Monday, February 6, 2006

Today marks the 166th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, New Zealand’s founding document, in 1840.

Although this is New Zealand’s national day, the commemoration has often been the focus of protest by Maori activists, and is often marred by controversy. This year, the morning celebrations at Waitangi were peaceful, and there was only a brief altercation during the afternoon. Celebrations also went smoothly at over 60 other sites around the country, except for a confrontation at Hayman Park in Manukau City between local Maori and National Front members.

New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark did not attend the dawn service at Waitangi today, or visit the lower Te Tii Marae. She hosted a breakfast for Northland civic leaders before taking part in other events around the country. In the afternoon she visited Hoani Waititi Marae in West Auckland, then attended the reception at Government House hosted by the Governor General.

The Leader of the Opposition Dr Don Brash visited the upper Te Tii Marae on Saturday afternoon.In his speech at the Marae, Dr Brash said New Zealand needs to stop looking in the “rear-view mirror” and that the speedy settlement of claims is important for all New Zealanders.

The current Labour government has pledged to finish all Treaty claims by 2020, while National’s 2005 election policy called for all claims to be settled by 2010.

Dr Brash said National is still committed to settling claims quickly, but because of the current Labour government, National’s deadline of 2010 to settle treaty grievances is no longer realistic. The target will be reviewed in a National Party caucus meeting next week.

Dr Brash also attended the dawn service at the upper Te Tii Marae, where he was asked to offer a prayer; he said about the treaty we “ask your forgiveness for our sins…none of us is without sin, we have all fallen short of the treaty promise”. The Prime Minister has refused to comment on the prayer.

Dr Brash then visited Hoani Waititi Marae, leaving before the Prime Minister arrived.

This year also marked the first time in a decade that the Royal New Zealand Navy (RNZN) has had a major presence at Waitangi Day celebrations.

Chief of Navy, Rear Admiral David Ledson says “You can either build walls of silence or you can use words to build bridges…we’d sooner use words and conversation to build bridges than sit either side of a stone wall.”

At dawn, the RNZN raised the New Zealand flag, the Union Jack and the White Ensign on the flagstaff in the treaty grounds.

This was followed by a church service and cultural displays. Several boats re-enacted the calling ashore of Governor Hobson to sign the treaty.

The annual hikoi (protest march) with about 500 people started at lunch time and marched from the lower Te Tii Marae, up to the upper Te Tii Marae and then to the contentious flagpole, where some protestors had a brief standoff with police.

The day closed with the flags being lowered by the RNZN in a traditional ceremony.

Governor-General Dame Silvia Cartwright said in her annual Waitangi Day address. “Celebrations at Waitangi on Waitangi Day have changed a great deal over the years…[now] involving families, schools, youth and community groups…let us as always, remember our history, but let us look forward also to a bright future for our country.”

The Governor-General arrived at Waitangi on Saturday, February 4, where she welcomed the Governor-General of Papua New Guinea to Waitangi before she attended a reception onboard HMNZS Te Mana.

Today she attended the dawn service on the treaty grounds, followed by celebrations in Hamilton. She then hosted an afternoon garden party at Government House in Auckland, not at the traditional Wellington Government House venue. This is her last Waitangi Day as Governor-General.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=New_Zealand_marks_Waitangi_Day,_2006&oldid=4391828”
Posted in Uncategorized

byadmin

Many people suddenly wake up to the smell of waste water in the basement and discover that they need to call a plumber for sump pump repair in Naperville IL. The stench and waste water mean that you may have to find an emergency plumber to have an entire sump pump installation done. Not many people know about the importance of the sump pump in Naperville IL, where it can be found in the home and what to do when it stops working.

Sump Pump Naperville IL Facts From An Emergency Plumber

When you’re buying a new home, the plumbing is one of the aspects that you need to take into consideration. This is quite hard because most of it is hidden behind the walls and underground, but if you do get the chance to have a real search round the house, then head to the basement to have a look at the sump pump: One of the most important plumbing parts you ever need.

* A sump pump in Naperville IL plays a vital role and is used in most homes to pump away water that has built up in the water accumulation sump pit.

* Mostly located in the basement of the home which is the lowest part of the home. The reason for this is that water, and plumping follows the basic laws of gravity.

* Water flows down, so having a sump collection pit and a sump pump in your basement is vital to the smooth running of your entire plumbing system.

* Water enters the collection pit via the natural ground water in the area, when it rains or from the basement drains funneling into the sump collection pit.

* Sump pumps are designed to get the waste water out of your home and into the city and municipal drainage system where it belongs.

What Happens When It All Goes Wrong With Your Sump Pump in Naperville IL?

Plumbing systems can be fickle, and you just never know when they’ll decide to stop working. With much of the plumbing hidden from view, the first sign that there might be a problem is when you step out of bed and into a foot of water. Having a plumber for the repair of your sump pump in Naperville IL is essential and could save you time and money.

