News

Top 1% Doubled Income In Last 30 Years - CBO Report

The U.S. departure from Iraq is an illusion

source: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article29519.htm

 39,000 soldiers will leave Iraq this year, but US military control will continue in such guises as security and training

By James Denselow

October 26, 2011 "The Guardian" - -Barack Obama has made good on one of his election promises, announcing: "After nearly nine years, America's war in Iraq will be over." The Iraqis' assertion of their sovereignty – meaning no legal immunity for US troops – was the deal-breaker, and 39,000 US soldiers will leave Iraq by the end of the year.

Jonathan Steele wrote that the Iraq war was over and the US had learned "that putting western boots on the ground in a foreign war, particularly in a Muslim country, is madness". Yet this madness may continue in a different guise, as there is a huge gap between rhetoric and reality surrounding the US departure from Iraq. In fact, there are a number of avenues by which the US will be able to exert military influence in the country.

These can be divided into four main categories:

Embassy, consulates and private security contractors

The US embassy – the largest and most expensive in the world – is in a green zone of its own in Baghdad, supplied by armed convoys and generating its own water and electricity, and treating its own sewage. At 104 acres, the embassy is almost the same size as Vatican City. It is here that the US is transforming its military-led approach into one of muscular diplomacy.

State department figures show that some 17,000 personnel will be under the jurisdiction of the US ambassador. In addition, there are also consulates in Basra, Mosul and Kirkuk, which have been allocated more than 1,000 staff each. Crucially, all these US staff, including military and security contractors, will have diplomatic immunity. Essentially, the Obama administration is reaping the political capital of withdrawing US troops while hedging the impact of the withdrawal with an increase in private security contractors working for a diplomatic mission unlike any other on the planet.

This "surge" of contractors has even raised the possibility of controversial firm Blackwater, now known as Xe, returning to the country. The firm was responsible for the deaths of 17 Iraqis in 2007 in the infamous Nisour Square massacre, yet president and chief executive Ted Wright told the Wall Street Journal recently that he would like to do business in Iraq again.

In 2008, much was made in of the fact that as part of the Status of Forces Agreement (Sofa) between the US and Iraq, contractors would lose their immunity. However, as a congressional research report noted: "The term defined in the agreement, 'US contractors and their employees', only applies to contractors that are operating under a contract/subcontract with or for the United States forces. Therefore, US contractors operating in Iraq under contract to other US departments/agencies are not subject to the terms of the Sofa."

Congressman Jason Chaffetz questioned the replacement of military forces with contractors, asking: "Are we just playing a little bit of a shell game here?" There is some irony in the fact that a decision by the Iraqi government to deny US soldiers immunity will result in an increase in the numbers of much hated and unaccountable security contractors.

Military trainers included as part of arms deals

There are an estimated 400 arms deals between Baghdad and Washington, worth $10bn, with an additional 110 deals, worth $900m, reportedly pending. Many of these, as part of the deal, require US trainers, who would be working through the Office of Security Co-operation in the embassy. Bloomberg news reported that this "newly established office will have a core staff of 160 civilians and uniformed military alongside 750 civilian contractors overseeing Pentagon assistance programmes, including military training. They will be guarded, fed and housed by 3,500 additional contract personnel", working in 10 offices around the country .

In September, Iraq made the first payments in a £1.9bn deal to buy 18 F-16s. The agreements mean that despite the claim that Iraq took full responsibility for its airspace in October, effective aerial sovereignty will be in the hands of the Americans for years to come as they help to patrol the country's skies and control its airspace, and train its air force. A senior Iraqi politician explained to me last week: "We are absolutely incapable of defending our borders. We don't even have one fighter jet to defend our airspace."

US moving under the Nato umbrella

Nato has a training mission in Iraq that will stay through 2013. The alliance is providing expertise in logistics and policing and Iraqi lawmakers are currently discussing an extension of the Nato mission that could see US military trainers move under the jurisdiction of an agreement originally made in 2004.

