But wait!...
First and most importantly, these guys are heroes. These kaitiaki stepped up.
Ka pai to mahi! (btw, how do you get a macron on twitter?)
cont...
But wait!...
cont...
continued...
If they're breathing: recovery position. Done.
continued...
Use "Head-Tilt, Chin-Lift" to 'open the airway'. And hold it there until ambulance arrives.
https://t.co/47S236HV6c
30 compressions, then 2 breaths (pinching the nose closed).
If you forget EVERYTHING: just push hard and push fast...the worst thing is to just stand there as someone's oxygen level is dropping and they're dying.
May we all have someone like these two proactive tane to help us...
If anyone knows them, please invite them along to the surf lifesaving club!
-end-
More from World
Watch the entire discussion if you have the time to do so. But if not, please make sure to watch Edhem Eldem summarizing ~150 years of democracy in Turkey in 6 minutes (starting on 57'). And if you can't watch it, fear not; I've transcribed it for you (as public service). Thread:
"Let me start by saying that I am a historian, I see dead people. But more seriously, I am constantly torn between the temptation to see patterns developing over time, and the fear of hasty generalizations and anachronistic comparisons. 1/n
"Nevertheless, the present situation forces me to explore the possible historical dimensions of the problem we're facing today. 2/n
"(...)I intend to go further back in time and widen the angle in order to focus on the confusion I believe exists between the notions of 'state', 'government', and 'public institutions' in Turkey. 3/n
"In the summer of 1876, that's a historical quote, as Midhat Pasa was trying to draft a constitution, Edhem Pasa wrote to Saffet Pasa, and I quote in Turkish, 'Bize Konstitusyon degil enstitusyon lazim' ('It is not a constitution we need but institutions'). 4/n
https://t.co/1GtPJaxi1H - Ka\xe7\u0131rmay\u0131n bu muhte\u015fem Bo\u011fazi\xe7i hocalar\u0131 ge\xe7idini !
— dilek cinar (@dlkcinar) February 16, 2021
"Let me start by saying that I am a historian, I see dead people. But more seriously, I am constantly torn between the temptation to see patterns developing over time, and the fear of hasty generalizations and anachronistic comparisons. 1/n
"Nevertheless, the present situation forces me to explore the possible historical dimensions of the problem we're facing today. 2/n
"(...)I intend to go further back in time and widen the angle in order to focus on the confusion I believe exists between the notions of 'state', 'government', and 'public institutions' in Turkey. 3/n
"In the summer of 1876, that's a historical quote, as Midhat Pasa was trying to draft a constitution, Edhem Pasa wrote to Saffet Pasa, and I quote in Turkish, 'Bize Konstitusyon degil enstitusyon lazim' ('It is not a constitution we need but institutions'). 4/n
1/10 With respect, multiple straw men here:
A) If you mean by "legally questionable" either that Senate is barred by constitution from trying an official impeached while in office, or that there are even very strong arguments against it, I have to differ...
2/10 Constitutional structure, precedent & any fair reading of original intent dictate that argument for jurisdiction is far stronger than argument against. On original intent, see
3/10 If you mean argument against jurisdiction is plausible, sure, it's plausible. It's just weak. In practical fact, Senate can try Trump now, find him guilty & disqualify him from future office if there are sufficient votes. And no court would presume to overturn that result
4/10 b) The argument from resources is awfully hard to take seriously. Fewer than a dozen House members act as Managers for a few weeks. They are staffed, as are Senators hearing case, by folks whose job it is to do stuff like this...
5/10 Yes, Senate floor time will be taken up. But it's past time for us to stop thinking of members of either house as feeble, fluttering, occupants of a nationally-funded convalescent home. There are nearly 500 of these people with 1000s of staff and a bunch of big buildings...
A) If you mean by "legally questionable" either that Senate is barred by constitution from trying an official impeached while in office, or that there are even very strong arguments against it, I have to differ...
Some argue that if the Senate declines to hold a legally questionable, resource-sucking trial, Trump would be getting a free pass. That assumes criminal authorities do nothing and citizens can't be trusted to evaluate. Censure and focus important work?
— Ross Garber (@rossgarber) January 22, 2021
2/10 Constitutional structure, precedent & any fair reading of original intent dictate that argument for jurisdiction is far stronger than argument against. On original intent, see
3/10 If you mean argument against jurisdiction is plausible, sure, it's plausible. It's just weak. In practical fact, Senate can try Trump now, find him guilty & disqualify him from future office if there are sufficient votes. And no court would presume to overturn that result
4/10 b) The argument from resources is awfully hard to take seriously. Fewer than a dozen House members act as Managers for a few weeks. They are staffed, as are Senators hearing case, by folks whose job it is to do stuff like this...
5/10 Yes, Senate floor time will be taken up. But it's past time for us to stop thinking of members of either house as feeble, fluttering, occupants of a nationally-funded convalescent home. There are nearly 500 of these people with 1000s of staff and a bunch of big buildings...
THREAD
1)
Newsweek — #Iran has sent deadly "Shahed-136 suicide/kamikaze drones" to the Houthis in #Yemen. These advanced UAVs are deployed to the Houthi-controlled northern Yemeni province of Al-Jawf.
More reason why the West should not appease Tehran.
https://t.co/gtNDCGbtQs
2)
#Iran has long provided drones to the Houthis
March 22, 2017
“… seven Houthi Qasef-1 drones and one drone engine recovered by forces from the UAE. Six of the drones were captured in October on a known Iranian smuggling route that runs through
3)
US to designate #Iran-backed Houthis in #Yemen as a foreign terrorist org (FTO)
https://t.co/ILBCg3Pfvs
Iran’s IRGC long funded/armed/trained/provided for the Houthis.
Dec 30—Missile attack on Aden airport. Yemen gov holds Houthis
4)
#Iran provides at least $360 million, ballistic missiles, other ordnance, technology and training to the Houthis in
5)
The Houthis recently claimed responsibility for a missile attack targeting Saudi Arabia’s Aramco oil
1)
Newsweek — #Iran has sent deadly "Shahed-136 suicide/kamikaze drones" to the Houthis in #Yemen. These advanced UAVs are deployed to the Houthi-controlled northern Yemeni province of Al-Jawf.
More reason why the West should not appease Tehran.
https://t.co/gtNDCGbtQs

