text:
Apparently afflicted with a bizarre determination to disbelieve everyone else, the United States refused to believe Saddam Hussein when he said he didn't have weapons of mass destruction. Which he didn't. Now Kim Jong-un says he does have a hydrogen bomb, and the United States refuses to beleve him.
Tag Archives: Nuclear Weapons
SYNDICATED COLUMN: Obama's Governus InterruptusDecember 20, 2013
Obama is a Uniquely Lazy, Ignorant, Weird President Who Has Done More to Undermine Faith in American Democracy Than We Could Have Imagined In Our Worst Nightmare
Obama will go down in history as a unique president. Because he's black*, obviously.
Also because he's a uniquely weird guy: a politician who knows nothing about politics — and doesn't seem interested in figuring it out. Even while his presidency is in crisis, he's so obliviously impassively oblivious you have to wonder if he's living in the same dimension as the rest of us.
Officially (Dow Jones Industrial Average, rich people's incomes, the fake unemployment and inflation figures issued by the Bureau of Labor Statistics), the economy is recovering. Officially, the wars are ending. ("On the ground" in Iraq and Afghanistan, not so much.) Yet Obama's approval ratings are plunging, even lower than other recent two-term presidents at the same point in time — including the vile, insipid, illegitimate usurper Bush.
No wonder: Obama's messaging is lousy. John McCain, a zillion years older than the president he lost to and operating with a brain damaged under torture, can see it — so why can't Obama?
That's what McCain was wondering aloud after a panel convened to advise Obama about the NSA issued its report: "Most presidents would have now given a speech and said, 'OK, here's what the recommendations are; here's what I think we ought to do.' Instead, it just came out." Like a wet turd. "There's not a translation of facts and events to remedies that the president supports." How hard is it to tell the panel to submit their ideas to him first so he can repackage the ones he agrees with as his own? That's Management 101.
Obama is ignorant. Doesn't have a clue what his minions are up to. Which is bad. Obama's ignorance is devastating because he lets us know that he doesn't know. Reagan only read single-page memos, and though Americans suspected he was daft, they didn't know. It makes a difference.
Chiming in from the even-a-right-winger-who-loved-Bush-can-be-right-twice-a-year corner of The Washington Post op-ed page, Charles Krauthammer marvels: "With alarming regularity, [Obama] professes obliviousness to the workings of his own government. He claims, for example, to have known nothing about the IRS targeting scandal, the AP phone records scandal, the NSA tapping of Angela Merkel. And had not a clue that the centerpiece of his signature legislative achievement — the online Obamacare exchange, three years in the making — would fail catastrophically upon launch. Or that Obamacare would cause millions of Americans to lose their private health plans."
Dude went to Columbia and Harvard. He seems smart. What's wrong with him? Is he — as his former colleagues at the University of Chicago, who noticed that he never published — lazy? He's certainly a far cry from the LBJ who, according to his biographer Robert Caro, routinely burned the midnight oil committing every sentence of every bill, ever, to memory.
Obviously, a president who finds time to watch sports, play golf and kick off for vacations for weeks at a time — while the global economy is melting down — hell, while his signature legislative accomplishment, Obamacare has all but completely imploded — is lazy as all get up. Still, there's nothing new about presidential sloth. Reagan, Clinton and Bush all worked less than the average minimum-wage worker whose misery they were steadfastly ignoring.
Obama is unique, though. It goes beyond laziness. He doesn't follow tried and true practices of presidential governance that have served his predecessors for more than two centuries. Intentional? Who knows? It seems more than likely that (and this is so outlandish that I've literally waited years to write these words) he is so ignorant of history that he doesn't know why and how previous presidents have failed and succeeded. Because, let's face it, if this is three-dimensional chess, he's down three queens.
The most blinding example of Obama's ignorance of/unwillingness to/disdain for the act of governing/politicking is what I call Governus Interruptus — delivering a major speech on a problem, then failing to follow up with a policy initiative (a bill, say).
"President Obama's speeches…are often thoughtful, nuanced, highly evocative, and exceptionally well-delivered — and worse than inconsequential," Amitai Etzioni writes in The Atlantic. "They raise expectations — a world without nukes! Ending global warming! Finally curbing gun violence! — but are not followed by much of anything. These barren speeches are one reason the public, and especially the young, are becoming disaffected from politics, bad news for any democracy."
Speaking of LBJ: When he announced "a national war on poverty" with one objective — "total victory" — to lift up the people "who have not shared in the abundance which has been granted to most of us, and on whom the gates of opportunity have been closed" — he didn't leave it at that. Food stamps, Head Start and other anti-poverty programs followed…laws that began as bills. Bills drafted by the White House and proposed to Congress, which the president strong-armed into passing.
Where is Obama's nuclear disarmament bill? Why hasn't he convened a global summit to address the environmental emergency, with the U.S. leading the way with dramatic initiatives to reduce greenhouse gases? Where is his gun control proposal?
Obama jawboned his way into the White House. Evidently Obama hasn't read enough to know that talking isn't governing.
Either that, or he doesn't care.
(Support independent journalism and political commentary. Subscribe to Ted Rall at Beacon.)
Rules of WarAugust 30, 2013
SYNDICATED COLUMN: Lose Your House, Collect $300April 13, 2013
Why Aren't Rioters Burning Down the Banks?
One in ten Americans take such antidepressants as Prozac and Paxil. Among those in their 40s and 50s, it's 23%. Maybe that's why we're so passive.
Like the blissed-out soma-sucking drones of Huxley's "Brave New World," we must be too drugged to feel, much less express, rage. How else to explain that furious mobs haven't burned the banks to the ground?
Last week, as the media ginned up empty speculation about Hillary Clinton's presidential prospects, and wallowed in nuclear cognitive dissonance — Iran, which doesn't have nukes and says it doesn't want them, is repeatedly called a grave threat worth going to war over, while North Korea, which does have them and won't stop threatening to turn the West Coast of the U.S. into a "sea of fire," is dismissed as empty bluster, nothing to worry about — the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Reserve released the details of the settlement between the Obama Administration and the big banks over the illegal foreclosure scandal.
Citibank, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and other major home mortgage lenders foreclosed upon and evicted millions of homeowners between the start of the housing collapse in 2007 and 2011. Millions of families became homeless, including 2.3 million children. The vast majority of these Americans are still struggling; many fell into poverty from which they will never escape.
Disgusting, amazing, yet true: the banks had no legal right to evict these people. In many cases, the banks didn't have basic paperwork, like the original deed to the house. They resorted to "robo-signing" boiler room operations to churn out falsified and forged eviction papers. In others cases, people could have kept their homes if they'd been allowed to refinance — their right under federal law — but the banks illegally refused, giving them the runaround, repeatedly asking for the same paperwork they'd already sent in. Soldiers fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, protected from foreclosure under U.S. law, came home to find their homes resold at auction. In other cases, banks even repossessed homes where the homeowner had never missed a mortgage payment.
The foreclosure scandal helped spark the Occupy Wall Street movement.
Promising justice and compensation for the victims, President Obama's Justice Department joined lawsuits filed by the attorneys general of several states.
Last year, Obama announced that the government had concluded a "landmark settlement" with the banks that would "deliver some measure of justice for those families that have been victims of their abusive practices." The Politico newspaper called the $26 billion deal "a big win for the White House." $26 billion. Sounds impressive, right?
So…the envelope, please.
How much will the banks have to pay? What will people whose homes were stolen — there is no other word — receive? Now we know the details.
Remember what we're talking about. Your house is your biggest asset. You own tens of thousands, in some cases hundreds of thousands of dollars in equity. One morning the sheriff comes. He throws you and your family out on the street. Your possessions are dumped on the lawn. You have nowhere to go. Your kids are crying. If you were struggling before, now you're completely screwed. And the bank that did it had no legal basis whatsoever to do what they did.
They took your house, sold it, and pocketed the profits.
What would happen to you if you walked into Tiffany's and stole a $200,000 necklace?
The details:
- Even though they qualified for federal loan modifications, the banks seized 1.1 million homes, making 1.1 million families homeless after they were approved for refinancing. Since the average foreclosed home was worth $191,000, the banks stole $210 billion in homes. Under the "landmark settlement," these wrongfully evicted Americans will receive $300 or $500 each, the value of a modest night out at a nice restaurant in Manhattan (two tenths of one percent of their loss).
- 900,000 borrowers who were entitled under Obama's Make Home Affordable program to refinancing were denied help and lost their homes. They get $300 or $600.
- 420,000 homeowners who lost their homes while the banks intentionally dithered and "lost" their paperwork get $400 or $800.
- 28,000 families who were entitled to protection against foreclosure under federal bankruptcy law, but got thrown out of their homes anyway, get $3,750 to $62,500.
- 1,100 soldiers entitled to protection against foreclosure because of their military status get $125,000.
- 53 families who weren't late on their mortgages, never missed a payment, but got thrown out anyway, get $125,000.
So we've got more than 2.4 million families — that's 5 million people — whose homes got bogarted by scumbag banksters. They're getting a thousand bucks each on average. A thousand bucks for a two hundred thousand dollar theft! Not to mention the heartbreak and stress they suffered.
Why aren't those five million people stringing up bank execs from telephone poles? It's gotta be the Paxil.
But what really gets me is the 53 families who are getting $125,000 payouts for losing homes they were 100% up to date on.
Even if you're a heartless right-winger, you've got to have a problem with a bank taking your house when you never missed a payment. Sorry, but these are multinational, multibillion dollar banks. They should pay these families tens of millions of dollars each.
Those 53 families should own Citibank, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Wells Fargo.
Some perspective:
Citigroup CEO Vikram Pandit received $260 million in pay between 2007 and 2012, the height of the foreclosure scandal.
In 2011 alone, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon was given $23 million. In 2012, the company's board of directors "punished" him for a $6 billion loss in derivatives trading by paying him "merely" $18.7 million.
In 2012 alone, Bank of America paid CEO Brian Moynihan $12 million; Wells Fargo paid $23 million to CEO John Stumpf.
Not bad for some of the worst criminals in history.
That's how things work in the United States: the criminals get the big payouts. The people whose lives they destroy get $300.
(Ted Rall's website is tedrall.com. His book "After We Kill You, We Will Welcome You Back As Honored Guests: Unembedded in Afghanistan" will be released in November by Farrar, Straus & Giroux.)