Drones and targeted assassinations

With the US in de facto control of Iraq's airspace, Obama is likely to increase his reliance on drones and targeted killings as a means of attacking al-Qaida targets. As the US is still at war with al-Qaida, it can find justification in self-defence and article 51 of the UN charter.

D.C. Transit Police Say This Man "Fell" Out of his Wheelchair (VIDEO)

source: http://www.politicususa.com/en/d-c-transit-police-say-this-man-fell-out-of-his-wheelchair

NEWS

House Democrats Challenge Citizens United v. Federal Election Commision

source: http://www.hillbillyreport.org/showDiary.do

One of the most pressing fights for Progressives to restore America to all Americans is overturning the ungodly Citizens United v. Federal Election Commision that gave Corporate America the power to buy elections. In the last election cycle that resulted in a flood of money and corruption in an already troubled voting process. Of course, with a tainted voting process there is no possibility for true Democracy no matter what country you live in.

As most of you know, this ruling is so dangerous for Democracy because it allows Corporate America a loophole in disclosing their spending on elections:
-----
The Citizens United decision did not strike down any rules that require disclosure of political spending, but loopholes in the tax system and lax campaign finance rules allow corporations to give money in ways that are very hard to track, disclosure advocates say.

According to an analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics in the 2010 election 67 percent of all outside (non political party) spending came from groups that had been freed to contribute by the Citizens United decision with non-profit 501(c) groups dominating spending on election ads.

IRS rules state that 501(c)(4) groups don't have to name their contributors as long as electioneering is not their primary purpose, but this can be difficult to enforce in a meaningful way. Groups can form and carry out campaign work and then later switch to other activities so that political projects don't appear to dominate their activities.
-----
Luckily today at least someone is trying to do something about it. Although it will die in the corporate-controlled House of Hypocrites, John Conyers and Donna Edwards have introduced legislation to overturn that terrible decision:
-----
Sponsored by Reps. John Conyers (Mich.), senior Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, and Donna Edwards (D-Md.), the proposal would amend the Constitution to empower Congress and the states to limit corporate spending on political activities.

"Last year, the Supreme Court overturned decades of law and declared open season on our democracy," Conyers said in a statement. "It is individual voters who should determine the future of this nation, not corporate money."
-----
At the time, the priorities of those on both sides of this argument were summed up nicely by the justices themselves:
-----
The majority argued there is nothing in the First Amendment to indicate that corporations shouldn't be afforded the same constitutional protections as individuals.

"Its text offers no foothold for excluding any category of speaker," wrote the conservative Justice Antonin Scalia.

Writing in dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens, representing the court's liberal wing, argued that corporations and individuals often have very different interests. The decision, he warned, "threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the Nation."
-----
Which boils down to a simple question to Americans. Are corporations as important as people and is money considered "free speech"?? It seems to me that money cannot be considered as "speech" in our society as created by the founding fathers quite simply because it gives those with more money more "say" in what will happen in our country. When elections can simply be bought and paid for the eventual result will be huge majorities of people whose interests aren't represented as politicians bend to the monied interests to try and be reelected. Only a blind person cannot see that has already happened.

Even with the eventual result of this legislation carved in stone we should all let our Congressfolks know that we support overturning this travesty that moves our country away from Democracy and into Oligarchy.

This fight has just begun.

What withdrawal? Obama wants $100 million prison in Afghanistan

source: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/09/19/bagram/index.html

 As the Obama administration announced plans for hundreds of billions of dollars more in domestic budget cuts, it late last week solicited bids for the construction of a massive new prison in Bagram, Afghanistan. Posted on the aptly named FedBizOps.Gov website which it uses to announce new privatized spending projects, the administration unveiled plans for "the construction of Detention Facility in Parwan (DFIP), Bagram, Afghanistan" which includes "detainee housing capability for approximately 2000 detainees." It will also feature "guard towers, administrative facility and Vehicle/Personnel Access Control Gates, security surveillance and restricted access systems." The announcement provided: "the estimated cost of the project is between $25,000,000 to $100,000,000."

