text:
AHRP Testimony: Protections for Foster Children Enrolled in Clinical Trials Submitted to Cong.Ways & Means Hearing
AHRP Speaks Out, Children Victimized, Eugenics & Medical Atrocities, Foster Care
THE ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION (AHRP)
https://ahrp.org
142 West End Ave. Suite 28P
Testimony by The Alliance for Human Research Protection
Committee on Ways and Means Hearing on Protections for Foster Children Enrolled in Clinical Trials
On March 10, 2004, The ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION (AHRP) filed a complaint with both the Food and Drug Administration and the federal Office of Human Research Protection (OHRP) when we learned that 36 Phase I and Phase II AIDS drug experiments had been conducted on infants and children who were under the guardianship of the New York City Administration for Children's Services (ACS). The children were living at Incarnation Children's Center, a foster care facility under contract with ACS and the Catholic Archdiocese. We had reason to believe that the experiments were unethical, illegal, and coercive–and that federal regulations have been violated. We did not know at the time that children in foster care nationwide were subjected to research exploitation at prestigious medical research institutions.
Historically such children have been abused and exploited in medical experiments – for that reason, federal regulations were enacted to restrict the use of foster care children in research. The Associated Press confirms that for more than two decades, government officials colluded with hospitals and researchers to facilitate the enrollment of children who were in the care of the state for experimental drug trials. Nationwide, an estimated 698 to 1,388 foster children were used to test experimental AIDS drugs – at least 465 of those children were in the care of NYC's ACS – almost all were children of color. How ironic it is that children, who were placed by the courts into the protective custody of foster care agencies pursuant to the provisions of the Adoption and Safe Homes Act of 1997, should end up further victimized by their caretakers.
These children were exposed to pain, risks, and potentially harmful experimental drugs – the children suffered, some died. In some cases the children were diagnosed with HIV infection – in other cases infants were merely "presumed" to be HIV-infected.
The Code of Federal Regulations (45 CFR 46.409 and 21 CFR 50.56) prohibits subjecting children who are wards of the state to experiments involving greater than minimal risk:
(a) Children who are wards of the State or any other agency, institution, or entity can be included in research approved under 46.406 or 46.407 only if such research is:
1) related to their status as wards; or
2) conducted in schools, camps, hospitals, institutions, or similar setting in which the majority of children involved as subjects are not wards.
(b) If the research is approved under paragraph (a) of this section, the IRB shall require appointment of an advocate for each child who is a ward, in addition to any other individual acting on behalf of the child as guardian or in loco parentis.
The advocate shall be an individual who has the background and experience to act in, and agrees to act in, the best interests of the child for the duration of the child's participation in the research and who is not associated in any way (except in the role as advocate or member of the IRB) with the research, the investigator(s), or the guardian organization.
The Phase I and Phase II experimental drug and vaccine trials in question were unrelated to their status as wards–the NYC- ACS enrollment guidelines applied to foster care children only. The ACS guidelines falsely stated that the trials posed "minimal risk," and the guidelines clearly focused on facilitating rapid enrollment of as many foster children as possible – rather than ensuring that the trials were in the children's best interest: [Attached]
"ACS will review clinical trial protocols for HIV-infected children as soon as such protocols become available, before a specific hospital decides to participate in the study. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and pediatric AIDS specialists throughout New York State will make ACS aware of protocols as soon as they are in final form, before hospitals are ready to enroll children. This procedure will expedite ACS' decision-making even before physicians are ready to start treating children in the protocols."
The Associated Press confirmed our suspicion that most of the children in the care of ACS did not have a personal advocate – as required under federal regulations. Indeed, of the 465 NYC children in the experiments, only 142 had an advocate. Furthermore, ACS even waived the requirement for individual consent for these children – encouraging them to be herded en masse into drug trials as if they were animals.
Phase I and Phase II drug experiments involve the highest level of risk, uncertainty, and discomfort – the safety and toxicity of drugs as well as maximum dose tolerance are tested in these trials. Experiments at that testing stage are unlikely to have any direct benefit for the children in whom the drugs are tested. In some trials children were diagnosed with HIV infection – in some cases infants were merely "presumed" to be HIV-infected:
#292: A Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial of the Safety and Immunogenicity of a Seve n Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in Presumed HIV-Infected Infants
#345 A Study of Ritonavir (an Anti-HIV Drug) in HIV-Positive Infants and Children, last amendment 3/13/2000.
"Replacement infantsŠare either presumed HIV infected or have already been shown to be HIV-infectedŠ"
Infants and children were exposed to experimental HIV vaccines – which have never been successful:
#218 A Placebo-Controlled, Phase I Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety and Immunogenicity of Recombinant Envelope Proteins of HIV-1gp160 and gp120 in Children >=1 Month Old with Asymptomatic HIV Infection.
Although more than 4 AIDS drugs had never been tested in children, foster care children were exposed to an 8 drug cocktail "some at higher than usual doses" (which was reduced to 7 drugs because of "significant toxicity" 11/9/ 2001).
#1007 Multi-Drug Antiretroviral Therapy for Heavily Pretreated Pediatric AIDS Patients: A Phase I Proof of Concept Trial
Among the drugs tested in foster care children, is Nevirapine, a drug whose safety has been the center of controversy. [AP] Because Nevirapine confers resistance following even a single (low) dose, its manufacturer cautions that its use should be restricted to "previously untreated women with HIV infection who present at labor" for the prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV. Yet, 4 to 17 year old children in foster care were exposed to Nevirapine.
A Phase I trial of a Glaxo Wellcome drug, Valacyclovir hydrochloride was terminated in 1997 – Why? Typically, trials terminated at such an early stage show unacceptable levels of toxicity.
The Associated Press reported: "Some foster children died during studies, but state or city agencies said they could find no records that any deaths were directly caused by experimental treatments." It is not for those city agencies to decide the cause of death. ACS Commissioner, John B. Mattingly, testified before a City Council General Welfare Committee, that he knows of just 19 children – out of 465 – who remain within the NYC foster care system.
In addition, a series of recent investigative media reports from Texas, Florida, Ohio, New York, California, Illinois, raise concerns that over 50% of all children in foster care are currently being prescribed untested, experimental combinations of powerful, mind altering, psychotropic drugs – including antipsychotics (e.g., Risperdal, Zyprexa), anticonvulsants (e.g., Depakote, Neurontin), antidepressants (Zoloft, Paxil, Prozac, Celexa and others), tranquilizers (Klonopin, Xanax), stimulants (Ritalin, Adderall), as well as heavily sedating drugs such as the anti-hypertensive medication clonidine. These prescribing patterns are essentially uncontrolled experimental drug trials. [See: The Columbus Dispatch series by Encarnacion Pyle. Forced medication straitjackets kids, Sunday, April 24, 2005]
Clinical trials approved by the FDA study only a single drug given in tightly controlled dosages. Combinations of two and three or more different psychotropic drugs have simply never been studied in a rigorous and responsible manner. Furthermore, the foster parents and social workers who are mostly entrusted with supervising these children have less than rudimentary knowledge about these drugs' adverse effects, and even less skills in monitoring these children to avoid dangerous drug reactions. This is of course less than the protection afforded subjects in ordinary clinical trials. It is worth repeating: none of these idiosyncratic drug combinations — called polypharmacy — have ever been studied by any responsible government or other agency, and the children receiving them may be considered guinea pigs in a gigantic uncontrolled medical experiment.
How can the Congress fail to take strong corrective action?
The public has a right to know:
How many children in foster care have been enrolled in clinical trials?
What happened to foster children who were used as human guinea pigs?
What adverse effects did the children suffer during and after participation?
How many children died during the experiments?
A question has been raised about the size of the cemetery plot in which children in ACS custody are buried: Were any children buried in mass graves?
What were the specific sources of funding for these Phase I and Phase II clinical trials?
Did the foster care agencies or foster families receive payment, fees, or other rewards for enrollment of the children in these trials?
How much money was paid to the researchers and participating hospitals?
What happened in 2001 that the AIDS drug trials in foster children were stopped?
What other drug trials are being conducted on foster children?
The other questions we pose below suggest that there may have been a breakdown in the implementation of the Adoption and Safe Families Act and/or related federal law governing the protection of children in foster care. Our questions, by extension, suggest that the Council on Accreditation of Family and Children Services (COA), and one of its two founding organizations, the Child Welfare League of America (CWLA), may not be meeting their obligations.
Child protection falls within the purview of the juvenile and family court system, which remands abused and neglected children into the care of public and private, non-profit foster care agencies. In our view, the courts have ultimate jurisdiction and responsibility for what happens to these vulnerable children.
The Congress may want to consider a dual approach in dealing with the issues at hand. Child welfare laws operate by regulating the care-givers. Child abuse reporting laws, for example, require health, school, and social service personnel to report suspected child abuse. If such laws were to define "suspected child abuse" to include enrollment of foster children in Type I and Type II clinical trials, in violation of the protections afforded by 45 CFR 46.409 and 21 CFR 50.56), there would be many more eyes watching to protect children from overreaching biomedical researchers who, history has shown, have abused their authority to exploit children in foster care.
Were there violations of the provisions of the Adoption and Safe Families Act and/or related child welfare legislation by officials of the foster care agencies that permitted enrollment of foster children in Phase I and Phase II clinical trials?
Should not the supervising foster parents and/or social workers have reported suspected child abuse in these high risk, Phase I and Phase II clinical trials of experimental drugs and vaccines?
What training, if any, is provided to supervising foster parents and/or social workers about the conditions that must be satisfied by reference to 45 CFR 46.409 and 21 CFR 50.56 in order to justify enrollment of foster children in ANY biomedical research involving greater than minimal risk?
Is there a need for new federal legislation that would amend the Adoption and Safe Families Act and/or 45 CFR 46.409 and 21 CFR 50.56 to expressly define children in foster care a "protected class," whose enrollment in ANY biomedical research would trigger appointment of an independent research ombudsman under the supervision of the juvenile or family court that remanded the foster child into state custody?
