Monday, 28 June 2010
The Red Eyes - I Get Wild / Wild Gravity
This is a first time cover recording for The Red Eyes who are known for their large repertoir of original material, including the anthem Highplace which was recently nominated in the shortlist for the 2009 Triple J Hottest 100.
Nonetheless, I Get Wild / Wild Gravity – a B-side track from the Talking Heads’ 1983 album Speaking in Tongues – was an easy choice for the band who count Talking Heads as up among the top of their varied list of musical influences. The tempo and style of the track lends itself to the Dub/Reggae groove of The Red Eyes and the song has quickly become a crowd pleaser in their massive live show.
‘The Red Eyes’ fan base flock to hear the Melbourne outfit’s party dub sound.’ (Rolling Stone Australia, April 2007) ‘…such is the power of top-shelf dub. True to the spirit and messages of the music’s long history, the Red Eyes are breathing new life into dub in Australia and are doing it with soul and authenticity.’ (In The Mix) ‘Say what you like about John Butler, he has backed an absolute winner in the form of the Red-Eyes…’ (Beat Magazine)
http://thered-eyes.com/
A New Generation of Natural Gas Drilling Is Endangering Communities From the Rockies to New York
HERE
This recently released film looks to be essential viewing, the current information available about the environmental repercussions of "Fracking" as an industrial extraction method leave little to be desired. As mentioned in the article, the secrecy over ingredients used in the process, the involvement of habitual offender,"Short-Cut" Halliburton(already under a cloud for the BP Gulf Disaster), in the industry can only maximise concern. Yet another example of industry failing to look at all the equations before putting its big foot in the pond. And yes, this is the water supply that is being poisoned by industry for money, let's hope they can chop all that money up and hopefully liquify enough for a drink in the future. If this doesn't rank as Managerment Stupidity, I certainly don't know what does, and the sooner these knuckleheads are held accountable the better.....beeden
We Spend $1 Billion/Year Fighting Each al Qaeda Member in Afghanistan
Think Progress does the math on Panetta’s admission that there are just 100 al Qaeda members in Afghanistan, and discovers we’ve got 1,000 American troops in Afghanistan for each al Qaeda member.
This sort of adds a new twist to that old Einstein quip about the definition of insanity being doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Because we’re doing the same thing over and over again–at a cost of $1 billion a year per nominal opponent–and expecting anything other than bankruptcy.
The U.S. has committed nearly 100,000 troops to the mission in Afghanistan. ABC This Week host Jake Tapper asked CIA Director Leon Panetta how big is the al Qaeda threat that the soldiers are combating:
The 100,000 U.S. forces that have been tasked to dismantle the 100 or so al Qaeda members — a ratio of 1000:1 — is complicated by the fact that we are also engaged in operations going after the Taliban leadership.TAPPER: How many Al Qaeda, do you think, are in Afghanistan?
PANETTA: I think the estimate on the number of Al Qaeda is actually relatively small. I think at most, we’re looking at 50 to 100, maybe less. It’s in that vicinity. There’s no question that the main location of Al Qaeda is in the tribal areas of Pakistan.
Now let me add to their math. Even Afghan war fans admit that it costs $1 million a year–on top of things like salary–to support a US service member in Afghanistan.
So 1,000 US troops per al Qaeda member, at a cost of $1 million each. That’s $1 billion a year we spend for each al Qaeda member to fight our war in Afghanistan.Michael O’Hanlon, a defense analyst at the Brookings Institution, says one useful way to break down these huge numbers is to look at how much it costs to send just one soldier to war.
“We are at a point where it’s unbelievably costing us close to a million dollars, in additional costs — above and beyond salaries and the equipment that’s already in the inventory — per soldier or Marine per year,” he says.
Fighting in Afghanistan means fighting in one of the most remote regions on Earth, and that plays a large role in the seemingly astronomical figure.
Dov Zakheim, a former chief financial officer for the Defense Department, says the $1 million price tag includes getting the soldier to Afghanistan, getting his equipment to Afghanistan, and moving the soldier around once in the country.
This sort of adds a new twist to that old Einstein quip about the definition of insanity being doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Because we’re doing the same thing over and over again–at a cost of $1 billion a year per nominal opponent–and expecting anything other than bankruptcy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
