2 months ago
Saturday, June 27, 2009
C.S. Lewis
I fully embrace the maxim (which . . . borrows from a Christian) that “all power corrupts.” I would go further. The loftier the pretensions of the power, the more meddlesome, inhuman, and oppressive it will be. Theocracy is the worst of all possible governments. All political power is at best a necessary evil: but it is least evil when its sanctions are most modest and commonplace, when it claims no more than to be useful or convenient and sets itself strictly limited objectives. Anything transcendental or spiritual, or even anything very strongly ethical, in its pretensions is dangerous and encourages it to meddle with our private lives. Let the shoemaker stick to his last. Thus the Renaissance doctrine of Divine Right is for me a corruption of monarchy; Rousseau’s General Will, of democracy; racial mysticisms, of nationality. And Theocracy, I admit and even insist, is the worst corruption of all.
American Eugenics: Policy of US Government
This, along with all the other areas of fascists news I have reported on, is troubling. I love the end of this where Ezekiel Emanuel leaves after the comment is made about him. No Time for questions. No time for debate. No Time for further development and explanation. He has to leave. WHY?
N. Korea threatens to shoot down Japanese planes in its air space
Does this sound as though another world war is about to erupt. Imagine the magnitude of such an event. In 1919 WWI ended. This was called the Great War and the War to End All Wars. Indeed, no one could have guessed that WWII was just lurking around the corner. If history is to teach us anything, then in this case we should take threats very seriously, for as we have seen in the past, they end up, in many cases, coming true. I suppose some might argue for a preemptive strike. This is not what I am calling for. Rather, we need to figure some diplomatic way, not via the UN, to deal with this oncoming threat. I know not what, but we must take such things to heart.
USA TODAY
North Korea threatened Saturday to shoot down any Japanese planes that enter its airspace, accusing Tokyo of spying near one of its missile launch sites.
The North has designated a no-sail zone off its eastern coast from June 25 to July 10for military drills, raising concerns that it might test-fire short- or mid-range missiles in the coming days, in violation of a U.N. resolution.
North Korea's air force said Japan's E-767 surveillance aircraft conducted aerial espionage near the Musudan-ri missile site on its northeast coast Wednesday and Thursday.
The country's official Korean Central News Agency said the air force "will not tolerate even a bit the aerial espionage by the warmongers of the Japanese aggression forces but mercilessly shoot down any plane intruding into the territorial air of the (North) even 0.001 mm."
An official from Japan's defense ministry said the country's planes regularly gather information on North Korea but declined to comment on the types of planes used or the locations monitored. He spoke on condition of anonymity, citing government policy.
The threat against alleged Japanese aerial espionage is rare, though the North has regularly complained of U.S. spy missions in its airspace.
Japan is very sensitive to North Korea's missile programs, as its islands lie within easy range. In 1998, a North Korean missile flew over Japan's main island. Tokyo has since spent billions of dollars on developing a missile shield with the United States and has launched a series of spy satellites primarily to watch developments in North Korea.
But in April, another rocket flew over Japan's main island, drawing a strong protest from Tokyo. Pyongyang claims it put a satellite into orbit, while the U.S. and its allies say it was really a test of the country's long-range missile technology.
The launch was one of a series of missile tests in recent months, and the communist regime further raised tensions by conducting a second underground nuclear test in May. Its actions have drawn harsh international condemnation and new U.N. sanctions.
USA TODAY
North Korea threatened Saturday to shoot down any Japanese planes that enter its airspace, accusing Tokyo of spying near one of its missile launch sites.
The North has designated a no-sail zone off its eastern coast from June 25 to July 10for military drills, raising concerns that it might test-fire short- or mid-range missiles in the coming days, in violation of a U.N. resolution.
North Korea's air force said Japan's E-767 surveillance aircraft conducted aerial espionage near the Musudan-ri missile site on its northeast coast Wednesday and Thursday.
The country's official Korean Central News Agency said the air force "will not tolerate even a bit the aerial espionage by the warmongers of the Japanese aggression forces but mercilessly shoot down any plane intruding into the territorial air of the (North) even 0.001 mm."
An official from Japan's defense ministry said the country's planes regularly gather information on North Korea but declined to comment on the types of planes used or the locations monitored. He spoke on condition of anonymity, citing government policy.
The threat against alleged Japanese aerial espionage is rare, though the North has regularly complained of U.S. spy missions in its airspace.
Japan is very sensitive to North Korea's missile programs, as its islands lie within easy range. In 1998, a North Korean missile flew over Japan's main island. Tokyo has since spent billions of dollars on developing a missile shield with the United States and has launched a series of spy satellites primarily to watch developments in North Korea.
But in April, another rocket flew over Japan's main island, drawing a strong protest from Tokyo. Pyongyang claims it put a satellite into orbit, while the U.S. and its allies say it was really a test of the country's long-range missile technology.
The launch was one of a series of missile tests in recent months, and the communist regime further raised tensions by conducting a second underground nuclear test in May. Its actions have drawn harsh international condemnation and new U.N. sanctions.
Friday, June 26, 2009
NKorea vows nuke attack if provoked by US
By KWANG-TAE KIM
Associated Press Writer
SEOUL, South Korea—Punching their fists into the air and shouting "Let's crush them!" some 100,000 North Koreans packed Pyongyang's main square Thursday for an anti-U.S. rally as the communist regime promised a "fire shower of nuclear retaliation" for any American-led attack.
Several demonstrators held up a placard depicting a pair of hands smashing a missile with "U.S." written on it, according to footage taken by APTN in Pyongyang on the anniversary of the day North Korean troops charged southward, sparking the three-year Korean War in 1950.
North Korean troops will respond to any sanctions or U.S. provocations with "an annihilating blow," one senior official vowed—a pointed threat as an American destroyer shadowed a North Korean freighter sailing off China's coast, possibly with banned goods on board.
A new U.N. Security Council resolution passed recently to punish North Korea for conducting an underground nuclear test in May requires U.N. member states to request inspections of ships suspected of carrying arms or nuclear weapons-related material.
In response to the sanctions, the North pulled out of nuclear talks and has ramped up already strident anti-American rhetoric. And the isolated regime may now be moving to openly flout the resolution by dispatching a ship suspected of carrying arms to Myanmar.
While it was not clear what was on board the North Korean-flagged Kang Nam 1, officials have mentioned artillery and other conventional weaponry. One intelligence expert suspected missiles.
The U.S. and its allies have made no decision on whether to request inspection of the ship, Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said Wednesday in Washington, but North Korea has said it would consider any interception an act of war.
If permission for inspection is refused, the ship must dock at a port of its choosing so local authorities can check its cargo. Vessels suspected of carrying banned goods must not be offered bunkering services at port, such as fuel, the resolution says.
A senior U.S. defense official said the ship had cleared the Taiwan Strait. He said he didn't know whether or when the Kang Nam may need to stop in some port to refuel, but that the Kang Nam has in the past stopped in Hong Kong's port.
Another U.S. defense official said he tended to doubt reports that the Kang Nam was carrying nuclear-related equipment, saying information seems to indicate the cargo is banned conventional munitions. Both officials spoke on condition of anonymity in order to talk about intelligence.
North Korea is suspected to have transported banned goods to Myanmar before on the Kang Nam, said Bertil Lintner, a Bangkok-based North Korea expert who has written a book about leader Kim Jong Il.
Pyongyang also has been helping the junta in Yangon build up its weapons arsenal, a South Korean intelligence expert said. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
The two countries have not always been on good terms. Ties were severed in 1983 after a fatal bombing during the South Korean president's visit to Myanmar blamed on North Korean commandoes.
Associated Press Writer
SEOUL, South Korea—Punching their fists into the air and shouting "Let's crush them!" some 100,000 North Koreans packed Pyongyang's main square Thursday for an anti-U.S. rally as the communist regime promised a "fire shower of nuclear retaliation" for any American-led attack.
Several demonstrators held up a placard depicting a pair of hands smashing a missile with "U.S." written on it, according to footage taken by APTN in Pyongyang on the anniversary of the day North Korean troops charged southward, sparking the three-year Korean War in 1950.
North Korean troops will respond to any sanctions or U.S. provocations with "an annihilating blow," one senior official vowed—a pointed threat as an American destroyer shadowed a North Korean freighter sailing off China's coast, possibly with banned goods on board.