Finally, if, as we argue, the courts have ultimate jurisdiction and responsibility for what happens to children whom the courts remand to the protective custody of state and private, non-profit foster care agencies, then the Congress might wish to consider amending the existing requirement for the appointment of a child advocate by the IRB pursuant to 45 CFR 46.4.09 and 21 CFR 50.56 to require instead that the child advocate be appointed by and be held accountable to the court of original jurisdiction for foster children who may be subjected to biomedical research involving greater than minimal risk. The courts, we believe, are the last recourse that foster children have to protect them from the predatory practices of those who would exploit and take advantage of their vulnerability. We should remind ourselves that the measure of a society is how it treats its most vulnerable citizens.
Vera Hassner Sharav, President, AHRP
John H. Noble, Jr, PhD, Treasurer
David Cohen, PhD, Secretary
The invited panel of witnesses to the hearing are:
Panel: Alan Fleischman, M.D., Senior Advisor, The New York Academy of Medicine, New York, New York Roberta Harris, Deputy Secretary, Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services, Madison, Wisconsin Marjorie Speers, Ph.D., Executive Director, Association for the Accreditation of Human Research Protection Programs, Inc. Moira Szilagyi, M.D., Ph.D., Fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics, on behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics
Not a single invited witness remotely represents the interest of the children who were targeted and used as human guinea pigs to test experimental AIDS drugs and vaccines!
Not a single invited witness represents the concern of the African-American and Latino community whose children were targeted.
Not a single invited witness represents any of the child welfare agencies or rsearch institutions that are under federal investigation for their role in the enrollment of these children.


Not merely turkey redux, but a whole new animal. Transports you from Plymouth to Oaxaca. This is adapted from Mark Bittman and was printed in the San Francisco Chronicle a few years ago. He started with fresh turkey legs; I use my leftover turkey meat from Thanksgiving. Muy sabroso!
Soak ancho or other mild chili in hot water to cover. Once softened, remove from water and remove stems and seeds. Set aside.
Heat half the oil at medium-high in heavy skillet or casserole that can later be covered. Add hot chili and onion and cook, stirring occasionally, until onion begins to soften, about 3-5 minutes. Add almonds, salt, pepper, garlic, tomatoes, cinnamon, cloves, mild chiles, vinegar and half the stock. Cook, stirring occasionally, until tomatoes begin to break down. Cool slightly (or for several hours) then puree in blender. Add remaining stock as needed to allow the blender to do its work. Taste, and add more salt, pepper and vinegar to taste.
Shred turkey (or use whole legs), and add to mole until heated throughout.
Sprinkle with sesame seeds. Serve with tortillas.
This entry was posted in Main, Mexican, Poultry, Thanksgiving and tagged Leftover Turkey Recipe, Mark Bittman, Turkey Mole on November 23, 2011 by .
Blend oil with basil, oregano, garlic and pepper; pour half over meat and brush over both sides.
Grill lamb over medium coals in covered grill, about 6 inches from coals, for 20 to 25 minutes per side.
Baste occasionally with remaining herbed olive oil.
Rest lamb for about 10 minutes; slice lamb crosswise at a diagonal slant.
This entry was posted in Main and tagged easter dish, lamb, leg of lamb recipe on April 16, 2011 by Chad Davine.
In Hailey, Idaho, you'll find 6,000 acres of certified organic range land and irrigated alfafa pasture. It is here that Lava Lake sheepherders practice humane animal husbandry. They are an artisanal producer of grass-fed lamb—raised sustainably, and without antibiotics or growth hormones. Lava Lake Lamb has partnered with us to share this recipe that's both simple to prepare and elegant in presentation.
Begin by cooking onions for 5 minutes. Grill over coals covered with gray ash. Turn onions over when browned and cook until tender.
Add lamb chops and grill for 7 minutes on each side or to desired degree of doneness.
Nutrition per serving: 447 calories, 33 g protein, 5 g carbohydrate, 32 g total fat (66% calories from fat), 128 mg cholesterol, 1 g fiber, 341 mg sodium, 9 mg niacin, 0.23 mg vitamin B6, 3.16 mcg vitamin B12, 3 mg iron, 5 mg zinc.
This entry was posted in Christmas, Lamb, Main and tagged lamb, Organic Black Pepper, Organic Fennel Seed, organic garlic powder on December 12, 2010 by Chad Davine.


Palazzo Siena is an ancient residence dating back to seventeenth/eighteenth century and is located in Specchia Gallone, a little town in Salento which is placed in the district of Minervino di Lecce very close to the white beaches and pure waters of Alimini, Santa Cesarea Terme, Porto Badisco, Baia dei Turchi and Torre Sant'Andrea, not far from Otranto and about 40 kilometres from Lecce. In origin it was owned by a baron named Basalù and afterwards it became the residence of the high priest Brunori who used to receive local poor people herein; today it is owned by our family from which the name "Palazzo Siena" takes origin.
The Palace has been subject to a restoration work which preserved the original building: actually it is composed by 2 floors and a wide garden with many fruit trees where an ancient colonnade covered by centenary grapevines and an ancient citrus grove prevail. A part of the garden has been used as vegetable garden, which is constantly and carefully treated with natural methods and offers organic seasonal products which guests may taste during their stay. The swimming pool of 85 square meters is equipped with hydro-massage and is sanitized with sodium chloride.
There are 11 rooms in total and 5 of them are used as residence for our family whereas the other 6 rooms are reserved to our guests who may feel as part of our family, if they like so. "Home & More" perfectly describes the idea of hospitality we have: a new formula of reception thought as space and interests'sharing in a familiar atmosphere where everyone is free to decide how to spend its own time.


The north of England is engaged in a historic transformation from its industrial past to a bright future that connects vibrant cities and globally competitive commercial activities. The scale of those activities should not be underestimated.
Growing faster than anywhere else in the UK, if the north of England was a country, it would be the 10th largest economy in Europe, exporting €56.4bn worth of goods each year and accounting for nearly 20pc of the UK's overall gross value add (GVA).
The opportunities set out in Enterprise Ireland's recent Northern Powerhouse report play to the strengths of Irish companies, particularly in the construction, life sciences, and digital sectors.
Northern Powerhouse is a government initiative that aims to rebalance the UK's economy, by maximising the combined potential of the north of England's cities and regions, including Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle, Sheffield and Tees Valley, an area of approximately 14,400 sq miles with a population of 14.9 million people.
The initiative, first launched in 2016, is delivering substantial public investment, with a focus on improving transport infrastructure between cities in the north of England and supporting economic activities around emerging capabilities. As a result, Northern Powerhouse is creating a wide range of business opportunities suited to the strengths of Irish exporters.
Trafford Council chief executive Theresa Grant said: "Irish companies are long-standing trading partners to the North of England, contributing to its robust economy and reaffirming Ireland's successful relationship to this part of the UK. With rail links like HS2 & HS3 and improved worldwide air connectivity opening up, enabling the cities in the Northern Powerhouse to grow and prosper, we anticipate the Anglo-Irish partnership will grow even stronger."
The most significant opportunities are likely to arise from new economic activities and clusters, which are largely based on science and innovation. With the European Commission's 2017 Innovation Scorecard ranking Irish SMEs first for innovation, Irish companies have a leading position internationally.
TTM Healthcare chief executive Brian Crowley said: "Since 2012, the TTM Group has been working with NHS Trusts, private hospitals and charitable organisations across the north of England, supporting more than 20 clients and employing 110 permanent and temporary staff. We see this region as of one of the fastest in growth terms for TTM, as we work with amazingly innovative and progressive healthcare organisations.
"Through the support of Enterprise Ireland and Northern Powerhouse, Irish SMEs can provide modern, innovative and high-quality services across several industries."
Ardmac, a construction specialist that works with leading companies across the pharma and technology sectors, has an office in Manchester and a portfolio of clients across the north of England.
Armac chief executive Ronan Quinn said: "Our business has seen considerable growth in the region in recent years. A significant amount of that business has come from building a shared vision of what our clients want to achieve. The ease of travel between the north of England and our offices mean that we can be face to face with a client within an hour."
Notwithstanding the threat of Brexit, the UK's economy is in growth mode and remains Ireland's most significant export market. Enterprise Ireland is focused on supporting firms to consolidate and grow exports to the UK, while also supporting them to diversify their export markets across the globe.
Enterprise Ireland is planning a trade mission to the north of England in April with the aim of strengthening the presence of client companies in the region. Companies interested in exploring opportunities should begin by downloading the Northern Powerhouse report, available on Enterprise Ireland's website.


TranScrip has conducted an extensive number of respiratory projects since 2008. It has covered projects ranging from translational medicine, working with mature products and managing the challenges of inhaled generics. The contracts include supporting major successful MAAs and NDAs, variations and a wide range of expert services in translational medicine and drug development.
TranScrip's Respiratory team has worked on all phases of projects ranging from translational programmes involving provision of a complete, virtual biotech team to peri-registration work involving submissions for big pharma. Project size has ranged from provision of therapeutic, operational and / or strategic expertise by individuals through to provision of multifunctional strategic and operational teams of up to 10 people.
Tim leads TranScrip's clients' programmes in respiratory product development, registration, and post-licensing.
He has over 30 years' of industry experience covering the complete product life-cycle from "Target Product Profile" and national/global launches to post-patent strategies for respiratory and other therapeutic areas.
Lars is one of TranScrip's key experts in respiratory, allergic and immunological diseases.
He has more than 40 years' experience of clinical work in the disease areas, and more than 20 years' pharma experience covering all stages of global drug development including biopharmaceuticals, MABs and antisense oligonucleotides, systemic as well as inhaled. In addition, he has extensive experience in licensing and evaluation/due diligence of pharma and biotech projects.