Rise of the EconotraitorsMarch 27, 2013
Mutual Assured GovernanceMarch 1, 2013
One year ago, Congressional Democrats and Republicans put into motion a time-bomb that would force them to come to terms over the federal budget: "the fiscal cliff" of across-the-board federal budget cuts, harsh austerity, just when the economy might be starting to recover.
SYNDICATED COLUMN: Will the Next 9/11 Arrive via Drone?February 7, 2013
Aggressive Drone Wars Set a Dangerous Precedent
There's no denying it: we Americans, we have a lot of nerve.
We love to pick fights, but when someone punches back, man, the whining never stops. And boy, do we love to escalate. Nuclear weapons? We invented the suckers, used them not once but twice – the only country that ever has – the only anybody who ever has – yet we have the balls to slap economic sabotage on the Iranians and North Koreans and smear them as "rogue states" for even thinking about trying to get their own. Which these nations only want – irony alert – because they're afraid of us.
You know the pattern. We escalate the arms race with some nifty new gadget devilishly designed to kill and maim more efficiently and effectively, then we deploy brute economic and military force (along with wildly hypocritical propaganda about how we're nice and peaceful and the most trustworthy bunch around) to keep those fancy new weapons all to ourselves for as long as possible. Like cyber warfare. We started it.
The first major state-against-state – completely unprovoked – first strike in cyberspace was the Stuxnet virus unleashed against Iranian nuclear power facilities. A joint American-Israeli effort, it wasn't enough for us to mess with the Iranians. We had to gloat.
Now it's drones. Beginning in 2004 with George W. Bush, the drone warfare program against the peoples of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Ethiopia and God knows where else was greatly escalated by an Obama administration marketing itself as a regime ending two wars in public (though not really) while it secretly expands America's military footprint.
And jokes about it.
Operating as usual in full-on bully mode, the U.S. blithely acts as though it's entitled to the perpetual exclusive right to invade other nation's sovereign airspace at will. Rather than assume the dignified posture of silence or the embarrassed sheep business of a kid who got caught in the cookie jar, Obama officials even had the gall to get all sassy and file a formal diplomatic protest after the Iranians shot at one of their spy Predators in November. In a different world, one where Iran had the world's largest military and was the world's undisputed number-one arms dealer, the Islamic Republic could have made a credible case under international law for war against the U.S.
In an ideal world – i.e., the kind of society people of goodwill work to create – these devices would be illegal under international law. Like landmines, drones do a lot more harm than good. You'd might as well declare the First Amendment dead and gone now that private corporations, the FBI, CIA, local police and just about anyone else can scan the crowds at antigovernment protests and identify demonstrators with facial recognition software. Who is going to dare to make a radical statement now? As it is, you can't count on cops not to shoot unarmed African-American men. How many more innocent civilians are going to die due to the faulty judgment of a drone pilot miles away? As the first country to develop drone technology, the U.S. had the chance to keep this genie stuffed inside its bottle; instead, we let the monster loose and told it to run wild.
It doesn't take a genius military strategist to worry about drone weapons proliferation. The technology is relatively simple and cheap, so cheap that soldiers occupying Afghanistan use throwaway six-pound mini-drones slightly larger than paper airplanes to see what's around the next mountain.
The FAA is rushing to approve licenses to "tens of thousands of police, fire and other government agencies able to afford drones lighter than traditional aircraft and costing as little as $300," reports The New York Times, including everything from "remote-controlled planes as big as jetliners to camera-toting hoverers called Nano Hummingbirds that weigh 19 grams." Police departments from Seattle to Gadsden, Alabama have already bought these creepy devices. And it's now possible for a private citizen to buy his own drone for $300. A peeping Tom's dream!
It was only a matter of time – not much time – before other countries followed suit. Which prompts two questions.
What's to stop a hostile nation-state from attacking the United States with drones?
What if terrorists get drones?
Answer to the first question first: Nothing can stop a nation from Hellfiring us. While there are practical and economic barriers to entry that reduce nuclear proliferation, even the poorest nations can develop a scary drone program. Israel and its American ally claim to be terrified of the prospect of an Iranian nuclear attack against Tel Aviv, but the threat of a conventional weapons attack via drone is really what should be keeping policymakers up at night. Iran unveiled its Shahed 129 drone plane, a device that can fly 24 hours in a row, in September. That's the one they plan to export. In September an Iranian drone launched from Lebanon successfully took pictures of Israeli military facilities.
The trouble isn't just the drones themselves. It's how the United States uses them: aggressively, prolifically, violently and with little concern for legal or diplomatic niceties. "Skip the drone debate, just kill the terrorists before they kill us," reads the headline of a FoxNews piece by Erick Erickson, one of the Right's most reliable cretins. But it's not that simple. When the United States, the first nation to develop and deploy drones for surveillance and military attack purposes, asserts the right to "defend" itself by looking anywhere it wants and blowing up anyone it feels like, including its own citizens and people who have never expressed the slightest desire to attack the United States, it sets a precedent.
"More than 50 nations have or are trying to get [drone] technology," notes The Times. "The United States will set the standard for them all." Osama bin Laden said he wouldn't have hesitated to use a nuke against the U.S. because Hiroshima and Nagasaki were civilian targets. Using the same reasoning as the Obama administration, why wouldn't the government of Yemen be legally justified to deploy Yemeni drones over American airspace and use them to blow up any Americans or anyone else they felt like?
We don't hold back. Why should anybody else?
While a nation-state might feel constrained by the international community, its allies or domestic public opinion from attacking civilian targets in the United States, an underground resistance organization would be far less likely to refrain from using drones to make a political statement and/or wage remote-control guerrilla warfare. Even terrorist groups care about PR – but, like bin Laden, they could easily make the case that we have it coming.
Though some commentators – mainly and interestingly, liberals aligned with the Obama administration, which makes one wonder if they'd change sides after a GOP electoral sweep – pooh-pooh the terrorist drone threat, this is one time when the smoke rising from the ashes of buildings in an American city isn't a remote (no pun intended) possibility created by a fevered theorist but rather an absolute certainty. It isn't a matter of if we'll get hit by drones. It's a matter of when.
(Ted Rall's website is tedrall.com. His book "After We Kill You, We Will Welcome You Back As Honored Guests: Unembedded in Afghanistan" will be released in November by Farrar, Straus & Giroux.)
SYNDICATED COLUMN: Factchecking the FactcheckersOctober 23, 2012
In a Media Without Real Journalists, Lies Become True
When fact-checking organizations like Politifact and Factcheck.org appeared a few years ago, they seemed like perfect antidotes to a lazy, corrupt and broke corporate media unable and/or unwilling to hold politicians to account for their lies. Cue Murphy's Law: Rather than set a higher standard, independent fact-checkers gave mainstream journalists more excuses not to work.
"Perhaps the most jarring aspect of media factchecking is that many reporters see it as someone else's job," Peter Hart and Julie Hollar wrote in FAIR's Extra! magazine.
This year's presidential debates have been showcases of absentee journalism. With the exception of a single interjection by Candy Crowley (on a trivial point), all three moderators sat silently and passively as Barack Obama and Mitt Romney told one lie after another to an audience mostly composed of citizens who were paying attention to the campaign for the first time.
"My moderator mission was to stay out of the way of the flow," said Jim Lehrer, moderator of debate number one.
Lame mission accomplished.
To make things worse, the pundits and journalists voters count upon to set things straight let the biggest lies and gaffes stand uncorrected. Even partisan screamers let us down: Fox News failed to call out Obama's biggest fibs while MSNBC dropped the ball on Romney's.
And the fact-checking commentariat let the ugliest and meanest sleeping dogs lie.
Last night's third and final presidential debate included a few gaffes—my favorite was the geographically challenged Romney's repeated statement that "Syria is Iran's route to the sea"—Iran doesn't have a border with Syria, nor is it landlocked—and the usual share of whoppers, most of which have gone unchallenged so long that people consider them facts.
Do politicians' lies matter? You bet.
Whether people are deciding which of the two corporate major-party candidates to vote for, or they're looking outside the system to a third party, voter boycott or revolution to overthrow the entire system, they can't make an intelligent decision without knowing the pertinent facts. The myth of U.S. exceptionalism, for example, mistakenly teaches Americans that their country is #1; if they knew the truth, that the U.S. is behind much of the industrialized world by such measures as child poverty (we're #34 out of the 35 industrialized nations, just ahead of Romania), they might decide to stop tolerating U.S.-style corporate capitalism.
Lies are the glue that hold a sick and sickening system together.
As far as I can tell, neither cable news networks, nor news websites, nor newspapers have questioned somewhere the following bipartisan lies, which all reared their heads at the third debate:
Obama said: "We ended the war in Iraq, refocused our attention on those who actually killed us on 9/11."
Actually, 16,000 U.S. troops will remain after the "pullout." Hilariously reclassified as "staff" of the U.S. embassy in Baghdad—world's biggest force of security guards—American soldiers will be fighting alongside 3,500 to 5,000 private U.S.-paid mercenaries.
9/11 was not carried out, or planned, by citizens of Iraq or Afghanistan.
What if they gave a war, and people came, but nobody knew? Some antiwar voters will vote for Obama for ending a war he is actually continuing.
Obama said: "We killed bin Laden…when we bring those who have harmed us to justice, that sends a message…"
The president could have argued that bin Laden got what he deserved. Bringing someone to justice means placing them under arrest so their fate can be determined by a judge and jury in a court of law. If the president can get away with saying—and the media doesn't question it—that an assassination is justice, then law and order no longer have any meaning.
We live in an authoritarian police state.
A police state full of lazy reporters.
Obama said: "Moammar Gadhafi had more American blood on his hands than any individual other than Osama bin Laden."
Everyone "knows" bin Laden was behind 9/11. That he admitted it in a video. But though bin Laden never shied away from his involvement in terrorism—he admitted ordering the 1998 East Africa embassy bombings—he denied ordering 9/11. The translated "confession" was shown to have been faked by the CIA.
Obama said: "Iran is a threat to our national security and it's a threat to Israel's national security…And they have said that they want to see Israel wiped off the map."
Though debunked, the oft-repeated canard that Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wants to "wipe Israel off the map" is part of Democratic and Republican propaganda alike.