A new U.N. Security Council resolution passed recently to punish North Korea for conducting an underground nuclear test in May requires U.N. member states to request inspections of ships suspected of carrying arms or nuclear weapons-related material.
In response to the sanctions, the North pulled out of nuclear talks and has ramped up already strident anti-American rhetoric. And the isolated regime may now be moving to openly flout the resolution by dispatching a ship suspected of carrying arms to Myanmar.
While it was not clear what was on board the North Korean-flagged Kang Nam 1, officials have mentioned artillery and other conventional weaponry. One intelligence expert suspected missiles.
The U.S. and its allies have made no decision on whether to request inspection of the ship, Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said Wednesday in Washington, but North Korea has said it would consider any interception an act of war.
If permission for inspection is refused, the ship must dock at a port of its choosing so local authorities can check its cargo. Vessels suspected of carrying banned goods must not be offered bunkering services at port, such as fuel, the resolution says.
A senior U.S. defense official said the ship had cleared the Taiwan Strait. He said he didn't know whether or when the Kang Nam may need to stop in some port to refuel, but that the Kang Nam has in the past stopped in Hong Kong's port.
Another U.S. defense official said he tended to doubt reports that the Kang Nam was carrying nuclear-related equipment, saying information seems to indicate the cargo is banned conventional munitions. Both officials spoke on condition of anonymity in order to talk about intelligence.
North Korea is suspected to have transported banned goods to Myanmar before on the Kang Nam, said Bertil Lintner, a Bangkok-based North Korea expert who has written a book about leader Kim Jong Il.
Pyongyang also has been helping the junta in Yangon build up its weapons arsenal, a South Korean intelligence expert said. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
The two countries have not always been on good terms. Ties were severed in 1983 after a fatal bombing during the South Korean president's visit to Myanmar blamed on North Korean commandoes.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Michael Jackson Is Dead
We've just learned Michael Jackson has died. He was 50.
Michael suffered a cardiac arrest earlier this afternoon at his Holmby Hills home and paramedics were unable to revive him. We're told when paramedics arrived Jackson had no pulse and they never got a pulse back.
A source tells us Jackson was dead when paramedics arrived. A cardiologist at UCLA tells TMZ Jackson died of cardiac arrest.
Once at the hospital, the staff tried to resuscitate him but he was completely unresponsive.
We're told one of the staff members at Jackson's home called 911.
La Toya ran in the hospital sobbing after Jackson was pronounced dead.
Michael is survived by three children: Michael Joseph Jackson, Jr., Paris Michael Katherine Jackson and Prince "Blanket" Michael Jackson II.
Michael suffered a cardiac arrest earlier this afternoon at his Holmby Hills home and paramedics were unable to revive him. We're told when paramedics arrived Jackson had no pulse and they never got a pulse back.
A source tells us Jackson was dead when paramedics arrived. A cardiologist at UCLA tells TMZ Jackson died of cardiac arrest.
Once at the hospital, the staff tried to resuscitate him but he was completely unresponsive.
We're told one of the staff members at Jackson's home called 911.
La Toya ran in the hospital sobbing after Jackson was pronounced dead.
Michael is survived by three children: Michael Joseph Jackson, Jr., Paris Michael Katherine Jackson and Prince "Blanket" Michael Jackson II.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
NKorea threatens US; world anticipates missile
HYUNG-JIN KIM
Associated Press
SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea threatened Wednesday to wipe the United States off the map as Washington and its allies watched for signs the regime will launch a series of missiles in the coming days.
Off China's coast, a U.S. destroyer was tailing a North Korean ship suspected of transporting illicit weapons to Myanmar in what could be the first test of U.N. sanctions passed to punish the nation for an underground nuclear test last month.
The Kang Nam left the North Korean port of Nampo a week ago with the USS John S. McCain close behind. The ship, accused of transporting banned goods in the past, is believed bound for Myanmar, according to South Korean and U.S. officials.
The new U.N. Security Council resolution requires member states to seek permission to inspect suspicious cargo. North Korea has said it would consider interception a declaration of war and on Wednesday accused the U.S. of seeking to provoke another Korean War.
"If the U.S. imperialists start another war, the army and people of Korea will ... wipe out the aggressors on the globe once and for all," the official Korean Central News Agency said.
See Full Article Here
Associated Press
SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea threatened Wednesday to wipe the United States off the map as Washington and its allies watched for signs the regime will launch a series of missiles in the coming days.
Off China's coast, a U.S. destroyer was tailing a North Korean ship suspected of transporting illicit weapons to Myanmar in what could be the first test of U.N. sanctions passed to punish the nation for an underground nuclear test last month.
The Kang Nam left the North Korean port of Nampo a week ago with the USS John S. McCain close behind. The ship, accused of transporting banned goods in the past, is believed bound for Myanmar, according to South Korean and U.S. officials.
The new U.N. Security Council resolution requires member states to seek permission to inspect suspicious cargo. North Korea has said it would consider interception a declaration of war and on Wednesday accused the U.S. of seeking to provoke another Korean War.
"If the U.S. imperialists start another war, the army and people of Korea will ... wipe out the aggressors on the globe once and for all," the official Korean Central News Agency said.
See Full Article Here
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Ron Paul: Obama’s ‘goal’ is economic collapse
David Edwards and Stephen Webster
Raw Story
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Ron Paul, the popular Republican Congressman from Texas, is ripping into the president and Congress for what he sees as their “goal” with round after round of stimulus: complete economic collapse.
“From their spending habits, an economic collapse seems to be the goal of Congress and this administration,” he said in his June 22, 2009, weekly address.
He added that Democrats who voted for the president’s war funding request, which gave an additional $106 billion to military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq — among other, unrelated items — were actually voting in favor of the wars, not just authorization of the president’s agenda.
He called it an affront to everyone who believed a vote for Obama was a vote for a peace candidate.
The president’s insistence on including an additional $108 billion in asset exchange with the International Monetary Fund is merely “buying global oppression,” he said.
Paul added that, “this [bill sent] $660 million to Gaza, $555 million to Israel, $310 million to Egypt, $300 million to Jordan and $420 million to Mexico; and some $889 million will be sent to the United Nations for so-called peace keeping missions.”
In other words, the latest U.S. war funding was an “International bailout,” he said.
The legislation’s provisions for the IMF included 100 billion dollars for the New Arrangements to Borrow (NAB), a credit instrument providing the multilateral institution with additional resources to deal with exceptional risks to the stability of the international monetary system.
They also include an expansion of the nation’s special drawing rights by five billion SDRs, adding roughly eight billion dollars to the IMF’s financial firepower.
The 100 billion dollars for the NAB acts as a credit line for the IMF in case member countries need emergency loans that exceed the institution’s resources. As such, the money is not considered an immediate budget expense.
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) had proposed to strip out the IMF funds, but his measure was defeated in May by a vote of 64-30.
“Not only does sending money to the IMF hurt citizens here, evidence shows that it even hurts those it pretends to help,” Paul said. “Along with IMF loans come IMF required policy changes called ’structural adjustment programs,’ which amount to forced Keynesianism. This is the very fantasy-infused economic model that brought our own country to its knees.”
Raw Story
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Ron Paul, the popular Republican Congressman from Texas, is ripping into the president and Congress for what he sees as their “goal” with round after round of stimulus: complete economic collapse.
“From their spending habits, an economic collapse seems to be the goal of Congress and this administration,” he said in his June 22, 2009, weekly address.
He added that Democrats who voted for the president’s war funding request, which gave an additional $106 billion to military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq — among other, unrelated items — were actually voting in favor of the wars, not just authorization of the president’s agenda.
He called it an affront to everyone who believed a vote for Obama was a vote for a peace candidate.
The president’s insistence on including an additional $108 billion in asset exchange with the International Monetary Fund is merely “buying global oppression,” he said.
Paul added that, “this [bill sent] $660 million to Gaza, $555 million to Israel, $310 million to Egypt, $300 million to Jordan and $420 million to Mexico; and some $889 million will be sent to the United Nations for so-called peace keeping missions.”
In other words, the latest U.S. war funding was an “International bailout,” he said.
The legislation’s provisions for the IMF included 100 billion dollars for the New Arrangements to Borrow (NAB), a credit instrument providing the multilateral institution with additional resources to deal with exceptional risks to the stability of the international monetary system.
They also include an expansion of the nation’s special drawing rights by five billion SDRs, adding roughly eight billion dollars to the IMF’s financial firepower.
