Waste Management, Inc. (WM) is scheduled to report fourth-quarter 2016 results before the opening bell on Feb 16.
Italy’s Saras SPA, which operates a 300,000-b/d, high-conversion refinery in Sarroch, on the southwestern coast of Sardinia, has temporarily shuttered one of two units at the refinery’s catalytic reforming (CCR) plant following an operational upset in early December.
FirstEnergy Corp. (FE) has inked a deal with an affiliate of Murray American Energy, Inc. to ship coal combustion residuals from the former's Bruce Mansfield Plant in Shippingport.
The first trailer for 'Kong: Skull Island' has arrived, and it gives us all sorts of juicy new information about what's to come. Here's what we saw.
Как преодолеть последствия «банкопада» и тотального недоверия между банками и клиентами
Waste Management, Inc. (WM) recently inked a Master Services Agreement with Empire Diversified Energy, Inc.
Начальная ситуация такая: есть 8 офисов в разных частях страны, надо их свести в единую сеть так, чтобы доступность каждого офиса была максимальной при любых катаклизмах. В качестве роутеров во всех офисах стоят Mikrotik. На основной площадке — CCR CCR1036-12G, на остальных — 1100 AHx2 Во избежание проблем с интернетом было протянуто по 2 канала от разных провайдеров, питание тоже зарезервировали и пришли к вопросу “а какую сеть-то строить?”. Как видно из названия статьи, в итоге решили строить FullMesh. Эта схема полностью удовлетворяет требованиям руководства — при выходе из строя любого интернет-канала или даже любого офиса сеть остается связной. Остался только вопрос с маршрутизацией. Из вариантов был всеобщий бридж с RSTP, OSPF и статические маршруты. Естественно я в итоге выбрал OSPF — меньше проблем, чем на статике и меньше нагрузки для маршрутизаторов, чем при RSTP. Сама настройка и готовый конфиг под катом. Читать дальше →
On his KCRW show "Scheer Intelligence," Truthdig Editor in Chief Robert Scheer spoke with Gary Tyler, who served over 40 years in prison after being wrongly convicted as a teenager of murdering a 13-year-old boy in 1974. After being on death row twice during his sentence, Tyler was finally freed this spring. Before his release, he directed a passion play cast only with prisoners from Angola penitentiary in Louisiana, where he was incarcerated. The experience was made into the documentary "Cast the First Stone." Tyler tells Scheer how the play forever changed him and the cast of prisoners, how he maintained hope over the years that he would eventually gain his freedom, and how a group of seasoned inmates helped him survive in prison. Adapted from Truthdig.com Read the transcript below: Robert Scheer: Hello, it's Robert Scheer with another edition of Scheer Intelligence, my weekly podcast with KCRW. The intelligence comes from our guests and today our guest is Gary Tyler, a remarkable person who got swept up in a series of events when he was 16 years old. Attempt to integrate schools in Louisiana and the viscous white resistance to it and in the process of a turmoil one such day, a young man was shot and they hunted to see who did it and despite the available evidence, they picked on Gary Tyler, a 16 year old. Tried as an adult, denied legal competence, this was all determined by courts later, and yet, was on death row for two years in Louisiana and through a series of court decisions invalidating - the Supreme Court - Invalidating the death penalty, he ended up serving life without possibility of parole. However, this last April, was finally paroled after 41 and a half years in Angola Penitentiary, one of the largest and fearsome prisons in the United States, if not the world. Welcome, Gary Tyler. Let's begin with the 16 year old who's blamed and fingered for murder and convicted and looking at electrocution. Gary Tyler: Thank you, Bob. On October the 7th, 1974, I was a 16 year old juvenile and that morning, there was a rumor that there was going to be an altercation blacks and white students at the school. I was earlier suspended after I departed from the bus and I was suspended three days and I left. Later I was brought back to the school by one of the deputies that felt that I was not only truant but also suspect of being one of the perpetrators that was involved in a racial conflict at Destrehan High School at the time. When he brought me back to school and found out that I was not the one that the principals and everything felt that was part of the incident, I was immediately ordered to depart from his vehicle. Upon doing so, a decision was made between myself and the guy that I was with to catch a ride on the school buses that was going back to the community. At that time, they was ushering people on the bus, not the exact bus that was going directly to their community. We was put on a school bus and as we departed from the school, there was a shot. Many on the bus panicked feeling as though they were being shot at. Of course, the bus driver stopped. Later, he was told to park the bus on a side road and when he did that, that's when everybody was being pulled off the school bus and was searched. Little did we know at the time, that someone was shot and we just felt that during the time of the heyday of the racial integration at the schools that it was just one of those things that routinely that we were being harassed that we were being discouraged from going to school. When I look - we were being deported and ordered to go in a vacant parking lot and I, of course, along with the other students, we were basically gathered in that general area. I saw my cousin, he was being harassed and pulled aside. I wanted to know what was happening and he told me that they was arresting him for having a .22 bullet around his neck. I protested. The deputy told me to come back across the ditch. As I was attempting to do so, that's when I was stopped by another police officer. I protested and one thing led to another and I was arrested for disturbing the peace and interfering in police officer's duty. After everything cleared up at the school, that's when I was, you could say, transported to the substation. They went to asking questions. When I didn't have the answer, then that's when they went to beating on me and like I said, for about two to three hours. I was beaten by several police officers in the substation until my mother intervened because she heard the beating in the room. She demanded that she see somebody. When they tried to transfer me to another room, then that's when she saw what happened. I called out and told her that they was accusing me of doing something about a murder. Little did I know at the time, that someone had gotten shot. Everyone at the time was a suspect, but little did I know, later on I was the prime suspect behind it. They transported me and they charged me with first-degree murder of a 13 year old white kid at the school. RS: As the facts emerged, first of all, you were very poorly defended and the courts were critical of that eventually - GT: Right. RS: You were tried as an adult, even though you were 16 and you got international attention of having been wrongfully imprisoned. You were on death row for two years. GT: