USA & CANADA (901)
Latest News
Solar plane departs from China to Hawaii
Sunday, 31 May 2015 00:00 Written by theeagleonline
Andre Borschberg, 62, team leaders of the Swiss-made solar-powered plane, Solar Impulse 2, said it departed from the eastern Chinese city of Nanjing on Sunday morning to fly across the Pacific.
Borschberg said the Solar Impulse 2’s departure from China to Hawaii at 2.40am on Sunday came more than a month after it landed in Nanjing on the night of April 21.
He said the plane delayed its originally planned departure from Nanjing on May 5 as its two pilots waited for the right weather conditions.
He said: “The journey from Nanjing to Hawaii is expected to take six days and six nights.
“This is the toughest segment in its round-the-world trip.
“When the plane crosses the ocean, I will be able to nap for 20 minutes at a time, the maximum amount of time the solar plane can navigate automatically.”
Bertrand Piccard, the plane’s other pilot, said the plane was being powered by more than 17,000 solar cells installed on its wings.
Piccard said the Solar Impulse 2 was circumnavigating the globe to promote green energy.
Piccard said the solar plane has been featured in a number of events during its stay in China to promote new energy and materials.
He explained that the plane has 12 scheduled stops in the around-the-world adventure.
Piccard said after reaching Hawaii, the solar-powered airplane would fly across the US and stop in Africa before finally reaching Abu Dhabi, where it took off on March 9.
Xinhua/NAN.
Fifa Bans Arrested Officials Over Fraud Probe
Friday, 29 May 2015 00:00 Written by channelsTelevisionThe Ethics Committee of world football governing body, Fifa has banned 11 top officials including its executive members from all football-related activities.
The banned individuals are: Jeffrey Webb, Eduardo Li, Julio Rocha, Costas Takkas, Jack Warner.
Others are Eugenio Figueredo, Rafael Esquivel, José Maria Marin, Nicolás Leoz, Chuck Blazer and Daryll Warner.
These individuals were indicted and arrested on bribery and racketeering charges relating to the bidding process for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups.
South Africa’s Sports Minister, Fikile Mbalula, has said that South Africa’s successful bid for the 2010 World Cup has not been tainted in any shape or form.
Mbalula was speaking a day after the game was plunged into turmoil following the arrest of senior Fifa officials on corruption charges.
He also said that all 2010 soccer World Cup funds are accounted for and audited.
Blatter Refuses To Quit
Meanwhile, Sepp Blatter refused to resign following a request from UEFA chief, Michel Platini, and then opened the 65th Fifa congress in Zurich.
The 79-year-old held an emergency meeting with key Fifa officials on Friday after world football’s governing body was subjected to yet more damaging corruption claims.
He then met Platini alone, at which point he was urged to quit, but refused and vowed to carry on with his mandate.
Blatter, who is seeking a fifth term as president appears to still have the support of the Confederation Of African Football as well as the Asian Football Confederation.
Newspapers' ongoing search for subscription revenue: from paywalls to micropayments
Tuesday, 26 May 2015 00:00 Written by theconversationIt’s no mystery that newspapers are struggling to make money: between 2006 and 2014, the industry lost approximately 30 billion dollars in advertising.
In response, many news publishers have experimented with ways to increase digital advertising revenue through native advertising, or through collaborative models like the recently-announced Facebook Instant. Still, many newspapers continue to tinker with paywalls – which require readers to pay to access online content.
But are paywalls viable?
So far the record is mixed. For some publications like The New Yorker they seem to be working, while other newspapers like the Toronto Star are getting rid of them.
It’s difficult to discern the exact trajectory of this moving target – especially since reliable data on their revenues are often unavailable – but there are noticeable trends. As the paywall model continues to evolve, other revenue models are emerging, including another tactic used by news publishers: micropayments.
A brief history of paywalls
A paywall basically acts as a barrier between an internet user and a news organization’s online content. To access the content, users must purchase a digital subscription.
While most newspapers only began experimenting with this model in the past few years, a longer history traces back to The Wall Street Journal, which launched the first paywall in 1997. Despite its success, general news outlets feared that launching a paywall would reduce online readership and digital advertising revenue – a tension that continues today.
In 2009, with newspaper revenue plummeting, a lively debate erupted over the paywall model. Publications like The Guardian, The New York Times, Time Magazine and The Atlantic published op-eds debating the paywall model’s viability.
Even Mark Cuban weighed in. The renowned entrepreneur and owner of the Dallas Mavericks argued that newspapers should put their most valuable content behind a paywall and partner with cable companies to offer customers a heavily discounted digital subscription rate (such as five cents per month).
