text:
November 28, 2006
Contact: Kevin M. Mukri
(202) 874-5770
OCC Reminds Consumers of Holiday Tips on Gift Cards
WASHINGTON – As the holiday shopping season gets underway, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) wants consumers to know that it is important to check carefully the terms and conditions that apply to gift cards they buy or receive.
People thinking about purchasing gift cards should consult a 2004 OCC Consumer Advisory that provides important information about such issues as fees and expiration dates, and explains how to handle complaints and lost or stolen cards.
"As we enter the holiday season, it is especially important that consumers be alert to the wide variety of terms and conditions available in the gift card market," said Comptroller John C. Dugan. "By asking a few questions based on the information provided in our Advisory, holiday shoppers will be able to select the gift card that best meets their requirements for this popular product."
Some issuers, for example, deduct a monthly fee from the gift card or apply inactivity fees if the card has not been used for some period of time. Gift card holders may not realize that the value of their cards has been reduced until they use them for a purchase.
The OCC suggests that consumers make sure they have received disclosures on some of the important terms and conditions of the gift card they purchase, including:
If these disclosures are not stated on the gift card itself, or its packaging, the OCC suggests that consumers check to see if there is a toll-free number or Web site that will provide this information.
Some gift cards are issued by banks and some are issued by nonbank companies. The OCC has been providing periodic guidance to national banks on the subject of stored-value cards, including gift cards. The most recent OCC guidance on gift cards was issued on August 14, 2006, and addressed disclosure and marketing issues associated with gift cards.
Related Links
# # #


text:
Facilitating the spread of knowledge and innovation in professional software development
Back to login
Richard Warburton and Sadiq Jaffer talk about the ins and outs of profiling in a production system, the different techniques and approaches that help understand what's really happening with a system. This helps solve new performance problems, regressions and undertake capacity planning exercises.
QCon returned to London this past March for its thirteenth year in the city, attracting 1,500 senior developers, architects, and team leads.
Mark Grundland explores practical techniques for information visualization design to take better account of the fundamental limitations of visual perception.
Liz Ince and Chris Wilkinson look at the different measures commonly found in software development, what they're used for, highlight the good, the bad and the ugly aspects of measuring progress versus productivity and how all metrics should relate to a desired business outcome. They share stories of what happened when the wrong thing got measured and offer some practical ways to help us.
Communication within Kubernetes clusters is a solved issue, but communication across clusters requires more design and operational overhead. Before deciding on whether to implement multicluster support, you should understand your communication use case.
Software Dev Conference
InfoQ Homepage
Sojo Content on InfoQ
Is your profile up-to-date? Please take a moment to review and update.
Note: If updating/changing your email, a validation request will be sent

subset: commoncrawl


text:
CHICAGO, Aug. 15 (UPI) -- According to a new report, employers may lose billions during fantasy football season due to employees eschewing their responsibilities at work to focus on managing their fake teams.
Outplacement consultancy Challenger, Gray & Christmas reports the hours that millions of fantasy football players spend analyzing their teams and checking stats could cost their bosses more than $13 billion in lost productivity.
"We are not trying to demonize fantasy football," CEO John A. Challenger said in a statement to the Chicago Tribune. "It is important to understand that there are more distractions than ever in today's workplace. If it's not fantasy football, it's the latest Hollywood gossip, shopping on Amazon, or checking Facebook."
Although that may be true, there is certainly no shortage of fantasy sports websites, as well as traditional sports outlets like ESPN and Sports Illustrated, to capture the attention of fantasy football fanatics.
Challenger called fantasy football a "massively popular phenomenon that cannot be ignored" and noted that it is popular enough at some workplaces to actually slow down a company's Internet speed.
In their analysis, the firm estimated that employed participants spend two hours a week looking at fantasy sports while they are at work during the 15-week fantasy football season.
Despite the potential revenue loss, Challenger recommends letting employees play on.
"An across-the-board ban on all fantasy football or sports websites is likely to backfire and cause a drop in morale, loyalty and, ironically, productivity," Challenger said. "The end result could be far worse than any loss of productivity caused by an hour or two of team management each week."


text:
18 Listings:
2 Sold:
Transworld Business Advisors Profile
• Transworld is the Largest Business Brokerage Franchise in the United States
• Established for over 35 years
• Maintains an inventory of at least 1,500 current and exclusive business listings at any time
• Network of nearly 200 Transworld Brokers working for YOU!
• Offices located in across the contine
Michael Berry
Transworld Business Advisors of Indiana
Farmersburg, IN
65 Unit Self Storage Business on 2 Acres with room for expansion.
Thank you for signing up for the BizBuySell bulletin.
Sign up for the BizBuySell Bulletin and get advice on:
You can opt out of the BizBuySell Bulletin at any time.
Business listed by:
Unknown Broker
Unknown Broker Company
Full name is required.
Get free alerts via email when new businesses are listed matching your Sullivan County Transportation And St... search criteria.
Reveal hidden alerts and unlock advanced features on search results and detail pages to help you find the perfect business.
Edge Members also get valuable insight into the buying process via our
video series, access to our advanced
business search agent, and more!
©2019 BizBuySell


text:
Message Board
Carrie Kabak Message Board
Talk about the novels, new and used books that Kabak has written!
Author Kabak's Book Reviews
Cover the Butter
Arriving home from a holiday, to find her world is not how it could be, or should be, Kate Codogan starts her journaling at 33 Cherry Blossom Road , Dorton, United Kingdom, Europe, Planet Earth.Kate fights with her ever present mother, Biddy. Kate's choices of friends, boyfriends, career ambitions, style of living, are always displeasing voiced by Biddy. As a matter of fact, Biddy is just displeased about everything and everyone, especially Kate....


text:
The acquisition cost of F-35s for the international partners is bound to be affected by the slowdown in U.S. production, Dave Scott, Lockheed Martin's director for international F-35 customer engagement, told AIN. "But we'll still be doing about 30 in each of the next few years for the U.S., and when you add orders that have already been confirmed by the partners plus Israel and Japan, it's not a bad annual rate," he continued.
Under F-35 procurement procedures, the partners pay the same unit recurring flyaway cost as the U.S. for the aircraft that they order in each annual or (eventually) multi-year buy. Smaller order quantities should mean higher unit prices, but countering this trend, Scott told AIN, is the fact that "as we refine the supply chain and the production processes, the price will continue to reduce."
Scott noted that six of the eight partners now have committed to or ordered aircraft. "They're all in it together, and have been for 10 years now," he said, referring to the system design and development phase in which all of them made contributions. These ranged from $2 billion from the UK, a Level 1 partner, to $1 billion from Italy and $800 million from the Dutch as Level 2 partners to $125 million to $175 million from the remainder, as Level 3 partners.
