Wikinews interviews Democratic candidate for the Texas 6th congressional district special election Daryl Eddings, Sr’s campaign manager

Tuesday, April 20, 2021

Wikinews extended invitations by e-mail on March 23 to multiple candidates running in the Texas’ 6th congressional district special election of May 1 to fill a vacancy left upon the death of Republican congressman Ron Wright. Of them, the office of Democrat Daryl Eddings, Sr. agreed to answer some questions by phone March 30 about their campaigns and policies. The following is the interview with Ms Chatham on behalf of Mr Eddings, Sr.

Eddings is a federal law enforcement officer and senior non-commissioned officer in the US military. His experience as operations officer of an aviation unit in the California National Guard includes working in Los Angeles to control riots sparked by the O. J. Simpson murder case and the police handling of Rodney King, working with drug interdiction teams in Panama and Central America and fighting in the Middle East. He is the founder of Operation Battle Buddy, which has under his leadership kept in touch with over 20 thousand veterans and their families. He was born in California, but moved to Midlothian, Texas. He endeavours to bring “good government, not no government”. Campaign manager Faith Chatham spoke to Wikinews on matters ranging from healthcare to housing.

An Inside Elections poll published on March 18 shows Republican candidate Susan Wright, the widow of Ron Wright, is ahead by 21% followed by Democrat Jana Sanchez with 17% and Republican Jake Ellzey with 8% with a 4.6% margin of error among 450 likely voters. The district is considered “lean Republican” by Inside Elections and voted 51% in favour of Donald Trump in last year’s US presidential election. This is down from 54% for Trump in 2016’s presidential election, the same poll stated.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews_interviews_Democratic_candidate_for_the_Texas_6th_congressional_district_special_election_Daryl_Eddings,_Sr%27s_campaign_manager&oldid=4684113”

Two people die after contracting H1N1 virus, number of swine flu deaths in Scotland rises to 28

Sunday, November 1, 2009

Two people have died in Scotland as a result of the H1N1 virus, or swine flu. The Scottish Government revealed the information today.

Both of the victims were adults. One came from NHS Ayrshire and Arran and the other came from NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde. This announcement from the Scottish National Health Service (or NHS) means that the number of deaths from the virus in the country has now increased to 28.

Nicola Sturgeon, who is the current Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing in Scotland, made a statement about the situation: “I am sorry to have to announce two more deaths and my thoughts are with the patients’ loved ones at this distressing time.” Nicola said that most people who caught the virus would make a full recovery after experiencing mild symptoms of the flu and that both of the victims in this particular case had underlying health problems. Sturgeon, who is also the Deputy First Minister of Scotland said: “The vaccination is being rolled out but please wait until you are invited before visiting your GP for the vaccine.”

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Two_people_die_after_contracting_H1N1_virus,_number_of_swine_flu_deaths_in_Scotland_rises_to_28&oldid=4627125”

McCain and Obama face off in U.S. presidential candidate debate

Sunday, September 28, 2008

The two major party presidential candidates in the US, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, faced each other yesterday in the first TV debate. Despite that McCain had asked to postpone the debate, both were present at the University of Mississippi. The debate, which was moderated by PBSJim Lehrer, was planned to be focused on foreign policy, however due to concerns about the US financial crisis, the debate began focused on economy.

McCain repeatedly referred to his experience, drawing on stories from the past. Often, he joked of his age and at one point seemed to mock his opponent. Obama spoke of mistakes and repeatedly laid out detailed plans.

The debate was widely seen as a draw. A CBS poll conducted after the debate on independent voters found that 38% felt it was a draw, 40% felt Obama had won, and 22% thought that McCain had won. Voters and analysts agreed that Obama had won on the economy, but that McCain had done better on foreign policy issues, which were the focus of the debate. However, Obama had a more substantial lead on the economy than McCain did on foreign policy.

The McCain campaign faced some ridicule prior to the debate, after airing an internet ad declaring McCain had won the debate hours before it had started.

The candidates were asked where they stood on the country’s financial plans.

Obama put forward four proposals for helping the economy. First, to “make sure that we’ve got oversight over this whole [bailout] process”. Second, to “make sure that taxpayers, when they are putting their money at risk, have the possibility of getting that money back and gains”. Third, to “make sure that none of that money is going to pad CEO bank accounts or to promote golden parachutes”. And lastly, “make sure that we’re helping homeowners, because the root problem here has to do with the foreclosures that are taking place all across the country”.

He then went on to say, “we also have to recognize that this is a final verdict on eight years of failed economic policies promoted by George Bush, supported by Senator McCain, a theory that basically says that we can shred regulations and consumer protections and give more and more to the most, and somehow prosperity will trickle down”.Lehrer then turned to McCain, giving him two minutes as well.

McCain, on the other hand, stressed the urgency of the crisis and the partisanship present in Washington before going on. “This package has transparency in it. It has to have accountability and oversight. It has to have options for loans to failing businesses, rather than the government taking over those loans. We have to — it has to have a package with a number of other essential elements to it,” he told viewers, pausing to briefly mention energy and jobs before Lehrer stopped him.

Lehrer asked the two to come back to his question and urging them to speak to each other, first turning to Senator Obama.

“We haven’t seen the language yet,” Obama began, speaking to Lehrer and not McCain. “And I do think that there’s constructive work being done out there”, he said, before noting he was optimistic a plan would come together. “The question, I think, that we have to ask ourselves is, how did we get into this situation in the first place?”

He continued, stressing his foresight on the issues two years ago, before Lehrer turned to McCain, asking if he planned to vote for the bailout plan.

