COSTUMES
Category: Anti Halloween Groups

Wristbands Used For Safety Purposes

Wristbands Used For Safety Purposes

Sometimes we didn’t notice that wristbands are not just for fashion statement but these have many purposes and uses. Wristbands are useful in hospitals, police officials, athletes and etc. For police officials, the Cherry red wristbands with message “say no to risk” is useful for drivers to take precautions and be safe while on the road. These wristbands connote awareness to be responsible drivers. As well as crossing the roads to be more anxious and follow the safety rules by using the pedestrian crossings, for passengers to wear seatbelts at all times to avoid incidents.

In schools, wristbands are used for many purposes. Children are wearing blue wristbands show and support anti-bullying to treat people fairly and diligently.
In a Halloween party, you can use wristbands to prevent from danger. Fire fighters distribute glow in the dark wristbands stating give respect-get respect to remember every individual who are celebrating said event to not to fight and have fun instead. Funny moments sometime because other group to be distracted so better prevent it by wearing wristbands for every group or individual to be aware of.

In hospitals, wristbands are use for patient safety purposes. They have color coded wristbands to monitor patients with the right medication and treatment to be given. Like patients with allergies, can be prevented if with wristbands that states the condition of patients. Under the new rainbow system, five colors are used for specific conditions, purple means do not resuscitate, pink means restricted extremity, green denotes latex allergy, and yellow for fall risk.

Wristbands are also used for caring children that are lost and help them found their parents. Fluorescent bands are the best type of wristbands for this particular purpose as it includes emergency contact numbers and other legitimate information to help the children in contacting their parents.

I am a freelance writer of a  wristbands website based in the California area. For affordable and customize wristbands, visit http://www.kulayful.com

Tags: Purposes, Used, Wristbands, police, Safety
 

RMS Queen Mary

RMS Queen Mary

Construction and naming

With Germany launching their Bremen and Europa into service, the British did not want to be left out in the ship building race. White Star Line began construction on their 60,000 ton Oceanic in 1928, while Cunard planned a 75,000 ton unnamed ship of their own.

Construction on the ship, then known only as “Hull Number 534″, began in December 1930 on the River Clyde by the John Brown & Company Shipbuilding and Engineering shipyard at Clydebank Scotland. Work was halted in December 1931 due to the Great Depression and Cunard applied to the British Government for a loan to complete 534. The loan was granted, with enough money to complete the Queen Mary and to build a running mate, Hull No. 552 which would become the Queen Elizabeth. One condition of the loan was that Cunard would merge with the White Star Line, which was Cunard’s chief British rival at the time and which had already been forced by the Depression to cancel construction on its Oceanic. Both lines agreed and the merger was completed in April 1934. Work on the Queen Mary resumed immediately and she was launched on 26 September 1934. Completion ultimately took 3 years and cost 3 million pounds sterling in total. Much of the ship’s interior was designed and constructed by the Bromsgrove Guild.

The ship was named after Queen Mary, the consort of King George V. Until her launch the name she was to be given was kept a closely guarded secret. Legend has it that Cunard intended to name the ship “Victoria”, in keeping with company tradition of giving its ships names ending in “ia”. However, when company representatives asked the King’s permission to name the ocean liner after Britain’s “greatest queen”, he said his wife, Queen Mary, would be delighted. And so, the legend goes, the delegation had of course no other choice but to report that No. 534 would be called RMS Queen Mary. This story was denied by company officials, and traditionally the names of sovereigns have only been used for capital ships of the Royal Navy. Some support for the story was provided by Washington Post editor Felix Morley, who sailed as a guest of the Cunard Line on the 1936 maiden voyage of the Queen Mary. In his 1979 autobiography, For the Record, Morley wrote that he was placed at table with Sir Percy Bates, chairman of the Cunard Line. Bates told him the story of the naming of the ship “on condition you won’t print it during my lifetime.” The name Queen Mary could also have been decided upon as a compromise between Cunard and the White Star Line, with which Cunard had recently merged, both lines had tradition of using names either ending in “ic” with White Star and “ia” with Cunard.

History (1934-1939)

Queen Mary 1936

There was already a Clyde turbine steamer named Queen Mary, so Cunard White Star reached agreement with the owners that the existing steamer would be renamed TS Queen Mary II, and in 1934 the new liner was launched by Queen Mary as RMS Queen Mary. On her way down the slipway, the Queen Mary was slowed by eighteen drag chains, which checked the liner’s progress into the Clyde, a portion of which had been widened to accommodate the launch.