Your plumber for repair and installation of a sump pump in Naperville IL is there to make sure that you don’t have to worry about things like your sump pump installation or any aspect of your home plumbing. As your home ages, natural wear and tear become a part of your home maintenance budget and having your sump pump checked regularly and replaced when need be, can save you the huge expense of having your basement flooded and repairs done to the foundations of your home.

Plumbers to handle the repair and installation of your sump pump Naperville are there for instant repair work and long term replacement and installation of all plumbing components. Call thegreatestplumber.com to have your sump pump checked.

Posted in Hyperhidrosis Surgery

Sunday, September 28, 2008

The two major party presidential candidates in the US, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, faced each other yesterday in the first TV debate. Despite that McCain had asked to postpone the debate, both were present at the University of Mississippi. The debate, which was moderated by PBSJim Lehrer, was planned to be focused on foreign policy, however due to concerns about the US financial crisis, the debate began focused on economy.

McCain repeatedly referred to his experience, drawing on stories from the past. Often, he joked of his age and at one point seemed to mock his opponent. Obama spoke of mistakes and repeatedly laid out detailed plans.

The debate was widely seen as a draw. A CBS poll conducted after the debate on independent voters found that 38% felt it was a draw, 40% felt Obama had won, and 22% thought that McCain had won. Voters and analysts agreed that Obama had won on the economy, but that McCain had done better on foreign policy issues, which were the focus of the debate. However, Obama had a more substantial lead on the economy than McCain did on foreign policy.

The McCain campaign faced some ridicule prior to the debate, after airing an internet ad declaring McCain had won the debate hours before it had started.

The candidates were asked where they stood on the country’s financial plans.

Obama put forward four proposals for helping the economy. First, to “make sure that we’ve got oversight over this whole [bailout] process”. Second, to “make sure that taxpayers, when they are putting their money at risk, have the possibility of getting that money back and gains”. Third, to “make sure that none of that money is going to pad CEO bank accounts or to promote golden parachutes”. And lastly, “make sure that we’re helping homeowners, because the root problem here has to do with the foreclosures that are taking place all across the country”.

He then went on to say, “we also have to recognize that this is a final verdict on eight years of failed economic policies promoted by George Bush, supported by Senator McCain, a theory that basically says that we can shred regulations and consumer protections and give more and more to the most, and somehow prosperity will trickle down”.Lehrer then turned to McCain, giving him two minutes as well.

McCain, on the other hand, stressed the urgency of the crisis and the partisanship present in Washington before going on. “This package has transparency in it. It has to have accountability and oversight. It has to have options for loans to failing businesses, rather than the government taking over those loans. We have to — it has to have a package with a number of other essential elements to it,” he told viewers, pausing to briefly mention energy and jobs before Lehrer stopped him.

Lehrer asked the two to come back to his question and urging them to speak to each other, first turning to Senator Obama.

“We haven’t seen the language yet,” Obama began, speaking to Lehrer and not McCain. “And I do think that there’s constructive work being done out there”, he said, before noting he was optimistic a plan would come together. “The question, I think, that we have to ask ourselves is, how did we get into this situation in the first place?”

He continued, stressing his foresight on the issues two years ago, before Lehrer turned to McCain, asking if he planned to vote for the bailout plan.

McCain stammered that he hoped so. Lehrer asked again, and McCain replied, “Sure. But — but let me — let me point out, I also warned about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and warned about corporate greed and excess, and CEO pay, and all that. A lot of us saw this train wreck coming.”

McCain then continued, giving a story about former US President Dwight Eisenhower, who “on the night before the Normandy invasion, went into his room, and he wrote out two letter”. Eisenhower, he said, had taken accountability for his actions.

HAVE YOUR SAY
Who won the debate? Did the debate change your opinions on either of the candidates or the issues?
Add or view comments

“As president of the United States, people are going to be held accountable in my administration. And I promise you that that will happen.”

Obama then agreed with McCain, adding that more accountability was needed but not just when there’s a panic. “There are folks out there who’ve been struggling before this crisis took place,” Obama continued, “and that’s why it’s so important, as we solve this short-term problem, that we look at some of the underlying issues that have led to wages and incomes for ordinary Americans to go down, the — a health care system that is broken, energy policies that are not working, because, you know, 10 days ago, John said that the fundamentals of the economy are sound”.

Obama was asked to say it to McCain. Obama replied, “I do not think that they are”. Lehrer asked him to say it more directly to McCain, and Obama laughed, repeating himself to McCain.

McCain joked about his age, saying, “Are you afraid I couldn’t hear him?”

