Man do I wish I was in vegas with the rest of the Bloggers. But since I blew my wad back
in March There was no way My wife was going to let me go again this soon.
Did anyone else watch Curt Shillings Near NoNo?? Wow is all I can say, Too bad he lost it with 1 out in the 9th. He would have been working on a Perfect game if Lugo hadn't booted that grounder which means the Shanon Stewart wouldn't have come to bat in the 9th.
Poker has been interesting. Went to Foxwoods on wensday night to play the 6 P.m tourney which is still a luck fest after the first hour. No Hands of Note and lost the one Coin flip at the end with TT.
Man do I wish I was in vegas with the rest of the Bloggers. But since I blew my wad back
in March There was no way My wife was going to let me go again this soon.
Did anyone else watch Curt Shillings Near NoNo?? Wow is all I can say, Too bad he lost it with 1 out in the 9th. He would have been working on a Perfect game if Lugo hadn't booted that grounder which means the Shanon Stewart wouldn't have come to bat in the 9th.
Poker has been interesting. Went to Foxwoods on wensday night to play the 6 P.m tourney which is still a luck fest after the first hour. No Hands of Note and lost the one Coin flip at the end with TT < AJo. Such is life so I sat down at a 4/8 table and proceded to win about 265 in the next 4 hours. I think I might just skip the tourney and play 4/8 next time I go. strange news here:
How would you like to be this guy? Got his wheelchair stuck in a semi and the driver didn't know.Unable to hear Carpenter's cries for help over the hum of the diesel engine, the truck driver continued down Red Arrow Highway at speeds of approximately 50 mph."
Talk about an exhilarating ride of you life. Amazingly He wasn't hurt.
Have a great weekend and too all the Bloggers in Vegas have a Drink for me.
peace
Billy B.
Showing posts with label hammer day. Vegas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hammer day. Vegas. Show all posts
Thursday, June 07, 2007
Close but no Cigar
Monday, May 07, 2007
Is alcohol more dangerous than ecstasy?
Is alcohol more dangerous than ecstasy?
by Julia Layton
March 27, 2007
Scientists in Britain are proposing a complete revamping of drug classifications in the wake of findings that reveal some major discrepancies between a drug's legality and its safeness. A study surveying health, crime and science professionals regarding the dangers of a set of 20 legal and illegal drugs, published in The Lancet in March 2007, found that alcohol and tobacco, which are legal in Britain and the United States, are considered by experts to be more dangerous than ecstasy and marijuana, which are illegal in both countries.
In Britain, under the Misuse of Drugs Act, illegal drugs (including prescription drugs sold on the street) are classified as A, B or C. Class A is supposed to be the most harmful, and Class C is supposed to be the least harmful. For instance, heroin is a class A drug, and marijuana is a class C drug. The study was intended to achieve harm rankings for 20 drugs, 15 illegal substances and five legal substances that have shown potential for harm, using a systematic, scientific approach. The researchers surveyed two separate groups of experts including medical doctors, mental health professionals, scientists and forensics experts. Each group returned similar ranking results for the 20 drugs based on three primary features:
Harm Ranking.) Drug = Legal Classification
(MOST HARMFUL)
1.) Heroin = A
2.) Cocaine = A
3.) Barbiturates = B
4.) Methadone = A
5.) Alcohol = legal
6.) Ketamine = C
7.) Benzodiazepines = C
8.) Amphetamine = B
9.) Tobacco = legal
10.) Buprenorphine = C
11.) Cannabis = C
12.) Solvents = legal
13.) 4-methylthioamphetamine = A
14.) LSD = A
15.) Ritalin® = B
16.) Anabolic steroids = C
17.) GHB = C
18.) Ecstasy = A
19.) Alkyl nitrites = legal
20.) Khat = legal
(LEAST HARMFUL)
Probably the most notable discrepancy is the position of alcohol, a legal drug, at 13 places above ecstasy, an illegal, class A drug. And LSD, also a class A drug, was ranked considerably less harmful than benzodiazepines, a class C group of drugs.