The 100 billion dollars for the NAB acts as a credit line for the IMF in case member countries need emergency loans that exceed the institution’s resources. As such, the money is not considered an immediate budget expense.
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) had proposed to strip out the IMF funds, but his measure was defeated in May by a vote of 64-30.
“Not only does sending money to the IMF hurt citizens here, evidence shows that it even hurts those it pretends to help,” Paul said. “Along with IMF loans come IMF required policy changes called ’structural adjustment programs,’ which amount to forced Keynesianism. This is the very fantasy-infused economic model that brought our own country to its knees.”
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Obama's Doctor Knocks ObamaCare
David Whelan
David Scheiner, an internist based in the Chicago neighborhood of Hyde Park, has a diverse practice of lower-income adults from the nearby housing projects mixed with famous patients like U.S. Sen. Carol Mosely Braun, the late writer Studs Terkel and, most notably, President Barack Obama.
Scheiner, 71, was Obama's doctor from 1987 until he entered the White House; he vouched for the then-candidate's "excellent health" in a letter last year. He's still an enthusiastic Obama supporter, but he worries about whether the health care legislation currently making its way through Congress will actually do any good, particularly for doctors like himself who practice general medicine. "I'm not sure he really understands what we face in primary care," Scheiner says.
Read full story here
David Scheiner, an internist based in the Chicago neighborhood of Hyde Park, has a diverse practice of lower-income adults from the nearby housing projects mixed with famous patients like U.S. Sen. Carol Mosely Braun, the late writer Studs Terkel and, most notably, President Barack Obama.
Scheiner, 71, was Obama's doctor from 1987 until he entered the White House; he vouched for the then-candidate's "excellent health" in a letter last year. He's still an enthusiastic Obama supporter, but he worries about whether the health care legislation currently making its way through Congress will actually do any good, particularly for doctors like himself who practice general medicine. "I'm not sure he really understands what we face in primary care," Scheiner says.
Read full story here
Obama: Approval Levels Drop
Lydia Saad
Thirty-three percent of Americans now disapprove of the job Obama is doing as president, just one point shy of his record-high 34% disapproval score from early June.
Since Obama took office in January, his approval rating in Gallup tracking has averaged 63%, and most of his three-day ratings have registered above 60%. Approval of Obama did fall to 59% in individual readings in February, March, April, and early June; however, in each case, the rating lasted only a day before rebounding to at least 60%.
The latest decline in Obama's approval score, to 58%, results from a drop in approval among political independents as well as among Republicans. Democrats remain as highly supportive of the president as ever.
Obama's approval rating was 60% from June 13-15, at which time 88% of Democrats, 60% of independents, and 25% of Republicans approved of the job he was doing. In the June 16-18 polling, Democrats' approval of him stands at 92% -- up slightly -- whereas approval is down among both independents (by seven points) and Republicans (by four points).
Since February, Obama's weekly approval ratings from Republicans have consistently averaged close to 30% and from independents, close to 60%. With Republican approval now down to 21% and independent approval down to 53%, Obama's overall job approval has dipped to a new low for his presidency.
It is not clear what's behind the decline, but two issues have received considerable play in the news this week, and could be contributing factors. On Monday, the president received bad news on healthcare reform from the Congressional Budget Office, whose estimate of the cost of one reform plan caused sticker shock on Capitol Hill. This may be feeding into public concerns about the administration's deficit spending. At the same time, the disputed Iranian presidential election has been front-page news. Obama's cautious response has sparked sharp criticism from Republican Sen. John McCain and many on the political right who are eager for him to declare the election a "fraud," and to show more solidarity with the Iranian protestors.
Survey Methods
Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,504 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted June 16-18, 2009, as part of Gallup Poll Daily tracking. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
PRINCETON, NJ -- President Barack Obama's job approval rating fell to 58% in Gallup Poll Daily tracking from June 16-18 -- a new low for Obama in Gallup tracking, although not dissimilar to the 59% he has received on four other occasions.
Thirty-three percent of Americans now disapprove of the job Obama is doing as president, just one point shy of his record-high 34% disapproval score from early June.
Since Obama took office in January, his approval rating in Gallup tracking has averaged 63%, and most of his three-day ratings have registered above 60%. Approval of Obama did fall to 59% in individual readings in February, March, April, and early June; however, in each case, the rating lasted only a day before rebounding to at least 60%.
The latest decline in Obama's approval score, to 58%, results from a drop in approval among political independents as well as among Republicans. Democrats remain as highly supportive of the president as ever.
Obama's approval rating was 60% from June 13-15, at which time 88% of Democrats, 60% of independents, and 25% of Republicans approved of the job he was doing. In the June 16-18 polling, Democrats' approval of him stands at 92% -- up slightly -- whereas approval is down among both independents (by seven points) and Republicans (by four points).
Since February, Obama's weekly approval ratings from Republicans have consistently averaged close to 30% and from independents, close to 60%. With Republican approval now down to 21% and independent approval down to 53%, Obama's overall job approval has dipped to a new low for his presidency.
It is not clear what's behind the decline, but two issues have received considerable play in the news this week, and could be contributing factors. On Monday, the president received bad news on healthcare reform from the Congressional Budget Office, whose estimate of the cost of one reform plan caused sticker shock on Capitol Hill. This may be feeding into public concerns about the administration's deficit spending. At the same time, the disputed Iranian presidential election has been front-page news. Obama's cautious response has sparked sharp criticism from Republican Sen. John McCain and many on the political right who are eager for him to declare the election a "fraud," and to show more solidarity with the Iranian protestors.
Survey Methods
Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,504 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted June 16-18, 2009, as part of Gallup Poll Daily tracking. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
Friday, June 19, 2009
U.S. Military Set to Intercept North Korean Ship Suspected of Proliferating Missiles, Nukes
FOX News
Jennifer Griffin
Justin Fishel
The U.S. military is planning to intercept a flagged North Korean ship suspected of proliferating weapons material in violation of a U.N. Security Council resolution passed last Friday, FOX News has learned.
The USS John McCain, a navy destroyer, will intercept the ship Kang Nam as soon as it leaves the vicinity off the coast of China, according to a senior U.S. defense official. The order to inderdict has not been given yet, but the ship is getting into position.
The ship left a port in North Korea Wednesday and appears to be heading toward Singapore, according to a senior U.S. military source. The vessel, which the military has been tracking since its departure, could be carrying weaponry, missile parts or nuclear materials, a violation of U.N. Resolution 1874, which put sanctions in place against Pyongyang.
The USS McCain was involved in an incident with a Chinese sub last Friday - near Subic Bay off the Philippines.
The Chinese sub was shadowing the destroyer when it hit the underwater sonar array that the USS McCain was towing behind it.
That same navy destroyer that was being shadowed by the Chinese is now positioning itself for a possible interdiction of the North Korean vessel.
This is the first suspected "proliferator" that the U.S. and its allies have tracked from North Korea since the United Nations authorized the world's navies to enforce compliance with a variety of U.N. sanctions aimed at punishing North Korea for its recent nuclear test.
The ship is currently along the coast of China and being monitored around-the-clock by air.
The apparent violation raises the question of how the United States and its allies will respond, particularly since the U.N. resolution does not have a lot of teeth to it.
The resolution would not allow the United States to board the ship forcibly. Rather, U.S. military would have to request permission to board -- a request North Korea is unlikely to grant.
North Korea has said that any attempt to board its ships would be viewed as an act of war and promised "100- or 1,000-fold" retaliation if provoked.
The U.S. military may also request that the host country not provide fuel to the ship when it enters its port.
The Kang Nam is known to be a ship that has been involved in proliferation activities in the past -- it is "a repeat offender," according to one military source. The ship was detained in October 2006 by authorities in Hong Kong after the North Koreans tested their first nuclear device and the U.N. imposed a subsequent round of sanctions.
The latest tension follows a Japanese news report that North Korea may fire a long-range ballistic missile toward Hawaii in early July.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday the military is "watching" that situation "very closely," and would have "some concerns" if North Korea launched a missile in the direction of Hawaii. But he expressed confidence in U.S. ability to handle such a launch.
Gates said he's directed the deployment of the Theater High Altitude Area Defense, a mobile missile defense system used for knocking down long- and medium-range missiles.
"The ground-based interceptors are clearly in a position to take action. So, without telegraphing what we will do, I would just say ... I think we are in a good position, should it become necessary, to protect the American territory."