Obama said that he and McCain disagreed fundamentally and that he wanted accountability “not just when there’s a crisis for folks who have power and influence and can hire lobbyists, but for the nurse, the teacher, the police officer, who, frankly, at the end of each month, they’ve got a little financial crisis going on. They’re having to take out extra debt just to make their mortgage payments”. Tax policies, he said, were a good example.

McCain disagreed. “No, I — look, we’ve got to fix the system. We’ve got fundamental problems in the system. And Main Street is paying a penalty for the excesses and greed in Washington, D.C., and on Wall Street. So there’s no doubt that we have a long way to go. And, obviously, stricter interpretation and consolidation of the various regulatory agencies that weren’t doing their job, that has brought on this crisis”.

Lehrer went on to the next question, asking if there were fundamental differences between the approaches of the two.

McCain began by saying he wanted to lower “completely out of control” spending. He promised as president to “veto every single spending bill” He then attacked Senator Obama’s use of earmarks, citing it as a fundamental difference.

Senator Obama agreed that earmarks were being abused, but not that it was a large problem. “Earmarks account for $18 billion in last year’s budget. Senator McCain is proposing — and this is a fundamental difference between us — $300 billion in tax cuts to some of the wealthiest corporations and individuals in the country, $300 billion. Now, $18 billion is important; $300 billion is really important.” He then attacked McCain’s tax plans, saying, “you would have CEOs of Fortune 500 companies getting an average of $700,000 in reduced taxes, while leaving 100 million Americans out”.

He then stressed his focus on the middle class, saying, “We’ve got to grow the economy from the bottom up. What I’ve called for is a tax cut for 95 percent of working families, 95 percent”.

McCain was called on.

“Now, Senator Obama didn’t mention that, along with his tax cuts, he is also proposing some $800 billion in new spending on new programs,” McCain said, attacking his opponent. He also said that Obama had only suspended pork barrel spending after he started running for president.

“What I do is I close corporate loopholes,” Obama objected, “stop providing tax cuts to corporations that are shipping jobs overseas so that we’re giving tax breaks to companies that are investing here in the United States. I make sure that we have a health care system that allows for everyone to have basic coverage”.

He then turned to McCain, asking him to look at his tax policies, which he said were ignoring the middle class and a continuation of Bush policies.

Lehrer asked McCain to respond directly to Obama’s attack on his tax policies.

“Well — well, let me give you an example of what Senator Obama finds objectionable, the business tax,” McCain began. He then explained the reasoning behind his business tax cuts, saying that companies would want to start in countries where they would pay less taxes. “I want to cut that business tax. I want to cut it so that businesses will remain in — in the United States of America and create jobs”.

Obama explained that his tax cuts would affect 95% of taxpayers, then replied, “Now, John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he’s absolutely right. Here’s the problem: There are so many loopholes that have been written into the tax code, oftentimes with support of Senator McCain, that we actually see our businesses pay effectively one of the lowest tax rates in the world”.

McCain, he said, opposed closing loopholes but just wanted to add more tax breaks on top of that.

This was a clear victory for Barack Obama on John McCain’s home turf. Senator McCain offered nothing but more of the same failed Bush policies, and Barack Obama made a forceful case for change in our economy and our foreign policy.

He went on, attacking McCain’s health credit idea, saying that McCain wanted to tax health credits. “Your employer now has to pay taxes on the health care that you’re getting from your employer. And if you end up losing your health care from your employer, you’ve got to go out on the open market and try to buy it”.

McCain responded with an example of Obama voting for tax breaks of oil companies.

Obama cut in, “John, you want to give oil companies another $4 billion”, he pointed out.

McCain shot back, attacking Obama’s earmark spending and tax policies. “Who’s the person who has believed that the best thing for America is — is to have a tax system that is fundamentally fair?”, he said, referring to himself. “And I’ve fought to simplify it, and I have proposals to simplify it”.

He then accused Obama of voting “to increase taxes on people who make as low as $42,000 a year”. Obama repeated several times that McCain’s accusations were untrue.

McCain then accused him of giving tax cuts to oil companies, which Obama once again said was untrue. “The fact of the matter is, is that I was opposed to those tax breaks, tried to strip them out,”he said. “We’ve got an emergency bill on the Senate floor right now that contains some good stuff, some stuff you want, including drilling off-shore, but you’re opposed to it because it would strip away those tax breaks that have gone to oil companies.”

Lehrer then broke in, stopping the argument. He switched to a new question, asking what priorities and goals for the country the candidates would give up as a result of the financial crisis.

He allowed Obama to answer the question first, who said many things would have to be delayed but not forgotten. He then began to list what he felt the country had to have to continue to compete.

“We have to have energy independence,” he said, “so I’ve put forward a plan to make sure that, in 10 years’ time, we have freed ourselves from dependence on Middle Eastern oil by increasing production at home, but most importantly by starting to invest in alternative energy, solar, wind, biodiesel”.

