the batteries and charging systems that were NOT allowed as costs under the California rebate program, made current off grid operation uneconomical. My decision was validated considering that I have had 1 outage for 2.5 hours since I installed my system.  This was caused by the 1st rain this year (shorted out a nearby transformer), and I started up on Jun. 13 2003 (today is Nov. 11 2004). I actually had a first this week, I had a day that I actually had 0 kWh output all day long, it sure was dark out, I have averaged 48.71814672 since installation, > In the first place, even though we’ve had a few outages over the > years, I’ve learned that we’re in a privileged rotating outage block > — there’s a fire station located under a mile from our house.  

Strange, we have a fire station 3 blocks from the house, maybe we are also privileged. I wish > that I had paid attention to the frequency and duration of outages > that we had in 1999 and 2000 — I expect that it will get bad again > some day.  Second, the California Energy Commission only rebates the > customer for installing grid-tied generating capacity, and not for > batteries.  Finally, the battery systems are the presently the least > cost-effective part of the system, with the most room for technical > improvements.  I’m particularly dismayed that I would need to buy a > new battery bank every 4-6 years, even if my power never goes out! > The longer I can defer buying the battery system, the better I think > that I’ll do.

What I think I will do, is to buy the Sunny Boy Island when it is available. (remember I have 4 Sunnyboy 2500U inverters) If I can use the Island in conjunction with a small 5-10 kW generator set to avoid the whole battery and charging hassle I will.  A new good small generator set in this size can easily be had for less than $2,000 and is quite adequate for powering my home’s off peak emergency loads. I may be able to jury rig an auto starting system on the generator set if I have to using my control computer to start it, if I have to, but I would prefer to buy the auto start capability as an inherent part of the generator set’s options. I am sure that SMA will tie this to their existing product line, since that is the prevailing theme I have seen with their other products.  So far all of their small and medium sized inverters will work together with all of their Control units. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Having convinced myself to forego the batteries for now, I still have > to make decisions now that may affect what happens in the future when > I go to add a battery backup.  Different inverter manufacturers have > different approaches to the islanding problem.  It appears that > Xantrex requires you to commit to having your batteries at the time > that you install the inverter.  One inverter model allows grid-tie, > but no battery interface.  Another inverter provides both grid-tie and > battery connections, but I’m told that you CAN’T RUN IT unless you > have the batteries!  SMA appears to have taken a different approach. > Their inverters are grid-tie devices, with an OPTION to connect an > external islanding device and batteries. > I don’t like the idea of buying inverters twice, and having holes cut > in the wall of my house twice.  Thus, I’m leaning toward the SMA > inverters on the promise of a future upgrade path.  The only problem > is that the battery-managing device, called the Sunny Boy Island, is > apparently not yet approved for use by the California Energy > Commission.  

Using it the way I want to, I do not see how the CEC enters into it at all, since they are already be out of the picture because I got my rebate and 1st years tax credit earlier.  Unfortunately, however the Sunny Boy Island will probably need utility approval because it is an anti-islanding device and you do know PG&E’s reputation.  Of course I could ignore PG&E and just wire it in since PG&E has already inspected me. > One of my PV contractors said that the scuttlebutt is > that it will eventually be avaiable here.  I sent an email to a > marketing person at SMA-America to try to find out about whether they > had at least applied to the CEC to get the Sunny Boy Island approved. > My email wasn’t answered.  That’s not encouraging.

Try sending it to the president of SMA America John Berdner. they do have something on their website "http://www.sma-america.com/sunnyislandsizing.html" for sizing something called Sunny Island, but NO PRODUCT information. (so far) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Both PV contractors have advised me to add a sub-panel of circuit > breakers that I’ll eventually want to supply with the battery backup. > I like this idea better than the separate emergency that we discussed > earlier.  At the very least, I would want uninterruptable power to my > refrigerator/freezer.  I’d prefer not to drive home from work, only to > find that I’d lost power six hours earlier, and that I wouldn’t have > spoiled food if only I’d driven home to transfer the power cord from > one outlet to the other… > Do I understand everything that I’ve been told correctly? > Thanks again for your expert advice! > — > Rainforest laid low. > "Wake up and smell the ozone," > Says man with chainsaw. > John J. Ladasky Jr., Ph.D.

– Jim Baber 1350 W Mesa Ave. Fresno CA, 93711 (559) 435-9068 (559) 905-2204 (A no charge Verizon IN cellphone to other Verizon IN accounts) See our 10kW grid tied solar system at "www.baber.org"

Response:

Hi, Anthony, Good to hear from a fellow Californian.  Thanks for setting "SQLit" straight.  Either SQLit does not live in a net-metering state, or does not understand the concept of net-metering.  Normally, I can find it in myself to respond politely to posts such as that one.  For whatever reason, I could not do so this time. > My two cents for the original poster runs like this… > There is a market for used inverters so if you happen to want another > model some time in the future the "old" one wouldn’t be a total loss. > If you replace one inverter with another then you should be able to > use the same holes in the walls for the wires. Even if you can’t, > holes in the walls are fairly easily repaired. Cover the messy fixes > to the walls with a big sign describing the system. > You will note that the rebates do not require that you keep the stuff > connected forever (or any amount of time). You can sell it all off the > moment their check clears.

Well, I certainly don’t intend to sell anything right away.  But it’s good to know that I could trade in the inverters, if I had to. > You may want to see if you can arrange to have the rebates get paid > to your vendor/installer/PV supplier. Whoever receives the rebates > has to declare them as income and pay taxes on it. The PV seller > has to pay taxes on their income anyhow so it won’t cost them anything > but floating the money until the government pays.

Yes, both of the contractors I’m considering will apply for the CEC rebates for me, and float me the money. > I too would suggest the separate panel for circuits you want powered > in an emergency. When you lose power the contents of the fridge won’t > spoil for several hours and the freezer for over a day. You could buy > a small generator (perhaps natural gas or propane fueled) that could > power these circuits for now using an automatic or manual transfer > switch. Later you can add more expensive (and more environmentally > friendly) ways to power everything. You don’t have to do everything > at once.

Right, that’s exactly what I’m planning.  Grid-tied solar now, to get free of the utility company’s financial clutches — and to free my conscience as an electricity consumer.  Worry about how to use off-grid PV power at a later date, when battery technology is cheaper and outages are more frequent. You seem to be expressing the opinion that, because they can be resold, it doesn’t matter whether I choose SMA or Xantrex inverters now. I was really hoping to hear from someone about the Sunny Boy Island. A user in the UK, perhaps?  I want to know whether it’s worth planning around this product, even though California won’t let me have one connected to a grid-tied system (yet). > http://www.northerntool.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?… > For instance, the above generator (Generac Centurion Automatic Standby > Generator 3400 watts) uses two propane tanks, auto starts on power > failure and has it’s own "subpanel" in the form of a power strip that > can be user installed inside the house. Northern Tool is selling them > for $1800.

I might go with a gas-powered generator.  Then again, I might just tough it out for a few years. > Anthony

– Rainforest laid low. "Wake up and smell the ozone," Says man with chainsaw. John J. Ladasky Jr., Ph.D.

Response:

> …I’m particularly dismayed that I would need to buy a new battery >bank every 4-6 years, even if my power never goes out!

Unused batteries last longer, esp if kept cold, in a small fridge? > …It appears that Xantrex requires you to commit to having your > batteries at the time that you install the inverter.  One inverter > model allows grid-tie, but no battery interface.  Another inverter > provides both grid-tie and battery connections, but I’m told that > you CAN’T RUN IT unless you have the batteries!

Investigate further. You may find the "battery Xantrex" you have in mind will work in grid-tie-only mode with very few batteries, eg two. Years ago, I heard one Xantrex engineer describe their tests with a 4024(?) and two old absolutely dead Diehards from a junkyard. The grid-tie mode worked fine, even though the batteries wouldn’t hold a charge long. They just acted as high-ripple current capacitors, with large 60 Hz currents. Nick

Response:

… > If you do not have an battery bank the PV sort of looses its effect. Sun up > electricity, > sun down no electricity.

This is correct as long as you don’t have a grid. With a grid it means Sun up, you put electricity into the grid, Sun down you take electricity out. > When the rolling back up happens and a cloud goes by your array. How the > hell do you think the refrigerator is going to get enough power to start? > All motors can draw up to 6 times running amps for a while. A while could be > almost a second. Where are you going to get the power for this?

With a grid tie and no batteries the inverter shuts down because it’s designed not to operate without the grid. That means no grid, no power. > Grid tie is going to cost you an fortune. Forget the rebates they will never > return the expenses. You get to pay for all of the equipment for grid tie > AND maintain it. This includes the utility disconnect, metering, and > frequency control. Last time I checked into this around here that meant > separate "Utility Grade metering and controls".  Have you checked with the > serving utility about the regs your going to have to meet?  The utility will > pay you an paultry sum for the privilege of receiving the energy. Usually > 1/3 to 1/4 what you pay.

Here in California we have net metering laws. The grid has to buy the power from you for the same amount you pay them. The utility supplies the meter (a typical home meter suffices as it runs both forward and backwards) and only bills you the difference between what you use and what you produce. Grid tied inverters provide all the frequency and voltage control required and the utility disconnect is simply a switch. Maintenance on a grid tied system amounts to cleaning off the panels when they get dusty (a couple of times a year) and making sure no animals have been chewing on the wires or nesting inside the inverter. The panels are expected (and warranted) for 25 years and the inverters typically have 3 to 5 year warranties and both can be reasonably expected to last quite a bit longer than their warranty periods. The rebates won’t pay for all the equipment but they can pay for half of it which makes it a reasonable long term investment. Reason, of course, doesn’t have to enter into the buying decision but it helps. My two cents for the original poster runs like this… There is a market for used inverters so if you happen to want another model some time in the future the "old" one wouldn’t be a total loss. If you replace one inverter with another then you should be able to use the same holes in the walls for the wires. Even if you can’t, holes in the walls are fairly easily repaired. Cover the messy fixes to the walls with a big sign describing the system. You will note that the rebates do not require that you keep the stuff connected forever (or any amount of time). You can sell it all off the moment their check clears. You may want to see if you can arrange to have the rebates get paid to your vendor/installer/PV supplier. Whoever receives the rebates has to declare them as income and pay taxes on it. The PV seller has to pay taxes on their income anyhow so it won’t cost them anything but floating the money until the government pays. I too would suggest the separate panel for circuits you want powered in an emergency. When you lose power the contents of the fridge won’t spoil for several hours and the freezer for over a day. You could buy a small generator (perhaps natural gas or propane fueled) that could power these circuits for now using an automatic or manual transfer switch. Later you can add more expensive (and more environmentally friendly) ways to power everything. You don’t have to do everything at once. http://www.northerntool.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?… For instance, the above generator (Generac Centurion Automatic Standby Generator 3400 watts) uses two propane tanks, auto starts on power failure and has it’s own "subpanel" in the form of a power strip that can be user installed inside the house. Northern Tool is selling them for $1800. Anthony

Response:

