British adventurer flies powered paraglider over Everest

Friday, May 18, 2007

British explorer and mountaineer Edward “Bear” Grylls, has set a new altitude record by piloting a powered paraglider above Mount Everest reaching 29,494ft (8,990m). He and his fellow pilot, Giles Cardozo, who had invented and developed the parajet engine, set out on their attempt from the Himalayan village of Pheriche (altitude 14,435ft (4,400m)) in the early morning of 14th May.

Grylls, 33, is a mountaineer, best selling author and television presenter who spent three years with the elite British Special Air Service (“SAS”) forces. During this time he was involved in a horrific parachuting accident in which he broke his back in three places, almost severing his spinal cord. Remarkably, in 1998, after months of rehabilitation, he became at 23, the youngest British climber to scale Mount Everest and return alive.

Cardozo is considered to be one of the top paragliding pilots in the world, and it is reported that he and Grylls first came up with the idea for the attempt about a year ago when he had invented the engine that would take them up the mountain.

Grylls and Cardozo flew their paragliders together to 28,001ft (8,353m) surviving temperatures of minus 76°F (-60°C) and dangerously low oxygen levels, when a fault developed in Cardozo’s engine, and he had to abort his attempt just 984ft (300m) below the summit. Grylls went on to reach his record height at 09.33 local time. He had originally intended to cross the Mountain but turned back to base camp fearing that he might be arrested if he entered Chinese airspace.

On his return to Kathmandu, Grylls voiced his feelings of loneliness and exhilaration:

When Giles descended and I found myself alone so high up I was feeling a lot more vulnerable but I knew the weather and wind conditions were perfect. It was so amazing to look into Nepal, India and Tibet and all of a sudden these great Himalayan giants looked so tiny. It was a very special moment when I realised that there was no mountain in the world above me, especially after having stood on the top of the world myself nine years ago.
 

The attempt was sponsored by British technology and engineering group GKN. The project, GKN Mission Everest, raised £500,000 (approximately $1m) for Global Angels, a charity helping children in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

In a separate incident, a German paragliding champion has survived being sucked up by a storm to a height of 32,612ft (9,940m) whilst preparing for a world paragliding championship in Manilla, New South Wales, Australia.

Ewa Wisnierska, 35, the 2005 World Cup paragliding winner, lost consciousness and was covered in ice and battered by orange-sized hailstones as she was pulled upwards by the sudden tornado-like storm which she had been attempting to skirt. After regaining consciousness as she descended she was able to make contact with her ground team which had been tracking her by her GPS equipment, and landed safely 40 miles (60km) from where she took off.

Remarkably she spent only an hour in hospital after her experience, being treated for frostbite and blistering to her face and ears.

A fellow competitor, 42 year old Chinese man, He Zhongpin, who was also caught up in the storm, was not so fortunate and died from lack of oxygen and the extreme cold.

Posted in Uncategorized

Haitian earthquake: in pictures

Friday, January 15, 2010

Haiti was hit by a heavy earthquake with a magnitude of 7.0 on Tuesday, killing an unknown number of people, and destroying up to ten percent of buildings in the capital, Port-au-Prince.

No official death toll has been released as of yet, although the United Nations says that up to fifty thousand people may potentially have been killed. An estimated 300,000 more were left without homes.

In a special photo report, Wikinews looks at the extensive damage caused by the disaster.


To find more information about a certain image or to enlarge it, click it. For an in-depth textual report on the same subject, please see Haiti relief efforts: in depth.

Posted in Uncategorized

Universal and FOX are shutting down “Firefly” t-shirt sites

Thursday, November 2, 2006

Universal Studios and Fox Broadcasting are sending cease-and-desist letters to websites that offer t-shirts related to the television program Firefly and its sequel film Serenity.

One cease and desist letter, for example, reads:

“This firm represents Universal Studios Licensing, LLLP (“Universal”). As you presumably are aware, Universal owns the valuable copyrights and intellectual property in and to an assortment the theatrical motion picture “Serenity” and all images contained therein (“the Universal Property”). [See, e.g., Walt Disney Productions v. Filmation Associates, 628 F.Supp. 871, 876, 878, 879-80 (C.D. Cal. 1986) (defendant’s use of plaintiff’s protected images in defendant’s promotional trailer, brochures and other materials found infringing)].”

Affected by the cease-and-desist letters is CaféPress, a website which enables people to open their own store — they have since stopped allowing people to search for Firefly merchandise.