He continued, saying that the health care system had to be fixed because it was bankrupting families.

“We’ve got to make sure that we’re competing in education,” he continued. “We’ve got to make sure that our children are keeping pace in math and in science.” He also mentioned making sure college was still affordable.

He also stressed making sure the country was still stable structurally, “to make sure that we can compete in this global economy”.

Lehrer then turned to McCain, asking him to present his ideas.

“Look, we, no matter what, we’ve got to cut spending”, McCain began and reminded the audience that he “saved the taxpayers $6.8 billion by fighting a contract that was negotiated between Boeing and DOD that was completely wrong”.

Lehrer broke in, asking if it was correct that neither of them had any major changes to implement after the financial crisis.

Obama replied that many things would have to be delayed and put aside, and that investments had to be made. He then agreed with McCain that cuts had to be made. “We right now give $15 billion every year as subsidies to private insurers under the Medicare system. Doesn’t work any better through the private insurers. They just skim off $15 billion. That was a give away and part of the reason is because lobbyists are able to shape how Medicare work”.

McCain then made a suggestion. “How about a spending freeze on everything but defense, veteran affairs and entitlement programs”. Lehrer repeated “spending freeze?” and McCain went on, “I think we ought to seriously consider with the exceptions the caring of veterans, national defense and several other vital issues”.

Obama disagreed with McCain’s idea, saying it was “using a hatchet”. Some vital programs, he said, were seriously underfunded. “I went to increase early childhood education and the notion that we should freeze that when there may be, for example, this Medicare subsidy doesn’t make sense”.

The two candidates began to argue more directly.

“We have to have,” McCain argued, “wind, tide, solar, natural gas, flex fuel cars and all that but we also have to have offshore drilling and we also have to have nuclear power”.

He accused Obama of opposing storing nuclear fuel.

Lehrer interrupted the two with another question, asking how the financial crisis would affect how they ran the country.

Obama replied first. “There’s no doubt it will affect our budgets. There is no doubt about it”. He went on to stress that it was a critical time and the country’s long term priorities had to be sorted out.

There was one man who was presidential tonight, that man was John McCain. There was another who was political, that was Barack Obama. John McCain won this debate and controlled the dialogue throughout, whether it was the economy, taxes, spending, Iraq or Iran.

McCain replied by criticizing Obama’s health care plans. “I want the families to make decisions between themselves and their doctors. Not the federal government,” he said, then called for lower spending.

He went on to speak about the national debt and stressing the importance of low taxes.

Obama went on the offensive, attacking McCain’s record of voting. “John, it’s been your president who you said you agreed with 90 percent of the time who presided over this increase in spending”, he said, accusing him of voting for an “orgy of spending”.

McCain countered that he had opposed Bush “on spending, on climate change, on torture of prisoner, on – on Guantanamo Bay. On a — on the way that the Iraq War was conducted”. He called himself a maverick, and referred to his running mate as a maverick as well.

Lehrer asked the two what the lessons of Iraq were.

McCain answered first, stressing that the war in Iraq was going well. “I think the lessons of Iraq are very clear,” he answered, “that you cannot have a failed strategy that will then cause you to nearly lose a conflict”.

He went on to praise the efforts in Iraq, saying the strategy was successful and the US was winning. “And we will come home with victory and with honor. And that withdrawal is the result of every counterinsurgency that succeeds”, and continued that Iraq would make a stable ally.

Lehrer asked Obama how he saw the lessons of Iraq, who began by questioning the fundamentals of the war and whether the US should have gone in the first place.

“We took our eye off [bin Laden]. And not to mention that we are still spending $10 billion a month, when they have a $79 billion surplus, at a time when we are in great distress here at home, and we just talked about the fact that our budget is way overstretched and we are borrowing money from overseas to try to finance just some of the basic functions of our government”.

The lesson, he said, was to “never hesitate to use military force”, but to use it wisely.

McCain was asked if he agreed on the lesson, though he did not comment on a lesson learned. Obama, he said, had been wrong about the surge.

The two opponents then began arguing, as Lehrman tried to mediate them.

McCain felt it was remarkable that “Senator Obama is the chairperson of a committee that oversights NATO that’s in Afghanistan. To this day, he has never had a hearing”.

“The issues of Afghanistan,” Obama responded, “the issues of Iraq, critical issues like that, don’t go through my subcommittee because they’re done as a committee as a whole”.

He then began to attack McCain’s optimism. “You said that we were going to be greeted as liberators. You were wrong. You said that there was no history of violence between Shiite and Sunni. And you were wrong”.

McCain responded to the criticism by telling a story of when he spoke to troops who were re-enlisting. “And you know what they said to us? They said, let us win. They said, let us win. We don’t want our kids coming back here. And this strategy, and this general, they are winning. Senator Obama refuses to acknowledge that we are winning in Iraq”.

