Israel No Longer Under U.S. Nuclear Umbrella Per Clinton

Clinton Reverses: Israel on its Own With Iran
from Israel National News
June 14, 2009

(IsraelNN.com) In a reversal of her stated position as a presidential candidate, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton revealed last week that an Iranian attack on Israel would no longer be considered as an attack on America. Speaking during an interview on ABC TV she said that the Iranians could expect “retaliation” but America was not committing itself to come to Israel's defense. Interviewer and White House Correspondent George Stephanopoulos reminded Clinton of her previous position by playing a 2008 video recording in which she states: "I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States.”

When asked if her new statement was official U.S. policy, Clinton dodged the question, "I think it is U.S. policy to the extent that we have alliances and understandings with a number of nations. I don't think there is any doubt in anyone's mind that, were Israel to suffer a nuclear attack by Iran, there would be retaliation." Stephanopoulos pressed her: "By the United States?" But Clinton declined to commit: "Well, I think there would be retaliation.”
Click to read the article and the comments

NKorea warns of nuclear war - Obama says nothing to worry about!

from Yahoo News
by Hyung-jin Kim
Associated Press Writer

SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea's communist regime has warned of a nuclear war on the Korean peninsula while vowing to step up its atomic bomb-making program in defiance of new U.N. sanctions.

The North's defiance presents a growing diplomatic headache for President Barack Obama as he prepares for talks Tuesday with his South Korean counterpart on the North's missile and nuclear programs.

South Korean President Lee Myung-bak told security-related ministers during an unscheduled meeting Sunday to "resolutely and squarely" cope with the North's latest threat, his office said. Lee is to leave for the U.S. on Monday morning.

A commentary Sunday in the North's main state-run Rodong Sinmun newspaper, carried by the official Korean Central News Agency, claimed the U.S. has 1,000 nuclear weapons in South Korea. Another commentary published Saturday in the state-run Tongil Sinbo weekly claimed the U.S. has been deploying a vast amount of nuclear weapons in South Korea and Japan.

North Korea "is completely within the range of U.S. nuclear attack and the Korean peninsula is becoming an area where the chances of a nuclear war are the highest in the world," the Tongil Sinbo commentary said.

Kim Yong-kyu, a spokesman at the U.S. military command in Seoul, called the latest accusation "baseless," saying Washington has no nuclear bombs in South Korea. U.S. tactical nuclear weapons were removed from South Korea in 1991 as part of arms reductions following the Cold War. [If we don't have any tactical nuclear weapons in South Korea, we better hurry and get some there, otherwise the North Koreans could literally overun South Korea just by the amount of troops they have stationed at the DMZ. - my comment]

South Korea's Unification Ministry issued a statement Sunday demanding the North stop stoking tension, abandon its nuclear weapons and return to dialogue with the South.

On Saturday, North Korea's Foreign Ministry threatened war on any country that dared to stop its ships on the high seas under the new sanctions approved by the U.N. Security Council on Friday as punishment for the North's latest nuclear test.

It is not clear if the statements are simply rhetorical. Still, they are a huge setback for international attempts to rein in North Korea's nuclear ambitions following its second nuclear test on May 25. It first tested a nuclear device in 2006.

In Saturday's statement, North Korea said it has been enriching uranium to provide fuel for its light-water reactor. It was the first public acknowledgment the North is running a uranium enrichment program in addition to its known plutonium-based program. The two radioactive materials are key ingredients in making atomic bombs.

On Sunday, Yonhap news agency reported South Korea and the U.S. have mobilized spy satellites, reconnaissance aircraft and human intelligence networks to obtain evidence that the North has been running a uranium enrichment program.

South Korea's Defense Ministry said it could not confirm the report. The National Intelligence Service — South Korea's main spy agency — was not available for comment.

North Korea said more than one-third of 8,000 spent fuel rods in its possession has been reprocessed and all the plutonium extracted would be used to make atomic bombs. The country could harvest 13-18 pounds (6-8 kilograms) of plutonium — enough to make at least one nuclear bomb — if all the rods are reprocessed.

In addition, North Korea is believed to have enough plutonium for at least half a dozen atomic bombs.

North Korea says its nuclear program is a deterrent against the U.S., which it routinely accuses of plotting to topple its regime. Washington, which has 28,500 troops in South Korea, has repeatedly said it has no such intention.

The new U.N. sanctions are aimed at depriving the North of the financing used to build its rogue nuclear program. The resolution also authorized searches of North Korean ships suspected of transporting illicit ballistic missile and nuclear materials.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the new U.N. penalties provide the necessary tools to help check North Korea's continued pursuit of nuclear weapons. [Barry and Hillary are living in a dream world - my comments]

The sanctions show that "North Korea's pursuit of nuclear weapons and the capacity to deliver those weapons through missiles is not going to be accepted by the neighbors as well as the greater international community," Clinton said Saturday at a news conference in Canada.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Criminally Useful Idiocy - with more on the way...

image by rees

article from Power Line Blog
June 14, 2009
by Paul

On Friday, President Obama had this to say about the election in Iran:

We are excited to see what appears to be a robust debate taking place in Iran. Whoever ends up winning the election in Iran, the fact there has been a robust debate hopefully will advance our ability to engage them in new ways.

This was an extremely foolish comment for at least two reasons. First, the debate in Iran was circumscribed. The candidates were screened by the mullahs. Four were permitted to run; hundreds were deemed insufficiently in tune with the "Revolution." And there appars to have little or no debate on the issue of primary concern to the U.S. -- Iran's nuclear program. Ahmadinejad's main rival, Mir-Hossein Moussavi, was in full agreement with the regime on this matter.

Second, there was always a strong possibility of election fraud. Robust debate, even had it existed, would be meaningless in the face of a fraudulent election. Thus, Obama should not have lauded the election, much less characterized it as advancing our ability to engage Iran in new ways, until he was satisfied that the election was honest. A fraudulent election in which the existing, intransigent regime claims a landslide victory will not advance our ability to engage in Iran in new ways.

A day later, it seems clear that the election was fraudulent. U.S. officials have said as much off-the-record. They find it "not credible" that Mousavi would have lost the balloting in his hometown or that a third candidate, Mehdi Karoubi, would have received less than 1 percent of the total vote.

So Obama has praised an election that appears to have been a travesty. It's difficult to see how either Iran's rulers or its dissidents can view him as other than a fool -- usefully so in the case of the rulers; criminally so in the case of the dissidents.

Hey Obama: That "Robust" Iranian Election Debate That "Excited" You Turned Into Violent Riots!

In a Reuters news article on Friday, June 12th, the headline was "Obama excited by Iran's robust election debate." Hey Barry, how do you feel now about the "robust" riots that are taking place and the protestors that are being beaten by the Revolutionary Guards?
Rees

Ahmadinejad's victory greeted by Tehran protests

from Reuters
June 13, 2009
By Parisa Hafezi and Fredrik Dahl

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Thousands of protesters clashed with police after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won an election which his reformist challenger called a "dangerous charade."

The protests were a rare direct challenge to Iranian authorities. The result and its violent aftermath raised fresh questions about the direction of Iranian policies at a time when U.S. President Barack Obama wants to improve relations with Iran.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told Iranians to respect Ahmadinejad's victory, which upset expectations that reformist candidate Mirhossein Mousavi might win the race.

Interior Minister Sadeq Mahsouli, an Ahmadinejad ally, declared the president had been re-elected with 62.6 percent of the vote, against 33.7 percent for Mousavi.

Mousavi complained of violations and vote-rigging -- allegations rejected by Interior Ministry officials.