Yes. RS: And got off death row and ended up, until this last April, being in Angola Penitentiary in Louisiana for 41 and half years. How did you get from being wrongfully accused, you're 16 years old, you're in this really rough prison and you're on death row for two years. Why aren't you crazy? Why weren't you destroyed by this? GT: Many people ask me that question, a lot. Sometimes the answer that I give them, I guess it's not enough because many of them say that despite everything that I told them, that if they were in my situation that they would be stark mad and that they would hate the world. I guess, in a way, they are right about that, but you know, for some reason a human being, they are genetically built to endure the difficulties that we find ourselves going though. I guess, at the time, when I was in prison, I was introduced to a culture that I never thought existed. I mean, not in my mind. I could never fathom that something like this existed, period. I was sent to a prison at a very young age and a prison that, at one time, had been declared the bloodiest prison in the United State. As a child, you know we heard a lot about it. We never thought - well that was no concern of mine, because I'd never go to prison. Unfortunately, I wound up in prison. And not only on death row, but also there was an execution date set on me. May the 1st, 1976. That beared heavily on my mind. I guess when I went to prison, I didn't know anybody. I'll never forget that when I went to death row, they had these doors that were slamming and prisoners shouting and hollering. It was like being introduced to an insane asylum, I guess. When I was put on a tier, it was a short tier with 14 people. No, I take that back, there were 13 people on the tier. I was assigned cell eight. When I stepped across that threshold in that cell, that's when the cell door slammed behind me and at that time, it was one of the most weirdest sounds I ever heard. But it was like my fate had been sealed. That now my execution date was set and I was going to set there until that day come. And it was fast approaching. Nonetheless, then on death row, I'd gotten to know some guys that at that time, they was considered the incorrigibles. The worst of the worst in prison. That the prison administrators feared and the kept them locked up in c-cell, in which case, close cell restriction. They kept these guys monitored. They thought the worst of these guys. For some reason, these guys when they saw me come on that tier, as young as I was, in which case, I didn't know anybody, wasn't familiar with the culture of prison. What they did, they formed a bond around me; they took me in. We're talking about guys who was in prison for murdering other prisoners, who committed horrible crimes in prison. But, when they saw me, they saw their little brother, they saw their son, they saw their nephew, they even saw their neighbor's child, and they knew that no way in the world, physically, that I'd be able to survive this environment if they didn't step up to help me. And that's what they did. And I contribute that to those guys, because they were able to help me to survive and gather my footing while I was in prison. They gave me the best of themselves and I guess because they knew that their lives was over with and they saw hope within me. RS: You had some people on the outside trying to help your case, right? GT: Right, right. I had, you know, even after 41 and half years later, those very people - RS: Well, there's a guy here who teaches here at USC, Bill Blum, who's a former judge. He wrote an article about your case back in 1970. GT: Yes. RS: Advocating your case. And then I look back at the record and there were famous rock groups and others who had songs about you. Your case did get some attention and publicity. GT: Right. Yes. RS: But it still didn't get you out. GT: No, it didn't. What it did was that it kept my plight alive with the public. It reminded people of the injustice that not only had been perpetrated against me, that I was still in this suspended, you understand, state of injustice. It gave me hope knowing that people were out there. People who correspond with me, the letters that I've gotten from people, the cards, who have constantly, on an annual basis, encouraged me to hold, to stand, to be strong. And, don't let this get the best of you that one day something good going to happen. RS: So how did you get involved with the theater group in prison? GT: Well, after getting out of CCR and later, the cell block, there was a guy named Herman Smith. He was over the drama club. He was looking forward to going home. He read a lot about me and he felt that he wanted to leave the organization in some capable hands. Now, I never ran no organization before in my life. The only thing I had for me is who I am and my reputation. But he felt that I would be a good addition to the drama club. RS: So this is a guy who's getting out of prison and he cares that the drama club continue? GT: Yes. Because drama club was one of the earliest organizations that was established in prison because back then, they did not have any recreational activities that was in the prison itself. When later, when the inmates was allowed to establish self-help programs, the drama club was one of the organizations that was earlier developed. And he had been the president of that organization ever since. RS: He singled you out. Let me ask you though, the thing that happened with the drama club, which brings us to the question of this movie that people can watch that shows about your production. First, there was a woman that helped you and then the warden who got involved. GT: Right. RS: And it kind of got mixed up with telling the story of Jesus and that this was supported by the local Baptist, Christian community, right? Or, Catholic community in Louisiana? How did that happen? You'd done a lot of plays with this drama club. GT: Yes, we did numerous productions inside of the prison, matter of fact, we were one of the first prison organizations that traveled around the state, performing at universities, college, schools, and civic centers. Bring our message out. And what we did was that, we had wrote plays centered around social issues like teenage pregnancy, drug abuse, Alcoholic Anonymous, and various other things. We performed around the country, excuse me, around the state with our production. So, it kind of, like gave the guys in the organization, you understand, it gave them that experience. They was able to sharpen their acting abilities. But, you know, after so many years of performing, you had people that able to build their confidence, people that able to feel as though that they could just about do anything. RS: Well the startling thing about, I didn't see the play, which was performed at the prison. But the film about the play, everyone in, and we didn't get to this part, but insisted on having women actors come over from the women prison. Every single person who made the cut, I guess you had auditions, they were all, like, stellar actors. The were professionally incredible. What is the title, by the way? GT: Cast the First Stone. RS: Yes. How did that play, that particular production come about? GT: It came about through one of the assistant wardens that went to Scotland. She went to Scotland on a tour and she was invited to a Passion Play and she watched it and she liked what she saw. She felt, I guess she got an idea that, that this same production could be performed in Angola. But when she came back, she went to the religious community in the prison and asked them would they be willing to do the play. And, of course, many of them had their reservation. The felt that they weren't capable of doing it and, at the same time, my name kept coming up in the middle of the conversation. She, at the time, she wanted the religious community because they felt that by Angola having one of the biggest faith-based program in the nation that it would have been good having graduates of the Bible college performing the play. Not realizing that those guys were not actors. Those guys were basically typical plain, just old prisoners. They did not have any acting experience and many of them kind of shoned away from it. But they kept telling her that, "You need to get Gary to do it, get Gary to do it. If anybody can make this happen, Gary can do it." Later she came to me and she asked me about it. Would I be willing to do this? Of course, I had my reservations. How it would look for me to do a Christian play in a prison that thrives off of Christianity. And that many of them know that I was not a man of any Christian or religious belief. And that they would vehemently be against me taking on that responsibility. But little did I know that they was the ones that kept recommending that I was the one to do the production. RS: This is actually a good side of the impact of religion in that this warden, because he's on your film, he's in the film - GT: Right. RS: He says, "Well, you know, the other thing of just oppressing these people and beating them down and everything is not working; we got to do something else here." And he said he was inspired that through Jesus' message of love and understanding and openness, something other could happen, right? GT: Right. RS: I know you're not, you don't call yourself a religious person, although many of your actors are. Not all Christian. GT: Right RS: You have Buddhist, Muslims. GT: Muslims, Jewish. RS: But the fact of the matter is, this is a case where that religious impulse that was brought into the prison basically from more conservative, Southern-types ended up being a good thing, you know? GT: Yes, of course. One thing that I'm also asked that I have to the liberty to rewrite the script. I was given the latitude to do that. What I did, in turn, was - RS: You got to rewrite the Bible? GT: Well, what I did was, I kind of like, you could say, compacted it a little more and took out the more practical things out of the script, you understand? We're talking about a play that it took over three to four hours to perform. The Passion Play. And I had to do this play within 2 hours. So I knew that I wasn't going to be able to do everything in the script, so give me the liberty to change things, and I'm then going to give, you understand, you what you want. I took some things out and I also wrote characters in the script as well as one in particular, Judas, because I felt that Judas was a pivotal character back then. We're talking about someone who had betrayed Jesus. That's all many people remember Judas about. I realized that what Judas did, he was destined to do that. Even though he was destined to do that very act, that it was something that was ordained from the heavens. And that we look at Judas as the betrayer of Jesus, but Judas could be setting right there next to Jesus in heaven today. Because he was forgiven by Jesus. Despite the treacherous act that he committed, he was forgiven by Jesus. And right there, I felt that it showed redemption; it showed forgiveness and that's why I wanted Judas, you understand, to be a pivotal role in the play itself. RS: So let me ask you, first of all, most of the actors are African American in the play, right? Is the prison population disproportionately - GT: The prison population, yes, of course, disproportionately, African American. RS: And yet, within that community, you have people who are not. You had, as I said before, different religions and different attitudes, but the interesting thing was that the ideas were ideas that everyone could grab onto and relate back to their own life. The amazing thing about watching that is you are watching and listening to a conversation that is as intelligent as you're ever going to listen to but from people who are basically not well-educated, I assume, or not all, and have had a hard life and are in a prison and have every reason to be cynical and say, "who needs this," and yet, you have one of the most thoughtful discussions of the meaning of life and of values and of the worth of individuals. Precisely as the image of Christ that we have was intended to convey. GT: Right. RS: Right. And all these notions of forgiveness. I was amazed that the warden seemed to endorse that whole approach. Were you surprised in his little speech? GT: Yes, I was, and I felt that it was needed. It was needed to the women and men that was in the production because you know, let's look at where we're at. We're talking about people who are serving life sentences, who are serving a long stretch in prison, whether it's life or not and, they could have been doing other things. They all agreed to do this production because they felt that this gave them an opportunity to be able to give back to society. It gave them a chance to be able to show people that they were not that person that they were when they first went to prison. That they have changed. And also to be able to prove to their families that despite where they are at, that they can make the best out of a bad situation. Of course, I was able to recruit people from all walks of life in the prison. Also, that we're talking about some people that had disciplinary problems and I knew these guys. I knew that giving them a chance, an opportunity, I could help transform them. I like that I had opportunity to interview and audition, you understand, these guys, because I opened it up to the prison population and I was getting, if you consider the worst of the worst, and to hear these guys say, "Give me chance. Let me prove myself." It's like people asking society, "Give me a second chance." So, I heard their cries and I gave them that chance. I found them to be the most committed and dedicated actors that I had in the production. RS: Even though as you say in the movie, many of them knew they were only leaving that prison in a casket? GT: Yes, yes. RS: Who was Jesus in your play? GT: Jesus was performed by a guy named Bobby Wallace, who now is out. RS: And the performance, is it an open area in part of the prison? GT: Yes, but it was performed in the Rodeo Arena. RS: Tell me about the audience because it was a lot of family - GT: It was open to the public and the public, family members, people from various universities and schools. It was - We had a very resounding