kscarbel2

Heavy Duty Trucking / January 8, 2016 The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is proposing to modify the tariff for operating at its marine terminals to deny access to trucks with model year 1994 and 1995 engines, effective January 1, 2018, and to require that, effective March 1, 2016, new trucks seeking to serve the port terminals must be equipped with a 2007 or newer model year engine. The proposed changes to engines allowed by the tariff will be posted on the Port Authority website and available for comment during a 30-day period beginning in February. Comments may be emailed to: publiccomments@panynj.gov. PANYNJ also announced that it will commit $1.2 million to supplement the $9 million the joint agency expects to receive in federal funding to assist port truckers operating older trucks to buy newer, more environmentally friendly vehicles. The joint agency said the total $10.2 million in funds for its Truck Replacement Program will provide grants for a portion of the cost of replacement trucks. The program’s stated goal is to replace some 400 trucks with model-year 1994 and 1995 engines that now call on the port. According to PANYNJ, the approximately 400 newer trucks would result in emissions reductions of about 184 tons of fine particulate matter and 3,843 tons per year of nitrogen oxides over the remaining useful life of the vehicles being replaced. “This is the equivalent of taking more than 56,000 automobiles off the road each year, based on an Environmental Protection Agency formula,” the agency noted. In addition, the Port Authority has set a goal to eventually have all trucks serving its terminals equipped with 2007 or newer engines. The agency said it is “working closely with financial institutions to explore whether low-interest loans can be made available to truckers for the replacement of trucks serving the port with model year 1996 to 2006 engines.” Since the Truck Replacement Program was launched in 2010, PANYNJ has facilitated the replacement of 429 trucks with newer models. To date, the program has resulted in an estimated emission reduction of 157 tons of fine particulate matter and 4,122 tons of nitrogen oxide for the remaining useful life of the vehicles that were replaced. “Our goal is to balance the need to efficiently and effectively move goods to and from our port terminals, while continuing to be good environmental stewards to the communities that surround our port facilities," said Port Authority Port Commerce Director Molly Campbell. "We believe our plan achieves this balance and will ensure that we continue to systematically address this issue for all stakeholders.”

Rubio ‘absolutely’ stands by 2004 Florida proposal to give in-state tuition to illegal immigrants The Washington Post / January 10, 2015 Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said he stands by a 2004 bill he co-sponsored in the Florida legislature to provide in-state tuition to illegal immigrants, saying it was "narrowly" drafted and set specific eligibility criteria. Rubio said Sunday on ABC's "This Week" that he "absolutely" stands by the proposal. It required undocumented immigrants to have a certain GPA, to be a graduate of a Florida high school and to have been living in the United States for a certain period to qualify for in-state tuition, he said. "It was very narrowly tailored to high-performing students who found themselves in a situation where they were brought here by their parents when they were 5, didn't even speak another language except English and, therefore, couldn't attend college because they were being charged like they were from out of state," Rubio said. "They still had to pay for college, but they paid for what people paid when they lived in Florida." "We didn't legalize anybody. That's the issue here," he added. In 2014, well after Rubio left the state legislature, Florida Gov. Rick Scott ® signed into law an initiative to provide in-state tuition for illegal [immigrant] students who attended a Florida high school for at least three years. Rubio said recent claims against the legislation are exaggerated, adding that he believes there have to be "real consequences for violating our laws." "I continue to support and have supported and sponsored the largest border surge in American history, 20,000 new border agents, 700 miles of fencing and walls, a mandatory e-verify system, entry-exit tracking system to prevent visa overstays," Rubio said.