"I'm warning I will not surrender to this dangerous charade. The result of such performance by some officials will jeopardize the pillars of the Islamic Republic and will establish tyranny," Mousavi said in a statement made available to Reuters.

After the result was announced, thousands of his supporters took to the streets, some chanting, "What happened to our vote?." Others shouted anti-Ahmadinejad slogans. "We are Iranians too," and "Mousavi is our president," they shouted.

Police beat protesters with batons as they spread out across the capital. Small fires burned at roadsides.

Though the protests were small compared to the mass demonstrations that led to the 1979 Islamic revolution, they were the most widespread in the city since then.

Khamenei, Iran's top authority, told defeated candidates and their supporters to avoid "provocative behavior."

"The chosen and respected president is the president of all the Iranian nation and everyone, including yesterday's competitors, must unanimously support and help him," Khamenei said in a statement read on state television.

Ahmadinejad, in a televised address to the nation, said the election had been "free and healthy."

Iranian and Western analysts said Ahmadinejad's re-election would disappoint Western powers aiming to convince Iran to halt a nuclear program they suspect is aimed at making bombs.

Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

AhmadiCorn Takes Credit For Ahmadinejad's Victory!

image by rees

from MSNBC.com
June 13, 2009

TEHRAN, Iran - Opponents of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad clashed with police in the heart of Iran's capital Saturday, pelting them with rocks and setting fires in the worst unrest in Tehran in a decade. They accused the hard-line president of using fraud to steal election victory from his reformist rival.

The brazen and angry confrontations — including stunning scenes of masked rioters tangling with black-clad police — pushed the self-styled reformist movement closer to a possible moment of truth: Whether to continue defying Iran's powerful security forces or, as they often have before, retreat into quiet dismay and frustration over losing more ground to the Islamic establishment.

But for at least one day, the tone and tactics were more combative than at any time since authorities put down student-led protests in 1999. Young men hurled stones and bottles at anti-riot units and mocked Ahmadinejad as an illegitimate leader. The reformists' new hero, Mir Hossein Mousavi, declared himself the true winner of Friday's presidential race and urged backers to resist a government based on "lies and dictatorship."

Authorities, too, pushed back with ominous measures apparently seeking to undercut liberal voices: jamming text messages, blocking pro-Mousavi Web sites and Facebook and cutting off mobile phones in Tehran.

Reformist leaders arrested
The extent of possible casualties and detentions was not immediately clear. Police stormed the headquarters of Iran's largest reformist party, the Islamic Iran Participation Front, and arrested several top reformist leaders, said political activists close to the party.The activists spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.

Mousavi did not appear in public, but warned in a Web message: "People won't respect those who take power through fraud."

Many backers took this call to the streets. Thousands of protesters — mostly young men — roamed through Tehran looking for a fight with police and setting trash bins and tires ablaze. Pillars of black smoke rose among the mustard-colored apartment blocks and office buildings in central Tehran. In one side road, an empty bus was engulfed in flames.

Police fought back with clubs, including mobile squads on motorcycles swinging truncheons.

The scuffles began when protesters gathered hours outside the Interior Ministry around the time officials announced the final election results showing a nearly 2-to-1 landslide for Ahmadinejad. Demonstrators chanted "the government lied" and waved the ribbons of Mousavi's "green" movement — the signature color of his youth-driven campaign.

"I won't surrender to this manipulation," said a statement on Mousavi's Web site. "The outcome of what we've seen from the performance of officials ... is nothing but shaking the pillars of the Islamic Republic of Iran's sacred system and governance of lies and dictatorship."

No compromise
The door for possible compromise was closed by Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. He could have used his near-limitless powers to intervene in the election dispute. But, in a message on state TV, he urged the nation to unite behind Ahmadinejad, calling the result a "divine assessment."

There are no independent election monitors in Iran. Mousavi's claims, however, point to some noticeable breaks with past election counting.

The tallies from previous elections — time-consuming paper ballots — began to trickle in hours after polls closed. This time, huge chunks of results — millions at a time — poured in almost immediately from a huge turnout of about 85 percent of Iran's 46.2 million voters. The final outcome: 62.6 percent of the vote to Ahmadinejad and 33.75 for Mousavi, a former prime minister from the 1980s.

The U.S. refused to accept Ahmadinejad's claim of a landslide re-election victory said it was looking into allegations of election fraud.

U.S. watching outcome
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said she hoped the outcome reflects the "genuine will and desire" of Iranian voters. At a joint appearance with Clinton, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon said his country was "deeply concerned" by reports of irregularities in the election.

Past Iranian elections were considered generally fair. In 2005, when Ahmadinejad was first elected, the losing candidates claimed irregularities at the polls, but the charges were never investigated.

"The majority of Iranians are certain that the fraud is widespread," said Tehran-based analyst Saeed Leilaz. "It's like taking 10 million votes away from Mousavi and giving them to Ahmadinejad."

Much depends on how much they are willing to risk. The heartland of Iran's liberal ranks is the educated and relatively affluent districts of north Tehran. It's also the showcase for the gains in social freedoms that began with the election of President Mohammad Khatami in 1997: makeup, Internet cafes, head scarves that barely cover hair and satellite dishes that are technically illegal but common.

The ruling clerics tolerate all that to a point — part of a tacit arrangement that the liberties stay as long as reformists remain politically meek. A real protest movement could threaten their coveted Western-looking lifestyle and risk a brutal response from groups vowing to defend the Islamic system.

The political chief of the powerful Revolutionary Guard has warned it would crush any "revolution" against the Islamic regime by Mousavi's "green movement" — drawing parallels to the "velvet revolution" of 1989 in then-Czechoslovakia.

Foreign media blamed
Ahmadinejad accused the foreign media of producing coverage that harmed the Iranian people, saying "a large number of foreign media ... organized a full-fledged fight against our people."

Authorities also called foreign journalists with visas to cover the elections, including members of The Associated Press, and told them they should prepare to leave the country. Italian state TV RAI said one of its crews was caught in the clashes in front Mousavi's headquarters. Their Iranian interpreter was beaten with clubs by riot police and officers confiscated the cameraman's tapes, the station said.

"The massive demonstrations of police and army presence on the streets was designed to show that they were quite ready to kill protesters if they had to in order to impose order," said Patrick Clawson, deputy director at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. "On the whole, these guys in north Tehran who are terribly upset about what is happening are not ready to die."

Hadi Ghaemi, spokesman for the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, denounced the outcome as "a Tehran Tiananmen" — a reference to China's brutal 1989 crackdown on pro-democracy activists — and urged the international community not to recognize the result.

There were also protests by Mousavi supporters in the southern city of Ahvaz in the oil-rich province of Khuzestan who shouted, "Mousavi, take our votes back!" witnesses said.

Talking tough
Mousavi called on his backers to avoid violence, but he is still talking tough about pressing his claims of election fraud. He charges the polls closed early but has not fully outlined all of his fraud allegations.

Unlike his ally Khatami, Mousavi is a hardened political veteran who led the country during the grim years of the 1980-88 war with Iraq. He also could join forces with the powerful political patriarch Heshemi Rafsanjani, who strongly opposed Ahmadinejad's re-election during the intense monthlong campaign.

Amjad Atallah, a Washington-based regional analyst, called it "one of the most existential moments" in Iran since 1979 Islamic Revolution.

"You can't overstate how important what is happening now is for Iran," he said.

In Tehran, several Ahmadinejad supporters cruised the streets at dawn waving Iranian flags out of car windows and shouting "Mousavi is dead!"

They were quickly overwhelmed by the Mousavi backers.

The protesters — some hiding their faces with masks — still wandered the streets after nightfall

as some fires still burned. The pungent smell of burning rubber and smoldering trash lingered in some parts of the city.