attendance from the public. Before the ladies and men stepped on that stage I was able to talk to them. I let them know that this was their moment, not mine. It was theirs. I did everything I could to help them. I gave them the best of me so now everything was in their court and it was, understand, it was their time to shine and fortunately, they rose to the occasion. They went out there and the performed like champs. RS: When I watched the movie on the play, I had a sense - I wouldn't say I believe any more in a heaven, a hell and an afterlife, I certainly did feel it was inspirational. I felt touched, touched. I wonder if you felt, having spent so much time with this material, whatever you think about religion, you're dealing with the basic issues of human existence. What is the meaning of life? What is right and wrong? What do I stand for? Who am I? Did you become, were you influenced by it? GT: Yes, of course. You're influenced by everything that goes on in life and doing this production wasn't any difference to me. I always felt that even though I wasn't a religious man, that I was a spiritual man. I'm someone that I can accept anyone for who they are and what they believe in. Because I feel that to accept people for who they are, it gives you an opportunity to get to know them, to be able to appreciate them. And having to work with the men and the women of these two different prisons, what it did was that, it helped educate me. It helped gave me a profound appreciation of working with people, you understand, from various backgrounds. I can set here and tell you those very people, regardless of their belief, they have showed me that they have changed. That they are not the people they were when they first went to prison. RS: The interesting thing about this film is it's also a documentary. You see scenes from the play but, you also see people having arguments. You see somebody who you go visit in his cell and he's falling off, right? He's gotten involved with some druggers - GT: Yes, he'd gotten in a physical altercation with another prisoner. RS: He can't be in the play at that time. GT: Yes. RS: You get a lot of this human interaction. However, I - Not however, because of that I defy anyone to watch this film and still think of people in our - This massive incarcerated population that we have in this country, the largest in the world, certainly, by far as proportional to our population, and think of them as the other. Not think of them as themselves, their own family, their own people. I think that is the great achievement of this film. That it forces you to recognize the humanity of people that we have systematically attempted to put out of sight, out of mind, and deny their humanity. I think it's a singularly important artistic achievement. I want to thank you once again for doing this and to encourage people to check it out; it's really profound. Thank you. GT: Thank you, Robert for having me here. RS: This is Robert Scheer, another edition of Scheer Intelligence where the intelligence is supplied by my guests, in this case, Gary Tyler, 41 and a half years in prison, great director of an important play. Maybe one of the most important plays that you can see and his film version. My producers have been, Joshua Scheer and Rebecca Mooney. Technical engineers are Mario Diaz and Kat Yore, here at USC where they've generously supplied the studio, Sebastian Grubar. See you next week for another edition of Scheer Intelligence. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
They Said It: Grace Slick, Art Garfunkel, Ian Anderson, CCR's Stu Cook Opine On A Range Of Subjects
Over the past few decades, I have interviewed dozens of rock icons from the 1960s and 1970s. While compiling a new book about these historic chats, I have found some gems.In Part 1, we quoted Ginger Baker, John Densmore, Butch Trucks, Grace Slick and the late Jack Bruce about other [...]
The drinking water challenges facing Flint, Michigan and other communities throughout America have raised the collective consciousness about the quality of the water we drink, and the infrastructure that treats and delivers it through 1.5 million miles of pipes serving more than 300 million people. The National Association of Water Companies (NAWC) members, who are investor-owned utilities, recently distributed their annual water quality reports to the customers they serve throughout the country. These reports compare drinking water quality to state and federal standards and are an annual requirement of the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) for water providers. With a few exceptions, most of the water from the nation's rivers, streams and underground aquifers generally is not healthy to drink without being treated. Geographically there are many other variables that impact treatment protocol. The final treated drinking water that flows from the faucet must meet strict EPA water quality standards. Yet the day-to-day responsibility for federal and state regulatory compliance for water quality standards belongs to the water utility. This responsibility is profound when one considers reliable water service is essential to our quality of life. As a requirement of the EPA's Safe Drinking Water Act, nearly all Americans receive notices about the quality of their water from their respective water utilities. These annual notices, called Consumer Confidence Reports (CCRs), provide important printed and online information about the levels of contaminants found in untreated source water and the quality of the drinking water delivered to the faucet after it has been treated. These reports show private water companies have a stellar record of providing high-quality drinking water, underscoring each NAWC member company's commitment to consistently make the necessary investments to improve water infrastructure. A recently published study (Konisky, D. and Teodoro, M., 2015, When Governments Regulate Governments) concluded that private water utilities have significantly fewer violations of the Safe Drinking Water Act than the national average. Today, millions of Americans depend on investor-owned water utilities or private water contractors (vis-à-vis public-private partnerships) to treat their water and ensure the water and wastewater systems operate reliably and safely. Private water professionals across the nation constantly monitor and test the untreated source water for unhealthy contaminants identified by the EPA. Once the water is treated, these same private water professionals monitor and test the water again to ensure it meets or exceeds strict EPA standards. Recent technological advances can now detect contaminants in water down to parts per billion. Private water companies have been committed to providing safe, clean water and reliable service to homes and businesses for more than 100 years. These water and wastewater service providers reliably support the needs of nearly 73 million people every day. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
FleetCor Technologies, Inc. (FLT) recently acquired Travelcard Nederland B.V. from LeasePlan Corporation N.V. for an undisclosed amount.