McCain stammered that he hoped so. Lehrer asked again, and McCain replied, “Sure. But — but let me — let me point out, I also warned about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and warned about corporate greed and excess, and CEO pay, and all that. A lot of us saw this train wreck coming.”

McCain then continued, giving a story about former US President Dwight Eisenhower, who “on the night before the Normandy invasion, went into his room, and he wrote out two letter”. Eisenhower, he said, had taken accountability for his actions.

HAVE YOUR SAY
Who won the debate? Did the debate change your opinions on either of the candidates or the issues?
Add or view comments

“As president of the United States, people are going to be held accountable in my administration. And I promise you that that will happen.”

Obama then agreed with McCain, adding that more accountability was needed but not just when there’s a panic. “There are folks out there who’ve been struggling before this crisis took place,” Obama continued, “and that’s why it’s so important, as we solve this short-term problem, that we look at some of the underlying issues that have led to wages and incomes for ordinary Americans to go down, the — a health care system that is broken, energy policies that are not working, because, you know, 10 days ago, John said that the fundamentals of the economy are sound”.

Obama was asked to say it to McCain. Obama replied, “I do not think that they are”. Lehrer asked him to say it more directly to McCain, and Obama laughed, repeating himself to McCain.

McCain joked about his age, saying, “Are you afraid I couldn’t hear him?”

Obama said that he and McCain disagreed fundamentally and that he wanted accountability “not just when there’s a crisis for folks who have power and influence and can hire lobbyists, but for the nurse, the teacher, the police officer, who, frankly, at the end of each month, they’ve got a little financial crisis going on. They’re having to take out extra debt just to make their mortgage payments”. Tax policies, he said, were a good example.

McCain disagreed. “No, I — look, we’ve got to fix the system. We’ve got fundamental problems in the system. And Main Street is paying a penalty for the excesses and greed in Washington, D.C., and on Wall Street. So there’s no doubt that we have a long way to go. And, obviously, stricter interpretation and consolidation of the various regulatory agencies that weren’t doing their job, that has brought on this crisis”.

Lehrer went on to the next question, asking if there were fundamental differences between the approaches of the two.

McCain began by saying he wanted to lower “completely out of control” spending. He promised as president to “veto every single spending bill” He then attacked Senator Obama’s use of earmarks, citing it as a fundamental difference.

Senator Obama agreed that earmarks were being abused, but not that it was a large problem. “Earmarks account for $18 billion in last year’s budget. Senator McCain is proposing — and this is a fundamental difference between us — $300 billion in tax cuts to some of the wealthiest corporations and individuals in the country, $300 billion. Now, $18 billion is important; $300 billion is really important.” He then attacked McCain’s tax plans, saying, “you would have CEOs of Fortune 500 companies getting an average of $700,000 in reduced taxes, while leaving 100 million Americans out”.

He then stressed his focus on the middle class, saying, “We’ve got to grow the economy from the bottom up. What I’ve called for is a tax cut for 95 percent of working families, 95 percent”.

McCain was called on.

“Now, Senator Obama didn’t mention that, along with his tax cuts, he is also proposing some $800 billion in new spending on new programs,” McCain said, attacking his opponent. He also said that Obama had only suspended pork barrel spending after he started running for president.

“What I do is I close corporate loopholes,” Obama objected, “stop providing tax cuts to corporations that are shipping jobs overseas so that we’re giving tax breaks to companies that are investing here in the United States. I make sure that we have a health care system that allows for everyone to have basic coverage”.

He then turned to McCain, asking him to look at his tax policies, which he said were ignoring the middle class and a continuation of Bush policies.

Lehrer asked McCain to respond directly to Obama’s attack on his tax policies.

“Well — well, let me give you an example of what Senator Obama finds objectionable, the business tax,” McCain began. He then explained the reasoning behind his business tax cuts, saying that companies would want to start in countries where they would pay less taxes. “I want to cut that business tax. I want to cut it so that businesses will remain in — in the United States of America and create jobs”.

Obama explained that his tax cuts would affect 95% of taxpayers, then replied, “Now, John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he’s absolutely right. Here’s the problem: There are so many loopholes that have been written into the tax code, oftentimes with support of Senator McCain, that we actually see our businesses pay effectively one of the lowest tax rates in the world”.

McCain, he said, opposed closing loopholes but just wanted to add more tax breaks on top of that.

This was a clear victory for Barack Obama on John McCain’s home turf. Senator McCain offered nothing but more of the same failed Bush policies, and Barack Obama made a forceful case for change in our economy and our foreign policy.

He went on, attacking McCain’s health credit idea, saying that McCain wanted to tax health credits. “Your employer now has to pay taxes on the health care that you’re getting from your employer. And if you end up losing your health care from your employer, you’ve got to go out on the open market and try to buy it”.

McCain responded with an example of Obama voting for tax breaks of oil companies.

Obama cut in, “John, you want to give oil companies another $4 billion”, he pointed out.

McCain shot back, attacking Obama’s earmark spending and tax policies. “Who’s the person who has believed that the best thing for America is — is to have a tax system that is fundamentally fair?”, he said, referring to himself. “And I’ve fought to simplify it, and I have proposals to simplify it”.

He then accused Obama of voting “to increase taxes on people who make as low as $42,000 a year”. Obama repeated several times that McCain’s accusations were untrue.

McCain then accused him of giving tax cuts to oil companies, which Obama once again said was untrue. “The fact of the matter is, is that I was opposed to those tax breaks, tried to strip them out,”he said. “We’ve got an emergency bill on the Senate floor right now that contains some good stuff, some stuff you want, including drilling off-shore, but you’re opposed to it because it would strip away those tax breaks that have gone to oil companies.”