Lars became MD at the University of Umeå, Sweden, in 1977 and holds board certificates in Internal Medicine, Pulmonary Medicine and Allergy. He is Associated Professor in Pulmonary Medicine at the University of Umeå. After several years in full time clinical work in internal medicine and respiratory medicine, he joined Astra (later AstraZeneca) in 1995 as medical adviser, and then advanced to head Medical Department at Astra Draco in 1997. In 1999 he moved to Pharmacia Diagnostics AB as VP Medical and Regulatory Affairs and later held positions as VP and CMO at a number of biotech companies, including Biolipox AB and Resistentia, before moving on to his role as Clinical Research Head Cough, Cold and Allergy, at Novartis Consumer health. Most recently he was Executive Medical Director Licensing for Respiratory and Inflammation therapeutic area in AstraZeneca.
During his years in industry, Lars has worked in small start-up biotech companies as well as large pharma companies and has been involved in all stages of drug development of biopharmaceuticals, large molecules and oligonucleotides, including inhaled delivery of large molecules. He has interacted with regulatory authorities in Europe as well as USA and Japan on several occasions, and worked closely with commercial colleagues to find the optimal positioning for novel treatments. He has also organised and participated in numerous advisory boards and KOL meetings, and organised and spoken at company arranged symposia.
Whilst working as CMO in biotech companies, and more recently as a board member, Lars has actively participated in fund raising and IPO processes. As Executive Medical Director Licensing he has also gained a lot of experience in evaluating external projects and closing licensing deals in several therapeutic areas.
Since joining Transcrip in 2013 he has worked in several small and mid-sized companies designing and executing development programs in respiratory and allergic diseases. The work has included small as well as large molecules and systemic as well as inhaled routes. He has also organised and taken part in authority meetings and KOL ad boards..
SME Complement Inhibitors Translational Asthma: Identification and coordination of centres to run phase 1a/1b studies. Developing clinical programme design, managing translational clinical programme and decisions relating to next steps. Regulatory strategy input to support European development in asthma. Providing legal representation and 'responsible' person.
Medium Inhaled LABA & LAMA Phase III Asthma: Support for regulatory and development programmes and the submission dossier and answering specific regulatory questions.
Top 50 CRTH2 Antagonist Phase III Asthma: Support of study feasibility & investigator suitability, study investigator training plan, additional appropriate study sites and creation of contingency plans for patient recruitment and retention.
SME PDE-4 Inhibitor Translational Asthma and COPD: Due diligence on in-license of respiratory portfolio and specific due diligence on a PDE-4 inhibitor.
SME Inhaled IFN Translational Asthma and COPD: Medical director and drug safety management, clinical development operations. Regulatory support for strategic, operational and clinical development activities.
Top 50 Various Translational - Phase III Asthma and IPF: Clinically responsible for development programs, including development of clinical plans, authority contacts etc.
SME CRTH2 Antagonist Translational Asthma and Allergy: Outline regulatory plan for paediatric development, GAP analysis to support paediatric regulatory plan, discussion of GAP analysis and/or clinical development plan with client and preliminary planning of clinical development plan.
Not Pharma Various Translational Asthma and COPD: Due diligence advice in relation to potential investment in drug projects already in clinical development.
Medium Inhaled Device Translational Asthma and/or COPD: Provision of expert support to design a PoC study for potential development of a combination product in an API-activating device.
Medium Inhaled Anticholinergic Phase III COPD: Regulatory support for clinical summary and clinical expert report (2.5).
SME IL8 Antagonist Translational COPD: Oversight of first in man study, creation of IB and clinical trial applications.
Top 50 Inhaled Immunological Mature Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Scientific advice for early research and development projects plus mechanism and regulatory, positioning support.
SME Inhaled Product Translational Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: regulatory project, successfully obtaining orphan drug designation. Managing the regulatory approval to run trials in US and UK, managing the clinical trials and the drug safety database, responsible person and annual reporting.
Medium Surfactant Mature Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Newborns: Risk Management Plan update for an orphan drug in the new regulatory approved format.
Medium Inhaled ICS LABA Translational Acute Respiratory Distress: QC of Common Technical Document Sections (2.7.2, 2.7.3, 2.7.4 and 2.5) and due diligence.
Top 50 Surfactant Translational Acute Respiratory Distress in Neonates: Consultation on clinical development.
Medium Various Mature Respiratory: Assessing and facilitating access to respiratory portfolio for the Japanese and Asian market.
Medium Various Inhaled Phase III Respiratory: support for new inhaled devices.
Top 50 Various Translational Allergy: Evaluation and development plan for approval of a new therapy for allergy.
SME Inhalation Devices Phase III Cystic Fibrosis: Provision of advice on inhaled therapies and inhalation devices.
SME Peptide Translational Cystic Fibrosis: Preparation of a grant submission to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation.


From the Bishop's Palace in Limerick to St. Patrick's Cathedral in Dublin and sites such as Westminster Abbey in London, the adventure is never ending on this exciting tour. The journey begins in Limerick, where you have two days to get acquainted with the Irish way of life. From here, you will head south to Killarney, to Dublin on the east coast and then all the way up to Belfast in Northern Ireland. In each city you enjoy a fantastic mixture of guided touring and independent exploration time, which gives you the opportunity to make the most of each destination. From Belfast, the tour continues across the Irish Sea to London, where you get an insider's look at some of the most sought-after attractions in the city. With insight from local experts along the way and 2 weeks worth of great cities to explore, this is a vacation that just keeps on giving.
Céad míle fáilte - a hundred-thousand welcomes! While in Limerick, your Local Host will help you maximize your time. This afternoon, your Local Guide will take you on a walking tour past the Treaty Stone, Bishop's Palace, King John's Castle, and St. Mary's Cathedral, and lets you experience the wealth of history and folklore that this lively Irish city has to offer.
Today is yours to enjoy at your own pace. Your Local Host might have suggestions for you, like a visit to the Frank McCourt Museum, a vivid reconstruction of his childhood home, as depicted in Angela's Ashes, or you could take a relaxing stroll through the People's Park.
This morning, you will be transferred to Killarney by chauffeured car/minibus.
Start your exploration of Killarney with a fun-filled jaunting car ride through the town and the national park to Ross Castle. Enjoy the splendid vistas of Ireland's highest mountain range, MacGillycuddy's Reeks, and stop for photographs of the glorious Lakes of Killarney.
Enjoy this colorful resort on your own today, or take up one of your Local Host's suggestions. A stroll through Killarney National Park and a cup of tea in the Deenagh Lodge Tearoom, which dates back to 1834, or a visit to St. Mary's Cathedral, used as a shelter during the Great Famine and home to an impressive collection of stained-glass windows.
Travel to Dublin by train (with change at Mallow).
Morning guided sightseeing takes you past St. Patrick's Cathedral, the largest church in Ireland, along elegant Georgian squares, and statue-lined O'Connell Street. Look out for the effigy of Oscar Wilde, reclining on a huge granite stone and seemingly without a care in the world; or a Molly Malone, commemorating the young woman featured in the local ballad Cockles and Mussels. Finally, visit the Old Library at Trinity College, and see the famous 1,200-year-old Book of Kells. It is testimony to Dublin's literary tradition, dating back over a thousand years when monks would transcribe the Bible into beautiful manuscripts. In the evening, you might like to take a guided tour of the Guinness Storehouse and sample some of the "Black Stuff."
Note: Dublin sightseeing might take place on Day 7.
Your Hop-on Hop-off sightseeing tour will take you past all the city's attractions, including City Hall, the Albert Memorial Clock Tower, Queens University, the murals on Falls Road and Shankill Road, and the Parliament Buildings at Stormont. Also included is a ticket to the fascinating Titanic Experience, where you learn all about the building of the largest passenger steam ship, its maiden voyage, and the tragic night of April 14, 1912.
Note: The Hop-on Hop-off tickets in Belfast are valid for 48 hours and can be activated on the day of arrival.
Belfast is all yours to discover and your Local Host will help you with ideas. Why not follow the famous story of Irish emigration at the Ulster American Folk Park, where history comes to life?
Morning guided sightseeing includes all of London's famous landmarks. Drive past the Houses of Parliament and Big Ben; Westminster Abbey, where Prince William and Catherine, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, were married; Whitehall's mounted horseguards; the Prime Minister's Downing Street; Piccadilly Circus; and Buckingham Palace. Take photographs of the London Eye; the giant Ferris Wheel situated on the riverbank, and the Shard, the tallest building in Western Europe. Visit St. Paul's Cathedral, Sir Christopher Wren's masterpiece with its world-famous dome is an iconic feature of London's skyline, and the awe-inspiring interior holds fascinating stories about its history.
Enjoy a leisurely day on your own; your Local Host will be pleased to help you make plans. You might want to try authentic English Afternoon Tea at one of the exclusive hotels, consisting of finely cut sandwiches, warm scones with jam and clotted cream, delicate pastries, and freshly brewed tea.
Ideally located in the heart of Killarney town, this 198 room property is within walking distance of the main shopping street, great pubs and restaurants, and the beautiful Killarney National Park. Complimentary Wi-Fi access is available in all public areas and guestrooms. The Killarney Plaza is home to three fine restaurants featuring global cuisine freshly prepared by internationally trained chefs, two bars, and a lounge. The leisure amenities in the hotel include a fully stocked state-of-the-art gym, sauna, steam room, jacuzzi, swimming pool and the Sundari spa with a large array of treatments on offer.
This modern and luxurious hotel is located in fashionable South Kensington; a relaxed environment is the heart of London. Situated next to Gloucester Road underground station, it is perfectly placed for visiting London's greatest attractions including Hyde Park, the Royal Albert Hall, Kensington Palace, the Natural History Museum, and the Victoria and Albert Museum. The hotel offers a variety of dining options such a Bombay Brasserie and Bugis Street Brasserie for Indian and Oriental Cuisine, South West 7 for breakfast and Humphrey's Bar for light meals and drinks. 24-hour room service, concierge service, and a fitness room with cardiovascular equipment and weights is also available.