Video"A financial transaction tax would help ensure Wall Street works for Main Street" is the intriguing title of a paper released today by the Economic Policy Institute. A few years ago, I had designated myself as the left wing of the elderly curmudgeon division of CCR LLP, a large regional [...]
Despite the bizarre politics on display in Cleveland, sometimes knowing where someone stands on an issue is pretty straightforward. We can be sure about this: The private prison industry doesn't share our goal of ending mass incarceration. In fact, they profit more the bigger our criminal justice system grows--the country's two largest private prison companies, Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) and GEO Group, made $361 million in profits in 2015 alone. Think about what we could do with that money. We could invest in things people really need, like job training and mental health care, and alternatives to incarceration. In the past few weeks we've taken big steps towards getting our money back from the shareholders, executives, and Wall Street banks that profit from mass incarceration: Colorado's Kit Carson Correctional Center, operated by CCA, will close at the end of this month--it will be the fourth private prison to close in the state since 2009. The Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition (CCJRC) has been working for over 15 years to reduce the prison population enough to make the prison unprofitable for CCA. In June, Mississippi announced that the notorious, privately operated Walnut Grove Correctional Facility will soon be closed. The closing is the culmination of years of work by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which, in 2010, argued that conditions at the prison were unconstitutional. U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) has introduced legislation that would make it harder for private prison companies to take advantage of federal rules that provide massive tax breaks. After converting themselves into special real estate trusts in 2012, CCA and GEO Group have avoided hundreds of million dollars in federal income taxes--they avoided a combined113 million in 2015 alone. L=Just last week, a federal judge ruled that the government must make contracts with private prison companies available to the public. Detention Watch and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) had sued the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) due to a severe lack of transparency in the agency's detention of immigrants, which is 62% privatized. These wins are a big deal. As we've outlined, prisons run by private companies are more violent than public prisons and have higher rates of recidivism. Every taxpayer dollar we take back from the private prison industry is a dollar that can be spent on cultivating a more humane criminal justice system and a safe and just society. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Если посмотреть на историю роутеров от Микротика, то сначала появились пяти портовые устройства двух ценовых категорий - дешевое с медленным процессором, и дорогое, с более быстрым и гигабитными сетевыми портами. Потом появилась серия RB2011, где сетевых портов было десять, при чем половина - гигабитные, а в некоторых моделях возможна установка SFP модуля. Конечно, были устройства серии RB1200, которые быстро сняли с производства, и RB1100, которые выпускаются в настоящее время, однако они стоят дорого и больше подходят для установки на узлах связи, совместно с CCR. Кроме большого количества портов, их объединяет и высокая цена, что не позволяет использовать их для непосредственного подключения пользователей. С недавнего времени ситуация изменилась - появился новый многопортовый маршрутизатор CRS125-24G-1S, который располагает 24 гигабитными сетевыми портами и слотом для установки оптического SFP модуля. При этом его стоимость не сильно выше Mikrotik RB2011LS, а портов вдвое больше. Для каких же целей можно использовать CRS125-24G-1S? 1. Подключение клиентов к сети в многоквартирных домах - при этом авторизовывать можно прямо на порту, что не требует использование вланов или установку допольниельных многопортовых коммутаторов. 2. Установка в термобоксах на крышах, где требуется подключать большое количество беспроводного оборудования (базовые станции, мосты точка-точка и т.п.) - иногда такие задачи встречаются, когда RB2011 оказывается мало и приходится соединять два аналогичных устройства патчкордом. 3. Использования в качестве многопортового роутера в офисной сети, при этом можно сразу группировать порты по типам, например часть для компьютеров, часть для телефонных аппаратов и т.п., при этом не требуется установка сторонних коммутаторов. При желании можно найти и другие применения, которых на самом деле много, вплоть до полного вытеснения коммутаторов других производителей.(http://www.lanmart.ru/blo...)