Jonathan Steele of the UK Guardian provides the best available translation of what Ahmadinejad really did say: "The Iranian president was quoting an ancient statement by Iran's first Islamist leader, the late Ayatollah Khomeini, that 'this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time,' just as the Shah's regime in Iran had vanished. He was not making a military threat. He was calling for an end to the occupation of Jerusalem at some point in the future. The 'page of time' phrase suggests he did not expect it to happen soon."
A top Israeli official, intelligence and atomic energy minister Dan Meridor, agreed recently that Ahmadinejad never used that "wipe off the map" phrase, which doesn't exist in Farci. Meridor says that Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said "that Israel is an unnatural creature, it will not survive. They didn't say, 'We'll wipe it out.'"
Romney again repeated his meaningless line that Iran is "four years closer to a nuclear weapon." By the same logic, Iran was eight years loser to a nuclear weapon during Ronald Reagan's two terms as president.
Bob Schieffer asked Romney: "What if the prime minister of Israel called you on the phone and said: Our bombers are on the way. We're going to bomb Iran. What do you say?" Romney replied: "Our relationship with Israel, my relationship with the prime minister of Israel is such that we would not get a call saying our bombers are on the way or their fighters are on the way. This is the kind of thing that would have been discussed and thoroughly evaluated well before that kind of action."
Romney can't be that sure. Israeli officials have told their U.S. counterparts that they won't ask permission before attacking Iran—and will give us no more than 12 hours advance notice.
Romney lied less but his biggest lie was the biggest.
"America's going to…continue to promote principles of peace," he said in his closing statement.
It must have been difficult for the audience, who'd promised to keep quiet, not to laugh out loud. America? Peaceful?
Unless they believe that stuff about Obama ending the war in Iraq.
(Ted Rall's latest book is "The Book of Obama: How We Went From Hope and Change to the Age of Revolt." His website is tedrall.com.)
DISTRIBUTED BY Universal Uclick/TED RALL
4520 Main St., Kansas City, Mo. 64111; (877) 682-5425 / TED RALL ONLINE: rall.com
Mini DronesJune 15, 2012
SYNDICATED COLUMN: Our Suicidal Ruling ClassJanuary 5, 2012
Why Won't the Rich and Powerful Try to Save Themselves?
I spent last week at Occupy Miami and Occupy Fort Lauderdale. One question came up several times: What if the system responds—or pretends to respond—to our demands? What if the political class agrees to create more jobs, help the unemployed, let distressed homeowners keep their houses?
Then the Occupy movement (and American progressivism) will be out of business. "President Obama could finish us off over night," I said. "A speech would be enough. He wouldn't even have to do anything."
Obama could announce a big jobs bill, knowing full well that Congressional Republicans would kill it. It would probably increase his reelection prospects.
But don't worry.
He won't.
He can't.
America's corporate rulers and their pet politicians know that people are furious. They understand that their actions and policies are accelerating the pace of income inequality and creating a growing, permanently alienated underclass.
They know history. Sooner or later, the downtrodden rise up, overthrow and kill their oppressors.
It's not a nice way to rule. Nor is it smart. So—if all it would take for America's masters to save themselves from the raging mobs of the not-so-distant future are a few empty words, why not try?
There's no doubt about the nature or scale of the problem. Economists from left to right agree that the United States suffers from high structural inequality. "At least five large studies in recent years have found the United States to be less mobile than comparable nations," reported The New York Times on January 5th. According to a Swedish study 42 percent of American boys raised by parents whose incomes fall in the bottom 40 percent of wage earners remain in the bottom 40 percent as adults—a much higher rate than such nations as Denmark (25 percent) and England (30 percent), "a country famous for its class constraints."
To be poor in the United States is not unusual. Half of Americans live under two times the poverty line. But the depth and persistence of poverty in America is unique among developed industrialized nations. The gap between the poor and the rich is bigger. Mobility—access to the American Dream—is less.
Born rich? You'll more likely to die rich in the U.S. than in other countries. Born poor? You're likelier to die poor.
"Miles Corak, an economist at the University of Ottawa, found that just 16 percent of Canadian men raised in the bottom tenth of incomes stayed there as adults, compared with 22 percent of Americans. Similarly, 26 percent of American men raised at the top tenth stayed there, but just 18 percent of Canadians."
When family background determines your fate you look for other options. Like getting rid of the system that makes things that way for your kids and their kids. That's what happened in France in 1789 and Russia in 1917 and China in 1949.
There is no better predictor of revolution than an absence of economic mobility.
Right-wing extremists dismiss empirical data with anecdotal evidence. "If America is so poor in economic mobility, maybe someone should tell all these people who still want to come to the U.S.," Stuart Butler of the Heritage Foundation told the Times.
Someone should.
Most Americans are poor. They don't need to read these studies. They're living them. Which is why they want politicians to create big jobs programs, raise wages, establish permanent unemployment benefits (standard in Europe) and impose a moratorium on foreclosures. The polls are clear.
No one cares about Iran's supposed nuclear weapons program.
Yet here we are in the heat of a presidential election year, and no candidate—not "liberal" Obama, not the weird Republican, Ron Paul, no one—is talking about the issues Americans care about.
During the 1930s and 1960s liberal leaders ended street protests by promising change. Why not now? Why isn't anyone promising to address income inequality? They could lie and break their promises later.
First, the rich are feeling squeezed. The global capitalist system no longer has much room to expand. Emerging markets have emerged. Globalization is not only nearly out of steam, it's allowing the weakest trading partners to drag down their healthier partners. Feeling squeezed, our rulers aren't in the mood to be generous. They'd rather loot the scraps of the pending collapse than expand the social safety net.
Second, the ruling classes have fooled themselves into believing that they no longer need to exploit workers in order extract surplus value. They make their profits without us in massive arbitrage transactions that collect spreads from borrowed money. To be sure, it's a bubble. It'll burst. But it feels good now.
Third, the rich think they can insulate themselves from the roiling masses of the dispossessed, safe behind high-tech alarm systems inside their gated communities. Arrogance rules.
Louis XVI had good security too.
Finally, there has always been a division within the elites between enlightened liberals and hardass thieves. The liberals don't like us; they fear us. So they try to keep us satisfied enough not to revolt. The thieves count on brute force—cops, pepper spray, camps—to keep the barbarians at bay. The balance of power has shifted decisively to the thieves—which is why figures like Obama can't even pretend to care about the issues most important to the great majority of people.
(Ted Rall is the author of "The Anti-American Manifesto." His website is tedrall.com.)


text:
Motorbike in very good visual and technical condition.
KH 500 has an original purchase document from a Kawasaki dealer from Vienna in 1976 (photo).
A rich service history (photo).
New tires, a new battery.
In addition, the motorcycle after a thorough review. Each of our motorcycles is thoroughly checked.
We ship motorcycles across Europe as well as outside. We only use the services of professional carriers. Our shipments are insured and secured. We have already sent motorcycles to 8 countries in Europe.
If you are intrested contact with us:
+48 509 719 394 – english

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Regulations (Standards - 29 CFR) - Table of Contents
| Part Number:
| Part Title:
|Occupational Safety and Health Standards
| Subpart:
| Subpart Title:
|Hazardous Materials
| Standard Number:
| Title:
|Process safety management of highly hazardous chemicals.
| Appendix:
| GPO Source:
Purpose. This section contains requirements for preventing or minimizing the consequences of catastrophic releases of toxic, reactive, flammable, or explosive chemicals. These releases may result in toxic, fire or explosion hazards.1910.119(a)
This section applies to the following:1910.119(a)(1)(i)
A process which involves a chemical at or above the specified threshold quantities listed in Appendix A to this section;1910.119(a)(1)(ii)
A process which involves a Category 1 flammable gas (as defined in 1910.1200(c)) or a flammable liquid with a flashpoint below 100 °F (37.8 °C) on site in one location, in a quantity of 10,000 pounds (4535.9 kg) or more except for:1910.119(a)(1)(ii)(A)
Hydrocarbon fuels used solely for workplace consumption as a fuel (e.g., propane used for comfort heating, gasoline for vehicle refueling), if such fuels are not a part of a process containing another highly hazardous chemical covered by this standard;1910.119(a)(1)(ii)(B)
Flammable liquids with a flashpoint below 100 °F (37.8 °C) stored in atmospheric tanks or transferred which are kept below their normal boiling point without benefit of chilling or refrigeration.1910.119(a)(2)
This section does not apply to:1910.119(a)(2)(i)
Retail facilities;1910.119(a)(2)(ii)
Oil or gas well drilling or servicing operations; or,1910.119(a)(2)(iii)
Normally unoccupied remote facilities.1910.119(b)
Atmospheric tank means a storage tank which has been designed to operate at pressures from atmospheric through 0.5 p.s.i.g. (pounds per square inch gauge, 3.45 Kpa).
Boiling point means the boiling point of a liquid at a pressure of 14.7 pounds per square inch absolute (p.s.i.a.) (760 mm.). For the purposes of this section, where an accurate boiling point is unavailable for the material in question, or for mixtures which do not have a constant boiling point, the 10 percent point of a distillation performed in accordance with the Standard Method of Test for Distillation of Petroleum Products, ASTM D-86-62, which is incorporated by reference as specified in Sec. 1910.6, may be used as the boiling point of the liquid.
Catastrophic release means a major uncontrolled emission, fire, or explosion, involving one or more highly hazardous chemicals, that presents serious danger to employees in the workplace.
Facility means the buildings, containers or equipment which contain a process.
Highly hazardous chemical means a substance possessing toxic, reactive, flammable, or explosive properties and specified by paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
Hot work means work involving electric or gas welding, cutting, brazing, or similar flame or spark-producing operations.
Normally unoccupied remote facility means a facility which is operated, maintained or serviced by employees who visit the facility only periodically to check its operation and to perform necessary operating or maintenance tasks. No employees are permanently stationed at the facility. Facilities meeting this definition are not contiguous with, and must be geographically remote from all other buildings, processes or persons.
Process means any activity involving a highly hazardous chemical including any use, storage, manufacturing, handling, or the on-site movement of such chemicals, or combination of these activities. For purposes of this definition, any group of vessels which are interconnected and separate vessels which are located such that a highly hazardous chemical could be involved in a potential release shall be considered a single process.
Replacement in kind means a replacement which satisfies the design specification.
Trade secret means any confidential formula, pattern, process, device, information or compilation of information that is used in an employer's business, and that gives the employer an opportunity to obtain an advantage over competitors who do not know or use it. See Appendix E to § 1910.1200—Definition of a Trade Secret (which sets out the criteria to be used in evaluating trade secrets).