27th April 2019 $2,713 Please call for availability.
Enter your details below if you would like to be notified when 2020 dates and prices are available for Limerick, Killarney, Dublin, Belfast & London.
Prices are correct at the time of publication, however are subject to change at time of booking. Hotel and Rail accommodations listed above, are subject to change based on availability at the time of booking. Prices are land-only, per person based on double-occupancy. Dates & prices do not include air travel.
Participation in this vacation requires purchase of the following flights, not included in pricing: (1) roundtrip air from your U.S. gateway and intra-vacation air segments; or (2) intra-vacation air segments only, starting at $189. Required intra-vacation air segment: Belfast/London. Air prices were effective on September 12, 2018 and their availability is limited. At the time you purchase your vacation, air prices may be higher.


text:
https://apnews.com/article/1eb8be1126a6cf4eb7a3bc7e646f8768
Another member of fire panel resigns, criticizes PG&E plan
By MICHAEL LIEDTKEApril 4, 2020 GMT
BERKELEY, Calif. (AP) — The former chief financial officer for a Northern California city destroyed in a 2018 wildfire caused by Pacific Gas & Electric equipment is trying to upend the utility's plan for getting out of bankruptcy because she believes the company is shortchanging the people devastated by its misconduct.
Karin Gowins, the former comptroller for Paradise, told The Associated Press Friday that she resigned from the bankruptcy committee overseeing the claims of wildfire victims so she can publicly lambaste what she believes is a deeply flawed, $13.5 billion settlement with PG&E.
Gowins is the third member of the wildfire victims' committee to resign in the past two weeks.
"I have never liked this deal and I could not let my name be attached to it in good conscience," Gowins said in an interview.
As part of the settlement reached in December, the attorneys representing the wildfire victims as well as the 11 members on the committee overseeing the claims have been forbidden from opposing the deal.
The two other former members of the committee, Kirk Trostle and Adolfo Veronese, share some of the same misgivings about the settlement as Gowins.
Most of their complaints revolve around the $6.75 billion in PG&E stock that represents half the settlement. They are worried about the company's stock falling in value before victims can sell their shares, a concern that has been magnified in the past month as the economic fallout from the coronavirus pandemic has roiled the financial markets. PG&E's stock closed Friday at $7.93, a 57% drop from its six-month high in early February.
Gowins believes the lawyers representing more than 81,000 fire victims aren't being totally honest about the increasing risks underlying the deal because they are eager for PG&E's bankruptcy plan to win court approval so they collect their fees from the settlement.
"They're just not breaching their fiduciary duty, they're blowing it up," Gowins said. "There has been a complete lack of transparency."
Email requests seeking comment from 15 lawyers representing the wildfire victims' committee did not receive a response by late Friday afternoon. But in bankruptcy court hearings, lawyers for the victims have repeatedly described the $13.5 billion settlement as the best deal possible and emphasized that each member of the panel will be free to accept or reject it as part of a balloting process running through May 15.
In a statement, PG&E reiterated that its top priority is getting wildfire victims paid. Besides the victims of the 2018 wildfires that killed 85 people, the $13.5 billion settlement also covers deadly 2017 wildfires blamed on the utility's fraying electrical grid. The company is trying to win final confirmation of its plan to emerge from bankruptcy by June 30.
Consumer activist Erin Brockovich, best known for a crusade against PG&E for contaminating the water supply of Hinkley, California, wrote an opinion piece this week urging the wildfire victims to approve the settlement because she believes it's the only viable deal still on the table.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


#KeychainLeadership – As part of the summer #GYA intensive for all staff, he offered a leadership cohort for young adults interested in next level leadership training while at Big Lake Camp. This learning journey ran for eight weeks, including weekly teaching sessions, assignments, and application pieces.
The leadership cohort provided young adults with excellent leadership teaching and community connection, supporting their development as influencers and followers of Jesus.
1. Soil: Create an environment great people actually want to be a part of.
2. Seeds: Build an team with awesome people who share the same values and vision for moving forward.
3. Water: Give the team every tool and resource they need to be successful. Express clarity of mission and give trust.
4. Light: Show gratitude and affirmation for your team on a regular basis. Shine the light of Jesus into their lives during their toughest moments by journeying with them side-by-side.
5. Pull the Weeds: Call out bad behavior and distractive practices. Don't allow your environment to grow habits that will kill the culture you were trying to build and the vision you were trying to bring to life.
6. Give Your Plants Space: Empower your team and leaders, and let them go. Don't micromanage and hover over your people. Trust and step away so people can grow and develop.
A nursing school graduate, name Hailey, was part of staff training week and heard all the presentations. She was very inspired hearing the presentation about "Empathy", and the call to step into the shoes of those around her to better understand their story, challenges, hopes, and dreams.
The week after staff training Hailey was headed up to Tacoma, Washington to be interviewed for a new graduate nursing job in the neonatal intensive care unit of a local hospital. Hailey shared, "On the drive to my interview God clearly told me to talk about empathy." During the interview she expressed her desire to sit on the curb with parents and families, making an intentional effort to really understand their story, while providing the most excellent care for her patients.
The #GYA teaching on empathy gave her the language to express what God had put inside of her in desiring to listen, understand, and love people better. She's got the job and starts early Fall.


Speaking to Asian Mirror a short while ago, General Manager of Araliya Group Lal Sirisena, another brother of Maithripala Sirisena, told that the lorry has been attacked by an armed group. He asserted that a powerful Minister of the ruling party was behind the attack.
Media, on several occasions, revealed that employees and vehicles of Road Development Authority were being deployed to paste posters of Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa's election campaign. 'Sirasa' TV telecast a video yesterday (28th) confirming this.
The video shows an employee of RDA pasting a poster in Chilaw area and his views regarding the job he has been assigned to do.
Recently Wimal Weerawansa, the minister said to be carrying out scavenging for the government, made himself a bid of Rs.600 million. However, a strongman in the government, who has decided to support the common candidate of the opposition, has said Weerawansa is not worth a dime for the millions of people who have rallied to topple the despotic regime.
Jathika Hela Urumaya General Secretary Patali Champika Ranawaka has said that Minister of Higher Education SB Dissanayake seems to be opening way for another student uprising with his speeches and action.
He said this yesterday evening in response to a question posted in his Q&A session #AskChampika on Twitter. The session took place both on Facebook and Twitter and started at 7pm yesterday.
JHU Parliamentarian Athuraliye Rathana Thera is to be the key speaker of the presidential campaign of the common candidate Maithripala Sirisena, Rathana Thera's role in the campaign will be similar to that of Wimal Weerawansa in President Mahinda Rajapaksa's election campaigns in 2005 and 2010.
Meanwhile, speaking to Asian Mirror, Rathana Thera said the JHU has already decided to extend its support to common candidate Maithripala Siisena at the presidential election.
It is revealed that Kumaran Pathmanathan alias KP, who became the leader of the LTTE after Vedlupillai Prabakaran died, still remains as the leader of the outfit. He has not resigned or given up the leadership of the LTTE.
KP, who was apprehended in Malaysia immediately after the war ended, became the leader of the LTTE while he was the international leader, the chief procurer of arms for the outfit and ran a network of LTTE offices which were engaged in its weapons procurement, logistics and money laundering operations.
Defending its submarine's docking at Colombo port as common practice, Chinese military yesterday termed "utterly groundless" reports that it is setting up 18 naval bases in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Myanmar and several other places in the western and southern Indian Ocean.
"The report is not accurate", Geng Yansheng told a media briefing here replying to a question about a report published in a Namibian newspaper on November 11 quoting a Chinese media report stating that China plans to set up 18 naval in several places including Sri Lanka.
Rathna Bandara, Leader of the National Sinhalese Buddhist People's Party, today filed a writ petition in Court of Appeal urging the court to declare President Mahinda Rajapaksa had intentionally violated the constitution of the country by enacting 18th amendment to the constitution without having a referendum.
The petitioner stated that owing to this reason the president is disqualified to remain in office, and therefore should be removed from his position with immediate effect.
Diplomat and Political Scientist Professor Dayan Jayatilleka said yesterday that even though Maithripala Sirisena emerged as the common candidate taking the government by surprise, President Mahinda Rajapaksa still holds an edge in the battle.
According to Jayatilleka, the incumbent President stands a strong chance to win the presslidential election of 2015; but a charismatic village-person such as Maithripala Sirisena emerging as the common candidate has certainly made the Presidential Election more competitive.
Common candidate of the opposition Maithripala Sirisena Sirisena today urged the Inspector General of Police and the Elections Commissioner to remove all cut-outs and posters pertaining to the election after December 08- the last date of nominations.
While commenting on the propaganda campaign launched by the ruling party, Sirisena said President Rajapaksa can stick posters and hang large cutouts even on top of Adam's Peak. He also assured that the common opposition will not use polythene or cut-outs during the election campaign.
While there is still no final decision on the election symbol of common candidate Maithripala Sirisena, Elections Commissioner Mahinda Deshapriya left the country today (28) morning and he will return to Sri Lanka on December 01, sources from the Elections Department said.
Sirisena will contest under the party 'Apey Jathika Peramuna' whch had telephone as its symbol However, the party has requested the Elections Commissioner to replace its symbol with pigeon or lotus. The first choice of the party, according to political sources, is 'pegion'.
Azwer Resigned From Parliament: Seat Given To Amir Ali?
United People's Freedom Alliance Parliamentarian A H M Azwer has resigned from the Parliament a short while ago, Asian Mirror learns.
A H M Azwer was a National List member of the Parliament of Sri Lanka. He was a minister of Muslim Affairs for some time.
Azwer was a staunch supporter of President Mahinda Rajapaksa and a strong critique of the main opposition party. However, the reason for the Parliamentarian's resignation is not officially announced.
