Source : todaysbighit[dot]com
Tuesday, June 3, 2014
Jay Leno takes on the 2014 Mille Miglia in a Jaguar XK120
Since retiring from his job as a late night talk show host, Jay Leno has kept himself busy with a few things; most of them being cars. His all new, online-based tai show, ‘Jay Leno’s Garage’ is a popular watch among many a petrol head.
This week, Jay has somewhat of a special episode in store for his viewers. He took on of Italy’s most famous (and lets add, beautiful) races, the Mille Miglia.
And of course, him being Jay Leno and all, he did in utter style – in a classic, stunningly beautiful, Jaguar XK120.
The Mille Miglia, for those of you who don;t know, is an annual, 1000 mile race in Italy that stretches from Brescia to Rome and back. The first ever Mille Miglia was held in 1927 and was a full-on endurance race until 1957. However, in 1977 the race was reinstated as a ‘regularity race’ for vintage and classic cars.
All cars entered into the Mille Miglia are not allowed to be produced after 1957 and each one entering the competition had to be registered on the original race; between 1927 and 1957. So real, it is the most beautiful endurance race in the world.
And obviously Jay Leno’s 1951 Jaguar was the perfect addition to such an elite race.
Joining Leno on the trip is nine other than Jaguar’s own Director of Design, Ian Cullum. He chats to Leno about all things Jaguar, so you can be sure to pick up some interesting did bits. Leno also talks to previous winners of the race – like the 1955 champion Stirling Ross – another must see moment.
Whilst the ride and drive must be amazing, it does have somewhat of a scary element. according to the rules, the drivers don’t have to adhere to the speed limit, and are allowed to really push their cars as much as they want. No doubt that this aspect would make certain drivers a little bit nervous!
So enough talking, you can check out the Mille Miglia episode of Jay Leno’s Garage below:
Source: YouTube
Source : carblog[dot]co[dot]za
Iraq: The Chilcot Inquiry - British Government blocks transparency
Amidst howls of "whitewash" from media commentators and interested observers of all political hues, it seems the findings of the Chilcot Inquiry in to the Iraq war are finally to be published by the end of this year.
Felicity Arbuthnot
The Inquiry, Chaired by Sir John Chilcot ran from autumn 2009 to February 2011. Their Report is expected to run to several thousand pages with the total cost incurred from the date of the establishment of the hearings: "on 15th June 2009 up to 31st March 2012 ... £6,129,000." As of 16th May this year: " On the present timetable, the Inquiry may incur further costs of some £2 million."(1, pdf.)
From June 2013 to November 2013 the Inquiry: "submitted ten requests covering some two hundred Cabinet-level discussions and twenty five Notes" from Tony Blair to President Bush "and more than one hundred and thirty records of conversations between either" Tony Blair or subsequent Prime Minister Gordon Brown and President Bush.(2)
Finally, on the 28th May Sir John published his letter (3,pdf) to Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood recording their: "agreement on the principles that will underpin disclosure of material from Cabinet level discussions between the (former) UK Prime Minister and the President of the United States which the Inquiry has asked to use in its Report ... My colleagues and I judge that this material is vital to the public understanding of the Inquiry's conclusions." In the letter he also recalls some of the hurdles that have been put in the Inquiry's path by the British government, past and present.
Sir Jeremy (NB: who was Private Secretary to Tony Blair prior to the 2003 invasion) appears to have followed in the footsteps of his predecessor Sir Gus O'Donnell who: "wrote to the Inquiry in January 2011 (making) clear that there was no prospect of reaching agreement that notes from Mr. Blair or records of discussions" (between him and President Bush) "should be disclosed in their entirety, even with redactions. Accordingly, the requests ... submitted last summer were for permission to disclose quotes or gists of the content. We have concluded they are sufficient to explain our conclusions."
In July and August last year: "some potential gaps in the material provided by the government" had been identified which have now been addressed, Sir John further notes in his letter.
Now it is down to "gists and quotes" from the notes, documents and a hundred and thirty conversations: Consideration will be based on the principle that this material should not reflect President Bush's views." Agreement is also: that the use of direct quotations from the documents should be the minimum necessary ..."