The British (three) and the Dutch (two) have already ordered aircraft, Scott noted. Australia (two) and Italy (four) are placing their first orders in Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) Lot 6, and have already funded long-lead production items. Turkey is following in LRIP 7, and Norway (four) in LRIP 8. Canada and Denmark are the two partners who have yet to commit. The first deliveries to Israel and Japan will be from LRIP 8.
According to Scott, "some countries" are considering an increase in their F-35 orders, though he would not specify who they are. But the UK is certain to reduce its requirement for 132, and two days after AIN spoke with Scott, Italy announced that it is chopping 40 aircraft from its previously planned buy of 131. The Australian defense minister recently stated that his country's plans to order its next 14 F-35s are on hold.
Guest (not verified)
February 18, 2012 - 5:20am
The F-35 JSF is a lemon and is totally incapable of facing high end threats that would not cement any nation's regional air power lead. This has shown that the JSF has a lot of limitations and it cannot do a lot of things as aspected to show and promise that is a true fifth generation fighter. Because it does not meet all the requirements of partner nations, the aircraft will be too weak, inferior, vulnerable and won't be able to survive against the Russian/Chinese Sukhoi family and upcoming J-20 Mighty Dragon fighters.
It is too heavy, overweight and sluggish to be successful as an air superiority fighter, due to the fuselage which has too much cross section, the wings are too small which lack the extreme manoeuvrability (the ability to out-manoeuvre the adversary in air-to-air combat), the wing platform is optimised for subsonic cruise and transonic manoeuvre and doesn't provide enough lift and drag to defeat Beyond Visual Range (BVR) and Within Visual Range (WVR) air-to-air missiles (AAMs) from enemy fighters in the dogfight and stand off ranges, advanced surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) and ground fire.
The aircraft has inferior acceleration, poor manoeuvrability, short range with no loiter time and very limited weapons payload that is unsuited for bomber and cruise missile defence and unsuited for air superiority role when compared against Sukhoi family of aircraft, particularly post 2010 configurations; definitely post 2015 evolved growth variants.
The JSF is not lethal. This means that for the outrageous amounts of money spent on air-to-air and air-to-ground fighting capabilities, the JSF brings absolutely nothing to the table that existing aircraft designs such as the F-111, F-15, F-22, A-10 and other aircraft – cannot already do and do better.
The F-35 JSF is not survivable. The kind of stealth quality the aircraft has is much less than the F-22 Raptor. The JSF will need the F-22 to survive serious high-end threats and the F-35 is not designed as a top level fighter. When stealth goes naked, due to turns that the maker of the aircraft has already stated, "can increase an aircraft's radar cross section by a factor of 100 or more", the F-35 has no extreme high altitude and speed of the survivable F-22. The JSF is optimised for 'Forward' and 'Side' aspect best performance limited to X band, only. Target KPP downgraded to Low Observable (LO) from Very Low Observable (VLO) – an order of magnitude change. Conversely, while the JSF's APG-81 radar provides respectable air-to-air radar coverage capability, it is being optimised as a bomber radar to meet the Joint Operational Requirements Document (JORD) and CAIV.
The aircraft is undergoing a substantial flight test and evaluation program, which is not progressing well and not meeting test objectives. Its been stated that what will be delivered (if F-35 ever arrives) will be obsolete; and that the F-35 is not affordable or sustainable. With cost increases, schedule delays, and continuing technical problems also increases the risk that the program will not be able to deliver the aircraft quantities and capabilities in the time required by the warfighter. The F-35 has failed the initial test of its stealth capability and remains behind schedule to provide the performance requirements. The cost of supporting the JSF will not be progressively refined between now and its introduction into its service. The F-35 will be extremely costly to operate than the F-111, F/A-18 or other aircraft.
Detailed modelling, analysis and participation in highly fidelity simulator exercise which have shown and demonstrated that the JSF has been defeated all realistic current and future threats that some nations are likely to face by the Sukhoi family aircraft and J-20 Mighty Dragon. Part of the presentation showed a computer simulation which calculated that the F-35 would be consistently defeated by the Russian-made Su-35 fighter aircraft. The defeat calculated by the scenario also showed the loss of the F-35's supporting airborne-early warning and air-to-air refuelling aircraft.
The F-35 lacks the aerodynamic performance to be employed effectively as an air defence interceptor/fighter, while its stealth performance in provably insufficient for defensive/offensive counter-air and ASuW strike operations against contemporary regional capabilities.
The technology in the Su-35S Super Flanker-E will also see its way into growth upgrades of other Su-27/30-fighter variants used by countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, India and Vietnam. Chinese variants of these aircraft should also see similar growth capability in the coming years. No matter what upgrade to this very remarkable warplane, the advanced Flankers are extremely capable, very powerful beast, tough, and hard to shoot down that no F-35s or even small fighters with shorter range can compete with this adversary that faces biggest threat to ANY air force to go up against in combat.
The Russian-made T-50 PAK-FA low-observable fighter now in development is expected to be much more lethal in air-to-air combat against the F-35. The Su-35 and T-50 made appearances last year at the Russian aerospace industry air show known as MAKS 2011. Both aircraft will include sensors and networking which can minimise the effects of the limited low-observable qualities of the F-35. They will also have higher performance, longer range (without refuelling), more powerful radars, advanced sensors, networking, data fusion capabilities and carry more air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons than an F-35.
The F-35 JSF's fuselage is too thinned skinned. Lockheed Martin has done very little with major safety precautions on the Joint Strike Fighter to protect against fire. As an close air support which the F-35 is suppose to be (when it attempts to discriminate tanks, convoys, SAMs and AAAs) its totally incapable, the aircraft will be an very easy target to shoot down, because it's such a delicate aeroplane which means the aircraft has a huge F135-PW-100 turbofan engine surrounded by fuel wrapped around entirely in the engine and to the fuselage. Very little they can do because the .22 Rifle or any form of gunfire can very easily penetrate the skin on the airframe and causes it to catch on fire like a "blow torch". With safety precautions being dropped claimed that is not needed due to save weight, I find that big disaster, certainly a very vulnerable aircraft.
The JSF will expose more heat (in full afterburner) this will make the adversaries to detect the F-35 at BVR (Beyond Visual Range) range, using heat seeking air-to-air missiles.