The common candidate of several left wing political parties including the Frontline Socialist Party (FSP) is to be declared today (27).
Speaking, Propaganda secretary of the FSP - Pubudu Jagoda said that the candidate would be revealed today.
Discussions had taken place between five left wing political parties including the FSP for nearly three months.
Australia Test batsman Phil Hughes has died, officials say.
He had been in a critical condition in a Sydney hospital since being hit by a ball on Tuesday.
Hughes was carried off on a stretcher after a short-pitched delivery struck his head, missing his helmet.
The Bodu Bala Sena organization today officially extended its support to President Mahinda Rajapaksa for the forthcoming presidential election.
Addressing a media conference in Colombo, Galagodaaththe Gnanasara Thera said the organization would use its maximum strength to defeat common candidate of the opposition, Maithripala Sirisena.
Gnanasara Thera also pledged to 'go around the country' to ensue the victory of President Mahinda Rajapaksa who, according them, is a national leader.
Asian Mirror reliably learns that Western Provincial Council member Hirunika Premachandra and Minister Jeewan Kumaratunga has met common candidate of the opposition, Maithripala Sirisena, at his residence in Colombo and pledged to extend their support to him at the forthcoming presidential election.
Sources close to Sirisena's family confirmed that the meeting between the two parties has been successful.
UNP Challenges MR To Take Action On "Files"
The United National Party today alleged that President Mahinda Rajapaksa was covering up malpractices and corruption by not taking action on "files" of those who defected the government.
Issuing a special media statement this morning, the main opposition party said the claim on "files" raised some serious question.
"Why are these files being hidden from the public and law enforcement? How many more files does the President have on his own party members?
Kotikawatta – Mulleriyawa PS Chairman Prasanna Solangaarachchi has joined the common opposition to support Maithripala Sirisena's candidature at the upcoming presidential election.
Solangaarachchi has made an official statement regarding his crossover at a UPFA local government representatives' meeting yesterday (26) afternoon. During the meeting Solangaarachchi has confirmed that he would extend his support to the common candidate Maithripala Sirisena.
The Common Opposition will present an election manifesto that is based on three main points, highly placed political sources told Asian Mirror this evening (27).
"The manifesto, which will be short and concise, will focus on three main points – namely bringing sovereignty back to the people, eradication of corruption and ensuring transparency and good governance," a strongman of the common opposition, who was instrumental in drafting the manifesto, told 'Asian Mirror' .
Several Leaders of the SAARC region have extended wishes to President Mahinda Rajapaksa for the upcoming Presidential Election in January, 2015.
The leaders have made their wishes to President Mahinda Rajapaksa on Twitter social media while they were taking part in the SAARC summit in Nepal.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has tweeted, ""President Rajapaksa will soon go into (re-election) & I wish him good luck."
The broadest mediation to defeat despotic administration and to build a broad people's movement that will continue beyond the day the presidential election is held that would rally all peoples is the programme of the JVP regarding the presidential election said the Leader of the JVP Anura Dissanayaka.
Mr. Dissanayaka said this at a media conference held at the head office of the JVP at Pelawatta today (24th) to explain the stand the JVP would take regarding the presidential election. The Information Secretary Vijitha Herath and Member of the Political Bureau K.D. Lal Kantha too were present.
Since seeing is believing, the world-record holder for Test wickets goes to a sideboard in the sitting room of his house – open, verdant, yet far from palatial – on the outskirts of Colombo, and kneels. "Come," Muttiah Muralitharan says, asking for a volunteer.
Palm upwards, the record holder extends his right elbow along the sideboard. It is not straight. To be exact, his elbow rises at an angle of 27 degrees above the horizontal – even when the volunteer pushes down on Murali's right forearm as hard as he can. Murali's right elbow simply does not straighten. Nor does his left elbow, which rises 24 degrees above the horizontal. It is a condition, he says, which he inherited from his grandfather.
Common Candidate of the opposition Maithripala Sirisena and opposition leader Ranil Wickemesinghe will hold discussions at Sirikotha, the UNP headquarters, today to finalize the agreement pertaining to the common opposition.
Sirisena arrived at the UNP headquarters in Pitakotte a short while ago and received a warm welcome from a large number of UNP supporters who were gathered at the Sirikotha premises.
National Freedom Front (NFF) Leader Wimal Weerawansa has said that the opposition itself is uncertain on their policy of abolishing Executive Presidency.
According to Weerawansa, different parties of the common opposition have expressed different and contradictory opinions on the abolition of Executive Presidency, creating a doubt in the minds of the general public.
The Q Branch of the Tamil Nadu police arrested four men in Ramanathapuram district for trying to smuggle 250kg of ganja to Sri Lanka through sea route in the wee hours of Tuesday.
Q Branch sleuths seized the contraband and the vehicles used for the purpose. However, three others managed to escape.
Q Branch officials received a tip-off that ganja was smuggled to Sri Lanka from Keelakarai area in the district and intensified patrolling in the coastal areas.
Soon after arriving in Nepal to take part in the 18th SAARC Summit, President Mahinda Rajapaksa visited Lumbini – the birthplace of the Lord Buddha – one of the most sacred places for Buddhists.
Though it's not the President's first time in Lumbini, he did participate in a number of events, with particular significance to Sri Lankan Buddhists.
President Rajapaksa first visited and prayed at the Maya Devi Temple, named after Queen Maha Maya, Lord Buddha's Mother. Dating back to 623 B.C., this Temple houses the exact birthplace of Lord Buddha.
"Conspiracy To Leave Harin Fernando Out Of Political Shows Ahead Of Presidential Polls"
Former UNP Parliamentarian and Opposition Leader of the Uva Provincial Council Harin Fernando said there was a conspiracy to leave him out of political programmes on television ahead of the upcoming present election.
Education Minister Bandula Gunawardena and UPFA Parliamentarian Ramesh Pathirana yesterday refused to engage In a debate with Fernando on the "waada pitiya" political talk show yesterday, on the grounds that Fernando was a Provincial Councilor.
Multiple sources from the opposition confirmed Asian Mirror last night that one ruling party Parliamentarian will cross over to the opposition today.
The MP will extend his support to Maithripala Sirisena, the common candidate of the opposition, at the presidential election.
Although the opposition spokespersons did not disclose the name of the ruling party MP, it was learnt that the defector is a Muslim Parliamentarian.
CBK - Maithripala "Crossover" Strategy Backfired?
With no ruling party MP crossing over during the third reading vote of the budget, questions have now been raised whether the 'crossover' strategy adopted by common candidate Maithripala Sirisena and former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kunaratunga has backfired.
From the outset, the former President assured the main opposition party that SLFP MPs will crossover and join the opposition "in installments."
Flatly denying allegations that the date of the presidential election clashes with the schedule of the papal visit, Elections Commissioner told reporters today that his department sets dates for elections after taking into consideration nationally important events.
This remark also came in a context where there were widespread speculations that certain astrologers are heavily influencing dates of elections. The Elections Commissioner cleared the air on dates of elections at a press conference that was held at his office this morning. He asserted that the elections dates were not set according to the advices of astrologers.
Amidst the heat of the presidential election, President Mahinda Rajapaksa left for India this morning on his way to Nepal to attend the 18th SAARC Summit.
On the sidelines of the summit, the President will hold important bilateral discussions with leaders of the South Asian regions, sources from the government said. A special focus, according to them, will be given to discussions with Indian authorities just one and a half months ahead of a crucial presidential election.
Mervyn Silva Threatened In Public Near Court Premises!
An unknown man who came in a jeep threatened Public Relations Minister Merveyn Silva in public this morning near the Colombo Chief Magistrate Court premises.
This incident happened when the Minister was speaking to some reporters near the court premises. He was present at the court today as his son Malaka Silva's case was scheduled to be taken up before the Colombo Chief Magistrate.
Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) sources report that they are to extend 'strategic support' to the common candidate Maithripala Sirisena at the presidential election.
Director of the National Catholic Center for Social Communication, Rev. Fr. Cyril Gamini Fernando has said that the Papal visit will go ahead as planned.
Fr. Cyril Gamini Fernando has stated this while speaking to BBC Sandeshaya.
The Presidential Election is to be held on January 08, 2015 while the Papal visit will take place five days later, from January 13-15.
Maithri - BBS to meet?
A discussion is to be held between common candidate - Maithripala Sirisena and the Bodu Bala Sena organisation (BBS), reports say.
Upon inquiring, CEO of the BBS - Dilanthe Withanage said to 'Sri Lanka Mirror' a niece of Maithripala Sirisena had informed him this morning that her uncle was hoping to have a discussion with the BBS.
She has also requested the BBS to support her uncle.
Public representatives including all electorate organisers of the United National Party (UNP) have been summoned to be in Colombo on Nov. 26, internal sources from the party say.
The electorate organisers have been thus summoned in order to engage in a special discussion with the common candidate Maithripala Sirisena.
The meeting will reportedly take place at 10.00 am on that particular day.
In the event Maithipala Sirisena defeats Incumbent President Mahinda Rajapaksa would be taken to the international criminal court for war crimes committed was added by Suren Surendiram,spokesman and director of strategic Initiative for the global Tamil forum.This was added participating in a television interview with Al-Jazeera television.
It has now come to the limelight that General Secretary of the UNP, Tissa Attanayake has held negotiations with the government over a possible crossover.
The move comes in the wake of the crossover of former General Secretary of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party Maithripala Sirisena. It is clear that the attempts to lure the UNP General Secretary into the ruling party is a move to counter Maithripala Sirisena's exit.
Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa has admitted that he kept files regarding various activities of his ministers in a bid to have a hold over them. This proves the accusation the JVP has been making regarding the President having his ministers tightly tied using files of their moves.
Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna will announce the decision whether it will support common candidate Maithripala Sirisena in the upcoming presidential election today.