> Hello again, folks, > I checked in here about a month ago.  Your input helped me to narrow > down my list of solar PV contractors to two.  I have a few more > decisions to make, and then I’ll be ready to sign on the dotted line. > Hope y’all can help! > I’ll briefly reintroduce myself and my project.  I’m installing a PV > system on a suburban house in San Jose, California.  I have been > interested in installing some off-grid, outage-proofing capabilities > as well as grid-tie.  Our earlier discussion started here:

http://groups.google.com/groups?&selm=c09b237b.0410041639.379d3020%40… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I’m now wavering on installing the batteries and islanding > capabilities, at least for the time being.  The reasons are several. > In the first place, even though we’ve had a few outages over the > years, I’ve learned that we’re in a privileged rotating outage block > — there’s a fire station located under a mile from our house.  I wish > that I had paid attention to the frequency and duration of outages > that we had in 1999 and 2000 — I expect that it will get bad again > some day.  Second, the California Energy Commission only rebates the > customer for installing grid-tied generating capacity, and not for > batteries.  Finally, the battery systems are the presently the least > cost-effective part of the system, with the most room for technical > improvements.  I’m particularly dismayed that I would need to buy a > new battery bank every 4-6 years, even if my power never goes out! > The longer I can defer buying the battery system, the better I think > that I’ll do. > Having convinced myself to forego the batteries for now, I still have > to make decisions now that may affect what happens in the future when > I go to add a battery backup.  Different inverter manufacturers have > different approaches to the islanding problem.  It appears that > Xantrex requires you to commit to having your batteries at the time > that you install the inverter.  One inverter model allows grid-tie, > but no battery interface.  Another inverter provides both grid-tie and > battery connections, but I’m told that you CAN’T RUN IT unless you > have the batteries!  SMA appears to have taken a different approach. > Their inverters are grid-tie devices, with an OPTION to connect an > external islanding device and batteries. > I don’t like the idea of buying inverters twice, and having holes cut > in the wall of my house twice.  Thus, I’m leaning toward the SMA > inverters on the promise of a future upgrade path.  The only problem > is that the battery-managing device, called the Sunny Boy Island, is > apparently not yet approved for use by the California Energy > Commission.  One of my PV contractors said that the scuttlebutt is > that it will eventually be avaiable here.  I sent an email to a > marketing person at SMA-America to try to find out about whether they > had at least applied to the CEC to get the Sunny Boy Island approved. > My email wasn’t answered.  That’s not encouraging. > Both PV contractors have advised me to add a sub-panel of circuit > breakers that I’ll eventually want to supply with the battery backup. > I like this idea better than the separate emergency that we discussed > earlier.  At the very least, I would want uninterruptable power to my > refrigerator/freezer.  I’d prefer not to drive home from work, only to > find that I’d lost power six hours earlier, and that I wouldn’t have > spoiled food if only I’d driven home to transfer the power cord from > one outlet to the other… > Do I understand everything that I’ve been told correctly? > Thanks again for your expert advice! > — > Rainforest laid low. > "Wake up and smell the ozone," > Says man with chainsaw. > John J. Ladasky Jr., Ph.D.

If I understand correctly If you do not have an battery bank the PV sort of looses its effect. Sun up electricity, sun down no electricity. When the rolling back up happens and a cloud goes by your array. How the hell do you think the refrigerator is going to get enough power to start? All motors can draw up to 6 times running amps for a while. A while could be almost a second. Where are you going to get the power for this? Grid tie is going to cost you an fortune. Forget the rebates they will never return the expenses. You get to pay for all of the equipment for grid tie AND maintain it. This includes the utility disconnect, metering, and frequency control. Last time I checked into this around here that meant separate "Utility Grade metering and controls".  Have you checked with the serving utility about the regs your going to have to meet?  The utility will pay you an paultry sum for the privilege of receiving the energy. Usually 1/3 to 1/4 what you pay. Do you really have an understanding of what an UPS does and how big it would need to be to run an refrigerator? Let alone and another load called an freezer. UPS’s are not usually sized to start motors. I am not trying to insult. Seems to me your out in an pasture some where just grazing.

Response:

Hello again, folks, I checked in here about a month ago.  Your input helped me to narrow down my list of solar PV contractors to two.  I have a few more decisions to make, and then I’ll be ready to sign on the dotted line. Hope y’all can help! I’ll briefly reintroduce myself and my project.  I’m installing a PV system on a suburban house in San Jose, California.  I have been interested in installing some off-grid, outage-proofing capabilities as well as grid-tie.  Our earlier discussion started here: http://groups.google.com/groups?&selm=c09b237b.0410041639.379d3020%40… I’m now wavering on installing the batteries and islanding capabilities, at least for the time being.  The reasons are several. In the first place, even though we’ve had a few outages over the years, I’ve learned that we’re in a privileged rotating outage block — there’s a fire station located under a mile from our house.  I wish that I had paid attention to the frequency and duration of outages that we had in 1999 and 2000 — I expect that it will get bad again some day.  Second, the California Energy Commission only rebates the customer for installing grid-tied generating capacity, and not for batteries.  Finally, the battery systems are the presently the least cost-effective part of the system, with the most room for technical improvements.  I’m particularly dismayed that I would need to buy a new battery bank every 4-6 years, even if my power never goes out! The longer I can defer buying the battery system, the better I think that I’ll do. Having convinced myself to forego the batteries for now, I still have to make decisions now that may affect what happens in the future when I go to add a battery backup.  Different inverter manufacturers have different approaches to the islanding problem.  It appears that Xantrex requires you to commit to having your batteries at the time that you install the inverter.  One inverter model allows grid-tie, but no battery interface.  Another inverter provides both grid-tie and battery connections, but I’m told that you CAN’T RUN IT unless you have the batteries!  SMA appears to have taken a different approach. Their inverters are grid-tie devices, with an OPTION to connect an external islanding device and batteries. I don’t like the idea of buying inverters twice, and having holes cut in the wall of my house twice.  Thus, I’m leaning toward the SMA inverters on the promise of a future upgrade path.  The only problem is that the battery-managing device, called the Sunny Boy Island, is apparently not yet approved for use by the California Energy Commission.  One of my PV contractors said that the scuttlebutt is that it will eventually be avaiable here.  I sent an email to a marketing person at SMA-America to try to find out about whether they had at least applied to the CEC to get the Sunny Boy Island approved. My email wasn’t answered.  That’s not encouraging. Both PV contractors have advised me to add a sub-panel of circuit breakers that I’ll eventually want to supply with the battery backup. I like this idea better than the separate emergency that we discussed earlier.  At the very least, I would want uninterruptable power to my refrigerator/freezer.  I’d prefer not to drive home from work, only to find that I’d lost power six hours earlier, and that I wouldn’t have spoiled food if only I’d driven home to transfer the power cord from one outlet to the other… Do I understand everything that I’ve been told correctly? Thanks again for your expert advice! — Rainforest laid low. "Wake up and smell the ozone," Says man with chainsaw. John J. Ladasky Jr., Ph.D.

Response:

… > Now, the maximum voltage in James’ setup should be (28.9V/module + > (0.112 V/

Question:

> Russia and Germany, for two.  But it really isn’t relevant.  The French see > themselves as a counterweight to the United States.

Not just the french. Now, the rest of world see the need to counter the USA’s current ambitions. Some are more vocal then others, some don’t have the guts to jeoperdize their commercial ties with USA and their government doesn’t say anything, and some, like england, are now stuck having to support a war criminal because they can’t afford to be seen widthdrawing the support they erroneously gave to Bush/Rumsfelt/Cheney/Wolfowitz. > The world would be a heckofalot worse off without the U.S. than with it.

Not right now. The world would be a safer , quieter and more peaceful place without the USA. The USA is to this decade what the Soviet Union was to the 20th century. A totalitarian regime, police state that invades other countries at will and wants to dictate how other countries are runned. > We’re the ones who repeatedly send emergency disaster relief whenever > there’s a problem somewhere,

That is because your media never shows disaster relief coming from other countries. So you think you are the only ones sending it. That is very false. > the population wants to come here.  If you saw how many people from places > like Pakistan, China, Korea, etc. who have settled here, that would be quite > apparent.

And of you realised that there are immigrats from those countries n many more countries than the USA, you’d realise that you don’t have a monopoly on desirable destinations for people leaving their home country. > see it.  But the world is a small place now.  And even Canada is part of it. > Your economy is pretty closely tied to ours.  If we have a recession, you > will too.  Look what happened worldwide after 9-11.

Exactly. But we don’t have a vote in your elections, yet your regime affects the whole world by abusing its powers and mismanaging itself and its economy. > I’m not sure  you can substantiate that.  Furthermore, Bush doesn’t own any > "failing oil companies" – the only one he was ever involved in went bankrupt > nthe 80’s,

You’ve obviously not seen Farenheight 9-11. Moore documented Bush’s failing busineses before he got into politics. The ones that didn’t go bankrupt were the ones where the Bin ladin family invested in, or in one case, got one of the oil companies they controlled to buy Bush Jr’s failing company. If you watch the movie, start with the final credits and check out the legal team that was hired to clear all the facts stated in this "documentary". There are parts that are perhaps dramatized and likely were staged (from real events), but there are parts that are clearly factual in nature. > and companies like Exxon Mobil aren’t exactly failing.  Of the > 7-sisters, Chevron-Texaco and Exxon Mobil are American,

These aren’t the only oil companies in Texas. And while the big ones above may be classified as "american", it doesn’t mean that foreign interests don’t own large chunks of it. It just means that the company is based in the USA and operates in USD. As far as I know, there are no foreign ownership limits on american oil companies like there are on airlines. > isn’t totally American.  Halliburton is a servicing company, not an oil > company.  Big difference.

They are, to a large extent, in the oil industry. Hence an oil company.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->    U.N. Battles Sex Abuse by Peacekeepers > Now, where are your complaints about the organization that you think is the > global government? >That organisation has setup investigations to look into this problem as well >as the stupid allegatiosn of curruption in the Oil For Food programme made by >US politicians. Anan even made damned sure he hired a US republican to head >that investigation so that when he does declare that there was no serious >wrongdoing, the republicans will be forced to believe him and shut the fuck up. >Go to the UN web site and read up on the Oil For Food programme. They have >tons of pages of information about how it works, the problems that were >discovered and how they dealt with them. >Iraq wasn’t allowed to sell Oil. It was the UN that sold oil and then paid for >the approved goods to be delivered to Iraq. >The whole republican attacks on Anan are based on some anonymous interview of >Hussein who was probably under duress and which resulted in allegations that >hussein *TRIED* to bribe various countries to help suspend sanctions >against Iraq. >And while it is probably very true that Hussein tried to bribe various >countries, there was never any country that pushed to have sanctions lifted. >Partial lifting of sanctions was discussed however, notably medical supplies. >This was pushed not by France, but by aid organisations such as Amnisty Intl >and Intl Red Cross who saw the suffering inside Iraq. >You also need to understand that the Oil For Food programme started in 1998, >before which Hussein had refused offers of OFF. He had to accept because his >country was in ruins to a point where the suffering of his people bothered >even Hussein. >What you need to understand is that Hussein didn’t cheat OFF, he cheated the >sanctions. He lived very well because he STOLE oil, shipped it by truck to >neighbouring countries and sold in on the black market at lower price than >world price. This happened way before OFF was instituted and probably >continued once OFF was begun. The proceeds of those illegal sales couldn’t be >officially used, so he used the money to build personal >homes/castles/mansions. >If there was any wrongdoing in the OFF, you can then blame the OFF programme >board, of which the USA was a member. So the blame is more likely to go to the >USA members than to Kofi Anan. >In terms of wrongdoing in Congo, why blame Anan ? If this wasn’t a UN policy >and was done by individuals and ignored by their direct supervisors, the blame >lies at the low levels. >This is quite different from a government that tells its troups to do what it >takes to extract information from prisoners and make damned sure that the >Defense scretary isn’t told what methods they are using so he is not >incriminated. This is such a shallow attempt at providing some deniability >that the secretary of defense authorised torture. It may work on gullible >americans, but the rest of teh world sees thorugh this.