Employee participation.1910.119(c)(1)
Employers shall develop a written plan of action regarding the implementation of the employee participation required by this paragraph.1910.119(c)(2)
Employers shall consult with employees and their representatives on the conduct and development of process hazards analyses and on the development of the other elements of process safety management in this standard.1910.119(c)(3)
Employers shall provide to employees and their representatives access to process hazard analyses and to all other information required to be developed under this standard.1910.119(d)
Process safety information. In accordance with the schedule set forth in paragraph (e)(1) of this section, the employer shall complete a compilation of written process safety information before conducting any process hazard analysis required by the standard. The compilation of written process safety information is to enable the employer and the employees involved in operating the process to identify and understand the hazards posed by those processes involving highly hazardous chemicals. This process safety information shall include information pertaining to the hazards of the highly hazardous chemicals used or produced by the process, information pertaining to the technology of the process, and information pertaining to the equipment in the process.1910.119(d)(1)
Information pertaining to the hazards of the highly hazardous chemicals in the process. This information shall consist of at least the following:1910.119(d)(1)(i)
Toxicity information;1910.119(d)(1)(ii)
Permissible exposure limits;1910.119(d)(1)(iii)
Physical data;1910.119(d)(1)(iv)
Reactivity data:1910.119(d)(1)(v)
Corrosivity data;1910.119(d)(1)(vi)
Thermal and chemical stability data; and1910.119(d)(1)(vii)
Hazardous effects of inadvertent mixing of different materials that could foreseeably occur.1910.119(d)(2)
Note: Safety data sheets meeting the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.1200(g) may be used to comply with this requirement to the extent they contain the information required by this subparagraph.
Information pertaining to the technology of the process.1910.119(d)(2)(i)
Information concerning the technology of the process shall include at least the following:1910.119(d)(2)(i)(A)
A block flow diagram or simplified process flow diagram (see Appendix B to this section);1910.119(d)(2)(i)(B)
Process chemistry;1910.119(d)(2)(i)(C)
Maximum intended inventory;1910.119(d)(2)(i)(D)
Safe upper and lower limits for such items as temperatures, pressures, flows or compositions; and,1910.119(d)(2)(i)(E)
An evaluation of the consequences of deviations, including those affecting the safety and health of employees.1910.119(d)(2)(ii)
Where the original technical information no longer exists, such information may be developed in conjunction with the process hazard analysis in sufficient detail to support the analysis.1910.119(d)(3)
Information pertaining to the equipment in the process.1910.119(d)(3)(i)
Information pertaining to the equipment in the process shall include:1910.119(d)(3)(i)(A)
Materials of construction;1910.119(d)(3)(i)(B)
Piping and instrument diagrams (P&ID's);1910.119(d)(3)(i)(C)
Electrical classification;1910.119(d)(3)(i)(D)
Relief system design and design basis;1910.119(d)(3)(i)(E)
Ventilation system design;1910.119(d)(3)(i)(F)
Design codes and standards employed;1910.119(d)(3)(i)(G)
Material and energy balances for processes built after May 26, 1992; and,1910.119(d)(3)(i)(H)
Safety systems (e.g. interlocks, detection or suppression systems).1910.119(d)(3)(ii)
The employer shall document that equipment complies with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices.1910.119(d)(3)(iii)
For existing equipment designed and constructed in accordance with codes, standards, or practices that are no longer in general use, the employer shall determine and document that the equipment is designed, maintained, inspected, tested, and operating in a safe manner.1910.119(e)
Process hazard analysis.1910.119(e)(1)
The employer shall perform an initial process hazard analysis (hazard evaluation) on processes covered by this standard. The process hazard analysis shall be appropriate to the complexity of the process and shall identify, evaluate, and control the hazards involved in the process. Employers shall determine and document the priority order for conducting process hazard analyses based on a rationale which includes such considerations as extent of the process hazards, number of potentially affected employees, age of the process, and operating history of the process. The process hazard analysis shall be conducted as soon as possible, but not later than the following schedule:1910.119(e)(1)(i)
No less than 25 percent of the initial process hazards analyses shall be completed by May 26, 1994;1910.119(e)(1)(ii)
No less than 50 percent of the initial process hazards analyses shall be completed by May 26, 1995;1910.119(e)(1)(iii)
No less than 75 percent of the initial process hazards analyses shall be completed by May 26, 1996;1910.119(e)(1)(iv)
All initial process hazards analyses shall be completed by May 26, 1997.1910.119(e)(1)(v)
Process hazards analyses completed after May 26, 1987 which meet the requirements of this paragraph are acceptable as initial process hazards analyses. These process hazard analyses shall be updated and revalidated, based on their completion date, in accordance with paragraph (e)(6) of this standard.1910.119(e)(2)
The employer shall use one or more of the following methodologies that are appropriate to determine and evaluate the hazards of the process being analyzed.1910.119(e)(2)(i)
Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOP);1910.119(e)(2)(v)
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA);1910.119(e)(2)(vi)
Fault Tree Analysis; or1910.119(e)(2)(vii)
An appropriate equivalent methodology.1910.119(e)(3)
The process hazard analysis shall address:1910.119(e)(3)(i)
The hazards of the process;1910.119(e)(3)(ii)
The identification of any previous incident which had a likely potential for catastrophic consequences in the workplace;1910.119(e)(3)(iii)
Engineering and administrative controls applicable to the hazards and their interrelationships such as appropriate application of detection methodologies to provide early warning of releases. (Acceptable detection methods might include process monitoring and control instrumentation with alarms, and detection hardware such as hydrocarbon sensors.);1910.119(e)(3)(iv)
Consequences of failure of engineering and administrative controls;1910.119(e)(3)(v)
Facility siting;1910.119(e)(3)(vi)
Human factors; and1910.119(e)(3)(vii)
A qualitative evaluation of a range of the possible safety and health effects of failure of controls on employees in the workplace.1910.119(e)(4)
The process hazard analysis shall be performed by a team with expertise in engineering and process operations, and the team shall include at least one employee who has experience and knowledge specific to the process being evaluated. Also, one member of the team must be knowledgeable in the specific process hazard analysis methodology being used.1910.119(e)(5)
The employer shall establish a system to promptly address the team's findings and recommendations; assure that the recommendations are resolved in a timely manner and that the resolution is documented; document what actions are to be taken; complete actions as soon as possible; develop a written schedule of when these actions are to be completed; communicate the actions to operating, maintenance and other employees whose work assignments are in the process and who may be affected by the recommendations or actions.1910.119(e)(6)
At least every five (5) years after the completion of the initial process hazard analysis, the process hazard analysis shall be updated and revalidated by a team meeting the requirements in paragraph (e)(4) of this section, to assure that the process hazard analysis is consistent with the current process.1910.119(e)(7)
Employers shall retain process hazards analyses and updates or revalidations for each process covered by this section, as well as the documented resolution of recommendations described in paragraph (e)(5) of this section for the life of the process.1910.119(f)
Operating procedures.1910.119(f)(1)
The employer shall develop and implement written operating procedures that provide clear instructions for safely conducting activities involved in each covered process consistent with the process safety information and shall address at least the following elements.1910.119(f)(1)(i)
Steps for each operating phase:1910.119(f)(1)(i)(A)
Initial startup;1910.119(f)(1)(i)(B)
Normal operations;1910.119(f)(1)(i)(C)
Temporary operations;1910.119(f)(1)(i)(D)
Emergency shutdown including the conditions under which emergency shutdown is required, and the assignment of shutdown responsibility to qualified operators to ensure that emergency shutdown is executed in a safe and timely manner.1910.119(f)(1)(i)(E)
Emergency Operations;1910.119(f)(1)(i)(F)
Normal shutdown; and,1910.119(f)(1)(i)(G)
Startup following a turnaround, or after an emergency shutdown.1910.119(f)(1)(ii)
Operating limits:1910.119(f)(1)(ii)(A)
Consequences of deviation; and1910.119(f)(1)(ii)(B)
Steps required to correct or avoid deviation.1910.119(f)(1)(iii)
Safety and health considerations:1910.119(f)(1)(iii)(A)
Properties of, and hazards presented by, the chemicals used in the process;1910.119(f)(1)(iii)(B)
Precautions necessary to prevent exposure, including engineering controls, administrative controls, and personal protective equipment;1910.119(f)(1)(iii)(C)
Control measures to be taken if physical contact or airborne exposure occurs;1910.119(f)(1)(iii)(D)
Quality control for raw materials and control of hazardous chemical inventory levels; and,1910.119(f)(1)(iii)(E)
Any special or unique hazards.1910.119(f)(1)(iv)
Safety systems and their functions.1910.119(f)(2)
Operating procedures shall be readily accessible to employees who work in or maintain a process.1910.119(f)(3)
The operating procedures shall be reviewed as often as necessary to assure that they reflect current operating practice, including changes that result from changes in process chemicals, technology, and equipment, and changes to facilities. The employer shall certify annually that these operating procedures are current and accurate.1910.119(f)(4)
The employer shall develop and implement safe work practices to provide for the control of hazards during operations such as lockout/tagout; confined space entry; opening process equipment or piping; and control over entrance into a facility by maintenance, contractor, laboratory, or other support personnel. These safe work practices shall apply to employees and contractor employees.1910.119(g)
Initial training.1910.119(g)(1)(i)
Each employee presently involved in operating a process, and each employee before being involved in operating a newly assigned process, shall be trained in an overview of the process and in the operating procedures as specified in paragraph (f) of this section. The training shall include emphasis on the specific safety and health hazards, emergency operations including shutdown, and safe work practices applicable to the employee's job tasks.1910.119(g)(1)(ii)
In lieu of initial training for those employees already involved in operating a process on May 26, 1992, an employer may certify in writing that the employee has the required knowledge, skills, and abilities to safely carry out the duties and responsibilities as specified in the operating procedures.1910.119(g)(2)
Refresher training. Refresher training shall be provided at least every three years, and more often if necessary, to each employee involved in operating a process to assure that the employee understands and adheres to the current operating procedures of the process. The employer, in consultation with the employees involved in operating the process, shall determine the appropriate frequency of refresher training.1910.119(g)(3)
Training documentation. The employer shall ascertain that each employee involved in operating a process has received and understood the training required by this paragraph. The employer shall prepare a record which contains the identity of the employee, the date of training, and the means used to verify that the employee understood the training.1910.119(h)