Single engine is unsuited for overwater operations, this makes the aircraft more vulnerable to engine failure which will cause heavy losses to the entire fleet. The Pratt & Whitney F135-PW-100 turbofan engine will cause damage to flight deck and runways with heat build-up and exhaust impedes the aircraft's ability to conduct missions in hot environments. The F-35 engine and integrated power package exhaust may cause excessive damage to the flight deck environment and runway surfaces that may result in operating limits or drive costly upgrades and repairs of JSF basing options. In fact single engine should be ruled out of the F-X (Fighter Experimental) program to replace the ageing fighters and you can't afford any more losses. It's not designed for overwater operations, they are designed for land based operations which are only suitable for smaller NATO countries e.g. Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Finland etc, Middle East, South American and small Asian country nations to operate single engine planes. The reason why single engine aircraft are suitable for those nations is because of the vast size of their country is surrounded by land areas, small economy which means their range is not as important.
To send the pilots into a fight with an inferior platform deliberately purchased when a demonstrably better alternative may have been available is questionable decision making at best.
michael (not verified)
February 22, 2012 - 4:38pm
What nonsense from this guy. Principal JSF stakeholders, including LM, the U.S. military and the U.S. government, are confident that the JSF will achieve all its design goals. And in time, F-35 will prove herself to be the world's deadliest combat aircraft. This clown should ask himself why so many nations have ordered or remain committed to the F-35. It seems unlikely that Japan recently ordered the F-35 (following a stiff competition) because it was judged to be "inferior"
Guest (not verified)
February 18, 2012 - 5:38am
Why does the Pentagon say the JSF is a true 5th Generation Fighter. Really?
Here are the major problems with the JSF which are:
Cost of the program. $385 billion for development and production, and about $ 1 trillion or more to maintain and operate F-35 aircraft over decades.
Range. The short range of the JSF means they would have to be refuelled several times to fly across Australia, America or anywhere.
Please note: For e.g. Australia is about 2,222 nm (4,000 km) wide. Aircraft designed for European use such as the Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale, MiG-35, SAAB JAS-39 Gripen and American F-16 Fighting Falcon, F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and F-35 JSF have too short a range for use by such a large country as Australia. Those aircraft are unsuitable to cement Australia's regional air power lead and the RAAF really needs a large airframe with high capability to fulfill the requirements. Small fighters with short range are only ideal for smaller NATO countries e.g. Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Finland etc, Middle East and South American nations to operate them. The reason why the small airframes are only ideal for those countries is because of the vast size of their country is surrounded by land areas, small economy which means their range is not as important which are ideal for short range fighters with either single or two engines. (Actual range varies with mission)
Single-Engine. This makes the aircraft more vulnerable to engine failure which is totally ill-suited for overwater operations. Remember this makes the aircraft more vulnerable to engine failure that will cause heavy losses to the entire fleet and putting pilots lives in jeopardy. The Pratt & Whitney F135-PW-100 turbofan engine will cause damage to flight deck and runways with heat build-up and exhaust impedes the aircraft's ability to conduct missions in hot environments. The F-35 engine and integrated power package exhaust may cause excessive damage to the flight deck environment and runway surfaces that may result in operating limits or drive costly upgrades and repairs of JSF basing options.
Thinned Skinned fuselage: Again, Lockheed Martin has done very little with major safety pre-cautions on the Joint Strike Fighter to protect against fire. As an close air support which the F-35 is suppose to be (when it attempts to discriminate tanks, convoys, surface-to-air missiles and anti aircraft artillery) its totally incapable, the aircraft will be an very easy target to shoot down, because it's a very delicate aeroplane which means the aircraft has a huge F135-PW-100 turbofan engine surrounded by fuel wrapped around entirely in the fuselage and engine. Very little they can do because the .22 Rifle or any form of gunfire can very easily penetrate the skin on the airframe and causes it to catch on fire like a "blow torch". Its a very vulnerable aircraft.
Speed. The top speed of the JSF is only Mach 1.6 placing it at a significant disadvantage to Mach 2.4 aircraft such as the super cruising Sukhoi. Wing and engine intake geometry is optimised for sub-sonic flight - so a more powerful engine cannot fix the problem even if one would fit in the small JSF airframe.
Super Cruise: No (-1)
Thrust Vectoring Control – TVC: No (-1)
High Agility Supersonic / Subsonic: Neither (-1)
Large Thrust to Weight Multi Engine Thrust Growth: Middling T/W One Engine Little Growth (-1)
High Combat Ceiling (> 7 deg/sec turn rate, sustained): No < 45 ft (-1)
Large Internal Fuel Load (lbs): Yes >18 lbs (0) which is very inefficient.
APG-81 AESA radar. The nose geometry of the JSF limits the aperture of the radar. This makes the JSF dependent on supporting AEW&C aircraft which are themselves vulnerable to long range anti-radiation missiles and jamming. Opposing Sukhoi aircraft have a massive 1 meter radar aperture enabling them to detect and attack at an JSF long before the JSF can detect the Sukhoi. It has Medium Power Aperture (0) (Detection range around 140 – 150 nm at BVR)
"Partial Stealth". It is argued that these disadvantages are offset by the JSF being "partially stealthy" in that it has low frontal visibility to millimetre-band radar. However, this is of little value against VHF radar using meter-long wavelengths. Russian engineers are now producing advanced VHF radar systems for the Sukhoi and for ground-based system such as Nebo SVU. As explained by my friends and colleagues in the defence, this exposes most fighter-sized 'stealth' aircraft. While the radar technology will only improve, the stealth characteristics of the JSF are locked-in with its flawed geometry.
Unavailability. The JSF is not expected to be fully operational around 2018 or later.
Weight. The JSF seems to have a serious weight problem and may be unable to take off with a full load of fuel and weapons making it even more dependent on air-tanker support.
Only "Four" BVR Air-to-Air Missiles. The JSF can only carry four air-air missiles (AAM) for Beyond Visual Range (BVR) combat. By contrast late model Sukhoi Flankers can carry a wide range of AAM on twelve hard-points.
Classified Components. The JSF is likely to have a range of components that are 'off-limits' to the Australia and can only be serviced in the US.
Highly Integrated Avionics: Yes (0)
Sidelooking ESA Apertures: No (-1)
High Specific Excess Power – Ps: No (-1)
High Situational Awareness (SA) - Onboard / Offboard: Yes (0)
This is certaintly the biggest failed project of all time I've ever seen and must be scrapped.