The General Secretary of the JVP Tilvin Silva has told local media that the party leaders have been discussing the current political situation and have come to a decision.
Maintaining that the party has always taken decisions with the interest of the public in mind, Silva has said that the decision at this juncture was also taken after much deliberation.
UNP Puttalam District Parliamentarian Palitha Range Bandara has refuted rumors that he is planning to cross over to the government.
Bandara was one of several UNP leaders that were said to be considering a crossover apparently angered by the party's decision to support the common candidate Maithripala Sirisena.
However, multiple sources from the government and oppositionconfirmed that the UNP Parliamentarian might cross over to the government this week.
Sri Lanka Muslim Congress has decided to take a decision on which candidate to support in the forthcoming presidential elections after considering the election manifestos of the two main candidates.
The parliamentarians and provincial council members of the party took this decision at a meeting presided by SLMC leader Rauff Hakeem yesterday, the General Secretary of the party Hassan Ali told media.
However, the SLMC is a constituent party in the government and its leader Hakeem is the Minister of Justice.
Pre Election period of 2015 Presidential Elecion is getting increasingly violent as shots were fired two houses in Madampe, Puttalam last night, reports Campaign for Free and Fair Elections (CaFFE).
According to CaFFE the house of Mr. Milton, a staunch UNP supporter, at Medagama, Madampe was attacked twice after 00.20 today (23). The house of Mr. Sudeh Priyankara, at Second Lane, Medagama, was also attacked.
Vote on the Third Reading of the 2015 Budget is set for tomorrow (24) and Maithripala Sirisena, who is standing in for the presidential election as the common candidate and former Minister Champika Ranawaka have decided to boycott the vote.
Extending support to Maithripala Sirisena,Ministers Rajitha Senaratne, Duminda Dissanayake, M.K.B.S. Gunawardana and MPs including Rajiva Wijesinghe, Perumal Rajadurai and Vasantha Senanayake who quit the government have also decided to boycott the budget debate tomorrow.
Singer Madumadawa Aravinda has stated that the current Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa is to stand in for the general election.
He has made this comment in an interview with 'Mawbima' newspaper.
When the Mawbima journalist questioned whether Gotabaya Rajapaksa will stand in for the next election Madu has said "I do not know that, but he will contest at the general election".
He has further stated that Ven. Athuraliye Rathana Thero left the government as he was not offered a ministerial portfolio.
Rajapaksas' supporters have set up a huge operation to get the budget vote scheduled to be held tomorrow (24th) passed say reports. They have launched the operation fearing that those who support common opposition candidate Maithripala Sirisena would attempt to defeat the budget.
According to the operation each and every minister and Parliamentarian is to be met personally to get their allegiance to Rajapaksa regime confirmed. The operation is being carried out by ministers loyal to Rajapaksa family as well as several outsiders say reports.
Central Province Chief Minister Sarath Ekanayake yesterday said in a meeting that whether Maithripala Sirisena wins or loses the forthcoming presidential election, he is ultimately the loser.
Ekanayake said that Sirisena is likely to lose the election by a fair margin but even if he wins by some chance, he shall have to abolish the executive presidency and hand over the premiership to UNP Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe. Therefore, Sirisena will lose either way, Ekanayake added.
In an inquiry made by BBC Sandeshaya with regard to the political agenda to be followed by small political parties at the upcoming presidential election, leaders of 3 leftist parties have stated that they will field presidential candidates.
Accordingly, Frontline Socialist Party (Peratugami Samajawadi Pakshaya), New Sama Samaja Party and United Socialist Party are to field 3 presidential candidates.


text:
Gray v. Sanders (1963)
The Equal Protection Challenge to Winner Take All: A Legal Guide
Sep 14, 2017·15 min read
Today, the non-profit that I founded, EqualCitizens.US, announced it would crowdfund support for two lawsuits to challenge the way votes are allocated in the Electoral College. All but two states allocate their vote according to a winner-take-all system, in which the winner of the popular vote gets all the electoral votes for that state. We believe winner-take-all violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, and we intend, through EqualVotes.US, to build a case (and a campaign) to get the Supreme Court to agree.
We're not the first to have this thought. (I was brought to see it by Sam Issacharoff's essay; last November, I published a related argument on Medium by Jerry Sims.) And we're not so naive to believe that this fight will be easy. But we do believe that a credible and true argument can be made, and that there is real value in raising and pressing this argument now. In this post, I offer a guide to that legal argument, styled, for quick skimming, as an FAQ.
(1) What's the practical problem with the winner-take-all system?
Winner-take-all skews the presidential selection process in two critical ways.
First, it focuses the attention of presidential campaigns — and hence, candidates — on no more than a dozen "battleground" states. Those are the swing states, the states that could conceivably go one way or the other. A rational campaign works hard to win those states by tailoring its message and platform to the interests of voters in those states. Thus, in 2016, two-thirds of campaign events happened in just 6 battleground states — Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Michigan. Four battleground states — Florida, North Carolina, Ohio and Pennsylvania — saw 71% of campaign ad spending and 57% of candidate appearances. Altogether, the 14 battleground states saw 99% of ad spending and 95% of candidate campaign stops.
Yet these battleground states do not truly represent America. They are whiter, older, and more focused on 20th century industry than the rest of America. A presidential campaign aiming to please them is thus not a campaign for America.
Second, winner-take-all increases the probability that the loser of the popular vote will be selected as president. Two of the last 3 presidents were inaugurated after losing the popular vote. Some estimate that America's changing demographics mean the probability of this will only increase over time. According to some, in close elections, there's as much as a 40% chance that the popular vote loser will be selected as President. This again radically undermines the ability of the President to represent America as a whole.
The only way to solve these two problems perfectly would be to eliminate the Electoral College (by amending the Constitution), or to effectively (and very cleverly) evade it (as the National Popular Vote initiative would do, through a compact by states representing at least 270 electoral votes to pledge their electors to the winner of the national popular vote).
The first solution just will not happen. Amendments require 38 states to be ratified. There are easily 13 states that are ok with the current system.
The second solution could very much happen. But it will take an enormous political movement to convince the states to support the national popular vote compact. Even the most optimistic in that movement believe it will be years before they have enough votes committed.
Our aim is to make progress now. We want to build a movement to support the fight to get the courts to apply the principle of "one person, one vote" to our presidential elections, ban winner-take-all and thus force a change by 2020.
(2) The electoral college is part of the Constitution. How could a Court ever invalidate it?
Our lawsuit will not challenge the Electoral College. We will challenge the winner-take-all rules for allocating electoral college votes. Those rules are not part of the Constitution. They are the creation of state legislatures. It is the states that establish the procedures that erase the impact of any vote for any candidate other than the winning candidate. Those state procedures do not have the sanction of the framers' Constitution. But they must conform to the standards of our amended Constitution—amended by the 14th Amendment.
(3) But doesn't the Constitution give the states "plenary power" to choose their electors however they wish?
It does, but let's be clear about what the Supreme Court has said "plenary power" means. As the Court wrote in Williams v. Rhodes (1968),
[T]he Constitution is filled with provisions that grant Congress or the States specific power to legislate in certain areas; these granted powers are always subject to the limitation that they may not be exercised in a way that violates other specific provisions of the Constitution. Nor can it be thought that the power to select Electors could be exercised in such a way as to violate express constitutional commands that specifically bar States from passing certain kinds of laws. Clearly, the Fifteenth and Nineteenth Amendments were intended to bar the Federal Government and the States from denying the right to vote on grounds of race and sex in presidential elections. And the Twenty-fourth Amendment clearly and literally bars any State from imposing a poll tax on the right to vote "for Electors for President or Vice President." Obviously we must reject the notion that Art. II, § 1, gives the States power to impose burdens on the right to vote, where such burdens are expressly prohibited in other constitutional provisions. We therefore hold that no State can pass a law regulating elections that violates the Fourteenth Amendment's command that "No State shall … deny to any person … the equal protection of the laws."
That's why, in the following year, in Moore v. Ogilvie (1969), the Court applied "one person, one vote" to Illinois' system for petition gathering in the selection of presidential electors. And that's why, more recently, in Bush v. Gore (2000), the Court affirmed the application of "one person, one vote" to "the Presidential selection process." 531 U.S., at 107.
The reason, as Bush explained, is that once the state decides to give the vote for President to the people, that changes, fundamentally, the freedom the state has. As Bush described,
[w]hen the state legislature vests the right to vote for President in its people, the right to vote as the legislature has prescribed is fundamental; and one source of its fundamental nature lies in the equal weight accorded to each vote and the equal dignity owed to each voter. 531 U.S., at 107.
The legislature is certainly not compelled to give the people the right to vote for President. But once it does, its "plenary" authority has been fundamentally constrained. That is the meaning of the "one person, one vote" jurisprudence for almost 50 years.
(4) Ok, assuming, as Bush states, the "Presidential selection process" is constrained by "one person, one vote," how does winner-take-all actually deny anyone an equal vote?
This is the critical step in the argument. Certainly, there is no decision by the Supreme Court that squarely addresses the issue. But the reasoning of the Court's jurisprudence clearly points to the conclusion that winner-take-all violates "one person, one vote."
To see why, however, we need to take a couple steps.
Winner-take-all systems are of two kinds. The most common—call it "final winner-take-all"—aggregates, and then discards, votes at the final stage of an election. Candidate X gets 1,000,000 votes; candidate Y gets 1,100,000 votes. Candidate Y thus wins. This is the way congressmen are elected. The winner of the popular vote at the final stage becomes the congressman. Those who voted for her opponent have their votes counted at the final stage. There are just not enough of them for the opponent to prevail.
But sometimes, winner-take-all systems aggregate (and discard) votes at both the final stage, and an intermediate stage ("intermediate winner-take-all").