Not punishing the Bundys for the Nevada standoff led to the occupation in Oregon The Washington Post / January 7, 2016 If authorities let anti-government protesters get away with breaking the law, they'll keep doing it. It has become a familiar scene: a cluster of armed “patriots” gathered at a rural locale in the West, protesting federal land-use policies and disputing the legitimacy of the government back in Washington, while nearby, law enforcement officers act stunned into submission. That all unfolded again this past week in Burns, Ore., as a group of activists with guns seized a federal building on a wildlife refuge and demanded freedom for a couple of ranchers convicted of arson and sentenced to mandatory minimum prison terms, in what they claim is another example of extreme federal overreach. The local school district shut down, since it couldn’t guarantee the safety of children traveling to and from school. Burns residents expressed agitation and exasperation with the standoff, since most, if not all, of the participants appear to live outside Harney County. The sheriff requested that the two dozen or so men holed up at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge pack up and leave town. If the news from Oregon seemed like deja vu all over again, that’s because it was: At the head of the protest were Ammon and Ryan Bundy, the sons of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy. Back in April 2014, Cliven grabbed headlines by holding Bureau of Land Management officials at bay in an armed standoff on his ranch in which bloodshed was, by all accounts, only narrowly averted. So why do federal officials once again find themselves in this position — awkwardly wringing their hands in hopes that the radicals’ demands and willpower will erode with a little time and cold weather? And facing the same cast of characters who humiliated law enforcement officials less than two years ago? The answer, to a large extent, lies in that Nevada canyon where Bundy’s compatriots aimed their weapons at the federal agents and police officers who had come to enforce a court order requiring the confiscation of the ranch’s cattle, after Bundy refused for years to pay federal grazing fees for using public lands. When those guns were brandished, multiple violations of federal and state law occurred: It is a felony to point a weapon at a law enforcement officer and a federal felony to take aim at a U.S. government agent. And yet there were no arrests that day. Moreover, despite the FBI’s assumption shortly afterward of the investigation into weapons use at the Bundy ranch — along with vows to hold the people responsible for the standoff fully accountable — no meaningful action has yet been taken against anyone involved. That includes, of course, Cliven Bundy himself (who still hasn’t paid the fees and fines he owes the government) and his sons — who have now turned up in Oregon, threatening again to take over public lands, in defiance of the local community and the wishes of the people on whose behalf they’re ostensibly protesting, all in pursuit of their campaign to destroy the federal government’s ability to administer land policies. Bundy explained his rationale, such as it is, in a press release shortly before the occupation began: “The United States Justice Department has NO jurisdiction or authority within the State of Oregon, County of Harney over this type of ranch management. These lands are not under U.S. treaties or commerce, they are not article 4 territories, and Congress does not have unlimited power.” The men leading the protest believe in an arcane interpretation of the Constitution that radically limits the reach and scope of the federal government — in their alternate universe, the county sheriff is the highest authority, while the feds are limited to regulating overseas trade and waging war. Derived from the racist swamplands of far-right extremism, their version of “constitutionalism” reflects a paranoid culture in which government officials are believed to be trading away Americans’ freedom on behalf of a nefarious New World Order that seeks to enslave all mankind. If federal law enforcement authorities had taken their roles as stewards of the rule of law seriously, many of these players would be facing justice in federal courts right now, instead of opportunistically raising hell out in poverty-stricken rural areas. Certainly, there is no small irony in the fact that the tepid response from federal authorities demonstrates how little resemblance they have to the tyrannical thugs the Bundys say they are. But it also shows how just that accusation, when wielded by white conservatives, can cause federal law enforcement to back down. Ever since their April 2014 standoff, Bundy and his associated “patriots” in such movements as the far-right Oath Keepers have been attempting to force further armed showdowns over Western land policies. Last spring, they tried to organize a confrontation with BLM officials in southwestern Oregon over mining rights, but that effort eventually fizzled out. Another attempted showdown in Montana with the U.S. Forest Service, also over mining rights, wound up being overshadowed by the massive forest fires that hit the state this summer. None of that should have been possible: There should have been a number of arrests after the nonsense at the Bundy ranch. That there were none not only emboldened these right-wing radicals — and encouraged them to believe that their bizarre misinterpretation of the Constitution has some legitimacy — but, in the case of the Bundy brothers, directly empowered them to carry on as they did before. “We believe these armed extremists have been emboldened by what they saw as a clear victory at the Cliven Bundy ranch and the fact that no one was held accountable for taking up arms against agents of the federal government,” said Heidi Beirich, director of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project. The failure of federal law enforcement to adequately respond to this kind of threatening behavior has also become a source of low morale in agencies the Bundys and their ilk like to demonize, such as the BLM and the Forest Service. This is particularly the case among federal field employees, who, according to those I’ve spoken with, are encountering increasing incidents of radicalized (and armed) “patriots” claiming that the agencies have no jurisdiction on federal lands. That’s not to suggest that federal law enforcement should respond immediately with tactical units and guns blazing. That approach was attempted in the 1990s at two armed standoffs with far-right extremists — at Ruby Ridge in northern Idaho and at the Branch Davidian compound near Waco, Tex. — to disastrous effect. Those incidents inspired a fresh wave of far-right radicalism (including the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995) and were seen by many on the right as omens of looming government oppression. It’s understandable that federal law enforcement might be reluctant to act precipitously after those disasters. A failure to act in any way whatsoever, though, invites more of the same and certain escalation, as the Oregon standoff demonstrates. The brass back in Washington and agents in field offices throughout the West should look back to a different, less infamous siege from 20 years ago, one that offers a more helpful model for responding to these situations. In 1996, a group calling itself the Montana Freemen — which operated a number of money-making scams and made armed threats against county officials in Jordan, Mont. — similarly defied the federal government in an attempt to create its own homeland out on the prairie. It took 81 days to wait them out, during the harsh Montana winter and into the muddy Montana spring, but rather than rush in, as in Waco and Ruby Ridge, FBI negotiators eventually persuaded all the people inside the Freemen compound to surrender peacefully. Several of the chief perpetrators wound up doing extensive federal prison time for a variety of bank, wire and mail fraud charges, as well as for making threats against county and federal officials. There can be a middle ground between the bloodshed of Ruby Ridge and Waco and the tacit acceptance of what’s going on in Burns. We know from how the FBI handled the Freemen that federal authorities are perfectly capable of bringing extremists who brandish weapons and threaten government employees to justice without creating martyrs or worsening the situation. Somehow, in the intervening 20 years — and amid the changes in administrations along the way, not to mention personnel and law enforcement philosophies — that lesson got lost. Federal authorities in the Justice Department and elsewhere have seemingly made a tactical decision to avoid confronting right-wing radicals, though their rationale has never been made clear. Maybe they fear backlash from a conservative media pack that has made efforts to track and confront right-wing extremist terrorism difficult, if not impossible, for federal law enforcement agencies (thanks in no small part to the nonsensical uproar that arose in 2009 over a Department of Homeland Security bulletin regarding recruitment and terrorist violence among right-wing extremists). But no one from any federal agency has come forward to explain their inaction, and in the meantime, people like the Bundys are taking exactly the wrong lessons from it. What’s become abundantly clear in Oregon is that federal agents made a horrific mistake in failing to enforce the law after the Bundy ranch showdown. They are paying the price for that failure now. Maybe it’s time they remembered that it’s possible to stand up for the rule of law without breaking it.

