blogsysteme.com

Thursday, March 2, 2006

Buffalo, New York —In an unanimous vote, the City of Buffalo‘s Planning Board voted to table the Elmwood Village hotel Proposal, postponing voting on legislation for up to 30 days.

The Board said its decision was due to the lack of public involvement, saying that there have not been enough meetings.

The Elmwood Village Hotel is a proposed project by Savarino Construction Services Corporation and was designed by Karl Frizlen of The Frizlen Group. The hotel would be placed on Elmwood and Forest Avenues in Buffalo, New York. In order for the hotel to be built, at least five buildings, that include both businesses and residents, must be demolished.

The Forever Elmwood Corp. is a Buffalo-based non-profit organization founded in 1994. Justin Azzarella, the Executive Director for the organization voiced support for the proposal, stating: “I am here today to lend Forever Elmwood’s support the hotel project. Particularly, Forever Elmwood is encouraged by the fact that this building follows the more stringent Elmwood Village Design Guidelines. We have been speaking with Savarino Construction, and they have promised us [Forever Elmwood] that they will engage the community further, including the surrounding Block Clubs and businesses. For that reason, while Forever Elmwood is in support of this project and the type of project that it is, we are asking also that the project be tabled so that the community can be further engaged. Specifically the surrounding Block clubs which include the Granger, Claremont, Asland and The Lincoln Parkway Block Clubs.”

“Because of the excellent work that Karl does and the game plan that they have, I think its an ideal use of this particular location. I think that this particular type of development needs to be encouraged and promoted as opposed to roadblocked,” said a man who owns five properties near the proposal site.

However, Evelyn Bencinich, a resident of Granger Place and whose house would be located directly behind the hotel said, “My property value will be depreciated or non-existent because no one is going to want to live behind a multi-story hotel. We are facing up to a year of noisy and dangerous demolition and construction. Children, pets and even drunk rebellers could wander on site and get hurt. Traffic tie-ups caused by large machinery and garbage bins is inevitable. Where will pedestrians walk? We could experience increased unsanitary flooding in our yards and basements due to the digging and cementing for the underground parking garage. Rats will be displaced into the immediate neighborhoods and be in great abundance. Once we get past the year of nightmare construction, what if you build it and they don’t come? We could ultimately have a seven million dollar rooming house on our corner.”

Patty Morris, co-owner of Don Apparel with Nancy Pollina at 1119 Elmwood also asked that the project be tabled saying, “this has only been public knowledge for less than two weeks and the public never saw the redesign. How can you vote on anything that no one has seen yet? The Board cut off Morris saying, “so specifically you don’t have any problem with it [the design] you just…” Morris then said, “Oh I am totally against this project, but thats besides the point isn’t it.”

The planning board is also concerned that the current design may still be too big.

At one point Board member Susan Curran Hoyt said, “we know you’ve cut down your number of rooms on this project, but we still see it doesn’t seem to fit the description of a ‘botique’ hotel,” and asked Eva Hassett, Vice President of Savarino Construction, “we wonder if you could reduce the rooms further.”

“One thing I didn’t talk about was the price levels of these rooms and that will be important to know. The room rate will be somewhere between US$120 and $160 a night, which is about the same price of the Hampton Inn down town and the smaller you make the hotel, the more expensive the rooms will get. We believe that we’ve made a good compromise in terms of the size of the hotel and perhaps botique means different things to different people,” said Hassett.

The board was also concerned that there is not enough parking asking, “are there alternative plans for valet parking off-site, in the event that you have a full hotel or a large event going on?”

“We are exploring several possibilities with respect to additional parking for valet and parking near-by,” replied Hassett. “We are also exploring the possibility of using the rear of 1105 Elmwood for additional parking, which would give us an additional ten or eleven spaces.”

The new design has a total of 55 parking spaces for 72 rooms, with 39 of them underground and the rest on ground level.

Hassett also said that a “parking study” will be done on the area.

Concerns that the second floor of the hotel will be too close to the property of 605 Forest were also brought up. The board asked how far the hotel would be from the property and Karl Frizlen replied saying it would “be approximately five feet from the property line,” but he also admitted that, “I do not know exactly how close the house next door” will be from the hotel, but did say “I think the house is about four or five feet away from the property line and we [the hotel] sit right on the property line.”

The board is concerned the setback from the property is not enough saying the space between the building and the hotel is “pretty narrow.”

The City’s Common Council also agreed to table the proposal also citing the need for more public engagement and the need for more organizations to respond including the Buffalo Preservation Board and the Office of Historic Preservation.