While only a handful of publications in the US had a paywall in 2009, by 2014 – largely as a response to declining revenue – over 500 daily newspapers were using one. Since then, the debate has shifted from whether paywalls could work to asking whether they are working.
The empirical record
After several years of trial and error, there have been noteworthy successes, along with failures.
In 2011 The New York Times launched their “metered” paywall, a model similar to the Financial Times'.
Metered paywalls block a reader from accessing articles once they reach a certain threshold. The New York Times initially allowed readers to access 20 articles (now it’s 10) for free each month. This model has been increasingly emulated because it is believed that only core readers, who are the most likely to purchase a digital subscription for unlimited access, will eventually be blocked from viewing more articles.
Meanwhile, casual readers – and the publication’s advertising dollars – are not affected. These “fly-bys” account for 93% of news websites' unique visitors, so their retention is highly valued.
Newspapers have also succeeded in asking print subscribers to pay slightly more for a digital subscription, while reducing its price if new customers will accept a Sunday paper. They’ll also allow readers to access articles found through search or social media even if they’ve exceeded their monthly limit.
The Gannett Company, whose newspapers include USA Today and The Arizona Republic, implemented metered paywalls at 78 of its newspapers. In 2013, digital subscriptions added more than $100 million in operating income.
And in 2014, digital subscriptions at the New York Times Company earned $169 million. While these substantial gains are cause for optimism, they’re tempered by the fear that paywalls may only generate a temporary boost, as subscription revenue has notably stalled at the Tribune Publishing Company and Gannett.
On the other hand, some newspapers have decided to take down their paywall altogether. In 2013, The Dallas Morning News removed a “hard” paywall, which rarely allowed readers to access articles without a digital subscription. The Columbia Journalism Review subsequently declared that hard paywalls made sense for only “the most essential news providers” – places where readers cannot find the same information elsewhere, like The Wall Street Journal’s coverage of finance.
After a similar misstep – which was exacerbated by publishing some of their news content on a free website – the San Francisco Chronicle took down its hard paywall five months after its launch.
The Toronto Star hadn’t made such errors, but nonetheless jettisoned its paywall after growth had “plateaued” to focus on increasing digital ad revenue and readers with an improved tablet edition.
These cases notwithstanding, it’s difficult to predict whether a paywall will help or hurt a publication’s bottom line. Newspapers have generally been unwilling to publicly discuss how much revenue their paywall is generating, and how it’s impacting their audience size and advertising revenue.
Simply put: newspapers are experimenting, but they aren’t sharing the results. We only know for certain that paywalls are being implemented, that the metered model is preferred, and that the increases in subscription revenue – while substantial for some – haven’t matched losses in advertising revenue.
The future of paywalls
Paywalls may work as a partial solution for finding new revenue streams but the search for a better subscription model continues. In March, two new models involving “micropayments” – in which readers pay a small fee (roughly 25 cents) to read a single article – made headlines.
First, The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal signed up to the news aggregator Blendle. Following the so-called iTunes model, this Dutch startup allows readers in the Netherlands to make micropayments to access individual newspaper and magazine articles from a variety of publications.
By hosting a variety of news publishers, both individual publishers and Blendle are hoping that individuals will be more likely to use micropayments. Think of iTunes: while an individual might not sign up to use iTunes if it were just for one record company, the fact that the largest companies are using iTunes makes listeners more likely to use the service and for companies to profit from it.
On the other hand, a newspaper could try to “cut out the middle man” and use micropayments on their own website. Indeed, Winnipeg Free Press, a Canadian newspaper, recently announced plans to use micropayments on their own website, making it the first North American newspaper to do so. Free Press editor Paul Samyn explained the novel decision by noting that while newspapers have had some success with paywalls, “their ability to grow paid digital subscriptions appears to have either stalled or only grown marginally.”
The micropayment model has critics – as do paywalls in general.
Unfortunately, whether any subscription model can convince consumers to pay enough to sustain the journalism that a healthy democracy requires remains an open question.
Since the future of commercially viable journalism hangs in the balance, the stakes are considerable. More research is needed (and more data needs to be made publicly available). And conversations should continue about what the future of digital journalism – including noncommercial models – should look like in a democratic society.