In the U.S., prisons are so wildly overcrowded that courts are ordering them to release inmates en masse because conditions are so inhumane as to be unconstitutional (today, the FBI documented that a drug arrest occurs in the U.S. once every 19 seconds, but as everyone knows, only insane extremists and frivolous potheads advocate an end to that war). In the U.S., budgetary constraints are so severe that entire grades are being eliminated, the use of street lights restricted, and the most basic services abolished for the nation's neediest. But the U.S. proposes to spend up to $100 million on a sprawling new prison in Afghanistan.

Budgetary madness to the side, this is going to be yet another addition to what Human Rights First recently documented is the oppressive, due-process-free prison regime the U.S. continues to maintain around the world:

Ten years after the September 11 attacks, few Americans realize that the United States is still imprisoning more than 2800 men outside the United States without charge or trial. Sprawling U.S. military prisons have become part of the post-9/11 landscape, and the concept of "indefinite detention" -- previously foreign to our system of government -- has meant that such prisons, and their captives, could remain a legacy of the 9/11 attacks and the "war on terror" for the indefinite future. . . . .

The secrecy surrounding the U.S. prison in Afghanistan makes it impossible for the public to judge whether those imprisoned there deserve to be there. What’s more, because much of the military's evidence against them is classified, the detainees themselves have no right to see it. So although detainees at Bagram are now entitled to hearings at the prison every six months, they're often not allowed to confront the evidence against them. As a result, they have no real opportunity to contest it.

In one of the first moves signalling just how closely the Obama administration intended to track its predecessor in these areas, it won the right to hold Bagram prisoners without any habeas corpus rights, successfully arguing that the Supreme Court's Boumediene decision -- which candidate Obama cheered because it guaranteed habeas rights to Guantanamo detainees -- was inapplicable to Bagram. Numerous groups doing field work in Afghanistan have documented that the maintenance of these prisons is a leading recruitment tool for the Taliban and a prime source of anti-American hatred. Despite that fact -- or, more accurately (as usual), because of it -- the U.S. is now going to build a brand new, enormous prison there.

One last point: recall how many people insisted that the killing of Osama bin Laden would lead to a drawdown in the War on Terror generally and the war in Afghanistan specifically. Since then -- in just four months since bin Laden's corpse was dumped into the ocean -- the U.S. has done the following: renewed the Patriot Act for four years with no reforms; significantly escalated drone attacks in Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan; tried to assassinate U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki with no due process; indicted a 24-year-old Muslim for "material support for Terrorism" for uploading an anti-American YouTube clip after he talked to the son of a Terrorist leader; pressured Iraq to keep U.S. troops in that country; argued that it has the virtually unlimited right to kill anyone it wants anywhere in the world; and now finalized plans to build a sprawling new prison in Afghanistan. If that's winding things down, I sure would hate to see what a redoubling of the American commitment to Endless War looks like.

NEWS

National National Preparedness Month, Was Anyone Told? Nasa Was & You Might Want To Be Part Of Their Familysource: http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/videogallery/index.html?media_id=111137351

Those that have been aware of our world in change have been paying close attention to the world's news. Has anyone noticed, with everything going on, that September is National Preparedness Month? Nasa has, as of the 12th of September, posted a number of videos to their Nasa family telling them to drop what they are doing and get prepared for emergencies. Are you ready? Watch the video.

Wall Street's Secret Oil Games, by Sen. Bernie Sanders

source: http://www.truth-out.org/wall-streets-secret-oil-games/1316442676

 Why have oil prices spiked wildly? Some argue that the volatility is a result of supply-and-demand fundamentals. More and more observers, however, believe that excessive speculation in the oil futures market by investors is driving oil prices sky high.