McCain repeatedly accused Obama of opposing funding to troops.

Obama responded by speaking to Lehrer, to explain why he had voted against funding troops. “Senator McCain opposed funding for troops in legislation that had a timetable, because he didn’t believe in a timetable. I opposed funding a mission that had no timetable, and was open- ended, giving a blank check to George Bush. We had a difference on the timetable”.

“Admiral Mullen suggests that Senator Obama’s plan is dangerous for America,” McCain cut in once Obama had finished.

Obama said it was not the case, that the wording was “a precipitous withdrawal would be dangerous”.

McCain then argued that Iraq, and not Afghanistan, was the central battle ground against terrorism. He also attacked Obama’s surprise that the surge had worked.

Lehrer switched to a new question. “Do you think more troops — more U.S. troops should be sent to Afghanistan, how many, and when?”

Obama mentioned he had been saying more troops in Afghanistan were needed for over a year. He argued that no Al-Qaeda were present in Iraq before the invasion, and the people there had nothing to do with 9/11.

He then went on to list a three part plan beginning with pressuring the Afghani government to work for it’s people and control it’s poppy trade. He also pressed the need to stop giving money to Pakistan.

To be frank, I’m surprised McCain didn’t play the POW card more tonight, consider how frequently he and his campaign have used it earlier in the campaign.

McCain responded by saying Iraq had to be stabilized and that he would not make the mistake of leaving Iraq the way it is.

“If you’re going to aim a gun at somebody,” he said, “you’d better be prepared to pull the trigger”.

Obama responded by arguing that if the Pakistani government would not take care of terrorists in it’s borders, action had to be taken. He then commented on past US policies with Pakistan, saying that the US support of Musharraf had alienated the Pakistani people.

“And as a consequence, we lost legitimacy in Pakistan. We spent $10 billion. And in the meantime, they weren’t going after al Qaeda, and they are more powerful now than at any time since we began the war in Afghanistan. That’s going to change when I’m president of the United States”, he finished.

McCain quickly replied that Pakistan was a failed state at the time. He then went on to talk about his voting record. “I have a record of being involved in these national security issues, which involve the highest responsibility and the toughest decisions that any president can make, and that is to send our young men and women into harm’s way”.

Obama argued that Afghanistan could not be muddled through, and that problems were being caused by not focusing on Al-Qaeda. As he finished, Lehrer attempted to announce a new question, but McCain quickly attacked Obama, saying his plans would have a “calamitous effect” on national security and the region.

Lehrer directed his next question towards McCain, asking about his thoughts on Iran and it’s threat to the US.

McCain’s reading of the threat in Iran was “if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it is an existential threat to the State of Israel and to other countries in the region”. He stressed the need to avoid another Holocaust, and the need for a league of democracies

Anybody hearing a snicker from McCain while Obama is talking?

to battle Iran. “I am convinced that together, we can, with the French, with the British, with the Germans and other countries, democracies around the world, we can affect Iranian behavior”.

Obama went next, focusing on the Iraq war’s effect on Iran. Iraq, he said, was Iran’s “mortal enemy” and had kept Iran from becoming a threat. “That was cleared away. And what we’ve seen over the last several years is Iran’s influence grow. They have funded Hezbollah, they have funded Hamas, they have gone from zero centrifuges to 4,000 centrifuges to develop a nuclear weapon”.

He then went on to say that refusing to use diplomacy with hostile nations has only made matters worse and isolated the US.

Lehrer turned to McCain, asking him how he felt about diplomacy as a solution.

McCain hurried through his response, attacking Obama on his willingness to meet with hostile leaders without preconditions. People like Ahmadinejad, he said, would have their ideas legitimized if a President met with them.

Obama responded by pointing out that Ahmadinejad was only a minor leader. Meeting leaders without preconditions, he said, “doesn’t mean that you invite them over for tea one day”. He then turned to attacking McCain, who he said “would not meet potentially with the prime minister of Spain, because he — you know, he wasn’t sure whether they were aligned with us. I mean, Spain? Spain is a NATO ally”.

McCain retorted that he was not yet President so it would be out of place. The two then began to argue over the comments of Dr. Kissinger’s stance on meeting foreign leaders.

McCain argued that meeting with and legitimizing ideas was dangerous and naive, and said it was a fundamental difference of opinion.

Obama accused McCain of misrepresentation, stressing that he would not speak without low level talks and preparations.

McCain responded by mocking Obama. “So let me get this right. We sit down with Ahmadinejad, and he says, ‘We’re going to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth,’ and we say, ‘No, you’re not’? Oh, please”.

The two started arguing among each other, as Lehrer attempted to interject, finally succeeding with a new question. He turned to Obama, asking how he saw the relationship with Russia and it’s potential.