Amazing that you possess all this insider "knowledge".  I guess the world leaders, in particular Annan and Hussein, must call you at your mommy’s house for daily briefings……

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> If you think the U.S. is bad as far as it treats visitors, how do you > rate the many countries that you’ll find in the Middle East where all > visitors regardless of origins have to confirm to religious and other > customs? >The USA brags about being a defendor or human rights. That is why there is >criticism for the double standars where the USA tells other countries to >respect human rights, but abuses them inside its own country. > more rights than visitors to other countries get. If you get jailed in > America, regardless of your citizenship, you have the same rights > unless you’re classified as an enemy combatant or are convicted of > spying, etc. >Or you’re a canadian with full working papers in the USA who shows up late to >renew a form and are sent to a jail in another state, without any charges, >without any access to lawyers and without th eimmigration departmnet allowing >you to contact your family or employer to tell them that you won’t make it to >the morning staff meeting (or any meetings for an indeterminape period). And >of course, you can’t tell anyone they’ll stuff you in aone cell with 12 people >in it and lights on 24 hours a day. >Or unless you’re a grand mother from a scandinavian country vising her >daughter and grandchildren  in the USA and gets arrested because of some >paperwork issue and sent to jail and then sent back to her home country as a >criminal with shackles and police guard in front of all other passengers. >(instead of simply accompanying her to the flight back to where she came from, >as is accepted practice worldwide when you refuse entry). >Cosnider the case of that guy who lives in CDG in a state of limbo. He may >have been refused entry, but he wasn’t sent to jail. >The problem in the USA is that "enemy combattant" or "suspected terrorist" do >not have any formal definitions and any law enforcement officer can find a way >to decide anyone can fit that description, at which point they have no rights >anymore, no right to a lawyer, can be detained indefinitely without charge etc >etc. And yes, this has happened to USA citizens too, but usuallty just to non >citizens because the Bush regime argues the USA constitution applies only to >citizens (even though, the constitution referes  to "people" noty "citizens" >when it defines legal rights. > Let’s get real: the number of true friends the U.S. has hasn’t changed > much over the years. >You are dead wrong on this one. The USA is now seen as a dangerous wild >country that must be stopped.  It is still seen as the big economic bully that >you are forced to listen to and be polite to because your own economy depends >on trade with the USA. This was very evident when poor nations signed up to >the Bush illegal invasion of Iraq because of arm twisting and bribing done by >Bush/Powell to get anyone to support his illegal and unwarranted destroction >of Iraq. >The USA has lost a lot of friends. It is distrusted and people now laugh at >statements made by the USA making wild claims about country X having dangerous >weapons etc etc. >If the USA didn’t have veto in the security council, you can bet that there >would have been resolutions sanctioning the USA for its war crimes committed >against Iraq. > Yes, people supposedly rallied around us after > 9/11, >Supposedly ?????? >Geez man, your media really didn’t show you what really happened.  Even Bush >had to apoligise for having forgotten that Canada had provide so much help on >9-11 and in the fight against terrorism. (In 2001, Bush had purposefully >ignored Canad’s invitation to visit, traditionally the first intl visit for a >new president of the USA and instead went to Mexico, and after 9-11, Bush >purposefully omitted Canada from a long list of countries which had porvided >moral support for the USA after 9-11, even tough Canada was the one that had >provided the most help (by far) and suffered the most (we lost airlines >because of that). >Despite these very serious diplomatic insults, Canada was one of the first >ones to commit to sending troups to Afghanistan, and Canada didn’t widthdraw >its troups to Afghanistan despite the fact that your drugged military fired on >canadian troups.  And Canada inscreased its presenced in Afghanistan to allow >USA to move troups to Iraq. >France and Germany made similar moves. You had a lot of friends for the war on >terrorism. You have lost them becayuse you shifted the focus from battling >terrorism to invading other countries to impose your own ideology on the >middle east, whcih will motivate the formation of even more terrorism. >We can’t stop the USA from driving drunk because the USA is too big a bully. >But we sure aren’t going to help it get into a car and start destroying the >world any more than it has already done. >Remember that while you almost impeached some guy for getting a blow job, you >elected a guy who got arrested for drunk driving, so the analogy to drunk >drivers is very good. > Many of the countries in Europe that are railing against Iraq supposed > Saddam during his reign. >OK, Lets take France as an example. Your supposed enemy number 1. It is the >USA that made France an ennemy. Not the other way around. Secondly, yes, >France had trade relations with Iraq, so did MANY countries. Weeks before the >USA destrouction of Iraq began, there was a large international trade >fair in Iraq. >What you don’t understand is that the sanctions against Iraq were not >"complete". There were banned products. Iraq could not import anything that >could be used to make banned weapons. Chlorine for instance was banned, which >prevented its use in water purification plants. But it did not prevent Iraq >from importing cars, machinery, steel etc etc etc. >So the accusations made by US pooliticians to stain the UN are only listened >to by gullible americans who can’t take a few minutes to read about the oil >for food programme on the UN web site. >Just because France sold cars to Iraqis doesn’t mean in any way that France >was involved in corrupting the OFF programme. And in fact, as some foreign >newspapers pointed out, the IOFF programme wasn’t driven by Kofi Anan, it was >driven by the security council where the USA played an important role in >approving all purchases. >Also, if you read the OFF reports carefully, you will see that at one point, >the price of oil was too low to generate sufficient funds to feed Iraqis. The >UN decided to take some of the money generated by OFF to purchase oil >production equipment to fixup the Iraqi oil production in the hopes of >increasing production and thus increasing revenus. So the purchases of >non-food products with oil money was fully approved by the security council >and fully documented. >Where there was corruption is in Hussein stealing oil from the UN and shipping >it covertly to neighbours and keeping the proceeds of those sales to himself. >But compared to the current corruption, this was peanuts. Right now, the USA >is stealing all the oil and using it to pay Haliburton and other contractors >working to protect troups in Iraq, instead of hiring local Iraqis to rebuild >their country. (which, in any event, should be fully paid for by theinvading >country, not with oil belonging to the invaded country).

Why don’t you volunteer to go and help rebuild Iraq, since you care about it so much? And, let’s face it, you got nothing else to do…….

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Any country’s guarantees vis a vis rights will almost always tilt more > toward protecting its own citizens. Nothing specific to the U.S. > there. >Read your own constitution. Tell me how you can interpret the legal rights >that are garanteed under yor constitution apply more to citizens than non >citizens. They apply to PEOPLE.  If you are within the legal jurisdiction of >the USA, any human must be afforded the rights garanteed under your >constitution. Your regime has ignored this and just conveniently said that >only citizens are given rights. >Consider the few cases of kidnapped humans held by americans who were >transfered and given due legal process when it was realised they were US >citizens, but those who were not US citziens were still denied due legal >process and still held without charge. >Consider the rights of police to detain anyone they suspect of having ties >with terrorism. These are the exact same powers the USA were decrying the >soviet regimes. > So don’t be late — that simple. If I’m driving a car with an expired > license, I’ll be fined. I can’t enter another country with an expired > passport. Life’s really not that hard in many ways. >You won’t go to jail without right to call you lawyer and without being >charged with a crime. People with legal papers in the USA were sent to jaim >and treated as criminals because the USA instituted now paperwork requirements >and someone decided there was a dot missing on an i. One of them was a senior >VP at Oracle. Not exactly the "illegal alien" mexican low wage worker you >would be thinking about. > I’m not saying jail treatment is necessary for things like that, only > that most of a person’s problems can be avoided. >Tell me how that scandinavian grand mother could have avoided jail by showing >up at USA customs ? If her papers were not in order, she shoudl have been >refused entry and shown to the next flight home, as was the case before the >Bush regime put in the Patriot Act. > Personally, I don’t > think we should be having many cross-border workers to begin with. >Then tell your government to stop giving green cards to anyone. If you have a >green card, a house, family and pay taxes etc, you shouldn’t have to fear >being sent to jail without valid reason. > If Canada wants to lavish free health care on their citizens, then our > GNP shouldn’t help prop that up. >Canadians who go to the USA don’t help prop up our health care system. > That has nothing to do with this issue. He’s not a criminal, only a > citizen of a country that no longer officially exists. >He was refused entry into France for reason X. He was not sent to jail as he >would have been had he arrived in the USA. > Enemy combattant actually does have a definition and that designation > must be specifically given. >Bullshit. Patriot act allows law enforcement to detain anyone they feel like >detaining by applying various designations. That is the whole point of patriot >act: being able to detain anyone they couldn’t detail with due legal process >as was the case in the past. > Even those people have rights, the only > thing that’s majorly different is they can be tried in a military > court rather than a U.S. civilian court. >They have no rights. Canadians who were detained in the USA were not allowed >one phone call, were not granted legal representation and were not charged >with anything. They did not have the right to a cell where lights are turned >off at night. (technically, leaving lights on 7/24 is torture BTW). >It isn’t just Gantanamo where civil rights have been abused. It has happened >inside the USA big time. And I am only speaking about those canadians that >were detained, there are many many more stories of people of arab etnicity who >were detained in similar ways. > Saddam did gas his own people and people in Iran. That’s pretty much a > known. I don’t approve of the operation against them and it ticks me > off that we ever backed that maniac in the first place. >You didn’t back him, you sold him those weapons. In fact, Rumsfeld and Bush >Father arranged for those sales. >And guess what: yes France had sold Saddam weapons. But that was in the 1970s, >and when Saddam was looking for more firepower to attack Iran, he went to the >USA where he met Rumsfeld and company who saw the opportunity to have Iraq hit >Iran with all sorts of nasty stuff and supported Hussein at which point France >stopped selling weapons and it was the USA that got the contract (complete >with staellite intelligence on whare to hit Iran). > Sanctions? Of what? We pay a ton of the freight for the U.N. And > again, most of the countries that might bitch have sure as hell had > their share of dirty laundry. >Iraq also paid dues to the UN as a member. Yet it got sanctions big time for >invading Kuwait. The USA, and in fact no country, can be above the law. Right >now, because of its VETO at the UN, the USA cannot be punisghed for war >crimes, torture, violation of human rights etc. >Note how Bush knows that he is a criminal since he refuses to acknowledge the >ICC because he doesn’t want to be put where he belongs: next to Milosovich, >Hittler and others. >Note that the ICC exists only for countries that refuse to try their leaders >for war crimes. And Since, instead of impeaching the war criminal, americans >re-elected a criminal, the ICC then becomes more relevant because it is clear >that internal mechanisms will not try and punish Bush and hiw cabinet for war >crimes, as well as all the lies to the congress and american public. > You act as if Canada was bankrupted by allowing planes to land there > on 9/11. >Not because of allowing them to land and hosting 30,000 passengers. But >because of the closing of air space which hurt airlines to a point where some >went under very quickly. > And how many did you send? How much money did you send? Friendly fire > is regrettable and should be punished, but that’s beside the point and > something that will  happen in any conflict. >But when we hear about USA accusing Canada of not helping out, it hurts >because you don’t even know we hepped big time and also had sacrifices. > How many people did France sent? Germany? Face it, after the U.S. and > England, everyone else’s "contribution" pales in comparison. >Wrong. For afghanistan, it was a large multinational force. Sanctioned by UN. >It is Iraq where the USA is all alone with the UK and a few token troups from >bribed countries. > As far as enriching its pockets with Iraqi trade, nobody comes close > to France. >You got it wrong. Selling cars in Iraq fills pockets of Renault, Citroen etc, >not the iraqi pockets. > Those sanctions were U.N. based, not just an act of the U.S. >Correct. the 1990s sanctions on Iraq were UN sanctions, and only the UN could >decide to act on them. > The price of oil isn’t something that the U.S. controls. So you can’t > blame us for that situation. >Yes. As the largest consumer of oil, as as the country that refuses to sign up >to treaties to become more energy efficient, the USa not only contributes to >higher oil consumption, but laos cannot use its power to get developing >nations such as China and India to also cleanup their pollutionand oil >consumption problems. > So the billions upon billions that we’re spending to rebuild the place > is imaginary? News to me. >The billions and billions are going to feed your army and to build new bombs >to drop on Fallujah. Not much as gone to actual reconstruction of all the >stuff you guys destroyed with your weapons of mass destruction. >Red Cross has issued a statement that Falluja is uninhabitable because of too >much physical destruction of infrastructure.