Over the past year, several attempts in the New York legislature to pass laws protecting Israel against the boycotts, divestment and sanctions collectively known as "BDS" have failed. BDS punishes Israel for its illegal occupation of Palestinian lands. In an unprecedented end run around the legislative process, Gov. Andrew Cuomo issued an executive order this month that would accomplish just what the legislature has refused to do. Cuomo's order directs all agencies under his jurisdiction to discontinue all dealings with companies and organizations that support BDS. It also mandates that Cuomo's commissioner compile a list of institutions and companies that support a boycott of Israel. The blacklist will be publicly posted. The burden of proving that these entities do not support the boycott is on the companies and institutions themselves. What Is BDS? The boycott, divestment and sanctions movement was launched in 2005 by representatives of Palestinian civil society. They called upon "international civil society organizations and people of conscience all over the world to impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era ... [including] embargoes and sanctions against Israel." To read more stories like this, visit Human Rights and Global Wrongs. This call for BDS specified that "these non-violent punitive measures" should last until Israel fully complies with international law by (1) ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the barrier Wall; (2) recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and (3) respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their land as stipulated in United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194. The BDS movement has had several successes in recent years. Groups honoring BDS include the United Church of Christ, Presbyterian Church (USA), United Methodist Church, Mennonites and Quakers and several academic institutions, as well as many artists and intellectuals. In 2014, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu excoriated BDS during his address to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, the powerful United States-based organization that lobbies for Israel. Cuomo now walks in lockstep with Netanyahu. In his executive order, Cuomo declared, "If you boycott against Israel, New York will boycott you." Omar Barghouti, a founder of the BDS movement, said in an email to The New York Times: "Having lost many battles for hearts and minds at the grass-roots level, Israel has adopted since 2014 a new strategy to criminalize support for BDS from the top" in order to "shield Israel from accountability." What Is the Israeli Occupation? Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories is a form of colonialism. Israel maintains effective control over Gaza's land, airspace, seaport, electricity, water, telecommunications and population registry. Israel deprives Gazans of food, medicine, fuel and basic services. The occupation constitutes collective punishment, which is considered a war crime. In 2002, more than 100 Israeli army reservists declared they would no longer fight in the West Bank and Gaza Strip "with the aim of dominating, expelling, starving and humiliating an entire people." "The price of occupation," they said, "is the loss of the Israeli Defense Forces' semblance of humanity and the corruption of all of Israeli society." The soldiers reported firing at Palestinians who hadn't endangered them, stopping ambulances at checkpoints, and stripping areas clean of groves and trees necessary to people's livelihoods. Cuomo's executive order is a blatant ploy to prevent any criticism of Israel's policy of occupation and oppression of Palestinians. An Unconstitutional Executive Order Cuomo's order is also unconstitutional. "The Supreme Court has made clear [that the] government can't penalize people or entities on the basis of their free expression, and political boycotts are a form of free expression," the New York Civil Liberties Union declared. "Creating a government blacklist that imposes state sanctions based on political belief raises serious First Amendment concerns." "Boycotts are a constitutionally protected form of speech, association and assembly -- as well as a non-violent form of resistance to oppression," according to Audrey Bomse, co-chair of the National Lawyers Guild's Palestine Subcommittee. Barghouti concurs. He told the Times that the boycott is a "time-honored tactic of resisting injustice in the US." Boycotts Achieve Social Change Indeed, it was the domestic consumer and rent boycotts, the international academic boycotts and divestments, and the UN General Assembly's call for boycotts and sanctions against South Africa that nourished the anti-apartheid movement. "As someone who successfully moved a boycott of South African goods in 1962 ... I fully support the right to use a boycott as a legitimate expression of those who oppose [Israel's policies]," said Lord Hughes, chairman of the UK's Anti-Apartheid Movement for 20 years, in an interview with Al Jazeera. From 1965 to 1970, a consumer grape boycott organized by the United Farm Workers (UFW) forced growers to sign their first union contracts, granting workers better pay, benefits and protections. UFW President Cesar Chavez called it "a gate of hope through which [farm workers] expect to find the sunlight of a better life for themselves and their families." And the 1955 to 1956 Montgomery Bus Boycott by African Americans, guided by Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. after Rosa Parks refused to relinquish her seat on a bus to a white man, ultimately led the US Supreme Court to order the integration of Montgomery's bus system. "Gov. Cuomo has decided that his moral compass points in the direction of Joseph McCarthy rather than Rosa Parks," said Columbia Law School professor Katherine Franke, who chairs the board of the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR). The National Lawyers Guild, Palestine Legal and CCR wrote in a legal memorandum that the anti-BDS bills pending in the New York legislature "harken back to the McCarthy era when the state sought to deny the right to earn a livelihood to those who express controversial political views." The memo added, "The courts long ago found such McCarthy-era legislation to be at war with the First Amendment," as they "unconstitutionally target core political speech activities and infringe on the freedom to express political beliefs." More than 100 churches, human rights groups and legal organizations signed a letter to the New York legislature opposing the pending legislation, saying "it would chill and deter constitutionally protected speech by intimidating people from engaging in political actions for fear of being blacklisted ... These measures are dangerous and unconstitutional. No legislation should restrict the rights of New Yorkers to engage in efforts to bring sanctions against a nation engaged in human rights violations." In addition, "It is unprecedented for a state to create a list of entities that support or engage in a First Amendment protected political activity, and deny them financial benefits because of it," according to Palestine Legal. BDS Is a Nonviolent Anti-Occupation Strategy Last week, Ron Huldai, mayor of Tel Aviv-Jaffa and a former Israeli Air Force pilot, made news when he declared that Israel's occupation is a factor that causes Palestinians to turn to terrorism. Likewise, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barack once said that if he were a Palestinian, he would have joined a terrorist organization. After the June 8 terrorist attack in Tel Aviv claimed the lives of four Israelis, an editorial in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz stated, "The terror will continue as long as the Palestinian people have no hope on the horizon ... The only way to deal with terrorism is by freeing the Palestinian people from the occupation. Until then, the Palestinians will continue their opposition using force, as most peoples have done throughout history." In Bomse's words, "The response of the movement in solidarity with the Palestinian people should be to build an even stronger consensus in support of Palestinian human rights and against Israeli colonialism." Rebecca Vilkomerson, executive director of Jewish Voice for Peace, said, "There will not be progress toward a just peace without pressure on Israel to respect Palestinian rights." She added, "Bringing about that pressure, through a global grassroots mobilization, is exactly what BDS is about." BDS should be embraced as a nonviolent strategy to challenge the Israeli occupation. Copyright, Truthout. Reprinted with permission. Marjorie Cohn is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild and a member of Jewish Voice for Peace. She writes, speaks and does media about human rights and US foreign policy. Her latest book is Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral, and Geopolitical Issues. Follow her on Twitter. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (JEC) has recently won twin contracts.