Hundreds of anti-riot police blocked the streets leading to Tehran University's dormitory, home to thousands of students and the site of the 1999 student riots that marked the biggest disturbances in post-revolution Iran. University exams nationwide were postponed until next month.

Normal life amid clashes
Oddly, normal life was interspersed with the anger. People continued shopping and stores remained open.

With the Internet and mobile texting down, some Iranians turned to Twitter to voice their views.

"Very disappointed with Iran elections," said one entry."Apparently still a backward regressive nation."

Another: "Elections in Iran: stayed tuned as it gets interesting (& maybe scary)."

Ahmadinejad addressed a crowd in Tehran, but did not mention the unrest, saying only "a new era has begun in the history of the Iranian nation."

But there were no hints of any new policy shifts on key international issues such as Iran's standoff over its nuclear program and the offer by President Barack Obama to open dialogue after a nearly 30-year diplomatic estrangement. All high-level decisions are controlled by the ruling theocracy.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Fiery Crash Involving Ammunition Created Deadly Scenario

1 killed, 1 critically injured in I-80 wreck

from KSL.com
June 13th, 2009

TOOELE -- Crews are working to clear up a fiery, fatal accident on Interstate 80 near the Salt Lake-Tooele County line. Live ammunition on the road is making the cleanup difficult and traffic is backed up for miles.

Utah Highway Patrol says around 11 a.m. an eastbound Dodge Dakota pickup truck collided with a Fed-Ex truck near milepost 102, where westbound S.R. 201 meets westbound I-80.

Both vehicles were engulfed in flames at one point.

The driver of the pickup died; the driver of the Fed-Ex truck was airlifted to Intermountain Medical Center in critical condition.

UHP's Sgt. Jeff Nigbur says the Fed-Ex truck was pulling three trailers. The first trailer contained ammunition which has been going off periodically, making it unsafe for crews to open lanes of traffic.

The interstate is closed in both directions. Nigbur says it may take another three to four hours to reopen it.

Westbound I-80 traffic reportedly is backed up for eight to 10 miles. One lane of eastbound traffic has been open intermittently.

The accident is under investigation.

Stay with KSL Newsradio 102.7 FM/1160 AM and KSL.com for updates on this developing story.

Riots In Iran Over Election Results - Riot like it's 1999

image from AP - modified by rees

I didn't think they would even allow riots to happen. I thought they would be shooting people in the street. Well, I guess this is the new modern Iran. (Actually, they'll arrest them, take them out of sight of the press and then shoot them.)
Rees

Clashes erupt in Iran over disputed election

from KSL.com
June 13th, 2009
By Ali Akbar Dareini and Anna Johnson
Associated Press Writers


TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Supporters of the main election challenger to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad clashed with police and set up barricades of burning tires Saturday as authorities claimed the hard-line president was re-elected in a landslide. The rival candidate said the vote was tainted by widespread fraud and his followers responded with the most serious unrest in the capital in a decade.

Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, closed the door on any chance he could use his limitless powers to intervene in the disputes from Friday's election. In a message on state TV, he urged the nation to unite behind Ahmadinejad, calling the result a "divine assessment."

Several hundred demonstrators, many wearing the trademark green colors of pro-reform candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi's campaign chanted "the government lied to the people" and gathered near the Interior Ministry as the final count from Friday's presidential election was announced.

It gave 62.6 percent of the vote to Ahmadinejad and 33.75 to Mousavi _ a former prime minister who has become the hero of a youth-driven movement seeking greater liberties and a gentler face for Iran abroad.

Mousavi rejected the result as rigged and urged his supporters to resist a government of "lies and dictatorship."

"I'm warning that I won't surrender to this manipulation," said a statement on Mousavi's Web site. "The outcome of what we've seen from the performance of officials ... is nothing but shaking the pillars of the Islamic Republic of Iran's sacred system and governance of lies and dictatorship," it added.

Mousavi warned "people won't respect those who take power through fraud." The headline on one of his Web sites read: "I won't give in to this dangerous manipulation."

Mousavi appealed directly to Khamenei to intervene and stop what he said were violations of the law. Khamenei, who is not elected, holds ultimate political authority in Iran and controls all major policy decisions.

Mousavi and key aides could not be reached by phone.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the U.S. hopes the outcome of the election reflects the "genuine will and desire" of the Iranian people. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said the U.S. administration is paying close attention to reports of alleged election irregularities.

At a joint appearance with Clinton, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon said his country was "deeply concerned" by reports of irregularities in the election.

The clashes in central Tehran were the more serious disturbances in the capital since student-led protests in 1999. They showed the potential for the showdown to spill over into further violence and challenges to the Islamic establishment.

The demonstrations began Saturday morning shortly before the government announced the final results.

Protesters set fire to tires outside the Interior Ministry and anti-riot police fought back with clubs and smashed cars. Helmeted police on foot and others on buzzing motorcycles chased bands of protesters roaming the streets pumping their fists in the air. Officers beat protesters with swift blows from their truncheons and kicks with their boots. Some of the demonstrators grouped together to charge back at police, hurling stones.

Plumes of dark smoke streaked over the city, as burning barricades of tires and garbage bins glowed orange in the streets. Protesters also torched an empty bus, engulfing it in flames on a Tehran street.

An Associated Press photographer saw a plainclothes security official beating a woman with his truncheon. Italian state TV RAI said one of its crews was caught in the clashes in front Mousavi's headquarters. Their Iranian interpreter was beaten with clubs by riot police and officers confiscated the cameraman's tapes, the station said.

In another main street of Tehran, some 300 young people blocked the avenue by forming a human chain and chanted "Ahmadi, shame on you. Leave the government alone." There was no word on any casualties from the unrest.

It was not clear how many Iranians were even aware of Mousavi's claims of fraud. Communications disruptions began in the later hours of voting Friday _ suggesting an information clampdown. State television and radio only broadcast the Interior Ministry's vote count and not Mousavi's midnight news conference.

Nationwide, the text messaging system remained down Saturday and several pro-Mousavi Web sites were blocked or difficult to access. Text messaging is frequently used by many Iranians _ especially young Mousavi supporters _ to spread election news.

Mousavi's campaign headquarters urged people to show restraint.

Interior Minister Sadeq Mahsouli, who supervised the elections and heads the nation's police forces, warned people not to join any "unauthorized gatherings."

The powerful Revolutionary Guard cautioned Wednesday it would crush any "revolution" against the Islamic regime by Mousavi's "green movement." The Revolutionary Guard is directly under the control of the ruling clerics and has vast influence in every corner of the country through a network of volunteer militias.

Even before the vote counting began, Mousavi declared himself "definitely the winner" based on "all indications from all over Iran." He accused the government of "manipulating the people's vote" to keep Ahmadinejad in power and suggested the reformist camp would stand up to challenge the results.

"It is our duty to defend people's votes. There is no turning back," he said, alleging widespread irregularities.

Mousavi's backers were stunned at the Interior Ministry's claim that Ahmadinejad won after widespread predictions of a close race _ or even a slight edge for the reformist candidate.

Turnout was a record 85 percent of the 46.2 million eligible voters.

"Many Iranians went to the people because they wanted to bring change," said Mousavi supporter Nasser Amiri, a hospital clerk in Tehran. "Almost everybody I know voted for Mousavi but Ahmadinejad is being declared the winner. The government announcement is nothing but widespread fraud. It is very, very disappointing. I'll never ever again vote in Iran."

At Tehran University _ the site of the last major anti-regime unrest in Tehran in 1999 _ the academic year was winding down and there was no sign of pro-Mousavi crowds. But university exams, scheduled to begin Saturday, were postponed until next month around the country.

