mikkey

The DHC-6 Twin Otter has a proven track record in rugged environments from the tropics to the tundra, and the variety of spare part programs is second to none. While it may not offer the "tailgate exit", its high tail elevator, STOL flight characteristics, and the 12,500-gtow (part 91, solo pilot) make it the best skydiving aircraft available if you have enough skydivers to support it. Just wait until the PAC 750 XL hits the US market. The purchase price, running cost and climbing ability (14 K turnaround is about 15 minutes). I think it will be huge competition for both Caravans and Otter's. Somebody told me that a Caravan here in OZ needs about 10-12 sports skydivers on a load to break even, the XL only needs 6.... I heard the order books are already full in NZ with lots of orders from both Europe and US. Rumor says the Kiwis have already increased the price due to large demand. I will be jumping from a brand new XL from early January. Will be posting pics and review then.... --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

I define "fun jumper" as a licensed (current) skydiver who is NOT a) DZ staff, instructor etc. or b) member of a team and/or participating in competition. So just skydiving for "fun". Like yesterday when I rocked up to my DZ found a couple of others and did a couple of "fun" 3-ways and had some good "fun". If you are lucky enough to jump at a DZ with a few "fun" skydivers around it can be a very good way of participating in the sport without it becoming your no. 1 priority. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Well put. There is one more point to this. When you start on anything like torture you are crossing a line. You cannot say "it is just in these cases" or "it is under strict rules". What if somebody is innocent and you torture him or her? How can you say your country is defending human rights, the rule of law and democracy if you start crossing the line? It is a Pandora’s box. The issue of Guantanamo is very dangerous. Not because the US is holding terrorists, it is because they are bypassing their own constitution as well as international conventions they have signed. This is a slippery slope. Would I have a problem if somebody slaps OBL around - no - BUT once you start behaving like this there is no way of controlling it. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Firstly, trusting your elected officials blindly is very naive at best and probably stupid. Not the idea of democracy (does Watergate ring a bell?). Secondly, acting only in the US interest and not the UN interest is not a smart statement. In the long run it is in the US' best interest to act through and with the UN. The attitude expressed by some posters here " god bless America and fuck the rest" is exactly the attitude that will foster anti- Americanism and terrorism. The arrogance of power is very dangerous. Getting back to the theme of the thread, the problem with Guantanamo Bay is the lack of transparency and accountability. There is too much doubt who is being held there and why. This is damaging to the US' standing in the world. The following is an article from an Australian Newspaper from today. I do not know how credible it is, but it does raise questions about what is going on in GB... ------------------------------------------------------------ US misleads on terror suspect: lawyer By Fergus Shiel October 23, 2003 Maha Habib wants her husband freed. US President George Bush had misled the Australian public about the capture of one of the two Australian terror suspects held without charge in Guantanamo Bay, a member of the men's US legal team claimed yesterday. Last week President Bush said that the Australian detainees, Mamdouh Habib and David Hicks, had been "picked up on the battlefield". But Melbourne lawyer Richard Bourke, who is acting in the US on behalf of detainees imprisoned at the US Navy base on the south-eastern tip of Cuba, said Habib was nowhere near a battlefield when captured. "In fact, Mamdouh Habib was detained before the US invasion of Afghanistan even began. He was picked up hundreds of kilometres inside Pakistan, apparently preparing to return to Australia," Mr Bourke said. He said Habib had never been a combatant, instead having travelled to Pakistan to look for employment and for a school for his two children. He was arrested by Pakistani authorities on October 5, 2001, two days before the US launched its first aerial assault on Afghanistan and before ground fighting began. Later, Habib was taken to Egypt before being handed to the Americans, who took him to Afghanistan and then Cuba. Habib's wife, Maha, has written to President Bush, saying her husband, whom she has not spoken to since his arrest, has never broken an American law. She writes that the youngest of their four children cannot remember their father. "He is a decent and loyal citizen of Australia, where he has lived for 19 years, and was in Pakistan on family business," Mrs Habib writes. "His only crime was that he was in the wrong place at the wrong time." --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Did you grow up with black and white TV only? --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

You mean American POW's in Vietnam in the 60/70's. That is not the standard. NV did break the Geneva Convention and committed war crimes. So the US should behave the same way as North Vietnam did? The detainees are not POW's - they have no status what so ever (that IS the problem). They do not currently receive the entitlements of POW's as prescribed under the Geneva Convention. The US is holding these individuals (of which the majority probably are scum bags) under no recognized law or convention what so ever. This is what is being criticized. You can’t have it both ways. If the US wants other countries to obey international law and conventions, they need to do so as well - no matter how bad the guys they are holding are. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

