Latest news with #GeorgeH.W
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
What Makes Boeing's Doomsday Plane Different From Air Force One?
As the iconic Boeing 747 is on its final flight path to obsolescence, there are only a few airlines still flying them. Yet oddly enough, a handful of old 747s remain some of the most important aircraft in the country. There are modified versions of the aircraft used for both Air Force One and the so-called "Doomsday Plane" that's designed to be sort of a flying Pentagon in case of nuclear war. How old are these aircraft? The two planes serving as Air Force One have been transporting U.S. presidents around the world since the 20th century, with President George H.W. Bush taking his first flights in both in 1990. With aircraft that old, it's no wonder former Pizza Hut spokesperson Donald Trump is desperate to fly on a new Air Force One. And the Doomsday editions have been around even longer. Needless to say, it's hard to get parts for these out-of-production planes, which makes it hard to service them in a timely manner, and although they're still considered safe, they've served well past their expected life cycles. Boeing had contracted for new Air Force One planes under the Obama administration, but delays in the program and problems with other Boeing aircraft seem to have left that project up in the air. Which means the old Air Force One and Doomsday Planes are still up in the air, playing two very different roles. Read more: These Movies And TV Shows Have The Best Car Casting A Quick Look At Air Force One The two jets that serve as Air Force One started life as Boeing 747-200B airliners; the Air Force uses the designation VC-25A for the planes after they've been modified for presidential use. Technically, "Air Force One" is the radio call sign for a plane only when the president is on board; otherwise, they go by their tail numbers: 28000 and 29000. Now, Air Force One does have some (classified) defense systems, including some that hide the jet engines' heat signature from missiles, as well as other countermeasures meant to misdirect the missiles' flight. Its communications capabilities have been beefed up, too. But Air Force One is really about providing a place where the president can relax and/or do business while in the air. For starters, it can hold up to 71 passengers with an executive suite for the commander in chief, complete with its own shower. You'll also find a main conference room, smaller meeting rooms, and a medical suite (staffed by a flight surgeon and registered nurse). If folks get hungry, Air Force One has two galleys that can prepare 100 meals at a time. For the long haul, there are enough ingredients on board for 2,000 meals, and the aircraft can refuel while in flight. Escape pods? Those are only for movies so far, but maybe one will be added to Trump's so-called "free" plane from Qatar. A Quick Look At The Doomsday Plane First off, the Air Force doesn't officially refer to the E-4B -- another militarized version of the 747-200 -- as "Doomsday" anything. It's the Night Watch or, when it's on duty, the National Airborne Operations Center; its mission is to essentially act as the country's military command center in case the ground-based ones are destroyed in a nuclear war, zombie apocalypse, or other calamity. There are actually four of these planes now in service, all of which became operational in 1974. Due to the nature of their role, the exact details of the Night Watch aircraft are classified, of course, but there are a few general overviews out there. Based out of Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska, the E-4Bs can fit up to 111 people, and one is on duty around the clock. Inside, the main deck is split into different stations with vague names like command center, conference room, communications room, etc. The E-4Bs also have their share of fancy defensive countermeasures. Perhaps the key difference is that the Nightwatch — unlike Air Force One — is shielded from thermal radiation and electromagnetic pulses (EMPs). That's good news considering how eager AI is to launch nukes when global trouble starts. Want more like this? Join the Jalopnik newsletter to get the latest auto news sent straight to your inbox... Read the original article on Jalopnik.