Application. This paragraph applies to contractors performing maintenance or repair, turnaround, major renovation, or specialty work on or adjacent to a covered process. It does not apply to contractors providing incidental services which do not influence process safety, such as janitorial work, food and drink services, laundry, delivery or other supply services.1910.119(h)(2)
Employer responsibilities.1910.119(h)(2)(i)
The employer, when selecting a contractor, shall obtain and evaluate information regarding the contract employer's safety performance and programs.1910.119(h)(2)(ii)
The employer shall inform contract employers of the known potential fire, explosion, or toxic release hazards related to the contractor's work and the process.1910.119(h)(2)(iii)
The employer shall explain to contract employers the applicable provisions of the emergency action plan required by paragraph (n) of this section.1910.119(h)(2)(iv)
The employer shall develop and implement safe work practices consistent with paragraph (f)(4) of this section, to control the entrance, presence and exit of contract employers and contract employees in covered process areas.1910.119(h)(2)(v)
The employer shall periodically evaluate the performance of contract employers in fulfilling their obligations as specified in paragraph (h)(3) of this section.1910.119(h)(2)(vi)
The employer shall maintain a contract employee injury and illness log related to the contractor's work in process areas.1910.119(h)(3)
Contract employer responsibilities.1910.119(h)(3)(i)
The contract employer shall assure that each contract employee is trained in the work practices necessary to safely perform his/her job.1910.119(h)(3)(ii)
The contract employer shall assure that each contract employee is instructed in the known potential fire, explosion, or toxic release hazards related to his/her job and the process, and the applicable provisions of the emergency action plan.1910.119(h)(3)(iii)
The contract employer shall document that each contract employee has received and understood the training required by this paragraph. The contract employer shall prepare a record which contains the identity of the contract employee, the date of training, and the means used to verify that the employee understood the training.1910.119(h)(3)(iv)
The contract employer shall assure that each contract employee follows the safety rules of the facility including the safe work practices required by paragraph (f)(4) of this section.1910.119(h)(3)(v)
The contract employer shall advise the employer of any unique hazards presented by the contract employer's work, or of any hazards found by the contract employer's work.1910.119(i)
Pre-startup safety review.1910.119(i)(1)
The employer shall perform a pre-startup safety review for new facilities and for modified facilities when the modification is significant enough to require a change in the process safety information.1910.119(i)(2)
The pre-startup safety review shall confirm that prior to the introduction of highly hazardous chemicals to a process:1910.119(i)(2)(i)
Construction and equipment is in accordance with design specifications;1910.119(i)(2)(ii)
Safety, operating, maintenance, and emergency procedures are in place and are adequate;1910.119(i)(2)(iii)
For new facilities, a process hazard analysis has been performed and recommendations have been resolved or implemented before startup; and modified facilities meet the requirements contained in management of change, paragraph (l).1910.119(i)(2)(iv)
Training of each employee involved in operating a process has been completed.1910.119(j)
Mechanical integrity.1910.119(j)(1)
Application. Paragraphs (j)(2) through (j)(6) of this section apply to the following process equipment:1910.119(j)(1)(i)
Pressure vessels and storage tanks;1910.119(j)(1)(ii)
Piping systems (including piping components such as valves);1910.119(j)(1)(iii)
Relief and vent systems and devices;1910.119(j)(1)(iv)
Emergency shutdown systems;1910.119(j)(1)(v)
Controls (including monitoring devices and sensors, alarms, and interlocks) and,1910.119(j)(1)(vi)
Written procedures. The employer shall establish and implement written procedures to maintain the on-going integrity of process equipment.1910.119(j)(3)
Training for process maintenance activities. The employer shall train each employee involved in maintaining the on-going integrity of process equipment in an overview of that process and its hazards and in the procedures applicable to the employee's job tasks to assure that the employee can perform the job tasks in a safe manner.1910.119(j)(4)
Inspection and testing.1910.119(j)(4)(i)
Inspections and tests shall be performed on process equipment.1910.119(j)(4)(ii)
Inspection and testing procedures shall follow recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices.1910.119(j)(4)(iii)
The frequency of inspections and tests of process equipment shall be consistent with applicable manufacturers' recommendations and good engineering practices, and more frequently if determined to be necessary by prior operating experience.1910.119(j)(4)(iv)
The employer shall document each inspection and test that has been performed on process equipment. The documentation shall identify the date of the inspection or test, the name of the person who performed the inspection or test, the serial number or other identifier of the equipment on which the inspection or test was performed, a description of the inspection or test performed, and the results of the inspection or test.1910.119(j)(5)
Equipment deficiencies. The employer shall correct deficiencies in equipment that are outside acceptable limits (defined by the process safety information in paragraph (d) of this section) before further use or in a safe and timely manner when necessary means are taken to assure safe operation.1910.119(j)(6)
Quality assurance.1910.119(j)(6)(i)
In the construction of new plants and equipment, the employer shall assure that equipment as it is fabricated is suitable for the process application for which they will be used.1910.119(j)(6)(ii)
Appropriate checks and inspections shall be performed to assure that equipment is installed properly and consistent with design specifications and the manufacturer's instructions.1910.119(j)(6)(iii)
The employer shall assure that maintenance materials, spare parts and equipment are suitable for the process application for which they will be used.1910.119(k)
Hot work permit.1910.119(k)(1)
The employer shall issue a hot work permit for hot work operations conducted on or near a covered process.1910.119(k)(2)
The permit shall document that the fire prevention and protection requirements in 29 CFR 1910.252(a) have been implemented prior to beginning the hot work operations; it shall indicate the date(s) authorized for hot work; and identify the object on which hot work is to be performed. The permit shall be kept on file until completion of the hot work operations.1910.119(l)
Management of change.1910.119(l)(1)
The employer shall establish and implement written procedures to manage changes (except for "replacements in kind") to process chemicals, technology, equipment, and procedures; and, changes to facilities that affect a covered process.1910.119(l)(2)
The procedures shall assure that the following considerations are addressed prior to any change:1910.119(l)(2)(i)
The technical basis for the proposed change;1910.119(l)(2)(ii)
Impact of change on safety and health;1910.119(l)(2)(iii)
Modifications to operating procedures;1910.119(l)(2)(iv)
Necessary time period for the change; and,1910.119(l)(2)(v)
Authorization requirements for the proposed change.1910.119(l)(3)
Employees involved in operating a process and maintenance and contract employees whose job tasks will be affected by a change in the process shall be informed of, and trained in, the change prior to start-up of the process or affected part of the process.1910.119(l)(4)
If a change covered by this paragraph results in a change in the process safety information required by paragraph (d) of this section, such information shall be updated accordingly.1910.119(l)(5)
If a change covered by this paragraph results in a change in the operating procedures or practices required by paragraph (f) of this section, such procedures or practices shall be updated accordingly.1910.119(m)
Incident investigation.1910.119(m)(1)
The employer shall investigate each incident which resulted in, or could reasonably have resulted in a catastrophic release of highly hazardous chemical in the workplace.1910.119(m)(2)
An incident investigation shall be initiated as promptly as possible, but not later than 48 hours following the incident.1910.119(m)(3)
An incident investigation team shall be established and consist of at least one person knowledgeable in the process involved, including a contract employee if the incident involved work of the contractor, and other persons with appropriate knowledge and experience to thoroughly investigate and analyze the incident.1910.119(m)(4)
A report shall be prepared at the conclusion of the investigation which includes at a minimum:1910.119(m)(4)(i)
Date of incident;1910.119(m)(4)(ii)
Date investigation began;1910.119(m)(4)(iii)
A description of the incident;1910.119(m)(4)(iv)
The factors that contributed to the incident; and,1910.119(m)(4)(v)
Any recommendations resulting from the investigation.1910.119(m)(5)
The employer shall establish a system to promptly address and resolve the incident report findings and recommendations. Resolutions and corrective actions shall be documented.1910.119(m)(6)
The report shall be reviewed with all affected personnel whose job tasks are relevant to the incident findings including contract employees where applicable.1910.119(m)(7)
Incident investigation reports shall be retained for five years.1910.119(n)
Emergency planning and response. The employer shall establish and implement an emergency action plan for the entire plant in accordance with the provisions of 29 CFR 1910.38. In addition, the emergency action plan shall include procedures for handling small releases. Employers covered under this standard may also be subject to the hazardous waste and emergency response provisions contained in 29 CFR 1910.120 (a), (p) and (q).1910.119(o)
Compliance Audits.1910.119(o)(1)
Employers shall certify that they have evaluated compliance with the provisions of this section at least every three years to verify that the procedures and practices developed under the standard are adequate and are being followed.1910.119(o)(2)
The compliance audit shall be conducted by at least one person knowledgeable in the process.1910.119(o)(3)
A report of the findings of the audit shall be developed.1910.119(o)(4)
The employer shall promptly determine and document an appropriate response to each of the findings of the compliance audit, and document that deficiencies have been corrected.1910.119(o)(5)
Employers shall retain the two (2) most recent compliance audit reports.1910.119(p)
Trade secrets.1910.119(p)(1)
Employers shall make all information necessary to comply with the section available to those persons responsible for compiling the process safety information (required by paragraph (d) of this section), those assisting in the development of the process hazard analysis (required by paragraph (e) of this section), those responsible for developing the operating procedures (required by paragraph (f) of this section), and those involved in incident investigations (required by paragraph (m) of this section), emergency planning and response (paragraph (n) of this section) and compliance audits (paragraph (o) of this section) without regard to possible trade secret status of such information.1910.119(p)(2)
Nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the employer from requiring the persons to whom the information is made available under paragraph (p)(1) of this section to enter into confidentiality agreements not to disclose the information as set forth in 29 CFR 1910.1200.1910.119(p)(3)
Subject to the rules and procedures set forth in 29 CFR 1910.1200(i)(1) through 1910.1200(i)(12), employees and their designated representatives shall have access to trade secret information contained within the process hazard analysis and other documents required to be developed by this standard.