A June 2 article in the Wall Street Journal said it all: "Wall Street is tapping a real gusher in 2011, as heightened volatility and higher prices of oil and other raw materials boost banks' profits." ExxonMobil Chairman Rex Tillerson, testifying before a Senate panel this year, said that excessive speculation may have increased oil prices by as much as 40 percent. Delta Air Lines general counsel Richard Hirst wrote to federal regulators in December that "the speculative bubble in oil prices has concrete detrimental consequences for the real economy." An American Trucking Association vice president, Richard Moskowitz, said, "Excessive speculation has caused dramatic increases in the price of crude oil, which harms end-users like America's trucking industry."

I released records last month that documented the role of speculators and put the information on my Web site for three reasons.

First, the American people have a right to know why oil prices are artificially high. The CFTC report proved that when oil prices climbed in 2008 to more than $140 a barrel, Wall Street speculators dominated the oil futures market. Goldman Sachs alone bought and sold more than 860 million barrels of oil in the summer of 2008 with no intention of using a drop for any purpose other than to make a quick buck.

Wall Street, of course, wants to hide this information. They don't want the American people to know the extent to which speculators keep oil prices artificially high and the great damage that does to our economy. After the information became public, it was suggested that some on Wall Street may stop trading in the oil futures market. Good!

Second, Congress recognized last year that excessive oil speculation must end. The Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation required the CFTC to eliminate, prevent or diminish excessive oil speculation by Jan. 17, 2011. Months after that deadline, the commission still has failed to enforce the law, and speculators still are making out like bandits.

Third, the commodity regulators' claim that they cannot end excessive oil speculation because they lack sufficient data is nonsense. As the information I released makes clear, the commission has been collecting this information for more than three years. The time for studying is over. It is time for action.

I agree with those who say trust in government is at an all-time low. That's not because Washington is too heavy-handed with Wall Street. Quite the contrary! The American people are angry and disillusioned because they see our government act boldly to protect Wall Street CEOs but not ordinary Americans. When Wall Street needed a $700 billion bailout, the government was there for them. When working families need an end to excessive oil speculation and real relief at the gas pump, the government has failed to act.

The same Dodd-Frank bill that required commodity regulators to limit speculators included my amendment calling for an audit of the Federal Reserve from Dec. 1, 2007, to July 21, 2010, the period of the financial crisis. What we learned was that the Fed provided $16 trillion in secret, low-interest loans to every major American financial institution and to other central banks, large corporations and wealthy individuals. The audit provision was vigorously opposed by the Federal Reserve chairman.

It was right, however, that the veil of secrecy at the Fed was lifted and the American people learned about its actions.

Now it is appropriate to lift the veil of secrecy in the oil futures market. The American people have a right to know how much excessive speculation has driven up oil prices and which Wall Street firms are doing it.

NEWS

50 Cent – Street King Energy Shots

Love him or hate him, 50 Cent will always remain to be a charismatic individual. In an attempt to help starvation in Africa, 50 Cent has established a new brand of energy drink called Street King. Each purchase of a shot helps to provide one meal for a child, in conjunction with the United Nations World Food Programme. The goal of this project is to raise one billion meals and 50 Cent is reaching out to the masses for support. In terms of the energy drink itself, there are two 100% natural flavors offered in Orange Mango and Grape. Find out more about the project on the Street King website and click after the jump to hear what 50 Cent has to say about children dying from hunger in Africa.

NEWS

NATO Seeks Cyber Alliance with India

source: http://https://www.infosecisland.com/blogview/16526-NATO-Seeks-Cyber-Alliance-with-India.html

Chinese state backed hackers are not the only threat we are facing. The Russian Business Network and other foreign government-backed entities are falling from the radar as Chinese hackers take center stage. Lets not forget the lone hackers or hacktivist groups that are very active...

Times poll finds a souring mood among troops

source: http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/09/military-times-poll-finds-souring-mood-091411w/#.TnNzQ...

