OBL Blinks
 

Nepotism, probably.

OBL Blinks
 

it's starting to seem like Howard 100 and 101 onSirius except all about me. I'm pretty flattered, like whne spank Myasski first came along.

OBL Blinks
 

Hardly. Basque food rocks!!!

Arzak is my homie.

The bottom line on ANWAR
 

Sebby, for the love of God, just acknowledge that you have no fucking idea what you're talking about. Yes, the statutory definition of "wilderness" precludes roads. People have spent huge sums of money fighting about, e.g., whether some vestigial trail through the backcountry in Utah was a road, because it then defeats wilderness protection, and so on. The point of the statutory definition of wilderness is that it precludes development such as roads.

Probably because you didn't look at all. I used to litigate this stuff, so I'm not going to bother looking either. You can take my word for it.

Why don't you stop pretending that developing ANWR involves "driving one road and one pipeline" into it? You sound like a shill for an oil company. It's ignorant.

The bottom line on ANWAR
 

Why do you ignore the fact that eventually it will be drilled? Are you hoping technology will be advanced so the damage will be lessened? Teleportation of the oil?

The bottom line on ANWAR
 

Your predictions have not yet reached the status of "fact," Hank, and I say that without needed to resort to any semantic trickery about the meaning of that word.

The bottom line on ANWAR
 

I bet I could find a blog saying it's so- would that convince you?

The bottom line on ANWAR
 

Depends on the blog.

The bottom line on ANWAR
 

daily koz will write what you tell him if you pay- will this blog do that?

The bottom line on ANWAR
 

How much you got?

Sexual Harassment Panda Outed!
 

Sexual Harassment Panda Outed!
 

Oh Christ, if my wife sees this I'm dead.

Appropriateness?
 

Venezuela is planning a "buying spree" for military equipment that goes beyond the country's legitimate needs, the State Department said Friday. In recent days, the United States has sought to block proposed sales of military planes and other equipment to Venezuela by Spain and Brazil. . . . The United States has the authority to block the sale because some of the planes' technology is American-made.

It's not clear to me whether the State Dept. position is that they have a problem with Venezuela getting their hands on the particular type(s) of aircraft, or whether they would be OK with them getting one or two, but think twelve is excessive.

The justifications given by the State Dept. spokesman sound to me like the actual reason is the latter, but it seems like the authority we have to block the sale(s) would be premised on the former -- that when the US gov't allows a type of technology to be exported and sold to a foreign government, one of the terms of sale is that they can't sell it (even after incorporation into another product) to a third party without our approval, because we don't want killing machine high technology to get into the wrong hands. But that's an on/off switch, not a rheostat.

Heh. I am such the electrician.

Appropriateness?
 

If this is to be believed, the Administration is trying to deny Venezuela access to commuter aircraft.

Appropriateness?
 

The engine of the C-295 is the PW127 turboprop. It is generic for the 70-seat civilian turboprop market . . . The C-295 is, as you'd expect, the militarized version of the 70-seat flying bus, configurable to haul seats, pallets, or stretchers. They go for about $25,000,000 each.

The engine of the CN-235 is the GE CT7-9C turboprop. It too is generic for the 45-seat civilian turboprop market, . . . The CN-235 is, as you'd expect, the militarized version of the 45-seat flying bus, configurable to haul seats, pallets. They go for about $17,000,000. The C-295 is a stretched derivative of the CN-235 transporter, with characteristic high wing, rear loader design.

$25 million and $17 million seem like quite high prices for used planes that are essentially harmless, but, looking at Boeing's website, it looks like the smallest version of the 737, which seats 110, went for between $45 million and $55 million in 2005.


I would not be surprised if the planes, after being outfitted for the Brazilian or Spanish military or whatever, hadn't had some fancy-pants electronics installed in them that make them not the everyday commuter plane.

ETA on rereading the thingy you linked to, it isn't clear to me that the planes themselves are essentially harmless -- just that the engines, which it says are the US portions that we can restrict the sale of, could be used for perfectly innocent purposes. Well, yeah, like an aircraft carrier could be used just as like a big floating city, and you could like put basketball and tennis courts on the flight deck.

EATA this is the first thing that pulled up when I searched "C-295" -- http://www.c295-tour.com/family.html

Actually I don't even buy that website's story at all -- it appears that Raytheon and EADS (European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company) jointly manufacture it, and Raytheon seems most definitely to be an American company, so there'd be a lot more US tech in a plane they were making than just some engine.

I deem that website full of shit. But I know a lot more about planes now.