Jennifer Griffin
Justin Fishel
The U.S. military is planning to intercept a flagged North Korean ship suspected of proliferating weapons material in violation of a U.N. Security Council resolution passed last Friday, FOX News has learned.
The USS John McCain, a navy destroyer, will intercept the ship Kang Nam as soon as it leaves the vicinity off the coast of China, according to a senior U.S. defense official. The order to inderdict has not been given yet, but the ship is getting into position.
The ship left a port in North Korea Wednesday and appears to be heading toward Singapore, according to a senior U.S. military source. The vessel, which the military has been tracking since its departure, could be carrying weaponry, missile parts or nuclear materials, a violation of U.N. Resolution 1874, which put sanctions in place against Pyongyang.
The USS McCain was involved in an incident with a Chinese sub last Friday - near Subic Bay off the Philippines.
The Chinese sub was shadowing the destroyer when it hit the underwater sonar array that the USS McCain was towing behind it.
That same navy destroyer that was being shadowed by the Chinese is now positioning itself for a possible interdiction of the North Korean vessel.
This is the first suspected "proliferator" that the U.S. and its allies have tracked from North Korea since the United Nations authorized the world's navies to enforce compliance with a variety of U.N. sanctions aimed at punishing North Korea for its recent nuclear test.
The ship is currently along the coast of China and being monitored around-the-clock by air.
The apparent violation raises the question of how the United States and its allies will respond, particularly since the U.N. resolution does not have a lot of teeth to it.
The resolution would not allow the United States to board the ship forcibly. Rather, U.S. military would have to request permission to board -- a request North Korea is unlikely to grant.
North Korea has said that any attempt to board its ships would be viewed as an act of war and promised "100- or 1,000-fold" retaliation if provoked.
The U.S. military may also request that the host country not provide fuel to the ship when it enters its port.
The Kang Nam is known to be a ship that has been involved in proliferation activities in the past -- it is "a repeat offender," according to one military source. The ship was detained in October 2006 by authorities in Hong Kong after the North Koreans tested their first nuclear device and the U.N. imposed a subsequent round of sanctions.
The latest tension follows a Japanese news report that North Korea may fire a long-range ballistic missile toward Hawaii in early July.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday the military is "watching" that situation "very closely," and would have "some concerns" if North Korea launched a missile in the direction of Hawaii. But he expressed confidence in U.S. ability to handle such a launch.
Gates said he's directed the deployment of the Theater High Altitude Area Defense, a mobile missile defense system used for knocking down long- and medium-range missiles.
"The ground-based interceptors are clearly in a position to take action. So, without telegraphing what we will do, I would just say ... I think we are in a good position, should it become necessary, to protect the American territory."
Ron Paul Slams Federal Reserve’s New Dictatorial Powers
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, June 19, 2009
Responding to the Obama administration’s new regulatory reform plan, which will officially hand the Federal Reserve complete dictatorial control over the U.S. economy, Congressman Ron Paul told MSNBC that the Fed was now more powerful than Congress.
Paul emphasized that no amount of regulation could compensate for a financial system created and controlled by the Federal Reserve that was completely unstable to begin with.
“The regulations should be on the Federal Reserve. We should have transparency of the Federal Reserve. They can create trillions of dollars to bail out their friends, and we don’t even have any transparency of this. They’re more powerful than the Congress,” said Paul.
As we reported yesterday, the new rules would see the Fed given the authority to “regulate” any company whose activity it believes could threaten the economy and the markets.
Obama’s regulatory “reform” plan is nothing less than a green light for the complete and total takeover of the United States by a private banking cartel that will usurp the power of existing regulatory bodies, who are now being blamed for the financial crisis in order that their status can be abolished and their roles handed over to the all-powerful Fed.
“They’re giving a tremendous amount of more power to the Federal Reserve - the very institution that created our problem. That’s about the way Washington works,” said the Congressman
“Too much regulations to begin with, so they give it more. The Federal Reserve creates the problem, so we give them more power. It’s fiat money that’s the problem, so we allow them to double the money supply - you can’t solve the problems that way. That’s like saying you can take care of a drug addict by just giving them more drugs,” concluded Paul, adding that the lack of understanding about how the Federal Reserve created the problem and how the free market ought to work was the root of the crisis.
Prison Planet.com
Friday, June 19, 2009
Responding to the Obama administration’s new regulatory reform plan, which will officially hand the Federal Reserve complete dictatorial control over the U.S. economy, Congressman Ron Paul told MSNBC that the Fed was now more powerful than Congress.
Paul emphasized that no amount of regulation could compensate for a financial system created and controlled by the Federal Reserve that was completely unstable to begin with.
“The regulations should be on the Federal Reserve. We should have transparency of the Federal Reserve. They can create trillions of dollars to bail out their friends, and we don’t even have any transparency of this. They’re more powerful than the Congress,” said Paul.
As we reported yesterday, the new rules would see the Fed given the authority to “regulate” any company whose activity it believes could threaten the economy and the markets.
Obama’s regulatory “reform” plan is nothing less than a green light for the complete and total takeover of the United States by a private banking cartel that will usurp the power of existing regulatory bodies, who are now being blamed for the financial crisis in order that their status can be abolished and their roles handed over to the all-powerful Fed.
“They’re giving a tremendous amount of more power to the Federal Reserve - the very institution that created our problem. That’s about the way Washington works,” said the Congressman
“Too much regulations to begin with, so they give it more. The Federal Reserve creates the problem, so we give them more power. It’s fiat money that’s the problem, so we allow them to double the money supply - you can’t solve the problems that way. That’s like saying you can take care of a drug addict by just giving them more drugs,” concluded Paul, adding that the lack of understanding about how the Federal Reserve created the problem and how the free market ought to work was the root of the crisis.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
State Run News: ABC Turns Programming Over To Government
Tell me this does not sound Fascist!
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, June 16, 2009
Completely dispensing with any notion of independence or impartiality, ABC News is set to mimic the likes of Communist China and North Korea by completely turning its news coverage over to the government and excluding any dissenting opinions to promote President Obama’s health care agenda.
The night of Wednesday June 24th will officially herald the open commencement of state run news, imitating similar systems in historical dictatorships such as the Soviet Union, where Pravda was the official propaganda organ of the Central Committee of the Communist Party from 1912 to 1991.
In China, the vast majority of news outlets are completely owned and controlled by the Communist Party. Negative viewpoints about government policy are blocked and news developments that could reflect badly on China are ignored and censored. An almost identical system of media also exists in Stalinist North Korea.
Still, at least the Chinese and the North Koreans don’t try to hide the fact that the press is state run, unlike ABC News, owned by the corporate giant Walt Disney Company, which masquerades as an independent news outlet yet in little over a week will completely turn over its news coverage to act as enthusiastic propagandist for the government’s health care “reform” program.
The coverage will be in addition to ABC News’ regular programming, which is already vehemently pushing the government’s agenda on this issue.
“On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care — a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!,” according to the Drudge Report.
“ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.”
“The network plans a primetime special — ‘Prescription for America’ — originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.”
In a complaint to ABC News, Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay called the decision “astonishing,” noting that ABC had rejected a request that dissenting voices from all sides of the political spectrum be represented.
ABC News’ announcement that they will openly turn over their news coverage to the government while censoring dissenting opinions goes one step further than the Bush administration, who at least made the effort to keep their fake news scandal a secret until it was exposed in 2005.
Under Bush, the government produced fake news packages and distributed them to local news networks around the country, most of which aired them without question. The fake news packages were also broadcast on a national level by CNN. Reporters and pundits were also paid off by the government to promote specific policies.
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, June 16, 2009
Completely dispensing with any notion of independence or impartiality, ABC News is set to mimic the likes of Communist China and North Korea by completely turning its news coverage over to the government and excluding any dissenting opinions to promote President Obama’s health care agenda.
The night of Wednesday June 24th will officially herald the open commencement of state run news, imitating similar systems in historical dictatorships such as the Soviet Union, where Pravda was the official propaganda organ of the Central Committee of the Communist Party from 1912 to 1991.
In China, the vast majority of news outlets are completely owned and controlled by the Communist Party. Negative viewpoints about government policy are blocked and news developments that could reflect badly on China are ignored and censored. An almost identical system of media also exists in Stalinist North Korea.