[57 FR 23060, June 1, 1992; 61 FR 9227, March 7, 1996; 77 FR 17776, March 26, 2012; 78 FR 9313, Feb. 8, 2013]
Next Standard (1910.119 App A)
|Regulations (Standards - 29 CFR) - Table of Contents


text:
Re-Seduction of Csirnis (Day 43)
This morning I sort of snuck out of my cave in case Tultamaan was lurking in wait for me, which he wasn't, and then crept outside the drake's cave and lurked in wait for Csirnis. Which meant conversations with Ythac, Osoth, and Greshthanu, of the form "Good morning, Jyothky, what are you doing now?" — "I'm lurking." — "Right. Happy lurking!" Or, "Whatever for?", followed by me looking trying to look simultaneous mysterious, responsible, and elegant. I had better grow two more heads if I'm going to pull that off.
(That's not a bad idea actually — maybe I'll do it. It takes a couple weeks to get used to multiple heads though. Maybe I'll be hideously annoyed with everyone and want to spend that long away from them, and can stomp off to a different corner of the desert and practice seeing everything from three sides for long enough so I don't run into things and trip over my own feet constantly. Also the thought of watching myself eat is oddly disturbing, I don't know why. I don't like having a mirror at table, either, for what that's worth.)
I prepared a very elegant and eloquent proposition for that most elegant of drakes. It was full of courtly language, and it had three internal rhymes, and enough fancy vocabulary that it looked as if Osoth had helped me write it. I rolled it over and over in my head, and it was delightful.
Finally Csirnis glided out. Yes, he glides when he walks. I don't know how he does it — he's only got four legs most of the time.
"Good morning, Csirnis!"
He looked amused in a generally dignified way. "Good morning, Jyothky. What brings you to the drake's cave so early?"
My whole elegant and eloquent proposition fell apart. It came out something like, "Let's … us … I mean, you and me … and a desert … there…"
He smiled anyways. "I take it today is my turn?" I nodded with all available elegance and eloquence. He continued, "At the top of Khamrou Elephantodontou is a pleasant spring set about with aromatic afhtherias trees. There, let me give you my love." He can do elegance and eloquence on a moment's notice and only half a night's sleep.
As Csirnis and I flew out, Osoth muttered to Nrararn, "We had been lucky up to now. No more." Nrararn lashed the ground with his tail.
At the top of Khamrou Elephantodontou, the tallest and whitest and shiniest of the Khamrou Voresc range, there was indeed a pleasant spring, a round bathtub of a spring, warm water bubbling through smooth white pebbles. Lazy orange fish swam there, and a pair of ducks that flew off when we landed. The afhtherias trees filled the air with the scent of sweet resin, and amid their roots star-shaped white flowers bloomed, and rendered the place exceedingly romantic. Of course, a few big clawprints in the grass showed that the romance had already been tested and confirmed.
I flickered my shape around and took out the cubical box of ghee.
"Oh, no, I do not imagine that we will need that," said Csirnis.
"You know what it's for?" I mumbled.
"Certain technical details have gotten around among the drakes, I'm afraid," he said. "But today we may set them aside."
"Well …it's your hemipenises in danger," I said. "Ready?" I crouched to take off, and spread my claspers.
His eyes twinkled. "Let us not be quite so swift. We are not fleeing from warplanes and an artillery barrage here!"
So he wasn't quite so swift. He danced for me, coiling and twirling in the lower air, and if he didn't have Nrararn's perfect sky-mage's mobility, he had far more grace. Then he called to me and we danced together. I don't have either the mobility or the grace, but he had enough for two: he taught me a Chiriact court dance for one slow and one fast dragon.
Then we lay by the bank of the pond. "Let me please the senses you have," he said. We kissed and breathed careful fire and lightning into each other's mouths, pouring the strength of his whefô into mine and mine into his, which is really delightful. You do have to do it right, or it turns into a very painful attack. I wouldn't do it with Llredh, say, but this was Csirnis.
(Aside: I am actually more powerful of whefô than Csirnis, though not by much. It's not that he's absolutely the best of us at absolutely everything — Llredh beats him in fights often enough, Greshthanu sometimes, and even Nrararn did once or twice, Osoth and Nrararn and Ythac are better sorcerers, and I'm better at breath, and I guess Arilash is the better lover. He's just a very close second-best at everything that he's not the best at, and he's utterly beautiful about it.)
And Csirnis broke some pods of spice-seeds on his belly, enhancing his natural scent just the right way, and we spent some long time smelling and tasting each other. Yum, beautiful musky boy!
Finally he leapt into the air and beckoned for me to follow, and we mated in the sky, and everything on my body worked the way it's supposed to. Without extraneous additions of ghee, or even needing to consciously spread my claspers. I actually felt like a grown-up dragoness for once.
Well. Everything worked except the parts of me that never work. Csirnis was well-satisfied, by the sight and scent of his body at least. I don't get any such satisfaction. He had managed to tell my body that there was a beautiful, agreeable drake around, but my body couldn't tell that she'd actually had him.
So we splashed in the pool to clean off — even washing in water is somehow an elegant joy with Csirnis. Then we sprawled in the hot sunlight and I made him tell me about Chiriact's court politics until my body gave up on the beautiful agreeable drake that she knew was somewhere around and folded my claspers and grumbled quietly.
Well, it was a very romantic morning, anyways.
Originally published at Mating Flight. You can comment here or there.


text:
With the holidays right around the corner, fantasy owners are digging through their waiver wires searching for that special gift that can help lead their team into the playoffs. Whether its an injury replacement or a young player finally developing after two full months of play, here are some players who can provide value for your roster. During last week's Crashing the Net, we discussed players such as Corey Crawford, Kevin Shattenkirk, and Antoine Vermette.
Anders Lindback – G, Nashville Predators (12% Yahoo! / 31% CBS)
This rookie netminder will see a bulk of the work while regular goalie Pekka Rinne is sidelined with a knee injury for the next two to four weeks. Not only will Lindback receive a majority of work in Rinne's absence, but he's also a solid goaltender that is capable of posting big numbers. While Rinne dealt with an injury earlier this season, Lindback went 3-0-1 during a two week stretch as the number one goaltender. For the season, Lindback is 3-1-1 with a 2.78 GAA and a .913 SV% over eight games played. Nashville plays seven games over the next two weeks, so there's no reason not to add him. Unfortunately, once it's determined that Rinne is 100 percent healthy, Lindback will return to his backup role with the Predators as the team did not plan on playing him more than 22 games this year.
Corey Crwaford – G, Chicago Blackhawks (24% Yahoo! / 42% CBS)
Crawford was listed on the "Other to Monitor" last week, but it's now time to add the 25-year old netminder. With the Western Conference being a very close race and every win determining your playoff hopes, the Blackhawks will turn to Crawford just as much as Marty Turco this season. First and foremost, Turco owners should own Crawford as a handcuff, because coach Joel Quenneville has made it obvious that he will play the "hot hand" going forward. Crawford has won his last five starts and prior to his last start against the St. Louis Blues, he had not allowed more than two goals during those games. Over his ten games this season, Crawford has posted a 6-4-0 record, but has a terrific 2.38 GAA. Even with the 6-4 record, the Blackhawks need wins and that's exactly what Crawford is bringing to the table.
Jeff Tambellini – LW, Vancouver Canucks (2% Yahoo! / 4% CBS)
This winger was another player listed on the "Others to Monitor" earlier in the season, but due to his two-way contract, he's been a fantasy risk splitting time between the AHL and NHL. He was sent down when Alex Burrows was healthy enough to play, but has found himself back in the NHL and is currently making the most of his time. Besides finding himself on a line with the Sedin Twins earlier in the year, Tambellini now finds himself on another offensive line, as he's been skating with Mason Raymond and Ryan Kesler. Since his latest recall, Jeff has two goals and four total points over his last four games.
Tomas Fleischmann – LW, Colorado Avalanche (22% Yahoo! / 56% CBS)
I tweeted my thoughts on Flash moving from Washington to Colorado earlier in the week, but I've always thought Flash was roster worthy in most leagues. Colorado knows how to score goals, which is backed up by their 3.36 goals per game this season. Now most of the scoring happened while Chris Stewart was healthy, but this team is still a threat to score goals. Flash is currently playing on second line with center Matt Duchene and winger David Jones, but could find himself floating not only between multiple positions, but floating between the first and second line. While the Avs are without Stewart and T.J. Galiardi, Fleischmann will not only see increased ice time, but significant ice time on the powerplay.
Cam Fowler – D, Anaheim Ducks (7% Yahoo! / 47% CBS)
The 12th overall pick during the 2010 NHL Draft seems to finding his fit with the Ducks thus far. Fowler just turned 19 and is not only seeing close to 20 minutes of ice time per game, and is averaging over three minutes of power play ice time per game on a unit that features players such as Ryan Getzlaf, Corey Perry, and Bobby Ryan. Fowler has collected six points over his last 10 games and should tally close to 30 points overall this season. Even if you Fowler is a spot-start here and there, he's definitely worth taking in deeper leagues and keeper leagues.
You can follow @dailyfaceoff on Twitter for hockey news and notes. You can also follow Reggie on Twitter at @fakehockey. Be sure to check out the Starting Goalies section for your fantasy starters tonight and the Team Lineups page.


text:
Louis Vuitton watches confirms its commitment to bringing the excitement of the catwalk to the wrist, by launching its boldest collection of ladies' watches to date.
We use our own and third party cookies to improve your experience and our services. If you continue, we consider that you accept their use. You can get more information on your website at cookies policy.


text:
Home >> Daily News >> ASEAN STOCK WATCH
12 September 2014
The Straits Times Index (STI) ended -1.73 points lower or -0.05% to 3345.55, taking the year-to-date performance to +5.71%.
The FTSE ST Mid Cap Index declined -0.16% while the FTSE ST Small Cap Index declined -0.18%. The top active stocks were DBS (+0.76%), Genting Sing (-1.68%), UOB (+0.17%), SingTel (unchanged) and Keppel Corp (-0.74%).
The outperforming sectors today were represented by the FTSE ST Basic Materials Index (+0.43%). The two biggest stocks of the FTSE ST Basic Materials Index are Midas Holdings (unchanged) and Geo Energy Resources (unchanged). The underperforming sector was the FTSE ST Consumer Goods Index, which declined -1.08% with Wilmar International's share price declining -0.62% and Thai Beverage's share price declining -2.63%. The FTSE ST Consumer Services Index declined -0.48%. The FTSE ST Real Estate Index gained +0.07%. The FTSE ST Utilities Index declined -0.75%.
The three most active Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) by value today were the IS MSCI India (+0.39%), SPDR Gold Shares (-1.00%), DBXT EONIA TR ETF USD (+1.68%).