Los Angeles Times
6 days ago
- General
- Los Angeles Times
The Americans With Disabilities Act changed my life. Now my generation needs to fight for it
When the Americans With Disabilities Act was signed into law on this day in July 1990, my parents didn't yet know how much the landmark civil rights law would soon shape my life — and theirs. I was born profoundly deaf, but my parents didn't even know this part yet. I was 6 months old that summer, and hearing screenings for newborns weren't universal medical practice in those days. My parents had brought me home from the hospital thinking I was just like them — that is, hearing, someone who also lived amid sound and speech. But that August, just a few weeks after President George H.W. Bush signed the ADA on the White House's South Lawn, they learned otherwise. My sensory and linguistic world was fundamentally different from theirs. And thus my life would be too. My diagnosis came as a surprise for my parents. At first, they felt like they had no road map to follow. They didn't yet know American Sign Language. They knew nearly nothing about deafness, and they lived in a culture where disability was still too often classified as tragedy. But they jumped into their steep learning curve — and found the ADA waiting for us. Now, 35 years later, I am a member of the 'ADA generation,' which means I know what accessibility can be: an invitation into greater human community, as well as a precious right we must preserve for future generations. This truth is hitting me hard this summer. The ADA and I have come of age together, but modern life — and the future — now look different than I once thought it would. First, the good part: Thanks to the ADA, many more doors have opened to me than my parents could ever have imagined in 1990. From my youngest years, I had access to early intervention services. I had an Individualized Education Program in school, where I was the only deaf student, and I enjoyed learning from my teachers and peers through watching my ASL interpreters. I went to after-school sleepovers with my friends, where we all watched TV with the captions on. My closest friends learned ASL, and as an adult I've felt astonished at how much they still remember. Now they, too, know wider ways to communicate. The ADA has helped me figure out how to belong. Ever since I was a bookish kid, I knew that I wanted to travel, to write, to stay in school as long as I could, to have meaningful conversations with new friends and strangers. I just didn't know how I'd do some of these things — unless I somehow became hearing, too, when I grew up. News flash: I am still not hearing, but because of the power of accessibility, I've continued finding my way. I've lived abroad, completed my doctoral degree, written a book. I live a charmed life, and belonging to the ADA generation is one major reason why. Now the not-so-good part: The ADA is still the law of the land, but these are terrifying times for deaf and disabled people in America. Our lives are under threat in ways I never imagined when I was growing up. Our current president overtly scapegoats disabled people, as we've seen on numerous occasions, from mocking a disabled journalist in 2015 to baselessly blaming people with disabilities for the tragic plane crash in the Potomac River in January. This spring, his administration withdrew 11 pieces of federal accessibility guidelines intended to help businesses comply with the ADA. The budget bill signed on July 4 makes huge cuts to Medicaid, on which many disabled people rely to access healthcare and essential support services. Ongoing federal cuts, including to the Department of Education, threaten everything from special education to antidiscrimination policies for students with disabilities. The examples tumble on. It's time for the ADA generation to step up as we never have before. This means pressing into the legal and legislative fights ahead, calling representatives and engaging in protests. But it also means bringing our native-born knowledge to all our interactions, while pulling in others we know, people like my childhood classmates, who have witnessed the power of inclusion. We can support each other's access needs, even in the most everyday ways. We can speak out about what access has done for us. When I was growing up, I always took the ADA for granted. I thought of it as my birthright, when I thought of it at all. It was only 10 years ago that I began to see otherwise: During the 25th anniversary of the ADA in 2015, I watched the White House celebrations online and saw members of my generation, surrounded by disability activists who had been present for the law's passing. I saw how everyone in that room had their own distinctive ways of being and communicating, from wheelchairs to crutches to braille to ASL. And I also saw how they'd gathered with such vibrancy and joy. At age 25, I'd only just started to identify with the broader disability community, beyond the deaf culture that was much more familiar to me — but I recognized the deep resourcefulness of the people in that room, the communal spirit it takes to build more inclusive worlds. And I wanted everyone else to see it too. As the ADA and I are now 35, I see that we should not only celebrate those past disability activists but also embrace their approaches and bring the same doggedness and ingenuity to a new generation of challenges. We must keep providing care for each other, something that is always a political act in itself. I don't take the ADA for granted anymore. Instead, living in the world that it has made possible, here's what I know: Deaf and disabled Americans already belong. And accessibility already belongs to all of us, especially once we recognize how transformative it can truly be. Rachel Kolb is the author of the forthcoming memoir 'Articulate: A Deaf Memoir of Voice.'