Firefly premiered and was cancelled in 2002 after 11 episodes aired. Many fans who watched and enjoyed the short-lived show were part of a cult following that encouraged Joss Whedon to create a film called “Serenity” in 2005. There are no current plans for a sequel or the revival of the Firefly series.

Posted in Uncategorized

Pest Control San Diego – Curbing The Infestation In The City Of San Diego

byalex

The city of San Diego is indeed truly beautiful. It is one city in the state of California that truly stands out for its aesthetic quality and the influx of tourists to the city is the proof of that. There are many reasons for why the city truly stands out from a visual standpoint. One of those reasons is because the city has managed to combine its natural beauty with a very appealing urban appearance.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x8UgQ-7S_o[/youtube]

This combination has really served the city well and has allowed for it to really shine and be appreciated better by people. There is however a concern that presents itself to all places and to all cities and unfortunately even the paradise like locale of San Diego is not safe from it. This concern is none other than the invasion of that much reviled part of the natural world, the pests.

The term pest can be one that is open to interpretation. From a more philosophical perspective, a pest is anything that causes one harm or discomfort. A pest is a term that is often used to describe someone that is a bother, a nuisance or just simply a problem. The pest in this cases however not some profound way to phrase enemy is and is instead meant to identify those that invade where they should not and those that disrupt where they are not welcome.

The pest is in this case an insect or more specifically those insects that find their way in to the dominions of people and make them comfortable despite the fact that they were not invited to do so. These pests truly are a bother and they can be quite troublesome for people to deal with. There are even certain instances where these pests can be downright dangerous. It is in those times when the threat of pests becomes evident and disruptive, that calling for pest control San Diego would be the next best move.

The business of pest control is not exactly a glamorous one but it is one that needs to be done. The elimination of these unwelcome parasites is a very serious job and it is important that it be left up to the professionals so as to avoid any unfortunate occurrences. Pests can cause people some very serious problems and they must be met with firm and swift action to neutralize the threat and ensure that the pest nightmare will end.

The invasion of the pest population can be cause for real trouble and when that happens there is only one business to turn to forpest control San Diego. Antac Pest Control will eliminate the pests and give people that peace of mind brought by a pest free environment.

JFK airport terminal evacuated due to suspicious package

Sunday, July 1, 2007

According to reports, a terminal at John F. Kennedy International Airport located in New York, New York was evacuated after authorities found a suspicious package outside the main American Airlines terminal.

Reports say that the package was found outside the terminal on a street curb just before 10:30 a.m. (eastern time), and turned out to be men’s cologne.

“There was a suspicious package that was found at 10:20 a.m. curbside at Terminal 9, which is American Airlines. It turned out to be a package containing cologne,” said Steve Coleman, a spokesman for American Airlines.

At approximately 11:35 a.m. (eastern time) authorities began to let passengers back into the terminal, giving it the all clear.

No flights were affected by the incident.

The United States had raised the presence of police and bomb sniffing dogs at airports across the U.S. after a terrorist attack in Glasgow, Scotland.

Posted in Uncategorized

Prince Laurent of Belgium testifies in marine fraud case

Tuesday, January 9, 2007

This article features in a News Brief from Audio Wikinews:

Prince Laurent of Belgium, the youngest son of King Albert II of Belgium, has been questioned last night by the federal police and is attending today’s court session in Hasselt in a marine fraud case that has gripped Belgian media since last December. He arrived in a Smart car and was accompanied by his lawyer and former politician Fred Erdman. The case turns around funds of the Belgian Navy that have been used to beautify the Prince’s villa in Tervuren. The Prince is expected to testify this afternoon.

In total, 2.2 million was supposedly diverted from the marine’s purchasing services using false invoices. Roughly € 185 000 was allegedly used to paint the Prince’s villa, install lights in the garden, for the purchase of carpet and furniture, and for his secretariat and for animal clinics the Prince supports via his Foundation. Twelve marine officers and contractors are being accused of document fraud, collusion, bribery, embezzlement of government money etc. and could face 10 years in prison. The money was part of the budget that wasn’t spent at the end of the year, and which would flow back to the government if the army didn’t spend it.

The Prince, who is also an officer in the navy, is being treated only as a witness in this case, there have been no charges against him. The Attorney General in Hasselt Marc Rubens has said that there are no elements in the investigation that point to the fact that Laurent was aware of the affair, however several accused have contested this in the press. Technically, the villa is not the property of the Prince himself, but of the Royal Gift, which manages the real property of the Royal Family.

