What would exiting the Euro actually accomplish? Greek banks have been fundamentally reliant on the Emergency Liquidity Assistance funding since February this year, when the ECB stopped accepting bonds guaranteed by the Greek government as collateral for loans, following the direction that the general financial markets have been taking for some months previous to that. So the Bank of Greece would still need to borrow money from somewhere, and exiting the Euro doesn't make borrowing suddenly easier....
How is a jump from $250 per unit to between $610 and $1250 (an increase of between 244% and 500% against the dollar) any more stable than either the Euro (~15% fall over the Dollar during the past year or so), the GBP (~10% rise over the dollar during the past year or so).
Something doesn't make sense.
Or more aptly, those who apply and are the best fit for the job - there is no point in berating a company for woeful diversity hiring figures when all they did was concentrate on hiring the best candidate.
When it can be shown that Facebook turned down a better qualified minority candidate in order to hire a more poorly qualified white candidate, then there is an issue in hiring standards - if minority candidates are being failed by the education and social support systems to the point where we have a noticeable disparity in hireable candidates, well thats something we all need to fix properly rather than just tut at companies who would rather hire the better candidate regardless of race, colour or sex.
If you know anything about jet engines, then you would know that a simple set of ear protection earmuffs can kill a multi million dollar engine if ingested.
Why wasn't he sent to the US during the 2 years he was residing in the UK prior to scampering to the Ecuadorian embassy? Or even better, during the week or so that he was actually remanded into custody pending the extradition hearings during December 2010?
This aspect of the "all of this is just to get him to the US" claims is never explained.
Except that the Ecuadorian embassy is on the second floor of a shared building, with no direct access to the garage or other internal locations. The only way in and out of the embassy is via a shared stairwell, which is not covered under diplomatic privilege and therefore anyone using said staircase is subject to normal laws of the host country.
So how is he to get from the embassy to the car without being arrested?
Also, how would Assange get there? The moment he steps out of the front door of the Ecuadorian embassy, he will be arrested.
You should read the judgements handed down by the extradition court judges in their rulings - they assert that all the allegations against Assange in the European Arrest Warrant and extradition request does indeed qualify as rape under UK law. That Telegraph story is based on what Assanges lawyers said, not what is actual fact.
Read the original ruling here: http://www.theguardian.com/media/interactive/2011/nov/02/julian-assange-extradition-full-judgment
In all the challenges made under "dual criminality" (ie, the fact that the offences must be comparable offences under the executing member state as well as the requesting member state), the judges ruled that "dual criminality" was satisfied under UK law and Assanges challenges were dismissed. The rulings in this regard runs from page 15 to page 32 in the rulings PDF.
The vehicle would be registered and taxed based on its weight and displacement, so any damage to the road should be covered under the cost of the road fund license (commonly called vehicle tax or road tax), which is set by the DVLA.
If the vehicle is driven with its road track blocks installed (rubber blocks that go on the tracks) then in theory it should have a lower pavement weight than a similarly heavy lorry, as the vehicles weight has a greater footprint, and thus lowers the stress on the road.
Really? The HMRC in the UK is very quick at giving overpayments and corrections back - on a few occasions I have had cheques simply turn up without any requests or even knowing I was due one.
Anyone can have multiple jobs...
I think engaging in a modern war when there is a legal basis for said war is something that is acceptable, and if that is acceptable, then whatever can be done to remove our sides people from harms way is also acceptable.
Therefore drones are a natural, acceptable progression from manned aircraft, whether they are conducting reconnaissance or dropping ordnance. A drone doesn't increase the number of people that one person can kill effectively, in-fact the current crop of drones are a reduction in offensive capability when compared with a pilot in a modern fighter jet such as the F-16 or Eurofighter. What the drone does is remove the pilot from potential harm.
Why are drones singled out as the big evil in this regard? How many faces do you think F-16 or B-1B pilots see before and after they drop their bombs on the designated target? Drones haven't changed that, they just move the pilot out of harms way.
Jurassic World is NOT a reboot, its a direct continuation on from Jurassic Park III - that's the reason they chose to keep the dinosaurs as not having feathers, something which has drawn ire from scientists in the run up to the release. The film also includes the ruins of the original visitor centre from the first film.
So, to improve the "reboot" there would first have to be a "reboot".
I suggest you go and read the treaties and agreements that were signed at that point by Greece - the European Monetary Union had been a long standing goal of EU founder member states since before Greece joined the EU, and provisions were included in member state agreements and treaties requiring all states without a viable opt out clause (only a couple of states had this, including Denmark and the UK) to join the EMU in due course.
The EMU became the Euro currency and the European Central Bank banking system during 1992 with the signing of the Maastrict Treaty, and member states from that point onward were bound by the agreements they had already signed when joining.