George W. Bush, with his Administration devised the horror of "Shock and Awe", planned to attack Iraq two years before 11th September 2001, devising 935 public lies during the planning (4) and who said on 11th November 2002: "... for the sake of protecting our friends and allies, the United States will lead a mighty coalition of freedom-loving nations and disarm Saddam Hussein.
"See, I can't imagine what was going through the mind of this enemy when they hit us. They probably thought the national religion was materialism, that we were so selfish and so self-absorbed that after 9/11/2001 this mighty nation would take a couple of steps back and file a lawsuit." (5)
In spite of this: "the material should not reflect George W. Bush's views." In light of the enormity of the breaches of international law and crimes seemingly devised by the Bush and Blair Administrations the level of protection and kid glove handling of the alleged culprits might be near unprecedented.
It should also be remembered that Baroness Eliza Manningham-Buller, former head of MI5 (2002-2007) told the Chilcot Inquiry that the Bush line that Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida were connected has no "credible intelligence" a view also held by the CIA she said - and that Saddam had "nothing" to do with 9/11. She added: "Arguably, we gave Osama bin Laden his Iraqi jihad." The invasion also: " radicalised young Muslims in Britain (Evidence 20th July 2010.)
However, not all are happy. On the BBC's "Today" morning news programme, former Prime Minister Sir John Major, normally an unusually quiet and conciliatory man for a politician said:
"I think it is a pity the papers are going to be withheld for several reasons. Firstly, they will leave suspicions unresolved and those suspicions will fester and maybe worsen.
"Secondly, in many ways I think withholding them is going to be very embarrassing for Tony Blair, not least of course because he brought the Freedom of Information Act into law when he was in government."
He pointed out that "strict rules" prevented the current government from getting involved, but the Labour Party or indeed Mr Blair could contacts the Cabinet Office and clear the full release of the documents.
"Mr Blair could, the previous Labour government could, and maybe in their own interests they should think about that because otherwise, as I say, this will fester and I don't think anybody wishes to see that", he stated. Of course for Blair to make such a request would be akin to a multi-millionaire alleged war criminal turkey voting for Christmas.
Former Labour MP Andrew Mackinlay also a previous Member of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee accused Chilcot of "surrender" adding:
"It is a bad, bad day for democracy and justice. The Establishment of this country, and the security and intelligence services, have won again. Truth has lost out ... We were lied to as a country time and time again on Iraq. The lies endure."(6)
Rose Gentle whose soldier son Gordon was just nineteen when he was killed in Iraq in 2004, feels Blair himself is "behind" the gagging decision. She will not be alone, particularly as current Prime Minister David Cameron has talked of his admiration for him, regarding him as a "mentor" it would seem.
The most prescient and amusing account of the whole outrageous government cover up come from the blog of the most searingly honest and astute of MPs., Paul Flynn. The first three paragraphs of his 30th May blog on the subject are far too good to paraphrase:
"Surprised to hear today that I was lined up to do battle on the Chilcot betrayal with 'Peter Jay.' Even more surprised he used the words 'shits' three times at noon on the eminently respectable BBC Wales.
"I've not heard his name for years. But I remember him as a broadcast journalist son-in-law of Jim Callaghan. There were whispers of nepotism when he was appointed, without diplomatic qualifications, ambassador to the USA. His spell there was distinguished by personal indiscretions - including allegedly fathering a child with his children's' nanny. His colourful career afterwards included a spell as Chief of Staff to Robert Maxwell. In company Maxwell always called him 'Mr Ambassador'.
"From today's performance on BBC Wales, it's clear he has now become very righteous and correct. He said that only 'shits' would want to publish the whole truth on the Bush-Blair correspondence that led to the Iraq War and the deaths of 179 UK soldiers. Is this how diplomats communicate? The loved ones of the fallen had no right to hear the whole truth, Jay explained. Protocol between the UK and USA was a higher priority. His is the authentic voice of yesterday's contemptible establishment arrogance telling the lower orders ' Yours not to reason why. Yours, but to do and die.' "
Cameron of course, is still eyeing his very own war in intervening in Syria, surely not coincidentally, a course urged by Blair - so fearful that he is safely guarded by a large armed protection squad at British taxpayers expense where ever he goes. Incidentally, it seems Tony Blair is again currently bidding for another go as EU President.(8) Given the horrors he unleashed as a Prime Minister of a small island off France, imagine the nightmare if he prevails.