Raptor1 (not verified)
February 18, 2012 - 1:12pm
Everyone's been told stealth is need, interoperability is needed, and integrated avionics is needed. The reality of the world is that Russia and China recognize the need for an air superiority airframe even better than we do! This is evidenced by the mass buys of SUkhois and the integration of all ther weapons your typical strike fighter carries, plus all the stuff we say is NEEDED. My point?.. If you're gunna market an air superiority aircraft as the F-35 is being martketed, you need all the things that come from a larger aircraft that's properly fitted for air superiority; so in the end, you can have the speed, maneuverability and firepower air-to-air, AND the same for ground attack.
What aircraft isavailable (or available quickly) that can fit the needs of OUR Air Force which envisions the PacRim as the major threat and deployment area and the partners that actually LIVE in that region? Look real hard at the Silent Eagle... It's already fired weapons, has advanced 5th gen technology, PROVEN airframe that's been further improved, manageable and affordable stealth, and when stealth isn't needed, the RANGE and FIREPOWER to punish any forces beneath it. AT $100 milluion a piece, you get a massive AESA, probably supercruise, top-end avionics, digital EWS system, dual HMCS, and the ability to fight it out with anything we can envision. This is a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned! Go Boeing! :-)
Guest (not verified)
February 18, 2012 - 10:04pm
Advanced Boeing F-15E+ Strike Eagle or Silent Eagle instead of the lemon JSF.
The best aircraft to fulfill any air forces requirements is either the advanced F-15E+ Strike Eagle or Silent Eagle (off-the-shelf upgraded versions of existing US fighters) to be a viable option, capable of filling the maritime expeditionary capacity.
The F-15 will be one of the world's most survivable aircraft. The combat-proven F-15 boasts an exceptional safety record, thanks to its advanced avionics systems, two engines (for improved survivability and over water operations), robust airframe, speed, manoeuvrability, long range (without refuelling) and better weapons load. Combat aircraft survivability is largely determined by two factors: how well an aircraft avoids being hit and how well it can withstand a hit. The F-15 avoids and withstands hits with success unsurpassed by any aircraft that carries weapons or fuel tanks under its wings or fuselage.
The F-15's integrated avionics and electronics systems provide exceptional situational awareness, giving its crew a better view of the battlespace than its enemy has. Its radar sweeps the air and ground for targets at long distances, allowing the crew to detect and attack with long-range weapons before the enemy knows what is happening. Advances in radar and weapon technology will further enhance these advantages.
The terrain-following system that allows the aircraft to fly at very low altitudes, its automated electronic jamming system integrated with a radar-warning receiver, and its smoke-free engines thwart enemy attempts to locate the aircraft.
The Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-229 or General Electric F110-GE-129 engines, which can propel the F-15 to speeds exceeding twice the speed of sound, and an airframe capable of 9 g manoeuvres, allow the F-15 to routinely out-manoeuvre the adversaries.
The aircraft has a triple-redundant hydraulic system and redundant electrical generation system that prevent a single failure from ending a mission. Fuel dispersal throughout the wings, with none above the engines, a foam fire-suppression system, and self-sealing fuel lines significantly reduce the vulnerability of the aircraft's fuel system. In addition, much of the aircraft is made of fire-resistant titanium.
Each F-15 will carry a two-person crew. The division of duties between pilot and weapon system officer allows each to remain focused on their individual tasks without becoming overwhelmed and encountering dangerous mental and physical fatigue. Traditionally, aircraft with two-person crews have performed better than those with single-person crews.
For the long-range, multi-role missions flown under the challenging conditions at which the F-15 excels, these are significant advantages. Having two crew members in the cockpit is also advantageous in the event of injury or illness to one of them.
The F-15 has one of the best safety records in U.S. Air Force history. On those few occasions when an incident occurred, F-15s have safely landed after being hit by lightning, after withstanding a fuel-tank explosion, with destroyed tail sections and with half a wing missing.
Leveraging unchallenged experience, the F-15E offers proven, not merely promised survivability. The F-15E enjoys all the benefits that have contributed to the unmatched safety record of earlier F-15s.
The F-15 is in production. Boeing has built more than 1,500 of all its F-15 models, the company has extended the production line well into the 2020s to attract and satisfy new and existing customers.
Another alternative I was thinking for a while develop a new single seat F-15, based on the latest advancements in F-15E as an export variant for new and existing customers to purchase the fighter for predictable costs, in a similar concept to the Sukhoi Su-35S Super Flanker-E.
If any anti-F-35 folks think the new pre-posed single seat F-15 is a awesome idea. I recommend this great concept can be email to Brad Jones Director, F-15 US Air Force Development Programs.
Roger Besancenez Boeing Vice President, F-15 Program or
Richard 'Rick' Banholzer, Boeing's Director of Business Development for Air Force Fighters and Weapons about the idea of developing a new proposed single-seat F-15. Boeing can suggest the export designation of the Eagle for e.g. the F-15F or any idea's they can come up with.
Most nations (not all) should be the Eagle country.
P.S. Raptor 1 (Silent Eagle is THE way to go!) Well said, I strongly agree that a larger aircraft (with high capability) that's fitted for air superiority role; indeed, you need to have the speed, extreme manoeuvrability, long range, more powerful fire control radar and sensors and a hefty firepower for air-to-air and air-to-ground to do the job which small fighters with short range don't fit in that category very well in some respects for e.g. small weapons load and small aperature nose which lacks the detection range at adversaries at extremely long range.
I put a comment to Mars Patrol from DoD Buzz website about the F-15AU and F-22AU concepts will certainly provide a potent combination of flexibility and capability to suit Australia's "long range" requirements as a perfect replacement for the 71 F/A-18A/B Hornet fleet.
Guest (not verified)
February 23, 2012 - 7:56pm
You find this nonsense. I'm not confident that the JSF will achieve all its design goals. The F-35 will never prove herself to be the world's deadliest combat aircraft. You should ask yourself why are so many nations have ordered or remain committed to the F-35 that is unaffordable, behind schedule, cost overruns, obsolete and never be able to fulfil its mission requirements???
Guest (not verified)
March 7, 2012 - 4:32am
Your opinion is a load of sheer nonsense.
"The world's best air forces choose the world's biggest failed project, inferior to the Sukhoi family of fighters and advanced SAM systems which is not lethal and not survivable, extremely expensive to fly and maintain."
It is very fortunate that there are so many representations and sortions of facts presented in the opinion piece offered by Winslow Wheeler, Pierre Sprey, Air Power Australia, retired fighter pilots and officers.
The simple facts are as follows:
–– The F-35 will never be the most lethal and survivable multirole fighter in history;
–– The F-35 is not meeting or not exceeding every single one of the Key Performance Parameters that the services have mandated;
–– The F-35's capabilities are not being validated in their laboratories, and in on ground- and flight-test programme today;
–– The F-35's procurement costs are not up to date and not meeting programme cost objectives, and certainly are not on track to meet the customers' unit flyaway cost targets; and
–– The F-35 programme is behind schedule to deliver the first production-model aircraft next year (from 2010).