Still, at least the Chinese and the North Koreans don’t try to hide the fact that the press is state run, unlike ABC News, owned by the corporate giant Walt Disney Company, which masquerades as an independent news outlet yet in little over a week will completely turn over its news coverage to act as enthusiastic propagandist for the government’s health care “reform” program.
The coverage will be in addition to ABC News’ regular programming, which is already vehemently pushing the government’s agenda on this issue.
“On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care — a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!,” according to the Drudge Report.
“ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.”
“The network plans a primetime special — ‘Prescription for America’ — originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.”
In a complaint to ABC News, Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay called the decision “astonishing,” noting that ABC had rejected a request that dissenting voices from all sides of the political spectrum be represented.
ABC News’ announcement that they will openly turn over their news coverage to the government while censoring dissenting opinions goes one step further than the Bush administration, who at least made the effort to keep their fake news scandal a secret until it was exposed in 2005.
Under Bush, the government produced fake news packages and distributed them to local news networks around the country, most of which aired them without question. The fake news packages were also broadcast on a national level by CNN. Reporters and pundits were also paid off by the government to promote specific policies.
Medical Care and Socialism
This is a unique story. We have heard about national helth care for years, yet here it is. I have been following this to some degree. You can see my previous post by clicking here.
Obama to propose strict new regulation of financial industry
Reporting from Washington -- The Obama administration this week will propose the most significant new regulation of the financial industry since the Great Depression, including a new watchdog agency to look out for consumers' interests.
Under the plan, expected to be released Wednesday, the government would have new powers to seize key companies -- such as insurance giant American International Group Inc. -- whose failure jeopardizes the financial system. Currently, the government's authority to seize companies is mostly limited to banks.
But critics say the easing of the financial crisis that gripped the country last year appears to have reduced the momentum for some of the most far-reaching proposals, such as merging several banking regulatory agencies.
They're also concerned that the proposed agency whose mission would be to protect consumers against financial misconduct wouldn't have the authority to do so for a wide-enough range of products."This is too little, too late," said Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks), based on his understanding of the plan. "It's going to be way less than it should be."
On Monday, Obama administration officials sketched the outlines of the plan the president is to unveil Wednesday. They said it would seek to reduce gaps in regulatory oversight, rein in the use of mortgage-backed securities and other complex derivatives, reduce incentives for companies to take excessive risk and give the government new power to quickly intervene during any future crises. "We had a system that proved too unstable, too fragile. . . . Those are things we have to change,"
Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said Monday at an economic forum in New York.The administration also is expected to propose creation of a regulatory body for financial products marketed to consumers, such as credit cards, whose oversight is now spread over several agencies.
Read full story here
Under the plan, expected to be released Wednesday, the government would have new powers to seize key companies -- such as insurance giant American International Group Inc. -- whose failure jeopardizes the financial system. Currently, the government's authority to seize companies is mostly limited to banks.
But critics say the easing of the financial crisis that gripped the country last year appears to have reduced the momentum for some of the most far-reaching proposals, such as merging several banking regulatory agencies.
They're also concerned that the proposed agency whose mission would be to protect consumers against financial misconduct wouldn't have the authority to do so for a wide-enough range of products."This is too little, too late," said Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks), based on his understanding of the plan. "It's going to be way less than it should be."
On Monday, Obama administration officials sketched the outlines of the plan the president is to unveil Wednesday. They said it would seek to reduce gaps in regulatory oversight, rein in the use of mortgage-backed securities and other complex derivatives, reduce incentives for companies to take excessive risk and give the government new power to quickly intervene during any future crises. "We had a system that proved too unstable, too fragile. . . . Those are things we have to change,"
Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said Monday at an economic forum in New York.The administration also is expected to propose creation of a regulatory body for financial products marketed to consumers, such as credit cards, whose oversight is now spread over several agencies.
Read full story here
Monday, June 15, 2009
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Doctors’ Group Opposes Public Insurance Plan
ROBERT PEAR
New York Times
WASHINGTON — As the health care debate heats up, the American Medical Association is letting Congress know that it will oppose creation of a government-sponsored insurance plan, which President Obama and many other Democrats see as an essential element of legislation to remake the health care system.
The latest on President Obama, the new administration and other news from Washington and around the nation.
The opposition, which comes as Mr. Obama prepares to address the powerful doctors’ group on Monday in Chicago, could be a major hurdle for advocates of a public insurance plan. The A.M.A., with about 250,000 members, is America’s largest physician organization.
While committed to the goal of affordable health insurance for all, the association had said in a general statement of principles that health services should be “provided through private markets, as they are currently.” It is now reacting, for the first time, to specific legislative proposals being drafted by Congress.
In the presidential campaign last year and in a letter to Congress last week, Mr. Obama called for a new “public health insurance option,” which he said would compete with private insurers and keep them honest.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California said Wednesday that she supported that goal. “A bill will not come out of the House without a public option,” she said Wednesday on MSNBC.
But in comments submitted to the Senate Finance Committee, the American Medical Association said: “The A.M.A. does not believe that creating a public health insurance option for non-disabled individuals under age 65 is the best way to expand health insurance coverage and lower costs. The introduction of a new public plan threatens to restrict patient choice by driving out private insurers, which currently provide coverage for nearly 70 percent of Americans.”
If private insurers are pushed out of the market, the group said, “the corresponding surge in public plan participation would likely lead to an explosion of costs that would need to be absorbed by taxpayers.”
While not the political behemoth it once was, the association probably has more influence than any other group in the health care industry. Lawmakers seek its opinion and support whenever possible. It has repeatedly persuaded Congress to cancel or postpone cuts in Medicare payments to doctors, though it has not secured a “permanent fix.”
New York Times
WASHINGTON — As the health care debate heats up, the American Medical Association is letting Congress know that it will oppose creation of a government-sponsored insurance plan, which President Obama and many other Democrats see as an essential element of legislation to remake the health care system.
The latest on President Obama, the new administration and other news from Washington and around the nation.
The opposition, which comes as Mr. Obama prepares to address the powerful doctors’ group on Monday in Chicago, could be a major hurdle for advocates of a public insurance plan. The A.M.A., with about 250,000 members, is America’s largest physician organization.
While committed to the goal of affordable health insurance for all, the association had said in a general statement of principles that health services should be “provided through private markets, as they are currently.” It is now reacting, for the first time, to specific legislative proposals being drafted by Congress.
In the presidential campaign last year and in a letter to Congress last week, Mr. Obama called for a new “public health insurance option,” which he said would compete with private insurers and keep them honest.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California said Wednesday that she supported that goal. “A bill will not come out of the House without a public option,” she said Wednesday on MSNBC.
But in comments submitted to the Senate Finance Committee, the American Medical Association said: “The A.M.A. does not believe that creating a public health insurance option for non-disabled individuals under age 65 is the best way to expand health insurance coverage and lower costs. The introduction of a new public plan threatens to restrict patient choice by driving out private insurers, which currently provide coverage for nearly 70 percent of Americans.”
If private insurers are pushed out of the market, the group said, “the corresponding surge in public plan participation would likely lead to an explosion of costs that would need to be absorbed by taxpayers.”
While not the political behemoth it once was, the association probably has more influence than any other group in the health care industry. Lawmakers seek its opinion and support whenever possible. It has repeatedly persuaded Congress to cancel or postpone cuts in Medicare payments to doctors, though it has not secured a “permanent fix.”
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
A Thought Of My Own: Torture
How is it the policy of the United States to torture people, when we ourselves would shutter at the very idea of such actions towards others? Does our own willingness to torture indicate that we as US citizens have now begun to put variant values on different people of different races and creeds? Does not Emma Lazarus best describe the mindset of this nation with her poem The New Colossus when she so poignantly stated, "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me: I lift my lamp beside the golden door" Does this no longer apply. Did it ever?
How is it the policy of the US military to allow such treatment of others who, according to our own documents, hold natural rights which only God can remove; among those include "life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?" Is it the official policy of the majority of Americas to be double faced. We smear at the idea of the Holocaust, and scream injustice of Saddam Housain, and yet WE HAVE GETMO!
How is it that Christians will sit back and allow, by our own inaction, such atrocities to take place, even if such actions do not meet our own definition of what torture is? 1 Peter versus 8-9 assert: "Finally, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous: Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing." It matters not if we think a certain action is torture, rather, what matters is that we remain "of one mind" with the scriptures.
Torture is a violation of the sound doctrine to which this nation rests. I end with a thought from Thomas Jefferson who once said, "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."