Lehrer then broke in, stopping the argument. He switched to a new question, asking what priorities and goals for the country the candidates would give up as a result of the financial crisis.

He allowed Obama to answer the question first, who said many things would have to be delayed but not forgotten. He then began to list what he felt the country had to have to continue to compete.

“We have to have energy independence,” he said, “so I’ve put forward a plan to make sure that, in 10 years’ time, we have freed ourselves from dependence on Middle Eastern oil by increasing production at home, but most importantly by starting to invest in alternative energy, solar, wind, biodiesel”.

He continued, saying that the health care system had to be fixed because it was bankrupting families.

“We’ve got to make sure that we’re competing in education,” he continued. “We’ve got to make sure that our children are keeping pace in math and in science.” He also mentioned making sure college was still affordable.

He also stressed making sure the country was still stable structurally, “to make sure that we can compete in this global economy”.

Lehrer then turned to McCain, asking him to present his ideas.

“Look, we, no matter what, we’ve got to cut spending”, McCain began and reminded the audience that he “saved the taxpayers $6.8 billion by fighting a contract that was negotiated between Boeing and DOD that was completely wrong”.

Lehrer broke in, asking if it was correct that neither of them had any major changes to implement after the financial crisis.

Obama replied that many things would have to be delayed and put aside, and that investments had to be made. He then agreed with McCain that cuts had to be made. “We right now give $15 billion every year as subsidies to private insurers under the Medicare system. Doesn’t work any better through the private insurers. They just skim off $15 billion. That was a give away and part of the reason is because lobbyists are able to shape how Medicare work”.

McCain then made a suggestion. “How about a spending freeze on everything but defense, veteran affairs and entitlement programs”. Lehrer repeated “spending freeze?” and McCain went on, “I think we ought to seriously consider with the exceptions the caring of veterans, national defense and several other vital issues”.

Obama disagreed with McCain’s idea, saying it was “using a hatchet”. Some vital programs, he said, were seriously underfunded. “I went to increase early childhood education and the notion that we should freeze that when there may be, for example, this Medicare subsidy doesn’t make sense”.

The two candidates began to argue more directly.

“We have to have,” McCain argued, “wind, tide, solar, natural gas, flex fuel cars and all that but we also have to have offshore drilling and we also have to have nuclear power”.

He accused Obama of opposing storing nuclear fuel.

Lehrer interrupted the two with another question, asking how the financial crisis would affect how they ran the country.

Obama replied first. “There’s no doubt it will affect our budgets. There is no doubt about it”. He went on to stress that it was a critical time and the country’s long term priorities had to be sorted out.

There was one man who was presidential tonight, that man was John McCain. There was another who was political, that was Barack Obama. John McCain won this debate and controlled the dialogue throughout, whether it was the economy, taxes, spending, Iraq or Iran.

McCain replied by criticizing Obama’s health care plans. “I want the families to make decisions between themselves and their doctors. Not the federal government,” he said, then called for lower spending.

He went on to speak about the national debt and stressing the importance of low taxes.

Obama went on the offensive, attacking McCain’s record of voting. “John, it’s been your president who you said you agreed with 90 percent of the time who presided over this increase in spending”, he said, accusing him of voting for an “orgy of spending”.

McCain countered that he had opposed Bush “on spending, on climate change, on torture of prisoner, on – on Guantanamo Bay. On a — on the way that the Iraq War was conducted”. He called himself a maverick, and referred to his running mate as a maverick as well.

Lehrer asked the two what the lessons of Iraq were.

McCain answered first, stressing that the war in Iraq was going well. “I think the lessons of Iraq are very clear,” he answered, “that you cannot have a failed strategy that will then cause you to nearly lose a conflict”.

He went on to praise the efforts in Iraq, saying the strategy was successful and the US was winning. “And we will come home with victory and with honor. And that withdrawal is the result of every counterinsurgency that succeeds”, and continued that Iraq would make a stable ally.

Lehrer asked Obama how he saw the lessons of Iraq, who began by questioning the fundamentals of the war and whether the US should have gone in the first place.

“We took our eye off [bin Laden]. And not to mention that we are still spending $10 billion a month, when they have a $79 billion surplus, at a time when we are in great distress here at home, and we just talked about the fact that our budget is way overstretched and we are borrowing money from overseas to try to finance just some of the basic functions of our government”.

The lesson, he said, was to “never hesitate to use military force”, but to use it wisely.

McCain was asked if he agreed on the lesson, though he did not comment on a lesson learned. Obama, he said, had been wrong about the surge.

The two opponents then began arguing, as Lehrman tried to mediate them.

McCain felt it was remarkable that “Senator Obama is the chairperson of a committee that oversights NATO that’s in Afghanistan. To this day, he has never had a hearing”.

“The issues of Afghanistan,” Obama responded, “the issues of Iraq, critical issues like that, don’t go through my subcommittee because they’re done as a committee as a whole”.

He then began to attack McCain’s optimism. “You said that we were going to be greeted as liberators. You were wrong. You said that there was no history of violence between Shiite and Sunni. And you were wrong”.

McCain responded to the criticism by telling a story of when he spoke to troops who were re-enlisting. “And you know what they said to us? They said, let us win. They said, let us win. We don’t want our kids coming back here. And this strategy, and this general, they are winning. Senator Obama refuses to acknowledge that we are winning in Iraq”.

McCain repeatedly accused Obama of opposing funding to troops.

Obama responded by speaking to Lehrer, to explain why he had voted against funding troops. “Senator McCain opposed funding for troops in legislation that had a timetable, because he didn’t believe in a timetable. I opposed funding a mission that had no timetable, and was open- ended, giving a blank check to George Bush. We had a difference on the timetable”.