Obama began spelling out his opinion, stating that he felt the US approach to Russia had to be evaluated. He then continued that the US has to press for a unified alliance and for Russia to remove itself from other nations, adding that the US had to “explain to the Russians that you cannot be a 21st-century superpower, or power, and act like a 20th-century dictatorship”.

He went on, stressing the importance of diplomacy and affirming relationships, and inviting Russian-influenced countries into NATO. “Now, we also can’t return to a Cold War posture with respect to Russia. It’s important that we recognize there are going to be some areas of common interest. One is nuclear proliferation”.

McCain responded by attacking Obama’s reaction to the Russian-Georgian conflict, criticizing his initial comment that both sides should show restraint, calling it naive. “He doesn’t understand that Russia committed serious aggression against Georgia. And Russia has now become a nation fueled by petro-dollars that is basically a KGB apparatchik-run government”.

Lehrer asked Obama if there were any major differences between the two’s opinion on Russia, who answered that he and McCain had similar opinions on Russia. He then stressed foresight in dealing with Russia, as well as reducing dependence on foreign oil through alternative energy.

“Over 26 years, Senator McCain voted 23 times against alternative energy, like solar, and wind, and biodiesel,” he mentioned.

The two began to argue over alternative energy. As Lehrer began announcing the next question, McCain interjected. “No one from Arizona is against solar. And Senator Obama says he’s for nuclear, but he’s against reprocessing and he’s against storing So,” he continued, as Obama objected, “it’s hard to get there from here. And off-shore drilling is also something that is very important and it is a bridge”.

McCain continued, as Obama interrupted to correct him, saying that he had voted for storing nuclear waste safely.

The two began interrupting each other, each trying to get a word in, before Lehrer stopped them and moved on.

“What do you think the likelihood is that there would be another 9/11-type attack on the continental United States?” asked Lehrer.

McCain said that America was far safer since 9/11, which he claimed a hand in. He went on to stress better intelligence and technology in keeping America safe, but that he felt the US was far safer.

Lehrer then turned to Obama.

Obama disagreed slightly, saying America was safer in some ways, but “we still have a long way to go”. He also felt that the US was not focusing enough on Al-Qaeda and fighting in Iraq was not making the US safer.

McCain accused Senator Obama of not understanding that “if we fail in Iraq, it encourages al Qaeda. They would establish a base in Iraq”.

Lehrer asked if Obama agreed.

Obama argued that the sole focus was currently Iraq, but that “in the meantime, bin Laden is still out there. He is not captured. He is not killed”. He noted that $10 billion was spent in Iraq every month, instead of going to healthcare. He argued that veterans were not getting the benefits they deserved, and that the next president’s strategies had to be broader.

McCain responded by attacking Obama saying he didn’t think Obama had the knowledge or experience to be President.

Obama then said that the job of the next President would be to repair America’s image and economy.

McCain concluded by citing his POW experience. “Jim, when I came home from prison, I saw our veterans being very badly treated, and it made me sad. And I embarked on an effort to resolve the POW-MIA issue, which we did in a bipartisan fashion, and then I worked on normalization of relations between our two countries so that our veterans could come all the way home”.

“And that ends this debate tonight,” finished Jim Lehrer.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=McCain_and_Obama_face_off_in_U.S._presidential_candidate_debate&oldid=1985219”
Posted in Uncategorized

Sunday, August 21, 2005

A robotic system at Stanford Medical Center was used to perform a laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery successfully with a theoretically similar rate of complications to that seen in standard operations. However, as there were only 10 people in the experimental group (and another 10 in the control group), this is not a statistically significant sample.

If this surgical procedure is as successful in large-scale studies, it may lead the way for the use of robotic surgery in even more delicate procedures, such as heart surgery. Note that this is not a fully automated system, as a human doctor controls the operation via remote control. Laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery is a treatment for obesity.

There were concerns that doctors, in the future, might only be trained in the remote control procedure. Ronald G. Latimer, M.D., of Santa Barbara, CA, warned “The fact that surgeons may have to open the patient or might actually need to revert to standard laparoscopic techniques demands that this basic training be a requirement before a robot is purchased. Robots do malfunction, so a backup system is imperative. We should not be seduced to buy this instrument to train surgeons if they are not able to do the primary operations themselves.”

There are precedents for just such a problem occurring. A previous “new technology”, the electrocardiogram (ECG), has lead to a lack of basic education on the older technology, the stethoscope. As a result, many heart conditions now go undiagnosed, especially in children and others who rarely undergo an ECG procedure.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Gastric_bypass_surgery_performed_by_remote_control&oldid=4331525”
Posted in Uncategorized

Sunday, January 10, 2010

Chinese officials have said that their country’s exports surged last December to edge out Germany as the world’s biggest exporter.