Authors: Alex T. Williams; PhD Student in Communications at University of Pennsylvania and Victor Pickard Assistant Professor of Communication at University of Pennsylvania
credit link: https://theconversation.com/newspapers-ongoing-search-for-subscription-revenue-from-paywalls-to-micropayments-40726 <img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/40726/count.gif" width="1" />
The article was originally published on The Conversation (www.conversation.com) and is republished with permission granted to www.oasesnews.com
Fast-track overcomes key hurdle, but obstacles remain as trade deals hang in balance
Tuesday, 26 May 2015 00:00 Written by theconversationAfter the Senate’s refusal to pass trade promotion authority (TPA) on May 12, some trade advocates feared that President Obama’s ongoing commercial negotiations with Asia and Europe would die a slow death.
Yesterday’s narrow vote in the Senate to close debate on TPA – a key hurdle to final passage – promises to lift their spirits considerably, as it likely guarantees passage of the bill within the next few days, ahead of the Memorial Day recess.
The vote was interesting because it didn’t follow the expected pattern of hyper-partisanship in Congress. Rather, it pitted a Democratic president and most Republican lawmakers against the bulk of the president’s own party.
Supporters of TPA needed a relatively small number of pro-trade Democrats to tip the scales toward Obama’s trade agenda, and they achieved that through a last-minute bargain over the future of the controversial Export-Import Bank.
While the vote signaled an important victory for TPA’s proponents, more challenges remain before the president can pop open the champagne, both in the Senate and next month in the House. If ultimately passed, TPA would guarantee that international trade agreements negotiated by the president would receive an up-or-down vote by Congress with no amendments.
Without TPA, America’s high-stakes negotiations with 11 other countries including Australia and Japan to create the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and with the European Union to create the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) would probably be unachievable.
That’s because foreign trade ministers are skittish about Congressional amendments that could upset the delicate balance of international bargains that they consider already settled.
More hurdles remain
Of course, there is still a long way to go before the final passage of TPA, including from lawmakers in other TPP participant countries such as Australia. So what hurdles still confront the president and trade supporters in Congress?
First, the Senate must vote on several controversial amendments to TPA. One of these, which is adamantly opposed by President Obama and pro-trade lawmakers, would seek to curb protectionist currency manipulation by America’s trading partners.
Supporters of TPP fear that a Congressional requirement to negotiate penalties for currency manipulation could cause the other 11 countries to balk at a final agreement. Whether or not such dire predictions are true, there is no question that adding currency manipulation to the TPP agenda could slow down the talks considerably.
In any case, once TPA passes the Senate, it must still be approved by the House. This could prove tricky, because Democratic opposition in that body is firmly entrenched. Interestingly, Democratic skeptics are also joined by some Tea Party Republicans who say that TPA would give the president too much power.
At the same time, as Georgia State University’s Jeffrey Lazarus points out, the more centralized procedures in the House make the ultimate outcome there more dependent on the Republican leadership than it is in the Senate. With a firm commitment of support from Speaker John Boehner, the bill has a reasonable chance of approval.
What’s next for TPP?
As for TPP itself, negotiations seem to be drawing to a close, and President Obama, if armed with TPA, could set the agreement before Congress quite soon. It seems likely that, if TPA garners enough votes from Congress to pass, the Trans-Pacific Partnership also stands a good chance of getting its stamp of approval later this year.
While US agreement is of course critical for the ultimate implementation of TPP, the other 11 signatories have their own processes for domestic ratification. In some countries, centralized institutions or one-party dominance make rapid approval likely, while in others, political hurdles remain. The skepticism of Australia’s opposition Labor Party and other members of Parliament, for example, may slow its ratification.
In the final analysis, today’s vote on TPA is significant only insofar as it increases the chances that Congress will eventually back TPP and TTIP. Together, these agreements would build much deeper economic links between the United States and economies in Europe and Asia that represent a considerable proportion of global output and trade.
If implemented, they could have a profound effect on all of the economies involved. For that reason, citizens of all signatory countries should keep a close eye on how this issue evolves.
Author: Charles Hankla; Associate Professor of Political Science at Georgia State University
credit link: https://theconversation.com/fast-track-overcomes-key-hurdle-but-obstacles-remain-as-trade-deals-hang-in-balance-42221 <img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/42221/count.gif" width="1" />
The article was originally published on The Conversation (www.conversation.com) and is republished with permission granted to www.oasesnews.com
Popular News
Sitting on a scoop: the story behind the V-E headlines of May 1945
Tuesday, 26 May 2015 00:00 Written by theconversationThere’s quite a story behind the story of the end of the fighting in World War II in Europe. As we observe another Memorial Day, it is worth remembering the events of that busy May of 1945, when the Allies achieved victory in Europe.