When she sailed on her maiden voyage from Southampton, England on 27 May 1936, she was commanded by Sir Edgar T. Britten, who had been the master designate for Cunard White Star whilst the ship was under construction at the John Brown shipyard. The Queen Mary had a gross tonnage (GT) of 80,774 tons; her rival, Normandie, which originally grossed 79,280 tonnes, had been modified the preceding winter to increase her size to 83,243 GT (an enclosed tourist lounge was built on the aft boat deck on the area where the game court was), and therefore kept the title of the largest ocean liner. The Queen Mary sailed at high speeds for most of her maiden voyage to New York until heavy fog forced a reduction of speed on the final day of the crossing.

The Observation Bar lounge. The windows were once part of the enclosed Promenade Deck turnaround; the lounge was extended forward after 1967.

The Queen Mary’s design was criticized for being too traditional, especially when the Normandie’s hull was revolutionary with a clipper shaped, streamlined bow. Except for her cruiser stern, she seemed to be simply an enlarged version of her Cunard predecessors from the pre World War I era. Her interior design, while mostly Art Deco, still seemed restrained and conservative when compared to the ultramodern French liner. However, the Queen Mary proved to be the more popular vessel than its larger rival, in terms of passengers carried.

In August 1936, Queen Mary captured the Blue Riband from Normandie, with average speeds of 30.14 knots (55.82 km/h) westbound and 30.63 knots eastbound. Normandie was refitted with a new set of propellors in 1937 and reclaimed the honour, but in 1938 Queen Mary took back the Blue Riband in both directions with average speeds of 30.99 knots (57.39 km/h) westbound and 31.69 knots eastbound, records which stood until lost to the SS United States in 1952.

Interior

The First Class dining room map on the Queen Mary, which tracked the ship’s progress across the Atlantic Ocean.

Onboard amenities on the Queen Mary varied according to class, with First Class passengers accorded the most space and luxury. Among facilities available on board the Queen Mary, the liner featured an indoor swimming pool, salon, ship’s library, children’s nursery, outdoor paddle tennis court, and ship’s kennel. The largest room was the first class dining room (grand salon), which spanned three stories in height and was anchored by wide columns. The indoor swimming pool facility also spanned over two decks in height.

The first class dining room featured a large map of the transatlantic crossing, with twin tracks symbolizing the winter/spring route (further south to avoid icebergs) and the summer/autumn route. During each crossing, a motorized model of the Queen Mary would indicate the vessel’s progress en route.

The First Class dining room on the Queen Mary, also known as the Grand Salon.

As an alternative to the first class dining room, the Queen Mary featured a separate Verandah Grill on the Sun Deck at the upper aft of the ship. The Verandah Grill was an exclusive la carte restaurant with a capacity of approximately eighty passengers, and was converted to the Starlight Club at night. Irish writer and broadcaster, Brian Cleeve spent several months as a commis waiter on the ship in 1938, after he ran away from school. Also on board was the Observation Bar, an Art Deco styled lounge, with wide ocean views.

Woods from different regions of the British Empire were used in her public rooms and staterooms. Accommodations ranged from fully equipped, luxurious first class staterooms to modest and cramped third class cabins. Artists commissioned by Cunard in 1933 for works of art in the interior include Edward Wadsworth and A. Duncan Carse.

World War II

Arriving in New York Harbor, 20 June 1945, with thousands of U.S. troops.

In late August 1939, the Queen Mary was on a return run from New York to Southampton. The international situation led to her being escorted by the battlecruiser HMS Hood. She arrived safely, and set out again for New York on 1 September. By the time she arrived, the Second World War had started and she was ordered to remain in port until further notice alongside the Normandie. In 1940 the Queen Mary and the Normandie were joined in New York by Queen Mary’s new running mate Queen Elizabeth, fresh from her secret dash from Clydebank. The three largest liners in the world sat idle for some time until the Allied commanders decided that all three ships could be used as troopships (unfortunately, the Normandie would be destroyed by fire during her troopship conversion). The Queen Mary left New York for Sydney, where she, along with several other liners, was converted into a troopship to carry Australian and New Zealand soldiers to the United Kingdom. In the conversion, her hull, superstructure and funnels were painted navy grey. Inside, stateroom furniture and decoration were removed and replaced with triple-tiered wooden bunks (which would later be replaced by standee bunks). Six miles of carpet, 220 cases of china, crystal and silver service, tapestries and paintings were removed and stored in warehouses for the duration of the war. The woodwork in the staterooms, the first-class dining room and other public areas were covered with leather. Eventually joined in troop service by the Queen Elizabeth, the two ships were the largest and fastest troopships involved in the war, often carrying as many as 15,000 men in a single voyage, and often travelling out of convoy and without escort. Their high speed meant that it was difficult for U boats to catch them.