 After a decade of war in Afghanistan, many troops are losing confidence in the long-term likelihood of success for the U.S. military mission there, and their overall support for President Obama has slipped, according to the latest Military Times annual reader survey.

Slightly less than half of readers said the U.S. is “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to succeed in Afghanistan. The figure is lower among troops who have deployed in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, the survey shows.

That has slipped steadily from 2007, when more than 75 percent of readers surveyed said the U.S. was “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to succeed in Afghanistan.

The war in Afghanistan is dampening support for Obama. Support for his handling of the war has dropped significantly since the last Military Times survey in January 2010, with about 41 percent of active-duty respondents disapproving. That’s up from 34 percent in 2010, shortly after Obama announced a surge of 30,000 additional troops for the war effort.

When asked how Obama was handling his job as president, 53 percent disapproved, up from 51 percent in 2010.

When asked superficially about Obama’s handling of his job as commander in chief, 45 percent of active-duty readers disapproved, up from 40 percent in 2010.

Respondents were split on Obama’s decision in July to begin a limited troop drawdown this year in Afghanistan. Some 37 percent “disapprove” or “strongly disapprove,” while 38 percent “approve” or “strongly approve.”

Obama’s weakening support in the ranks comes at a time when his poll numbers are dropping nationwide. Among the general population, Obama’s disapproval rating reached 53 percent in August, up sharply from 45 percent in January 2010, according to weekly Gallup polls of likely voters.
Growing pessimism

The growing pessimism among troops about the war in Afghanistan may reflect doubts about America’s long-term commitment to the herculean task of executing a counterinsurgency strategy.

“People wonder if we really have the commitment to follow this through,” said retired Army Command Sgt. Maj. Michael Hall, who was the top enlisted service member for the NATO mission in Kabul in 2009 and 2010. “I think everybody knows that we can be successful over there. But it’s going to take time and presence and commitment, and I think folks are worried that we go over there, we sacrifice our families and we work hard — but are we going to follow through? Or is this all going be for naught?”

Doubts about success in Afghanistan are slightly higher among troops who have deployed there. In a series of interviews, some troops say the mission there is fraught with a sense of futility driven by several factors, including a belief that the Afghan security forces are unmotivated.

“A lot of [the Afghan security forces] are just kind of like, ‘Well, we’ll fight with you here today and if tomorrow you all leave, then we’ll just fight for the next guy who comes along,’ said a 33-year-old Army captain who deployed to Afghanistan in 2009 and worked as a mentor to Afghan security forces. He requested anonymity because he said his command discourages talking to the media.

Michael Menning, a recently retired Air Force colonel and hospital administrator, said he became skeptical of the mission in Afghanistan after working with Afghans trying to set up a medical facility.

“They really have no interest in professional development, in learning how to run a hospital,” Menning said. “They really just think, ‘Hey, build us the hospital and we’ll run it the way we’ve always run it.’”

The pessimism is also fueled by a belief that the country is hopelessly corrupt. A 31-year-old Army sergeant who deployed to Afghanistan in 2010 said many troops believe the Afghan central government and many tribal leaders play both sides of the fence.

“Everybody knows that a majority of them still have ties with the Taliban,” said the sergeant, who asked to remain anonymous because he was not authorized to speak to the press.

Many respondents had different sentiments about Iraq. Some 70 percent say the war there has been a success. The figure was slightly higher among troops who have deployed to Iraq.

Similarly, 70 percent “approve” or “strongly approve” of current plans to withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of this year.

Opinions on Obama’s handling of Iraq remain unchanged. About 40 percent of troops approve, the same level shown in the 2010 reader survey.

Still, doubts about the initial decision to invade Iraq remain. When asked, “Should the U.S. have gone to war in Iraq?” 43 percent of troops say yes.