“Admiral Mullen suggests that Senator Obama’s plan is dangerous for America,” McCain cut in once Obama had finished.

Obama said it was not the case, that the wording was “a precipitous withdrawal would be dangerous”.

McCain then argued that Iraq, and not Afghanistan, was the central battle ground against terrorism. He also attacked Obama’s surprise that the surge had worked.

Lehrer switched to a new question. “Do you think more troops — more U.S. troops should be sent to Afghanistan, how many, and when?”

Obama mentioned he had been saying more troops in Afghanistan were needed for over a year. He argued that no Al-Qaeda were present in Iraq before the invasion, and the people there had nothing to do with 9/11.

He then went on to list a three part plan beginning with pressuring the Afghani government to work for it’s people and control it’s poppy trade. He also pressed the need to stop giving money to Pakistan.

To be frank, I’m surprised McCain didn’t play the POW card more tonight, consider how frequently he and his campaign have used it earlier in the campaign.

McCain responded by saying Iraq had to be stabilized and that he would not make the mistake of leaving Iraq the way it is.

“If you’re going to aim a gun at somebody,” he said, “you’d better be prepared to pull the trigger”.

Obama responded by arguing that if the Pakistani government would not take care of terrorists in it’s borders, action had to be taken. He then commented on past US policies with Pakistan, saying that the US support of Musharraf had alienated the Pakistani people.

“And as a consequence, we lost legitimacy in Pakistan. We spent $10 billion. And in the meantime, they weren’t going after al Qaeda, and they are more powerful now than at any time since we began the war in Afghanistan. That’s going to change when I’m president of the United States”, he finished.

McCain quickly replied that Pakistan was a failed state at the time. He then went on to talk about his voting record. “I have a record of being involved in these national security issues, which involve the highest responsibility and the toughest decisions that any president can make, and that is to send our young men and women into harm’s way”.

Obama argued that Afghanistan could not be muddled through, and that problems were being caused by not focusing on Al-Qaeda. As he finished, Lehrer attempted to announce a new question, but McCain quickly attacked Obama, saying his plans would have a “calamitous effect” on national security and the region.

Lehrer directed his next question towards McCain, asking about his thoughts on Iran and it’s threat to the US.

McCain’s reading of the threat in Iran was “if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it is an existential threat to the State of Israel and to other countries in the region”. He stressed the need to avoid another Holocaust, and the need for a league of democracies

Anybody hearing a snicker from McCain while Obama is talking?

to battle Iran. “I am convinced that together, we can, with the French, with the British, with the Germans and other countries, democracies around the world, we can affect Iranian behavior”.

Obama went next, focusing on the Iraq war’s effect on Iran. Iraq, he said, was Iran’s “mortal enemy” and had kept Iran from becoming a threat. “That was cleared away. And what we’ve seen over the last several years is Iran’s influence grow. They have funded Hezbollah, they have funded Hamas, they have gone from zero centrifuges to 4,000 centrifuges to develop a nuclear weapon”.

He then went on to say that refusing to use diplomacy with hostile nations has only made matters worse and isolated the US.

Lehrer turned to McCain, asking him how he felt about diplomacy as a solution.

McCain hurried through his response, attacking Obama on his willingness to meet with hostile leaders without preconditions. People like Ahmadinejad, he said, would have their ideas legitimized if a President met with them.

Obama responded by pointing out that Ahmadinejad was only a minor leader. Meeting leaders without preconditions, he said, “doesn’t mean that you invite them over for tea one day”. He then turned to attacking McCain, who he said “would not meet potentially with the prime minister of Spain, because he — you know, he wasn’t sure whether they were aligned with us. I mean, Spain? Spain is a NATO ally”.

McCain retorted that he was not yet President so it would be out of place. The two then began to argue over the comments of Dr. Kissinger’s stance on meeting foreign leaders.

McCain argued that meeting with and legitimizing ideas was dangerous and naive, and said it was a fundamental difference of opinion.

Obama accused McCain of misrepresentation, stressing that he would not speak without low level talks and preparations.

McCain responded by mocking Obama. “So let me get this right. We sit down with Ahmadinejad, and he says, ‘We’re going to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth,’ and we say, ‘No, you’re not’? Oh, please”.

The two started arguing among each other, as Lehrer attempted to interject, finally succeeding with a new question. He turned to Obama, asking how he saw the relationship with Russia and it’s potential.

Obama began spelling out his opinion, stating that he felt the US approach to Russia had to be evaluated. He then continued that the US has to press for a unified alliance and for Russia to remove itself from other nations, adding that the US had to “explain to the Russians that you cannot be a 21st-century superpower, or power, and act like a 20th-century dictatorship”.

He went on, stressing the importance of diplomacy and affirming relationships, and inviting Russian-influenced countries into NATO. “Now, we also can’t return to a Cold War posture with respect to Russia. It’s important that we recognize there are going to be some areas of common interest. One is nuclear proliferation”.

McCain responded by attacking Obama’s reaction to the Russian-Georgian conflict, criticizing his initial comment that both sides should show restraint, calling it naive. “He doesn’t understand that Russia committed serious aggression against Georgia. And Russia has now become a nation fueled by petro-dollars that is basically a KGB apparatchik-run government”.

Lehrer asked Obama if there were any major differences between the two’s opinion on Russia, who answered that he and McCain had similar opinions on Russia. He then stressed foresight in dealing with Russia, as well as reducing dependence on foreign oil through alternative energy.

“Over 26 years, Senator McCain voted 23 times against alternative energy, like solar, and wind, and biodiesel,” he mentioned.

