Donating Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


bluemic last won the day on December 23 2015

bluemic had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

32 Excellent

About bluemic

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    An island in the Pacific
  • Interests
    Keeping Mrs Pee happy...

Recent Profile Visitors

2,708 profile views
  1. Interesting article from the land Dununda relating to F35 costs and spin-offs. Wonder how it compares to our 'stop-gap' Super Hornets?
  2. Uuummm...didn't see any link there defcon, however thanks for making the effort. You're not perhaps talking about this story are you? If this is the one you meant, the Fake News People are reporting it as happening in Edmonton, not YYZ. (D*mn FNP'ers, they even lie about the location of their fake events!) But location isn't important, it's "the rest of the story" that counts. (Sorry Paul.) Oddly, the video claims to show that the assailant swatted the camera, not the "young woman reporter." (Hmmm...not sure that even ancient old moi would refer to Sheila Gunn Reid as 'young'...but youth is all in the eye of the beholder I guess.) And speaking of eyes, can you believe it, the link below purports to show two eye-witnesses disputing Ms. Gunn Reid's assertion that she suffered a really, really big hit. And it's claimed that the camera was on a tripod! I mean, where DO they get these people? Brainwashed zombies who lie at the drop of a hat...or a camera! Lastly, the first video oddly - but cleverly - shows many people stepping in to separate the aggressive cretin from our shining heroine of unbiased journalism and thus they prevent any further interaction - but then again that could easily be photoshopped couldn't it? I daresay my grandkids could do it. Obviously the real story ended up on the cutting room floor! I dunno defcon...ya just can't trust anyone these days. The Fake News. The Real News. The girl doing the weather. Other people. Catholic priests. Elected officials whose names start with T-R-U. To paraphrase the wise words of Dear Leader: "Open minds my friends, open minds."
  3. Defcon, Could you provide a link to this incident/story in Toronto please? Cheers, mic
  4. I probably shouldn't even waste my energy by typing, but sometimes one has way too much time on one's hands, sometimes it's just too hot for the beach or sometimes one likes to imagine life as a schoolteacher. Before I go down this road: a caveat or two. I sincerely (and I sincerely, sincerely mean this) pray that I'm absolutely, totally, bigly wrong with what I'm implying in my words below. I also pray that anyone who reads what I've written won't rat me out to the you-know-who-in-the-chocolate-shirts. If I AM wrong, it'll be the easiest "Aw shucks, I did a boo boo!" to pass my lips, er, keyboard and I'll dance happily ever after with visions of sugar plums in my head. BUT if I'm right, the fallout - a term from my early CAF days that seems oddly pertinent - will not be pleasant. Lives will change forever. I doubt the changes will involve very many sugar plums. However, enough of my prefacing, my excuses, dire predictions and other CYA bafflegab. We all know that there's an old expression that begins, "Those who neglect the lessons of history...yada, yada, yada." (This well-worn cliche goes on to mention really doomy, gloomy things, but we'll skip those bits in the interests of brevity.) Anyway, let's just see if my little trip down History Lane can qualify as a 'lesson' - and whether I might've missed a lucrative career in the teaching profession. Ahem! [Clears throat.] Good morning class, please take your seats and remove your red ball caps. As we discussed last week, on the night of 27 February 1933 a fire broke out in the German Congress (Reichstag). While the exact circumstances of the fire are unknown, Herr Hitler quickly blamed the Communist Party for causing the blaze. Der Fuhrer backed up his claim by brandishing papers containing the names of 205 card-carrying communists, a number that was quietly reduced to 57 when it became yesterday's news. Kellyanne Conway later confirmed these facts on FOX, although to give her her due, she did stumble over the word 'Communist' several times, appearing to be hung up on another term that sounded something like 'puzzlin''. Seizing on the burning of the Reichstag building and claiming it to be the thin edge of the communist wedge or the very first domino or the work of a contracted arsonist, the Nazis threw millions of Germans into convulsions of terror at the concept of, well...terror-ists. Leftists world-wide convulsed in sympathy while wannabe jihadists turned towards Mecca and thanked their lucky crescent moons