The three most active Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) by value were Suntec REITs (-1.10%), CapitaMall Trust (+0.25%), Ascendas REITs (unchanged).
The most active index warrants by value today were HSI24400MBePW141030 (+1.75%), HSI24600MBePW140929 (+5.48%), HSI25200MBeCW141030 (-8.60%).
The most active stock warrants by value today were DBS MB eCW150106 (+7.48%), UOB MB eCW141201 (+0.68%), KepCorp MBeCW141201 (+1.22%).
Singapore Stock Market
Friday Thursday
*ST Index 3,345.55 -1.73 3,347.28 +8.65
Volume: 1,102.5M 1,194.1M
Value: $788.4M $855.5M
Gainers/Losers: 196/233 181/219
Daily Market Commentary (Securities)
12 Sep 2014
The FBM KLCI index lost 10.47 points or 0.56% on Friday. The Finance Index fell 0.49% to 17390.33 points, the Properties Index up 0.29% to 1507.63 points and the Plantation Index down 0.32% to 8490.78 points. The market traded within a range of 12.41 points between an intra-day high of 1868.05 and a low of 1855.64 during the session.
Actively traded stocks include NEXGRAM, TALAMT, PDZ, SUMATEC, NIHSIN, KTB, KBES, AAX, TEKSENG and PASUKGB. Trading volume increased to 2489.00 mil shares worth RM2234.79 mil as compared to Thursday's 2042.14 mil shares worth RM1918.08 mil.
Leading Movers were BAT (+86 sen to RM73.36), HLFG (+16 sen to RM18.06), YTL (+1 sen to RM1.66), AXIATA (+4 sen to RM6.99) and RHBCAP (+5 sen to RM9.21). Lagging Movers were AMMB (-24 sen to RM6.76), PPB (-44 sen to RM14.32), SIME (-22 sen to RM9.03), PETDAG (-34 sen to RM20.22) and KLK (-36 sen to RM21.92). Market breadth was negative with 389 gainers as compared to 435 losers.
The KLCI ended 10.47 points lower at 1855.64 after a lasts minute plunge. Investor sentiment was dented by rising of geopolitical tension in Ukraine and Middle East.
Trade Summary
Date As of: 12 September 2014
Description Volume Value Frequency
Stock 4,329,664,774 5,183,477,352,759 198,736
Warrant 261,789,200 3,079,026,700 1,885
Total 4,591,479,974 5,186,578,012,559 200,862
Trading Summary
As of 12 September 2014 Unit: M.Baht
Type Buy Sell Net
Institution 3,147.92 4,450.07 -1,302.15
Proprietary 4,717.06 4,338.90 378.16
Foreign 10,064.62 9,327.24 737.38
Individual 33,639.35 33,452.74 186.61
Total Trading Value 51,568.95 M.Baht
Vietnam index ends 0.6 pct higher, buying supports
Vietnam's benchmark VN Index closed 0.56 percent higher on Friday, supported by light buying in selected stocks, while analysts expect the market to
gain later this year.
More than 144 million shares changed hands on Friday, up 11.3 percent from Thursday.
"Prices of a relatively high number of good stocks have dropped to an attractive level," BIDV Securities said in a note to clients, advising investors to buy shares now.
The VN Index has lost nearly 2 percent since Sept. 3 when it hit an intraday high of 644.56, the highest in more than six-and-a-half years.
Confectionary maker Kinh Do Corp rose 5.83 percent on Friday, followed by property firm Vingroup with a 1.83 percent gain. Baoviet Holdings, the country's largest insurer, gained 0.87 percent.
The market's outlook is good in the medium- and long term,
FPT Securities and BIDV Securities said in their daily reports.
Here is a snapshot of the VN Index at the close
VN Index 632.5
SE Asia Stocks -Indonesia underperforms on week
Indonesian shares eked out small gains on Friday, posting their worst weekly loss in almost three months amid concerns about a likely end to fuel subsidies, while Thai stocks trod water amid selling in recent gainers including construction-related firms.
Indonesia's key index ended up 0.2 percent, led by cement shares such as Indocement and Semen Indonesia .
Banks were among losers, with foreign selling sending Bankyat Indonesia to a two-month closing low.
The benchmark stock index was down 1.4 percent on the week, the biggest fall since the week ended June 20, amid uncertainty about the direction of fuel prices.
A senior Bank Indonesia official said the country needs to raise fuel prices before March and preferably by the end of 2014 to ease pressure on the current account and let the central bank focus its attention on the weakening economy.
Foreign investors were net sellers of Indonesian shares worth 776 billion rupiah ($65.66 million), marking a fourth straight session of offloading, Thomson Reuters data showed.
The Thai SET index closed a tad higher on the day and was down 0.2 percent on the week, its first weekly loss in six.
Siam Commercial Bank was among gainers, while cement firm Siam Cement and builders including Italian Thai Development and Ch Karnchang fell amid profit taking, brokers said.
Fund flows were mixed across exchanges, with the Thai stock market reporting a net foreign buying of 737 million baht ($22.90 million), Malaysia posting a net foreign selling of 173 million ringgit ($54.13 million) and the Philippines recording net outflows worth 265 million pesos ($6.03 million),
Market Current Prev Close Pct Move
Singapore 3345.55 3347.28 -0.05
Kuala Lumpur 1855.64 1866.11 -0.56
Bangkok 1581.36 1580.87 +0.03
Jakarta 5143.71 5133.03 +0.21
Manila 7201.88 7202.06 0.00
Ho Chi Minh 632.50 628.99 +0.56
Home | About Us | Contact Us | Special Feature | Features | News | Magazine | Events | TV | Press Release | Advertise With us
| Terms of Use | Site Map | Privacy Policy | DISCLAIMER |


text:
It is not so very important for a person to learn facts. For that he does not really need a college. He can learn them from books. The value of an education is a liberal arts college is not learning of many facts but the training of the mind to think something that cannot be learned from textbooks.
Login | Register


text: Katie Boucher Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Department of Biomolecular Medicine Work address Technologiepark-Zwijnaarde 75, FSVMII 9052 Zwijnaarde Email email@example.com 1 – 2 of 2 publications Show 250 5 10 15 20 50 100 250 Sort by year (new to old) Actions Filter publications Save this search Download search results Subscribe to news feed Add to list Journal Article A1 open access Simple peptide quantification approach for MS-based proteomics quality control Teresa Maia (UGent) , An Staes (UGent) , Kim Plasman (UGent) , Jarne Pauwels (UGent) , Katie Boucher (UGent) , Andrea Argentini (UGent) , Lennart Martens (UGent) , Tony Montoye, Kris Gevaert (UGent) and Francis Impens (UGent) (2020) ACS OMEGA. 5(12). p.6754-6762 Add to list Conference Paper C3 Comprehensive mapping of the antigenic peptide repertoire during bacterial infection Rupert Mayer (UGent) , Teresa Maia (UGent) , Katie Boucher (UGent) , Bart Vandekerckhove (UGent) and Francis Impens (UGent) (2018) Belgian Proteomics Association, Conference abstracts.


text:
The Gift of the Holy Ghost (Dickman)
Music for Children, Solos to Sing, Submitted Music (1998-2006)
I have a gift from my Father above
That speaks to me gently of His fervent love.
I feel the warmth when I ponder and pray.
I can have guidance to show me the way.
When I was baptized a blessing was said
By the Priesthood holders with hands on my head.
"Receive the Holy Ghost" sounded to clear.
I will stay worthy to feel him near.
When I have choices or answers to find,
The still small voice fills my heart and my mind.
When I am frightened or sad or in need,
I can feel peace when his whisperings I heed.
The Holy Ghost is my constant friend
To comfort and bless me to know what is true;
He teaches me in my mind and my heart
And prompts me to know of the good I should do.
Text: Annette W. Dickman
Music: Annette W. Dickman
Album: Submitted Music (1998-2006)
Composition Date: 2000
More Info: CMS 2000


text:
Thank you to Experience Kissimmee for making this welcome dinner at Charley's Steakhouse possible. All opinions are my own.
Looking back, my recent trip to Kissimmee, FL was just a blur. I'm so glad that I took so many pictures that I can look back on to remember everything that we did.
That first day was just crazy. Finish packing up, head out to the airport to say goodbye to the wife and kids and check in, find out that I'm going to miss the connecting flight, and finally touch down to find that, thankfully, my luggage had come in on the first flight. When I finally got to my room at Westgate Vacation Villas, I had just under an hour to get settled, grab a quick shower and shave, iron the wrinkles out of my shirt and pants, and be ready to leave for our welcome dinner at Charley's Steakhouse in Kissimmee. Needless to say, I was feeling a little rushed!
When we did get to Charley's, I could just feel that rush lifted. I could tell right away that the staff was going to take care of everything. I must have been welcomed in four or five times. We walked right in past this incredible grill. This picture is definitely going into my file for future home ideas. I don't care whether it's inside or outside, I am having a grill like this one day. I mean, just look at it. How could anything coming off of that taste bad?
As we continued along, we came to the room that was reserved for us only to find this massive moray eel staring right at us. It is an absolutely beautiful creature.
The kids were just in awe of it. Here, one of the contestants holds her kids up to see. Those kiddos were just sweethearts. It is still hard to believe that that little girl is only three days older than my Sophie.
While the sites of the restaurant and the conversation with the contestants, other bloggers, and contest officials were nice and all, let's be honest, you come to a restaurant for the food. My wife has long told me that I spoil her with my cooking, so any restaurant that I enter is going to be tough to please me. I have to say that Charley's Steakhouse did a nice job. Overall, I was pretty impressed.
The first thing to come out was our appetizer, a plate of pan-fried calamari with mixed peppers served family style. The calamari was cooked perfectly. The breading was crunchy and the squid not at all chewy. The mix of mild and spicy peppers definitely kept the flavors interesting. The best part? Since it was family style, I was able to mooch from the ladies at the end of the table when I realized that they weren't going to finish their serving!
We had a choice of entrees, but, to me, Charley's Steakhouse is, after all, a steakhouse and, with that incredible grill, I just had to give the steak a try. I ordered mine medium rare and, well, I'll just let the picture do the talking.
Now, any good meal deserves a good finish, right? We were afforded a selection of desserts. That's my favorite way to have dessert. It's so hard to make a decision on dessert because the all look so good. I am a key lime pie fanatic, so I headed there right away, but that chocolate cake was so inviting…. I might just have to find an excuse to make one here soon!