In Georgia, for example, until the early 1960s, the state primary for statewide office was conducted through a kind of mini-electoral college. The winner of the vote in a county got the delegates from that county. Those delegates were then aggregated across all counties to determine the nominee for the state.
Gray v. Sanders (1963) invalidated that procedure because the size of the counties was different, and hence the weight of votes between counties was different. Georgia tried to defend that inequality by pointing to the Electoral College. The essence of its argument was "we're not as unequal as the Electoral College is." The Supreme Court rejected that argument. As the Court held, the federal electoral college did not sanction parallels at the state level.
Yet though unremarked by the Court, just as troubling as the unequal size of the counties was the fact that the procedure threw away votes for a statewide office before they were effectively and finally counted. If you happened to vote for the candidate for governor who lost in your county, your vote had no effect at the final stage of the counting.
This is a distinct — but should be equally troubling — constitutional problem.
To see why, imagine a state had 4 districts of exactly the same population — 2.5 million each. Imagine each district had 1.5 million voters. And imagine a candidate for governor — call her Jones — lost 3 of the districts (A, B, and C) by just 10,000 votes, but won the 4th district (D) by 500,000 votes.
If the state counted every vote equally, Jones would win statewide by more than 450,000 votes. But if the state allocated delegates at the district level, like the Electoral College, and determined who got that delegate on a winner-take-all basis, Jones would win delegates from just one district, while losing in the other three. She would therefore lose the election, determined through district level winner-take-all reckoning, even though she would have plainly won the popular vote for the state — overwhelmingly.
Now there's lots of ways our hypothetical state could achieve this same result more directly, without using the device of an electoral college. The problem for our hypothetical state is that each of these other ways has been clearly deemed illegal. If the state said, for example, that votes from districts A, B, and C were weighted at 20x a vote from district D, that would plainly violate the "one person, one vote" principle. Yet that would achieve the same result — Jones would lose the weighted count, even though she plainly wins the "one person, one vote" count.
Yet this is precisely what intermediate winner-take-all does. Votes are weighted contingently. If a vote is cast for a candidate who loses a district, that vote is weighted at zero. If the candidate wins the district, the vote is weighted at 1. That contingent weighting would just as effectively guarantee that Jones loses as the mini-electoral college would guarantee that Jones loses.
So the constitutional question comes to this — why is a system that contingently weights the votes in one district over another any better than a system that directly weights votes? Why is one that says "votes get weighted at 20x with certainty" any worse than one that says "votes get weighted at zero contingently"?
Our view is that there is no meaningful constitutional difference between a weighted vote system at an intermediate stage, and a contingently weighted vote system at an intermediate stage. Both systems violate the principle of one person, one vote. Both systems should therefore be forbidden by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
This is precisely the problem with winner-take-all in the Electoral College. The College is electing national officers — the President and Vice President of the United States. Citizens of the United States are voting for those national officers. But before their vote gets effectively counted, if they happen to vote for a candidate who loses their state, their vote is contingently discarded. If they vote for the loser, their vote is weighted at zero in the allocation of electoral college votes. It therefore has no power beyond their state, even if their candidate could win the election nationally. It thus violates the "one person, one vote" principle.
But notice the obvious point: Unlike the electoral college itself, which the Court in Gray signaled would receive a kind of 14th Amendment constitutional pass, intermediate winner-take-all is not part of the constitution. Even if Gray means that the unequally sized states within the electoral college don't violate the Constitution, Gray says nothing about the rules for how electors get allocated by the states. Those rules don't have constitutional sanction. Indeed, those rules, we believe violate the Constitution, as amended.
(5) Has the Court really never addressed this issue?
Never directly, indirectly once. And the authority of that one time has now been drawn into question by Bush v. Gore (2000).
The Court has never directly considered the question of whether winner-take-all violates "one person, one vote." Delaware asked it to do so just over 50 years ago. The Court ducked the question then, and has never heard arguments on the issue since.
The Court did summarily affirm a lower court's determination that winner-take-all does not violate "one person, one vote." In Williams v. Virginia Board of Elections (1968), a 3 judge district court upheld Virginia's winner-take-all rule against an Equal Protection challenge. As the lower court held, though winner-take-all did raise significant issues of fairness and equality, to violate the 14th Amendment, the plaintiff had to show that the rule was "invidious." As the 3 judge panel wrote,
[I]n a democratic society the majority must rule, unless the discrimination is invidious. No such evil has been made manifest here. 288 F. Supp, at 627.
Six months later, the Supreme Court summarily affirmed, without argument or opinion, the lower court ruling. Williams v. Virginia Board of Elections (1969). And under the rules governing summary affirmance, even though 50 years old, this decision would preclude us from raising a challenge to winner-take-all again — unless "'doctrinal developments' illustrate that the Supreme Court no longer views a question as unsubstantial, regardless of whether the Court explicitly overrules the case.' Bostic v. Schaefer, 760 F.3d 352, 373 (4th Cir. 2014) (quoting Hicks v. Miranda, 422 U.S. 322, 344 (1975))."
We believe Bush v. Gore is that "doctrinal development." For in that case, the Court found that a procedure for recounting votes did not meet the standards of "one person, one vote," but without any suggestion of invidiousness. The question for the Court was not whether the standard for recounting established by the Florida Supreme Court was invidious. The question was whether it secured to every voter equal protection for their vote. Bush thus removes the invidiousness requirement for "one person, one vote" claims in the context of the "Presidential selection process." It therefore permits us now to argue that winner-take-all violates the Equal Protection Clause.
(6) Yes, but didn't the Supreme Court say that the rule of Bush v. Gore applied to that case only?
It is true that the Court did say that its "consideration is limited to the present circumstances." 531 U.S., at 109. It's also true that no one really knows what that bizarre statement means. The Court could not, honestly, be saying that it was crafting a 14th Amendment rule for that case alone. It could not have been saying that somehow the 14th Amendment protects Republicans differently from how it protects Democrats. As Justice Scalia said in a law review article,
[W]hen, in writing for the majority of the Court, I adopt a general rule, and say, 'This is the basis of our decision,' I not only constrain lower courts, I constrain myself as well. If the next case should have such different facts that my political or policy preferences regarding the outcome are quite the opposite, I will be unable to indulge those preferences.
Yet if the Court was really saying, "here's the 14th Amendment we're applying here, so as to guarantee a Republican gets elected President, but in every other case, please apply a different 14th Amendment" then we shouldn't let it get away with such lawlessness so easily. Our presumption should be as Scalia declared it — that the "basis of" the decision constrains the lower courts and the Supreme Court. And the basis of the decision in Bush v. Gore is that invidiousness is no longer a requirement.
(7) If you win, won't the states just allocate electors at the congressional district level?
They may try, but if we win, they won't be allowed to. The basis upon which we would prevail would also foreclose allocation by congressional district.
The reason again is the "one person, one vote" principle.
If we win, the default remedy would be either national popular vote, or proportional allocation of electoral votes at the state level. From the perspective of equality, congressional allocation would be worse than either of these two solutions because it would less certainly assure a result that would be consistent with the "one person, one vote" results. Once we show that fact, the state would then bear the burden of justifying this less equal scheme. There is no justification for that added inequality. Electors have no ongoing connection to any congressional district. There is no other justification for accepting the less equal result. "One person, one vote" thus shows why the rule must be proportional allocation of electors, either at the state level, or nationally — at least so long as the states vest a vote for President in the People.
(8) If you win, won't the system become unstable. Won't third party candidates throw the election into the House?
Under the Constitution, if no candidate for President gets 270 votes in the College, then the House of Representatives must determine who the next President will be. The House votes by state delegation — each state gets one vote. Currently, 31 states are controlled by Republicans. Thus, if the election were decided by the House, it is most likely that the Republican candidate would win, regardless of who won the "one person, one vote" election.
Third party candidates increase the probability that no candidate would achieve a majority in the College. They therefore increase the chance that an election for President would be thrown into the House. But the consequence of that result, though constitutionally sanctioned, is an even greater probability that the selected President would not be the candidate who won the "one person, one vote" election.
This fact justifies the traditional state remedy for third party candidates. States have long had the power to limit third party candidates. In this case, the possible election in the House would justify the states limiting any allocation of their electors to any third party candidate who could not win in the college. Such an allocation rule by the states would increase the probability that the candidate who was ultimately selected was the candidate who won the "one person, one vote" vote. That fact would, at the very least, justify state rules that gave voters a ranked choice for President, or that excluded allocations to candidates who could not win in the College.
To say this is not to denigrate the Constitution's scheme for resolving elections in which no candidate achieves a majority. There needs to be a system for addressing that problem, when that problem arises. But even at the founding, election by the House was not the preferred method for selecting the President. As Hamilton explained in The Federalist Papers, it was "desirable that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the person to whom so important a trust was to be confided." That "sense" is expressed today through elections. A state rule that aims to preserve that sense is plainly justified — and especially so under the amended Constitution.
So yes, the Constitution gives the House the power to determined the President when no majority exists in the College. But a Constitution complemented by the "one person, one vote" principle certainly permits the states to adopt rules aimed at increasing the probability that the College would determine the President and Vice President consistent with the "one person, one vote" election.
Thus an outline of a legal argument for the conclusion that "one person, one vote" renders winner-take-all in the states unconstitutional. I'm happy to extend the analysis in response to questions raised in the comments. We're eager for feedback and criticism. Note, we don't consider "you're not going to win" criticism. In our view, the question is (1) do we have a correct legal claim, and (2) will bringing that claim help build the movement necessary to bring about reform, whether through this litigation or not.
I've tried to answer (1) in this post. I will say more about (2) later. But this should be enough to establish the core belief that is necessary to justify bringing a legal action in good faith: Under the law as it is right now, given the Constitution as it has been amended, states should not be allocating their electoral college votes according to the winner-take-all principle.