Corbitt and Brown http://www.hemmings.com/hcc/stories/2011/06/01/hmn_feature17.html

Real Jeeps (not the ones on Mitsubishi and Alfa Romeo platforms) If I could only buy a Cherokee Chief today. http://www.caranddriver.com/flipbook/nothing-more-nothing-less-sweet-photos-of-old-jeeps#1

So, you're suggesting that the promises made by the founding fathers (the aristocracy) to the masses of the thirteen colonies was a fraud, and the electoral college system is a sham?

We’ve touched on General Austin before (http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/index.php?/topic/41827-syria/?hl=austin). Clearly clueless and incompetent [Austin]...........and your life rests partially in his hands. Putin and company are calling a spade a spade and getting things done in the Middle East. They actually have a plan.

Yes, I see the White House made a mistake (wrote ISIL in lieu of Iraqi) and he read as it was written. (11th paragraph) https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/07/06/remarks-president-progress-fight-against-isil I wouldn't call the Pulitzer Prize-winning Guardian a liberal news organization. But I agree they set a very high standard on reporting the news......no added dramatics, just the news with abundant supporting facts. Thanks to them, you now know for a fact that all your e-mails, and posts on this website, are under the view of the government (think about that). Putin is sharp, isn't he.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott calls for Convention of States to take back states’ rights Associated Press / January 8, 2016 Gov. Greg Abbott, aiming to spark a national conversation about states’ rights, said Friday that he wants Texas to lead the call for a convention to amend the U.S. Constitution and wrest power from a federal government “run amok.” “If we are going to fight for, protect and hand on to the next generation, the freedom that [President] Reagan spoke of … then we have to take the lead to restore the rule of law in America,” Abbott said during a speech at the Texas Public Policy Foundation’s Policy Orientation that drew raucous applause from the conservative audience. He said he will ask lawmakers to pass a bill authorizing Texas to join other states calling for a Convention of States. Along with the speech, Abbott released a nearly 70-page plan – part American civics lesson, part anti-Obama diatribe – detailing nine proposed constitutional amendments that he said would unravel the federal government’s decades-long power grab and restore authority over economic regulation and other matters to the states. “The irony for our generation is that the threat to our Republic doesn’t come just from foreign enemies, it comes, in part, from our very own leaders,” Abbott said in a speech that took aim at President Obama, Congress and the judicial branch. The proposal for a convention, which has been gaining traction among some among conservative Republicans, comes just as the GOP presidential candidates begin to make forays into Texas ahead of the March primary election. The state, with 155 delegates up for grabs, will certainly be a key player in the party’s nominating process. Abbott hasn’t endorsed a candidate, though the field includes Sen. Ted Cruz, who was one of Abbott’s top employees when the governor was attorney general. Abbott is likely hoping to boost his national profile within the GOP as eyes turn to the state. This week, presidential contender U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., published a piece in USA Today endorsing the idea of a convention to amend the Constitution and restore limited government. In April, 27 active petitions had been filed with Congress seeking a convention to amend the constitution to require that Congress adopt a balanced budget. Congress would be forced to act once 34 states joined the effort. So far, Cruz hasn’t endorsed the idea. By this point, you may be wondering just what a constitutional convention or Convention of the States is and why it would be a big deal. A convention is one of two ways that the U.S. Constitution can be amended, and it’s described in Article V. One way is that Congress can propose amendments approved by two-thirds of the members of both chambers. The other method allows two-thirds of the state legislatures to call for a convention to propose amendments. Republicans backing the idea are confident that because they control state government in a majority of states, their ideas would prevail. In both cases, the amendments become effective only if ratified by three-fourths of the states. So far, the U.S. Constitution has been amended 27 times. None of those were amendments generated by a constitutional convention. Critics say there’s a good reason. In an editorial lambasting Rubio’s plan, USA Today‘s editorial board warned that such a process could invite mayhem and further poison the nation’s vitriolic political scene. It would also raise unresolved questions about the years-long process of ratification. And some conservatives who otherwise agree with Abbott and Rubio on many issues fear a convention could lead to greater restrictions on guns and money in politics and greater overall power for the federal government. Abbott, in his plan, dismisses many of those criticisms, saying that he would call for a limited scope to the convention. The plan lays out nine specific proposed amendments that would: - Prohibit congress from regulating activity that occurs wholly within one state. - Require Congress to balance its budget. - Prohibit administrative agencies from creating federal law. - Prohibit administrative agencies from pre-empting state law. - Allow a two-thirds majority of the states to override a U.S. Supreme Court decision. - Require a seven-justice super-majority vote for U.S. Supreme Court decisions that invalidate a democratically enacted law - Restore the balance of power between the federal and state governments by limiting the former to the powers expressly delegated to it in the Constitution. - Give state officials the power to sue in federal court when federal officials overstep their bounds. - Allow a two-thirds majority of the states to override a federal law or regulation. A convention, Abbott wrote, would force the federal government to “take the Constitution seriously again.” “The only true downside comes from doing nothing and allowing the federal government to continue ignoring the very document that created it,” Abbott wrote. James Henson, director of UT’s Texas Politics Project, said Abbott’s posture aligns well with the prominent stream of thought in the Republican Party that it is time to resuscitate state power as a check to the federal government. “I would find it fairly unlikely that this would get traction on the national level,” Henson said. “On the other hand, it’s not the first we’ve heard of this.” Democrats were quick to denounce Abbott’s plan Friday, saying the governor has misplaced priorities. “America added 292,000 new jobs in December. But under Abbott, Texas fell to sixth in job creation, remains the uninsured capitol of the nation, wages and incomes remain far too low for hardworking families, our neighborhood schools are still underfunded, and college education is slipping out of reach,” Texas Democratic Party Deputy Executive Director Manny Garcia said in a statement. “Texas families deserve serious solutions, not Tea Party nonsense.” The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas issued a statement with similar sentiment. “Governor Abbott, as Texans, we prefer the Framers’ plan. Don’t mess with the Constitution,” said Terri Burke, executive director of the ACLU of Texas. But Democrats haven’t been the only ones to chide the idea of fiddling with the Constitution. Last year, House legislators filed measures calling for such a convention. State Sen. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls, unleashed a screed against the proposal when it came before the Senate State Affairs Committee in May. He compared the idea to “a petulant teenager who’s lost a few basketball games and plans to burn down the gymnasium.” “The constitution has served us well for over 200 years. The problem is not the constitution,” Estes said, adding that the solution is to elect more conservative lawmakers. “Slap a bumper sticker for Ted Cruz on your car and get after it and knock yourself out.” Estes went on to promise a filibuster if the measure came to the Senate floor.