I'm not very pleased to see that many of the world's most elite air forces – including the US Air Force, US Navy and US Marine Corps, Canadian Air Force, Royal Air Force and Royal Navy, Royal Australian Air Force and other NATO air forces – do not agree with the opinions and facts from Lockheed Martin, the Pentagon and pro-JSF advocates that recent endorsements of the F-35 programme both in the US and abroad underscore these convictions.
I'm not the most proud of the fact that the F-35 is the system of choice for all participating nations to protect the freedoms that enable those with differing opinions to speak out.


text:
Crochet Giveaway #4 - Tails - Closed
What do you do with all of your tails? I save my tails and use them as yarn markers.
This will be giveaway #4. I will be giving away 4 hats and 1 doily. The giveaway will run from today through February 15, 2009. I will draw the winner on February 21, 2009. Everyone from any country is welcome to enter. As the winner, you are more than welcome to alter the hats in any way by removing the flowers and leaves.
- Comments are open to everyone. You do not need to be registered with blogger to participate.
- In the comment section you can leave a name, nickname or some way that I will be able to contact.
- I will also accept e-mail submissions. Please include GIVEAWAY #4 in the subject line.
- If you have previously won, I am going to ask that you wait 2 months to participate so everyone has a chance.


text:
Lindsey Graham on Technology
Republican Sr Senator; previously Representative (SC-3)
Veto message from President Bush:
This bill lacks fiscal discipline. I fully support funding for water resources projects that will yield high economic and environmental returns. Each year my budget has proposed reasonable and responsible funding, including $4.9 billion for 2008, to support the Army Corps of Engineers' main missions. However, this authorization bill costs over $23 billion. This is not fiscally responsible, particularly when local communities have been waiting for funding for projects already in the pipeline. The bill's excessive authorization for over 900 projects and programs exacerbates the massive backlog of ongoing Corps construction projects, which will require an additional $38 billion in future appropriations to complete. This bill does not set priorities. I urge the Congress to send me a fiscally responsible bill that sets priorities.
Title: To protect individuals, families, and Internet service providers from unsolicited and unwanted electronic mail.
Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act of 2007 - Amends the Internet Tax Freedom Act to make permanent the ban on state and local taxation of Internet access and on multiple or discriminatory taxes on electronic commerce.
Related bills: H.R.743, H.R.1077, H.R.3678, S.156.
A bill to prevent the Federal Communications Commission from repromulgating the fairness doctrine. Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), notwithstanding any other provision of any Act, from having the authority to require broadcasters to present opposing viewpoints on controversial issues of public importance, commonly referred to as the Fairness Doctrine.
|2010 Governor, House and Senate candidates on Technology:
|Lindsey Graham on other issues:
SC Gubernatorial:
Nikki Haley
SC Senatorial:
Jim DeMint
Dem. Freshmen
in 112th Congress:
AL-7:Terri Sewell
CA-33:Karen Bass
DE-0:John Carney
FL-17:Frederica Wilson
HI-1:Colleen Hanabusa
LA-2:Cedric Richmond
MA-10:Bill Keating
MI-13:Hansen Clarke
RI-1:David Cicilline
GOP Freshmen
in 112th Congress:
AL-2:Martha Roby
AL-5:Mo Brooks
AZ-1:Paul Gosar
AZ-3:Ben Quayle
AZ-5:David Schweikert
AR-1:Rick Crawford
AR-2:Tim Griffin
AR-3:Steve Womack
CA-19:Jeff Denham
CO-3:Scott Tipton
CO-4:Cory Gardner
FL-12:Dennis Ross
FL-2:Steve Southerland
FL-21:Mario Diaz-Balart
FL-22:Allen West
FL-24:Sandy Adams
FL-25:David Rivera
FL-5:Rich Nugent
FL-8:Dan Webster
GA-2:Mike Keown
GA-7:Rob Woodall
GA-8:Austin Scott
ID-1:Raul Labrador
IL-8:Joe Walsh
IL-10:Bob Dold
IL-11:Adam Kinzinger
IL-14:Randy Hultgren
IL-17:Bobby Schilling
IL-8:Joe Walsh
IN-3:Marlin Stutzman
IN-4:Todd Rokita
IN-8:Larry Bucshon
IN-9:Todd Young
KS-1:Tim Huelskamp
KS-3:Kevin Yoder
KS-5:Mike Pompeo
LA-3:Jeff Landry
MD-1:Andy Harris
MI-1:Dan Benishek
MI-2:Bill Huizenga
MI-3:Justin Amash
MI-7:Tim Walberg
MN-8:Chip Cravaack
MO-4:Vicky Hartzler
MO-7:Billy Long
MS-1:Alan Nunnelee
MS-4:Steven Palazzo
GOP Freshmen
in 111th Congress:
NC-2:Renee Ellmers
ND-0:Rick Berg
NH-2:Charlie Bass
NH-1:Frank Guinta
NJ-3:Jon Runyan
NM-2:Steve Pearce
NV-3:Joe Heck
NY-13:Michael Grimm
NY-19:Nan Hayworth
NY-20:Chris Gibson
NY-24:Richard Hanna
NY-25:Ann Marie Buerkle
NY-29:Tom Reed
OH-1:Steve Chabot
OH-15:Steve Stivers
OH-16:Jim Renacci
OH-18:Bob Gibbs
OH-6:Bill Johnson
OK-5:James Lankford
PA-10:Tom Marino
PA-11:Lou Barletta
PA-3:Mike Kelly
PA-7:Patrick Meehan
PA-8:Mike Fitzpatrick
SC-1:Tim Scott
SC-3:Jeff Duncan
SC-4:Trey Gowdy
SC-5:Mick Mulvaney
SD-0:Kristi Noem
TN-3:Chuck Fleischmann
TN-4:Scott DesJarlais
TN-6:Diane Black
TN-8:Stephen Fincher
TX-17:Bill Flores
TX-23:Quico Canseco
TX-27:Blake Farenthold
VA-2:Scott Rigell
VA-5:Robert Hurt
VA-9:Morgan Griffith
WA-3:Jaime Herrera
WI-7:Sean Duffy
WI-8:Reid Ribble
WV-1:David McKinley
Civil Rights
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Social Security
Tax Reform
Main Page
SC politicians
Contact info:
Email Contact Form:
Fax Number:
Mailing Address:
Senate Office SR-290, Washington, DC 20510
Phone number:
(202) 224-5972


text:
Chapel Hill, N.C. — New Able Flight pilots, Chris Spaur of California and Heather Schultz of New Jersey, will get their wings in a ceremony at EAA AirVenture at 10:30 am on Wednesday, July 28 in AeroShell Square. During June and July, Chris and Heather "lived aviation full time" at the Purdue University Airport where they were taught by university instructors while living in university housing.