I have long believed that the courts alone will not solve the problems with our democracy. I remain committed to that view. But EqualCitizens.US aims to rally as many Americans as possible to the understanding that our current democracy does not respect all citizens equally. This case will make that point clear in the context of the presidential selection system. In other fights, we will show why it is also true because of the private funding of public campaigns, because of gerrymandering, and because of the way we are not equally free to vote. All of these inequalities destroy the possibility of America being a "representative democracy." Yet a "representative democracy" (what the framers would have called, "a Republic") is what we were promised.
Help us fight to get that promise back. Join us at EqualVotes.US.
Equalcitizens
Equalvote
Matt Bevin's Loss in Kentucky Was About Matt Bevin
What Do WeThink of When We Think of War?
C. M. Barrett
As Shutdown Drags On, Some Step Up to Help Unpaid Federal Workers
The New York Times in The New York Times
A wargame designer defines our four possible civil wars.
Mike Selinker
When being 'American' gets in the way
Tony Ganzer
Read John McCain's Final Letter to America
What if we actually tried to get nonvoters to vote?
Ben Bromberg
The Trump Election was the Biggest Case of "Protest Vote" the World Has Ever Seen
Bradley S. in Data Driven Investor


text:
HomeTroubled AreasNorth KoreaNorth Korea Threatens To Shoot Down U.S. Bombers Even If They Are Flying In International Airspace
North Korea Threatens To Shoot Down U.S. Bombers Even If They Are Flying In International Airspace
September 25, 2017 North Korea, Troubled Areas, Weapons
Pyongyang could target planes even when they are not flying in North Korean airspace, North Korea's Foreign Minister told reporters.
On Sept. 25, North Korea's foreign minister Ri Yong Ho accused President Donald Trump of declaring war, saying that gives the regime the right to take countermeasures, including shooting down U.S. strategic bombers, even if they are not flying in North Korean airspace.
The new comment comes amid growing tensions and rhetoric between Pyongyang and Washington: on Saturday Sept. 23, hours after Kim Jong Un said that North Korea would soon test a hydrogen bomb over the Pacific, U.S. Air Force B-1B Lancer bombers from Guam, along with U.S. Air Force F-15C Eagle fighter escorts from Okinawa, Japan, flew in international airspace over waters east of North Korea, in what was the farthest north of the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) any U.S. fighter or bomber aircraft have flown off North Korea's coast in the 21st century.
Then, Trump said the North Korean regime "won't be around much longer" if North Korea's Foreign Minister "echoes thoughts" of dictator Kim Jong Un, referred to as "Little Rocket Man" by Trump:
Just heard Foreign Minister of North Korea speak at U.N. If he echoes thoughts of Little Rocket Man, they won't be around much longer!
According to Ri Yong Ho, Trump's comment was a declaration of war, that gives Pyongyang the right to shoot down U.S. bombers.
Whether North Korea would be able to shoot down a B-1 flying in international airspace or not is hard to say. The Lancers and their accompanying packages (that have also included stealthy U.S. Marine Corps F-35Bs) are theoretically very well defended and rely on the heavy electronic support provided by a large array of assets that continuously operate at safe distance from North Korea (or, in case of satellites, literally above it) to pinpoint Pyongyang forces, to collect signals required to update the enemy's EOB (Electronic Order of Battle), and to keep an eye on all the regime's moves.
However, North Korea's philosophy of self-reliance, the use of road-mobile launchers, underground bunkers as well as hidden shelters could create some hassle even to the world's most advanced air armada.
Considered the status of its geriatric Air Force, mainly made of Soviet-era aircraft, North Korea would only rely on Surface to Air Missile (SAM) batteries to attack a B-1, provided the bomber is well inside the missile engagement zone.
Indeed, North Korea operates a mix of Soviet SAMs, including the S-75 (NATO reporting name SA-2), S-125 (SA-3), S-200 (SA-5) and Kvadrat (SA-6), some of those not only are in good condition, but were probably upgraded locally. In addition to these systems, North Korea is also fielding an indigenous SAM system, dubbed KN-06 or Pongae-5, said to be equivalent to a Russian S-300P (SA-10) with a range of up to 150 km.
KN-06 SAM fired during a test on April 2, 2016. © North Korea's Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) / Reuters
Although, individually, these systems can't pose a significant threat to a modern strategic bomber flying off the North Korean coasts, combined and employed in a coordinated way by trained operators, they can be particularly tough to deal with, especially in case they are faced "head-on" by attackers intruding into the enemy airspace protected by many layers of mobile and fixed SAM batteries. However, should the need arise, U.S. forces would probably neutralize most (if not all) of the fixed batteries with long-range stand-off weapons before any attack plane enters the North Korean airspace.
By the way, this is not the first time Pyongyang threatens the B-1. A recent propaganda video showed, among the other things, the fake destruction of a Lancer bomber…
B-1 Lancer
F-35B STOVL
Italian Eurofighter Typhoon Crashes During Terracina Airshow Killing Test Pilot
RAF Tornado GR4 Jets Deploy To Decimomannu Airbase To Take Part In Ex. Serpentex 2017
For The Second Day In A Row US F-22 Jets Intercept Russian Tu-95 Bombers And Su-35 Fighters Entering Alaskan ADIZ
May 22, 2019 Russia, Troubled Areas
Nothing to be worried about, just an opportunity to take some nice photographs. On May 20, 2019, two pairs of F-22s and an E-3 Airborne Early Warning and Control System were scrambled from North American […]
U.S. Marine Corps F-35B to take part in South Korean drills amid growing nuclear tension with North
March 9, 2017 F-35, Military Aviation, North Korea, Troubled Areas
The USMC Joint Strike Fighters based in Japan will take part in Foal Eagle joint exercise with South Korea. A rather symbolic move. Some F-35B STOVL (Short Take Off Vertical Landing) are taking part in […]
How the AC-130 destroyed at least 20 vehicles per night during Vietnam War
July 28, 2014 Military Aviation
Dario Leone
During the early days of Vietnam Conflict, the US developed a special kind of attack aircraft to stop the flow of enemy troops and supplies: the gunship. The Gunship aircraft, born from the conversion of […]
Gindylow says:
I'm amazed they don't put remote kit on some old airframes like F111's or F5's and fly them in as bait planes.
Holztransistor says:
Trump and Kim Jong Un are both narcissistic people who can't back down. Even if what they say is pure nonsense. This makes the situation dangerous and unpredictable. And even if NK has only one operational nuke, that would be enough to make "Starfish Prime" a live event over the US.
Phreeze says:
Good luck with that DPRK.
leroy says:
It's getting even better. Kim is playing right into our hands (or he is planning a peremptory strike against the ROK, Japan and the US. Don't put it beyond him, and we must be prepared):
North Korea moves warplanes into US bombers' flight path after warning Trump they'll shoot down any American jet they see
"NORTH Korea has moved jet fighters to the coast to intercept US bombers after accusing Donald Trump of "declaring war"."
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4543242/white-house-blast-north-korea-us-war-declared-shoot-down-planes/
Let me suggest a tweet to President Trump. His next tweet; "Bring it on Rocket Man. Bring it on!"
El Kabong says:
Never heard of Tacit Rainbow, I see…


Zach Sinclair is an Account Executive for Wells Insurance providing Risk Management, Professional Liability, and Commercial Insurance services for Physicians, Hospitals, Assisted Living, Urgent Care in NC, VA, and SC. His background includes over 13 years of experience in insurance and risk management for Healthcare Entities. Zach's history in the industry ranges from a broker of Medical Liability Insurance in the Midwest at Keane Insurance Group, one of the largest malpractice brokers in the country, to a business development executive for two of the largest Medical Liability Insurers in the nation, MagMutual and Medical Mutual of NC. He has developed a unique understanding of the risks facing the healthcare industry of today and the foresight to project the emerging risks of tomorrow.
Zach's specific Healthcare experience is built around years working closely with healthcare administrators, risk managers, attorneys, and providers. He has a unique view of the industry having observed in-office patient engagement, in-patient and out-patient surgery, multiple settlement negotiations, and courtroom litigation. Having spent 13 years focused on healthcare risks has given him the insight to mitigate risk issues through policy, process improvement, and employee involvement. These skills give him the ability to understand the specific needs of his clients and to provide a level of expertise that is unique to the risk management industry.
Zach currently lives in Wilmington, North Carolina with his wife Kate and their son Aleksander.


For the fourth year in a row, the business management services firm, ZweigWhite, has named Marstel-Day to its Hot Firm List of fastest-growing US architecture, engineering, and environmental consulting firms.
Zweig Letter Hot Firm List has once again named Marstel-Day as one of the nation's 100 fastest-growing environmental consulting firms. Rankings are based on a survey of industry firms conducted by ZweigWhite, the publisher of The Zweig Letter, and a national leader in enhancing business performance for architecture, engineering, and environmental consulting firms. Firms were ranked according to their three-year growth rate in gross revenue for fiscal years 2008 through 2011, with 50% of the ranking based on percentage growth and 50% based on dollar growth.
"This is a tremendous honor, and one we are glad to have been able to again achieve for our fourth consecutive year," said company president Rebecca R. Rubin.
Click here to view Marstel-Day's inclusion in the List.
Marstel-Day's employees and offices are devoted to a continuous greening of the firm; in 2012, for instance, Marstel-Day joined two important nationwide sustainability pilots, published its first company climate action plan, and continued in its third year of being carbon neutral. The Company and its employees also promote an ethic of environmental awareness that is shared with clients. To meet this mission, the company's Green Vision Council assists in developing plans, monitoring implementation and reporting back on progress in areas including energy efficiency, consumption, electronics management, and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
In addition to its principal office in Fredericksburg, VA, the company has additional offices in Oakland and Oceanside, CA; Alexandria, Va; Stennnis Space Center, MS; and Plano, TX. Marstel-Day has received numerous awards for its "green" approach to environmental services and was most recently awarded the AWE (Alliance for Workplace Excellence) leadership award for its demonstrated ecological leadership.