The two began to argue over alternative energy. As Lehrer began announcing the next question, McCain interjected. “No one from Arizona is against solar. And Senator Obama says he’s for nuclear, but he’s against reprocessing and he’s against storing So,” he continued, as Obama objected, “it’s hard to get there from here. And off-shore drilling is also something that is very important and it is a bridge”.

McCain continued, as Obama interrupted to correct him, saying that he had voted for storing nuclear waste safely.

The two began interrupting each other, each trying to get a word in, before Lehrer stopped them and moved on.

“What do you think the likelihood is that there would be another 9/11-type attack on the continental United States?” asked Lehrer.

McCain said that America was far safer since 9/11, which he claimed a hand in. He went on to stress better intelligence and technology in keeping America safe, but that he felt the US was far safer.

Lehrer then turned to Obama.

Obama disagreed slightly, saying America was safer in some ways, but “we still have a long way to go”. He also felt that the US was not focusing enough on Al-Qaeda and fighting in Iraq was not making the US safer.

McCain accused Senator Obama of not understanding that “if we fail in Iraq, it encourages al Qaeda. They would establish a base in Iraq”.

Lehrer asked if Obama agreed.

Obama argued that the sole focus was currently Iraq, but that “in the meantime, bin Laden is still out there. He is not captured. He is not killed”. He noted that $10 billion was spent in Iraq every month, instead of going to healthcare. He argued that veterans were not getting the benefits they deserved, and that the next president’s strategies had to be broader.

McCain responded by attacking Obama saying he didn’t think Obama had the knowledge or experience to be President.

Obama then said that the job of the next President would be to repair America’s image and economy.

McCain concluded by citing his POW experience. “Jim, when I came home from prison, I saw our veterans being very badly treated, and it made me sad. And I embarked on an effort to resolve the POW-MIA issue, which we did in a bipartisan fashion, and then I worked on normalization of relations between our two countries so that our veterans could come all the way home”.

“And that ends this debate tonight,” finished Jim Lehrer.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=McCain_and_Obama_face_off_in_U.S._presidential_candidate_debate&oldid=1985219”

Vehicle Finance South Africa, Get A Much Better Car Finance Deal Through Us.

Vehicle Finance South Africa, Get A Much Better Car Finance Deal Through Us.

by

Auto Agent

Vehicle Finance South Africa is happy to help you get the optimum possible deal when buying a brand-new or secondhand car in South Africa and we have useful tools that will help you work things out, like a car finance calculator and links to websites that will inform you your current credit status.

We have years of experience in Vehicle Finance, Vehicle Insurance and Warranties, we pride ourselves in being really knowledgeable in the Private Vehicle Finance business, South Africa. We have aided literally many hundreds of clients with vehicle licensing, car registration and solid old fashioned proposals when it comes to purchasing secondhand cars. We are therefore highly competent to counsel you on most things associated to car finance and purchasing secondhand cars in South Africa.

I have purchased a vehicle privately, can you help me finance it?

Yes, is the only answer it s exactly what we do. Why not apply for Vehicle Finance Online.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i32QCNmYmLI[/youtube]

What precisely do we do?

Let s say you have bought a car from a colleague, or from someone less know to you on Gumtree or some different classifieds, and you would like to know if the car is safe and need to finance the vehicle privately. This is where we come in we will appraise the car, make sure that it s worth what you are going to pay for it, and then supply you with the car finance. We refer to all the major lenders, Wesbank MFC, ABSA, etc. and then choose the best business deal from the bunch. And that s not all, we supply unbeatable facility fees, and we will outperform nearly all offers from the financial institution. For instance, you WILL SAVE at least R2500 on facility fees when buying a car to the value of R100,000 and then we can give you a another saving of R1000 of licensing and reg.

Exactly are we able to offer you these savings?

As motor industry and vehicle finance experts, we saw an opportunity to help buyers in the used car market, especially those who have bought used cars from private sellers and needed financial assistance. We are happy to offer you an unbeatable deal, as we are in effect applying to the banks instantly for finance, and we stand surety against your purchase should something go wrong. It is therefore of the upmost importance that our clients are in worthy credit, as we are unable to action applications from clients who have bad credit or those who have a financial judgements.

How do I use the Car Finance Calculator and what does it do?

Our vehicle finance calculator makes it simple for you to see what kind of car you can afford. We have made sure that you are capable of calculating based on the total price of the motor vehicle, any deposit you might have and even the trade in valuation if you are purchasing a car from a dealership. The car finance calculator also allows balloon / residual calculations, if you are convinced that you will have a large sum of money when your payment term ends. Most Often, people use balloon / residuals if they are certain they will have a bonus or some other form of hard cash available.

Likewise, our convenient finance calculator will also show you just how much you might save on the facility fees, and it s normally a saving of R2,500 on a car purchased for R100,000! That s something to examine, why throw worthy cash down the drain. Cars that cost in the area of R80,000 can look to make an even bigger saving, in the region of R3000 for the facility fee and thats not all:

We will licence and roadworthy your car for R999 this represents another saving of R1000!

And we will also apply for car finance to all the leading banks, talk terms and then let you choose which offer is going to be better. We initiate with banks all day long, and we have a great relationship with many of them, so it stands to reason that we are competent to get a much better deal than if you were to approach them in private.

Vehicle Finance South Africa

– Get A Simply Excellent Vehicle Finance Deal With Us

Article Source:

ArticleRich.com

CanadaVOTES: CHP candidate Larry R. Heather in Calgary Southwest

Friday, October 10, 2008

In an attempt to speak with as many candidates as possible during the 2008 Canadian federal election, Wikinews has talked via email with Larry R. Heather. Heather is a candidate in Alberta’s Calgary Southwest riding, running under the Christian Heritage Party of Canada (CHP) banner. The CHP is a minor, registered political party running a significant number of candidates across the country, looking to earn its first ever seat in the House of Commons.

