The seaside cypress believed to have inspired the fanciful Truffula trees of Dr. Seuss’ classic 1971 children’s tale "The Lorax" has toppled in Southern California.
The Monterey cypress stood 80 to 100 years in Ellen Browning Scripps Park in San Diego’s La Jolla community before it fell Thursday, city officials said Monday.
"It’s an iconic tree, a beloved tree," said Timothy W. Graham, a San Diego city spokesman.
La Jolla was home to Dr. Seuss, author and illustrator Theodor Seuss Geisel, for more than 40 years, from 1948 until his death in 1991 at 87. In Geisel’s hands, the cypress with its long, sinewy trunk and densely clumped canopy became the cotton candy-hued Truffula. The trees’ existence, threatened by logging, finds a protector in The Lorax, whose "I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees" became an environmentalist and pop-culture battle cry.
As detailed in the website LaJolla.com, an environmentally conscious Geisel rankled at development he said threatened his community. That frustration found life in the tale’s villain, the Once-ler, who in the site’s words, "builds a huge, thriving business at the expense of the Truffula trees and the creatures who depend on them."
News of the toppled icon spread over the weekend even as San Diego officials said arborists were trying to understand what happened.
"We’re trying to figure out why the tree fell over," Graham said Monday.
The tree was alive and appeared to be in good health, save for termites, he said. San Diego’s weather was seasonably mild last week. Graham on Monday said that much of the tree has since been removed and that the city is "looking to salvage it somehow."
[New York Magazine] "Wednesday night, get your head right," they shout. "Why settle for a beer when the nutcracker’s here?"
The candy-colored drinks are such a staple of summer in the city that "nutcracker" has become an umbrella term for any sweet, boozy drink that’s sold illegally on the street, out of barber shops or bodegas, and, increasingly, online. Instagram teems with dozens of sellers, with handles like thenutcracker_jacker, nutcrackers_nemos, and kerbyscups, each offering free delivery and video testimonials: "This shit is fire!" says a devotee of brooklyn_nutcrackers. He takes a swig as the cameraman makes the rat-a-tat noise of a machine gun.
While police and community organizers once went to war with nutcrackers, the drinks remain largely unregulated. Now, John Cori, president of the Rockaway Civic Association, watches helplessly as sellers work in teams and reload from cars parked on side streets. "They’re definitely a menace," Cori says, bemoaning lost alcohol sales suffered by concessionaires on the boardwalk. Cops admit they tend to turn a blind eye to nutcrackers, as a spokesperson wrote in a terse email: "This is not something that is tracked by the NYPD."
My point in putting up the article. The gummint can't really effectively regulate anything. Prohibition never worked. The war on drugs never worked. The war on firearms is going to get them something that makes the other failures look tame.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
06/18/2019 8:19 Comments ||
[FoxNews] A Supreme Court ruling in the case of an Alabama man who pleaded guilty to a gun charge could have major implications for the unrelated white-collar case against former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort in New York -- by keeping him exposed to another set of charges, even if he ultimately wins a presidential pardon.
At issue in the Alabama dispute was whether the "dual sovereignty doctrine" -- which allows a person to face both state and federal charges for the same offense -- violates the Fifth Amendment's Double Jeopardy Clause. On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled it does not.
"Although the dual-sovereignty rule is often dubbed an 'exception' to the double jeopardy right, it is not an exception at all," Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the opinion. "On the contrary, it follows from the text that defines that right in the first place."
This clears a path for prosecutors in New York to continue their case against Manafort, who already has been convicted of federal crimes that include bank and tax fraud. Had the court ruled the other way in Monday's case, Gamble v. United States, and eliminated the dual sovereignty doctrine, a pardon from President Trump would have left Manafort free and clear.
But with the doctrine still in place, the New York case complicates matters since presidential pardons only affect federal cases, not state ones.
"No one is beyond the law in New York," Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance said in a statement when the indictment was announced. Manafort is facing 16 counts in that indictment, including conspiracy, residential mortgage fraud, and falsifying business records. The charges are based on allegations similar to ones related to his federal convictions.
Earlier this month, a judge agreed to have Manafort transferred from his federal prison in Pennsylvania to New York's notorious Rikers Island as he awaits trial.
The Gamble case, meanwhile, involved a man who was first convicted of a state gun possession charge following a guilty plea, then indicted in federal court for the same possession. He pleaded guilty in that case too, only to appeal with the argument that the federal charge violated double jeopardy.
Alito explained that the Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits multiple prosecutions for the same "offence," but "an 'offence' is defined by a law, and each law is defined by a sovereign." Therefore, Alito said, "where there are two sovereigns, there are two laws, and two 'offences.'"
Alito's opinion was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Brett Kavanaugh, as well as Chief Justice John Roberts.
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Neil Gorsuch each wrote dissenting opinions, marking the latest case that saw Gorsuch and Kavanaugh -- both Trump nominees -- on opposing sides. Ginsburg viewed the Double Jeopardy Clause as barring "successive prosecutions by parts of the whole USA," noting that the United States and the individual states "compose one people, bound by an overriding Federal Constitution."
Gorsuch pointed to historical interpretations, including those from when the Fifth Amendment was adopted in 1791, which "suggested that a prosecution in any court, so long as the court had jurisdiction over the offense, was enough to bar future re-prosecution in another court."
The conservative justice railed against the idea that a person in the United States should be allowed to be charged for the same thing in two separate cases.