While much fighting remained to be done in the Pacific, by early May, the military leaders of the Allied forces could see that Germany’s defeat was at hand. So, the Supreme Headquarters of the Allied Expeditionary Forces (SHAEF) command selected 17 correspondents from the world’s press and flew them to Reims, France, to witness the German surrender on behalf of the rest of the press corps and the people of the world.
There were very few Americans in the group. The ones who were there represented the big wire services and syndicates. In fact, not a single reporter representing a US newspaper was present.
According to the Allied military commanders, the news was to be embargoed, and the reporters were coerced into accepting a deal. In exchange for access to the event, they had to agree to hold the news until the Army said they could release it.
On the flight from Paris to Reims, the SHAEF press officer declared: “I pledge each one of you on his honor as a correspondent and as an assimilated officer of the United States Army not to communicate [the news] until it is released on the order of the Public Relations Director of SHAEF.”
It remains unclear what constitutes an “agreement” under such conditions – what were the correspondents supposed to do ? Get up and walk out of an airplane? – but they proceeded to witness the ceremony.
The surrender by the German high command came in the early hours of May 7. Ordinarily, you might expect that the surrender would touch off immediate celebrations.
Not so fast.
The press officer announced that orders had come “from a high political level” to impose a news blackout until 8 pm the next day, when the news would be announced simultaneously in Paris, London, Moscow and Washington. (Turned out, Stalin was insisting on the delay so he could make a show in Berlin.)
In other words, all the correspondents who had been eyewitnesses would lose their scoops. Instead, some desk-bound rewrite man or editor would get all the glory. The reporters protested to the SHAEF press officer, but to no avail. The political leaders had decided.
Among the press corps, one of the most upset was Edward Kennedy – not the late Democratic senator from Massachusetts but a man by the same name who was the chief correspondent in Europe for the Associated Press (AP). Bear in mind, Kennedy was in a special position. He had been burned earlier in the war when he cooperated with military brass. In 1943, Kennedy had agreed to suppress a story about Gen. George Patton and had been scooped by someone else. (I describe the incident in my book Covering America.)
Kennedy also knew that his account of the German surrender could probably reach more people on the planet more swiftly than any other news agency or government, since the AP supplied news stories to thousands of newspapers, radio stations and other customers worldwide. He knew, too, that the AP – then and now – thrives on being first and that AP correspondents had gone to great lengths to be first to deliver the news.
Besides, he figured, no embargo on such a momentous story could hold for that long. (Nor, perhaps, should it.)
He was still fuming when the correspondents were marched back onto the military plane. They were flown from Reims to Paris. Still, the world knew nothing of the surrender. Still, soldiers in Europe kept shooting at each other.
When the press contingent landed, Boyd Lewis of United Press got into the first jeep from the airport to the Hotel Scribe in Paris, which had been serving as the outpost for most of the press corps. When Lewis got to the press center, he tried to tie up all the available telegraph outlets. Next in line was James Kilgallen of the International News Service, who had beaten Kennedy to the hotel by throwing his portable typewriter at Kennedy’s legs, slowing him down.
Kennedy was beside himself. Then he heard that SHAEF had ordered German radio to announce the surrender. Kennedy went to the censors and announced that he was breaking the embargo. Using a telephone, he called the AP bureau in London and dictated the following lead:
REIMS, France, May 7_Germany surrendered unconditionally to the Western Allies and the Soviet Union at 2:41 am French time today.
The surrender took place at a little red schoolhouse that is the headquarters of Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower…..
Within minutes, the news was flashed to the world, and wild celebrations began, marking V-E Day.
At SHAEF, the top brass were furious and suspended AP filing facilities throughout Europe.
The rest of the press corps was furious, too. More than 50 correspondents signed a protest to SHAEF Supreme Commander Dwight Eisenhower, calling Kennedy’s action “the most disgraceful, deliberate and unethical double cross in the history of journalism.”
AP’s president apologized to the nation. AP executives told Kennedy he could keep his job if he admitted he had done wrong. He wouldn’t, and he was fired. (Three years ago, the AP formally apologized to Kennedy, who died in a car crash in 1963.)
What might seem amazing today – aside from the lack of cell phones and other forms of instant global communication that we now take for granted – is how unanimously the correspondents fell in line with the military.
Today, I daresay, US reporters would be at least split about the ethics of holding off on reporting something they knew to be both true and life-saving.