On 2 October 1942, Queen Mary accidentally sank one of her escorts, slicing through the light cruiser HMS Curacoa off the Irish coast, with the loss of 338 lives. Due to the constant danger of being attacked by U-Boats, on board the Queen Mary Captain C. Gordon Illingworth was under strict orders not to stop for any reason, the Royal Navy destroyers accompanying the Queen were ordered to stay on course and not rescue any survivors.

The forward section of the Queen Mary was fitted with new big windows and anti-aircraft guns seen here in Long Beach.

In December 1942, the Queen Mary was carrying 16,082 American troops from New York to Great Britain, a standing record for the most passengers ever transported on one vessel. While 700 miles from Scotland during a gale, she was suddenly hit broadside by a rogue wave that may have reached a height of 28 metres (92 ft). An account of this crossing can be found in Walter Ford Carter’s book, No Greater Sacrifice, No Greater Love. Carter’s father, Dr. Norval Carter, part of the

Tags: ocean liner, Mary, Halloween, Queen, river clyde
 

Bryce’s Pet Peeves of the Week

Bryce’s Pet Peeves of the Week

“Never trust a person who doesn’t have at least one known vice (e.g., drinking, smoking, swearing).”
- Bryce’s Law

INTRODUCTION

On August 1st of last year, my “Management Visions” (MV) broadcast premiered on the Internet. MV is a free Internet broadcast (aka “Podcast”) that is updated weekly (on Mondays) and is made available in MP3, WMA, and RealPlayer file formats (the RealPlayer is accompanied by graphics). During the broadcast, I discuss subjects related to Information Resource Management IRM), review upcoming events of interest, and review e-mails from listeners. I also describe my “Pet Peeve of the Week” which represents items irritating me at the moment. This has turned into a popular part of the show and, as such, I am including them herein for those of you who missed the broadcast. Hopefully, you will be able to relate to some of these peeves. They are meant to offer some humorous insight into current topics of interest. I hope you will enjoy them. Please note that these are my own opinions and do not necessarily represent the opinions of my company or any other group.

AUGUST 8, 2005 – BOUNTY COMMERCIAL

My “Pet Peeve of the Week” is a Bounty commercial I recently heard on the radio while driving into work the other day. Now as many of you know, Bounty is Proctor & Gamble’s “Quilted Quicker Picker-Upper” paper towels, which I don‘t have a problem with as such. We use Bounty in our house. However, the new radio ad described it as having “a new blue-dot quilting” that results in a “high resolution shine.” Frankly, when I heard this I burst out laughing. People in the cars next to me must have thought I had lost my mind. “High resolution shine”? I guess it seems funny to me to see something as mundane as paper towels go “high tech”. Ah, you gotta love Madison Avenue I guess.

AUGUST 15, 2005 – MICROSOFT WINDOWS

My “Pet Peeve of the Week” is Microsoft’s Windoze operating system. I recently purchased two computers for the office; one a laptop and the other a desktop, both equipped with
the latest version of Windows XP. I had to migrate a lot of data to both machines which offhand, shouldn’t be a big deal. It was. Now, I don‘t consider myself a technical guru by any stretch of the imagination but rather I like to consider myself a “power user” who knows his way around a computer.

I’ve installed a lot of operating systems over the years, both beta and production versions. Now, a lot of you know me as an advocate of IBM’s old OS/2 Warp operating system which I still consider the best 32-bit operating system on the block. Nonetheless, my track record of being able to crash a Windows operating system remains intact, for I had no end of problems and found it an extremely frustrating experience. I guess I’ve been spoiled by OS/2 with its object oriented desktop, System Object Model, and preemptive multitasking. I am still at a loss as to why IBM abandoned it.

But in my mind, I can’t imagine why anyone would bother wasting their time inventing computer viruses and worms when you have something like Windoze out there. The only thing that goes uninterrupted is Microsoft’s cash-flow. And no, Virginia, there is no o.s. monopoly out there is there?

AUGUST 22, 2005 – SOFTWARE TESTING

My “Pet Peeve of the Week” Is software testing. As I mentioned in my essay, there is a simple “bottom-up” way to test and install systems. However, I am concerned about the way software vendors are testing their products these days, if at all. The industry has fallen into the nasty habit of letting the customers test the products. For example, it is not uncommon anymore for people to get “beta” releases of software products, play with it, and report back to the manufacturer on problems encountered with it. Further, major releases of software products are being shipped with the manufacturers knowing
full-well the products are “buggy.” To pacify customers, they offer free upgrades of the next release (which actually represents the final version).