Heather sustained a C5 spinal cord injury in a diving accident in 2006. Since then, she has faced more than three years of intensive physical therapy and has defied the predictions of doctors who had told her she would never walk again. Heather's training was made possible through her selection as the 2010 recipient of the "Jet Aviation Scholarship".
Chris is a 20 year-old with muscular dystrophy. He's one of triplets, and shares the condition with a sister. He comes from a family with a tradition of flying as both his mother and his uncle are pilots. Chris was selected by Able Flight as the recipient of Able Flight's "Bombardier Scholarship" for 2010.
Special guests at the ceremony will include representatives of Purdue's Department of Aviation Technology, Bombardier and Jet Aviation, and Able Flight pilots Jessica Cox and Sean O'Donnell. Jessica's remarkable and inspiring story of learning to fly using only her feet is well known in the aviation community, and Sean was the second Able Flight pilot to earn a license, and is the founder of Philly Sport Pilot, a flight school that provides training to students with and without disabilities.


text:
500 people attend AMD [H]ardOCP FX GamExperience 2012
Subject: Graphics Cards, Processors, Shows and Expos | January 22, 2012 - 01:09 AM | Steve Grever
Tagged: overclocking, hardocp, ati, amd, 7970
More than 500 people made the trip to Eddie Deen's Ranch in Dallas, Texas to attend AMD and HardOCP's FX Game Experience event today. Many of the tech industry's heavy hitters were on hand with interactive booths to showcase their latest PC hardware and provide people with around $50,000 in giveaways and prizes.
Check out our video coverage of the AMD [H]ardOCP FX GamExperience 2012 event!
ASUS, MSI, and Sapphire each brought their latest respective AMD-based motherboards and performance graphics cards to showcase at the event, including their HD Radeon 7950 and 7970 offerings. ASUS also gave the audience a closer look at some of their other PC gaming peripherals, wireless routers, and Blu ray burners.
HardOCP founder Kyle Bennett put on a show for the crowd with numerous raffle drawings and crazy contests for people to win new AMD processors and other hardware from MSI, Gigabyte, ASUS, Corsair, Ergotech, Antec, Maingear, Optoma, Patriot Memory, Astro, Sapphire, Western Digital, ArcSoft, ASRock, vReveal, Diamond Multimedia, and Zotac.
Check out all of our coverage of the AMD [H]ardOCP FX GamExperience 2012!!
Gamers also got to test out the beta version of Firefall, which is a team-based action shooter with a large focus on character progression. It combines vast open-world, co-op gameplay that can be shared by hundreds of players. Blacklight Retribution was also on hand to survey the crowd's initial impressions of its fast-paced, first person shooter gameplay. AMD also hosted a Battlefield 3 gaming tournament that teamped up randomly-selected gamers to play each other to win a host of prizes.
All the vendors hosted several breakout sessions and workshops with event attendees on their latest products that consumers will see on store shelves this year.
Even pro PC gamer Johnathan "Fatal1ty" Wendel was on hand to discuss his latest Fatality Professional series motherboards being manufactured by ASRock.
ASUS held an overclocker's challenge to see who could get the best overclock on AMD's FX 8150 eight-core processor. ASUS was also showing people how to use their GPU tweak utility to squeeze a few more megahertz out of their GPU and memory.
One of the biggest attractions at this year's event was definitely the two gigantic Eyefinity gaming setups using three Optoma HD projectors. Both projector screens were 30 feet wide and 6 feet tall a piece and allowed gamers to enjoy Battlefield 3 in stunning 5760 by 1080 resolution!
This was the third year that AMD and HardOCP teamed up to showcase AMD's latest products and give back to the gaming community. The support from vendors in the PC hardware industry was outstanding as more than $50,000 in prizes were given out this year. This small community get together looks to become one of the annual gaming events that gamers won't want to miss.
Looking for more AMD information?? Check out these articles:
- XFX Radeon HD 7970 3GB Overclocked Graphics Card Review with CrossFire Results!
- AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB Reference Card Review and Video Review
- Gigabyte E350N-USB3 Fusion Mini-ITX Motherboard
Video News
So how much is it going to cost me to do the 3 screen Optoma setup? I have room in my basement.
Over $9000
Great job AMD!
this is great go go go AMD
This was awesome! :D Thanks all for the loot!
hola no entiendo como es que sacan una gráfica PCIe 3.0, si aun no an sacado una placa con esas características para AMD. Alguien me lo explica por que mas que busco no veo ninguna placa de AMD con PCIe 3.0
WOW!! what a screen wish i lived there i would of came if invited to it,Very Nice
The 3 screen Eyefinity setup is pretty easy to do and can be done for just about any size you want.
I built two using a custom frame and screen that cost me about $850 for two 30 foot wide screens and frames.
The projectors used were Optoma GT750 short throw 3D projectors running the games at 1920x1080 for each creating a 30 foot wide screen with the res of 5760x1080.
Each of these projectors run around $800 so the total to have the same thing would be....
$800 Projector
$800 Projector
$800 Projector
$425 30ft wide by 6ft tall screen and frame.


text:
ModelingPlatform/August 18, Telephone Conference
Modeling Platform Meeting August 18 Teleconference
- Robert Blust, UBS AG
- Yves Bontemps, SWIFT
- Stephan Eberle, Geensys
- Kenn Hussey, Cloudsmith
- Ian Skerrett, Eclipse Foundation
- Ed Merks
- Toby McLean, Zeiligsoft
- Stephane Lacrampe, Obeo
- Thomas Lang, UBS AG
- Christophe Gregoire, Alcatel-Lucent
1. Review Requirements and Gap Analysis Document
Stephan reviewed the latest documents regarding the detailed requirements and gap analysis.
For traceability requirements, the team is looking at the yakindu project http://code.google.com/a/eclipselabs.org/p/yakindu/. Obeo is also involved in the area http://5ise.quanxinquanyi.de/2010/08/06/requirements-traceability-for-eclipse/
Stephan and team have made progress on documenting more detailed requirements that would need to be implemented to support the higher level requirements. He will also start document a prioritization of these detailed requirements.
ACTION ITEM: All end user companies are requested to review the detailed requirements and send comments regarding requirements and potential prioritization.