Two weeks later, writing in The New Yorker on May 19, AJ Liebling, the great World War II reporter and press critic, took up the issue of Kennedy’s firing in his column “The Wayward Press. Liebling’s take:
The great row over Edward Kennedy’s Associated Press story of the signing of the German surrender at Reims served to point up the truth that if you are smart enough you can kick yourself in the pants, grab yourself by the back of the collar, and throw yourself out on the sidewalk. This is an axiom that I hope will be taught to future students of journalism as Liebling’s Law.
Liebling’s media criticism continued:
I do not think that Kennedy imperiled the lives of any Allied soldiers by sending the story, as some of his critics have charged. He probably saved a few, because by withholding the announcement of an armistice you prolong the shooting, and, conversely, by announcing it promptly you make the shooting stop. Moreover, the Germans had broadcast the news of the armistice several hours before Kennedy’s story appeared on the streets of New York… The thing that has caused the most hard feeling is that Kennedy broke a “combination,” which means that he sent out a story after all the correspondents on the assignment had agreed not to. But the old-fashioned “combination” was an agreement freely reached among reporters and not a pledge imposed upon the whole group by somebody outside it.
In my journalism classes at Boston University, I teach “Liebling’s Law” as a cautionary tale about what can happen when news organizations get too cozy with governments and forget to put their audiences first. Seventy years later, it’s a lesson worth remembering.
Author: Christopher B Daly; Professor of Journalism at Boston University
credit link: https://theconversation.com/sitting-on-a-scoop-the-story-behind-the-v-e-headlines-of-may-1945-42081 <img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/42081/count.gif" width="1" />
The article was originally published on The Conversation (www.conversation.com) and is republished with permission granted to www.oasesnews.com
Tanishq Abraham, 11, Graduates From California College With 3 Degrees
Monday, 25 May 2015 00:00 Written by Hollywoodlife
Absolutely amazing. A young boy by the name of Tanishq Abraham graduated from college at a very early age. But that isn’t the only remarkable thing about this story, he graduated with not one, but three degrees!
Tanishq Abraham has done something truly amazing. Not only did he graduate on May 20 from college at only 11-years-old, but he took home three degrees. He is now the youngest person to graduate from American River College in Sacramento, California.
Tanishq Abraham: Boy Graduates From California College Multiple Degrees
Tanishq is quite the overachiever. He didn’t earn just one associates degree from American River College — he earned three! One just so happens to be in math and physical science, another in general science and one in language studies, according to NBC. Sounds exhausting, but wow, what an accomplishment!
“Even in kindergarten he was pretty ahead, a few years ahead — and then it just went from there,” Tanishq’s mom, a veterinarian, told KCRA.
Tanishq added that his graduation wasn’t “much of a big thing for me”, and told the outlet, “I just followed my passion”.
One of the best parts of Tanishq’s graduation was his college graduation cap. The boy wrote his favorite Toy Story quote on the top of the cap, “2 Infinity and Beyond.” We love it!
Tanishq Shares His Future Plans
Tanishq is so adorable, he was so excited for his big accomplishment that he shared the news on his Twitter account on May 21. Not only does he plan on being a doctor, but he also is aiming high and wants to win the Nobel Prize! We have zero doubts that he won’t accomplish his mission.
China Used Ebola Crisis For Systematic Pillaging Of W. Africa Fisheries, Greenpeace Says
Thursday, 21 May 2015 00:00 Written by afkinsiderChinese fishing companies are engaged in systematic pillaging of West African fisheries on a huge scale, according to a new report from Greenpeace, which also says the companies took advantage of weak and chaotic governance resulting from last year’s Ebola outbreak in the region.
A two-year investigation by the environmental group Greenpeace found that four Chinese fishing companies, including state-owned China National Fisheries Corporation, carried out persistent “illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing activities and gross tonnage fraud” in West Africa.
In the most recent cases, the Greenpeace ship My Esperanza documented 16 illegal fishing activities by 12 Chinese vessels in Guinea’s exclusive economic zone in October and November 2014, while the Ebola outbreak was raging and countries in the region were unable to monitor their waters.
“While China extended a hand in friendship during the Ebola outbreak, rogue Chinese companies were unlawfully exploiting West Africa’s marine environment, taking advantage of weak enforcement and supervision from local and Chinese authorities to the detriment of local fishermen and the environment,” said Rashid Kang, head of Greenpeace East Asia’s China Ocean Campaign.
“Unless the government reins in this element of rogue companies they will seriously jeopardize what the Chinese government calls its mutually beneficial partnership with west Africa.”