In the light of the sustained campaign in high places to render the Chilcot Inquiry impotent, it is perhaps worth concluding with the Freedom of Information Act the then Prime Minster Blair introduced in 2000.
He became Prime Minister in 1997. In 1996 he stated of the proposed legislation:
"It is not some isolated constitutional reform that we are proposing with a Freedom of Information Act. It is a change that is absolutely fundamental to how we see politics developing in this country over the next few years...information is power and any government's attitude about sharing information with the people actually says a great deal about how it views power itself and how it views the relationship between itself and the people who elected it."
Further, also when in opposition, that: "Such an act would 'signal a new relationship between government and people: a relationship which sees the public as legitimate stakeholders in the running of the country.' "(9)
What a long time thirteen years is in politics and after an invasion or two. In his autobiography "A Journey", published in 2010 he writes:
"Freedom of Information Act. Three harmless words. I look at those words as I write them, and feel like shaking my head 'til it drops off. You idiot. You naive, foolish, irresponsible nincompoop. There is really no description of stupidity, no matter how vivid, that is adequate. I quake at the imbecility of it."
Moreover: "Scandals will happen ... The problem with FOI is that it can be used to expose them." Scandals don't get much bigger than embarking on an illegal war, destruction of the "Cradle of Civilisation", manufactured on a pack of lies.
Until, as has been tried on a number of occasions (10,11) someone finally arrests him and delivers him to the International Criminal Court, the least he can do is relieve the British taxpayer of the cost of the Chilcot Inquiry and pay for it out of the millions he has made since the slaughter of an upper estimate of one and a half million Iraqis and his departure from Downing Street.
Perhaps the Court will order his assets stripped, his seven mansions sold and used to compensate, in some small way, the maimed, bereaved, cancer patients resultant from the depleted uranium weapons used in Iraq and Afghanistan under his tenure. Globally, many still dream of international justice that is truly, universally, even handed.
A personal note: I emphatically believed this Inquiry would be yet another whitewash, given the totally establishment figures conducting it. I now believe their eyes and minds were opened to the historic lie-driven horror wrought upon Iraq and that Sir John has stood his ground and done his best against the iron wall of government resistance against this government proclaimed final "Open Inquiry."
1. www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn06215.pdf
2. http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/news/update_on_inquiry_progress_-_november_2013.aspx
3, http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/media/55103/2014-05-28_Chilcot_Heywood.pdf
4. http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/23/bush.iraq/
5. http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/11/20021101-2.html
7. http://paulflynnmp.typepad.com/
9. http://www.cfoi.org.uk/blairarticle060910.html
Source : english[dot]pravda[dot]ru
Monday, June 2, 2014
Google builds their own self-driving car
You may have heard the news already, but perhaps you didn’t believe it – because it really is almost unbelievable.
While we have heard of Google’s Prius powered self-driving cars before, we have not been well acquainted with their very own, ‘built-from-scratch’ self-driving car. This is mainly because it was only shown to the public for the very first time last week.
The mega tech company invited a handful of everyday, normal people like us to witness their very first prototype of their self-driving car in action. And needless to say, the people there (as well as us) were kind of blown away.
At first glance, the car looks kind of like a Smart Car crossed with a 1980′s plastic toy car – it’s tiny.
However, upon further inspection, you can actually see the craftsmanship and mind-blowing technological advances that reside in this petite, playful, self-driving car.
On the inside is what appears to be a couch. Also, what is most noticeably absent is a) a steering wheel and b) an accelerator or brakes. Now initially we were very concerned when we saw that there are no brakes. But, the people over at Google aren’t that crazy; luckily (for piece of mind) there is a big, red stop button that will, obviously, stop the car when you push it.
The car has internal power steering as well as hiding the brakes internally.
According to Google co-founder, Sergey Brin, the car has way more sensors than a normal car would have, thanks to the absence of an external steering wheel, accelerator or brakes.
The fact that there are more sensors to the self-driving car than the car that you and I drive, it makes the tiny thing safer; by placing the multitude of sensors in more strategic places.