Legendary human rights lawyer Michael Ratner died Wednesday. His pathbreaking legal and political work on behalf of the poor and oppressed around the world is unmatched. His death is an incalculable loss for the cause of freedom, peace and justice. The last time I saw Michael was shortly before he was diagnosed with cancer. We were in New York for the annual dinner of the National Lawyers Guild (NLG). Both of us had served as NLG presidents, he during the Reagan years, I during the George W. Bush administration. When we met in New York, Michael had just returned from Cuba, where he had a wonderful visit with Gerardo Hernández, one of the Cuban Five. I was about to leave for Cuba, where I would meet with René González and Antonio Guerrero, two other members of the Cuban Five. The Five had traveled to Miami to gather intelligence about terrorist plots against Cuba. When they turned over their data to the FBI, they were rewarded with arrests, convictions and incarceration. In Cuba, the Five ("Los Cinco") are considered national heroes. One of the conditions for the historic détente between Barack Obama and Raul Castro in December 2014 was the United States' release of the members of the Cuban Five who still remained in custody. Michael raved about his Cuba trip. A longtime friend and ally of the Cuban Revolution, Michael had first traveled to Cuba in the 1970s. He later co-authored the book, Who Killed Che?, in which he and Michael Smith concluded, based on U.S. government documents, that the CIA was behind the assassination. When Cuba opened its embassy in Washington, D.C., last July, Michael was there. He told "Democracy Now!" host Amy Goodman that "other than the birth of my children, this is perhaps one of the most exciting days of my life. ... This is a major, major victory for the Cuban people, and that should be understood. We are standing at a moment that I never expected to see in our history." Indeed, Michael will probably be best remembered for his victory in gaining the right to habeas corpus for U.S. detainees held in Cuba at Guantanamo. Michael was lead counsel in the 2004 case of Rasul v. Bush, in which the Supreme Court upheld the right of those detained as "enemy combatants" at Guantanamo to have their petitions for habeas corpus heard by U.S. courts. The Bush administration had argued that since the detainees were being held on Cuban soil, they had no right of access to U.S. federal courts to challenge their confinement. But the court held that the United States exercises complete jurisdiction and control over the Guantanamo Bay base. As Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority, "Aliens held at the base, no less than American citizens, are entitled to invoke the federal courts' authority" under the federal habeas corpus statute. "We went into court with a very straightforward proposition -- that habeas corpus meant every single person detained has a right to go into court and say to the government: 'Tell me why you are detaining me and give me the legal justification,'" Michael wrote in his chapter published in my book, "The United States and Torture: Interrogation, Incarceration, and Abuse." Michael also wrote that "[p]reventive detention is a line that should never be crossed. A central aspect of human liberty that has taken centuries to win is that no person shall be imprisoned unless he or she is charged and tried." Michael added, "If you can take away those rights and simply grab someone by the scruff of the neck and throw them into some offshore penal colony because they are non-citizen Muslims, those deprivations of rights will be employed against all. ... This is the power of a police state and not a democracy." In his chapter, Michael advocated "accountability by means of criminal prosecutions" of Bush, Dick Cheney, George Tenet and Donald Rumsfeld for their torture program. "Until this occurs," Michael wrote, "a future president can, with the stroke of a pen, put the United States back in the torture business." Michael sued Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Rumsfeld, the FBI and the Pentagon for their violations of law. He challenged U.S. policy in Cuba, Iraq, Haiti, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Puerto Rico and Israel/Palestine. He was lead counsel for whistleblower Julian Assange. As David Cole wrote in The Nation, Michael "knew that when you sue the powerful, you will often lose. But he also understood that such suits could prompt political action, and that advocacy inspired by a lawsuit was often more important in achieving justice than the litigation itself." Jules Lobel, who followed Michael as president of the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), said on "Democracy Now!" that Michael "never backed down from a fight against oppression, against injustice, no matter how difficult the odds, no matter how hopeless the case seemed to be." Lobel added, "Michael was brilliant in combining legal advocacy and political advocacy. ... He loved people all around the globe. He represented them, met with them, shared their misery, shared their suffering." As NLG president in the early 1980s, Michael initiated the guild's challenges to Reaganism, including U.S. interventions in Central America and the Caribbean. When he was president of CCR, he choreographed litigation that essentially ended New York City's draconian stop-and-frisk policing policy. Fellow past NLG president Barbara Dudley noted, "Michael leavened his brilliant mind and his creative legal skills with love and humor and an abundant energy. His work, his laugh, his irony and his enduring belief in the revolutionary spirit will live on." Vince Warren, CCR's executive director, called Michael "one of the great justice warriors of our time," noting that family members said Michael was born with the "empathy gene." In 2002, Michael presciently told The New York Times, "A permanent war abroad means permanent anger against the United States by those countries and people that will be devastated by U.S. military actions. Hate will increase, not lessen; and the terrible consequences of that hate will be used, in turn, as justification for more restrictions on civil liberties in the United States." We will not see the likes of him again. Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild, and deputy secretary general of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers. Her most recent book is Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral, and Geopolitical Issues. Follow her on Twitter. This article first appeared on Truthdig. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