NEWS

Drunk scientists pour wine on superconductors and make an incredible discovery

source: http://io9.com/5731129/drunken-scientists-pour-alcohol-on-superconductors-and-make-an-incred...

Wine makes superconductors better at their jobs. And apparently, it makes some scientists better at their jobs too.

Superconductors behave like most metals; they conduct electricity. They do so, however, with a twist. All metal has some resistance to the flow of electricity. But when the temperature drops, superconductors get less and less resistant (and therefore more conductive). When they reach very low temperatures, their resistance drops to zero.

Yoshihiko Takano and other researchers at the National Institute for Materials Science in Japan were in the process of creating a certain kind of superconductor by putting a compound in hot water and soaking it for hours. They also soaked the compound in a mixture of water and ethanol. It appears the process was going well, because the scientists decided to have a little party. The party included sake, whisky, various wines, shochu, and beer. At a certain point, the researchers decided to try soaking the compound in the many, many liquors they had on hand and seeing how they compared to the more conventional soaking liquids.

When they tested the resulting materials for superconductivity, they found that the ones soaked in commercial booze came out ahead. About 15 percent of the material became a superconductor for the water mixed with ethanol, and less for the pure water. By comparison, Shochu jacked up conductivity by 23 percent and red wine managed to supercharge over 62 percent of the material. The scientists were pleased, if bemused with their results.

So, a little nip of something turns out to make potential superconductors much better at their jobs. And, perhaps, scientists better at their jobs as well.

There's Snow in 49 States

source: http://gawker.com/5731176/snow-in-49-states

There's snow in 49 states right now, covering some 69.4 percent of the contiguous United States. Even Hawaii has snow , though it's on a volcano so it's sort of cheating. Can you guess which state is ruining our perfect record?

Florida! Yes, dumb old Florida is snow-free, making it the New York Giants to the snow's 07-08 New England Patriots. Thirty-two states have winter weather advisories! There's snow in Hawaii (on Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa), Texas, California and Louisiana! Every state is pitching in to make this a real American snowpocalypse, and Florida is just sitting it out.

Oh well. Forty-nine out of 50 is still pretty good. And pretty rare. CNN's Angela Fritz calls it "extremely unusual," though since meteorologists don't keep track of awesome statistics like "how many states have snow in them," it's hard to say how unusual.

Why so much snow? Well, the CIA weather ray appears to have created two storms a few days ago—one in the Midwest and one in Texas. Both storms travelled eastward on Obama's command and are meeting tonight in the Northeast, where everyone is freaking out.

The map above, via Google Maps and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, shows snow cover and is shaded for depth. At the link you can see maps of snow density and precipitation over the last 24 hours.

A Push For Legalizing Medicinal Marijuana in Arkansas | JackHerer.com

source: http://ozarksfirst.com/fulltext?nxd_id=385916

(B.J. Steed, KTHV)


(Little Rock, AR) — Activists and a handful of lawmakers hope to push a four page bill through the House legalizing medicinal marijuana by the end of the session.

Arkansas legislators could soon be faced with yet another bill that could change Arkansas law as we know it. The Arkansas Medicinal Cannabis Act of 2011, would allow patients to grow and use cannabis for medical purposes.

But would not intend to change current laws governing duty of care owed to others which means people would be held responsible for choices like operating a vehicle.

“We’re the natural state. This is a natural medication,” says supporter Robert Reed.

Don't Read This Politicians & CEO's - - have you lost your moral compass? The debt-driven Ponzi scheme is over!

A hard look at CEO pay, bonuses, perks and “Golden Parachute” severance packages will raise issues about the persistence and growth of economic inequality in the U.S.

Well, they didn't get the wage increases. They sacrificed -- so that CEOs (who presumably donate to your election campaigns) could pocket tens of millions of dollars in pay, stock options and PENSIONS. Because of that wage robbery -- that is the only word that fits when you look at the taking of the sweat of the brow with no fair return -- people had to borrow the American Dream. Not own it. Borrow it--either by using credit cards or draining equity from their homes. That is gone.