At present, the car has a top speed of 25 miles per hour, which translates to round about 40 km/h. Not very fast, but then again, it’s only the first prototype. The company has said that they would one day wish the car to reach up to 100 miles per hour – or 160 km/h for you and me.
But, is still a long time before we will see any of these ghost like cars on our public roads. Obviously, the car will still need to pass a mountain of safety measures before it’s given the green light (literally).
In the mean time, you can check out a video of the little thing in action – and also revel at the reactions of the lucky few that got to have a ride in it:
Source: Bandwidth Blog
Source : carblog[dot]co[dot]za
Sunday, June 1, 2014
International Children's Day: We should hang our heads in shame
International Children's Day, another day for reflection on the condition of the child, our children, our future, another benchmark to measure how far we have come since the same day was commemorated last year, another chance to examine the state of our planet and what legacy our generations leave for those to come. We bequeath a monster.
We bequeath a monster. We have turned the most beautiful habitaculum that Mother Nature presented us with, with a loving smile, into a living nightmare. We have insulted the most basic laws of Nature, massacring herds of animals with machine guns, hunting species to the point of extinction and beyond, just for "fun", we have desecrated swathes of land and sea with pollution, toxic chemicals, plastic and oil slicks being the punctuation which marks our disgusting presence.
We have insulted Mother Nature to the core, we have raped and humiliated our collective Mother with the utmost degrees of sheer cruelty and lack of respect, we have wounded her fatally, we have hurt her deeply, leaving emotional and physical scars which would be the death-knell of any being less resilient.
Having rendered the home of our future generations uninhabitable, a home in which the species that we travel miles to go and photograph will be extinct within 25 years bar a miracle, a home in which fish are dying in their millions, a home in which bees are becoming extinct (the good news for Mother Nature is that Homo sapiens sapiens will follow four years after our apiarian friends have disappeared), after thousands of years of civilization, our children still do not have basic birthrights.
The future of a child depends heavily on the place of birth, whether or not the mother or father hold a certain passport, whether or not the baby came into our home born on one side or the other of an invisible line, called a frontier. This in turn will dictate the child's right to travel and work and live, labelled as (s)he is by a few sheets of paper called a passport.
Our children today, in the year 2014 of the Christian Calendar, do not enjoy equal birthrights, our children today continue to be branded by gender, which in turn dictates their future in many cases. Millions of girls are subjected annually to female genital mutilation, and before westerners can get on their high horse, hundreds of children have their families or faces blown away every year by some coward flying a drone on the other side of the planet.
Official figures place the number of child victims of trafficking at 1.2 million, every year, sold into slavery, often sexual slavery, a nightmare from which they will only escape with irreversible emotional and physical scars, with their lives still intact, if they are lucky. Or unlucky.
Only Homo sapiens sapiens could create a collective society in which the best option for a lot of children would be death, a beautiful release from the nightmare they have been born into.
We live in a world in which any intelligent animal runs for its life when it senses the approach of a human being, we live in a world in which bears are kept in cages with a rod thrust into their livers to collect bile, in which rhinos are massacred because some apology of a man in China or wherever cannot perform in bed, in which bottlenose dolphins are hacked to death in Taiji, Japan in some barbaric ritual in which their noses are hacked off and the rest of the animal left to die, floundering around in blood, terrified and incredulous at this act of treachery from a species that dolphins help when it gets into trouble at sea.
We live in a world that spends 1.7 trillion dollars (one point seven thousand billion dollars) a year, every year, on weapons systems to kill each other, when one third of that amount would eradicate poverty, globally, forever, creating a world and a future for our children; NATO alone accounts for 1.2 trillion USD spent on weaponry and warfare.
The fact that in one year's time not one single fact in this report will have changed, even remotely, is a telling statement on Humankind 2014. If Mother Nature understands that the bee has to be the fall guy to get rid of us, all I can say is that I hope I am the last one standing when it happens, so that I can desecrate Humankind's collective grave and place a full stop on its sorry and miserable existence.
On this International Children's Day, we should all hang our heads in shame.
Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey
Pravda.Ru
(timothy.hinchey@gmail.com)
Source : english[dot]pravda[dot]ru
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)