The results seem to call into question exactly which method the British government is using to determine the relative harmfulness of drugs. According to the authors of the study, "Tobacco and alcohol together account for about 90 percent of all drug-related deaths in the U.K." Yet both of those substances are legal. In the United States, a study published in the journal of the American Medical Association in 2000 shows that 95 percent of drug-related deaths in the United States are from alcohol and tobacco use.
With little documentation that attempts to explain the current governmental ranking criteria, the study proposes a method for classifying drugs that uses scientific assessment. The classifications would be based on the three indicators of harm as presented to experts in the study -- personal, physical harm; abuse/dependence potential; and social harm. In the study, the rankings for each of the criterion were combined, with the researchers taking the mean of the three scores, to obtain the overall rankings listed above.
Of course, the legal status of drugs like alcohol and tobacco skews the results. Their legal status makes them far more available, so an accurate side-by-side comparison with a drug like heroin on all three criteria is impossible. Availability will always affect social effects of any given drug. Drugs that are easily available, legal and non-stigmatized logically will result in more widespread use, more adverse reactions and more money spent on police assistance and/or hospital care as a result of those adverse reactions.
Still, availability most likely wouldn't skew the abuse potential or the personal, physical harm associated with a drug. So the study does at least reveal some possible inconsistencies in British (and U.S.) drug law. Ultimately, the researchers believe that the foundations of drug policy need to be more transparent, since those foundations effect everything from public education to criminal sentences to treatment programs to methods of control and enforcement. They point out that without a clear, scientific basis for determining a drug's legal status and harmfulness, it's hard to establish credibility in the policies that dictate how a "drug war" is carried out, and it's hard to determine how effective those policies really are.
For more information on drug classification and related topics, check out the following links:
Interesting Article makes you wonder why we don't just go back to the day's of Prohibition.
Peace
Billyb
by Julia Layton
March 27, 2007
Scientists in Britain are proposing a complete revamping of drug classifications in the wake of findings that reveal some major discrepancies between a drug's legality and its safeness. A study surveying health, crime and science professionals regarding the dangers of a set of 20 legal and illegal drugs, published in The Lancet in March 2007, found that alcohol and tobacco, which are legal in Britain and the United States, are considered by experts to be more dangerous than ecstasy and marijuana, which are illegal in both countries.
In Britain, under the Misuse of Drugs Act, illegal drugs (including prescription drugs sold on the street) are classified as A, B or C. Class A is supposed to be the most harmful, and Class C is supposed to be the least harmful. For instance, heroin is a class A drug, and marijuana is a class C drug. The study was intended to achieve harm rankings for 20 drugs, 15 illegal substances and five legal substances that have shown potential for harm, using a systematic, scientific approach. The researchers surveyed two separate groups of experts including medical doctors, mental health professionals, scientists and forensics experts. Each group returned similar ranking results for the 20 drugs based on three primary features:
- physical harm to the person using the drug
- the drug's potential for abuse and/or dependence
- the drug's ill effects on society
Harm Ranking.) Drug = Legal Classification
(MOST HARMFUL)
1.) Heroin = A
2.) Cocaine = A
3.) Barbiturates = B
4.) Methadone = A
5.) Alcohol = legal
6.) Ketamine = C
7.) Benzodiazepines = C
8.) Amphetamine = B
9.) Tobacco = legal
10.) Buprenorphine = C
11.) Cannabis = C
12.) Solvents = legal
13.) 4-methylthioamphetamine = A
14.) LSD = A
15.) Ritalin® = B
16.) Anabolic steroids = C
17.) GHB = C
18.) Ecstasy = A
19.) Alkyl nitrites = legal
20.) Khat = legal
(LEAST HARMFUL)
Probably the most notable discrepancy is the position of alcohol, a legal drug, at 13 places above ecstasy, an illegal, class A drug. And LSD, also a class A drug, was ranked considerably less harmful than benzodiazepines, a class C group of drugs.
The results seem to call into question exactly which method the British government is using to determine the relative harmfulness of drugs. According to the authors of the study, "Tobacco and alcohol together account for about 90 percent of all drug-related deaths in the U.K." Yet both of those substances are legal. In the United States, a study published in the journal of the American Medical Association in 2000 shows that 95 percent of drug-related deaths in the United States are from alcohol and tobacco use.