Reuters / January 8, 2016 Texas Governor Greg Abbott called for a conference of the states to add new nine amendments to the U.S. Constitution, saying the U.S. Congress, the President and U.S. Supreme Court are eroding the rule of law in the country. Speaking at a conservative forum in Austin, Abbott, a Republican, said the federal government, courts and president were overreaching their constitutional bounds and he wanted legislation authorizing Texas to join other states in calling for a "Convention of States to fix the cracks in our Constitution." Amending the constitution, however, could prove difficult. Numerous past plans to change the document have been squashed over the decades. Article Five of the Constitution calls for approval by three-fourths of the states for a change, a tough barrier to cross in the current political climate. "The cure to these problems will not come from Washington D.C. Instead, the states must lead the way," he said. "The Texas plan fixes this government run amok." Abbott, formerly the Texas attorney general and now governor of the most-populous Republican-controlled state, has been a major opponent to Democrat President Barack Obama for years. He enlisted broad support from other Republican-dominated states for a lawsuit currently in federal court to block the president's executive order on immigration. His nine amendments include requiring Congress to balance the budget, allowing two-thirds of the states to override a U.S. Supreme Court decision and allowing a two-thirds majority of the states to override a federal law or regulation - rights that the states do not have.

You really need to experience these cabs in person to realize how spacious they are. A video is unable to convey it. But note how much more refined the features and construction is over today's disposable North American truck. Did you notice the one editor reading a magazine which had a picture of a Mack U-Model?

Disheartening that, particularly in today’s environment, they’re sending classified weapons via commercial transport rather than secure MATS flights? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AFP / January 7, 2016 A US Hellfire missile has turned up in Cuba after going missing in a fiasco that has left American officials worried the technology may be shared with China, Russia or North Korea, the Wall Street Journal reported. Though the missile was not carrying a warhead, the alarming diversion while it was in transit from Europe has spurred US investigators to probe whether its arrival on the communist island was the result of criminal activity or merely a series of mistakes, according to the newspaper. And despite a historic thaw in ties with Cuba over the past year, Washington has been unsuccessful in its push to get the missile back, the WSJ said. It reported that American officials were not concerned that Cuba would take apart the Hellfire -- an air-to-ground missile often carried by helicopters -- but were worried that Havana would share the technology with US rivals China and Russia, as well as North Korea. The missile's far-flung journey began in early 2014 when it was sent from Orlando International Airport by arms firm Lockheed Martin to Spain, where it was used in a NATO military exercise. From Spain it began a journey that was supposed to see it arrive back in the United States, and was passed between several shipping firms on the first leg of its trip. Officials loading a flight that was to carry the missile out of Madrid first noticed that it was missing, the Journal said. They then determined that it had been put on a truck operated by Air France, which took it to Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris, where it was loaded onto one of the company's flights to Cuba. By the time the missile was tracked down, it was already en route to Havana where an official noticed the labeling on its crate and seized it. Lockheed Martin notified the State Department of the incident when it realized the missile was missing around June 2014, the WSJ said. The US Justice Department is investigating the matter. If the missile was purposefully diverted to Havana, the incident could be a violation of the Arms Export Control Act and even sanction laws against Cuba, the Journal said. The bungled missile delivery comes with Washington and Havana working to build on their restoration of full diplomatic relations, a move first announced in December 2014. The United States and Cuba formally restored diplomatic relations in July and re-opened embassies in each other's capitals. Obama said he had made the decision because he concluded that 50 years of trying to encourage democratic and economic change in Cuba through isolation had failed. It also comes with the US pushing for greater pressure on North Korea over an alleged hydrogen bomb test this month, and with Washington at loggerheads with Moscow and Beijing over a litany of issues ranging from the civil war in Syria and the conflict in Ukraine to freedom of navigation in the South China Sea.