During that meeting, Hassett also said the proposal to try and get a variance to obtain the properties of 605 and 607 Forest were “now off the agenda.”

The Common Council is expected to meet and hold a public hearing about the project and the rezoning of the properties to be demolished (1119-1121 Elmwood) on Tuesday March 7, 2006 at 2:00 p.m. in Council Chambers at City Hall. At the moment the properties are not zoned for a hotel.

Sunday, December 21, 2008

On this day twenty years ago, a transatlantic airliner broke up in midair and came down onto the Scottish town of Lockerbie. All 259 people on board Pan Am Flight 103, and eleven people on the ground, lost their lives in what remains the worst air disaster in British history.

The disaster was an act of terrorism, caused by a bomb loaded on board. Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, an intelligence officer from Libya, was convicted of 270 counts of murder for the bombing in 2001. Libya has since paid US$1.5 billion in compensation to the victims.

Today, Megrahi’s legal campaign for freedom continues. The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission granted him a second appeal, saying there may have been a miscarriage of justice. The terminally ill man will begin that appeal next year. Wikinews wrote to Mr Megrahi in prison but he did not respond.

One who does not believe in Megrahi’s innocence is Kara Weipz. Her brother Richard Monetti lost his life in the bombing. Weipz, who now heads the Victims of Pan Am Flight 103 group, says she represents the large majority of victims’ families from the United States when she says that they “believe that there were others who acted with Mr. Megrahi and should be held accountable also,” when asked if she felt there was much still to learn about the events twenty years ago.

They have, she says, no sense at all that Megrahi may have been wrongly convicted; to the contrary she now has some closure from the trial. “The conviction has brought a sense of justice to the families. No we do not agree with the convict at all. We support the Crown office and the decisions of the Court,” she told Wikinews.

We asked her if there were any differences between her version of events, and about her thoughts on potential issues with the investigation. “There is no difference between the truth as we see it and the official version of events. The facts are the facts, Mr. Megrahi is guilty,” Weipz told Wikinews. “I don’t believe there were any issues with the investigation. What bothers me is people with conspiracy theories that spew them as truths. The programs that have been run on TV recently call them conspiracy theories as well.” Did the authorities let her down? “Not one bit. I am thankful for the Scottish Police and the FBI.”

She also revealed that she was not concerned that people might have viewed compensation for the bombing, granted from Libya, as ‘blood money’. “Calling it blood money is a misnomer. We entered into a civil trial. The outcome of a civil trial is a monetary one. We knew that since Libya was guilty that the outcome would be that they compensate the families. The only part that bothered me was [that] it was connected to the lifting of sanctions and removal from the State Sponsors Terrorism List. Our goal was to deter terrorism by making it expensive to kill innocent people.”

One of the aims stated by the website of her victims’ group is to maintain the memory of her loved ones; this she felt was still being done – “Absolutely!!!!” was what she told us. She says that the last twenty years have been hard, however: “While I miss my brother [every day], I live a healthy and productive life in his honor. Hard – yes, productive – yes.”

Megrahi has not been in touch with Weipz, or with any of the other victims, she tells us. Refusing to be drawn into speculation, she tells us she has “no idea” what secret documents Megrahi’s defense has been refused permission to see might contain – she has “never seen them” herself, so she does not know what they are.

She also did not feel that Megrahi should have been released upon his recent request on compassionate grounds owing to his terminal cancer, as “he is receiving the same medical treatment in prison as he would outside of prison. The Court didn’t feel it was appropriate either.” Wikinews also asked her if she believes the legal process generally has been fair to him over the years – “Yes, I believe it has been fair.”

VictimsofPanAmFlight103.org states “we are committed to seeking the truth about this tragedy and keeping the memory of our loved ones alive.” The final question Wikinews put to Kara Weipz was this: “Do you think we will ever know the truth?”

“I would love to say yes, but I don’t think we will ever know the whole truth,” she told us.

Monday, February 18, 2013

Venezuela’s government has opened a granite processing plant in the state of Bolívar, with the intention of providing about 25% of the granite required nationwide.

Ricardo Menéndez, vice president of the Productive Economic Area, said Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez has yearned for the creation of this project to empower Venezuelan construction. Granito Bolívar is reportedly the most modern Venezuelan granite plant, not consuming community water or electricity, and is also the largest, with a daily capacity to supply enough material for use in construction of about 820 houses.

Menéndez said, “These granite blocks are the natural resources of our country, are the wealth we have as a country and often [some] simply decided to remove this richness from our country and take them to other countries” ^{((es))Spanish language: ?Esos bloques de granito son la riquezas naturales de nuestro país, son las riquezas que tenemos como patria y que muchas veces sencillamente esas riquezas decidieron sacarlas de nuestro territorio nacional y llevarlas a otros países}.

