The issue is a concern for the southern part of Louisiana. It is said we lose one football field of protection (from hurricanes) each year - to erosion.

New Orleans does have a levy system along, Lake Pontchartrain, the Mississippi River and various canals. There has been maintenance on them since Katrina.

...as too usual...a discussion,...civil, information driven, more or less courteous and respectful...

...then IT, "Little...choggie Thing," rears ITs vitriolic filth dripping and spewing head.

At least, for a rare change, IT speaks from whence IT has an obvious extensive base of knowledge and experience, eg., drug-addled nightmares,


...and,...oh goodie...another insincere, self serving voting op! HMMMMM! Let's see,...I vote both, kind of,...TROLL who at ITs characteristic worst is yelling amazingly reflective self knowledge through his megaphone that is his alimentary canal in to his flith stuffed deafened ears.

So as long as it hasn't passed through the birth canal, it's just a bunch of cells. Once it has, it's a human being.

That flies in the face of logic and common sense.

You people are all believers in euthanasia, aren't you?
If a person is unwanted, just kill them.

Why not have abortion to the 19th month? or more? The mother decides she doesn't want the child, she should be able to terminate it, right? It probably is not participating to her satisfaction.

why do we prosecute such women for murder after the child has exited the birth canal?

It's amazing how clueless the people are about this. Makes me amusingly wonder about the "street psychics" you see sometimes in Las Vegas etc etc etc...Maybe, they're just guys with an assistant using a laptop talking into a microphone feeding to small ear canal speaker LOL...

Kitty like, but I kept dreading the nozzle accidentally enveloping the whole ear canal.

Well, I'm about to get down voted into oblivion, but I have to state this as bluntly as possible.

This is the most perverted kind of propaganda that can be trotted out by someone, and it sickens me to see it. Glen is absolutely correct in every fact he points out, and is in that respect, doing nothing but telling the truth and educating his audience with things they likely didn't know before, and should have. It would seem that should be an unqualified good thing then, but it's not.

What makes this offensive propagandizing to me is the absolutely deliberate omission of equally true, relevant and significant facts that Glen can't help but be aware of. His sole purpose for the omission is that it suddenly shifts things from black and white into the gray that audiences don't like as much.

I'll start from the most important point, and the very premise of the talk, why do they hate us? There is a bigger question though that is even more illuminating, and it is why to they(jihadist terrorists) hate and kill their fellow Islamic countrymen and neighbours? The fact here is that jihadi terrorists before 9/11 and even more so since, have killed tens and hundreds of times as many middle eastern muslims than they have white western infidels. Glen points out plenty of reasons people can have to be upset with America over it's past actions, which is legit in itself, but NONE of those reasons explain why these jihadists target there own fellow middle eastern muslims for the exact same violence and retribution America faced on 9/11. The fact this makes plain is that the jihadi terrorists will hate not only us, but everyone who is not willing to join them unconditionally. They are not the misunderstood, historically slighted and unjustly maligned people Glen's talk might lead people to think of them as. They(jihadi terrorists) do not deserve our sympathy or apologies, their countrymen and neighbours that are their biggest victims do.

Glen also goes on to list the deaths from sanctions on Iraq as an American crime. Apparently Saddam's horrific(then American approved) war on Iran, his genocide of the Kurds, his extensive use of chemical weapons in both, his complete seizure of Kuwait and his genocide of Iraqi Shiites are not relevant to the discussion of placing sanctions on his country. In Glen's discussion, despite this laundry list of crimes against humanity, Saddam is entirely innocent and not in anyway to blame for the children starving in his country while he continued to build himself new palaces and kept his personal guard and secret police forces well equipped and well fed. How is one to take this seriously?

Finally, Glen omits a terrifically important American crime in East Timor that Bin Laden listed. No, sadly it's not our tacit support for the pro Islamic genocide of the people there in the past, but it was America's support for an end to that genocidal repression and support for a free and independent East Timor. This was listed near the very top of American crimes. When Zarqawi blew up the Canal Hotel in Baghdad, he was very clear that it wasn't for Iraqi children dead at the hands of American sanctions. It was because Sérgio Vieira de Mello(killed in the blast) helped over see the transition to a free East Timor.

I'm afraid I am beyond disappointed by talks like this, I find them offensive and contemptible.

Your video, African Bullfrog Digs Canal To Save His Tadpoles From Death, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by pumkinandstorm.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Le-Grand-Journal-de-Canal-a-Cannes-coups-de-feu

I still didn't hear any shots on a second viewing, but did see the courageous Michel Denisot take refuge under the table.

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by oritteropo. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'guillermo capellan, reportaje conmovedor, censura politica, canal 7 salta' to 'banned, redacted' - edited by jonny

This cinematic is amazing, technically, although it is sort of frustrating when you then have to go play the ACTUAL game and:
(1) Units are nearly the same size, there's not this epic scale difference between battlecruisers and marines.
(2) You have a pop limit of 200, so you probably don't have more than 60 or 70 office units charging in, not the thousands shown here.
(3) Ultralisks can't actually step on things and squish them
(4) Nydus canals can't actually pop up in battles and be useful, because they're made of wet tissue paper.
(5) Things aren't so amazingly beautiful.

I'm being nitpicky, but the cinematic is great and it kind of makes you think "wow, that WOULD be a cool game" and then you have to go and play SC2, which admittedly is still a very, very well designed game.

Haha,

So destroying prospects for an Iran-Iraq-Syria-Pakistan-China pipeline via massive social engineering, extensive multi decade wars and risky political espionage is somehow cheaper than just good old price competition?

The Suez Canal is a much more direct threat to the trans-Israel pipeline (just look at a map to see what I mean) and clearly there is no massive, violent international conspiracy to suppress trade through that canal - Israel just undercuts their prices.

And for that matter, it's not like the trans Israel pipeline is some massive cash cow that is secretly protected at all costs. It's max capacity is only 400000 barrels per day - that's nothing as far as Israel is concerned profit-wise and definitely pathetic by Chinese daily demand-wise.

There is a grain of truth in every conspiracy: of course AIPEC is probably too influential, and of course the various wars going on right now have some economic incentives, but let's not be dumb about our accusations if we want to be taken seriously.

The bridge is over the Chagres river, which supplies water to the canal. All road and rail traffic in and out of the town of Gamboa must cross that bridge.
The canal itself continues off the right of the screen. The ship should be heading roughly parallel to the rail tracks. The tanker was out of the shipping lane; so, collision with the bridge was not the only danger, it could have run aground in shallow water.
An oil spill here would flow both directions, to the Pacific and to the Caribbean. Clearly someone f@^k'd up bad.