If you care so much, why aren’t you in Falluja volunteering your humanitarian services? Oh, I see, you’d rather rant 24/7 on usenet from the comfort of your own dungeon. JF, how many years has it been since you last saw sunlight?

Response:

> helped the Parti Quebecois gain strength.  And the French were getting > kickbacks from Saddam during the entire period of the sanctions since 1991.

Funny, the french TV documentary I saw about Saddam said the exact opposite. The french trade delegations were giving "gifts" to Saddam in exchange for the right to sell their cars and get oil contracts. Same with many other nations. The fact that you siongle out France means that you have an agenda against France. Many many other countries had done deal with Iraq to export their goods and services. > Which was improperly administered by senior UN people, including the > Secretary General, whose son was involved in the kickbacks.

You seen another case of wrong accusations. One US report during a US election made ALLEGATIONS against the UN.  the UN responded by setting up a formal investigation even though the allegations were unfounded since that was the only diplomatic way to shut those US politicians up. The UN is not without problems. The cases of rape mentioned by the rk stalker is one such example. But this is not a UN problem per say (althout ultimatly it is). These rapes are not as a tejh result of any mandate or order given by the UN. They are rogue peacekeepers supplied by a country which abused their own power. (East Timor was done mostly by aussies, and normally, those guilty of such crimes would be tried by the aussi military courts). When canadian peacekeepers were guilty of some crime in Ruanda, they were tried by the canadian military. Remember that the UN does not have its own troups/army. They essentially contract with memeber nations to provide such services when needed. UN defines the mandate. Countries implement the mandante. > to fund the UN over the years, and yet the UN is nothing more than a place > for a bunch of third world nitwits to rant, usually against the United > States, the West, or Israel.

That is what your media in the USA is telling you. For years now, they have been on a hunt to show the UN as a bunch of incapable fools. Why is it that in other countries, the UN isn’t shown in the same light ? Why is it only the US media that makes fun of the UN ? Canadians got killed in the balkans because of a US veto in the UN preventing our peacekeepers from fighting back.  So, who is the stupid ones ? The un ? the canadians, or the USA from purposefully sabotaging the UN’s efforts in the Balkans until the USA finally decided to actually get involved  (years late) and insulted those peacekeepers by saying things such as "we’ll even rescue those incapable UN troups stuck there and unable to leave". (And that was under Clinton, so the anti-UN atytacks from the USA have been going on for a long time). Fact is that the USA does not want the UN to succeed because it removes power for the USA to fuck up the rest of the world. What Bush has done now is to force other countries to pre-emptively prevent the USA from taking actiosn outside its own borders, effectively removing the word "super" from the superpower the USA pretends to be. Superpower ? Saudi Arabia holds about 7% of US assets in total. China holds a whole bunch too. Tow of them widthsraing their assets woudl cause the USA’s economy to collapse. Oh, and guess who kept rescuing Bush Jr,s failing OIL companies before he became a politician ? The Bin laden family. Talk about conflict of interest here. That family has huge investments in the USA.

Response:

> helped the Parti Quebecois gain strength.  And the French were getting > kickbacks from Saddam during the entire period of the sanctions since > 1991. > Funny, the french TV documentary I saw about Saddam said the exact > opposite. > The french trade delegations were giving "gifts" to Saddam in exchange for > the > right to sell their cars and get oil contracts. Same with many other > nations. > The fact that you siongle out France means that you have an agenda against > France.

I could care less about France.  As an American who has spent time in Paris (I confess, my only French experiences) and who speaks limited French, I’ve had positive experiences, and the people have been courteous and friendly to me.  But I also understand that the French have their own political objectives just like everybody else. > Many many other countries had done deal with Iraq to export their goods > and services.

Russia and Germany, for two.  But it really isn’t relevant.  The French see themselves as a counterweight to the United States.  They tend to act solely with this in mind (and, I grant you that I see this through American eyes, I’m quite happy to be American and I’m quite proud of my country, which allows me to disagree with its policies from time to time, something not always possible elsewhere). – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Which was improperly administered by senior UN people, including the > Secretary General, whose son was involved in the kickbacks. > You seen another case of wrong accusations. One US report during a US > election > made ALLEGATIONS against the UN.  the UN responded by setting up a formal > investigation even though the allegations were unfounded since that was > the > only diplomatic way to shut those US politicians up. > The UN is not without problems. The cases of rape mentioned by the rk > stalker > is one such example. But this is not a UN problem per say (althout > ultimatly > it is). These rapes are not as a tejh result of any mandate or order given > by > the UN. They are rogue peacekeepers supplied by a country which abused > their > own power. (East Timor was done mostly by aussies, and normally, those > guilty > of such crimes would be tried by the aussi military courts). > When canadian peacekeepers were guilty of some crime in Ruanda, they were > tried by the canadian military. > Remember that the UN does not have its own troups/army. They essentially > contract with memeber nations to provide such services when needed. UN > defines > the mandate. Countries implement the mandante. > to fund the UN over the years, and yet the UN is nothing more than a > place > for a bunch of third world nitwits to rant, usually against the United > States, the West, or Israel. > That is what your media in the USA is telling you. For years now, they > have > been on a hunt to show the UN as a bunch of incapable fools. Why is it > that in > other countries, the UN isn’t shown in the same light ? Why is it only the > US > media that makes fun of the UN ?

Because the U.S. is recipient of a disproportionate number of those complaints.  And I don’t believe most of what the U.S. media says – the past election here shows their bias. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Canadians got killed in the balkans because of a US veto in the UN > preventing > our peacekeepers from fighting back.  So, who is the stupid ones ? The un > ? > the canadians, or the USA from purposefully sabotaging the UN’s efforts in > the > Balkans until the USA finally decided to actually get involved  (years > late) > and insulted those peacekeepers by saying things such as "we’ll even > rescue > those incapable UN troups stuck there and unable to leave". (And that was > under Clinton, so the anti-UN atytacks from the USA have been going on for > a > long time). > Fact is that the USA does not want the UN to succeed because it removes > power > for the USA to fuck up the rest of the world.

The world would be a heckofalot worse off without the U.S. than with it. We’re the ones who repeatedly send emergency disaster relief whenever there’s a problem somewhere, and we’re the ones who are traditionally the targets of wackos who hate America, but who come from countries where half the population wants to come here.  If you saw how many people from places like Pakistan, China, Korea, etc. who have settled here, that would be quite apparent. > What Bush has done now is to force other countries to pre-emptively > prevent > the USA from taking actiosn outside its own borders, effectively removing > the > word "super" from the superpower the USA pretends to be. > Superpower ? Saudi Arabia holds about 7% of US assets in total. China > holds a > whole bunch too. Tow of them widthsraing their assets woudl cause the > USA’s > economy to collapse.

Don’t be so sure of that.  although, JF, I’m sure you think you’d like to see it.  But the world is a small place now.  And even Canada is part of it. Your economy is pretty closely tied to ours.  If we have a recession, you will too.  Look what happened worldwide after 9-11. > Oh, and guess who kept rescuing Bush Jr,s failing OIL companies before he > became a politician ? The Bin laden family. Talk about conflict of > interest > here. That family has huge investments in the USA.