2)
#Iran has long provided drones to the Houthis
March 22, 2017
“… seven Houthi Qasef-1 drones and one drone engine recovered by forces from the UAE. Six of the drones were captured in October on a known Iranian smuggling route that runs through
3)
US to designate #Iran-backed Houthis in #Yemen as a foreign terrorist org (FTO)
https://t.co/ILBCg3Pfvs
Iran’s IRGC long funded/armed/trained/provided for the Houthis.
Dec 30—Missile attack on Aden airport. Yemen gov holds Houthis

4)
#Iran provides at least $360 million, ballistic missiles, other ordnance, technology and training to the Houthis in
5)
The Houthis recently claimed responsibility for a missile attack targeting Saudi Arabia’s Aramco oil

All the leftists in the comments like oh no prageru made a good point lol
Polls consistently show conservative support for nuclear energy. It also has high support among elites. The myth that it is unpopular in general isn’t true—although it is unpopular in almost every specific case where they need to site it
Article is old but yeah
This study finds that risk & benefit predict individual opinion the most, followed by the share of nuclear energy already extant, followed by ideology (conservatives support more)
This one finds that journalists attitude affect public perceptions, but that energy consultants, nuclear engineers, bureaucrats, and the military show the highest support for nuclear energy
Nuclear energy:
— PragerU (@prageru) February 17, 2021
Safe? \u2705
Clean? \u2705
Efficient? \u2705
Scalable? \u2705
Why is it not receiving more political support?
Polls consistently show conservative support for nuclear energy. It also has high support among elites. The myth that it is unpopular in general isn’t true—although it is unpopular in almost every specific case where they need to site it
Article is old but yeah
This study finds that risk & benefit predict individual opinion the most, followed by the share of nuclear energy already extant, followed by ideology (conservatives support more)
This one finds that journalists attitude affect public perceptions, but that energy consultants, nuclear engineers, bureaucrats, and the military show the highest support for nuclear energy