Best known as an anti-abortion activist, this shipper-receiver holds a Bachelor of Religious Education from Saskatchewan’s Briercrest College and Seminary, and a BA in religion from Calgary’s Rocky Mountain College. He hosts the Gospel Road program on AM1140 in High River, and is remembered by many for his ketchup-soaked run-in with abortion law activist Henry Morgentaler.

He has run in the federal election of 1984 (Calgary South, ind.), 1988 (Calgary Southwest, ind), 1993 (Calgary West, CHP), 1997 (Calgary Southwest, CHP), 2004 (Calgary Southwest, CHP), and 2006 (Calgary Southwest, CHP), provincial elections of 1986 (Calgary Glenmore, ind), 1989 (Calgary Elbow, ind), and 2004 (Calgary Glenmore, Alberta Social Credit), and for various public school board ridings in 1989 and 1992. He has run against some big names, including Ralph Klein (1989), Preston Manning (1997), and Stephen Harper (1993, 2004, 2006). His 2006 campaign featured controversial and graphic images, to illustrate his pro-life and anti-same sex marriage messages.

His major opponent in the riding is economist and lecturer Stephen Harper, a Conservative, who just so happens to be the current Prime Minister. Harper previously represented Calgary West. Other names on the ballot include Liberal Marlene Lamontagne, New Democrat Holly Heffernan, Libertarian Dennis Young, and Green Party candidate Kelly Christie. The riding is any part of Calgary that is west of the Canadian Pacific rail line, and south of the Glenway Trail.

The following is an interview with Heather, conducted via email. The interview has had very limited editing, to eliminate in-text mentions of website addresses, but is otherwise left exactly as sent to Wikinews.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=CanadaVOTES:_CHP_candidate_Larry_R._Heather_in_Calgary_Southwest&oldid=4228883”

Wikinews Shorts: January 10, 2010

A compilation of brief news reports for Sunday, January 10, 2010.

 Contribute to Wikinews by expanding these briefs or add a new one.

Outgoing Croatian president Stjepan Mesi? pardoned 36-year-old Siniša Rimac, a convicted war criminal, jailed for eight years for participating in executions of Serb civilians back in 1991, when Croatia was at war with Serb forces. Among other crimes, he is guilty of killing a 12-year old girl. At that time he was part of a military unit led by Tomislav Mer?ep, who was never prosecuted.

Rimac’s jail term was shortened by one year, following president Mesi?’s decision.

Serbian president Boris Tadi? described the act as “anti-european” and “anti-civilisational” that cannot be justified.

Sources
  • “Mesic pardoned man convicted for murder of Serbian civilians” — Blic, January 8, 2010
  • “Tadi?: Pomilovanje ratnog zlo?inca anticivilizacijski ?in” — Jutarnji List, January 8, 2010
  • “Mesi? pomilovao ubojicu Rimca iz Pakra?ke poljane” — Jutarnji List, January 6, 2010

Mohamed Kohail, a Canadian resident convicted after a deadly school fight in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia will not be executed as originally sentenced. The country’s highest court, the Supreme Council, cancelled the death sentence but ordered that Kohail face retrial in the case. The Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade confirmed this development on Saturday.

Kohail’s younger brother Sultan is also charged in this case and could also be sentenced to death as his case was moved from the youth court to the adult system. Both brothers deny that they had caused the death of Munzer Haraki during the 2007 brawl.

Wikipedia has more about this subject:

Sources
  • “Saudi court revokes Montrealer’s death sentence” — CBC News, January 9, 2010
  • Linda Nguyen. “Montreal man spared beheading for fatal school fight in Saudi Arabia” — Canwest News Service, January 9, 2010
  • Richard Deschamps. “Mohammed Kohail’s death sentence revoked” — CJAD, January 9, 2010

More than 4,000 police officers attended the funeral of Constable Ireneusz “Eric” Czapnik in Ottawa, Ontario on Thursday. Czapnik was stabbed to death outside the Ottawa Hospital‘s Civic campus the previous Tuesday while completing paperwork at his vehicle. He was the first Ottawa police officer to be killed on duty since 1983.

Kevin Gregson, a suspended RCMP officer, is charged in connection with Czapnik’s murder.

Sources

  • “Slain officer honoured at massive funeral” — CBC News, January 7, 2010
  • “Thousands gather to honour slain Ottawa cop” — Ottawa Citizen, January 7, 2010
  • Joanna Smith. “Thousands gather to honour slain Ottawa constable” — Toronto Star, January 7, 2010

Wikipedia has more about this subject:

At 6:30a.m. Friday local time (1230 UTC) a gunman entered an ABB factory in St. Louis, Missouri, and began shooting. At this time it appears that he had killed three and injured five others, then himself. St. Louis Police Chief Dan Isom says, “”We are very confident that this is the shooter.” Reports say that there were two bodies found on the outside of the factory and two bodies, including that of the shooter, found on the interior.

Sources

  • “Gunman on rampage at Missouri factory” — BBC News Online, January 7, 2010
  • “ABB Has Received Reports Of A Shooting At Its St Louis Site” — Wall Street Journal, January 7, 2010
  • “8 people shot, 3 fatally, at St. Louis factory, police say” — CNN, January 7, 2010
  • Kim Bell. “Worker goes on rampage, shoots 8, kills 3 co-workers” — St. Louis Post-Dispatch, January 7, 2010

A French court ruled in favor of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, in a fraud case where fraudsters stole money from his bank accounts. He was awarded one Euro (US$1.43, ?0.89) in damages.