I’m not sure  you can substantiate that.  Furthermore, Bush doesn’t own any "failing oil companies" – the only one he was ever involved in went bankrupt nthe 80’s, and companies like Exxon Mobil aren’t exactly failing.  Of the 7-sisters, Chevron-Texaco and Exxon Mobil are American, Shell is anglo-dutch, and bp (which includes Amoco) is British.  So the oil industry isn’t totally American.  Halliburton is a servicing company, not an oil company.  Big difference.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> If you think the U.S. is bad as far as it treats visitors, how do you > rate the many countries that you’ll find in the Middle East where all > visitors regardless of origins have to confirm to religious and other > customs? > The USA brags about being a defendor or human rights. That is why there is > criticism for the double standars where the USA tells other countries to > respect human rights, but abuses them inside its own country. > more rights than visitors to other countries get. If you get jailed in > America, regardless of your citizenship, you have the same rights > unless you’re classified as an enemy combatant or are convicted of > spying, etc. > Or you’re a canadian with full working papers in the USA who shows up late > to > renew a form and are sent to a jail in another state, without any charges, > without any access to lawyers and without th eimmigration departmnet > allowing > you to contact your family or employer to tell them that you won’t make it > to > the morning staff meeting (or any meetings for an indeterminape period). > And > of course, you can’t tell anyone they’ll stuff you in aone cell with 12 > people > in it and lights on 24 hours a day. > Or unless you’re a grand mother from a scandinavian country vising her > daughter and grandchildren  in the USA and gets arrested because of some > paperwork issue and sent to jail and then sent back to her home country as > a > criminal with shackles and police guard in front of all other passengers. > (instead of simply accompanying her to the flight back to where she came > from, > as is accepted practice worldwide when you refuse entry). > Cosnider the case of that guy who lives in CDG in a state of limbo. He may > have been refused entry, but he wasn’t sent to jail. > The problem in the USA is that "enemy combattant" or "suspected terrorist" > do > not have any formal definitions and any law enforcement officer can find a > way > to decide anyone can fit that description, at which point they have no > rights > anymore, no right to a lawyer, can be detained indefinitely without charge > etc > etc. And yes, this has happened to USA citizens too, but usuallty just to > non > citizens because the Bush regime argues the USA constitution applies only > to > citizens (even though, the constitution referes  to "people" noty > "citizens" > when it defines legal rights. > Let’s get real: the number of true friends the U.S. has hasn’t changed > much over the years. > You are dead wrong on this one. The USA is now seen as a dangerous wild > country that must be stopped.  It is still seen as the big economic bully > that > you are forced to listen to and be polite to because your own economy > depends > on trade with the USA. This was very evident when poor nations signed up > to > the Bush illegal invasion of Iraq because of arm twisting and bribing done > by > Bush/Powell to get anyone to support his illegal and unwarranted > destroction > of Iraq. > The USA has lost a lot of friends. It is distrusted and people now laugh > at > statements made by the USA making wild claims about country X having > dangerous > weapons etc etc. > If the USA didn’t have veto in the security council, you can bet that > there > would have been resolutions sanctioning the USA for its war crimes > committed > against Iraq. > Yes, people supposedly rallied around us after > 9/11, > Supposedly ?????? > Geez man, your media really didn’t show you what really happened.  Even > Bush > had to apoligise for having forgotten that Canada had provide so much help > on > 9-11 and in the fight against terrorism. (In 2001, Bush had purposefully > ignored Canad’s invitation to visit, traditionally the first intl visit > for a > new president of the USA and instead went to Mexico, and after 9-11, Bush > purposefully omitted Canada from a long list of countries which had > porvided > moral support for the USA after 9-11, even tough Canada was the one that > had > provided the most help (by far) and suffered the most (we lost airlines > because of that). > Despite these very serious diplomatic insults, Canada was one of the first > ones to commit to sending troups to Afghanistan, and Canada didn’t > widthdraw > its troups to Afghanistan despite the fact that your drugged military > fired on > canadian troups.  And Canada inscreased its presenced in Afghanistan to > allow > USA to move troups to Iraq. > France and Germany made similar moves. You had a lot of friends for the > war on > terrorism. You have lost them becayuse you shifted the focus from battling > terrorism to invading other countries to impose your own ideology on the > middle east, whcih will motivate the formation of even more terrorism. > We can’t stop the USA from driving drunk because the USA is too big a > bully. > But we sure aren’t going to help it get into a car and start destroying > the > world any more than it has already done. > Remember that while you almost impeached some guy for getting a blow job, > you > elected a guy who got arrested for drunk driving, so the analogy to drunk > drivers is very good. > Many of the countries in Europe that are railing against Iraq supposed > Saddam during his reign. > OK, Lets take France as an example. Your supposed enemy number 1. It is > the > USA that made France an ennemy. Not the other way around. Secondly, yes, > France had trade relations with Iraq, so did MANY countries. Weeks before > the > USA destrouction of Iraq began, there was a large international trade fair > in Iraq.

France, for years, has seen itself in different eyes than the rest of the world.  Charles DeGaulle singlehandedly almost caused the breakup of your own country by his "vive le quebec libre" comment years ago, which certainly helped the Parti Quebecois gain strength.  And the French were getting kickbacks from Saddam during the entire period of the sanctions since 1991. > What you don’t understand is that the sanctions against Iraq were not > "complete". There were banned products. Iraq could not import anything > that > could be used to make banned weapons. Chlorine for instance was banned, > which > prevented its use in water purification plants. But it did not prevent > Iraq > from importing cars, machinery, steel etc etc etc. > So the accusations made by US pooliticians to stain the UN are only > listened > to by gullible americans who can’t take a few minutes to read about the > oil > for food programme on the UN web site.

Which was improperly administered by senior UN people, including the Secretary General, whose son was involved in the kickbacks. Frankly, JF, the United States has contributed far more than its fair share to fund the UN over the years, and yet the UN is nothing more than a place for a bunch of third world nitwits to rant, usually against the United States, the West, or Israel. > Just because France sold cars to Iraqis doesn’t mean in any way that > France > was involved in corrupting the OFF programme. And in fact, as some foreign > newspapers pointed out, the IOFF programme wasn’t driven by Kofi Anan, it > was > driven by the security council where the USA played an important role in > approving all purchases.

Other than the fact that French leaders were getting kickbacks from Saddam, that is. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Also, if you read the OFF reports carefully, you will see that at one > point, > the price of oil was too low to generate sufficient funds to feed Iraqis. > The > UN decided to take some of the money generated by OFF to purchase oil > production equipment to fixup the Iraqi oil production in the hopes of > increasing production and thus increasing revenus. So the purchases of > non-food products with oil money was fully approved by the security > council > and fully documented. > Where there was corruption is in Hussein stealing oil from the UN and > shipping > it covertly to neighbours and keeping the proceeds of those sales to > himself. > But compared to the current corruption, this was peanuts. Right now, the > USA > is stealing all the oil and using it to pay Haliburton and other > contractors > working to protect troups in Iraq, instead of hiring local Iraqis to > rebuild > their country. (which, in any event, should be fully paid for by > theinvading > country, not with oil belonging to the invaded country).

Frankly, I wish the United States WAS stealing oil – maybe our gasoline (petrol) prices would be lower than they are now.

Response:

>    U.N. Battles Sex Abuse by Peacekeepers > Now, where are your complaints about the organization that you think is the > global government?

That organisation has setup investigations to look into this problem as well as the stupid allegatiosn of curruption in the Oil For Food programme made by US politicians. Anan even made damned sure he hired a US republican to head that investigation so that when he does declare that there was no serious wrongdoing, the republicans will be forced to believe him and shut the fuck up. Go to the UN web site and read up on the Oil For Food programme. They have tons of pages of information about how it works, the problems that were discovered and how they dealt with them. Iraq wasn’t allowed to sell Oil. It was the UN that sold oil and then paid for the approved goods to be delivered to Iraq. The whole republican attacks on Anan are based on some anonymous interview of Hussein who was probably under duress and which resulted in allegations that hussein *TRIED* to bribe various countries to help suspend sanctions against Iraq. And while it is probably very true that Hussein tried to bribe various countries, there was never any country that pushed to have sanctions lifted. Partial lifting of sanctions was discussed however, notably medical supplies. This was pushed not by France, but by aid organisations such as Amnisty Intl and Intl Red Cross who saw the suffering inside Iraq. You also need to understand that the Oil For Food programme started in 1998, before which Hussein had refused offers of OFF. He had to accept because his country was in ruins to a point where the suffering of his people bothered even Hussein. What you need to understand is that Hussein didn’t cheat OFF, he cheated the sanctions. He lived very well because he STOLE oil, shipped it by truck to neighbouring countries and sold in on the black market at lower price than world price. This happened way before OFF was instituted and probably continued once OFF was begun. The proceeds of those illegal sales couldn’t be officially used, so he used the money to build personal homes/castles/mansions. If there was any wrongdoing in the OFF, you can then blame the OFF programme board, of which the USA was a member. So the blame is more likely to go to the USA members than to Kofi Anan. In terms of wrongdoing in Congo, why blame Anan ? If this wasn’t a UN policy and was done by individuals and ignored by their direct supervisors, the blame lies at the low levels. This is quite different from a government that tells its troups to do what it takes to extract information from prisoners and make damned sure that the Defense scretary isn’t told what methods they are using so he is not incriminated. This is such a shallow attempt at providing some deniability that the secretary of defense authorised torture. It may work on gullible americans, but the rest of teh world sees thorugh this.

Response:

> Any country’s guarantees vis a vis rights will almost always tilt more > toward protecting its own citizens. Nothing specific to the U.S. > there.

Read your own constitution. Tell me how you can interpret the legal rights that are garanteed under yor constitution apply more to citizens than non citizens. They apply to PEOPLE.  If you are within the legal jurisdiction of the USA, any human must be afforded the rights garanteed under your constitution. Your regime has ignored this and just conveniently said that only citizens are given rights. Consider the few cases of kidnapped humans held by americans who were transfered and given due legal process when it was realised they were US citizens, but those who were not US citziens were still denied due legal process and still held without charge. Consider the rights of police to detain anyone they suspect of having ties with terrorism. These are the exact same powers the USA were decrying the soviet regimes. > So don’t be late — that simple. If I’m driving a car with an expired > license, I’ll be fined. I can’t enter another country with an expired > passport. Life’s really not that hard in many ways.

You won’t go to jail without right to call you lawyer and without being charged with a crime. People with legal papers in the USA were sent to jaim and treated as criminals because the USA instituted now paperwork requirements and someone decided there was a dot missing on an i. One of them was a senior VP at Oracle. Not exactly the "illegal alien" mexican low wage worker you would be thinking about. > I’m not saying jail treatment is necessary for things like that, only > that most of a person’s problems can be avoided.

Tell me how that scandinavian grand mother could have avoided jail by showing up at USA customs ? If her papers were not in order, she shoudl have been refused entry and shown to the next flight home, as was the case before the Bush regime put in the Patriot Act. > Personally, I don’t > think we should be having many cross-border workers to begin with.

Then tell your government to stop giving green cards to anyone. If you have a green card, a house, family and pay taxes etc, you shouldn’t have to fear being sent to jail without valid reason. > If Canada wants to lavish free health care on their citizens, then our > GNP shouldn’t help prop that up.

Canadians who go to the USA don’t help prop up our health care system. > That has nothing to do with this issue. He’s not a criminal, only a > citizen of a country that no longer officially exists.

He was refused entry into France for reason X. He was not sent to jail as he would have been had he arrived in the USA. > Enemy combattant actually does have a definition and that designation > must be specifically given.

Bullshit. Patriot act allows law enforcement to detain anyone they feel like detaining by applying various designations. That is the whole point of patriot act: being able to detain anyone they couldn’t detail with due legal process as was the case in the past. > Even those people have rights, the only > thing that’s majorly different is they can be tried in a military > court rather than a U.S. civilian court.

They have no rights. Canadians who were detained in the USA were not allowed one phone call, were not granted legal representation and were not charged with anything. They did not have the right to a cell where lights are turned off at night. (technically, leaving lights on 7/24 is torture BTW). It isn’t just Gantanamo where civil rights have been abused. It has happened inside the USA big time. And I am only speaking about those canadians that were detained, there are many many more stories of people of arab etnicity who were detained in similar ways. > Saddam did gas his own people and people in Iran. That’s pretty much a > known. I don’t approve of the operation against them and it ticks me > off that we ever backed that maniac in the first place.

You didn’t back him, you sold him those weapons. In fact, Rumsfeld and Bush Father arranged for those sales. And guess what: yes France had sold Saddam weapons. But that was in the 1970s, and when Saddam was looking for more firepower to attack Iran, he went to the USA where he met Rumsfeld and company who saw the opportunity to have Iraq hit Iran with all sorts of nasty stuff and supported Hussein at which point France stopped selling weapons and it was the USA that got the contract (complete with staellite intelligence on whare to hit Iran). > Sanctions? Of what? We pay a ton of the freight for the U.N. And > again, most of the countries that might bitch have sure as hell had > their share of dirty laundry.

