Two defense officials today confirmed that in addition to accidentally sending live samples of anthrax to 28 government and private facilities across the US and army base in South Korea, the Pentagon also shipped the deadly spores to three laboratories in Canada. Investigations into anthrax shipments spurred by the recent discovery of the spores have shown that the US military also sent live samples to Australia in 2008, meaning that suspected live anthrax has now been sent by the Pentagon into three countries, 12 US states, and the District of Columbia.
The anthrax, which was sent from an Army lab at Dugway Proving Ground in Utah, was supposed to have been rendered inactive by Department of Defense scientists before being shipped for research purposes. A senior Defense Department official told USA Today that so far, no-one has been confirmed as infected by the still-alive samples, but BBC News reports that at least four US civilians and 22 military personnel from South Korea’s Osan air base are receiving preventative treatment.
In an email sent on Friday and obtained by USA Today, Daniel Sosin, deputy director of CDC’s Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response, suggested that the Dugway Proving Grounds base’s methods of killing anthrax spores was not entirely effective. “We have concern that the inactivation procedures, when followed properly, are inadequate to kill all spores,” Sosin said, but noted that “the US government is developing an approach to securing such possible samples from misuse.”
The Keystone Pipeline project was expected to create tens of thousands of high paying jobs in the oil industry. The project itself would create 20,000 construction jobs. And the pipeline would bring oil from Canada and North Dakota to refineries in the United States.
The proposed project would have extended from Alberta, Canada to Illinois, transporting approximately 400,000 barrels of crude oil per day. Estimated cost is $1.7 billion.
Once upon a time, a jolly old man named St. Nick, or Santa Claus, lived at the North Pole. Every year, at Christmas, he bundled up toys made by his magic elves and flew around the world in a sleigh pulled by flying reindeer, including his most famous one, Rudolph. Santa brought these presents to all the good little boys and girls in return for nothing more than cookies, milk, and unquestioned love. But he also kept a list of bad little boys and girls, who got a lump of coal in their stockings as a reminder to be better next year.
I’m sorry to have to tell you there will be no presents from Santa this year.
It’s not that you’ve been bad. Rather the world’s governments (sometimes run by bad boys and girls now grown up) have failed to address the long-worsening problem of climate change. Santa is the latest climate victim. As the last of the summer ice at the North Pole finally disappeared, Santa’s workshop sank to the bottom of the Arctic Ocean. When the insurance companies cancelled most flood insurance policies, and Canada claimed the North Pole, Santa lost everything and became the latest climate refugee.
Let me be clear, blunt, if the US or Israeli flag offends you, then YOU have a problem, so in short FUCK YOU
DEARBORN, Mich. – Metro Detroit is known as being a big melting pot, a place where people of all cultures can live together. But one couple says they are facing ethnic intimidation all because of a flag outside their home.
The latest incident they fell victim to was paintballs splattered all over their home and cars Friday night . Now the family says they fear for their safety.
Terresa and Hussein Dakhlallah say it all started two years ago when they put an American flag and an Israeli flag up outside of their Dearborn home.
Terresa is American, but she grew up in Canada. Hussein is from Lebanon.
“They left Nazi signs in our front yard, ” said Terresa. “Two people were standing there, one with a lighter and one with a gas tank, telling us that they were going to burn our home down.”
The couple has been taunted over and over again — even on Thanksgiving as Terresa began to decorate her home for Christmas.
And late Friday night a group men in an SUV came back firing paintballs at the cars and on the side of the house.
The couple is terrified and don’t feel safe in their own home.
I cannot tell these folks what to do, but I would say that bowing to these thugs will not bring any resolution. Hopefully the police will step in and arrest those responsible, and hopefully the DA will prosecute them! Until then, I would advise the couple to arm themselves.
Dr. Charles McVety of the Institute for Canadian Values has written an open letter to Chris Alexander, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada, asking that Kincaid be denied entry into the country. . . . “On behalf of the 125,000 members of the Institute for Canadian Values and Canada Family Action, we request that the Minister refuse admission of Dr. James Kincaid to Canada for a lecture on October 19th, 2013 in Toronto,” Dr. McVety wrote. “Dr. Kincaid is a well-known advocate for pedophilia, a criminal activity in Canada,” the letter states.
