Yay! This is video of our first snow as New York residents! ENJOY! :)
And NO, it's not just flurries since it did stick to the roofs of cars. :P
Orignal From: Our First Snow in NYC
Yay! This is video of our first snow as New York residents! ENJOY! :)
And NO, it's not just flurries since it did stick to the roofs of cars. :P
Workers laid off from their jobs at a factory have occupied the building and are demanding assurances they'll get severance and vacation pay that they say they are owed.
About 200 employees of Republic Windows and Doors began their sit-in Friday, the last scheduled day of the plant's operation. On Saturday, about 50 workers could be seen through a window sitting on chairs and pallets on the factory floor. Reporters were asked to stay out of the plant's work area.
Posted via email from thepete's posterous
Click to buy! |
Click to buy the 2-disk set! |
Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000 troops to domestic response -- a nearly sevenfold increase in five years -- "would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable," Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said in remarks last month at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. But the realization that civilian authorities may be overwhelmed in a catastrophe prompted "a fundamental change in military culture," he said.
Posted by email from thepete's posterous
Posted by email from thepete's posterous
Click to buy! |
Posted by email from thepete's posterous
Grabbed this on my iPhone just now and I have to admit that I don't trust this task force. These guys MUST be lying or hopelessly paranoid. There is no way you could say there's a better than 50/50 chance that a city will get hit by WMD.
Of course, bio or chem weapons I could see as being more likely, but still not a 50% chance, but nukes (which are what we all think of first when we hear the letters "WMD")?? No way, man, and reporting this story this way is nothing short of alarmist and fear mongering.
Reuters is really doing us a disservice by not making it immediately clear that nukes are much less likely than chem or bio. And even knowing that, when I saw that headline and read that first paragraph, I thought they meant their was a better than even chance that nukes would definitely hit a big city--then reality set in and I remembered how the odds of any random big city being hit are dramatically against.
Thanks, Reuters, for making us crap our pants...again!
Oh and newsflash: government task forces have been getting it wrong for the last 8 years--probably longer--all the press ever does is highlight the fear and bury the logic. Way to unquestioningly quote the party line and question little-to-nothing.
Posted by email from thepete's posterous