Iraq also paid dues to the UN as a member. Yet it got sanctions big time for invading Kuwait. The USA, and in fact no country, can be above the law. Right now, because of its VETO at the UN, the USA cannot be punisghed for war crimes, torture, violation of human rights etc. Note how Bush knows that he is a criminal since he refuses to acknowledge the ICC because he doesn’t want to be put where he belongs: next to Milosovich, Hittler and others. Note that the ICC exists only for countries that refuse to try their leaders for war crimes. And Since, instead of impeaching the war criminal, americans re-elected a criminal, the ICC then becomes more relevant because it is clear that internal mechanisms will not try and punish Bush and hiw cabinet for war crimes, as well as all the lies to the congress and american public. > You act as if Canada was bankrupted by allowing planes to land there > on 9/11.

Not because of allowing them to land and hosting 30,000 passengers. But because of the closing of air space which hurt airlines to a point where some went under very quickly. > And how many did you send? How much money did you send? Friendly fire > is regrettable and should be punished, but that’s beside the point and > something that will  happen in any conflict.

But when we hear about USA accusing Canada of not helping out, it hurts because you don’t even know we hepped big time and also had sacrifices. > How many people did France sent? Germany? Face it, after the U.S. and > England, everyone else’s "contribution" pales in comparison.

Wrong. For afghanistan, it was a large multinational force. Sanctioned by UN. It is Iraq where the USA is all alone with the UK and a few token troups from bribed countries. > As far as enriching its pockets with Iraqi trade, nobody comes close > to France.

You got it wrong. Selling cars in Iraq fills pockets of Renault, Citroen etc, not the iraqi pockets. > Those sanctions were U.N. based, not just an act of the U.S.

Correct. the 1990s sanctions on Iraq were UN sanctions, and only the UN could decide to act on them. > The price of oil isn’t something that the U.S. controls. So you can’t > blame us for that situation.

Yes. As the largest consumer of oil, as as the country that refuses to sign up to treaties to become more energy efficient, the USa not only contributes to higher oil consumption, but laos cannot use its power to get developing nations such as China and India to also cleanup their pollutionand oil consumption problems. > So the billions upon billions that we’re spending to rebuild the place > is imaginary? News to me.

The billions and billions are going to feed your army and to build new bombs to drop on Fallujah. Not much as gone to actual reconstruction of all the stuff you guys destroyed with your weapons of mass destruction. Red Cross has issued a statement that Falluja is uninhabitable because of too much physical destruction of infrastructure.

Response:

All this knowledge on the US from someone who sits in his mothers basement 24 hrs. a day. GET A LIFE, you pitiful asshole.

Response:

> Two huge differences between the French screw-up are: >  - The Israelis are in their own class, paranoia-wise

What I found interesting was that the article implied that the replica handgun was planted by an Israeli security official in a German airport. >  - Planting a replica gun is entirely different than planting genuine > C4,     as explaining a replica gun to a TSA screener would not be too >     bad, but explaining C4 is only the first step in a free trip to > Cuba.     The good news is that your relatives will eventually be > able to see     photos of you on TV, but the bad news is that you > will be naked     with a leash around your neck and some dyke > standing over you.

Brings a whole new dimension to "I’m a celebrity, get me out of here". — Simon Elliott    http://www.ctsn.co.uk

Response:

> Israeli security officers seem to make a habit of planting deactivated > handguns in passengers’ baggage. This time they lost one: > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3517570.stm > "According to Haaretz, security officers sometimes plant replica guns > in passengers’ luggage as a way of keeping El Al’s baggage-checkers > on their toes." > Two huge differences between the French screw-up are: > – The Israelis are in their own class, paranoia-wise

Can you blame them for being a bit paranoid? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> – Planting a replica gun is entirely different than planting genuine C4, >    as explaining a replica gun to a TSA screener would not be too >    bad, but explaining C4 is only the first step in a free trip to Cuba. >   The good news is that your relatives will eventually be able to see >    photos of you on TV, but the bad news is that you will be naked >    with a leash around your neck and some dyke standing over you. > Pete

Response:

> If you think the U.S. is bad as far as it treats visitors, how do you > rate the many countries that you’ll find in the Middle East where all > visitors regardless of origins have to confirm to religious and other > customs?

The USA brags about being a defendor or human rights. That is why there is criticism for the double standars where the USA tells other countries to respect human rights, but abuses them inside its own country. > more rights than visitors to other countries get. If you get jailed in > America, regardless of your citizenship, you have the same rights > unless you’re classified as an enemy combatant or are convicted of > spying, etc.

Or you’re a canadian with full working papers in the USA who shows up late to renew a form and are sent to a jail in another state, without any charges, without any access to lawyers and without th eimmigration departmnet allowing you to contact your family or employer to tell them that you won’t make it to the morning staff meeting (or any meetings for an indeterminape period). And of course, you can’t tell anyone they’ll stuff you in aone cell with 12 people in it and lights on 24 hours a day. Or unless you’re a grand mother from a scandinavian country vising her daughter and grandchildren  in the USA and gets arrested because of some paperwork issue and sent to jail and then sent back to her home country as a criminal with shackles and police guard in front of all other passengers. (instead of simply accompanying her to the flight back to where she came from, as is accepted practice worldwide when you refuse entry). Cosnider the case of that guy who lives in CDG in a state of limbo. He may have been refused entry, but he wasn’t sent to jail. The problem in the USA is that "enemy combattant" or "suspected terrorist" do not have any formal definitions and any law enforcement officer can find a way to decide anyone can fit that description, at which point they have no rights anymore, no right to a lawyer, can be detained indefinitely without charge etc etc. And yes, this has happened to USA citizens too, but usuallty just to non citizens because the Bush regime argues the USA constitution applies only to citizens (even though, the constitution referes  to "people" noty "citizens" when it defines legal rights. > Let’s get real: the number of true friends the U.S. has hasn’t changed > much over the years.

You are dead wrong on this one. The USA is now seen as a dangerous wild country that must be stopped.  It is still seen as the big economic bully that you are forced to listen to and be polite to because your own economy depends on trade with the USA. This was very evident when poor nations signed up to the Bush illegal invasion of Iraq because of arm twisting and bribing done by Bush/Powell to get anyone to support his illegal and unwarranted destroction of Iraq. The USA has lost a lot of friends. It is distrusted and people now laugh at statements made by the USA making wild claims about country X having dangerous weapons etc etc. If the USA didn’t have veto in the security council, you can bet that there would have been resolutions sanctioning the USA for its war crimes committed against Iraq. > Yes, people supposedly rallied around us after > 9/11,

Supposedly ?????? Geez man, your media really didn’t show you what really happened.  Even Bush had to apoligise for having forgotten that Canada had provide so much help on 9-11 and in the fight against terrorism. (In 2001, Bush had purposefully ignored Canad’s invitation to visit, traditionally the first intl visit for a new president of the USA and instead went to Mexico, and after 9-11, Bush purposefully omitted Canada from a long list of countries which had porvided moral support for the USA after 9-11, even tough Canada was the one that had provided the most help (by far) and suffered the most (we lost airlines because of that). Despite these very serious diplomatic insults, Canada was one of the first ones to commit to sending troups to Afghanistan, and Canada didn’t widthdraw its troups to Afghanistan despite the fact that your drugged military fired on canadian troups.  And Canada inscreased its presenced in Afghanistan to allow USA to move troups to Iraq. France and Germany made similar moves. You had a lot of friends for the war on terrorism. You have lost them becayuse you shifted the focus from battling terrorism to invading other countries to impose your own ideology on the middle east, whcih will motivate the formation of even more terrorism. We can’t stop the USA from driving drunk because the USA is too big a bully. But we sure aren’t going to help it get into a car and start destroying the world any more than it has already done. Remember that while you almost impeached some guy for getting a blow job, you elected a guy who got arrested for drunk driving, so the analogy to drunk drivers is very good. > Many of the countries in Europe that are railing against Iraq supposed > Saddam during his reign.

OK, Lets take France as an example. Your supposed enemy number 1. It is the USA that made France an ennemy. Not the other way around. Secondly, yes, France had trade relations with Iraq, so did MANY countries. Weeks before the USA destrouction of Iraq began, there was a large international trade fair in Iraq. What you don’t understand is that the sanctions against Iraq were not "complete". There were banned products. Iraq could not import anything that could be used to make banned weapons. Chlorine for instance was banned, which prevented its use in water purification plants. But it did not prevent Iraq from importing cars, machinery, steel etc etc etc. So the accusations made by US pooliticians to stain the UN are only listened to by gullible americans who can’t take a few minutes to read about the oil for food programme on the UN web site. Just because France sold cars to Iraqis doesn’t mean in any way that France was involved in corrupting the OFF programme. And in fact, as some foreign newspapers pointed out, the IOFF programme wasn’t driven by Kofi Anan, it was driven by the security council where the USA played an important role in approving all purchases. Also, if you read the OFF reports carefully, you will see that at one point, the price of oil was too low to generate sufficient funds to feed Iraqis. The UN decided to take some of the money generated by OFF to purchase oil production equipment to fixup the Iraqi oil production in the hopes of increasing production and thus increasing revenus. So the purchases of non-food products with oil money was fully approved by the security council and fully documented. Where there was corruption is in Hussein stealing oil from the UN and shipping it covertly to neighbours and keeping the proceeds of those sales to himself. But compared to the current corruption, this was peanuts. Right now, the USA is stealing all the oil and using it to pay Haliburton and other contractors working to protect troups in Iraq, instead of hiring local Iraqis to rebuild their country. (which, in any event, should be fully paid for by theinvading country, not with oil belonging to the invaded country).

Response:

> Israeli security officers seem to make a habit of planting deactivated > handguns in passengers’ baggage. This time they lost one: > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3517570.stm > "According to Haaretz, security officers sometimes plant replica guns > in passengers’ luggage as a way of keeping El Al’s baggage-checkers > on their toes."

Two huge differences between the French screw-up are:  - The Israelis are in their own class, paranoia-wise  - Planting a replica gun is entirely different than planting genuine C4,     as explaining a replica gun to a TSA screener would not be too     bad, but explaining C4 is only the first step in a free trip to Cuba.    The good news is that your relatives will eventually be able to see     photos of you on TV, but the bad news is that you will be naked     with a leash around your neck and some dyke standing over you. Pete

Response:

> > I have news for you. Inserting explosives in luggage is standard > practice around the world for airport security/police when doing > tests of the efficacy of explosives detection and staff training. > The hell it is.  There is no point in inserting explosives into an > innocent person’s luggage.  All that is needed to be done is to bring > a bag owned by the security detail and insert the explosives into it. > Many people used to lock their luggage before 9/11 and many still do. > It would be difficult to insert explosives into a locked bag.  The > French screwed up big time here.

Israeli security officers seem to make a habit of planting deactivated handguns in passengers’ baggage. This time they lost one: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3517570.stm "According to Haaretz, security officers sometimes plant replica guns in passengers’ luggage as a way of keeping El Al’s baggage-checkers on their toes." — Simon Elliott    http://www.ctsn.co.uk

Response:

> — and putting explosives into a passenger’s luggage without either asking > permission or even informing them is irresponsible behavior.