N Korea nuclear crisis taken to new level
Press TV
Tuesday
June 9, 2009
Stepping up its rhetoric amid growing US pressure against the country, North Korea says it could use nuclear weapons “as a merciless offensive” if provoked.
“Our nuclear deterrent will be a strong defensive means … as well as a merciless offensive means to deal a just retaliatory strike to those who touch the country’s dignity and sovereignty even a bit,” the official Korean Central News Agency quoted Pyongyang’s state-run Minju Joson newspaper as saying.
The tough talk came as the US has been pushing for tougher measures against North Korea in recent weeks in response to the communist nation carrying out nuclear and short-range missile tests.
US President Barack Obama has said that “North Korea’s actions over the last couple of months have been extraordinarily provocative”, adding that Washington was not “intending to continue a policy of rewarding provocation”.
On Sunday, South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) briefed President Lee Myung-Bak on plans for a counter-attack on North Korea should Pyongyang fire missiles at ships controlled by the South.
“North Korea’s firing of ground-to-ship missiles at our navy ships would prompt counter-attacks simultaneously from surface, air and sea,” JCS chairman Kim Tae-Young said.
Tuesday
June 9, 2009
Stepping up its rhetoric amid growing US pressure against the country, North Korea says it could use nuclear weapons “as a merciless offensive” if provoked.
“Our nuclear deterrent will be a strong defensive means … as well as a merciless offensive means to deal a just retaliatory strike to those who touch the country’s dignity and sovereignty even a bit,” the official Korean Central News Agency quoted Pyongyang’s state-run Minju Joson newspaper as saying.
The tough talk came as the US has been pushing for tougher measures against North Korea in recent weeks in response to the communist nation carrying out nuclear and short-range missile tests.
US President Barack Obama has said that “North Korea’s actions over the last couple of months have been extraordinarily provocative”, adding that Washington was not “intending to continue a policy of rewarding provocation”.
On Sunday, South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) briefed President Lee Myung-Bak on plans for a counter-attack on North Korea should Pyongyang fire missiles at ships controlled by the South.
“North Korea’s firing of ground-to-ship missiles at our navy ships would prompt counter-attacks simultaneously from surface, air and sea,” JCS chairman Kim Tae-Young said.
Monday, June 8, 2009
California contemplates ultimate reform - no welfare
By Cynthia Hubert
Sacramento Bee
Could California become the first state in the nation to do away with welfare?
That doomsday scenario is on the table as lawmakers wrestle with a staggering $24.3 billion budget deficit.
County welfare directors are "in shock" at the very idea of getting rid of CalWORKs, which has been widely viewed as one of the most successful social programs in the state's history, said Bruce Wagstaff, director of the Department of Human Assistance in Sacramento.
"It's difficult to come up with the right adjective to react to this," Wagstaff said. "It would be devastating to the people we serve."
H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of Finance, said California is in an unprecedented fiscal situation that has made all programs, from education to human services, vulnerable to deep and painful reductions.
"I don't wish for a moment to minimize the profound impact" that eliminating CalWORKs would have, Palmer said. "But the easy decisions are way past being in the rearview mirror for us. We face the specter of California not having cash on hand to pay its bills in July."
Wagstaff and other administrators are betting that the state will rescue the "welfare to work" program. But they are bracing for cuts that would slash benefits to the lowest levels since the late 1990s, when CalWORKs began as part of the federal government's bold reform of the welfare system.
Read the complete story
Sacramento Bee
Could California become the first state in the nation to do away with welfare?
That doomsday scenario is on the table as lawmakers wrestle with a staggering $24.3 billion budget deficit.
County welfare directors are "in shock" at the very idea of getting rid of CalWORKs, which has been widely viewed as one of the most successful social programs in the state's history, said Bruce Wagstaff, director of the Department of Human Assistance in Sacramento.
"It's difficult to come up with the right adjective to react to this," Wagstaff said. "It would be devastating to the people we serve."
H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of Finance, said California is in an unprecedented fiscal situation that has made all programs, from education to human services, vulnerable to deep and painful reductions.
"I don't wish for a moment to minimize the profound impact" that eliminating CalWORKs would have, Palmer said. "But the easy decisions are way past being in the rearview mirror for us. We face the specter of California not having cash on hand to pay its bills in July."
Wagstaff and other administrators are betting that the state will rescue the "welfare to work" program. But they are bracing for cuts that would slash benefits to the lowest levels since the late 1990s, when CalWORKs began as part of the federal government's bold reform of the welfare system.
Read the complete story
Court rejects challenge to 'don't ask, don't tell'
WASHINGTON
(AP)
The Supreme Court on Monday turned down a challenge to the Pentagon policy forbidding gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military, granting a request by the Obama administration.
The court said it will not hear an appeal from former Army Capt. James Pietrangelo II, who was dismissed under the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
The federal appeals court in Boston earlier threw out a lawsuit filed by Pietrangelo and 11 other veterans. He was the only member of that group who asked the high court to rule that the Clinton-era policy is unconstitutional.
In court papers, the administration said the appeals court ruled correctly in this case when it found that "don't ask, don't tell" is "rationally related to the government's legitimate interest in military discipline and cohesion."
During last year's campaign, President Barack Obama indicated he supported the eventual repeal of the policy, but he has made no specific move to do so since taking office in January. Meanwhile, the White House has said it won't stop gays and lesbians from being dismissed from the military.
Last year, the federal appeals court in San Francisco allowed a decorated flight nurse to continue her lawsuit over her dismissal. The court stopped short of declaring the policy unconstitutional, but said that the Air Force must prove that ousting former Maj. Margaret Witt furthered the military's goals of troop readiness and unit cohesion.
The decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was the first that evaluated "don't ask, don't tell" through the lens of a 2003 Supreme Court decision that struck down a Texas ban on sodomy as an unconstitutional intrusion on privacy.
The administration did not appeal that ruling to the Supreme Court and Witt's lawsuit is ongoing.
The appeals court in Pietrangelo's case also took the high court decision into account, but concluded that it should defer to Congress' determination that the policy fosters cohesion in military units.
The case is Pietrangelo v. Gates, 08-824.
(AP)
The Supreme Court on Monday turned down a challenge to the Pentagon policy forbidding gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military, granting a request by the Obama administration.
The court said it will not hear an appeal from former Army Capt. James Pietrangelo II, who was dismissed under the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
The federal appeals court in Boston earlier threw out a lawsuit filed by Pietrangelo and 11 other veterans. He was the only member of that group who asked the high court to rule that the Clinton-era policy is unconstitutional.
In court papers, the administration said the appeals court ruled correctly in this case when it found that "don't ask, don't tell" is "rationally related to the government's legitimate interest in military discipline and cohesion."
During last year's campaign, President Barack Obama indicated he supported the eventual repeal of the policy, but he has made no specific move to do so since taking office in January. Meanwhile, the White House has said it won't stop gays and lesbians from being dismissed from the military.
Last year, the federal appeals court in San Francisco allowed a decorated flight nurse to continue her lawsuit over her dismissal. The court stopped short of declaring the policy unconstitutional, but said that the Air Force must prove that ousting former Maj. Margaret Witt furthered the military's goals of troop readiness and unit cohesion.
The decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was the first that evaluated "don't ask, don't tell" through the lens of a 2003 Supreme Court decision that struck down a Texas ban on sodomy as an unconstitutional intrusion on privacy.
The administration did not appeal that ruling to the Supreme Court and Witt's lawsuit is ongoing.
The appeals court in Pietrangelo's case also took the high court decision into account, but concluded that it should defer to Congress' determination that the policy fosters cohesion in military units.
The case is Pietrangelo v. Gates, 08-824.
Friday, June 5, 2009
N.Korea agrees to talks with S.Korea: officials
AFP
Friday, June 5, 2009
North Korea on Friday agreed to hold talks with South Korea next week, Seoul officials said, amid high tensions between the two nations. Related photos / videos
The North has accepted a proposal for working-level talks on June 11 at the Kaesong joint industrial complex just north of the border, according to South Korea's unification ministry.
South Korean and US troops have gone on heightened alert since the North staged a nuclear test in late May, renounced the armistice that ended the Korean war in the 1950s and threatened the South with possible attack.
South Korean officials say they fear the North will stage a border provocation on land or at sea.
Next week's talks will focus on operations at Kaesong.
The two sides held their first government-level talks in more than a year on April 21. The North demanded pay rises for its workers and land-use fees at the Seoul-funded estate.