The official Xinhua news agency reported today that figures from the General Administration for Customs showed that exports jumped 17.7% in December from a year earlier. Over the whole of 2009 total Chinese exports reached US$1.2 trillion, above Germany’s forecast $1.17 trillion.

Huang Guohua, a statistics official with the customs administration, said the December exports rebound was an important turning point for China’s export sector. He commented that the jump was an indication that exporters have emerged from their downslide.

“We can say that China’s export enterprises have completely emerged from their all-time low in exports,” he said.

However, although China overtook Germany in exports, China’s total foreign trade — both exports and imports — fell 13.9% last year.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=China_overtakes_Germany_as_world%27s_biggest_exporter&oldid=3255271”
Posted in Uncategorized

Reviewing Old and New Basics for Working Capital

by

Allan Michael Taylor

One of the best current examples of why it is so important for small business owners to place a high priority on “getting back to the basics” is offered by increasingly limited working capital options. When businesses are faced with difficult financial circumstances, a simple common sense solution will often be more effective than a more complicated approach.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzL2Mubw4Ng[/youtube]

Improvements should always be welcomed by commercial borrowers when reviewing their cash management and working capital financing options. Some common advice for many complicated problems is often a variation of “it is time to get back to the basics”, and working capital loan options represent an ongoing illustration of this wisdom for small businesses. Looking at whether it is feasible to decrease overall bank financing is certainly a potential cost reduction that should not be overlooked. For almost all business financing services, many banks are increasing their fees. To avoid some of the inflated bank fees altogether, businesses should increasingly try to reduce their business debt levels. When this is not practical, the option of firing a current bank and replacing them with a new bank charging more reasonable fees will need to be seriously considered. Credit card processing is always a significant cost to evaluate when exploring business expense reductions that will help resolve a mismatch of income and costs. Certainly there will be those who say that this is easier said than done, and it is appropriate to emphasize that this process should involve the close involvement of a small business finance expert who is familiar with all aspects. This is frequently an expense area that is overlooked because the credit card processing provider was chosen for convenience or perhaps because they were recommended by a banking or other professional relationship. Analyzing alternative providers in conjunction with obtaining a merchant cash advance is one of the most practical methods for reducing this cost. Two cash flow benefits can be achieved by receiving business finance help while simultaneously reducing a major cost by combining efforts to obtain additional working capital (via a business cash advance) with a change of processing services. Business finance options can no longer be taken for granted by any business owner because of the recent ineffectiveness that prevails with commercial banking. The entire process of reviewing “working capital finance basics” will help businesses conclude how other commercial finance options are likely to be more effective in resolving their predicament than a traditional bank solution of taking on more business debt to resolve financial problems. Small businesses will quickly realize when they review working capital management and business loan basics that the most effective small business financing sources have changed during the past few years. Primarily because the active role that banks have traditionally played in providing both working capital loans as well other forms of commercial loans has been quietly stopped or significantly reduced, commercial borrowers might need to be alerted that there are both “new basics” and “old basics” for most small business financing situations.

Steve Bush and AEX Commercial Financing Group are a reliable source of

working capital loans

– Steve has offered commercial mortgage loans, business cash advance services and

business loan options

for 30 years

Article Source:

ArticleRich.com

Posted in Financial Solutions

Friday, June 17, 2005

PC manufacturer and Apple Computer competitor Dell, Inc. has stated that it is interested in shipping computers running Apple’s Mac OS X. Michael Dell, founder and chairman of Dell Computers, made the comments while talking to David Kirkpatrick of Fortune magazine.

“If Apple decides to open the Mac OS to others, we would be happy to offer it to our customers,” Dell wrote in an email to Kirkpatrick. Apple recently announced that it would begin using Intel x86 microprocessors in its computers next year, but has continued to deny reports that they will allow their OS to be run on non-Apple hardware.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Dell_would_be_%27happy%27_to_sell_PCs_running_Mac_OS_X&oldid=979449”
Posted in Uncategorized

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

In a videotape recorded prior to his murder on Sunday, Guatemalan lawyer Rodrigo Rosenberg accused President of Guatemala Álvaro Colom and his wife Sandra Torres of complicity in his violent death.

“If you are watching this message,” Rosenberg told the camera, “it is because I was assassinated by President Álvaro Colom with help from [private secretary to the president] Gustavo Alejos.”

In the video, distributed at his funeral, Rosenberg attributed the motive of the incipient murder to his representation of businessman Khalil Musa. Musa and his daughter Marjorie were murdered in April. Rosenberg alleged that Musa was killed because he was unwilling to enter into corrupt dealings at the behest of president Colom.

Presidential spokesperson Fernando Barrillas categorically rejected the accusations. “This reveals the intention of creating a political crisis around a case that should be investigated and processed by the courts,” he said in a statement posted on the official web site of the Guatemalan government. Barrillas also announced the intention to seek international help in the investigation of Rosenberg’s murder.