None of the news reports confirmed whether the pax had been notified or not. Just assuming worse case scenario. > luggage is, well, Just Fantasy, Mezei.  I think that is a solvable problem > without having to put explosive’s into a passenger’s luggage.

No it isn’t. You need real world testing. Not simulated testing. > But even more importantly the CDG security detected the explosives but allowed > it on the plane anyway.  That performance is even worse than the performance > of the French police.

They didn’t "allow" it to go on the plane. They just forgot to pull it off the belt because they got distracted while giving the dog goodies. (Or so the story goes) What we also don’t know is whether the dog handlers knew this was a test or not. If they knew it was a test (and as a result, would have been a test of only the dog’s abilities), then it might explain why no action was taken as soon as dogs sounded the alarm since the agent knew it wasn’t a dangerous package. If, however, the agents didn’t know this was a test, they they are in severe breach since they should have sounded the big alarm, stopped the belt and called the bomb squad (at which point the testers would have come in and announced it was just a test. These test are done routinely around the world. The dogs cost a LOT of money and can only work a few hours a day. They must  constantly be tested to ensure they continue to be addicted to the smell of explosive (that is what their training essentially consists of). > So we have French police inserting explosive’s into the luggage and we have > the French CDG security allowing it onto the plane.  And then the French CDG > personnel allow the plane to take off.  And then they don’t even know what > plane they put their luggage on.

You are abusing the word "allow". Try to follow a piece of luggage in a large airport automated luggage sorting facility. At AMS, one of the new systems can transport luggage at up to 60km/h. > The big error was that the screeners allowed the explosives onto any aircraft.

Yep. And that is why it is making the news. But the fact that this incident made the news is interesting because it shows how the media in France isn’t biased towards hiding their own government’s snafus. > And you don’t know that it hasn’t happenned before.

It has happened before. In fact, as you recall, TWA800 had traces of explosives on some strategically placed seats that triggered speculation that it was a terrorist act. Turns out that TWA had cooperated with one airport’s police dept to allow a TRACE of explosive to be put on a seat to see if their dog would catch it.

Response:

> I’m sorry, Sir, but I think you have made a logical error.  If the story was > not about the USA, why did you decide to rant against the USA?

I did not rant about the USA. Only pointed out that a passenger might be treated really bad in countries that do not respect due legal process for visitors. Look up Patriot Act which your politicians signed. > And please, your temper.

And stop steering anything I say into accusations of the USA.  Your participation in this newsgorup has one purpose and it is to turn everything I say into an accusation of the USA. > into an international one.  Of course, you turn that into yet another anti-USA

Again. I used how the USA treates incoming non citizen vistors as an example of the impact of this error by french police. This is not a rant against the USA. You are the one who steered this into a rant againt the USA. > rant.  Perhaps you should seek help for your hate, it’s not good for you.

Another example of you trying to steer this topid towards the USA. You need to learn to deal with the fact that your country has managed to turn solidarity after 9-11 into hjatred and disrespcted after Bush started his war crimes against Iraq and dismissed human rights and international treaties, especially with respect to treatment of passengers at airports. > Well, I have news for you Professor, just because it’s standard practice > doesn’t mean that it’s a very good idea, does it?

The reason one uses random luggage is to ensure that the dogs and staff will not get any clue from any familiar luggage that may have any smells related to the pairport police station where dogs are kept during their off time, or that any previous use of the luggage would leave traces of explosives, potenttially of another type, thus squewing the dog’s ability to detect that particular type of explosive. Random luggage also has legitimate luggage tags and also random scents from passenger,s own luggage (eg: nothing familiar to the docgs). > Personally, I think inserting explosives into a passenger’s luggage without > either informing the passenger or asking the passenger’s permission, is simply > wrong.  And a no-no.

Your TSA does this every day when they open luggage and leave a piece of paper indicating that the luggage was opened. > If that was a test, it sounds like the French totally flunked.  If I > understand aircraft security, it’s the job of the police to make sure that > explosives do not get on the plane, not to introduce explosives onto the > aircraft.  Perhaps you and/or the French have a different position on this.

Duh ! They are testing the process to block explosives. So they introduce explosives in the system and monitor the luggage through the system to ensure that it is spotted. In this case, it was in fact spotted, but they got distracted and left the luggage on the belt. The big error was the staff not taking down the tag information such as flight number. Perhaps they never coinsidered the possibility that the luggage would continue on the belts. This had not happened before. You can bet that procedures will be changed to ensure this doesn’t happen again. > Good manners states that you don’t have police put explosives into a > passenger’s luggage without informing him/her or asking him/her.

Proper testing requires you have totally anonymous luggage nobody knwos about with totally anonymous contents dogs have no familiarity with.  And the passenger must not know because his/her behaviour at the security check in might be different and lead staff to perform a check they woudln’t have performed if behaviour had been totally normal. If you want to have a perfectly legitimate test, you really need to put the luggage in a perfectly anonymous way.

Response:

> I have news for you. Inserting explosives in luggage is standard practice > around the world for airport security/police when doing tests of the efficacy > of explosives detection and staff training. Procedures always result in the > explosive being removed from luggage before it makes it to plane.

This isn’t the first time, so I guess it really isn’t "always" removed.

Response:

On Friday, a routine security check ran afoul… Security officers inserted some C4 explosives in a randomly chosen piece of luggage to test explosive detection process. The dogs did detect the eplosives, but while the officers congratulated the dog, they forgot to retrieve the luggage from the belt and the luggage made it to the plane with its explosives still in it. There were about 90 flights out of CDG during that time period. They had no clue on which aircraft the luggage went. (perhaps they should take a note of the luggage flight number before putting explosives in it) The C4 was not a danger since it had no detonator. However, imagine what would happen to a passenger landing in the USA and they open his luggage to find C4 explosives. The guys would be sent to Gantanamo or Syria in no time. Actually, even if the CDG officers had retrieved the C4 before releasing the luggage back onto the belt, wouldn’t there be traces of C4 left in the suitcase which could cause problems to the passenger ? Woudl such exercises result in the officers leaving a note in the luggage indicating that there was a legitimate test of C4 and that the passenger was not involved ? (in case there are problems at customs for passenger when he lands)

Response:

> I see you are off railing on the USA again — when it was the French police > putting power military explosives into a passenger’s luggage without asking > permission.  And then losing the explosives.ave

This story has nothing to do with your fucking country., Stop being pararoid about all non americans trying to destroy your country. Your country’s problems are of your own doings. > At least in the USA airports, it’s a no-no to let any one else have your > luggage much less put explosives in.  And it’s also a no-no to put explosives > on aircraft

I have news for you. Inserting explosives in luggage is standard practice around the world for airport security/police when doing tests of the efficacy of explosives detection and staff training. Procedures always result in the explosive being removed from luggage before it makes it to plane. This is why this mistake made worldwide news.

Response:

> The C4 was not a danger since it had no detonator.

C4 is highly flammable.  Troops have used it to heat their coffee or soup by cutting off small chunks and igniting it below their cup. It is similar to a product called Sterno (in the USA) in that respect. > However, imagine what would happen to a passenger landing in the > USA and they open his luggage to find C4 explosives. The guys > would be sent to Gantanamo or Syria in no time.

No kidding.  The French sure pulled a Keystone Kops routine. > Actually, even if the CDG officers had retrieved the C4 before > releasing the luggage back onto the belt, wouldn’t there be traces > of C4 left in the suitcase which could cause problems to the > passenger ?

Yes it would.  He could get rid of the C4 traces in his clothes by washing them, but it is difficult to wash the interior of a suitcase.  He would be well advised to trash the suitcase and any other item that cannot be washed, or at least never bring them to an airport. Pete

Response:

> I have news for you. Inserting explosives in luggage is standard > practice around the world for airport security/police when doing > tests of the efficacy of explosives detection and staff training.

The hell it is.  There is no point in inserting explosives into an innocent person’s luggage.  All that is needed to be done is to bring a bag owned by the security detail and insert the explosives into it.  Many people used to lock their luggage before 9/11 and many still do.  It would be difficult to insert explosives into a locked bag.  The French screwed up big time here. Pete

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> On Friday, a routine security check ran afoul… > Security officers inserted some C4 explosives in a randomly chosen piece > of > luggage to test explosive detection process. > The dogs did detect the eplosives, but while the officers congratulated > the > dog, they forgot to retrieve the luggage from the belt and the luggage > made it > to the plane with its explosives still in it. > There were about 90 flights out of CDG during that time period. They had > no > clue on which aircraft the luggage went. (perhaps they should take a note > of > the luggage flight number before putting explosives in it) > The C4 was not a danger since it had no detonator. However, imagine what > would > happen to a passenger landing in the USA

Un. Bee. Leevable. You turned a story about a French screw-up into a rant against the US. This is something only a pathetic kook with no life outside of Usenet would do.

Response:

> I have news for you. Inserting explosives in luggage is standard practice > around the world for airport security/police when doing tests of the efficacy > of explosives detection and staff training. Procedures always result in the > explosive being removed from luggage before it makes it to plane. This is why > this mistake made worldwide news.

It’s world wide practice to place explosives, drugs, and weapons in luggage. Luggage which is provided and marked in one way or another.  This is the first I’ve heard of stuffing Grandma Jones’s underwear bag with C-4.  We’ll have to add another name on the No-Fly list.  The French Security.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>I see you are off railing on the USA again — when it was the French >>police putting power military explosives into a passenger’s luggage >>without asking permission.  And then losing the explosives.ave >This story has nothing to do with your fucking country., > I’m sorry, Sir, but I think you have made a logical error.  If the story was > not about the USA, why did you decide to rant against the USA? > And please, your temper.

Note from the OP now deleted. "The C4 was not a danger since it had no detonator. However, imagine what would happen to a passenger landing in the USA and they open his luggage to find C4 explosives. The guys would be sent to Gantanamo (sic) or Syria in no time." That was certainly a comment about the US and, while the response was strong, it was not unconnected with the original post. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Stop being >pararoid about all non americans trying to destroy your country. > I’m sorry, Sir, but I think you have made yet another error — that’s Just > Fantasy, Mezei.  I am not paranoid about all non-USA people trying to destroy > the USA.  Please join us in reality. >Your >country’s problems are of your own doings. > This article is about the French inserting explosive’s unknowingly into a > passenger’s luggage.  That’s a problem the French have.  Except if the plane > is heading to the USA, then it’s a USA problem created by irresponsible French > police.  After all, after having inserted explosives into luggage — without > informing the owner, must less asking permission — they then subsequently > lost the explosives and it appears to have been loaded on a plane, only they > do not know which one!  Again, primarily a French problem which they turned > into an international one.  Of course, you turn that into yet another anti-USA > rant.  Perhaps you should seek help for your hate, it’s not good for you.  If > you read the paper this week, you’ll find that such emotions may prematurely > age you. >>At least in the USA airports, it’s a no-no to let any one else have your >>luggage much less put explosives in.  And it’s also a no-no to put >>explosives on aircraft >I have news for you. Inserting explosives in luggage is standard practice >around the world for airport security/police when doing tests of the >efficacy of explosives detection and staff training. > Well, I have news for you Professor, just because it’s standard practice > doesn’t mean that it’s a very good idea, does it?   > Personally, I think inserting explosives into a passenger’s luggage without > either informing the passenger or asking the passenger’s permission, is simply > wrong.  And a no-no. > Again, and perhaps there are differences between you and me, I think it’s > wrong to add explosive’s to the aircraft’s cargo.  You seem to have no problem > with that. > If that was a test, it sounds like the French totally flunked.  If I > understand aircraft security, it’s the job of the police to make sure that > explosives do not get on the plane, not to introduce explosives onto the > aircraft.  Perhaps you and/or the French have a different position on this. >Procedures always >result in the explosive being removed from luggage before it makes it to >plane. This is why this mistake made worldwide news. > Good manners states that you don’t have police put explosives into a > passenger’s luggage without informing him/her or asking him/her. > Again, and this is just little ol’ me, Professor, I consider that procedure to > be not only flawed but unbelievable stupid.  That is why it has made worldwide > news. > Do have a good day, Sir.