The number of Chinese fishing vessels in Africa has grown from 13 in 1985 to 462 in 2013, accounting for a fifth of China’s entire long-range fishing fleet. Greenpeace says Chinese companies are the worst offenders when it comes to illegal fishing in the region.
As well as fishing in prohibited areas, Chinese fishing companies systematically under-declare gross tonnage of their vessels, allowing them to evade licensing fees and operate in areas where large boats are forbidden.
The majority of these boats are bottom trawlers, which use one of the most destructive fishing techniques.
Ironically, China is taking steps to eliminate some of the most environmentally damaging fishing practices in its own waters.
Faced with more competition and stricter rules at home, Chinese fishing companies are looking further afield. The lack of rigorous fisheries management and enforcement in West Africa have made it an attractive destination for large Chinese companies with the resources to send boats to distant waters.
“If China wants to be a genuine friend of Africa, it should follow the path of the E.U.’s Common Fisheries Policy, which is slowly rectifying the E.U.’s own history of irresponsible fishing in the region,” said Ahmed Diame, Greenpeace Africa Ocean Campaigner.
China’s Ministry of Agriculture, which regulates Chinese fishing at home and abroad, and China National Fisheries Corp, the largest of the four Chinese companies identified in the Greenpeace report, declined to comment.
“That is nonsense, what evidence do they have? This sort of thing is rare, the controls are strict and there could be sanctions,” said Zhang Hua, general manager of Dalian Bo Yuan Overseas Fishing Corp, one of the four companies named in the voluminous Greenpeace report. The report included detailed evidence and records of their illegal fishing activity.
Two other companies, Dalian Lian Run and Shandong Overseas Fisheries Development, could not be reached for comment. Dalian Lian Run was punished in July 2013 by China’s Ministry of Agriculture for illegal fishing activities in Guinea.
- See more at: http://afkinsider.com/96667/china-used-ebola-crisis-for-systematic-pillaging-of-w-africa-fisheries-greenpeace-says/#sthash.lrBfP7yl.dpuf
Group wants Air Force General court-martialed for giving God credit
Monday, 18 May 2015 00:00 Written by newsexpressngr
An Air Force General who recently spoke about how God has guided his career should be court-martialed, a civil liberties group has said.
In a speech at a National Day of Prayer Task Force event on May 7, Maj. Gen. Craig Olson credited God for his accomplishments in the military, and refered to himself as a “redeemed believer in Christ.”
The Air Force Times reports that the Military Religious Freedom Foundation has taken issue with Olson’s remarks, is calling for the two-star general to be court-martialed and “aggressively and very visibly brought to justice for his unforgivable crimes and transgressions.”
The group authored a letter to Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Walsh, arguing that Olson’s speech violates rules within the Air Force, which prohibits airmen from endorsing a particular faith or belief.
The letter, posted on the group’s website, begins, “This demand letter is sent to you on behalf of countless members of the United States Air Force who are utterly disgusted and shocked by the brazenly illicit and wholly unconstitutional, fundamentalist Christian proselytizing recently perpetrated, on international television (“GOD TV”), and streaming all over the Internet and in full military uniform, by USAF Major General Craig S. Olson on Thursday, May 7, 2015 during a VERY public speech for a private Christian organization (The “National Day of Prayer Task Force”: NDPTF) headed up by Focus on the Family founder, Dr. James Dobson’s, wife Shirley Dobson.”
The group, which believes that the American flag and the U.S. Constitution are the only religious symbol and scripture, respectively, for those who serve in the military, also wants other service members who helped Olson to be investigated and punished “to the full extent of military law.”
During Olson’s 23-minute talk, the Air Force Times reports, Olson spoke of “flying complex aircraft; doing complex nuclear missions — I have no ability to do that. God enabled me to do that.”
“He put me in charge of failing programs worth billions of dollars,” Olson said. “I have no ability to do that, no training to do that. God did that. He sent me to Iraq to negotiate foreign military sales deals through an Arabic interpreter. I have no ability to do that. I was not trained to do that. God did all of that.”
At the end of his speech, Olson asked those in attendance to pray for Defence Department leaders and troops preparing to be deployed.
Olson is the program executive officer at Hanscom Air Force Base in Massachusetts, where he is responsible for more than 2,200 personnel, according to the U.S. Air Force website. He was commissioned in 1982 following graduation from the U.S. Air Force Academy and has extensive operational, flight test and acquisition experience.
•Text courtesy of Fox News. Photo shows Maj. Gen. Craig Olson.
Source News Express