During his interview by the police last night, Prince Laurent stated that he needed funds to renovate his villa, and that Noël Vaessen, his adviser, told him the Navy could help him. The Prince stated that he thought it was legal, and that he had no reason to doubt his adviser.

Ex-Colonel Noël Vaessen was an adviser of the Prince between 1993 and 1999. Vaessen has declared in the media during the last month that the Prince actively participated in the fraud, and that he fears a cover-up. He said that the Prince was a demanding party in the operation, and that “he knew that we were arranging things to make his life and his work as comfortable as possible.” According to Vaessen, the Prince was in need of money to support a royal lifestyle, and “didn’t even have enough money to buy food.”

In 2001, Vaessen was discharged with honour from the army “for medical reasons”, but Defence Minister André Flahaut is investigating if there was no agreement to give him his pension in exchange for the fact that he wouldn’t incriminate the Prince. Vaessen also accused the Prince of other things, such as racing against the high-speed train TGV on a French highway. He has also incriminated Admiral Herteleer. Captain Johan Claeys, one of the accused, studied with the Prince and worked at the facturation services of the Navy in 1998 and 1999. One of the accused contractors, Marc Luypaerts, has told the press that the judge responsible for the investigation in Hasselt had forbidden him to speak about Prince Laurent.

Laurent’s status as a Prince has several judicial consequences for the trial. In Belgium, it’s against the law to incriminate the Royal Family during a trial. Also, the Prince is protected from judicial pursuit because he is also a Senator by law. Justice Minister Laurette Onkelinx has issued a Royal Decrete, which the King has signed while on holiday in Napels, which would make it possible for Princes to testify in a trial.

However, Public Prosecutor Erwin Steyls has chosen to have Laurent interrogated by the police last night in Hasselt. This was the first time during the last six years of the inquiry that the Prince was questioned. Today in the court, the Prosecutor defended the act of having him questioned outside the trial, saying that there were several procedural issues. First, the subpoena for the Prince wasn’t issued in time to be legal. Second, the details of the protocol to hear the Prince in court were not explained in the recent Royal Decrete, making it worthless -something Minister Onkelickx denied. Thirdly, nobody can be forced to testify against himself, and if the Prince were to make false statements under oath, he could only be sued for perjury. However, the court has decided to let him testify anyway this afternoon.

Quote

Nobody is above the law and the Justice Department must be able to complete its task in full independence. When the courts find embezzlements, it seems fair to me that they would be compensated by anyone who profited from them.

During the last month, the case has caused a several spin-off discussions in Belgium. One of the surprises during this period was the King’s Christmas Message, in which he referred to the case. The regional governments are now investigating and discussing their donations to the IRGT/KINT, an environmental organisation supported by Prince Laurent. But there is also an ongoing debate over the position of the Monarchy in Belgium. Some politicians are suggesting to limit the role of the Monarchy, and other think that only the King and Queen, the Crown Prince or Princess and the widow(er) of the King or Queen should receive state funding.

Posted in Uncategorized

Top Shipping Options For Moving Abroad

byAlma Abell

Moving house is always a large ordeal, and moving internationally even more so. As well as your airline and where you are going to live, you will also need to consider how you will move your possessions to a new country, particularly if you are moving overseas. This quick guide will explain to you the options and help you decide which one to choose:

1. Moving Companya

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u8Q54I9Wwk[/youtube]

If you are moving within the Americas, international moving companies such as Armstrong Relocation – Dallas is probably your best option. Since airlines charge by weight, it is expensive to send large packages by air but moving them by road is much more affordable.

2. Shipping

If delivery by truck isn’t possible, you will have to choose between air and sea freight. This can be another tough choice to make. Universal Cargo says that it all depends on whether you need speed or to save money. Air transport is more expensive and calculated by weight but is much faster. Sea freight saves a lot of money but depending on distance, it can take months for shipments to arrive.

3. Do it Yourself

This is a great cost saving method, transporting possessions either in a U-Haul, a rented truck, or even using an airline’s baggage allowance, which can be as high as 30kg per bag on some airlines. The downside is that it is much more limiting and only works for small loads. You may have to leave a lot of things behind or repurchase them in your new country. If you have a larger load or are more concerned with safety, consider using international moving companies instead.