From defending civil rights in the US to defending Central American revolutions from the US. From representing HIV-positive Haitian asylum seekers quarantined at Guantanamo Bay in the early 1990s to representing the Muslims brought there 10 years later in the "global war on terror." From suing foreigners for torture in US courts to suing Americans for torture in courts abroad. The radical lawyer Michael Ratner, who died on May 11 at age 72, was always, instinctively, in the right place, fighting the right battle, from the right trench. Michael Ratner (far right) and Reed Brody (fist raised) at 1984 protest of US support for Nicaraguan "contras" © Reed Brody I first met Michael in June 1984. I had just returned from Nicaragua where, in a little hamlet by the Honduran border, villagers told me about the US-backed Contra rebels burning schools and farms and savagely murdering teachers and activists. I felt an enormous responsibility to do something -- indeed I promised the villagers that I would, but I didn't know what to do. A few days after my return, the National Lawyers Guild organized a blockade of the Federal Building in lower Manhattan to protest US policy in Nicaragua. Michael was there with other luminaries such as Prof. Arthur Kinoy and activist lawyer Bill Kunstler. Although I had sworn that I wouldn't do anything stupid for at least a week after my return, I was arrested that sweltering day with Michael and the others. That was my introduction to this man who was even then a reference on the progressive legal community, and I talked to him about how to fulfill my promise to the Nicaraguan villagers. Out of our discussions grew the idea for what would become my five-month investigation of widespread Contra atrocities, which landed on the front page of the New York Times, helped change the terms of the debate, and led to a temporary cutoff of US aid to the Contras. The next year, the International Court of Justice in The Hague, which used my report, ordered the US to stop supporting the Contras. Michael and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), which he led for three decades, decided that the world court's ruling had to be taken seriously and prepared to go to federal court to seek an injunction against further Contra aid. Feeling that they needed American plaintiffs with legal standing who could argue that their lives were at risk, Michael sent me back to Nicaragua, where I took statements from those who seemed the most exposed. Reed Brody and Michael Ratner, Berlin 2014 © Reed Brody One of them was Ben Linder, whose daily work bringing electricity to remote villages put him directly in the Contra's path. Ben signed an affidavit saying that he was "subject to personal danger to life and limb" and that if the court did not grant the injunction, he could "suffer irreparable physical harm as a result of the unlawful actions of the US government." The federal court refused to grant the injunction and less than a year later Ben was the first and only American executed by the Contras. Michael then spent years representing the Linder family as they sought redress against Contra leaders and the US government. Working together on issues ranging from Haiti to Abu Ghraib, Michael would become my best friend and mentor, my co-author (of The Pinochet Papers), my co-counsel, and for four years my Columbia Law School co-professor as we shared with a new generation of law students our ideas for how to "bring the bad guys to justice." Michael will perhaps best be remembered as the first member of the "Guantanamo Bar Association." In early 2002, as the attack on the World Trade Center was fresh in the minds of Americans, the US began taking detainees captured in Afghanistan and elsewhere - whom Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld called "the worst of the worst" -- to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in an attempt to put them beyond the jurisdiction of the US courts. Michael and the CCR sued President George W. Bush on their behalf. Ultimately the US Supreme Court ruled that prisoners at Guantanamo had constitutional rights, which could be enforced by the US courts. Most important, Michael was a gentle and generous human being who touched and inspired so many others all over the world. He and his wonderful wife, Karen, were - and are - at the heart of a large multi-generational progressive community in New York. In announcing his death, the CCR said, "Today we mourn. Tomorrow we carry on his work." Michael wouldn't have it any other way. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
US human rights lawyer who challenged the detention without charge of hundreds of prisoners in Guantánamo BayIn the years following 9/11, Michael Ratner, who has died of cancer aged 72, emerged as one of America’s foremost human rights lawyers. He galvanised 500 US lawyers of various political persuasions to challenge the legality of holding hundreds of Muslim men, arrested around the world, without charge or trial in Guantánamo Bay. He served as president and later president emeritus of the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), founded in 1966 by the leftwing lawyer William Kunstler and others who represented the civil rights movement in the southern states in its most challenging years. Ratner worked there for 40 years, and his leadership made CCR the focal point for the lawyers who went to Guantánamo to represent unknown prisoners from a dozen countries, and then a leading voice for closing the detention camp.As co-counsel in the landmark US supreme court case Rasul v Bush in 2004, Ratner and his team won Guantánamo prisoners the right to test the legality of their detentions in court. Disillusioned and angry at the politicised judiciary that made the cases fail on appeal over and over again until the present, Ratner worked tirelessly against the administration’s lawyers. Until the end of his life he was working for the cases that were among those that outraged and saddened him most – the continuing detention of Guantánamo prisoners cleared by the US military and security services years before, but still imprisoned in defiance of international law and the US constitution. Continue reading...