And you say workers haven't sacrificed?

Workers have sweated their asses off, becoming more productive, laboring harder than ever. Their wages have not kept pace with that productivity -- if it had, the MINIMUM WAGE would be over $19-an-hour. The geniuses running our economy?

You think that working 20 or 25 or 30 years in a job as a cop or a firefighter is not making a sacrifice? How many times have politicians rushed, to get the maximum p.r. value for their own careers, to the site of a fire or a shooting, where a cop or firefighter has died, and spouted the words "the ultimate sacrifice"... but now you are saying these people, when they survive the day-to-day grind and threats on the job, that they don't get to have a decent pension so they can live out the rest of their lives in some semblance of dignity and respect?

And exactly where in your moral frame of reference can you point to regular workers and say they have not sacrificed enough, compared to the people who you refuse to ask to sacrifice -- the richest one percent.

by raising taxes on the very wealthy and going back to a more progressive taxation system that we had in the 1970s.

We have a shortfall in the budget because we've destroyed a progressive tax system, in the state and across the nation, and let an elite enrich themselves -- the same elite that has incompetently run the economy so that for three decades real wages have declined while workers pay for scandal after scandal (the savings and loan crisis, the Internet bubble, the housing bubble and on and on.

Politicians & CEO'S have you lost your moral compass?

CALL OR VOTE THEM OUT

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-tasini/governor-paterson-have-yo_b_151694...

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=a_scandal_for_our_time

http://www.paulsjusticepage.com/RichGetRicher/fraud/legislation.htm 

 

North Korea releases first picture of Kim Jong-un, the man widely expected to succeed his father

A South Korean man watches a TV screen at a railway station in Seoul broadcasting a closeup of a KCNA group photo taken in Pyongyang centred on a man believed to be Kim Jong-Un.
North Korea has released the first official photograph of the man widely tipped to succeed Kim Jong-il as leader.
The western world knows very little about 28-year-old Kim Jong-un. He's Kim Jong-il's third and youngest son and his existence was only confirmed to the world by a mention in a biography written by a Japanese sushi chef who had worked for the Kim household in Pyongyang.
Until this picture was released, the only other image of Kim Jong-il in known (to the western world) existence was a grany video shot of him as a teenager, at boarding school in Switzerland.
Earlier this week, 68-year-old Kim Jong-il promoted his third son to the position of vice-chairman of the Central Military Committee and made him a four-star general. He is widely expected to succeed his father.

 

Sikorsky X2

 

Posted on gelsey on September 29, 2010 // Leave Your Comment

Sikorsky X2, the Americans are actually going to have tough time! The Eurocopter X3, a fusion helicopter that is currently suffering through several initial tests with an expectation to eventually fly at the desired speed of more than 220 knots, is reportedly just inches away to give tough competition to its apparent American rival i.e. the Sikorsky X2, another fusion helicopter that not only takes off like a chopper (an aircraft without wings), but has also the unlike ability to fly at the speed of more than 250 knots.

A few folks may remember that it was none other than Sikorsky X2 that had an off the record credit for being the fastest helicopter back in year 2008. According to the unofficial records, in that very demonstration Sikorsky X2 not only successfully achieved the top speed of exactly 250 knots, but also proved the reliability for being a non-customary deigned helicopter.

Since then Sikorsky X2 has utterly been ruling the sky, but today in their bid to beat the Americans, as the race to win the sky is getting faster and faster with every passing moment, Eurocopter, the Lutz Bertling based helicopter manicuring company, has uncovered their X3 archetype.
According to the available details, because the two turbo-propellers installed in the new Eurocopter X3, the aircraft will be able to fly 50 percent faster than any other ordinary helicopters.
The Eurocopter X3, a potential competitor of Sikorsky X2, is expected to hit the aircraft market in next few months, with an added advantage of its cost-efficiency.