Seoul said the fate of a South Korean manager at Kaesong who has been detained since March 30 must be settled before any other negotiations. Pyongyang alleges the man criticised its communist system and tried to persuade a local worker to defect.
Last month the North announced it had scrapped all wage and rent agreements in force at the estate. It told the 101 South Korean companies to pack up and leave if they cannot accept the new terms.
The announcement cast doubt on the future of the estate, opened in December 2004 as a symbol of reconciliation but frequently hit by political tensions.
The Seoul government and South Korean businesses have invested 730 billion won (548 million dollars) into the venture since construction began in 2002.
Kim Yong-Hyun, professor of North Korea studies at Seoul's Dongguk University, said the agreement to hold talks "should not be seen as a sign that North Korea is willing to ease its stance on relations with South Korea."
Kim told AFP it was expected to make specific proposals on wage rises and other matters next week. "It may deliver proposals unilaterally and shun talks on the detainee," he said.
The North would keep inter-Korean relations strained while seeking dialogue with the United States, Kim said, possibly by using two detained US journalists as bargaining chips.
The women went on trial Thursday in Pyongyang but there has been no word on their fate.
More than 38,000 North Koreans work at South Korean firms at Kaesong, producing items such as garments, kitchenware and watches.
They are paid around 75 dollars a month including insurance. The money goes directly to the North's state bodies, which return a portion to the workers.
Friday, June 5, 2009
North Korea on Friday agreed to hold talks with South Korea next week, Seoul officials said, amid high tensions between the two nations. Related photos / videos
The North has accepted a proposal for working-level talks on June 11 at the Kaesong joint industrial complex just north of the border, according to South Korea's unification ministry.
South Korean and US troops have gone on heightened alert since the North staged a nuclear test in late May, renounced the armistice that ended the Korean war in the 1950s and threatened the South with possible attack.
South Korean officials say they fear the North will stage a border provocation on land or at sea.
Next week's talks will focus on operations at Kaesong.
The two sides held their first government-level talks in more than a year on April 21. The North demanded pay rises for its workers and land-use fees at the Seoul-funded estate.
Seoul said the fate of a South Korean manager at Kaesong who has been detained since March 30 must be settled before any other negotiations. Pyongyang alleges the man criticised its communist system and tried to persuade a local worker to defect.
Last month the North announced it had scrapped all wage and rent agreements in force at the estate. It told the 101 South Korean companies to pack up and leave if they cannot accept the new terms.
The announcement cast doubt on the future of the estate, opened in December 2004 as a symbol of reconciliation but frequently hit by political tensions.
The Seoul government and South Korean businesses have invested 730 billion won (548 million dollars) into the venture since construction began in 2002.
Kim Yong-Hyun, professor of North Korea studies at Seoul's Dongguk University, said the agreement to hold talks "should not be seen as a sign that North Korea is willing to ease its stance on relations with South Korea."
Kim told AFP it was expected to make specific proposals on wage rises and other matters next week. "It may deliver proposals unilaterally and shun talks on the detainee," he said.
The North would keep inter-Korean relations strained while seeking dialogue with the United States, Kim said, possibly by using two detained US journalists as bargaining chips.
The women went on trial Thursday in Pyongyang but there has been no word on their fate.
More than 38,000 North Koreans work at South Korean firms at Kaesong, producing items such as garments, kitchenware and watches.
They are paid around 75 dollars a month including insurance. The money goes directly to the North's state bodies, which return a portion to the workers.
Obama admits US involvement in Iran coup in 1953
AFP
Friday, June 5, 2009
US President Barack Obama made a major gesture of conciliation to Iran on Thursday when he admitted US involvement in the 1953 coup which overthrew the government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh.
“In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government,” Obama said during his keynote speech to the Muslim world in Cairo.
It is the first time a serving US president has publicly admitted American involvement in the coup.
The CIA, with British backing, masterminded the coup after Mossadegh nationalised the oil industry, run until then in by the British-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company.
For many Iranians, the coup demonstrated duplicity by the United States, which presented itself as a defender of freedom but did not hesitate to use underhand methods to get rid of a democratically elected government to suit its own economic and strategic interests.
Full article here
Friday, June 5, 2009
US President Barack Obama made a major gesture of conciliation to Iran on Thursday when he admitted US involvement in the 1953 coup which overthrew the government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh.
“In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government,” Obama said during his keynote speech to the Muslim world in Cairo.
It is the first time a serving US president has publicly admitted American involvement in the coup.
The CIA, with British backing, masterminded the coup after Mossadegh nationalised the oil industry, run until then in by the British-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company.
For many Iranians, the coup demonstrated duplicity by the United States, which presented itself as a defender of freedom but did not hesitate to use underhand methods to get rid of a democratically elected government to suit its own economic and strategic interests.
Full article here
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
A Thought of My Own: Fascist America
I have found myself fighting a media battle which I am not sure I am winning. I believe that the alternative media is doing a great job, but I am concerned as to how many people take such claims as "Obama is Fascist" seriously. As always, I look to point out those areas where this present administration is moving the United States toward a socialist/fascist regime. We have seen them, a number of times, look to violate the 2nd amendment, we have seen police brutality against common citizens for nothing, we have seen youth corps being created, we have seen the Establishment of the National Civil Security Force,we have heard calls for US citizens to serve their president: a man elected to SERVE the people.
So clear do these acts point towards a fascists direction, I would argue that nothing more need to be added. However, less then 2 weeks ago our president argued in favor of preventative detention. In other words, a PREEMTIVE strike on POTENTIAL criminals. This is an act of terror upon people who have done nothing wrong, because the government feels they are a threat. According to Obama, these actions would be done so as to protect the founding documents; yet I argue, how does arresting "potential criminals" help to defend ones right to "life, liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." I am sick to think of this great nation under this present administration.
Ted Rall
The State Journal Register
June 2, 2009
We expected broken promises. But the gap between the soaring expectations that accompanied Barack Obama’s inauguration and his wretched performance is the broadest such chasm in recent historical memory. This guy makes Bill Clinton look like a paragon of integrity and follow-through.
Obama is useless. Worse than that, he’s dangerous.
From health care to torture to the economy to war, Obama has reneged on pledges real and implied. So timid and so owned is he that he trembles in fear of offending, of all things, the government of Turkey. Obama has officially reneged on his campaign promise to acknowledge the Armenian genocide. When a president doesn’t have the nerve to annoy the Turks, why does he bother to show up for work in the morning?
Obama is useless. Worse than that, he’s dangerous. Which is why, if he has any patriotism left after the thousands of meetings he has sat through with corporate contributors, blood-sucking lobbyists and corrupt politicians, he ought to step down now — before he drags us further into the abyss.
I refer here to Obama’s plan for “preventive detentions.” If a cop or other government official thinks you might want to commit a crime someday, you could be held in “prolonged detention.” Reports in U.S. state-controlled media imply that Obama’s shocking new policy would only apply to Islamic terrorists (or, in this case, wannabe Islamic terrorists, and also kinda-sorta-maybe-thinking-about-terrorism dudes). As if that made it OK.
In practice, Obama wants to let government goons snatch you, me and anyone else they deem annoying off the street.
Preventive detention is the classic defining characteristic of a military dictatorship. Because dictatorial regimes rely on fear rather than consensus, their priority is self-preservation rather than improving their people’s lives. They worry obsessively over the one thing they can’t control, what George Orwell called “thoughtcrime” — contempt for rulers that might someday translate to direct action.
Locking up people who haven’t done anything wrong is worse than un-American and a violent attack on the most basic principles of Western jurisprudence. It is contrary to the most essential notion of human decency. That anyone has ever been subjected to “preventive detention” is an outrage. That the president of the United States, a man who won an election because he promised to elevate our moral and political discourse, would even entertain such a revolting idea offends the idea of civilization itself.
Obama is cute. He is charming. But there is something rotten inside him. Unlike the Republicans who backed George W. Bush, I won’t follow a terrible leader just because I voted for him. Obama has revealed himself. He is a monster, and he should remove himself from power.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
“Prolonged detention,” reported The New York Times, would be inflicted upon “terrorism suspects who cannot be tried.”
“Cannot be tried.” Interesting choice of words.
Any “terrorism suspect” (can you be a suspect if you haven’t been charged with a crime?) can be tried. Anyone can be tried for anything. At this writing, a Somali child is sitting in a prison in New York, charged with piracy in the Indian Ocean, where the U.S. has no jurisdiction. Anyone can be tried.