Sources

  • “Sarkozy awarded €1 in fraud case” — Independent.ie, January 9, 2010
  • “France’s Sarkozy Awarded One Euro In Fraud Case” — New York Times, January 8, 2010

File:Gumby and Pokey – Bendable Figures.jpg

Wikipedia has more about this subject:

Art Clokey, a pioneer in the field of claymation, died Friday due to chronic disease. Clokey was well know for one of the characters he created, Gumby.

Sources

  • Jason Felch. “Art Clokey dies at 88; creator of Gumby” — Los Angeles Times, January 9, 2010
  • “Gumby creator pases away” — The Sydney Morning Herald, January 9, 2010

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews_Shorts:_January_10,_2010&oldid=3105651”

Residents of Leeds, England neighbourhood plagued with crime ask council for help

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Residents of a Leeds, England neighbourhood have requested help from a council because their neighbourhood is plagued by crime, overcrowding, and community tensions.

Leeds City Council received a request for help from residents of Hyde Park, who said they were worried about the increasing level of anti-social behavior and worsening community relations. A report will be unveiled on Wednesday by a council delegation, highlighting the problems in the area. “The people living in Hyde Park come from widely different population groups… these groups have very different customs, needs and living styles and this can provoke high levels of tension in the area,” the delegation said.

The council claims that because of the 28 per cent ethnic minority population and the 40,000 students living in the neighbourhood, there are tensions between residents. They added, however, that they are actively encouraging people to work together, citing a multi-faith forum, a cricket competition and activities which bring old and young together.

The report says that the council are trying to build relationships between Muslims and police, something which they said is “particularly important after the area’s connection to the London bombings on 7th July 2005.” A local newspaper reported that “the Shebab project introduces young Muslims to role models from sport and culture and also runs scholars’ talks to counter extremist ideologies.”

Crime has increased by 7% in the past year in Hyde Park, and residents noted that anti-social behaviour was getting worse. The council said that an anti-burglary task force had helped to reduce the number of thefts from homes. Residents complained that there was a lack of pride in the area, and at the end of the academic year in the summer, large piles of rubbish were left in streets, yards and alleyways. The report adds that the council operates a recycling scheme aimed towards teenagers, and that rubbish collections have increased.

[We are] slightly frustrated with certain communication issues that we’ve had with the council

The Guardian reported on Wednesday that campaigners are attempting to “take control of a derelict school building and transform it into a community hub are appealing for sponsors and partners in a bid to turn their dreams into reality.” They say that the unused building, owned by the council, could be used for meetings and events. A volunteer group of residents have been working on a business plan, and have gained support from local businesses to create “a vision of an open, accessible and valuable resource for all.”

A member of the commitee, however, said he was “frustrated” with the council’s attitude towards the plans. “The RPCC is slightly frustrated with certain communication issues that we’ve had with the council, but we’re working with them and hoping to gain further assistance going forward,” he said. “It’s a shame that certain setbacks could have been avoided.”

The deputation added that “a major factor in Hyde Park’s suffering is its high level of population density”, which they conceded is something they are unable to change. The council responded to complaints that streets are “cheap and unhealthy takeaways, letting agents and boarded-up shop fronts,” by saying that Hyde Park Corner and Headingley are, according to the Yorkshire Post, “thriving shopping areas and work had taken place to ensure a good mix of outlets.”

The report concludes: “The council acknowledges that because of the very particular circumstances which exist in the neighbourhood, Hyde Park faces difficult challenges which affect the quality of life of residents and that ‘normal’ service levels may not be sufficient to tackle some of these. The council will do more to enable local people to influence how services work and how local problems are tackled. Local community and voluntary groups will be invited to play an active role.”

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Residents_of_Leeds,_England_neighbourhood_plagued_with_crime_ask_council_for_help&oldid=3357971”

All About Breasts Implants

All about Breasts Implants

by

Mark D Epstein

I do wish my breasts were bigger. Not big… but less small – Calista Flockhart. Are you also not satisfied with the shape of your breast? You don t have to compromise anymore with the shape of the breast that is not of your interest. With the advancement of technology, there are wide array of breast implants through which you can obtain a breast shape of your choice. Women, who opt for Breast implant, not only improve the shape of their breast but also enhance their confidence. They go for breast implant either to increase the size of the breast or to improve the shape after a mastectomy or injury.

Who are not eligible for breast implants?

Breast implants are not recommended for,

– Women who presently have malignant or pre-malignant cancer

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4sdXsCeQ90[/youtube]

– Who have infection anywhere in the body and

– Pregnant women

Even before you undergo breast implant, it s very important that you know about the available Breast Augmentation Procedure in Long Island and then decide which one could be right for you.

There are two main types of breast implants, namely Saline implants and Silicone gel implants which are explained below.

Saline implants

Saline breast implant finds an important place in aesthetic breast surgery from longtime. It is one of the most commonly performed breast surgery in the United States. Patients with A-B cup breasts or even larger and patients who don t fall under thin category are considered to be best candidates for saline breast implant. This type of breast implant employs silicone outer shell filled with sterile saltwater or saline solution. The empty shell is surgically inserted in the right place and then it is filled with saline. Saline implant has number of benefits. As the silicone shell is filled with saline water, it is absolutely safe to the body. In the event of rupture or deflate, the body easily absorbs the saline solution. Thus, it is considered to be less contaminative.

Among all breast implants, saline breast implants requires smaller incisions. When it comes to appearance, it provides natural look and feel. This procedure helps women to get a beautiful breast shape and body contour.