According to Menéndez, with the help of a state plan, Venezuela intends to exploit its 40,000 million cubic meters or more of granite reserves, generating a set of factories. “[T]he central theme is that these plants, all these factories, are for the construction of socialism; that means using our potential, develop the value chain within the country and of course that yields benefits from the point of view of the production system’s organization…. [Granito] Bolívar is not only the vision that historically we had of exposing richness, but the industries, basic industries we have, that level of our workers in the basic industries and in addition the development of the potential we have in the state” ^{((es))Spanish language: ?el tema central es que estas plantas todas estas fábricas son para la construcción del socialismo, eso significa utilizar nuestras potencialidades, dessarrollar la cadena de valor dentro del país y por supuesto que eso genere beneficios desde el punto de vista de la organización del sistema productivo … Bolívar no solamente es la visión que históricamente se tuvo de exponer las riquezas, sino que son las empresas, las empresas básicas que tenemos, ese nivel de nuestros trabajadores de la empresas básicas y adicionalmente el desarrollo del potencial que tenemos en el estado}.

For the construction of the plant, supplied by 23 quarries, the government of Bolívar provided about 30 million bolívares (US$4.7 million) and the national government €2.3 million (US$3 million). Bolívar reportedly has reserves of about 40,000 million tons of red, black, pink and white granite, sufficient for domestic demand for 200 years.

Monday, February 14, 2005

The Brazilian Regional Council of Medicine has protested against a Ministry of Education decision to accept the diplomas of Cuban medical school graduates without subjecting them to a more rigorous evaluation process.

Under the Brazilian 44045 Edict of July 19, 1958, all students of Medicine, Brazilian or non-Brazilian, who studied in a foreign institution must undergo a strict evaluation before their professional registration is granted. The law aims to ensure that the physicians who graduated at foreign universities are properly prepared for and familiarized with the particular medical conditions of Brazil. Some diseases like malaria and dengue for example are very rare in some countries but are more common in Brazilian territory.

However the Brazilian Ministry of Education (MEC) has come to an agreement with the Cuban government to allow medical students who studied in Cuba to go through a less rigorous examination. Furthermore the MEC wants to exempt the students from the Cuban Escola Latino Americana de Medicina (Latin American Medicine School) or ELAM located in Havana from the examination. Under the agreement, the diplomas of ELAM students would be automatically recognized as valid in Brazil. The Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva signed the endorsement of this agreement last year during his visit to Cuba.

The Brazilian Regional Council of Medicine from São Paulo is opposed to the idea of accepting the Cuban diplomas and is to dispute the deal in Court. The council says the government decision is unfair and disadvantages Brazilian students. It also says that the decision puts the Brazilian community at risk because of differences between Cuban and Brazilian medical education. Cuban physicians are prepared for Cuban conditions and necessities in health which differ from Brazilian ones. Additionally the council argues that the decision is against the law because the Brazilian 44045 Edict demands that all medical students from foreign schools have to pass a careful examination.

The Cuban First Secretary of Technical and Scientific Collaboration in Health, Filisberto Perez, recognizes that both Brazil and Cuba have different models of apprenticeship in medicine. However he believes that Cuba and Brazil can recognize each other’s diplomas without difficulty.

Early this year, a team of Brazilian inspectors visited the leading medical schools in Cuba to evaluate them so the degrees can be formalized.

The MEC’s decision has angered some Brazilian students. “Why would I study for two years so I could get admitted to a Brazilian school if it would be easier to “buy” my diploma in Cuba?” asks Artur Oliveira Mendes in a email sent to a academic organization. He added: “…our schools of medicine are demoralized before the president’s declaration.”

The Brazilian students who are in Cuba were selected by the PT, PCdoB, and MST.

Senator José Agripino Maia (PFL) asked the Minister of Education Tarso Genro to explain before the Senate Education Commission why the students from Cuba are being favoured by the Brazilian government.

Monday, October 1, 2007

Jim Reeves is running for the Green Party of Ontario in the Ontario provincial election, in the York-Simcoe riding. Wikinews’ Nick Moreau interviewed him regarding his values, his experience, and his campaign.

Stay tuned for further interviews; every candidate from every party is eligible, and will be contacted. Expect interviews from Liberals, Progressive Conservatives, New Democratic Party members, Ontario Greens, as well as members from the Family Coalition, Freedom, Communist, Libertarian, and Confederation of Regions parties, as well as independents.