With little documentation that attempts to explain the current governmental ranking criteria, the study proposes a method for classifying drugs that uses scientific assessment. The classifications would be based on the three indicators of harm as presented to experts in the study -- personal, physical harm; abuse/dependence potential; and social harm. In the study, the rankings for each of the criterion were combined, with the researchers taking the mean of the three scores, to obtain the overall rankings listed above.
Of course, the legal status of drugs like alcohol and tobacco skews the results. Their legal status makes them far more available, so an accurate side-by-side comparison with a drug like heroin on all three criteria is impossible. Availability will always affect social effects of any given drug. Drugs that are easily available, legal and non-stigmatized logically will result in more widespread use, more adverse reactions and more money spent on police assistance and/or hospital care as a result of those adverse reactions.
Still, availability most likely wouldn't skew the abuse potential or the personal, physical harm associated with a drug. So the study does at least reveal some possible inconsistencies in British (and U.S.) drug law. Ultimately, the researchers believe that the foundations of drug policy need to be more transparent, since those foundations effect everything from public education to criminal sentences to treatment programs to methods of control and enforcement. They point out that without a clear, scientific basis for determining a drug's legal status and harmfulness, it's hard to establish credibility in the policies that dictate how a "drug war" is carried out, and it's hard to determine how effective those policies really are.
For more information on drug classification and related topics, check out the following links:
- How Alcohol Works
- How Alcoholism Works
- How Cocaine Works
- How Marijuana Works
- How Nicotine Works
- BBC News: Scientists want new drug rankings - Mar. 23, 2007
- CNN.com: Alcohol, tobacco among worst drugs - Mar. 23, 2007
- The Lancet: Development of a rational scale to assess the harm of drugs of potential misuse (free registration required)
- "Alcohol, tobacco among worst drugs." CNN.com. Mar. 23, 2007.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/03/23....ap/index.html - "Annual Causes of Death in the United States." Drug War Facts.
http://www.drugwarfacts.org/causes.htm - "New 'matrix of harm' for drugs of abuse." Bristol University. Mar. 23, 2007.
http://www.bris.ac.uk/news/2007/5367.html - Nutt, David, et al. "Development of a rational scale to assess the harm of drugs of potential misuse." The Lancet, 2007; 369:1047-1053.
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/ PIIS0140673607604644/fulltext - "Scientists want new drug rankings." BBC News. Mar. 23, 2007.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6474053.stm?ls
Interesting Article makes you wonder why we don't just go back to the day's of Prohibition.
Peace
Billyb
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
23 hours to go
| MAR 14 | ||||||
| CONFIRMATION NUMBER: xxxxx | ||||||
| 267 | HARTFORD | |||||
 | to LAS VEGAS | 07:00 AM | V | |||
Wow less that 24 hours to go. Till i get on a plane to vegas. Guess waking up at 4:30 the day before is kinda like being in training. but it did allow me to get the A boarding pass since Southwest doesnt assign seat this can be important.
5 days in vegas drinking and smoking and watching College Hoops. What more can I ask for?
peace
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Thursday, February 08, 2007
Netteller and the DOJ.
Neteller Funds Seized by FBI
Neteller has had $55 Million in Funds seized by the FBI. These funds are payment processes in transit to and from the US. Authorities are saying the funds are "frozen".
"As a result of the restrictions placed by third parties, court-ordered seizures, and related legal concerns, the group is currently unable to make payments to U.S. customers," Neteller said in a statement.
"The amount of funds seized by the USA or otherwise restricted by third parties does not exceed US$55 million (euro42 million)," it added. The FBI has also hired a forensic accounting firm to compile a list of US customers who have had Neteller Transactions. Neteller has apparently said it will co-operate.
Most internet poker players already know the 2 founders were arrested in the US and are each facing 20 year racketeering charges, and US Operations were suspended last month. Neteller lost upwards of 65% of its business due to New Anti Gambling Legislation which was "porked" into law in October of the coattails of the port security bill. George W. Bush signed the bill on October 14th making it US law. Neteller is based in the Isle of Man, traded on the Britain Exchange, and was the favorite payment processor for Internet Poker.
Now here was a statement from Netteller.
NETELLER Works to Return Funds to US Customers After US Withdrawal
NETELLER Plc (LSE: NLR), the leading global independent online money transfer
business, today issued the following update with regard to its US business and
criminal charges against two of its founders.