Of course if Mr. Kincaid is not, in fact a defender or advocate for pedophilia, then he ought to be offended. But what IS the truth here
Is that description — “a well-known advocate for pedophilia” – perhaps just a wee bit over-the-top? Does it fail to capture the complexity andsophistication of Kincaid’s nuanced arguments? Let’s read the publisher’s description of one of Kincaid’s books:
In Erotic Innocence James R. Kincaid explores contemporary America’s preoccupation with stories about the sexual abuse of children. Claiming that our culture has yet to come to terms with the bungled legacy of Victorian sexuality, Kincaid examines how children and images of youth are idealized, fetishized, and eroticized in everyday culture. Evoking the cyclic elements of Gothic narrative, he thoughtfully and convincingly concludes that the only way to break this cycle is to acknowledge—and confront—not only the sensuality of children but the eroticism loaded onto them.
Kincaid vehemently denies he is pro-pedophilia, and I hope that is true. I cannot label him a pedophile, that would be unfair, and I do not wish to be unfair. All I can say is that the views Kincaid holds are a bit, shall we say WEIRD, as in freakish. Children are not “erotic” they are children, and they ought to be allowed to be children before they grow up. Kincaid seems to have convinced himself that child predators are few and not all that dangerous
A controversial U.S. professor who writes about children and sexuality shot down his critics Saturday by declaring that he is not an advocate for pedophilia. Dr. James Kincaid, standing with his wife, Nita, at the University of Toronto, defended himself following his keynote address about children and sexuality. “I’ve already said I’m not in favour of pedophilia. Period. Isn’t that enough?” he firmly told Linda Beaudoin, a sexual abuse survivor and advocate for children’s rights after she challenged him following his address. . . . Kincaid told the Star he doesn’t think it’s a matter of rounding up “a few freaks and a few pedophiles and horrible monsters who regard young people as attractive.” He said the real problem is that in the United States there is enormous attention paid to stranger kidnappings of children that draws the focus away from a higher incidence of children who are physically or emotionally abused. Earlier, he told his audience that Canada is more enlightened than the U.S., where the public requires a steady diet of “predator kidnappers, Internet stalkers of youth, kiddie porn rings and such fantasies to maintain national identity.” Of Internet predators, he added, “we are given to believe that they are legion, but the hard evidence is small.”
Mr. Kincaid is blind on the facts it seems, what his motivation is is not so clear-cut. Suffice it to say, I would never trust him around a child
Last week Canada’s Supreme Court ruled that doctors could not unilaterally ignore a Toronto family’s decision to keep their near-dead husband and father on life support.
In the same breath, however, the court also confirmed that, under the laws of Ontario, Canada’s most populous province, a group of government-appointed adjudicators could yet overrule the family’s choice.
That tribunal, not the family or the doctors, has the ultimate power to pull the plug. In other words: Canada has death panels.
I use that term advisedly. Former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin made it famous in the summer of 2009, when Congress was fighting over whether to pass Obamacare.
As Republicans and Democrats continue to spar over health care, we should pause to wonder why millions of Canadians have come to accept the functional equivalent of an idea that almost sank health care reform even though, in this country, it was imaginary.
Why do Conservatives not stand up to thugs and bullies? Of course some do, but, why do we, or too many of us allow this kind of threat?
Now, I do not know who was there, and who that prick is talking to. Likely not to any male. But, again, I do not understand someone NOT sticking their finger in this punk’s face, and telling him to go blank himself. I am not advocating violence here, I am not, but I am suggesting taking a clear stand against this type of threat. Allow me to give you a example. I was born and raised in Tampa, and in the mid 1990’s I went to some County Commission meetings to fight against a group of people trying to change the County Seal because it contained a flag they were offended by, actually, the seal contained a flag, or other form of representation of every government that ever ruled over Florida, so it was very historical.
After one such meeting, I and some folks also protesting the change were accosted, verbally, by a loud mouth looking to instigate a violent incident. An incident that his group would, of course video tape in an attempt to blacklist those opposed to the change as violent racists. He focused on an older gentleman, who was much smaller than him. He berated him with taunts, slurs, and threats until some younger, much bigger guy, namely me, stepped in front of the man he was accosting, and got in the thugs face. In softly spoken but not so polite language, I told him if he wanted a fight then throw the first punch, or shut the Hell up and go away. I was certainly not stupid, and would never throw that first punch but I made it clear that if he REALLY wanted to start a fight that I would defend myself. Oddly enough, he backed down very quickly. Perhaps this is an approach more Conservatives should take? Any thoughts?