that Hitler hadn't (yet) focussed on them. Meanwhile, Hitler's press secretary reiterated that while der Fuhrer was indeed targeting a specific group of really, really bad hombres, he hadn't yet settled on which specific group. To continue our lesson.... The "Reichstag Fire Decree" is the common name of the "Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State" issued by German president Paul von, Hindenburg - on the advice of Hitler - in direct response to the fire. (At the same time, Paul, once a critic of the Fuhrer, managed to inject new life into the previously extinct word 'unctuous'.) The decree nullified many of the key civil liberties of German citizens including freedom of speech, freedom of picking the right books to burn and freedom to Tweet whenever they chose. Lederhosen, thankfully, was still listed as optional. But with Nazis in powerful positions in the government, the decree was used as the legal basis for the imprisonment of anyone considered to be opponents and to suppress publications not considered friendly to the cause. (Kellyanne later pronounced this as just another fake news story since only those publications dissing the leader would be affected. Hidden well down the list in the same fake news decree, Alec Baldwin was officially declared 'persona non grata' and subsequently frog-marched to the Manitoba border.) Back to actual history... Next, the Enabling Act was passed by Germany's parliament on March 23, 1933. It was the second major step after the Fire Decree through which the Nazis obtained dictatorial powers using largely legal means. The Act enabled, Hitler and his cabinet to enact laws without the participation of the Congress-cum-Reichstag. (History records that Paul and the rest of the Reichstag were afterwards seen scratching their heads, exchanging confused looks and tweeting "WTF?" Some were heard mumbling, "Hey! What happened to our job-share?" A few mused whether they should've read the fine print on Obama's universal unemployment insurance program.) More real - okay, only some of it's real - history again.... The formal name of the Enabling Act translates as the "Law to Remedy the Distress of the People and the Empire", but is more commonly known as the "Law to make Germany great - and safe - again" or simply the "Don't worry, I'm really, really smart and I know more than anyone about everything Law". [Sound of ringing bell] Unfortunately class, that brings us to the end of today's lesson. Tonight's homework will be to spot any historical similarities to recent events and to write a short essay on why you agree or why you can say "it ain't so, Joe, oops, Justin. Or Billy Bob. Or Ivanka." For added credits, please explain what actual - or staged - or even imaginary - event you think could lead to this happening again. And yes students, I'll admit that there may have been a little poetic licence taken with today's lesson, but do your best to spot the parallels anyway. If it gives you hope, rest assured it'll be heaps easier than last week's surprise "Where's Waldo?" test. Class dismissed, don't forget your hats. [Not really seeing it? Here's the link you want:] Note: with mangled quotes from various sources including Wikipedia but mixed with liberal doses of juxtaposed events and bound together using inputs from a really, really paranoid mind.
  5. I don't normally get into these types of discussions mostly because, like so many other topics, there is really no 'correct' solution. One discovers these little truths the older one gets I'm finding. But Kip, how would you address the hypothetical issue of say, a recent immigrant finding him/herself the victim of a vicious assault? Or being diagnosed with a serious disease? Does a family member have to show up at emerg with a recent T4 slip in order to commence treatment? And failing being able to produce said T4, does the hospital say, "Sorry"? Followed by, "Next!" Nothing is ever black and white'...
  6. Aaaw geez Moon, now you've gone and opened The Big Can of worms. Next someone will post about how 'twould never have happened on a Boeing and before you can add, "I ain't goin' " someone else will reference AF447 and then someone after that will write about design philosophies, the role of pilots, automation, Alternate Law, Trump and our human selfie-stick leader (oops, that's over in the political section) and sundry other opinions. Following that we'll have to slug through post after post listing Boeing vs Airbus accident stats, AoA indicators, CRM, linked control columns and tactile feedback. Yada, yada, yada....and the thread will go on foh-evah! Just remember, it'll be YOUR fault Moon! And it all started because a low-time pilot screwed the pooch.
