Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Tinderbox: Syria warns NATO over action against Turkish plane- Turkey promises ‘decisive’ response
Posted on June 25, 2012
http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2012/06/25/tinderbox-syria-warns-nato-over-action-against-turkish-plane-turkey-promises-decisive-response/
June 25, 2012 – MIDDLE EAST - Syria described its shooting down of a Turkish warplane as an act of self-defense and warned Turkey and its NATO allies against any retaliatory measures. In shell-shattered districts of Homs, heart of a 16-month-old revolt against President Bashar al-Assad, rebels battled troops as aide workers tried to evacuate civilians. Turkish television reported the desertion of a Syrian general and other officers across the border. Syria’s account of Friday’s shooting down, though tempered with commitment to a “neighborly relationship,” seemed likely to further anger Ankara, which has summoned a NATO meeting on Tuesday over what it calls an unprovoked attack in international air space. “NATO is supposed to be there to strengthen countries,” Syrian Foreign Ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi told a Damascus news conference. “If their meeting is for hostile reasons (they should know that) Syrian land and waters are sacred.” Turkey says the wreckage of the aircraft, shot down close to the Mediterranean maritime borders of both states, is lying in deep water. Makdissi said some flotsam had been found and turned over to Turkey. There was no word on the two airmen. “The plane disappeared and then reappeared in Syrian airspace, flying at 100 meters altitude and about 1-2kms (0.6-1.2 miles) from the Syrian coast,” he said. “We had to react immediately, even if the plane was Syrian we would have shot it down. The Syrian response was an act of defense of our sovereignty carried out by anti-aircraft machinegun which has a maximum range of 2.5 km.” In Ankara, Turkish air force chiefs briefed both President Abdullah Gul, the commander of the armed forces, and the cabinet on what Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said would be a “decisive” response. Turkey also said it would take the matter to the United Nations Security Council. –Reuters
The Exodus: Dozens of members of Syria’s military defected to Turkey overnight with their families, a Turkish official said Monday, at a time of heightened tensions between the two countries over Syria’s downing of a Turkish military plane. The state-run Anadolu news agency said 33 soldiers crossed into Turkey overnight and the group — 224 people in all — included a general and two colonels. A government official, however, said the group included three colonels and there was no general among them. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity in line with government rules, did not know the overall number of defectors and the two accounts could not immediately be reconciled. The defections come three days after Syria shot down a Turkish aircraft it said had violated its air space, further fraying relations between the two countries that were once allies. Nato-member Turkey said the plane had unintentionally strayed into Syria’s air space, but was inside international airspace when it was brought down. It has insisted the jet was on a training flight to test Turkey’s radar capabilities and was not spying on Syria. Turkey has summoned a Nato meeting Tuesday to discuss the incident, revoking article 4 of Nato’s founding treaty which allows an ally to request consultations whenever it feels its security is threatened. Anadolu said the group of defectors was placed in a refugee camp in Hatay, a province bordering Syria but there was no further information. Turkey is hosting some 33,000 Syrians who have crossed into Turkey to find refuge from the 15-months old violence. –Gulf News
Good info, gentlemen:)
Travel advisory if traveling to Kentucky (LOL): Woman Super Glued To Toilet Seat Inside Kentucky Walmart
June 22, 2012 1:39 PM
http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2012/06/22/woman-super-glued-to-toilet-seat-inside-kentucky-walmart/
MONTICELLO, Ky. (CBS Cleveland) — Better be careful the next time you want to use the bathroom at a Walmart.
Police were called to the store in Monticello, Ky., because a woman was glued to the toilet seat.
WLEX-TV reports that woman was stuck for more than an hour on the toilet because the seat was covered in super glue.
The unidentified woman was taken to the hospital after emergency responders were able to get her off.
“We are looking at it,” Chief Ralph Miniard of the Monticello Police Department told WAVE-TV. “Right now I wouldn’t be prepared to say if it was accidental or intentional.”
Walmart has yet to comment on the case.
WATCHDOGS: Solons worry Medicare billions going to Castro, Cuba
June 22, 2012
Mark Tapscott
Executive editor
The Washington Examiner
@mtapscott
Two U.S. senators and a representative worry that billions of tax dollars could be going to Cuba and other foreign countries via criminal schemes designed to defraud Medicare and Medicaid.
The schemes often involve the use of “nominees,” individuals who are paid to be fronts for the actual owners of corporate entities being used in the fraudulent operation. By concealing the identities of true owners, the approach invites its use to funnel tax dollars out of the country.
In a letter made public yesterday to Marilyn Tavenner, acting administrator of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid, senators Orrin Hatch, R-UT, and Tom Coburn, R-OK, were joined by Rep. Peter Roskam, R-IL, said they fear billions of tax dollars are being lost annually as a result.