"A free society does not allow its government to try the same individual for the same crime until it’s happy with the result," he said. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Neil Gorsuch each wrote dissenting opinions. From a common-sense, layman's view, it would seem to me that Gorsuch and Bader are correct. Suppose a person has business interests in many States. Many States have laws that parallel Federal law. Suppose, the criminal infraction carries a 1-2 year sentence in the Federal system and a similar penalty in the various States. It doesn't stand to reason that some relatively minor criminal infraction, could be compounded serially across many States and a person could end up spending the rest of his life in prison. 6:20PST Moved to Non WOT
And to Land of the Free at 1:50 pm EDT. — teamwork! :-)
DA Cyrus Vance (a chip off the old block, former SofS Vance) sent a concrete testing company owner to prison on sketchy charges, which were later overturned by an appeals court that ridiculed the prosecution. While in prison, Vance's victim tried to commit suicide.
""No one is beyond the law in New York," Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance said in a statement when the indictment was announced."
And, he added under his breath "Especially Republicans and Trump supporters"
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
06/18/2019 12:12 Comments ||
[AlAhram] Egypt has signed a $500 million settlement with state-owned Israel Electric Corp over a defunct natural gas deal, the Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation (EGPC) and Egyptian Natural Gas (EGAS) said in a statement on Sunday.
The statement said under the agreement signed on Sunday, Egypt will pay the amount over a period of 8-1/2 years in exchange for the Israeli company dropping all other claims resulting from a 2015 arbitration decision.
How fortunate that President Sisi’s government has brought Egypt's economy under control, so they can afford the additional expense.
The International Chamber of Commerce in 2015 ordered Egypt to pay Israel Electric about $1.8 billion in compensation after a deal to export gas to Israel via pipeline collapsed in 2012 after attacks by bully boyz in Egypt’s Sinai peninsula.
Egypt appealed the decision and began discussions on a settlement. The EGPC and EGAS statement said the agreement was reached with government support and as part of efforts to ensure a "conducive investment environment".
Israel’s Delek Drilling and its partner Noble Energy signed a landmark deal early last year to export $15 billion in natural gas from Israeli offshore fields Tamar and Leviathan to a customer in Egypt.
Turnabout being fair play. That’ll support Egypt’s improving economy until their new natural gas fields start delivering.
A Delek Drilling executive said on June 2 that the company hopes to begin commercial sales of natural gas to Egypt by the end of this month. Israeli officials called it the most significant deal to emerge since the neighbours made peace in 1979.
Shooting down the drone solves one problem, but tracing the control signals solves a bigger one. It's basically telemetry. Collect it. Use it to find the controllers. Use it in court.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
06/18/2019 9:36 Comments ||
What's needed is some attention from Rivet Joint. Instead, we get pictures of guys in safety vests standing around a tripod with a microwave projector on it. You either consider interference at a major airfield (civilian or military) a big problem, or you don't. Of course, HM Constabulary considers having to interdict / arrest / prosecute greenies a big problem too.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
06/18/2019 9:43 Comments ||
Hostis humani generis... Latin for "the enemy of all mankind" and a legal term once applied to pirates. This is threatening, by implication, random mass murder of civilians...
List them as a terrorist organization and treat them as such. Put leaders on trail for making terrorist threats. Go after finances and bring them in for questioning and generally make it clear to all that certain things cross the line. Even if they don't get a conviction it might scare off little rich terrorist-chic arsehole from joining up
Best possible use of these people. Every State should do this. They only "reap" from death row. Falun Gong is another pointless heathen cult that deserves no protection or encouragement. A lot of navel gazing and incense, driving people to inactivity and unproductive theology. Soon a religion is formed, and then they want legislation and a say in the State. China doesn't work that way. It can't afford to allow religions and cults to undo what has been built on thousands of corpses and the rubble of churches, mosques and temples. In a way it is only prudent, albeit cruel. By the way, UN hearts bleed for Falun Gong not even knowing or caring WhateverTF it is.
On the plus side ... it probably would not be a horrible way to die, if you are in a situation where they are going to kill you anyway. I had a friend back in Norfolk that harvested organs from organ donors, and they only did it if the patient died a controlled, non-violent death (DNR, etc.), usually under a doctor's supervision. From traumatic deaths like car crashes, they would often just collect bone and skin: they definitely would not harvest organs after a firing squad.
So, if your number comes up, pray that they need organs, not bones and skin.
It's kind of the same rules as road kill. Do a search on Alaska and Road Kill. You'll find they harvest the meat, of a car killed Moose, for example, IF the body cavity has not been ruptured, which would poison everything with nasty stuff from livers, kidneys, intestines, etc.
[BREITBART] The Green party in Germany said it will ban industrial farming to reduce global warming if it comes to power.
The measure was proposed by Katrin Goering-Eckardt, the party’s leader in the Germany parliament, as part of a massive €100 billion project to finance climate initiatives.
For several years, climate change doomsayers have turned their attention to cattle, as a series of reports demonstrated that "livestock emissions" are more dangerous for the environment than automobiles.
A 2016 article at EcoWatch declared that greenhouse gas emissions from livestock account for a higher percentage of total global emissions than the world’s 1.2 billion automobiles.
Whereas the entire transportation sector accounts for only some 14 percent of global emissions, cows produce a remarkable 14.5 to 18 percent of the global total, the article noted.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
06/18/2019 6:55 Comments ||
Cattle being ruminant animals are the only animals that can efficiently convert grass into protein, a large percentage of agricultural land is best or only suited for grassland.Ruminant animals have always been part of our environmental makeup.
Posted by: Bill Borgia6417 ||
06/18/2019 7:17 Comments ||
Not beef farmers Steve. Dairy, yes.
Having grown up with and worked the later I can only observe, industrial feedlots are one fucked up way to treat - raise animals. Not forgetting close proximity diseases making constant overuse of antibiotics highly necessary. Neither of which you should have in your food supply.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.