Commercial Motor TV - sponsored by DAF Trucks / January 7, 2016

Daimler Press Release / January 7, 2016 Despite partly difficult markets Daimler Trucks has increased its global sales to over 500,000 units in 2015 based on first December figures. In 2014 Daimler Trucks sold 495,700 vehicles worldwide under the Mercedes-Benz, FUSO, Freightliner, Western Star, Thomas Built Buses and BharatBenz brands. The final sales figures for 2015 will be presented on February 4th 2016 at Daimler's annual press conference. Daimler Trucks reached its goals in a very heterogeneous and challenging market environment: Although the truck markets in North America and Europe grew significantly, the important markets of Brazil and Indonesia slumped. Also in Turkey the market decreased during the last few months due to political insecurities. In particular, in November and December, market conditions have further deteriorated significantly. Nevertheless Daimler Trucks managed to reach its sales target thanks to strong products and an excellent performance in sales. Daimler Truck & Bus head Wolfgang Bernhard said “In 2015 we have sold over 500,000 trucks and have increased our unit sales for the third year in a row. Thanks to our leading products we will deliver one of the best years in the history of Daimler Trucks despite some very challenging markets. This is a great achievement by our global team. I thank all employees for their outstanding efforts." "Conditions in the truck market will remain challenging in 2016. Nevertheless, our sights remain set on our next sales target of 700,000 trucks in 2020," commented Bernhard. He continued: "To sit back is not an option for us. We remain focused on the implementation of our strategy. For this purpose, we will again demonstrate our technology leadership in the IAA year 2016. For example we will proceed with important developments for example in terms of vehicle connectivity but also when it comes to efficiency, active safety and autonomous driving. We are also expanding our global presence and will get even closer to our customers with six new regional centres. And I see large potential in expanding the global platform strategy beyond just the powertrain.” Clear increase in unit sales in North America The global increase has largely been driven by the NAFTA region, where Daimler Trucks is on the way to record sales thanks to robust market growth and a strong product range. Between January and November 2015 sales were up 20 percent to 176,100 units (prior year 147,200). Daimler Trucks has further extended its market leadership in weight classes 6-8, with market share rising to 39.1 percent (prior year 37.3). In 2016, the North American market for trucks in the classes 6-8 is expected to be below the very high level of 2015. One of the key reasons for the success of Daimler Trucks products in the North American market is that customers are increasingly recognising the benefits of the integral powertrain of Daimler trucks. With its perfectly coordinated combination of engine, transmission and axles, it delivers clear efficiency advantages. Daimler Trucks was the first manufacturer to offer this powertrain on the North American market. The DT12 automated manual transmission (AMT) is central to that success. More than 40 percent of Freightliner Cascadia and Western Star 5700 XE are now sold with AMT transmissions – around twice as many as in 2014. In order to be able to serve the growing demand in the region more quickly, local production of the DT12 transmission system for the North American market began in Detroit in November. From 2018, medium-duty engines for the NAFTA market will also be manufactured in Detroit. In total Daimler is investing around 450 million Euros. Business in Western Europe gained momentum over the course of the year In Western Europe too, Daimler Trucks increased sales in the first eleven months to 56,000 units (prior year 50,500). The pace of growth increased noticeably over the course of the year. Mercedes-Benz continues to lead the market in the medium-duty and heavy-duty segment with a market share of 21.9 percent (prior year 24.6). Despite a weaker economy and political instability in the region, unit sales in Turkey surpassed the high level of the previous year (18,900) to 20,400 trucks from January to November 2015. This was due in part to the effect of spending brought forward ahead of the EURO VI emissions standard coming into effect on January 1st 2016. However, the momentum tailed off over the year, a trend which is expected to continue in 2016. Market share further increased in Brazil despite market weakness In Latin America the unit sales of Daimler Trucks decreased to 27,900 (prior year 44,500) units in the first eleven months, primarily as a result of the dramatic downturn in the Brazilian market. In Brazil 15,200 vehicles were delivered between January and November, compared to 31,300 in the same period in the previous year. In this extremely tough market environment Daimler Trucks succeeded in increasing market share in the medium- and heavy-duty segment in Brazil to 26.6 percent (prior year 26.0). Despite the current market weakness Daimler Trucks continues to invest in order to increase its competitiveness in the local market in the longer term. Between 2014 and 2018 around 500 million Euros will be invested in Brazil in customised products, technologies and services as well as the modernisation of the production network. In October this year Mercedes-Benz in Brazil launched a number of product innovations onto the market, including further refinements to the locally manufactured truck models Accelo, Atego, Axor and Actros in terms of comfort, fuel consumption and total cost of ownership. Also for 2016 there is no recovery of the market situation to be expected. Mixed sales performance in Asian markets The Asian markets showed significant differences in performance in 2015. In Japan the FUSO brand increased sales by 4 percent to 41,600 vehicles (prior year 39,000). The share of the truck market in Japan increased further to 20.7 percent (prior year 20.3). In a sharp declining Indonesian market, sales fell to 29,400 units (prior year 51,400). However, Daimler Trucks increased its market share to 48.2 percent (prior year 47.2). In India Daimler Trucks could increase sales by 29 percent to 12,500 vehicles (prior year 9,700). More than 30,000 BharatBenz trucks have been delivered to customers since the company first entered the market in September 2012. The launch of new models also helped BharatBenz to increase its market share in the upper medium- and heavy-duty truck segment to 7.1 percent (prior year 5.9). An important new product this year was the heavy-duty BharatBenz 3143, which has been specially designed for use in mining and on construction sites. The Indian-made vehicles will play a key role in opening up important growth markets in Asia and Africa. In 2015 Daimler Trucks began exporting to more than a dozen additional markets from the plant in Chennai. Trucks from the plant now are being shipped to more than 20 markets in total. In 2016 the company plans to move into several additional markets with FUSO trucks that have been specially adapted to the needs of these countries. Greater global reach with six new regional centres Going forward, Daimler will position itself even more closely to its customers in Africa, Asia and Latin America so that it can benefit from the opportunities for growth in these highly promising markets. In October the first of the six planned regional centres was opened in Dubai. These centres will focus entirely on sales and after-sales for Daimler commercial vehicles. In the first quarter of 2016 further regional centres will open in Kenya for central Africa, in Pretoria (South Africa) for southern Africa and in Singapore for South East Asia. These new regional centres will enable Daimler to respond even faster and in a more targeted manner to the needs of customers in these markets. Technology highlight of 2015 – Highway Pilot enables semi-autonomous driving In 2015, Daimler Trucks further emphasized its pioneering role in the area of autonomous driving. In May, Daimler received a public driving licence for the Freightliner Inspiration Truck in the US state of Nevada – the first time a self-driving truck had ever been licensed for use on the road anywhere in the world. Just five months later, Daimler Trucks began testing the first autonomously driving series-produced truck in Germany on public roads. The truck used is a standard Mercedes-Benz Actros equipped with the intelligent Highway Pilot system to test autonomous driving on public roads. The Highway Pilot enables semi-autonomous driving, which means that while the Highway Pilot is able to steer the truck by itself on motorways, the driver retains full responsibility, needs to monitor the traffic at all times and must be able to intervene at any time. The Highway Pilot can therefore be compared to the autopilot commonly used in aviation. The system includes front-mounted radar and a stereo camera, as well as well-proven assistance systems such as Adaptive Cruise Control +. The technology was adapted for use on public roads and has been extensively tested to ensure that all the components work perfectly with one another. The Highway Pilot has already completed around 20,000 kilometres on test routes in Germany and the USA. It is conceivable that the technology will be ready to go into production in the next two to three years.