  7. av8tor's 'memory lane' post had me digging into my old high school yearbook in search of a former principal's message. [General Navereau High School, Metz, France, 1963.]
  8. Interesting video featuring Laurie Hawn and his thoughts on the Super Hornet. mic
  9. TOTALLY AWESOME! But do ya think the pre-takeoff briefing (the "I will - you will"s) might've gone something like this: "When I call '80 knots', you will..." "I will freeze up!" "Right. Then I will pretend to take my hands off the controls and we'll see what she does!" "I will then get out the 'Landing on unprepared surface' checklist." mic
  10. Hey Moon, Don't suppose you could've spotted a Nanchang CJ-6 perchance? Everyone and his dog seems to have one stuffed in a hangar these days.... mic
  11. "Disgusting to the Nth degree." I dunno but.... At the worst, it seems a 'fluff piece' on a slow news day. Entertainment. Background. Something of interest - to some perhaps. Certainly nothing to get one's knickers in a knot over. And after all, it's based on at least SOME research by a real historian, rather than a 'tossed-in-the-wind' comment casting doubt on a person's birthplace, true nationality, eligibility, etc. From the bleachers...
  12. The Prez-to-be 'chirps' up: "The Theater must always be a safe and special place". There's gotta be a huge - really, really huge - amount of US Presidential irony in there somewhere!
  13. FWIW, from last night's Colbert show: Colbert then asked Sanders two very important questions: "What is the best case scenario you see going forward.. [and] the worst case scenario" now that Trump is the president-elect. "The best case scenario is that Trump is not an ideologue," Sanders told the host. "His views are all over the place." Because of which, Sanders believes Trump may actually listen to smart people advising him and do the right thing. "What's the worst case scenario," Colbert then asked, warning Sanders to "keep it light." "The worst case, if not Trump himself, people around Trump are saying, hmm, we've got the House, the Senate... the White House.. the Supreme Court, we're going to change the rules of the game so we don't [ever] lose anymore," Sanders explained.
  14. Interesting read from 'Dununda'.... If you think Donald is bad, imagine Donald Trump 2.0 Bob Carr Amid the bleakness of Shakespeare's King Lear one character, Edgar declares: the worst is not/so long as we can say "this is the worst". Just when you think it can't get any worse – Trump as candidate – here comes a more troubling prospect: the Trump next time, four years off, who defeats an unpopular President Clinton. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump says he's a "victim of one of the great political smear campaigns in the history" of the US. It's easy to tick off what gave the Republican nomination this time to a bossy, ignorant demagogue – the loss of industrial jobs, anxiety over borders and trade, racist resentment of minorities. Perhaps, as well, bewilderment at a multipolar world where America can't get its way. None of these is about to fade. The old jobs aren't coming back. China is shrugging off traditional manufacturing so the plants in America's industrial belt aren't going to be opening again. In any case the robots are arriving to disrupt manufacturing and services alike. The anger of white working-class males, incited by Trump, is bound to simmer angrily at a distrusted woman in the White House imposing background checks for gun buyers and appointing three or four liberal justices to the Supreme Court. After years of decline violent crime is increasing. The cost of Obamacare is rising and will need higher premiums and bigger subsidies. The Congressional Budget Office projects debt to rise from 2.9 to 4.9 per cent of GDP over the decade. The US genius for innovation runs strong but the US system does a lousy job of distributing the gains. Stagnant real wages will feed grievance over immigration and there's little a president can do about it. The US will continue to be defied – not just by Putin, even by President Duterte of the Philippines. North Korea or Syria are problems without solutions, leaving chauvinists to lament the US has never been more powerless. The truth is this catch cry has been thrown at every president since Harry Truman, including Ronald Reagan in his last years. But the US Right stridently insists America is surrounded by enemies. The neo-cons who gave us Iraq and unleashed Islamic State are demanding America prove its greatness with new wars in the Middle East. If Clinton takes office on January 20 she will have been defined as "crooked Hillary" by Republican attacks over emails, the family foundation and paid speeches