Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[scriver]

Besides being much more dangerous, you mean?

Furthermore, there is whole lot of difference between wanting to put your face in the wind and being forced to sit in the wind for the whole trip.

[GlyphGryph]

Enclosed container, supposedly. Also, I'm not sure what he uses for fastening, but done properly (no clue if he did it properly), it's not really dangerous. Not appreciably more dangerous than taking him along in the car trip at all.

Of course, that's a whole lot of supposition. I don't know the full details. I'm just saying its certainly possible to have a roof top kennel that leaves the dog better off than if he was in a back of the vehicle kennel.

[scriver]

Enclosed container, supposedly.
 

That latter part was responding more to your "my dog liked hanging out the window so he would have liked being in the wind on the roof too" statement than having anything to do with the  the Mitt situation.

Also, I'm not sure what he uses for fastening, but done properly (no clue if he did it properly), it's not really dangerous. Not appreciably more dangerous than taking him along in the car trip at all.

Of course, that's a whole lot of supposition. I don't know the full details. I'm just saying its certainly possible to have a roof top kennel that leaves the dog better off than if he was in a back of the vehicle kennel.

I really doubt he welded the kennel stuck to or had the roof customized to have a secure lock mechanism. There's a reason we pack baggage on the roof, not people (or animals). It's not safer than inside the car.

[GlyphGryph]

I've seen quite a few vehicles with roof object locking mechanisms. And its not like we're talking about someone who can't afford it.

And as for the open cage, I wouldn't do that for anything more than short rides. But I might do it for short rides.

Definitely not a trip to Ontario! I'm sure any enjoyment for the dog would wear off pretty quickly.

Would the back of a pickup or a trailer have been acceptable, assuming is was securely fastened?

[scriver]

You mean secured as in hooked unto the car? Those are already dangerous as well, I wouldn't do it personally unless the animal was too big to fit in the car. Or too big a number. And I'd drive really, really slow instead of just overly careful.

As for a pick-up-like, I can't say, I don't know how nun you can secure things to the back of it. Overall, if I wouldn't put a human through it, I certainly wouldn't put an animal through it either

[Levi]

I was entertained a bit by this today:  http://sopatrack.com/

It shows which congressmen vote for whoever gives them money.  They almost all do, but interestingly the top offenders are all republicans, and the congressmen who most often vote against big money seem to be democrats.

[Truean]

http://news.yahoo.com/karzai-wants-least-2-billion-us-141710318.html

....

[start rant] Horrid timing aside, what is this inefficient de facto "protectorate state" thing we're doing? We've been propping up South Korea for over half a century, but have roughly under 1/3 the troops there and the Koreans have stepped up with their very own armed forces and intel. network. Don't give me that "we can't tell which ones are which and it's a terrible situation" cause we couldn't tell the difference between North and South Korean citizens either and "Dear Leader" was a nutjob ready to send more troops than we had bullets against us. [/end rant]

We are handling this FUBAR and I foresee SNAFU.

[Frumple]

... shouldn't those acronyms be reversed in placement? We have a SNAFU just waiting to go even more FUBAR.

That said, everything else aside, I liked the afghan prez's sentiment. "Get it in writing" is pretty much always a good idea.

[Truean]

... shouldn't those acronyms be reversed in placement? We have a SNAFU just waiting to go even more FUBAR.

That said, everything else aside, I liked the afghan prez's sentiment. "Get it in writing" is pretty much always a good idea.

Mine is the more pessimistic acronym placement, though either is acceptable.

I do not find the prospect of just handing over at least $2 Billion/year over to "Friendly" politicians good. Generally, any foreign politicians you have to refer to as "friendly" are dubiously so as a rule. Moreover he's coming off as "entitled" when but-for us he wouldn't be in power currently. This is a tactical blunder on his part at best.

In other news:
"High Court Rejects Former Enron Chief's Latest Appeal

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear the latest appeal by Jeffrey Skilling, the former chief executive of Enron serving a 24-year sentence in a federal prison for his role in the energy company's collapse. Without comment, the justices refused to grant Skilling's challenge to a federal appeals court ruling that any error committed by the trial judge was "harmless.""

[GlyphGryph]

Overall, if I wouldn't put a human through it, I certainly wouldn't put an animal through it either

Yes... I see...
Well, lets just say I'm... not sure that's the best standard. To use. If you care about the animals safety.