On 19 January 2007, at the request of the Group, the Group's legal advisers met
with representatives of the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern
District of New York ("USAO") to clarify the Group's position with respect to
the complaints brought on 16 January 2007 against two of the Group's founders,
Mr. Stephen Lawrence and Mr. John Lefebvre. Neither are current employees or
directors of NETELLER. In that meeting, the Group pledged to cooperate with the
USAO, indicated it was prepared to begin document production promptly and
discussed a potential mechanism for arranging an orderly repayment of funds to
US customers.
The discussions between the Group's legal advisers and the USAO are ongoing. The
Group is, under advice of its legal advisers, commencing production of documents
and intends to cooperate with the USAO in its investigation.
Following upon the complaints dated 16 January 2007, banks in the US began
declining to permit transactions involving the Group through accounts maintained
at one or more automated clearinghouses in the United States. Additionally, the
Group has been advised that the USAO has obtained court-ordered seizure warrants
seizing funds pertaining to the Group's transactions. To the best of the Group's
knowledge, it believes that the amount of funds seized by the USAO or otherwise
restricted by third parties does not exceed US $55 million. These funds were
largely in the process of being transferred from the Group to its US customers
or vice versa.
As a result of the restrictions placed by third parties, court-ordered seizures,
and related legal concerns, the Group is currently unable to make payments to US
customers. Nevertheless, the Group is in discussions with the USAO to manage an
orderly return of funds to US customers. As part of these discussions, it is
contemplated that the USAO will engage a forensic accounting firm, at the
Group's expense, to assist in this process and to examine the Group's financial
position. "The return of funds to our US customers is a top priority for
NETELLER" said Ron Martin, Group President and CEO. US customers wishing to
withdraw funds from their NETELLER e-wallet accounts will experience ongoing
delays while these discussions continue, and a further update will be provided
by the Group once effective repayment mechanisms are determined.
To the Group's knowledge, no criminal action or proceeding has been brought
against the Group, its current officers or directors by the USAO. Nevertheless,
there can be no assurance that the Group will not be charged in a criminal
action at some subsequent time. The Group intends to work with the USAO to seek
a negotiated resolution of any allegations relating to its US activities. Any
resolution of this matter may lead to potential sanctions against the Group
including material financial penalties, fines and forfeitures.
It is emphasized that in line with the Group's standard business practices for
all customers, funds held by the Group for US customers are held in segregated
trust accounts. The Group's own cash position remains strong and the Group
currently has sufficient working capital to fund all its customers' balances as
well as ongoing requirements of the business.
NETELLER remains committed to developing its business in line with its stated
strategic objectives including geographical and product diversification for all
markets. The Group will focus on its continuing business and the opportunities
available in the growing markets of Europe, Asia and the Americas outside of the
United States. Since the Group's withdrawal from the US market on 18 January
2007, average daily new account sign-ups of new customers from non-US markets
has been around 1,400. This compares to average daily sign ups of 3,303 for the
year to 31 December 2006. Daily fee revenue since 18 January 2007 has averaged
over US$ 200,000 per day (excluding any revenues from Netbanx, 1-Pay and
interest income). These metrics demonstrate the resilience of the Group's
ongoing business. NETELLER customers not resident in the US continue to be
minimally affected by this withdrawal from the US market.
In view of the continuing uncertainty, the Group's shares will continue to be
suspended from trading on AIM for the time being. Further announcements will be
made as appropriate.
So Let's all Hope and Pray That people actually see their Funds. I don't Understand how the U.S. Goverment can steal the money unless they can prove that it actually came from Gambling
and Not Legit Activities, But that is what Lawyers are for.
Here is the Headline that we all want to see:
"Neteller Funds Returned by FBI
Funds will be returned to rightfull owners"
Funds will be returned to rightfull owners"
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
Hammer Day, 36 and counting
I was doing my daily reading when I saw Biggestro write that today is
2/7/2007 HAMMER DAY.
you will need both tonight to survive.
Don't forget CC's Bash on thursday also. The gang from Pokerworks throws a great tourney.
36 more days till vegas.
Peace
Billyb
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