Ahmadinejad planned a public address later Saturday in Tehran.

In the capital, several Ahmadinejad supporters cruised the streets waving Iranian flags out of car windows and shouting "Mousavi is dead!"

The election outcome will not sharply alter Iran's main policies or sway major decisions, such as possible talks with Washington or nuclear policies. Those crucial issues rest with the ruling clerics headed by Khamenei.

But the election focused on what the office can influence: boosting Iran's sinking economy, pressing for greater media and political freedoms, and being Iran's main envoy to the world.

Iran does not allow international election monitors. During the 2005 election, when Ahmadinejad won the presidency, there were some allegations of vote rigging from losers, but the claims were never investigated.

Associated Press reporter Nasser Karimi contributed to this report from Tehran.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Obama's First Miracle - he conveniently found savings to pay for National Healthcare!

Obama's Healthcare Plan will be one of the biggest frauds ever perpetrated upon the American People.

from Yahoo News
by Josh Gerstein
June 13, 2009

President Barack Obama says he's now found savings that will pay almost all the costs of a massive overhaul of America's health care system.

Obama on Saturday is announcing an additional $313 billion in new proposed savings that he says would bring the total funding available for his top-priority health insurance reform to nearly $950 billion over 10 years.

White House officials insisted the new savings were rock-solid, but also acknowledged they had yet to settle on a specific mechanism to achieve lower prescription drug costs that make up nearly one-quarter of the new savings.

“Any honest accounting must prepare for the fact that health care reform will require additional costs in the short term in order to reduce spending in the long term,” Obama says in his weekly radio and Internet address. “Today, I am announcing an additional $313 billion in savings that will rein in unnecessary spending, and increase efficiency and the quality of care.”

The new proposals from Obama came as the drive for health care reform reaches a pivotal juncture in Congress. On Monday, the Senate Finance Committee is scheduled to receive Congressional Budget Office estimates on a slew of health-care options. On Wednesday, the committee is expected to unveil proposed legislation.

In advance of those milestones, the White House was moving aggressively to counter public criticism that funding plans for the health reform effort are unrealistic, particularly in the face of an expected 10-year pricetag of $1 trillion or more. Some analysts have faulted the White House for being overly optimistic about savings and tone-deaf to which tax-raising proposals are likely to fly in Congress.

In his address Saturday, Obama refers to a 10-year total of more than $600 billion in “savings” for health care. However, he does not explain in his latest comments that, under his revised budget released last month, $326 billion of that amount would come from tax hikes on Americans making over $250,000 a year, “loophole closers,” and higher fees for some government services.

In a conference call with reporters Friday, Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag said the latest announcement signaled that the White House had met its obligation to identify funding sources for a broad-based effort to make health insurance more affordable and more widely available.

“We are making good on this promise to fully finance health care reform over the next decade,” Orszag declared.

The bulk of the new $313 billion in savings would come from cutting or reducing the growth of payments to hospitals, medical equipment manufacturers and laboratories — though the major cuts don't target doctors, Orszag said.

Over the next decade, $110 billion is slated to come from reducing reimbursements to take account of what Orszag described as the ability of providers to improve their efficiency. “Health care services should be able to achieve and do achieve productivity improvements over time,” he said. According to a fact sheet released by the White House, future increases in such Medicare payments would be reduced based on an assumption that health care providers achieve half the productivity increases seen elsewhere in the economy. The budget official said the reductions would take place even if providers failed to garner the projected efficiencies.

Another $106 billion would come from cuts in so-called disproportionate share payments the federal government makes to hospitals with large numbers of uninsured patients. “As the ranks of uninsured decline under health reform, those payments become less necessary,” Orszag said.

About $75 billion is slated to come from lower payments for prescription drugs. However, Orszag said the White House was “in discussions with stakeholders over the best way of achieving that $75 billion.”

Notwithstanding that ambiguity, Orszag asserted that the White House had put forward $950 billion in budgetary offsets that could be use to fund health reform. He called the proposals "hard" and "scoreable," meaning that they were sufficiently certain and specific to pass muster with CBO officials who formally tally the cost of budget items.

Asked about the discrepancy, Orszag said, “There’s been continuous skepticism that we will come forward with detail….The detail on the $75 billion for prescription drugs will be forthcoming in the very near future and I will rest my reputation as a former CBO director on the fact that there are multiple ways in which those savings can be achieved and we are committed to achieving that level of savings in this package.”

There were signs that the announcement of the additional $313 billion of savings may have been rushed. In addition to the vagueness about the $75 billion in lower drug costs, the White House’s health care reform coordinator, Nancy-Ann DeParle, did not join a conference call with reporters to announce the new proposals. Her presence had been advertised in advance, but a spokesman said she was in another meeting and could not participate.

The cuts and savings are likely to engender warnings from providers that de-facto rationing will occur as patients in some areas find themselves unable to find providers willing to perform lab tests, X-rays and the like, due to the lower reimbursement rates.

Hospitals are also likely to protest that the disproportionate share payments, which are targeted for cuts of 75 percent, are vital to maintaining hospitals in costly urban centers, and to keeping teaching hospitals viable.

“It is unlikely to be an exact match on a hospital-by-hospital basis but what we believe will occur is that the remaining DSH payments that will still exist can be better targeted to the hospitals most in need,” Orszag said.

Kim Jong iL responds to new sanctions

image by rees

from The Wall Street Journal
Asia News
June 13, 2009

North Korea to Restart Uranium Enrichment

Associated Press SEOUL -- North Korea vowed on Saturday to embark on a uranium enrichment program and "weaponize" all the plutonium in its possession as it rejected the new U.N. sanctions meant to punish the communist nation for its recent nuclear test.

North Korea also said it would not abandon its nuclear programs, saying it was an inevitable decision to defend itself from what it says is a hostile U.S. policy and its nuclear threat against the North.

The North will take "resolute military action" if the United States or its allies try to impose any "blockade" on it, the ministry said in a statement carried by the North's official Korean Central News Agency.

The ministry did not elaborate if the blockade refers to an attempt to stop its ships or impose sanctions.

North Korea describes its nuclear program as a deterrent against possible U.S. attacks. Washington says it has no intention of attacking and has expressed fear that North Korea is trying to sell its nuclear technology to other nations.

The statement came hours after the U.N. Security Council approved tough new sanctions on North Korea to punish it for its latest nuclear test on May 25.

The U.N. resolution imposes new sanctions on the reclusive communist nation's weapons exports and financial dealings, and allows inspections of suspect cargo in ports and on the high seas.

The South Korean government said it "welcomes and supports the unanimous adoption of the resolution." A Foreign Ministry statement said it showed the council's unequivocal intention to stop the North's nuclear program and its proliferation.

Click to read the article and the comments

Obama: America's first Muslim president? - and it's last?

image from rees

from The Jewish World Review
By Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/


During his White House years, William Jefferson Clinton — someone Judge Sonia Sotomayor might call a "white male" — was dubbed "America's first black president" by a black admirer. Applying the standard of identity politics and pandering to a special interest that earned Mr. Clinton that distinction, Barack Hussein Obama would have to be considered America's first Muslim president.

This is not to say, necessarily, that Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim any more than Mr. Clinton actually is black. After his five months in office, and most especially after his just-concluded visit to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, however, a stunning conclusion seems increasingly plausible: The man now happy to have his Islamic-rooted middle name featured prominently has engaged in the most consequential bait-and-switch since Adolf Hitler duped Neville Chamberlain over Czechoslovakia at Munich.