How do you know this? Nobody has been charged yet. Can you explain to me why the BBC could find a number of Afghanis who were detained for up to 18 month and who had nothing to do with the Taliban, and even less with Al Qaeda? It took the US 18 month to establish this - and how come these guys were arrested and shipped to Cuba in the first place? How would you feel, if an American had been arrested in Tibet by the Chinese, labelled to be an enemy combatant working for Tibetan "terrorists", thrown into jail indefinitely without legal representation and without any charges. Would you repeat your eloquent statements ? What happened to the "assumed innocent until proven guilty" thing? How can the US claim to be the defender of western values? How can the US avoid being accused to be racist if it only dishes this treatment out to non-US citizens? I had no problems with the US holding these guys while they were "sorting things out". No problem - they were trying to stop new terrorist attacks and would have to vet who these guys are. But holding them 2 years without charge, without legal representation, without any "status" (POW, criminal, whatever) and creating a special "tribunal" system that has no foundation (to my knowledge) in US or International law.... that is just "not on". --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

If I can add my 2 cents. I had a 7-year and an 11-year break from the sport and I have seen many people come and go. The reason why people leave the sport seems in my opinion to anchor around 3 main issues: 1) “Social” issues 2) DZ issues 3) “Challenge” issues 1) Peoples live changes all the time. We go from study to work environment. We start focussing on a career. We move. We get married. We get kids. Our priorities change, it is natural. Some people who quit the sport due to these reasons come back later when their circumstances change again. 2) It is often the case that when people start skydiving they get very obsessed with it. It becomes their live and sometimes even their livelihood. Unfortunately, “politics” and conflicts can arise. Both on commercial DZ’s and in “clubs”. You see this in a workplace and in all kind of sports or clubs. These “politics” can get frustrating and if you have no alternative choice in your area – you might quit the sport. 3) If you can’t or won’t become an instructor/professional skydiver or member of a team, it can be frustrating to skydive. Being a “fun” jumper myself – it was a reason for me once to quit the sport. If you are not at a DZ with lots of other “fun” jumpers you will quickly get bored doing solo’s or doing 2-ways with students. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Interesting. This is the first and only source I have seen that claims this type of connections. There are a few well-documented sources (people involved in the intelligence community at a high level) that say the exact opposite and even the White House is not making these claims. Please note the following: 1) Source is a “weekly Iraqi newspaper”. We have no idea about this papers track record and its reputation for truth (could be some “trash” paper for what we know). 2) An unnamed Iraqi officer is the source…. (and the ONLY source). Now what kind of documentation/proof is this? 3) The claim is that 100 came for training in July 2001 and later it is claimed “On April 5, 2003, orders were issued to send these individuals to the battle front immediately”. So these guys stayed in this alleged camp for nearly 2 years?? These are very “thin” claims form one anonymous source in one unknown paper in Iraq. Why is this worthy of being shown prominently on Fox? Because it fits their agenda? What would happen if an unknown Middle East newspaper, based on one anonymous source, made some claims that the US was committing war crimes in Iraq. Would that be published on Fox? --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

As mentioned in this thread, key problem is holding people in legal limbo. Not a good thing if you are supposed to defend democracy and human rights. I do not buy the "who cares - they are terrorists" argument. We do not know how many of these people actually are "terrorists". I recently saw a documentary on the BBC where they were interviewing a couple of Afghanis who just been sent home after nearly 18 month of being held by the Americans. One of the guys was a taxi driver who happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. That cost him 18 month of his live under very harsh conditions and no idea if and when he would be release. He received no apology or compensation… He told about the conditions, the initial small animal cages they were held in, that the light is on 24 hours a day etc. This combined with the uncertainty of not knowing what you are accused of and how long you are being detained borders torture IMO. I have no sympathies for terrorists what so ever, but this does not justify breaking all kinds of conventions and the US constitution. It is being made worse by that probably quite a few of these detainees are “small fish” or even bystanders that got caught up in this. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

C-17 would be very expensive to run and their exit speed is still quite high. If I was looking for a craft that can take a large number of jumpers, has a ramp, low exit speed and (assumed) affordable(?) running cost, I would try to get my hands on one of the larger Russian (MIL) helicopters. Tried one of these (MI-17) 10 years or so ago in Europe - absolutely awsome experience.... --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Just found out that my DZ has bought the first (?) 750 XL in Australia.

Yes I need to correct/clarify. The OECD does get involved in development activities. The data I provided is however not just aid through the OECD, it covers all "official" (government financed) development aid through a number of channels. There are definitions available regarding what that covers. The moneys you mention in your post are to a great part private funds (e.g. migrants sending money to relatives overseas), NGO's activities which I can not compare as I do not have comparable data from non-US NGO (and many are international anyway), as well as churches (how does that compare to the Vatican?) etc. All very good, but a lot is not development aid as such and it is difficult to compare to activities in other countries (don't have the stats). What you can compare is the official aid given by the government through the recognized channels and this data I provided. And according to this data the US is far behind all other developed countries as a % of GDP or for that matter per capita. Now, I did not present the data in order to slam the US, I just wanted to deflate the argument that the "US is paying for everybody else in the World" - it is just not true... On the other hand there is a lot of development aid money that gets wasted by organizations and countries. So I am quite critical of some of these activities myself but that is different discussion. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