2. Ian is beginning a process to reach out to other organizations that might be interested in participating in the working group.
NEXT Meeting:
Wednesday, September 1, 10:30ET/16:30CET


text: Apologies if you received multiple copies of this message. ------------------------------------------ CLUSTER COMPUTING AND GRID (CCGrid 2005) http://www.cs.cf.ac.uk/ccgrid2005/ 9-12 May 2005 Cardiff, UK -------------------------------------------- ******************************************************* CALL FOR PARTICIPATION ******************************************************* SCOPE ===== Commodity-based clusters and Grid computing technologies are rapidly developing, and are key components in the emergence of a novel service-based fabric for high capability computing. Cluster-powered Grids not only provide access to cost-effective problem-solving power, but also promise to enable a more collaborative approach to the use of distributed resources, and new economic products and services. CCGrid2005, sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society is designed to bring together international leaders who are pioneering researchers, developers, and users of clusters, networks, and Grid architectures and applications. The symposium will also serve as a forum to present the latest work, and highlight related activities from around the world. CCGrid2005 is interested in topics including, but not limited to: o Hardware and Software (based on PCs, Workstations, SMPs or Supercomputers) o Middleware for Clusters and Grids o Dynamic Optical Network Architectures for Grid Computing o Parallel File Systems, including wide area file systems, and Parallel I/O o Scheduling and Load Balancing o Programming Models, Tools, and Environments o Performance Evaluation and Modeling o Resource Management and Scheduling o Computational, Data, and Information Grid Architectures and Systems o Grid Economies, Service Architectures, and Resource Exchange Architectures o Grid-based Problem Solving Environments o Scientific, Engineering, and Commercial Grid Applications o Portal Computing / Science Portals PROGRAMME ========= The conference will contain: o Over 75 papers in the main track (33% Acceptance Rate) o 9 workshops: Chair: Craig Lee (Aerospace Corporation, US) Workshop 1: Collaborative and Learning Applications of Grid Technology Organisers: Oscar Ardaiz-Villanueva, Technical University Catalunya, Spain Miguel L. Bote-Lorenzo, University of Valladolid, Spain Amy Apon, University of Arkansas, US Barry Wilkinson, Western Carolina University, US Workshop 2: Cluster-Sec 2005: Cluster Security -- The Paradigm Shift Organiser: William Yurcik, NCSA, US Workshop 3: Semantic Infrastructure for Grid Computing Applications Organisers: Line C. Pouchard, Oak Ridge National Lab, US Luc Moreau, University of Southampton, UK Valentina Tamma, University of Liverpool, UK Workshop 4: Fifth International Workshop on Global and Peer-2-Peer Computing: "Theory and Experience of Desktop Grids and P2P systems" Organisers: Franck Cappello, INRIA, France Adriana Iamnitchi, Duke University, US Mitsuhisa Sato, Tsukuba University, Japan Workshop 5: DSM 2005: Fifth International Workshop on Distributed Shared Memory Organisers: Laurent Lefevre, INRIA RESO/LIP, France Michael Schoettner, University of Ulm, Germany Workshop 6: GAN'05: Third Workshop on Grids and Advanced Networks Organisers: Laurent Lefevre, INRIA RESO/LIP, France Pascale Primet, INRIA RESO/LIP, France Workshop 7: Bio-Medical Computations on the Grid (BioGrid) Organisers: Chun-Hsi Huang, University of Connecticut, US Sanguthevar Rajasekaran, University of Connecticut, US Workshop 8: 1st International Workshop on Grid Performability Organisers: Nigel Thomas, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK Stephen Jarvis, University of Warwick, UK Workshop 9: Workshop on Agent-based Grid Economics (AGE-2005) Organisers: Daniel Veit, University of Karlsruhe, Germany Bjoern Schnizler, University of Karlsruhe, Germany o 4 Tutorials (31% acceptance rate -- 13 tutorial proposals were submitted) Chair: Michael Gerndt (TUM, Germany) Tutorial 1: High Performance I/O for Scientific Applications Robert Latham Mathematics and Computer Science Division, Argonne National Lab, IL, USA Tutorial 2: Practical Performance Measurement and Analysis of Parallel Programs on Clusters (and Grids) Bernd Mohr Forschungszentrum Juelich, Zentralinstitut fuer Angewandte Mathematik, 52428 Juelich, Germany Tutorial 3: Grid Computing Security - Issues, Concerns and Counter-measures Anirban Chakrabarti Grid Computing Focus Group, Software Engineering Technology Lab, Infosys Technologies, Electronics City, Bangalore, Karnataka 560100, India Tutorial 4: The Gridbus Toolkit: Creating and Managing Utility Grids for eScience and eBusiness Applications Rajkumar Buyya Senior Lecturer and StorageTek (USA) Fellow of Grid Computing Grid Computing and Distributed Systems (GRIDS) Lab Dept. of Computer Science and Software Engineering, The University of Melbourne, ICT Building, 111, Barry Street, Carlton, Melbourne, VIC 3053, Australia o A poster session with over 16 posters Posters Chair: Yan Huang (Cardiff University, UK) o Two General Keynote Talks: Talk 1: "e-Science, Cyberinfrastructure and Web Service Grids" Professor Tony Hey, University of Southampton/ERSRC, UK Talk 2: "Experiences with System X" Professor Srinidhi Varadarajan, Virginia Tech, US o An Industry Track Chair: Alistair Dunlop (OMII, UK) Industry Keynote: "WS-Agreement" Heiko Ludwig, IBM T.J.Watson Research Centre, US o A "Work in Progress" Session REGISTRATION DATES ================== http://www.cs.cf.ac.uk/ccgrid2005/registration.html Early bird registration : March 21, 2005 Accommodation (cut-off) date: March 21, 2005 SPECIAL EVENT ============= Conference Banquet will be at the National Museum and Galleries of Wales (within walking distance of the conference venue and hotels). More details at: http://www.nmgw.ac.uk/nmgc/ ========== Honorary Chair -------------- Tony Hey, EPSRC, UK Conference Chairs ----------------- David W. Walker, Cardiff University, UK Carl Kesselman, USC/ISI, US Programme Committee Chair ------------------------- Omer F. Rana, Cardiff University, UK Programme Committee Vice-Chairs ------------------------------- Jack Dongarra, University of Tenneesee, US Luc Moreau, University of Southampton, UK Sven Graupner, HP Labs, US Peter Sloot, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands Craig Lee, The Aerospace Corporation, US Publications Chair: Rajkumar Buyya, University of Melbourne, Australia Workshops Chair: Craig Lee, Aerospace Corporation, US Tutorials Chair : Michael Gerndt, TU Munich, Germany Industry Track Chair: Alistair Dunlop, OMII, UK Exhibits Chair: Steven