What little we know about Mr. Obama's youth certainly suggests that he not only had a Kenyan father who was Muslim, but spent his early, formative years as one in Indonesia. As the president likes to say, "much has been made" — in this case by him and his campaign handlers — of the fact that he became a Christian as an adult in Chicago, under the now-notorious Pastor Jeremiah A. Wright.

With Mr. Obama's unbelievably ballyhooed address in Cairo Thursday to what he calls "the Muslim world" (hereafter known as "the Speech"), there is mounting evidence that the president not only identifies with Muslims, but actually may still be one himself. Consider the following indicators:

Mr. Obama referred four times in his speech to "the Holy Koran." Non-Muslims — even pandering ones — generally don't use that Islamic formulation.

Mr. Obama established his firsthand knowledge of Islam (albeit without mentioning his reported upbringing in the faith) with the statement, "I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed." Again, "revealed" is a depiction Muslims use to reflect their conviction that the Koran is the word of G-d, as dictated to Muhammad.

Then the president made a statement no believing Christian — certainly not one versed, as he professes to be, in the ways of Islam — would ever make. In the context of what he euphemistically called the "situation between Israelis, Palestinians and Arabs," Mr. Obama said he looked forward to the day "…when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them) joined in prayer."

Now, the term "peace be upon them" is invoked by Muslims as a way of blessing deceased holy men. According to Islam, that is what all three were — dead prophets. Of course, for Christians, Jesus is the living and immortal Son of G0d.

In the final analysis, it may be beside the point whether Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim. In the Speech and elsewhere, he has aligned himself with adherents to what authoritative Islam calls Shariah — notably, the dangerous global movement known as the Muslim Brotherhood — to a degree that makes Mr. Clinton's fabled affinity for blacks pale by comparison.

For example, Mr. Obama has — from literally his inaugural address onward — inflated the numbers and, in that way and others, exaggerated the contemporary and historical importance of Muslim-Americans in the United States. In the Speech, he used the Brotherhood's estimates of "nearly 7 million Muslims" in this country, at least twice the estimates from other, more reputable sources. (Who knows? By the time Mr. Obama's friends in the radical Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN) perpetrate their trademark books-cooking as deputy 2010 census takers, the official count may well claim considerably more than 7 million Muslims are living here.)

Even more troubling were the commitments the president made in Cairo to promote Islam in America. For instance, he declared: "I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear." He vowed to ensure that women can cover their heads, including, presumably, when having their photographs taken for passports, driver's licenses or other identification purposes. He also pledged to enable Muslims to engage in zakat, their faith's requirement for tithing, even though four of the eight types of charity called for by Shariah can be associated with terrorism. Not surprisingly, a number of Islamic "charities" in this country have been convicted of providing material support for terrorism.

Particularly worrying is the realignment Mr. Obama has announced in U.S. policy toward Israel. While he pays lip service to the "unbreakable" bond between America and the Jewish state, the president has unmistakably signaled that he intends to compel the Israelis to make territorial and other strategic concessions to Palestinians to achieve the hallowed two-state solution. In doing so, he ignores the inconvenient fact that both the Brotherhood's Hamas and Abu Mazen's Fatah remain determined to achieve a one-state solution, whereby the Jews will be driven "into the sea."

Whether Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim or simply plays one in the presidency may, in the end, be irrelevant. What is alarming is that in aligning himself and his policies with those of Shariah-adherents such as the Muslim Brotherhood, the president will greatly intensify the already enormous pressure on peaceful, tolerant American Muslims to submit to such forces — and heighten expectations, here and abroad, that the rest of us will do so as well.

Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

New Sanctions on North Korea are a JOKE!

image by rees

The new U.N. sanctions approve inspecting North Korean Cargo. However, it has to be a "consensual" inspection. That means that if the Captain of the ship or the aircraft does not agree to the inspection, it won't happen. We'll just end up saying to the Captain, "Thanks, sorry to have bothered you, we hope you and your crew will have a great rest of the day" and then we'll have to leave!. Yep, that's it.

Even this article even mentions that North Korea will probably ignore this. I don't think it's probably, I think it's "they will" ignore it. The United Nations provided no means to enforce the inspection of cargo. I would be shocked if we even try to inspect any cargo. If we do, how many times of be told "NO" will it take before we're back at the U.N. trying to fix this pathetic excuse for a sanction. It won't be fixed. The only reason Russia and China supported it was because it was purposely written to be unenforceable. I wouldn't be surprised if China didn't call Kim Jong Il ahead of time and say, "look we're going to vote to approve these new sanctions against you, but don't worry, because no one is going to enforce them."

Susan Rice probably already sprained her arms patting herself on the back, because I'm sure she's got to be real proud of herself.

Hey Susan: The sanctions aren't worth the paper their printed on. Kim Jong Il is laughing at you, Obama and the rest of the United Nations.
Rees

United Nations approves new sanctions against North Korea and China Warns Against Force in Carrying Out the new Sanctions

from Bloomberg
By Peter S. Green and Bill Varner

June 13 (Bloomberg) -- China warned about the dangers involved in inspecting North Korean cargo under United Nations Security Council sanctions approved yesterday, saying countries intercepting vessels should avoid armed action.

“Under no circumstance should there be the use of force or the threat of use of force” in implementing the sanctions in Resolution 1874, Chinese Ambassador Zhang Yesui said in New York. Inspecting vessels carrying North Korean cargo is “complicated” and “sensitive,” he said.

The Security Council voted 15 to O to punish North Korea for its May nuclear-bomb test and missile launches. The resolution authorizes stepped-up inspection of air or sea cargoes suspected of being destined for the development of nuclear arms or ballistic missiles. The measure also calls for new restrictions on loans and money transfers to North Korea.

China’s support for the penalties may be significant given its close political and trade ties with the reclusive North Korean regime of Kim Jong Il. The U.S. is especially concerned about preventing North Korea from selling its nuclear technology to other countries.

U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice said at a White House briefing that the sanctions have “teeth that will bite.” She pointed out that the resolution doesn’t authorize the use of military force.

The U.S. is prepared to “confront” a vessel suspected of carrying an illegal shipment and attempt to board it “consensually,” Rice told reporters. If the crew refuses a boarding or to go to a nearby port for an inspection, the U.S. would make clear “whose vessel it is” and the likely cargo, “to shine a spotlight on it, to make it very difficult for that contraband to continue to be carried forward,” Rice added.

China, Russia Support

The UN vote followed almost three weeks of negotiations on tighter sanctions that began when North Korea detonated a suspected nuclear device on May 25, voided the 1953 armistice ending the Korean War and tested several missiles. Accord on the text by China and Russia, which have resisted sanctions, led to the Security Council consensus.

“The additional measures are substantive and targeted in nature and clearly tied to ending the DPRK program to create nuclear missiles,” Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said after the vote. “The attempt by the DPRK to create nuclear missiles not only doesn’t strengthen security but on the contrary ratchets up tension on the Korean peninsula.”

Churkin said his country was satisfied by the unanimous adoption of the resolution against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, or DPRK. He said the Russians made sure that the provisions for checking ships on the high seas wouldn’t set a precedent, and that he hoped the resolution would steer North Korea back to six-party nuclear disarmament talks.

Resolution’s ‘Bite’

“It is significant that China and Russia are willing to increase the language on interdiction and financial sanctions, but the resolution will not have that much bite if there is no implementation,” Nicholas Szechenyi of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies said.

Szechenyi said that while enforcement by China is critical to the resolution’s effectiveness, the government in Beijing likely will be reluctant to further provoke North Korea in the midst of a tenuous political situation involving the possible succession to Kim’s dictatorship.