“Clearly, the program vulnerabilities that facilitate billions of dollars to be stolen from the Medicare program each year also allow for some of that money to be funneled to foreign countries,” the three congressmen said.
“While the fraud itself is unacceptable, the loss of American dollars to foreign countries because of flaws in our system is totally unacceptable. The American people deserve the peace of mind to know that federal officials are doing everything they can to safeguard taxpayers’ dollars and the Medicare program.”
“Thus far, it does not appear that CMS has addressed the concept of nominee owners, false storefronts, and shell companies in any of its enrollment regulations or its Provider Screening statement of work,” they said.
Earlier this week, federal officials in Miami charged Oscar Sanchez in connection with a criminal operation that resulted in an estimated $31 million going to Cuban banks.
“Prosecutors say Oscar Sanchez, 46, was a key leader in a group that funneled $31 million in Medicare dollars into banks in Havana — the first such case that directly traces money fleeced from the beleaguered program into the Cuban banking system,” the Miami Herald reported Monday.
“Most of the money moved through an intricate web of foreign shell companies before ending up in Cuba, to avoid being detected in the United States, said investigators,” the Herald said.
Also earlier this week, federal officials announced the capture of two other individuals who had been involved in multi-million dollar frauds with overseas connections. In one, Irina Shelikhova was arrested Monday at JFK Airport in New York when shetried to re-enter the country from the Ukraine.
“From approximately March 2005 until July 2010, Shelikhova and her co-conspirators allegedly paid cash kickbacks to Medicare beneficiaries to induce them to receive unnecessary physicians’ services, physical therapy, and diagnostic tests at the medical clinics,” according to the Inspector-General of the Department of Health and Human Services.
“The co-conspirators created fraudulent medical records for these beneficiaries and then filed false claims with Medicare for these medical services, which either were never provided or were not medically necessary,” the HHS IG said.
Shelikhova and her co-conspirators are believed to have defrauded Medicare of as much as $70 million.
In the second case, federal officials arrested Miguel Cabello last week when he attempted to re-enter the country through Champlain, New York.
Cabello fled the country to Cuba in July 2008 after being indicted on health care fraud charges. “Cabello submitted approximately $2.1 million in fraudulent Medicare claims on behalf of south-Florida-based OB Pharmacy, Inc., and he received approximately $1.3 million in Medicare payments,” according to the HHS IG.
“Before Cabello’s involvement, OB Pharmacy, a durable medical equipment company that specialized in aerosol medications, submitted $151,572 in Medicare claims and was paid approximately $58,653.
“Around April 2008, Cabello became vice-president of OB Pharmacy. Investigators have concluded that OB Pharmacy submitted claims to Medicare for services that were not rendered, including approximately 10 claims for deceased beneficiaries.
“Investigators interviewed physicians who stated that they did not know the OB Pharmacy patients in question nor did they prescribe the medication purportedly provided to them.”
In their letter to Tavenner, Hatch, Coburn and Roskam cited a University of Miami report that quoted a former Cuban intelligence officer saying there are “strong indications” that the Castro government aids Medicare fraud, especially in South Florida, and provides safe harbor for individuals involved in those efforts.
“If confirmed, this indicates that Medicare program dollars are not only funding international criminal syndicates, but may be helping prop up the Castro government,” the congressmen said.
Back in April, Hatch and Coburn were joined in another letter to Tavenner by representatives Charles Boustenay, R-LA, and Wally Herger, R-CA, on the nominees issue, and expressed concern then that the problem was not being addressed.
The HHS IG “has expressed concerns regarding the use of nominee owners and recommended that CMS take aggressive action to identify them,” they wrote. “Thus far, it does not appear that CMS has addressed the concept of nominee owners, false storefronts, and shell companies …”
Probably just good Christians....
lol
House bill extends TSA intel sharing to mass transit (re volt is getting closer??)
Friday - 6/22/2012, 1:20pm ET
By Jolie Lee
@jleeWFED
The Transportation Security Administration already shares intelligence it collects with airports. Now a House bill would expand TSA's intel sharing to local mass transit systems as well.
Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), the bill's sponsor, said the legislation is a "common sense approach" to fighting terrorism. The House passed the bill May 30 and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is now considering the bill.
In an interview with The Federal Drive with Tom Temin and Emily Kopp, Speier said the bill creates "fusion centers" where TSA can provide intel to local law enforcement and emergency management officials.
"We have put in place through TSA a very elaborate system [in airports]. We all go through those metal detectors and those secondary searches. And we've put a lot of focus on the airlines for good reason. But we have neglected the mass transit components, generally speaking," she said.
Speier said 2 million people fly each day compared with more than 5 million who ride the subway each day in New York City alone. She pointed out that the most recent terrorist attacks have been on mass transit. Also, when U.S. Special Forces raided Osama Bin Laden's compound last year, intelligence gathered revealed the next attack was intended for mass transit.