While there are several options for international haulage and each one has their own advantages and disadvantages, looking into all of them and deciding on which one is best for your move will ensure all your possessions reach your new home so you can begin your new life.

Judge orders residents and city to come to agreement on partially collapsed building in Buffalo, New York

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Buffalo, New York —Judge Justice Christopher Burns of the New York State Supreme Court has ordered a halt to an emergency demolition on a 19th century stable and livery on 428-430 Jersey Street in Buffalo, New York that partially collapsed on Wednesday June 11, initially causing at least 15 homes to be evacuated. At least two homes remain evacuated.

Burns orders that both the city and the group Save The Livery (www.savethelivery.com) have to come to an agreement on what to do with the building, and try to work out ways of saving at least some portions if it including the facade, side walls and a lift tower. Save The Livery is comprised of concerned area residents who have grown to love the building’s historic and unique character. On June 14, they won a temporary restraining order to stop demolition. The court ruled that the city was only allowed to remove material in immediate danger to residents and pedestrians, but stated that the demolition could only be performed with “hand tools.” The court also ordered that any rubble which had fallen into neighboring yards when the building collapsed, to be removed.

“It is in the interest of the city to have a safe environment–but also important to maintain a sense of historical preservation,” stated Burns in his ruling. Burns has given the sides until tomorrow (Friday June 20) to come to an agreement and has ordered both parties to return to court at 9:30 a.m. (eastern time) “sharp.” Activists of Save The Livery urge supporters of the stable to “fill the courtroom” to show “continued and ongoing support.” The hearing is scheduled to take place at 25 Delaware Avenue in the Supreme Court building, 3rd Floor, trial part 19.

Currently the building is owned by Bob Freudenheim who has several building violations against him because of the buildings poor condition. He has received at least five violations in three months and residents who live near the building state that Freudenheim should be “100% responsible” for his actions. Many are afraid that if the building is demolished, Freudenheim’s charges of neglect will be abolished.

On June 17, developer and CEO of Savarino Companies, Sam Savarino was at the site of the stable, discussing the building with residents and preservationists. In 2006, Savarino proposed and planned The Elmwood Village Hotel, a ‘botique’ hotel on the Southeast corner of Elmwood and Forest Avenues. The project was later withdrawn after residents filed a lawsuit against Savarino and the city. Wikinews extensively covered the story, and contacted Savarino for his professional opinion on the building.

“[I would] love to see it preserved. I was there to see if there was anything we could do to help, to see if anything can be salvaged. I just want to see the right thing happen, and so does the city,” stated Savarino to Wikinews who added that he was allowed inside the building for a brief period.

“The side walls are beyond repair. The roof has rotted and it could come down at any time,” added Savarino who also said that the building “below the second floor appears to be stable.” He also states that the back wall of the building, which borders several homes, appears to be intact.

“Eliminating the back wall could be a problem for the neighbors. It is not unreasonable to leave at least 12 feet” of the back wall standing, added Savarino.

Savarino did not say if he was interested in buying the property, but did state, “I am sure there are a couple of people interested” in buying the property. On Thursday, Buffalo News reported that a “businessman” might be interested in purchasing the property, though Wikinews is not able to independently confirm the report. Savarino says that with the property still slated for emergency demolition, a potential buyer could face tax fees of nearly US$300,000.

Freudenheim gave the city permission to demolish the building on Thursday June 12 during an emergency Preservation Board meeting, because he would not be “rehabilitating the building anytime soon.” Freudenheim, along with his wife Nina, were part-owners of the Hotel Lenox at 140 North Street in Buffalo and were advocates to stop the Elmwood Village Hotel. They also financially supported a lawsuit in an attempt to stop the hotel from being built. Though it is not known exactly how long Freudenheim has owned the stable, Wikinews has learned that he was the owner while fighting to stop the hotel from being built. Residents say that he has been the owner for at least 22 years.

The building was first owned by a company called White Bros. and was used as a stable for a farm which once covered the land around the building for several blocks. The Buffalo Fire Department believes the building was built around 1814, while the city property database states it was built in 1870. Servants and workers of the farm were housed inside resident quarters situated at the rear of the building on what is now Summer Street, but are now cottages where area residents currently reside. Some date as far back as 1829.