You never have your facts right do you? There was a discussion if the existing UN resolutions were basis enough and the UK and US tried to get one more resolution "clearly" authorising the war. They did not achieve this, but most international law experts say that the existing resolutions were legal foundation enough. These resolutions clearly threatened military force if Iraq did not comply. Legally the "coalition" is not an aggressor in Iraq according to international law. Politically the coalition is however unfortunately "seen" to be an aggressor by especially Muslim countries who did not find the justification strong enough and do suspect hidden agendas other then WMD's and terrorism. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

I am not a specialist in this either and have no time to research it right now. However, take your examples and you will see that UN "authorisation" has played a central role: 1) Korea. The Korean war was sanctioned by the UN because NK attacked SK. McArthur was actually commander of the combined UN forces. 2) Balkans: Serbia was condemned by the UN for aggression against the other federation states and later Kosovo. Serbia was first hit by sanctions, later military (Kosovo) and the then leader of Serbia Milosovic (spelling?) is now in jail in The Haag and in front of the war crimes tribunal. 3) The first Gulf war was clearly sanctioned by the UN based on Iraq's aggression against Kuwait. One of the reasons that Bush senior "stopped" before he reached Baghdad was that the UN resolution only sanctioned the liberation of Kuwait, not the occupation of Iraq. The reason that the UK and US were so keen to get a second resolution before the latest war was to ensure not to get in trouble with international law. However, most international law experts agree that this was not really necessary due to earlier resolutions still in force. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Just to clarify before I am signing off: Foreign aid has NOTHING to do with the OECD. The OECD collects economic data and that is where I got the data from. The data is the aid given multi- and bilateral from each country. Go and visit their web site to understand what they do. Don't mix it up with the aid itself - they just collect the stats in this case. That is correct. Like in any budget the % of your total budget/wealth you spend on something shows the priority you give it. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

Show me "so-called education quotes" - I responded with some facts about Australian Universities when one of your friends here made derogatory remarks about the education system in Australia. I have not talked about my education here at all. I have talked about that this little club of red necks is constantly claiming "facts" that do not really resemble reality and I made the point - and maintain so - that you guys should try to get your facts right before posting your bigot and uninformed tirades in the forum. For that I have been called an academic snob or something. You have no idea about my background or education. Education does not have anything to do with knowing or researching your facts. So far I have seen several posts from you but not one where you made a contribution. Anyway, I am finished playing with the red neck club for today. Whilst some of the posts disgust me because of their bigot and sometimes racist content, it at least shows that you guys have no facts "to stand on" just your opinions and your mutual back slapping. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

This is what is called bilateral aid.... and it is included if it is aid for development. If it is money for weapons etc. it is not classified as “aid”. The $87B for Iraq is to pay for the occupation after the war. That is not classified as development aid. You can find some sites on the OECD and UN web sites that define which is which. But I assume that the numbers do not include weapons and cost of occupation by foreign troops as development aid.... --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

This does not make sense you take 4 countries and then apply some percentages? Lets take the facts. I have found the data and it is attached in the spreadsheet. You can see the US is the country that gives least in % of GDP of 22 OECD countries listed (there are 30 in total don’t know the numbers for the rest). Of the total $ amount of these 22's contribution the US contributes about 1/5. Japan with less then half the population contributed until recently far more in $ terms then the US. The EU countries listed combined paid 2.5 times more in $ terms and all far more in % of GDP. I am not sure if private programs like NGO's etc are included in the numbers. However, the non-government aid organisations are also very strong in e.g. Europe and I seriously doubt your statement that these NGO's in the US "dwarf” the ones in e.g. Europe. Got any facts for a change? Australia's numbers are included in the attached. In term of % of GDP it is 2.5 times the US aid. Much less in $ of course. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

This is actually an interesting thing to debate. The UN actually can. In order to act within international law you need to have the approval of the UN in most cases. That is why we had that discussion if a "second" UN resolution was necessary before the war. Example: If you start a war without approval of the UN Security Council, you are an "aggressor" that breaks international law and can be tried in front of a war crime tribunal and the UN will subject your country to sanctions. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

The one talking shit is you. Still nothing to add to the subject as such? Anything intelligent to say? --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

***Remember that OECD barely scratches the surface in terms of aid the US provides to other countries outside of UN programs (e.g. Egypt, Israel, Iraq, Pakistan, Mexico, Russia). *** No, wrong again. 1) OECD is an association of industrialised countries. When comparing “apples with apples” their membership is normally used as classifying the “developed world”. OECD has nothing to do with the aid numbers. 2) The numbers I mentioned are total “aid” given to foreign countries both through multilateral organisations like the UN and through bilateral aid given directly to one country from another. All aid was included in these numbers. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

One letter falls out in "cut and paste" and you post a Derogatory post? Have anything intelligent to say? --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

These things should be measured in % of GNI/GDP or per Capita in order to understand the priority an issue has in this countries policies - size of countries differ to much to just look at $. If you take the EU combined it spends about 2-3 times as much on foreign aid then the US in pure $ terms. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

It is a pitty that you can not even read your own post. You wrote: Implying you "deserve" to have priviliges because the US is sharing its wealth, when the fact is that the US is contributing the least in aid to other countries in the OECD in terms of % of GDP. So nothing to be proud of. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.