“Though North Korea’s recent behavior has angered the Chinese, causing them to lose face, you might suspect they would opt against enforcing the strongest measures,” Szechenyi said. “I would not expect them to take the lead and, without that, this is something that North Korea could well ignore.”

‘Acutely Concerned’

Ambassador Stephen Bosworth, the American special envoy on North Korea, said this week that China is “acutely concerned about what North Korea is doing,” and that the U.S. is satisfied that China is working to rein in North Korea’s behavior.

The measure “cuts off a significant source of funding for the North Korean nuclear and missile programs,” said Philip Parham, U.K. deputy envoy to the UN. “This is not directed against trade and should have no effect on the already hard- pressed people of North Korea.”

The UN’s previously adopted embargo on tanks, artillery and other heavy weapons would be expanded, and the measure asks for vigilance in the sale of light arms to the regime.

On the money front, member nations are urged “not to enter into new commitments for grants, financial assistance, or concessional loans,” or to “provide public financial support for trade” with North Korea.

If North Korea reacts to the strengthened sanctions by testing a third nuclear device or launching another long-range missile, “we’d take it badly,” Parham said.
Nonproliferation Treaty

The resolution “condemns” the May 25 detonation, and demands that North Korea halt its nuclear and ballistic missile programs. The government in Pyongyang also should remain a part to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and rejoin talks with China, Russia, Japan, South Korea and the U.S.

Bosworth said this week that the U.S. is considering targeting North Korean financial deposits held in other countries as part of the effort to compel the regime to change its behavior.

To contact the reporter on this story: Bill Varner at the United Nations at wvarner@bloomberg.net; Peter S. Green in New York at psgreen@bloomberg.net.

PALS can't govern Gaza, let alone their own state - what a joke!

image by rees

Gaza has become a cesspool since Israel vacated it for the peace process. Gaza is a gigantic welfare state supported by the United Nations. The only products the Palestinians export are terrorists and their state-of-the-art suicide bombers, which they now offer in the female versions.

They destroyed the infrastructure that Israel left them. Their mosques, schools and media preach nothing but hate for Western Civilization and Jews in particular. This won't and can't be reversed by this wonderful "peace process" that Obama is trying to shove down everyone's throat. Obama shows his ignorance by believing it can all be just that simple. What a moron!
Rees

from The Jerusalem Post
June 13, 2009
by the Associated Press in Beirut

President Barack Obama's special Mideast envoy George Mitchell said Friday that Washington supports the creation of a Palestinian state "as soon as possible."

Mitchell also sought to reassure Lebanon that US efforts toward a comprehensive peace in the Middle East - including reaching out to Syria and Iran - would not come at Lebanon's expense.

Some Lebanese are wary of Washington's outreach to Syria, which dominated the politically fractured country for decades and continues to maintain some influence through its support of the powerful Hizbullah terror group.

"President Obama remains committed to actively and aggressively seeking comprehensive peace in the Middle East. This includes supporting the establishment of a Palestinian state as a homeland for the Palestinian people as soon as possible," Mitchell told reporters in Beirut.

Mitchell spoke after talks with President Michel Suleiman and Prime Minister Fuad Saniora in Lebanon, his latest stop on a Mideast tour that will also take him to Syria.

The tour follows the Obama administration's new efforts to revive the stalled peace process. It comes just a week after Obama's landmark speech to the Muslim world in Cairo in which he promised to work aggressively to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Obama specifically demanded Israel freeze all settlement construction on land Palestinians claim for their future state and endorse the concept of such a state - something Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has so far refused to do, leading to the most public US-Israel disagreement in a decade.

Mitchell is the first high-ranking US official to visit Lebanon since a pro-Western coalition defeated the Iranian-backed Hizbullah in Sunday's parliamentary election.

Mitchell stressed that "there can be no lasting solution reached at Lebanon's expense."

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and other US officials have said before that Beirut does not have to fear that Washington's efforts to engage Syria could hurt Lebanon.

Lebanese factions have long been concerned that an improvement of US-Syrian relations might help restore Syria's influence in Lebanon.

Syria caved to international pressure and withdrew its troops from Lebanon after the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, a killing many Lebanese blamed on Damascus. Syria has denied the claim.

The Lebanese also worry an Arab-Israeli settlement could prompt many of the 400,000 Palestinian refugees that live in the country to stay permanently, altering Lebanon's delicate sectarian demographic balance.

Lebanese officials stressed their opposition to such an outcome in meetings with the US envoy.

Before leaving for Syria, Mitchell also held talks with Saad Hariri, the billionaire businessman and son of the slain former prime minister, who is emerging as the favorite to lead Lebanon's government after the election. Hariri, 39, is leader of the largest parliamentary bloc in the winning coalition.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Hey Obama: Ahmadinejad won! The debate is still a go...

image by rees

Tehran: Ahmadinejad wins second presidential term up to 2013
DEBKAfile Special Report
June 13, 2009

Tehran rules: Ahmadinejad is the winner. Mousavi claims election irregularities

With most of the votes counted, the election committee chairman in Tehran awarded president Mahound Ahmadinejad a 66 percent victory over his main reformist challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi's 33 percent with the remainder divided among the two last contestants in Iran's highly-charged presidential election. .

Earlier, Mousavi claimed to have toppled the president with 65 percent of the record-breaking turnout and alleged widespread irregularities. His disappointed supporters clashed with police in Tehran when the apparent results unfolded.

Turnout is estimated to top 80 percent of Iran's 46 million eligible voters. If the official results are confirmed, no run-off will be necessary.

DEBKAfile's Iranian sources report that the Islamic Republic's authorities appear to have swung into action to ensure the hard-line president's re-election and try and stop Moussavi, whose promise of change attracted many of the under-30s who make up three-quarters of the electorate.

The apparent freedom of debate permitted in the election campaign was held up in the West as denoting a certain easing in the regime's autocratic rule and a pointer to Mousavi's election which was heavily staked by the US administration, Western and Israeli media. DEBKAfile's Iranian sources report that in Tehran, the winner is preparing to raise the ante for consenting to dialogue with the parties who backed his rival.

While improving its image abroad, the authorities were accused by Mousavi's supporters of quietly preparing mechanisms to rig the results to make sure Ahmadinejad won the election in the first round.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly 400 published June 11 disclosed some of the alleged ruses:

Interior minister Sadeqh Mahsooli was accused of planting "mirror ballot boxes" at voting stations, pre-stuffed with mostly Ahmadinejad ballots ready to switch with the real ballots in precincts where opposition support was preponderant. [Sounds like ACORN at work - my comment]

By not requiring voters to present photo IDs and running off more than a million fake IDs in Qatar for use by the hundreds of thousands of loyal "bassij" (voluntary militiamen), the Tehran establishment made it possible for a huge number of voters to cast ballots in more than one polling station and substantially pad Ahmadinejad's support.

The Iranian government also set up a vast number of mobile ballots where voters were not required to provide their addresses. In former elections, bogus votes were uncovered by comparing the numbers cast with the number of registered voters in a given precinct. This kind of supervision is ruled out by mobile stations.

Crucial policies are not determined by the president but by the clerical establishment headed by the supreme ruler and the president of Iran

And Obama Comes A Crumblin' Down

image modified by rees

from Dick Morris.com
By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann
Published in the New York Post on June 11, 2009

It’s increasingly looking like President Obama may be sunk by his own deficit.

Yes, the recession started under George W. Bush — and voters will still blame him for unemployment and related woes. But rising interest rates and inflation are the coming fears — and Americans will increasingly see Obama’s big-spending ways as the cause.