Rosenberg was shot on Sunday while riding his bicycle in Zone 14 of Guatemala City. His video statement has been posted to the YouTube web site.

Helen Mack of the Myrna Mack Foundation, a Guatemalan Human Rights organization, called for the video to be authenticated by experts, describing the investigation of the accusations as “rather difficult at a political level.” ((Translated from Spanish))Spanish: ?bastante difícil a nivel político.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Assassinated_lawyer_accuses_Guatemalan_president_from_beyond_grave&oldid=4508908”
Posted in Uncategorized

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

General Motors (GM) announced on Tuesday a recall of 1.3 million Chevrolet and Pontiac cars in the US, Mexico, and Canada over problems with the power steering system.

Recalling these vehicles is the right thing to do for our customers’ peace of mind

The models, the 2005–2010 Chevrolet Cobalt and 2007–2010 Pontiac G5 in the US, the 2005–2006 Pontiac Pursuit in Canada and the 2005–2006 Pontiac G4 in Mexico, were affected by a fault that causes the power steering in the vehicles to fail. The company says that cars can still be safely controlled even after the loss of power steering, although more effort to turn the car would be required.

GM is currently working on developing a fix for the problem, after having conducted an internal investigation for more than a year, beginning last January. In addition to GM’s investigation, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration also conducted an investigation on the Cobalt, which began in January 2010. The investigation was begun after more than a thousand complaints about the model were received by the agency, including reports of 14 crashes caused by the fault. GM contacted the NHTSA about the problem on Monday.

GM blamed the issues on an external supplier partially owned by Toyota, another company currently in the process of a major recall of more than eight million vehicles. According to GM vice-chairman Bob Lutz, the supplier, which was not named, had not met “all requirements for reliability and durability.” In his comments, given at the Geneva Motor Show, Lutz also said that financial responsibility for the recalls had yet to be determined.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=GM_recalls_1.3_million_cars_over_steering_issues&oldid=2715047”
Posted in Uncategorized

Submitted by: Stewart Wrighter

The field of information security is one that is expected to grow quite a lot in the coming years and so perhaps obtaining some security training may not be such a bad investment. Because there is such a demand for certified professionals, many are well-paid if they have a security certification.

Certifications such as the CISSP (Certified Information Systems Security Professional), the ISSEP (Information Systems Security Engineering Professional), the ISSMP (Information Systems Security Management Professional), the CISM (Certified Information Security Manager), CSSLP (Certified Secure Software Lifecycle Professional) and the SSCP (Systems Security Certified Practitioner) carry such a focus.

At the basic level, a certified practitioner works to guard information from unauthorized users who may want to access, use, destroy or disrupt it. The phrases information assurance and computer security are often used to mean the same thing as information security.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fccJMgQBr0[/youtube]

In the modern era, corporations and other institutions must collect and store mass amounts of data which is often of the confidential sort. The information may involve researching products or financial account information which is often stored, processed and transmitted to more than one computer via a network. Much of this information must be protected from potential criminal use.

The ultimate goal of the information security industry is to protect the availability, integrity and confidentiality of information. Information security keeps information confidential by protecting it from unauthorized users or systems. An example of this would be encrypting an online credit card transaction so that credit card information cannot be stolen and used by a third-party. This kind of security works to ensure the integrity of information in that it makes certain information is not modified without detection. And last but not least, this industry aims to keep information available to those meant to have access to it.

The field has quickly become one of the most important within that of information technology, as it is essential to just about every modern business. Because of this widespread need, the area has continued to grow even through the recent recession.

This is just one aspect of the information technology industry, which refers to the use of computers and software to manipulate and maintain information. The field dates back to the days of Julius Caesar, who is thought to have created information security with his Caesar cipher around 50 BC. Just as Caesar wrote in code because he did not want his private messages to end up in the wrong hands, today s internet users must rely on information security to be able to safely use networks like the worldwide web.

The outbreak of World War II saw the first modern day signs that an information security field was blooming, but it was not until use of the internet became widespread that technological innovations in the field really began taking place. The need was great because of incidents of international terrorism and the growth of consumer business over the net led to many important developments in information security.

Because this field has come full circle in recent years, evolving and growing even now, there are a great number of positions available for professionals. Specialty jobs within this area of expertise can be found in application and database security, information systems auditing, network security, security testing, business continuity planning, digital forensics science and others.

About the Author: Stewart Wrighter recently studied new

security certification

sites online while conducting research for an article. His son searched the term

security training

online to find out more about registering for a class.

Source:

isnare.com

Permanent Link:

isnare.com/?aid=790063&ca=Internet

Posted in Computer Security Service

TO TOP