What they mean, of course, is that the hundreds of men and boys languishing at Guantánamo and the thousands of “detainees” the Obama administration anticipates kidnapping in the future cannot be convicted. As in the old Soviet Union, putting enemies of the state on trial isn’t enough. The game has to be fixed. Conviction has to be a foregone conclusion.
Why is it, exactly, that some prisoners “cannot be tried”?
The Old Grey Lady explains why Obama wants this “entirely new chapter in American law” in a boring little sentence buried a couple of paragraphs past the jump and a couple of hundred words down page A16: “Yet another question is what to do with the most problematic group of Guantánamo detainees: those who pose a national security threat but cannot be prosecuted, either for lack of evidence or because evidence is tainted.”
In democracies with functioning legal systems, it is assumed that people against whom there is a “lack of evidence” are innocent. They walk free. In countries where the rule of law prevails, in places blessedly free of fearful leaders whose only concern is staying in power, “tainted evidence” is no evidence at all. If you can’t prove that a defendant committed a crime — an actual crime, not a thoughtcrime — in a fair trial, you release him and apologize to the judge and jury for wasting their time.
It is amazing and incredible, after eight years of Bush’s lawless behavior, to have to still have to explain these things. For that reason alone, Obama should resign.
click here to read another article on this topic
So clear do these acts point towards a fascists direction, I would argue that nothing more need to be added. However, less then 2 weeks ago our president argued in favor of preventative detention. In other words, a PREEMTIVE strike on POTENTIAL criminals. This is an act of terror upon people who have done nothing wrong, because the government feels they are a threat. According to Obama, these actions would be done so as to protect the founding documents; yet I argue, how does arresting "potential criminals" help to defend ones right to "life, liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." I am sick to think of this great nation under this present administration.
Ted Rall
The State Journal Register
June 2, 2009
We expected broken promises. But the gap between the soaring expectations that accompanied Barack Obama’s inauguration and his wretched performance is the broadest such chasm in recent historical memory. This guy makes Bill Clinton look like a paragon of integrity and follow-through.
Obama is useless. Worse than that, he’s dangerous.
From health care to torture to the economy to war, Obama has reneged on pledges real and implied. So timid and so owned is he that he trembles in fear of offending, of all things, the government of Turkey. Obama has officially reneged on his campaign promise to acknowledge the Armenian genocide. When a president doesn’t have the nerve to annoy the Turks, why does he bother to show up for work in the morning?
Obama is useless. Worse than that, he’s dangerous. Which is why, if he has any patriotism left after the thousands of meetings he has sat through with corporate contributors, blood-sucking lobbyists and corrupt politicians, he ought to step down now — before he drags us further into the abyss.
I refer here to Obama’s plan for “preventive detentions.” If a cop or other government official thinks you might want to commit a crime someday, you could be held in “prolonged detention.” Reports in U.S. state-controlled media imply that Obama’s shocking new policy would only apply to Islamic terrorists (or, in this case, wannabe Islamic terrorists, and also kinda-sorta-maybe-thinking-about-terrorism dudes). As if that made it OK.
In practice, Obama wants to let government goons snatch you, me and anyone else they deem annoying off the street.
Preventive detention is the classic defining characteristic of a military dictatorship. Because dictatorial regimes rely on fear rather than consensus, their priority is self-preservation rather than improving their people’s lives. They worry obsessively over the one thing they can’t control, what George Orwell called “thoughtcrime” — contempt for rulers that might someday translate to direct action.
Locking up people who haven’t done anything wrong is worse than un-American and a violent attack on the most basic principles of Western jurisprudence. It is contrary to the most essential notion of human decency. That anyone has ever been subjected to “preventive detention” is an outrage. That the president of the United States, a man who won an election because he promised to elevate our moral and political discourse, would even entertain such a revolting idea offends the idea of civilization itself.
Obama is cute. He is charming. But there is something rotten inside him. Unlike the Republicans who backed George W. Bush, I won’t follow a terrible leader just because I voted for him. Obama has revealed himself. He is a monster, and he should remove himself from power.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
“Prolonged detention,” reported The New York Times, would be inflicted upon “terrorism suspects who cannot be tried.”
“Cannot be tried.” Interesting choice of words.
Any “terrorism suspect” (can you be a suspect if you haven’t been charged with a crime?) can be tried. Anyone can be tried for anything. At this writing, a Somali child is sitting in a prison in New York, charged with piracy in the Indian Ocean, where the U.S. has no jurisdiction. Anyone can be tried.
What they mean, of course, is that the hundreds of men and boys languishing at Guantánamo and the thousands of “detainees” the Obama administration anticipates kidnapping in the future cannot be convicted. As in the old Soviet Union, putting enemies of the state on trial isn’t enough. The game has to be fixed. Conviction has to be a foregone conclusion.
Why is it, exactly, that some prisoners “cannot be tried”?
The Old Grey Lady explains why Obama wants this “entirely new chapter in American law” in a boring little sentence buried a couple of paragraphs past the jump and a couple of hundred words down page A16: “Yet another question is what to do with the most problematic group of Guantánamo detainees: those who pose a national security threat but cannot be prosecuted, either for lack of evidence or because evidence is tainted.”
In democracies with functioning legal systems, it is assumed that people against whom there is a “lack of evidence” are innocent. They walk free. In countries where the rule of law prevails, in places blessedly free of fearful leaders whose only concern is staying in power, “tainted evidence” is no evidence at all. If you can’t prove that a defendant committed a crime — an actual crime, not a thoughtcrime — in a fair trial, you release him and apologize to the judge and jury for wasting their time.
It is amazing and incredible, after eight years of Bush’s lawless behavior, to have to still have to explain these things. For that reason alone, Obama should resign.
click here to read another article on this topic
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Grandmother: Great Threat To PD
This is an odd story! If in fact a suspect did what the police claim this grandmother did, then perhaps force would be required. However, I am hard pressed to believe that a 72 year old women would vindictively violate the law to the extent that a younger police officer would feel threatened to the point of having to use a teaser on an elderly women.
My question is this, at what point do we as citizens stop taking blatant abuse, and begin to hold such actions accountable for what they are: abuse of violent power? Even if she did what she is being accused of, I cannot fathom that such drastic measures were needed to subdue her, especially after seeing how big the officer is.
As a nation of liberty and understanding, we need to come to the understanding that such actions are a clear violation of power.
North Korea’s Kim moves to anoint youngest son as heir
Jon Herskovitz
Reuters
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
North Korean leader Kim Jong-il has signaled the anointment of his youngest son as heir to the ruling family dynasty as the rival Koreas bolstered their militaries along a disputed sea border on Tuesday.
North Korea, whose increasingly military posturing after last week’s nuclear test has prompted U.S. and South Korean forces to raise the alert level, is readying mid-range missiles for test launches, the South’s Yonhap news agency reported a lawmaker as saying after a defense briefing.
The news rattled financial markets in Seoul, adding to worries over reports the impoverished state is preparing to test fire a long-range missile that could fly as far as U.S. territory. The main Seoul index closed slightly down.
Analysts believe that Kim Jong-il, whose power base stems from his support for the military, may be using the growing tension to give him greater leverage over power elites at home to nominate his own successor.
It has raised alarm in the region over how far iron ruler Kim, 67 and thought to have suffered a stroke last year, may be prepared to take his latest military grandstanding.
Full article here
Reuters
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
North Korean leader Kim Jong-il has signaled the anointment of his youngest son as heir to the ruling family dynasty as the rival Koreas bolstered their militaries along a disputed sea border on Tuesday.
North Korea, whose increasingly military posturing after last week’s nuclear test has prompted U.S. and South Korean forces to raise the alert level, is readying mid-range missiles for test launches, the South’s Yonhap news agency reported a lawmaker as saying after a defense briefing.
The news rattled financial markets in Seoul, adding to worries over reports the impoverished state is preparing to test fire a long-range missile that could fly as far as U.S. territory. The main Seoul index closed slightly down.
Analysts believe that Kim Jong-il, whose power base stems from his support for the military, may be using the growing tension to give him greater leverage over power elites at home to nominate his own successor.
It has raised alarm in the region over how far iron ruler Kim, 67 and thought to have suffered a stroke last year, may be prepared to take his latest military grandstanding.
Full article here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)