Chicago Tribune
6 days ago
- Politics
- Chicago Tribune
Today in History: President George H.W. Bush signs the Americans with Disabilities Act
Today is Saturday, July 26, the 207th day of 2025. There are 158 days left in the year. Today in History: On July 26, 1990, President George H.W. Bush signed the Americans with Disabilities Act, prohibiting discrimination based on mental or physical disabilities. Also on this date: In 1775, the Continental Congress established a Post Office and appointed Benjamin Franklin its Postmaster-General. In 1847, the western African country of Liberia, founded by freed American slaves, declared its independence. In 1863, Sam Houston, former president of the Republic of Texas, died in Huntsville at age 70. In 1945, Winston Churchill resigned as Britain's prime minister after his Conservatives were soundly defeated by the Labour Party. Clement Attlee succeeded him. In 1947, President Harry S. Truman signed the National Security Act, which reorganized America's armed forces as the National Military Establishment and created the Central Intelligence Agency. In 1948, President Truman issued Executive Order 9981, which desegregated the U.S. military. In 1953, Fidel Castro began his revolt against Fulgencio Batista with an unsuccessful attack on an army barracks in eastern Cuba. (Castro ousted Batista in 1959.) In 1971, Apollo 15 was launched from Cape Kennedy on America's fourth successful manned mission to the moon. In 2002, the Republican-led House voted to create an enormous Homeland Security Department in the biggest government reorganization in decades. In 2016, Hillary Clinton became the first woman to be nominated for president by a major political party at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. In 2018, the last six members of a Japanese doomsday cult who remained on death row were executed for a series of crimes in the 1990s, including a gas attack on Tokyo subways that killed 13 people. Previously, seven other cult members were executed on July 6 of that year. In 2020, a procession with the casket of the late U.S. Rep. John Lewis crossed the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Alabama, where Lewis and other civil rights marchers were beaten 55 years earlier. Today's Birthdays: Former Australian Prime Minister John Howard is 86. Football Hall of Famer Bob Lilly is 86. Rock and Roll Hall of Famer Darlene Love is 84. The Rolling Stones' Mick Jagger is 82. Actor Helen Mirren is 80. Rock musician Roger Taylor (Queen) is 76. Olympic gold medal figure skater Dorothy Hamill is 69. Actor Kevin Spacey is 66. Actor Sandra Bullock is 61. Actor Jeremy Piven is 60. Actor Jason Statham is 58. Actor Olivia Williams is 57. Actor Kate Beckinsale is 52. Former New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern is 45. Actor Juliet Rylance is 45. Actor Monica Raymund is 39. Actor Francia Raisa is 37. Actor-singer Taylor Momsen is 32. Actor Elizabeth Gillies is 32. Actor Thomasin McKenzie is 25.
Toronto Sun
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Toronto Sun
GOLDBERG: Was bombing Iran deja vu all over again?
After a short and successful war with Iraq, President George H.W. Bush claimed in 1991 that 'the ghosts of Vietnam have been laid to rest beneath the sands of the Arabian desert.' Bush was referring to what was commonly called the 'Vietnam syndrome.' The idea was that the Vietnam War had so scarred the American psyche that we forever lost confidence in American power. The elder President Bush was partially right. The first Iraq War was certainly popular. And his successor, President Bill Clinton, used American power in the former Yugoslavia and elsewhere, with the general approval of the media and the public. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account But when the younger Bush, Clinton's successor, launched wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Vietnam syndrome came back with a vengeance. Barely three weeks after the U.S. attacked Afghanistan on Oct. 7, 2002, famed New York Times correspondent R.W. Apple penned a piece headlined 'A Military Quagmire Remembered: Afghanistan as Vietnam.' 'Like an unwelcome spectre from an unhappy past,' Apple wrote, 'the ominous word 'quagmire' has begun to haunt conversations among government officials and students of foreign policy, both here and abroad.' 'Could Afghanistan become another Vietnam?' he rhetorically asked. 'Echoes of Vietnam are unavoidable,' he asserted. Over the next 12 months, the newspaper ran nearly 300 articles with the words 'Vietnam' and 'Afghanistan' in them. The New York Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune and Los Angeles Times ran articles mentioning Iraq and Vietnam at an average rate of more than twice a day (I looked it up 20 years ago). Your noon-hour look at what's happening in Toronto and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. The tragic irony is that President George W. Bush did what his father couldn't: He exorcised the spectre of 'another Vietnam' — but he also replaced it with the spectre of 'another Iraq.' That's what's echoing in the reaction to President Donald Trump's decision to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. We're all familiar with cliches about generals fighting the last war, but journalists and politicians have the same habit of cramming the square peg of current events into the round hole of previous conflicts. Trump's decision to bomb Iran, which I broadly support, with caveats, is fair game for criticism and concern. But the Iraq syndrome cosplay misleads more than it instructs. For starters, no one is proposing 'boots on the ground,' never mind 'occupation' or 'nation-building.' This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. The debate over whether George W. Bush lied us into war over the issue of weapons of mass destruction is more tendentious than the conventional wisdom on the left and right would have you believe. But it's also irrelevant. No serious observer disputes that Iran has been pursuing a nuclear weapon for decades. The only live question is, or was: How close is Iran to having one? Tulsi Gabbard, director of national intelligence, told Congress in March — preposterously in my opinion — that 'Iran is not building a nuclear weapon.' On Sunday, 'Meet the Press' host Kristen Welker asked Vice-President JD Vance, 'So, why launch this strike now? Has the intelligence changed, Mr. Vice-President?' It's a good question. But it's not a sound basis for insinuating that another Republican president is again using faulty intelligence to get us into a war — just like Iraq. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. The squabbling over whether this was a 'pre-emptive' rather than 'preventative' attack misses the point. America would be justified in attacking Iran even if Gabbard was right. Why? Because Iran has been committing acts of war against America, and Israel, for decades, mostly through terrorist proxies it created, trained, funded and directed for that purpose. In 1983, Hezbollah militants blew up the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon, killing 63. Later that year, it blew up the U.S. Marine barracks, also in Beirut, killing 241 Americans. In the decades since, Hezbollah and other Iranian proxies have orchestrated or attempted the murder of Americans repeatedly, including during the Iraq War. It even authorized the assassination of President Trump, according to Joe Biden's Justice Department. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. These are acts of war that would justify a response even if Iran had no interest in a nuclear weapon. But the fanatical regime — whose supporters routinely chant 'Death to America!' — is pursuing a nuclear weapon. For years, the argument against eliminating that program has rested largely on the fact that it would be too difficult. The facilities are too hardened; Iran's proxies are too powerful. That is the intelligence that has changed. Israel crushed Hezbollah and Hamas militants and eliminated much of Iran's air defence system. What once seemed like a daunting assault on a Death Star turned into a layup by comparison. None of this means that things cannot get worse or that Trump's decision won't end up being regrettable. However, whatever that scenario looks like, it won't resemble what happened in Iraq, except for those who are unwilling to see it any other way. World World Toronto Maple Leafs Canada World
Yahoo
14-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - Our schools have a ‘boy problem' and we need to talk about it
These days it's impossible to avoid the avalanche of evidence about young men falling behind in America. Within the last month, the New York Times laid out the dismal data, the Wall Street Journal noted the rising misogyny among boys and Bloomberg documented their rising anger. One thing you won't read about the boys dilemma, this month or any other month: serious solutions to the problem. After a couple of decades as an education reporter, my first book was 'Why Boys Fail.' That was in 2011, one of several books written at the time about boys falling behind. Back then, it appeared we were on the cusp of finally doing something about it. But apparently not. Fourteen years later, all we have are more studies and op-eds. No solutions. Why? The boys dilemma has three components, and the reasons for inaction are different for each component. My focus for 'Why Boys Fail' was schooling. I traced the effects of well-intended education reforms that date back to the 1989 education summit in Charlottesville, Va., where President George H.W. Bush and 49 governors laid out a national plan for ramping up education achievement. The most notable goal was boosting early literacy skills to get all students on track for a shot at higher education. It was a noble goal, but President Bush and the governors overlooked a small but important detail: Girls are ready for early literacy challenges, but boys are not. Doubtful? Ask mothers of both boys and girls about who was the early reader. As schools pushed reading skills down by about two grades, boys faltered. They looked at the happy girls, who thrived on early reading, and concluded that school was for girls. Cue a massive school tap-out among boys, who found solace in video games. Why has nothing been done about this? Simply put, schools have no interest. Principals are overwhelmed by multiple challenges, boys being the least of them. Teachers, mostly women, have limited interest in the issue. They often see boys as discipline problems and prefer to focus on easier-to-teach girls. Groups such as the American Association of University Women (think of them as the 'thought leaders' behind the female-dominated teachers unions) see the boy problems as politically inconvenient. (It has to be a little awkward promoting women in higher education when, in fact, they are already dominating it to an almost embarrassing degree.) Second comes the problem of fatherless families, which by far hits Black males hardest. More than 70 percent of Black children grow up in families without a father. Strong mothers inspire the girls to pursue school success, but the boys appear to need more — far more. Why has nothing been done about this? That dilemma touches on issues that have long resisted solutions: race and economic inequity. Third, there's the self-image issue. Boys get thrown horribly off-track by confusing social cues. Are we supposed to be muscle-bound Jason Stathams, mowing down bad guys with punches and kicks, or sensitive Alan Aldas, whispering soothing life lessons to the ladies in his life? Why has nothing been done about this? Actually, there's been regression here. Do you really expect the current White House occupant, who brags about never having changed a diaper, praises the uneducated, bashes top universities and revels in UFC fights, to advise boys to tone down their masculinity? So, nothing gets done, and the spinoff problems fester. The biggest of those, the lack of 'marriageable mates' for women, is the little-mentioned driver behind the falling birth rate. Why would a woman take on a husband who is less likely to have a college degree than she is, and who has comparatively less to contribute to a family? Being realistic, the last two drivers of the boy problems may very well be intractable. That leaves schooling, which I would argue is the biggest factor and one that can actually be addressed. How? It all starts with convincing (in some cases, forcing) superintendents and principals to redirect schooling in boy-friendly directions. There's proof that it can be done. Roughly 15 years ago, when the alarm sounded that girls were falling behind in math and science schools engineered a turnaround for girls. Today, there's test evidence of that math-science gender turnaround everywhere. There are plenty of alarms sounding today about boys. So the question becomes: Why not do for boys what you already did for girls? Richard Whitmire is the author of six books on education issues. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