Newhouse, OMII, UK Posters Chair : Yan Huang, Cardiff University, UK Finance Chair: John Oliver, Welsh eScience Centre, UK Registration Chair : Tracey Lavis, Cardiff University, UK Local Arrangements Chair: Linda Wilson, Welsh eScience Centre, UK Publicity Chairs ---------------- Vladimir Getov, University of Westminster, UK (Europe) Marcin Paprzycki, Oklahoma State University, US (Europe) Cho-Li Wang, University of Hong Kong (Asia Pacific) Ken Hawick, Massey University, New Zealand (Asia Pacific) Manish Parashar, Rutgers University, US (America) PROGRAMME COMMITTEE ------------------- Thierry Priol, IRISA, France Seif Haridi, KTH Stockholm, Sweden Bruno Schulze, Laboratario Nacional de Computacio Cientifica, Brazil David Abramson, Monash University, Australia Steven Willmott, Universitat Polithcnica de Catalunya, Spain Xian-He Sun, Illinois Institute of Technology, US Yun-Heh (Jessica) Chen-Burger, University of Edinburgh, UK Thilo Kielmann, Vrije Universiteit, The Netherlands Brian Matthews, RAL/CCLRC and Oxford Brookes University, UK Maozhen Li, Brunel University, UK Greg Astfalk, HP Labs, US Marty Humphrey, University of Virginia, US Geoffrey Fox, University of Indiana, US Martin Berzins, University of Leeds, UK Hai Jin, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, China Giovanni Chiola, Universita' di Genova, Italy Domenico Talia, Universita' della Calabria/ICAR-CNR, Italy Josi Cunha, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal Ron Perrott, Queens University Belfast, UK Ewa Deelman, ISI/USC, US Stephen Jarvis, Warwick University, UK Niclas Andersson, Linkvping University, Sweden Putchong Uthayopas, Kasetsart University, Thailand John Morrison, University College Cork, Ireland Stephen Scott, Oak Ridge National Lab, US Luciano Serafini, ITC-IRST, Italy David A. Bader, University of New Mexico, US Mark Baker, University of Portsmouth, UK Emilio Luque, Universitat Autrnoma de Barcelona, Spain Akhil Sahai, HP Labs, US Gregor von Laszewski, Argonne National Lab, US Fethi Rabhi, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia Fabrizio Petrini, Los Alamos National Lab, US Kate Keahey, Argonne National Lab, US Sergei Gorlatch, Universitdt M|nster, Germany Brian Tierney, Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, US Rauf Izmailov, NEC Labs, US Stephen J. Turner, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Savas Parastatidis, University of Newcastle, UK Elias Houstis, University of Thessaly, Greece -- and Purdue University, US Karl Aberer, EPFL, Switzerland Rolf Hempel, DLR, Germany Anne Elster, NTNU, Norway Artur Andrzejak, Zuse Institute Berlin, Germany Jennifer Schopf, Argonne National Laboratory, US John Gurd, University of Manchester, UK Domenico Laforenza, ISTI/CNR, Italy Wolfgang Rehm, TU Chemnitz, Germany Gabriel Antoniu, IRISA, France Beniamino di Martino, Seconda Universita di Napoli, Italy Frank Z. Wang, Cranfield University, UK Daniel S. Katz, JPL/Caltech, US Nigel Thomas, University of Newcastle, UK Moustafa Ghanem, Imperial College, London, UK Kenneth Hurst, JPL/Caltech, US


text:
This news item from LifeSiteNews.com speaks for itself:
By Hilary White
LANCASTER, UK, March 27, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A proposal by the UK's Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) to allow abortionists to advertise on television comes straight "from the heart of the abortion industry," the Catholic bishop of Lancaster has said.
In a statement issued March 26, Bishop Patrick O'Donohue called the proposed changes "deeply damaging" and warned that they would "result in the deaths of many more preborn children and cause untold harm to women" and threaten "yet another hammer-blow to the sanctity of human life in this country."
The proposal comes as statistics continue to show rises in Britain's teenage pregnancy and abortion rates.
Pro-life advocates have warned also that a requirement in the proposal that pro-life pregnancy counselling services must "make clear if they do not refer women for abortion" is a form of pro-abortion discrimination on the part of the ASA.
Bishop O'Donohue wrote, "As a society, we need to wake up and stop treating abortion as a quick-fix solution to pregnancy and offer compassionate and practical support to women facing crisis pregnancies."
He recommends that those interested in helping women in crisis pregnancies donate their time or money to pro-life groups like the Cardinal Winning Pro-Life Initiative in Scotland.
"The killing of the innocent can never be a genuine solution to a problem," the bishop wrote. He called on "all those who care about the sanctity of human life to voice their opposition to this proposal with one voice".
Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
British TV Could Carry Advertisements for Abortionists
To donate to the Good Counsel Network, a pro-life crisis pregnancy service:
15 Maple Grove,
London, England,
Phone: 020 7723 1740
To contact the Advertising Standards Authority:
Mid City Place,
71 High Holborn,
Phone 020 7492 2222
Textphone 020 7242 8159
Fax 020 7242 3696
ASA website complaints form:
end of story
After reading this, I have to wonder aloud how soon this will happen in the US under Obama. He is after all sympathetic to the abortion mill crowd. And if recent history has proven anything, it has shown that the American public can get used to just about any obscene notion if it's brought on gradually (like a frog on a hotplate). Whether it's the sex industry or abortuaries, they whittle away at our sensibilities until someone shrieks. Then they stop...for a short while. Then they whittle away again...
Remember when there were no condom ads on TV? Before the first one appeared, very few would have thought it possible to get away with such a thing. Remember the days before topless bars and adult entertainment massage parlors advertised on every other billboard on our nation's interstate highways? Now several states allow them. Abortion commercials are merely the next step in the pornification of the UK; and you know that the UK is a testing ground for the US.


text: 1TV NEWS | one of the leading television stations in the country 1TV is the one of the leading television stations in the country. Known for its hard-hitting news reports and high-impact current affairs programs, 1TV prides itself on rapid, objective, and factual reporting. 1TV reaches a large percentage of highly educated and affluent viewers, targeting a younger audience and a greater share of the middle class. Its aggressive national outreach and catchy programming make it one of the leading privately owned commercial television stations in Afghanistan. http://www.1tvnews.af/en/ 2019-04-22T07:48:12+04:30 Joomla! - Open Source Content Management