Silicone Implants

A silicone breast implant uses a silicone elastomer shell which is filled with silicone gel. Through surgery it is either implanted under the breast tissue or under the chest muscle. Patients who wish to undergo silicone breast implant must be at least 22 years old. This procedure can be used for breast augmentation, i.e. to increase the size of the breast or as a revision surgery to correct the defects of primary breast augmentation surgery. Silicone breast implant is best suited for breast reconstruction as well. It aims at reconstructing or replacing breast tissue that has been removed due to cancer or trauma or in cases where the breast fails to develop due to abnormality.

Rupture of a silicone gel-filled breast implant is undetectable. Thus, patients who undergo this procedure need regular MRI screening examinations.

If you are considering a Breast Implant Surgery in Long Island, it is very important to be aware of the above procedures and opt for the one that best suits you!

Certified breast implant surgeon in Long Island provides you the latest cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery procedures to enhance the look and feel of your boobs. For more,

click here

Article Source:

ArticleRich.com

Influential Croat poet Dragutin Tadijanovi? dies

Saturday, July 7, 2007

Croatian poet Dragutin Tadijanovi? died last week in Zagreb, Croatia. He was 101 years old.

Born on November 4, 1905 in Rastušje, Slavonia, Croatia, he was erudite cordially referred to as ‘Bard’ in Croatia.

He published his first poem in 1922. He graduated in literature and philosophy at the University of Zagreb in 1937.

He worked as the lecturer of the official paper Narodne novine (1935-1940), taught at the Academy of Arts in Zagreb (1939-1945). Later he worked at the publishing house “Zora”, “Hrvatski pjesnici”, as well as Matica hrvatska, before becoming an editor at the [what?]. He joined the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts‘s Literary Institute, where he became the director in 1953 and served until his retirement in 1973. He was the president of the Society of Croatian Writers in 1964-1965, and he also became an academician of the Academy.

Apart from being among the longest living writers in Croatian history, Tadijanovi? held distinction as one of the most popular and most influential Croatian poets of 20th century. His poem Balada o zaklanim ovcama (Ballad of Slaughtered Sheep), written in 1930s, is one of the most powerful works of Croatian literature.

He was among the longest living writers in Croatian history, with generations studying his poems in school. His last couple of birthdays were marked with reports on national TV, awards and other special events and his commemoration ceremony was held at the Old City Hall on uphill Zagreb attended by the Mayor of Zagreb and other political and cultural officials.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Influential_Croat_poet_Dragutin_Tadijanovi?_dies&oldid=2584439”

Human remains in mass grave confirm Argentina secret death camp

Friday, December 12, 2008

File:Parque de la Memoria – Buenos Aires – Dennis Oppenheim – Monumento al escape.jpg

During a seven-month search, the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team (EAAF) on Tuesday, confirmed more than 10,000 charred human bone fragments were unearthed between February and September, in a pit at Pozo de Arana, a former La Plata, Argentina secret government detention center. The Arana prison or police station was used to torture prisoners during the so-called Argentina “Dirty War,” and was one of 300 used to interrogate Argentine prisoners.

The war refers to the state-sponsored violence against Argentine citizenry from roughly 1976 to 1983 carried out primarily by Jorge Rafael Videla’s military government. The exact chronology of the repression is still debated, as trade unionists were targeted for assassination as early as 1973. Isabel Martínez de Perón’s “annihilation decrees” of 1975, during Operativo Independencia, have also been suggested as the origin of The Dirty War.

The official record reveals that up to 13,000 people disappeared, while 30,000 were killed during this time. Argentine security forces and death squads worked hand in hand with other South American dictatorships in the frame of Operation Condor. An Argentine court would later condemn the government’s crimes as crimes against humanity and “genocide”.

EAAF president and forensic scientist Luis Fondebrider said that “in 25 years of searching, this was the first time that human remains were found at a former detention cente; the magnitude of what the team has found where the Clandestine Center of Arana was located, merits that sometimes they show partial results.” He further noted that “the bodies had been burned inside graves along with tires, combustibles and other material; and the possibilities of identifying some of these remains is low because of the state they are in.” Fondebrider concluded that “this scientifically confirms the testimonies of the detained, the hundreds of survivors who have said for years that authorities tortured, killed and burned the bodies of political opponents.”

The anthropological discovery further reveals that a wall with more than 200 bullet marks or holes and an “important quantity” of used ammunition shells on the ground nearby, were found adjacent the mass pit grave. As evidence of executions, they were marked with red paint by forensic scientists. The team, however, failed to determine how many bodies the fragments represented.

Maria Vedio, 47, legal chairwoman for the Permanent Assembly for Human Rights La Plata said that ” this is the first time there is proof that Arana wasn’t only a detention and torture center, but also a center of elimination.”

Sara Derotier de Cobacho, secretary of human rights for Buenos Aires said, “I ask the forgiveness of family members, because I can imagine what the mothers and all who are gathered here will feel, but what we are about to show is not to detail the genocide but so that we have proof for the trials that are to come; but let us not forget, that behind every clandestine center there were the names of the repressors. … so it is very important for all citizens to know those names; we are looking for the truth so we can attain justice and construct, from there, the memory of our 30,000 ‘desaparecidos’.”

Some of those responsible for the mass killings have been charged and meted life or death sentences. They include Miguel Osvaldo Etchecolatz, a senior Argentine police officer, who worked in the Buenos Aires Provincial Police during the first years of the military dictatorship known as the National Reorganization Process. He was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2006, on charges of homicide, kidnapping, and torture. The tribunal, besides handing the sentence, stated that Etchecolatz’s committed “crimes against humanity in the context of the genocide that took place in Argentina”. But the principal complainant, who was detained at Arana, has since disappeared.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Human_remains_in_mass_grave_confirm_Argentina_secret_death_camp&oldid=4281953”