Deficit spending has always been Americans’ bete noir; the gospel of balanced budgets is deeply ingrained in our political and economic psyche. Through all the Keynesian experiments of the ’60s and ’70s, voters remained committed to a balanced budget. They worried as deficits rose in the Reagan years — then calmed as the economy turned up.

But when the news turned bad under the first President George Bush, they blamed the deficit — the issue was a major source of Ross Perot’s appeal in the 1992 election. And when President Bill Clinton (and a Republican Congress) finally balanced the budget, the economy bloomed — reinforcing public beliefs about the dangers of deficits.

Still in shock over the financial collapse, voters tolerated the massive government stimulus package in January. But now they’re starting to turn on the deficit-makers.

In the latest Gallup Poll, Obama’s favorability remains high (67 percent), as does his job-approval rating (61 percent). But only 55 percent approve of his handling of the economy, just 45 percent approve of his handling of federal spending and only 46 percent approve of his treatment of the budget deficit.

Meanwhile, the Rasmussen poll finds that the public now trusts Republicans over Democrats in managing the economy (for the first time in two years) by 42 percent to 36 percent.

There lies the president’s vulnerability. As the consensus among economists and journalists grows that the deficit is pushing up interest rates and weakening the dollar, Obama’s weakest link will come under strain. If, say, the falling dollar pushes up gasoline prices and rising interest rates kill off any revival in the construction industry, the deficit will cause a perfect economic storm for the president.

The United States has to borrow a net $3 trillion to $4 trillion over the next two years — far more than the $1 trillion a year average of the last three years. Obama may well face a tough choice: Print more money (monetizing the debt), triggering a run on the dollar — or let interest rates skyrocket, killing off the recovery.

Alternately, he could raise taxes to try to fund his programs (particularly his health-care proposals). But even tax hikes confined to the upper brackets will undermine his popularity — and slow the economy.

Plus, voters will fear that the added government spending will just grow the deficit further. They won’t believe Obama’s claims that he can save by spending, worrying instead that he’s just on another big spending spree.

Indeed, deficit fears — rather than concerns about whether the program will work, or even opposition to the needed tax hikes — may prove to be the telling argument against Obama’s health-care plans.

The one thing Obama should do is the one thing he won’t do: cut spending.

The public has begun to realize that the stimulus package is doing little to help the economy. Obama’s answer is to ramp up spending — but voters in the Rasmussen poll believe, 45-36, that he should cancel the rest of the stimulus outlays.

Stoked by ongoing bad economic news, the firm public conviction that new deficit spending will do more harm than good will increasingly wear on Obama’s popularity — and may bring him down.

Hey Obama: Americans Say Your Takeover Of GM Sucks!

image by rees

from Fox News
June 11, 2009

Most Americans are unhappy with the actions the federal government has taken with General Motors, and people are uncertain about GM's future -- even with the government's help, according to a FOX News poll released Thursday.

Considering economic conditions overall, most people say things haven't been this bad since the Great Depression. Views are split, however, over whether the economy is getting better or worse.

By 58 percent to 38 percent voters across the country say they disapprove of the government takeover and majority ownership stake in General Motors. Majorities of Republicans (79 percent) and independents (59 percent) think it was a bad move, as well as a sizable minority of Democrats (39 percent).

And by an 8 percentage point margin slightly more Americans think the government should have let the market decide GM's fate (52 percent) than believe it was in the country's best interest to save the car maker (44 percent).

A majority of Democrats (62 percent) support the government intervening in GM, while majorities of Republicans (72 percent) and independents (54 percent) back letting market forces decide.

Does the government takeover mean GM will get back on track? When asked to look five years down the road, about half of Americans think the company will be profitable (22 percent) or breaking even (32 percent). Others are more pessimistic, including about one in five (21 percent) who think GM will be out of business, and 17 percent think it will still be losing money.

Among Democrats, who are more likely to support the government takeover, nearly a third think GM will either be gone (15 percent) or still showing red ink (13 percent).

Opinion Dynamics Corp. conducted the national telephone poll of 900 registered voters for FOX News from June 9 to June 10. The poll has a 3-point error margin.

Labor unions have been front and center in the government's rescue of GM -- and Chrysler as well. The largest number of Americans -- 43 percent -- think labor unions have too much influence on the Obama administration, 29 percent say the right amount and 12 percent too little influence.

Economic Conditions

The public is split on how things are going today, as about equal numbers say the economy is getting better (40 percent) as say it is getting worse (42 percent). Even this question reveals a partisan divide: Half of Democrats (50 percent) say things are getting better -- that's almost double the number of Republicans (27 percent) who feel the same way. A 57 percent majority of Republicans say things are getting worse. Independents split: 41 percent better and 41 percent worse.

Similarly, when asked if the government stimulus spending is working, 46 percent of Americans say yes, while almost as many people -- 39 percent -- say no. Three months ago sentiments were reversed, as 38 percent thought government actions were working and 44 percent disagreed (3-4 March 2009).

Nearly two-thirds of Americans (65 percent) think the country is in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

Do the tough times make you more appreciative for what you have? You bet -- 84 percent say they feel more grateful these days. Only 9 percent are "angry" they don't have as much as they used to have.

Among the car companies tested, Ford -- which has not taken government bailout money -- has the highest favorable rating at 72 percent, followed by Honda at 69 percent favorable. Just under half of Americans have a positive view of General Motors (48 percent) and Chrysler (46 percent).

Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Swine flu declared a pandemic - no vaccine available

from Yahoo News
by Maria Cheng And Frank Jordans
Associated Press Writer

GENEVA – The World Health Organization told its member nations it was declaring a swine flu pandemic Thursday — the first global flu epidemic in 41 years — as infections climbed in the United States, Europe, Australia, South America and elsewhere.

In a statement sent to health officials, WHO said it decided to raise the pandemic warning level from phase 5 to 6 — its highest alert — after holding an emergency meeting with its flu experts.

WHO chief Dr. Margaret Chan was expected to make a formal announcement on the pandemic later Thursday.

The long-awaited pandemic decision is scientific confirmation that a new flu virus has emerged and is quickly circling the globe. It will trigger drugmakers to speed up production of a swine flu vaccine and prompt governments to devote more money toward efforts to contain the virus.

"At this early stage, the pandemic can be characterized globally as being moderate in severity," WHO said in the statement, urging nations not to close borders or restrict travel and trade.

WHO also told countries it was in "close dialogue" with flu vaccine makers and it believed the firms would work "to ensure the largest possible supply of pandemic vaccine in the months to come."

Flu vaccine makers like GlaxoSmithKline PLC and Sanofi-Aventis have been working since last month on a swine flu vaccine. GlaxoSmithKline spokesman Stephen Rea said the company was ready to start making swine flu vaccine in large quantities once it finished its regular flu vaccine production in July.

On Wednesday, WHO said 74 countries had reported nearly 27,737 cases of swine flu, including 141 deaths. The agency has stressed that most cases have been mild and required no treatment, but the fear is that a rash of new infections could overwhelm hospitals and health authorities — especially in poorer countries.

Still, about half of the people who have died from swine flu, also known by its scientific name H1N1, were previously young and healthy — people who are not usually susceptible to flu.

Swine flu is also continuing to spread during the start of summer in the northern hemisphere. Normally, flu viruses disappear with warm weather, but swine flu is proving to be resilient.

The last pandemic — the Hong Kong flu of 1968 — killed about 1 million people. Ordinary flu kills about 250,000 to 500,000 people each year.

Many health experts say WHO's pandemic declaration could have come weeks earlier but the agency became bogged down by politics. In May, several countries urged WHO not to declare a pandemic, fearing it would cause social and economic turmoil.

"This is WHO finally catching up with the facts," said Michael Osterholm, a flu expert at the University of Minnesota who has advised the U.S. government on pandemic preparations.