Overall, this meal really kicked off the trip with a bang. Good food, good conversations, and no dishes! I think we all went back to the rooms feeling pretty stuffed but supremely satisfied.
How would you kick off your trip to Kissimmee? Leave me a comment and let me know!
Brian is a husband, dad, food, travel, and budgeting blogger and the owner of Simply Budgeted and This Cookin' Dad.
Latest posts by Tonis-Guest (see all)
- Just Escape To The South Seas Island Resort #Travel - April 3, 2016
- Kellie Pickler Talks VeggieTales and Her Role in Beauty and The Beet - March 2, 2015
- Ever Wonder How Capri Sun is Made? #CapriSunMom - March 20, 2014


text:
The survey was conducted on a sample of 1,008 respondents between February 26 and March 3. The data was collected by the Focus polling agency.
"This without doubt demonstrates an ongoing prevailing feeling of trust among the people of Slovakia towards the Czechs," stated Empirica in a commentary accompanying the outcomes of the poll, as quoted by TASR. "It can be presumed that if a similar survey were carried out in the Czech Republic, the results would be similar."
As many as 74 percent of the respondents said that they are in favour of joint projects in the field of the military defence industry, while nearly seven out of 10 people said that they favour an agreement between the Czech and Slovak governments on coordination when supplying their armies with weapons.
In addition, 56 percent of the respondents back the idea of Slovakia and the Czech Republic creating joint forces for missions abroad.
13. May 2015 at 6:12 | Compiled by Spectator staff


text:
Chefs and stout-lovers have known for decades that Guinness' magic doesn't have to stop at the bar. Instead it lends itself to lots of dishes, both savoury and sweet. Bringing dark, malty, roasted notes to bear on everything from coffee to bread, from brownies to cake, the best bit is that if there's any stout remaining after your cooking efforts, you'll just have to polish it off as a reward. We have compiled three of the top dishes that elevate Ireland's favourite drink from a cool refreshment to the essential cooking ingredient. And, in the final recipe, we've had some help from the head chef at Ashford Castle, whose thick slices of Guinness bread have guests rhapsodising on its merits.
Guinness Cake
Smooth and well-balanced (thanks to the sugary sweetness and bitter Guinness playing off against each another), the Guinness Cake can be baked as one big cake or separated to make lots of cupcakes.
Ingredients – Cake
- 250ml Guinness
- 250g unsalted butter
- 75g cocoa powder
- 400g caster sugar
- 140ml sour cream
- 2 large eggs
- 1 tablespoon vanilla extract
- 275g plain flour
- 2½ teaspoons bicarbonate of soda
Ingredients – Frosting
- 300g cream cheese
- 150g icing sugar
- 125ml double cream (or whipping cream)
- Preheat the oven to 180°C.
- Butter and line a 23cm cake tin. Alternatively, use a cupcake/muffin tin for individual Guinness cupcakes.
- Pour the Guinness into a saucepan, add the butter bit by bit and heat until the butter's melted.
- Whisk in the cocoa and sugar.
- Beat the sour cream with the eggs and vanilla and then pour into the pan.
- Whisk in the flour and bicarb.
- Pour the cake batter into the lined tin/tray and bake for 45 minutes to an hour. Leave to cool completely in the tin on a cooling rack, as it is quite a damp cake
When the cake's cold, sit it flat and make the icing.
- Lightly whip the cream cheese until smooth, sieve over the icing sugar and then beat them both together.
- Add the cream and beat again until it makes a spreadable consistency. (tip: this should be more on the thick side than a runny consistency)
- Ice the top of the black cake so that it resembles the head of the pint!
Guinness Stew
The maltiness of Guinness does wonders to an Irish stew's gravy, giving it much richer and deeper flavours. Just remember to season it well – Guinness absorbs thyme's earthy, citrusy notes perfectly and reacts beautifully to a thin spread of fresh black pepper.
- 4 rashers of bacon, cut into small pieces
- 1kg boneless beef
- 1 teaspoon salt
- freshly ground black pepper to taste
- 2 onions, coarsely chopped
- 1/2 teaspoon salt
- 4 cloves garlic, minced
- 500ml Guinness
- 1/4 cup tomato paste
- 4 sprigs fresh thyme
- 3 carrots
- 2 stalks celery
- 1 teaspoon white sugar
- 1/2 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
- 2 1/2 cups chicken stock
- 4 cups mashed potatoes
- Cook bacon in a heavy skillet over medium-high heat. Turn off heat and transfer bacon into a large stew pot, reserving bacon fat in the skillet.
- Season beef chuck cubes generously. Sear in the hot fat on both sides until browned, about 5 minutes. Place beef in stew pot with bacon, leaving fat in skillet. Turn heat down to medium; cook and stir onions in the retained fat in the skillet until lightly browned, 5-8 minutes.
- Cook garlic with onions until soft; pour beer into skillet and stir with a wooden spoon. Pour cooking liquid from skillet into the stew pot. Stir in tomato paste, thyme sprigs, carrots, celery, sugar, black pepper, and enough chicken broth to cover.
- Bring stew to a gentle simmer; reduce heat to low and cover pot. Simmer stew until beef is fork-tender, about 2 hours. Stir stew occasionally and skim fat or foam if desired.
- Remove cover. Bring stew to a low boil and cook until stew has slightly thickened, 15-20 minutes. Remove and discard thyme sprigs and adjust salt and pepper to taste.
Ashford Castle Guinness Bread
Beer breads are often popular but Ashford Castle's receives countless rave reviews. Great toasted, its dark, buttery ways can be dunked in the stew (above) or smothered in grilled hams, melted cheeses and sweet pickles.
- 450g brown flour
- 60g soft butter
- 14g bread soda
- 7g cream of tartare
- 8g salt
- 50g whole egg
- 75g honey
- 375ml Guinness
- Mix all dry ingredients with the butter and honey.
- Add the eggs and buttermilk and mix until all combined.
- Place into a 1kg loaf tin.
- Bake for 50 minutes at 170°C.
- Leave to cool before cutting.


text:
Effective from July 1st, 2016 the amended SOLAS legislation will come into force. As your transport solutions provider, we understand time and ease of use is of pivotal importance to your supply chain. This is why Containerships are introducing a value-added service of being your VGM representative have developed solutions together with our local partners to enable us to offer this VGM service for you as standard.
In the case where the shipper produced VGM proves incorrect or has not been provided with the container on arrival at the export port, the cost per container as per the list above will be debited to the freight payer for the production of a VGM by Containerships.
For any commercial queries please contact your local representative
In most cases, Containerships will weigh every single box before it is loaded on our vessel. This is to ensure your peace of mind that you are complying with this legislation as a shipper.
Containerships can become your representative in order to comply with this regulation amendment. Containerships is in the process of updating its standard bill of lading terms and conditions, in order to avoid further paperwork for you. We will publish our new terms well in advance of 1st July.
What if I want to weigh my own boxes and supply my own VGM?
This is entirely your right to do so, however, you need to keep in mind that Containerships will publish cut off times and dates for receipt of your declaration. If your 'VGM' is received after this cut off your container will not be shipped. In addition, interpretation of the rules may vary between each signatory state, any cost incurred by Containerships as a result of non-compliance will be for the shipper's account.
How do I send my VGM to MacAndrews?
We will be testing in the next few weeks, but we intend to have your VGMs sent to us via EDI or emails and this will be uploaded on our system in line with the booking and Bill of Lading process.
How do I get the Tare Weight?
If you want to apply Method 2 and are using a Containerships container, then Containerships will provide you with the Tare Weight of such container. The Tare Weight can also be found on the CSC plate mounted on the container. Another solution for receiving the Tare Weight is the Containerships stare Weight tool which you can find online under http://apps.MacAndrews.com/TareWeightQueries/
Will anything else change?
Yes, Containerships will have to be more stringent with cut off times to ensure the loaded containers get to the terminal earlier. The Verified Gross Mass (VGM) of the container needs to be provided to the ship's master or his representative and to the terminal or its representative sufficiently in advance for the vessel loading plan. For shipper produced VGM, the cut off time will be 24 hours before the vessel's working day. Please view the latest VGM Policy below.
VGM Tare Weight Web Service
Note: Only information for equipment provided by Containerships is available. Information for equipment owned/provided by other lines or owners is not available from the MacAndrews Web-Service.
Step 1: Open Tare Weight Web-Service in your Browser
Please open the Containerships Tare-Weight query screen in the web-browser of your choice by using the following link: http://apps.MacAndrews.com/TareWeightQueries/
Step 2: Enter Container ID in the input form
Please enter the container ID/number in the input form. The Container number should consist of four letters (Owner Code), a six-digit registration number and a check digit. The system will recognise the owner code, irrespectively if it is entered in capital letters or lower cases and also if you leave out the hyphen between the registration number and the check digit to better support copy and paste.
Step 3: Get your data
After entering the container number, please press the "SEARCH" button. The system will show you the data set for the respective container as shown on the right side.
In very few cases it might happen, that the information displayed is incorrect or the tare weight shown in the system does not match the tare weight shown on the CSC plate on the container. This does not necessarily mean that the tare weight shown in the Web-Service is incorrect as the weight on the CSC plate is the weight considered by the manufacturing company and might change during the lifetime of a container e.g. due to repairs, enhancements etc.
In case you have doubts about the tare weight shown in the Web-Service, please contact your local Containerships representative.
The proposed service (VGM representative) is subject to terms and conditions. In any case, failure to comply with the SOLAS regulations will likely result in extra costs incurred for the shipper's account. All information provided herein is subject to change with or without further notice. All business is undertaken subject to the Containerships bill of lading terms and conditions, valid at the time of booking which may change from time to time.


text:
Contact Us
Moonlight Inn & Suites
350 Moonlight Avenue. Sudbury,
Ontario, Canada P3B 3W3
Ontario, Canada P3B 3W3
Toll free: 1-800-424-0321
Phone: (705) 566-0321
Phone: (705) 566-0321
Individual booking: [email protected]
Your Sudbury Canada Hotel
Come visit us in Moonlight Inn & Suites Sudbury, Canada treats both vacation and business travelers to exceptional lodging and an array of amenities. Add value to your trip to Sudbury, Canada by booking one of our extended stay packages. Make your reservation today online or by phone.