Not that I've strapped anyone to the roof with a couple ropes. Or stuck a couple people in the trunk for a somewhat long car ride. Or had them unsecured in the back of a pickup with explicit instructions to "keep their heads down".

That would be silly. Haha.

[Kilroy the Grand]

Overall, if I wouldn't put a human through it, I certainly wouldn't put an animal through it either

Yes... I see...
Well, lets just say I'm... not sure that's the best standard. To use. If you care about the animals safety.

Not that I've strapped anyone to the roof with a couple ropes. Or stuck a couple people in the trunk for a somewhat long car ride. Or had them unsecured in the back of a pickup with explicit instructions to "keep their heads down".

That would be silly. Haha.

You can just say it,  I've had most of those things happen to me. The truck thing isn't even worth mentioning if you lived in the country.

[GlyphGryph]

In the country you don't have to tell them to keep their heads down.

[Frumple]

I do not find the prospect of just handing over at least $2 Billion/year over to "Friendly" politicians good. Generally, any foreign politicians you have to refer to as "friendly" are dubiously so as a rule. Moreover he's coming off as "entitled" when but-for us he wouldn't be in power currently. This is a tactical blunder on his part at best.

Looking at the article again, it seems less like it's for Karzi (or "friendly politicians") specifically and more for... well, the specific mention was "security," so presumably reestablishment (or further build up) of martial power (for law enforcement, counter-insurgency work, etc.) by the government.

It'd depend on what exactly the money was going to, really. I can sorta' see a bit of entitlement involved if it was for rebuilding some of the mess we made over there.

I'd personally need a hell of a lot more details and background information before I could say anything negative about what the guy was saying. Will say that the article itself was incredibly shittily written. Seemed to be aiming more to rabble rouse than provide actual information

[Descan]

The way the article is worded, it sounds like the U.S. was planning to informally give him more than 2 billion but he wants to lessen the amount but make it official? Hard to tell.

[alway]

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/04/201241682318260912.html
Massive quantities of mutant and dying seafood animals being found in the Gulf, with the oil spill being the likely cause. Fish with lesions, crabs without claws, shrimp without eyes or eye sockets, ect.

"At the height of the last white shrimp season, in September, one of our friends caught 400 pounds of these," Kuhns told Al Jazeera while showing a sample of the eyeless shrimp.

According to Kuhns, at least 50 per cent of the shrimp caught in that period in Barataria Bay, a popular shrimping area that was heavily impacted by BP's oil and dispersants, were eyeless. Kuhns added: "Disturbingly, not only do the shrimp lack eyes, they even lack eye sockets."

"Some shrimpers are catching these out in the open Gulf [of Mexico]," she added, "They are also catching them in Alabama and Mississippi. We are also finding eyeless crabs, crabs with their shells soft instead of hard, full grown crabs that are one-fifth their normal size, clawless crabs, and crabs with shells that don't have their usual spikes … they look like they've been burned off by chemicals."

While on a shrimp boat in Mobile Bay with Sidney Schwartz, the fourth-generation fisherman said that he had seen shrimp with defects on their gills, and "their shells missing around their gills and head".

"We've fished here all our lives and have never seen anything like this," he added.

Ladner has also seen crates of blue crabs, all of which were lacking at least one of their claws.

Darla Rooks, a lifelong fisherperson from Port Sulfur, Louisiana, told Al Jazeera she is finding crabs "with holes in their shells, shells with all the points burned off so all the spikes on their shells and claws are gone, misshapen shells, and crabs that are dying from within … they are still alive, but you open them up and they smell like they've been dead for a week".

Rooks is also finding eyeless shrimp, shrimp with abnormal growths, female shrimp with their babies still attached to them, and shrimp with oiled gills.

"We also seeing eyeless fish, and fish lacking even eye-sockets, and fish with lesions, fish without covers over their gills, and others with large pink masses hanging off their eyes and gills."

Rooks, who grew up fishing with her parents, said she had never seen such things in these waters, and her seafood catch last year was "ten per cent what it normally is".

"I've never seen this," he said, a statement Al Jazeera heard from every scientist, fisherman, and seafood processor we spoke with about the seafood deformities.