At about 1950, the stable was converted into an automobile body shop and gasoline station.A property record search showed that in 1950 at least four fuel storage tanks were installed on the property. Two are listed as 550 square feet while the other two are 2,000 square feet. All of the tanks are designated as a TK4, which New York State says is used for “below ground horizontal bulk fuel storage.” The cost of installing a tank of that nature according to the state, at that time, included the tank itself, “excavation and backfill,” but did not include “the piping, ballast, or hold-down slab orring.” It is not known if the tanks are still on the property, but residents are concerned the city was not taking the precautions to find out.

Posted in Uncategorized

Invited or not, news outlets criticize White House decision to pick and choose their peers

Monday, February 27, 2017

On Friday White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer held an informal “gaggle” press briefing but made a point of excluding certain news outlets. The White House’s decision has drawn ire from across the field, including organizations invited to the briefing, such as Fox News and The Wall Street Journal.

The New York Times and CNN, as well as the BBC, The New York Daily News, Al Jazeera, the LA Times, BuzzFeed, The Hill, and The Daily Mail, were all barred from attending the meeting, while Reuters, NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox News, Bloomberg, and the heavily conservative news outlets Breitbart News, One America News Network, and The Washington Times were admitted. Time, the Associated Press, and some other outlets were invited to the briefing but refused to attend in protest.

Spicer held the meeting in his office rather than the usual briefing room. He told the press the smaller gathering was because Trump had already made a large speech earlier in the day. “We want to make sure we answer your questions, but we don’t need to do everything on camera every day.” However, he also criticized media coverage of the Trump administration, which President Trump has cited as unfair. “We’re going to aggressively push back,” one reporter recorded him saying at the gaggle. “We’re just not going to sit back and let, you know, false narratives, false stories, inaccurate facts get out there.”

This meeting took place the day after CNN issued a report claiming the White House had asked high-level employees at the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation to rebut a story in The New York Times about the Trump administration’s alleged ties with Russia and Vladimir Putin.

“Apparently this is how they retaliate when you report facts they don’t like. We’ll keep reporting regardless,” said CNN in a statement.

“Nothing like this has ever happened at the White House in our long history of covering multiple administrations of different parties,” said New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet. “We strongly protest the exclusion of The New York Times and the other news organizations. Free media access to a transparent government is obviously of crucial national interest.”

“While we strongly object to the White House’s apparent attempt to punish news outlets whose coverage it does not like,” said Buzzfeed editor-in-chief Ben Smith, “we won’t let these latest antics distract us from the work of continuing to cover this administration fairly and aggressively.”

BBC bureau chief Paul Denahar was more formal: “We understand there may be occasions when, due to space or circumstances, the White House restricts press events to the established pool. However, what happened today did not fit into that pattern. On this occasion selected media were allowed to attend the briefing and the selected media, including the BBC, were not.”

National Review contributor David French also criticized the decision: “The only reason to exclude a news organization from a press briefing should be space available, with space allocated on a viewpoint-neutral basis. […] It’s one thing to bash the press. It’s another thing entirely to take steps to deny access to disfavored outlets. When it comes to access, Trump needs to be better than Obama, not worse.” He combined these remarks with a discussion of the Obama administration’s relationship with Fox News.

Some of the news organizations invited to Spicer’s meeting also opposed the exclusion of their peers:

“Some at CNN and New York Times stood with Fox News when the Obama admin attacked us and tried to exclude us,” said Fox anchor Bret Baier via Twitter, “a White House gaggle should be open to all credentialed orgs.”

The Wall Street Journal strongly objects to the White House’s decision to bar certain media outlets from today’s gaggle,” added a representative for the newspaper. “Had we known at the time, we would not have participated and we will not participate in such closed briefings in the future.”

The White House Correspondents’ Association took a milder view: “We’re not happy with how things went today,” said association president Jeff Mason. “I don’t think that people should rush to judgment to suggest that this is the start of a big crackdown on media access.”

Donald Trump has stated the mainstream media portrayed the first month of his presidency unfairly, calling some of their reports “fake news” and the press themselves the “enemy of the people” and insisting they refrain from using anonymous sources. “I’m against the people that make up stories and make up sources,” he told the Conservative Political Action Committee in Washington D.C.

“President Trump’s calls for an end to anonymous sources was alarming. It is not the job of political leaders to determine how journalists should conduct their work, and sets a terrible example for the rest of the world, where sources often must remain anonymous to preserve their own lives,” said Joel Simon of the Committee to Protect Journalists.

Posted in Uncategorized