Despite WHO's hopes, raising the epidemic alert to the highest level will almost certainly spark some panic about spread of swine flu.

Fear has already gripped Argentina, where thousands worried about swine flu flooded into hospitals this week, bringing emergency health services in Buenos Aires, the capital, to the brink of collapse. Last month, a bus arriving in Argentina from Chile was stoned by people who thought a passenger on it had swine flu. Chile has the most swine flu cases in South America.

In Hong Kong on Thursday, the government ordered all kindergartens and primary schools closed for two weeks after a dozen students tested positive for swine flu — a move that some health experts would consider an overreaction.

In the United States, where there have been more than 13,000 cases and at least 27 deaths from swine flu, officials at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said the move would not change how the U.S. tackled swine flu.

"Our actions in the past month have been as if there was a pandemic in this country," Glen Nowak, a CDC spokesman, said Thursday.

The U.S. government has already taken steps like increasing availability of flu-fighting medicines and authorizing $1 billion for the development of a new vaccine against the novel virus. In addition, new cases seem to be declining in many parts of the country, U.S. health officials say, as North America moves out of its traditional winter flu season.

Still, Osterholm said Thursday's decision was a wake-up call for the world.

"I think a lot of people think we're done with swine flu, but you can't fall asleep at the wheel," he said. "We don't know what's going to happen in the next 6 to 12 months."

AP Medical Writer Maria Cheng reported from London. AP Medical Writer Mike Stobbe in Atlanta and reporters Jill Lawless in London, Dikky Sinn in Hong Kong, Vincente L. Panetta in Buenos Aires and Bradley S. Klapper in Geneva also contributed to this report.

Obama Insults Israel With Oval Office Picture

image modified by rees

Some Israelis Insulted By Obama Picture
from CBS News
Posted by Howard Arenstein

Israeli TV newscasters Tuesday night interpreted a photo taken Monday in the Oval Office of President Obama talking on the phone with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as an "insult" to Israel.

They saw the incident as somewhat akin to an incident last year, when the Iraqi reporter threw a shoe at President Bush in Baghdad.

It is considered an insult in the Arab world to show the sole of your shoe to someone. It is not a Jewish custom necessarily, but Israel feels enough a part of the Middle East after 60 years to be insulted too.

Was there a subliminal message intended from the White House to Netanyahu in Jerusalem, who is publicly resisting attempts by Mr. Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to force Israel to stop any kind of settlement activity in occupied territories once and forever?

Whether or not it is true, it shows the mood in Israel. They feel cornered. The reactions out of Israel reflect that feeling.

Netanyahu is making a speech Sunday, in part as a response to Mr. Obama's address to the Arab world last week in Cairo.

Israel's Channel One TV reported that Netanyahu was told Tuesday by an "American official" in Jerusalem that, "We are going to change the world. Please, don't interfere." The report said Netanyahu's aides interpreted this as a "threat."

Netanyahu met with George Mitchell today for four hours in Jerusalem. The State Department announced this afternoon that Mitchell will be stopping in Beirut and Damascus when he finishes his visits to Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

Click to read the more than 500 comments

Known Terrorists Were On Board Air France 447

from Sky News
by Peter Allen in Paris

Two passengers with names linked to Islamic terrorism were on the Air France flight which crashed with the loss of 228 lives, it has emerged.

French secret servicemen established the connection while working through the list of those who boarded the doomed Airbus in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on May 31.

Flight AF 447 crashed in the mid-Atlantic en route to Paris during a violent storm.

While it is certain there were computer malfunctions, terrorism has not been ruled out.

Soon after news of the fatal crash broke, agents working for the DGSE (Direction Générale de la Sécurité Extérieure), the French equivalent of MI6, were dispatched to Brazil.

It was there that they established that two names on the passenger list are also on highly-classified documents listing the names of radical Muslims considered a threat to the French Republic.

A source working for the French security services told Paris weekly L'Express that the link was "highly significant".

Agents are now trying to establish dates of birth for the two dead passengers, and family connections.

There is a possibility the name similarities are simply a "macabre coincidence", the source added, but the revelation is still being "taken very seriously".

France has received numerous threats from Islamic terrorist groups in recent months, especially since French troops were sent to fight in Afghanistan.

Security chiefs have been particularly worried about airborne suicide attacks similar to the ones on the US on September 11, 2001.

New Chairman of GM: "I don't know Jack about cars!" - he actually said "anything"

This should make the taxpayers who involunteerily invested billons into GM, feel good about the odds that GM might actually recover. Nice job Obama! Way to install the right people into the critical positions to give GM it's best chance to survive. You have your car czar who doesn't know Jack, choose a chairman of the board who also doesn't know Jack.

Hey Obama: You, the new GM CEO and the new Chairman of the Board are all morons. Good luck on your future success.
Rees

from Cheat-Seeking Missiles
by Laer
June 10, 2009

"I don’t know anything about cars.” - Edward E. Whitacre, Jr., Newly
Annointed Chairman Of GM

I really can’t believe I’m in America, reading in American media what an American president is doing to an American enterprise. But I am. It is true. The government has named a new chairman for General Motors. Not the GM board of directors, not the shareholders, but Steven Rattner, Obama’s car czar, who knows about as much about cars as the new chairman, Edward Whitacre.

This is far more radical than anything I thought Obama would be able to pull off, even in eight years, let alone 14 weeks. Following on yesterday’s SCOTUS decision which said, basically, a contract is no longer a contract so investors can expect no protections, the critical condition of glorious American capitalism could not be more apparent. I worry that it will not survive until 2010’s mid-term elections.

Whitacre was picked for two reasons. The published one is that he guided AT&T through the transition from land-based wire telephone carrier to a leader in the wireless industry. The Obamaites see a similar future for GM, with it transforming from a market-driven car company to a government-driven car company, manufacturing cars Big Brother wants us to drive, whether we want to or not.

The unspoken reason for his selection is because Whitacre can be counted on to do what government tells him to do, as was evident when he quickly (and rightly) acquiesced to government pressure to open AT&T’s hardware to the feds for post-9/11 surveillance purposes. Not all telcom CEOs folded so quickly to government pressure, and since folding to government pressure is what’s in store for GM, Whitacre will make an ideal Obama-era chairman for the company.

The appointment should infuriate the Left. Besides being a lackey to George Bush’s gestapo security machine, Whitacre received a peon-snubbing $158.8 million retirement package from AT&T and was involved in some pretty brutal corporate downsizings (probably in no small part due to shifting jobs overseas). Oh, and let’s not forget that under his tenure AT&T censored (oops!) a Pearl Jam concert right when the band was blasting George Bush.

But Daily Kos has nothing posted on him as of his hour. Democratic Underground? Mum. [By the way, I typed "democraticunderground" instead of "democraticunderground.com," and was redirected to one of those stupid sponsored-link pages. Guess who came out on top? Barbara Boxer!] As for Huffington Post, which as I predicted in a tweet earlier today leads with how Homeland Security foresaw today’s attack on the Holocaust Museum in its report on right-wing radicalism, it also couldn’t find a reason to cover - let alone criticize - Whitacre’s appointment.

Of course not. They know what’s going on. Their long-awaited revolution is happening and they don’t want to crow about it too early because suddenly they’re very concerned about the enemy getting wind of our intentions. Not al-Qaeda - tell them anything - they don’t want their enemy, normal Americans, to wake up to what’s going on. No, they want to be much further down the road to economic ruin in the name of wealth redistribution before they haul out the red flags and have a victory parade.
Click to read the comments and other excellent articles at Cheat-Seeking Missiles