Thursday, September 8, 2005

The German Anarchist Pogo Party ran a campaign ad (Download here — NSFW) which, instead of discussing the party’s politics, featured various party scenes set to a heavy metal soundtrack. The spot included revellers smashing furniture, pouring beer down each other’s throats, and women dancing topless. The spot ends with the proclamation: “My vote for the rubbish”.

The ARD refused to air the ad because it “violates the human dignity” and showed only a heavily censored version at an earlier airtime. The Party then sued the station and got an injuction by an appeal court in Münster only minutes before the next ad was due, forcing the ARD to air the spot uncensored, right before their evening news flagship.

The ad has offended a number of people, but has likely gained the party nationwide attention among its younger demographics who could access campaign websites online (appd.de). The Hamburg-based APPD and every other party is entitled by law to free television airtime on Germany’s public TV Station ARD and ZDF for its advertisements because it is an officially registered political party competing for the upcoming federal elections. Its next ad is scheduled for Monday night, although broadcasting authorities may again censor the ad.

The party has a membership of approximately 750 — German newspapers posit that the ads will have little impact on the upcoming election.

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Reactions to the review of the economic implications of climate change include optimism about the commercial opportunities and apprehension about possible fiscal repercussions.

The Stern Review of the Economics of Climate Change, commissioned by the British Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, points to the need for urgent action to reduce carbon emissions if a world-wide economic catastrophe is to be avoided. The institution of global carbon trading, control of deforestation, increased investment in energy R & D and support to poorer countries in adapting to climate change are all key proposals in the Review.

A leaked letter from David Miliband, Environment Secretary, to Chancellor Brown contains a package of tax proposals to promote the use of public transport and to encourage people to buy smaller cars and fly less. The proposals also include charges on petrol-guzzling cars, road pricing, levies on air travel and increased charges for landfill waste disposal.

The findings of the Review and the promise of a Government Climate Bill, containing measures in response to the Review, received a mixed reception from employers and unions.

Miles Templeman, Director-General of the Institute of Directors, said: “Without countries like the US, China or India making decisive commitments, UK competitiveness will undoubtedly suffer if we act alone. This would be bad for business, bad for the economy and ultimately bad for our climate.”

The Confederation of British Industries, the British Chambers of Commerce and asset managers F&C all pointed out the dangers to business of additional taxation.

Brendan Barber, General Secretary of the Trades Union Congress, was optimistic about the opportunities for industry to meet demands created by investment in technology to combat climate change. The Prince of Wales’ Corporate Leaders Group on Climate Change, formed by 14 of UK’s leading companies shared this hope. Chairman of Shell UK, James Smith, expressed the hope of the group that business and Government would discuss how Britain could obtain “first mover advantage” in what he described as “massive new global markets.”

The markets for low-carbon energy products are expected to be worth £300 billion by 2050.

Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party, questions the assertions that there is scientific consensus on global warming. At best, he said, there is uncertainty. Politicians world-wide are jumping on the ‘green’ bandwagon, but, if they want popular support, they’d better be sure that this is not simply the ‘new witchcraft’.

Ruth Lea, Director of the Centre for Policy Studies, also questions the notion that there is a ‘scientific consensus’ over global warming. She alleges that “authorities on climate science say that the climate system is far too complex for modest reductions in one of the thousands of factors involved in climate change (i.e. carbon emissions) to have a predictable effect in magnitude, or even direction.” About economic models, upon which Stern relied for his projections, her experience was that forecasting just two or three years ahead was usually wrong. She described the problem of drawing conclusions from combining scientific and economic models as ‘monumentally complex’. She doubted whether international cooperation was really possible. She concluded that she thought that this Review was designed to cloak the motives of a government that wanted some moral justification for increasing taxation on fuels.

An unconfirmed report on BBC 24 early Tuesday morning, October 31, stated that the White House had not yet seen a copy of the Stern Review.

In response to the Stern Report Australia‘s Prime Minister John Howard promised a AU$60 million to fight climate change. The projects are part of the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. “The Asia-Pacific Partnership includes countries that represent about half of the world’s emissions, energy use, GDP (gross domestic product) and population, and is an important initiative that engages, for the first time, the key greenhouse-gas emitting countries in the Asia-Pacific region,” Mr Howard said in a statement.

A statement by Australian Greens senators Rachel Siewert and Christine Milne criticised the Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics saying “ABARE indicated that the type of research undertaken for the Stern Report is beyond them. They can put a price on what ratifying the Kyoto protocol would cost but have no idea or capacity to put a price on the cost of not acting. They are tinkering around the edges of the problem and don’t seem to know whether climate change is real or whether there is any urgency.”