Response:

Question:

> and who wants to go to bed with an electrician showing butt > cleavage?…LOL

Shame. That is a plumber trait and not seen in the more civilized trades. mike

Response:

,,,and then some electricians are working as engineers and making genius ideas work. You just won’t know until you question. In the end the owner has to feel comfortable with what he is doing and getting. If the electrician baulks then he just lacks confidence or bedside manner and who wants to go to bed with an electrician showing butt cleavage?…LOL

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Some electricians bent pipe for all five years of their apprenticeship. I > inspect their work professionally. Some of them can’t add two numbers > together. > I know one gentleman who spent three years of a four year > apprenticeship on a large project. Those three years were spent > installing and moving fluorescent lights in ‘T’ bar ceilings. His > helper did switches and receptacles. They were both good at what they > did, but NOT the other guy’s job. I don’t believe thinking was allowed. > Sad but true. The contractor wants to maximize profit, so the assembly > line mentality comes into play > mike

Response:

>Who wants 500MCM aluminum wire in their ground though?…LOL

No-one ever told you size doesn’t matter?  8*)  What’s the copper equivalent of 500MCM aluminum?

Response:

> Some electricians bent pipe for all five years of their apprenticeship. I > inspect their work professionally. Some of them can’t add two numbers > together.

I know one gentleman who spent three years of a four year apprenticeship on a large project. Those three years were spent installing and moving fluorescent lights in ‘T’ bar ceilings. His helper did switches and receptacles. They were both good at what they did, but NOT the other guy’s job. I don’t believe thinking was allowed. Sad but true. The contractor wants to maximize profit, so the assembly line mentality comes into play mike

Response:

> What’s the copper > equivalent of 500MCM aluminum?

350MCM Copper….. Me

Response:

Not many materials have the huge exponential resistance/heat curve aluminum does. Overload doesn’t make it glow like copper…it flashes and explodes.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Who wants 500MCM aluminum wire in their ground though?…LOL > No-one ever told you size doesn’t matter?  8*)  What’s the copper > equivalent of 500MCM aluminum?

Response:

>The heaviest copper you can afford.

You may be able to afford a lower voltage drop in aluminum wire than in copper.  For the main fed it really doesn’t matter (as long as the terminals are rated for aluminum and the wire is treated with the appropriate anticorrosion grease) what the material is, as long as the ampacity and voltage drop requirements are met.

Response:

Some electricians bent pipe for all five years of their apprenticeship. I inspect their work professionally. Some of them can’t add two numbers together. Ask questions and recommend what you want.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> Hi, >> I am currently getting my electrician to connect my new Farm House to >> the mains power. >> The energy companies pole where we need to start is 165 meters from >> pole to house fuse box. >> We are in Australia and use 240v >> How can I calculate the size of the underground cable required to >> complete this job? >> I am getting conflicting information from my electricians so I just >> want to get someone elses opinion. >> Thx Daren > If I was paying an electritian and felt I had to question my > electrician then I would get another electrician. The reason you pay > an "expert" is for his/her experience. Express your needs about how > you need the system to work and let them do there job. If it doesn’t > work right make them come back and fix it. If I was one of your > subcontractors and you where constantly working me off against > another over everything then I’d bow out and find another job to do. > if you were my sub and you complained about my "working off against > another" i would just fire you > my job my questions. get off the jobsite go home

Response:

Who wants 500MCM aluminum wire in their ground though?…LOL

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->The heaviest copper you can afford. > You may be able to afford a lower voltage drop in aluminum wire than > in copper.  For the main fed it really doesn’t matter (as long as the > terminals are rated for aluminum and the wire is treated with the > appropriate anticorrosion grease) what the material is, as long as the > ampacity and voltage drop requirements are met.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hi, > I am currently getting my electrician to connect my new Farm House to > the mains power. > The energy companies pole where we need to start is 165 meters from > pole to house fuse box. > We are in Australia and use 240v > How can I calculate the size of the underground cable required to > complete this job? > I am getting conflicting information from my electricians so I just > want to get someone elses opinion. > Thx Daren > If I was paying an electritian and felt I had to question my > electrician then I would get another electrician. The reason you pay > an "expert" is for his/her experience. Express your needs about how > you need the system to work and let them do there job. If it doesn’t > work right make them come back and fix it. If I was one of your > subcontractors and you where constantly working me off against > another over everything then I’d bow out and find another job to do.

if you were my sub and you complained about my "working off against another" i would just fire you my job my questions. get off the jobsite go home

Response:

The heaviest copper you can afford.   Hi,   I am currently getting my electrician to connect my new Farm House to the mains power.   The energy companies pole where we need to start is 165 meters from pole to house fuse box.   We are in Australia and use 240v   How can I calculate the size of the underground cable required to complete this job?   I am getting conflicting information from my electricians so I just want to get someone elses opinion.   Thx Daren

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Hi, > I am currently getting my electrician to connect my new Farm House to > the mains power. > The energy companies pole where we need to start is 165 meters from pole > to house fuse box. > We are in Australia and use 240v > How can I calculate the size of the underground cable required to > complete this job? > I am getting conflicting information from my electricians so I just want > to get someone elses opinion. > Thx Daren

If I was paying an electritian and felt I had to question my electrician then I would get another electrician. The reason you pay an "expert" is for his/her experience. Express your needs about how you need the system to work and let them do there job. If it doesn’t work right make them come back and fix it. If I was one of your subcontractors and you where constantly working me off against another over everything then I’d bow out and find another job to do.

Response:

  Hi,   I am currently getting my electrician to connect my new Farm House to the mains power.   The energy companies pole where we need to start is 165 meters from pole to house fuse box.   We are in Australia and use 240v   How can I calculate the size of the underground cable required to complete this job?   I am getting conflicting information from my electricians so I just want to get someone elses opinion.   Thx Daren   This calculator is based on the NEC so there could be differences in AU.   http://www.electrician.com/vd_calculator.html

Response:

>Hi, >I am currently getting my electrician to connect my new Farm House to >the mains power. >The energy companies pole where we need to start is 165 meters from pole >to house fuse box. >We are in Australia and use 240v >How can I calculate the size of the underground cable required to >complete this job?

Well, you need to know your wire size and type and current draw. You also need to know your wire length in the complete circuit (so in the US, that would be double the distance or 330 meters Then you need to know your acceptable losses. Then you can compute the voltage drop using Ohm’s Law:  E = I * R So the higher the resistance, or the higher the current, the greater the voltage drop. My rough calculations suggest that for 4-0 aluminum wire (a standard size for the US), assuming 240V/200Amp service, your voltage drop would be about 6.1% (13.81V). In the US, (at least where I live), for a run of your length, the power company would have required me to install a step up transformer at the street and run 480V underground; also a stepdown transformer at the house. This would reduce the resistive losses, as the current would be less.  Even taking into account transformer losses. It was one of the contributing factors to the expense of running grid power to my house, and one of the reasons I remain off-grid. –ron

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Hi, > I am currently getting my electrician to connect my new Farm House to > the mains power. > The energy companies pole where we need to start is 165 meters from pole > to house fuse box. > We are in Australia and use 240v > How can I calculate the size of the *underground* cable required to > complete this job? > I am getting conflicting information from my electricians so I just want > to get someone elses opinion. > Thx Daren

You haven’t given enough information to solve this problem, but it is absolutely necessary to know the peak kw (or current in Amperes) your house uses. If you have a shop with electric powered tools, your power needs are higher than average. Once you know the peak amperes (or kw) you will use, the process is fairly straight forward. You use a current rating table such as the one below:         AWG  dia    circ  open   cable  ft/lb   ohms/              mils   mils  air A  Amp    bare    1000′         10   101.9 10380    55    33    31.82   1.018         12    80.8  6530    41    23    50.59   1.619         14    64.1  4107    32    17    80.44   2.575 Courtesy: www.epanorama.net/documents/wiring/wire_resistance.html. It says that a 10 AWG copper wire can carry 33 amperes. To convert kw to current one uses the following equation:         amperes = watts / voltage. I suspect that the electricians you consulted estimated different kw you will use in the house. To be safe, use the larger wire, especially if you have future plans to expand the size of your house.

Response:

Hi, I am currently getting my electrician to connect my new Farm House to the mains power. The energy companies pole where we need to start is 165 meters from pole to house fuse box. We are in Australia and use 240v How can I calculate the size of the underground cable required to complete this job? I am getting conflicting information from my electricians so I just want to get someone elses opinion. Thx Daren

Response:

Question:

war stories So We Win Fallujah. Then What? The big question is what comes after. By Fred Kaplan Posted Monday, Nov. 8, 2004, at 3:10 PM PT So, the long-postponed offensive in Fallujah is finally under way, though it’s unclear to what end. Hundreds, probably thousands, of insurgents will be killed. At best, the American soldiers and Marines will take control of the city. But then what? Fallujah isn’t Masada or the Alamo, some last-ditch outpost where the rebels whoop their final battle cry, rally one more round of resistance, then pass into history when their last rifleman falls. The problem is that the insurgents are active all over the Sunni Triangle. They dramatized this fact over the weekend. In Samarra, attacks on Iraqi police stations killed 33, including the local national guard commander, and injured 48. In Ramadi, a slew of suicide car bombings wounded 20 U.S. Marines. In Haditha and Haqlaniyah, guerrillas raided three police stations, killing 22 officers. In Diyala Province, the governor’s aide and two members of the provincial governing council were killed. Bombs also exploded across Baghdad, at a Catholic church, and against U.S. convoys along the main road to the airport. The highly coordinated attacks in Samarra are particularly disturbing, as U.S. and Iraqi forces supposedly pacified that city just last month. They might now accomplish the same feat in Fallujah; between 10,000 and 15,000 American soldiers and Marines are involved in the offensive, after all. But after the fighting is over, the siege can’t be sustained for long. Residents, who have fled the city in anticipation of the battle, will want to return home; commercial traffic will once again flow; and it will be hard to block a new crop of insurgents from coming and going