1/7/2016 Iveco victorious in Stage 4 of the Dakar ​Gerard de Rooy scored a triumph in the Trucks category with his Iveco Powerstar in the first part of the marathon stage of the world's most difficult rally race. On the first day of the 2016 Dakar Rally that did not present any weather-related complications, the Iveco team demonstrated its potential on Argentina's roads with a victory in Stage 4, a 419-kilometer special for Trucks in the northern part of the country. Behind the wheel of Iveco Powerstar #501, the Dutchman Gerard de Rooy beat Pieter Versluis by 37 seconds and Hans Stacey by 1 minute and 18 seconds, taking full advantage of the last part of the special and putting the pedal to the metal in the final stretch. Another Iveco Powerstar, #514, driven by the Argentine pilot Federico Villagra, came in just 1 minute and 46 seconds behind the leader for 4th place. Aleš Loprais and Ton van Genugten made it into the special's Top 10, taking 8th and 10th place, 5 minutes and 26 seconds and 6 minutes and 8 seconds behind de Rooy, respectively. With these placements they are still in the Top 10 in the general classification of the 2016 Dakar. The experienced Spanish pilot Pep Vila was finally restored to 13th place in yesterday's race, as opposed to 36th place as the organization had initially announced. Coming in 12th place today, 11 minutes and 59 seconds behind the leader, Vila currently sits at 14th in the general, more than a half hour behind the front-runner. Stage 4 – Trucks 1. GERARD DE ROOY (NLD), IVECO – 3:58:6 2. Versluis (NLD), MAN – plus 37 seconds 3. Stacey (NLD), MAN – plus 1 minute 18 seconds 4. FEDERICO VILLAGRA (ARG), IVECO – plus 1 minute 46 seconds 5. Nikolaev (RUS), Kamaz – plus 3 minutes 32 seconds 8. ALEŠ LOPRAIS (CZE), IVECO – plus 5 minutes 26 seconds 10. TON VAN GENUGTEN (NLD), IVECO – plus 6 minutes 08 seconds 12. PEP VILA (SPA), IVECO – plus 11 minutes 59 seconds General Classification – Trucks 1. Versluis (NLD), MAN – 10:02:34 2. Stacey (NLD), MAN – plus 15 seconds 3. FEDERICO VILLAGRA (ARG), IVECO – plus 2 minutes 04 seconds 4. GERARD DE ROOY (NLD), IVECO – plus 4 minutes 59 seconds 5. Mardeev (RUS), Kamaz – plus 9 minutes 27 seconds 6. TON VAN GENUGTEN (NLD), IVECO – plus 13 minutes 32 seconds 8. ALEŠ LOPRAIS (CZE), IVECO – plus 15 minutes 04 seconds 14. PEP VILA (SPA), IVECO – plus 35 minutes 44 seconds To learn more about Iveco's teams and vehicles and to follow Iveco day-by-day throughout the race, visit www.iveco.com/dakar.

Truck News / January 7, 2016 Kenworth’s Paccar factory in Ste-Therese, Quebec recently produced its 150,000th truck, a Kenworth T370, made for long-time customer and Oshkosh subsidiary Pierce Manufacturing. The truck is equipped with a Paccar PX-9 engine with 350 horsepower, 1,000 pounds/foot of torque at 1,400 rpms, a five-speed Allison 3000 EVS automatic transmission with PTO provisions, full National Fire Protection Association compliance components and a 14,000-pound front axle and 26,000-pound rear axle with a rear axle ratio of 5.25. The vehicle will also be upfitted by Pierce, which manufactures custom fire apparatuses, with a fire tanker/pumper body. “Pierce Manufacturing, which maintains a strong reputation of superior performance, relies on Kenworth to develop features such as our new frame packaging option to make durable truck chassis that can be easily adapted to meet a wide range of needs,” said Jason Skoog, Kenworth assistant general manager for sales and marketing. “Over the years, Kenworth has worked closely with Pierce to provide customers with custom-made commercial tankers, pumpers, rescue trucks and other vehicles that get the job done, while handling punishing environments and holding their value. Kenworth appreciates its long-time association with Pierce and looks forward to continuing to provide medium duty truck chassis for Pierce customers.” Skoog presented a special commemorative plaque and the keys for the 150,000th truck to roll off the Ste-Therese assembly line to Rich Demski, Florida division chief engineer and commercial chassis manager for Pierce. “The production of 150,000 trucks at Paccar Ste-Therese culminates the hard work and strong commitment to quality among our employees,” said Chakib Toubal-Seghir, Paccar Ste-Therese plant manager. “We’ve taken great pride as we’ve watched or seen pictures and videos of the trucks we’ve built over the years for customers, such as Pierce Manufacturing, respond to roadside emergencies or carry water to extinguish building or residential fires. We’re confident this truck will carry on that tradition.” .