This approach to software testing is offensive to me.

I used to beta-test software products for vendors, but I no longer have the time nor inclination to do the manufacturer’s work for them anymore. Further, I no longer rush out to buy the latest release of “any” software product; I have been burned too many times by the vendors. As far as I’m concerned, the software vendors really need to clean up their act when it comes to testing. If they really want us to test their products for them,
let us know where we should send the bill.

AUGUST 29, 2005 – MICROMANAGEMENT

My “Pet Peeve of the Week” Is something a little different: micromanagement. There is a general inclination in the workplace today for managers to try and control “everything”; that nothing happens without the manager’s personal stamp of approval. I have also seen this phenomenon occurring in nonprofit organizations, everything from computer societies, to homeowner associations, garden clubs, little leagues, and, Yes, even Masonic Lodges.

Micromanagement represents a Theory X style of management, which means the organization is basically led by a dictator. Now, in some situations, I can understand the need for this. But for the workplace in general as well as our volunteer organizations, I am at a loss as to why people are doing this. One nasty byproduct of micromanagement is that people become complacent and will only do what they are told and nothing more. They evolve into robots with little loyalty for the institutions they work for.

Having played football on the gridiron years ago, I learned a lot about the concept of teamwork. In any team-type of environment you have several players, but only one coach who is responsible for the game plan. However, trying to control the actions of every player on the field is not only infeasible, it can be counterproductive. I have always found it to be more effective to empower people to make decisions and hold them responsible for their actions. People will not seek responsibility and will only put forth the minimum effort if they are not given some latitude. I always liked Ronald Reagan’s comment on his management style when he said, “Surround yourself with the best people you can find, delegate authority, and don‘t interfere as long as the policy you’ve decided upon is being carried out.”

In other words, ease up on the micromanagement, empower your people, give them direction, but don‘t tell how to do everything in meticulous detail.

Bottom-line: Do more management and less supervision.

SEPTEMBER 5, 2005 – UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS

My “Pet Peeve of the Week” are University programs that profess to offer a systems curriculum, but in reality, concentrate on nothing more than software development. I am often asked to give overviews of “PRIDE” at universities, normally at the MBA level, and am appalled on how superficially the colleges gloss over the fundamentals of true systems work. Normally, the curriculum offers an introductory course on systems but little else. Instead, they tend to focus on programming languages, networking, and computer trends. Small wonder when I start to talk about “PRIDE”, with its engineering/manufacturing concepts, the students look at me dumbfounded. Terms like “Product Structure,” “Blueprinting,” “Bill of Materials,” MRP, and Production Control are foreign concepts to most systems students. Consequently, our universities are spitting out more software people than we really need. A lot of the customers I deal with are looking for students who can grasp business concepts, know how to interview users, know basic math in order to prepare proposals, understand work flows and work measurement, and write effectively. Frankly, they are screaming for more systems people as opposed to the software candidates churned out by the colleges.

SEPTEMBER 12, 2005 – THE DEATH OF COMMON COURTESY

My “Pet Peeve of the Week” is the death of common courtesy. The other day we had a new FedEx driver make a delivery at our office in Palm Harbor. Since I happened to be by the front door, I opened it and watched him approach. He wore a scowl on his face as if he had been having a bad day. I opened the door, greeted him warmly, shook his hand and asked how his day was going. As I signed for the delivery, the driver looked at me strangely. I asked him if there was a problem. He said, No, it was just that I was the first person that day to be friendly to him and actually ask how he was doing. He said in most companies he visits he’s pretty much taken for granted and treated rudely.

I asked if he thought this was something unique to him as an individual. He said, No, the other drivers often speak of the callousness of their clientele. Come to think of it, I have seen evidence of this elsewhere. For example, when I go to a restaurant, the waiters and waitresses are often taken aback when I kid with them and ask them about their day. Often they look at me like I might have some ulterior motive. But once they get past this, they warm up to me and we have a good working relationship.

This made me stop and think about today’s corporate work place. Have we become so jaded and insensitive as to disregard the interpersonal relationships of our employees, our customers, and our vendors? Have we become so self-centered and aloof that we no longer care how we treat other people?

You know, I learned a long time ago that you can catch a heckova lot more flies with honey than you can with vinegar. A little courtesy and hospitality can go a long way with people. For example, I learned the virtues of a firm handshake some time ago. I don‘t just give

Tags: internet broadcast, Peeves, Bryce's, Week, microsoft windows
 
Celebrating Halloween is a Christian Thing?