to Wall Street. Only one voter in three sees her as honest or trustworthy and she may have the lowest approval rating of any victor since polls began. No honeymoon. Little goodwill. Add lashings of misogyny to this toxic atmosphere and all is tailored for a Republican revival, and a revival with strong elements of Tea Party radicalism and Trump's populist white nationalism. As a result the Republican Party of 2020 will be different from that of Reagan, the Bushes and McCain. It will be the party of the white working class, viscerally anti-trade. The party will be as anti-immigrant as right wing European parties like Marine Le Pen's. Nativism and populism will be the glue that holds it together. So, the Trump next time? The challenger who can render Hillary a one-term president like Jimmy Carter or George H. Bush? Donald Trump Jnr, now 38, or Ivanka Trump, 34, might be tempted. There is Trump's running mate Mike Pence. If they survive there are the vindicated Trump critics like Senator Ted Cruz and House Speaker Paul Ryan. The latter's stand-out policy, as economist Paul Krugman points out, is tax cuts for the rich. But the perfect candidate for new era Republicans may be the junior senator from Arkansas, 39-year-old Tom Cotton who boasts a dream CV, raised on a family farm and with combat service as lieutenant in Iraq and Afghanistan. He is an extreme ideologue. He helped torpedo immigration reform to the distress of then-Republican speaker John Boehner. He sabotaged criminal justice reform declaring the US suffers not from too many in jail but too few, what he calls "under-incarceration". In 2015 he tried to sabotage negotiations between the Obama administration and Iran by writing to Iran's Ayatollah saying any anti-nuclear agreement would be dishonoured by a future Republican president, breathtaking in undermining the foreign policy of his own country. He supported a short, sharp war against Iran. He wanted to arm Israel with B-52s to help. He received a campaign donation of nearly $1 million from Bill Kristol's Emergency Committee on Israel in fond appreciation. His slogans make good bumper stickers. "Let 'em rot," for example, is his stand on Guantanamo prisoners. He was described on Salon as "Sarah Palin with a Harvard degree; Ted Cruz with a war record." He has positioned himself to inherit Trump's base, speaking at the nominating convention and refusing to disown him after recent revelations. Post-election Trump is expected to launch a communications network to the right of Fox. Expect Cotton to be its favourite son. Last week Cotton campaigned for Republicans in Iowa, where caucuses every four years start the presidential election process. He speaks directly to the base of the new, emergent Republican Party. His raw inexperience combined with his relish for war elevates him to a level of menace that rivals that of 1964 Republican candidate Barry Goldwater. Trump might be finished. But another playwright, Bertolt Brecht, warned: "Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the b*st*rd, the bitch that bore him is in heat again." Bob Carr is a former foreign affairs minister and former NSW premier.
  15. Yes Malcolm, fwiw some of us flew the mighty Clunk. I was on the CF-100 with the EWU (414 Sqn) before moving on to the 104. My father also flew the airplane with NATO in the late '50s; back then it was a front-line interceptor with the RCAF's Air Division, like the ones in your photo. And I see that Kip has resurrected the old, "Whose is, better" debate with comments about climb performance. Here's a link that might shed some light: World records[edit] The F-104 was the first aircraft to simultaneously hold the world speed and altitude records. On 7 May 1958 U.S. Air Force Major Howard C. Johnson, flying YF-104A 55-2957, broke the world altitude record by flying to 91,243 feet (27,811 m) at Edwards AFB.[75] On 16 May 1958, U.S. Air Force Capt Walter W. Irwin flying YF-104A 55-2969 set a world speed record of 1,404.19 miles per hour (2,259.82 km/h) over a course 15 miles (24 km) long at Edwards AFB.[75] Flying F-104A 56-0762 over NAS Point Mugu, California U.S. Air Force Lt William T. Smith and Lt Einar Enevoldson set several time-to-climb records on 13 and 14 December 1958:[75] 3,000 metres (9,800 ft) in 41.85 seconds 6,000 metres (20,000 ft) in 58.41 seconds 9,000 metres (30,000 ft) in 81.14 seconds 12,000 metres (39,000 ft) in 99.90 seconds 15,000 metres (49,000 ft) in 131.1 seconds 20,000 metres (66,000 ft) in 222.99 seconds 25,000 metres (82,000 ft) in 266.03 seconds (BTW, we former 'zippers' disparagingly refer to the Voodoo as "heavier than air" - while the 104, naturally, is reverently referred to as "faster than air". )