Fleet Owner / January 7, 2015 International is a name steeped in history. From its beginnings in 1902 as International Harvester to today, the International name is synonymous with American history. And now it’s immortalized in a new book by Patrick Foster. International Harvester Trucks: The Complete History chronicles the company’s history from its first truck models in 1907 through today’s models. For those into truck history, the book is well worth the read. It’s available through Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/International-Harvester-Trucks-Complete-History/dp/076034860X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1452196799&sr=1-1&keywords=international+harvester+trucks+the+complete+history). .

According to the FBI UCS Annual Crime Reports, the number of murders in the United States has actually dropped every year but one since Obama took office. I didn’t vote for Obama. I’m neutral on him. If you faithfully believe in the Electoral College System, then you should be satisfied that Obama was duly elected by a majority of American voters. He didn’t elect himself.....over 50 percent of the American voting public did. So that’s that. If you voted for a 69-year-old McCain in 2008 or Romney in 2012, within our democracy your man came up short. As Mick Jagger harps, “You can’t always get what you want.” But I’ll say this..........I am surprised at how quickly people have forgotten about the just passed George W. Bush administration, whose performance was shocking. Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld are characters from a twilight zone, and Condoleezza Rice was a terrible Secretary of State. It will take a decade, possibly two, to undo the damage caused by Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice. ISIS is a byproduct of their work. Obama didn't make America a terrorist target.......Bin Laden started the anti-America thing in 1996. And let’s mention former CIA director George Tenet who under Bush said it was a "slam dunk" that Iraq still had weapons of mass destruction; and the incompetent and unqualified L. Paul Bremer who presided over the disastrous first 14 months of Iraq’s reconstruction. (The American-led rebuilding of Iraq......that was a real success story. What a mess, which led to the massive destabilization of the Middle East we have today. Many bad calls (decisions). Like a successful business, you need qualified, experienced and capable people in order to succeed. The only entities that appear to have come out on top in Iraq were companies like Halliburton that milked the U.S. taxpayer for billions). As you can see, the murder rate rose progressively from 1960 to the 1991-1993 period, after which the annual numbers, despite a still growing population, began to fall. Now, as we all know, the internet has expanded our awareness of events occurring across the country multiple times over. And I think our new nationwide awareness capacity is marvelous. Although the annual murder rate in 2014 was down to 14,249, I won’t be satisfied until we’re down to zero. I don’t own a gun, and have no desire to carry one. I would not locate myself in a vicinity that required me to carry a gun for protection. Life’s too short......I’m not going to live that way. The America of today is evolving. Though 14,249 Americans were murdered largely by Americans, we now have the threats of terrorists and drug cartel operatives on American soil. Cities in the heart of America like Detroit and Baltimore are virtual war zones. We are going to have to alter our long held beliefs on immigration, in order to tackle the terrorist threat. Why the federal government doesn’t stomp out the Latin American drug cartels operating in America that are destroying the minds and bodies of Americans coast-to-coast is one of many great mysteries. We have the capability........it’s a matter of making the call. Murders in the United States of America 1960 9,110 1961 8,740 1962 8,530 1963 8,640 1964 9,360 1965 9,960 1966 11,040 1967 12,240 1968 13,800 1969 14,760 1970 16,000 1971 17,780 1972 18,670 1973 19,640 1974 20,710 1975 20,510 1976 18,780 1977 19,120 1978 19,560 1979 21,460 1980 23,040 1981 22,520 1982 21,010 1983 19,310 1984 18,690 1985 18,980 1986 20,613 1987 20,096 1988 20,680 1989 21,500 1990 23,440 1991 24,700 1992 23,760 1993 24,530 1994 23,330 1995 21,610 1996 19,650 1997 18,208 1998 16,914 1999 15,522 2000 15,586 2001 16,037 2002 16,229 2003 16,528 2004 16,148 2005 16,740 2006 17,030 2007 16,929 2008 16,442 2009 15,399 2010 14,772 2011 14,661 2012 14,866 2013 14,319 2014 14,249 2015 15,696

Inspector General says State Department covered up Hillary's private email server for years even though senior officials knew Associated Press / January 7, 2016 The U.S. State Department told a watchdog group in 2013 that it didn't have any information about former secretary Hillary Clinton's emails, even though dozens of senior officials knew she was using a private server for all her electronic communications. A report released Thursday by the agency's inspector general described a cavalier culture about transparency inside Clinton's agency, saying that 177 requests for documents about Clinton are still 'pending' nearly three years after she left office. The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requires federal agencies to respond to requests for information within 20 business days. The botched FOIA request, filed in December 2012 just before Clinton left office, specifically asked whether or not Clinton used an email account other than one hosted at state.gov. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) was reacting to news that former Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator Lisa Jackson had used an alias – 'Richard Windsor' – to send and receive emails in a way that couldn't be tied to her when FOIA requests came in. In May 2013 the State Department responded to CREW's request, saying it had 'no records' related to what the group asked for. By then, Clinton had spent four years emailing department employees from her private home-brew account, but had never turned the messages over to the State Department. That CREW request was filed in December 2012, just before Mrs. Clinton left office, and specifically asked whether Mrs. Clinton used a non-State.gov email account for government business. 'At the time the request was received, dozens of senior officials throughout the Department, including members of Secretary Clinton's immediate staff, exchanged emails with the Secretary using the personal accounts she used to conduct official business,' the Office of Inspector General (OIG) concluded. 'OIG found evidence that the Secretary's then-Chief of Staff was informed of the request at the time it was received and subsequently tasked staff to follow up. However, OIG found no evidence to indicate that any of these senior officials reviewed the search results or approved the response to CREW.' The employees responsible for searching the State Department's records, the report says, never 'searched any email records, even though the request clearly encompassed emails.' State has received an unprecedented number of requests for Clinton-related documents – 240 in all, a number bigger than those related to secretaries Madeline Albright, Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice and John Kerry combined. But the inspector general found that the agency cut the number of people processing those FOIA requests as they poured in. Clinton's emails sat on her private server for years until the State Department asked her in 2014 to turn them over. She deleted more than half of the messages, calling them 'personal' in nature, before complying. In the meantime, however, her emails were out of reach when federal employees searched for records that might satisfy FOIA requests. Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) said Thursday that 'the FOIA process at the State Department is broken, and has been for several years.' The agency's breakdowns in performance, he said, 'are particularly troubling in light of the report’s revelation that former Secretary Clinton’s exclusive use of a non-government email server was known to senior staff at the department, but unknown to the FOIA office, thus causing the FOIA office to provide false information about the Secretary’s use of email.' The FOIA law, first enacted in 1966 before the advent of personal computers, 'neither authorizes nor requires agencies to search for Federal records in personal email accounts maintained on private servers or through commercial providers,' the inspector general report explained. State Department employees have 'no way to independently locate Federal records from such accounts unless employees take steps to preserve official emails in Department recordkeeping systems.' Current law requires State Department employees to forward work-related personal emails to their official accounts within 20 days of sending or receiving them, so the agency has a record of them. But Clinton never had a 'state.gov' account where her emails could be sent. A federal judge ultimately ordered the State Department to collect her emails, vet them for classified material, and release them on a monthly schedule. So far intelligence officials have had to block the release of portions of more than 1,200 emails because they contained classified information. .

But then again, one is inclined to assume that younger people are low turnout voters (it takes away from their social media time)..

The second amendment of the United States Constitution “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” The gun debate is interesting in that many people apply the literal wording of the second amendment to today. The United States was a very different place when the second amendment was adopted in December 1791. Let’s discuss why the founding fathers included the “right to bear arms” clause, and made it number two on the list. The second amendment was partially based on the right to keep and bear arms in English common-law, and influenced by the English Bill of Rights of 1689. English judge Sir William Blackstone (1723-1780), legendary for writing the Commentaries on the Laws of England which profoundly influenced the founding fathers, described the right as an auxiliary right, supporting the natural rights of self-defense, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the state. But equally important in understanding the mood of the moment, the English settlers of the thirteen colonies had just fought a very difficult war for independence from a government (and its military) which the settlers felt was oppressive. In the event that the new United States government should follow the same path, the founding fathers allowed the people to bear arms so that they could overthrow the new U.S. government by defeating its army, just as the common people had risen to defeat the British army of King George III (once more, resistance to oppression). “That” was the thought in their minds when they wrote the second amendment. Fast forward to today, the amendment is perceived far differently, in a way unimaginable to the founding fathers some 225 years ago. Other constitutional amendments have been revised since the Constitution was written, keeping them up to date, relevant with the times........but not the second amendment. (A superb read on America’s early development is "Independence: The Struggle to Set America Free", by John Ferling - http://www.amazon.co...s=independence) .

There's reason to believe that Trump will be the reason that Hillary Clinton wins, and then we will suffer at least 4 years of her arrogance. My perception is, she is nothing but trouble. I fear what could happen to the United States under her stewardship.

Owner/Driver / January 6, 2016 The Freightliner Racing transporter joins the Burrumbuttock Hay Runners convoy. Freightliner Racing transporter driver Paul ‘Stax’ Eddy has swapped his regular load of two V8 Supercars and race equipment for 32 bales of donated hay. Eddy is using the Freightliner Argosy prime mover, still decked out in its 2015 race team livery, to take part in the Burrumbuttock Hay Runners convoy that is delivering hay to drought-stricken farmers in Queensland. Eddy is traveling from the team’s headquarters in Albury to join as many as 120 other drivers at Darlington Point, south of Griffith in New South Wales. The convoy, departing on January 7, will travel to Ilfracombe, near Longreach in central western Queensland, a one way trip of some 1,850km. This convoy, organised by fourth-generation NSW farmer, Brendan Farrell, is the 10th to get underway since February 2014. Those interested in donating to help cover the hefty fuel bill, some $2,000 per truck, can visit the Burrumbuttock Hay Runners page on Facebook for details. Eddy was thrilled to be able to give up some of his off-season holiday and take part in the drought assistance drive. "The farmers are really doing it tough up there," Eddy says. "They have had no rain for so long that they could really do with a little help." Once Eddy returns from hay run, the Argosy prime mover will be fitted out with its 2016 Freightliner Racing livery in preparation for the new season that begins with the Clipsal 500 at Adelaide on March 3. .