"The writing is on the wall. We need to be better prepared than we are right now," Speier said.
Transit riders probably won't see more TSA agents in subways or bus stops, though, Speier said. The expanded TSA role falls more on analysts, she said.
Interview note: Speier mentioned she carries two bullets in her body. She was shot during the Jonestown Massacre in 1978 while working as a congressional aide. Her boss, Rep. Leo Ryan (D-Calif.), was killed in that attack.
Target: Syrian WMD (like Iraq's WMD, ???)
U.S. concerned Israel may launch attacks on Syrian WMD sites
http://freebeacon.com/target-syrian-wmd/
BY: Bill Gertz - June 22, 2012 5:00 am
U.S. intelligence agencies are closely watching Israel’s military for signs it will conduct strikes on Syria’s stockpiles of chemical weapons, amid concerns the deadly nerve agents could fall under the control of Hezbollah or al Qaeda terrorists, U.S. officials said.
Syria’s arsenal remains vulnerable as the result of the internal conflict currently underway in Syria between government forces and opposition rebels, one official said.
“Everyone suspects Syria maintains an active chemical weapons program; and it would be dangerous not to plan accordingly,” the official said.
As for concerns the weapons will be captured or transferred, the official said: “Most countries that have CW stocks view it as a strategic, not tactical, tool—and strategic tools are usually pretty well protected and aren’t given away lightly.”
However, other U.S. officials said special operations forces are prepared to take action inside Syria in the event the regime falls and the country spirals further into chaos. The teams would seek to secure or destroy stockpiles of chemical arms to keep them from being taken over by terrorists. Hezbollah has been very active in Syria, and there are reports that al Qaeda terrorists have moved into Syria during the current crisis.
The exact size of the Syrian chemical arsenal is not known. The Center for Strategic and International Studies reported several years ago that Syria has stockpiled 500 to 1,000 metric tons of chemical agents. The weapons are said to include long-lasting VX nerve agent and less-persistent Sarin nerve agent, as well as mustard blister agents.
Most but not all of the weapons stockpiles are known to U.S. intelligence agencies.
The New York Times reported Thursday that CIA operatives are working in southern Turkey to coordinate foreign assistance to Syrian rebel forces.
Recent statements by senior Israeli military officials prompted U.S. concerns over an Israeli strike on Syria.
Senior officials in Israel told the newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth that if Syria’s army gave chemical weapons to Hezbollah or other terrorists an Israeli attack would be needed.
The newspaper reported May 31 that Israel failed to prevent Syria’s transfer of M-600 rockets to Hezbollah and the weapons can now threaten central Israel. One military source was quoted as saying that mistake would not be repeated.
Israeli Maj. Gen. Yair Golan, commander of forces deployed on the Syrian and Lebanese front, was quoted in press reports expressing concerns about Syria being used as “a warehouse for war materiel that feeds terrorist elements in the region.”
Golan also said there were reports that al Qaeda terrorists are working against the regime in Damascus and those terrorists eventually would target Israel, perhaps in the coming months.
IDF Deputy Chief Maj. Gen. Yair Naveh also said June 11 that Israeli forces must be on alert because Syria’s military has “the largest chemical weapons arsenal in the region, which can reach any spot in Israel.” He expressed worries that the weapons could “fall into the hands of the rebels or the terrorists.”
A State Department arms compliance report from 2010 stated that Syria is also believed to have an offensive biological weapons program in addition to the chemical arms.
Calls for military intervention could increase if Syrian forces begin using the deadly chemical weapons in battling opposition forces.
A Syrian rebel leader, Col. Riad al-Asaad of the Syrian Free Army, told Al Jazeera June 8 that Syrian military aircraft had dropped chemical bombs that poisoned people, and that government forces had distributed gas masks to troops 10 days earlier in preparation for the use of the weapons against northern areas of the country.
State Department cables disclosed last year revealed Syria had obtained large quantities of chemical weapons precursor agents from China, Italy, and other states.
A July 10, 2008, cable said: “While Syria proclaims its desire to cooperate with the IAEA in investigating serious evidence of a covert nuclear program and allowed an extremely restricted June 22-25 IAEA visit to investigate a covert nuclear program, Syria has never accounted for its [chemical weapons] stocks, refuses to join the Chemical Weapons Convention, and is modernizing its long-range missile systems in cooperation with Russia, North Korea, and other countries.”
“There remain suspicions Syria could be sharing missile technology with Hezbollah,” the cable said, noting, “Just as Washington has done in past demarches regarding Syrian WMD and missile programs, Post believes a new scrub of releasable intelligence would strengthen our arguments regarding the gap between Syrian rhetoric and actions.”
A June 20, 2006, cable reported that Iran was assisting Syria’s chemical warfare program with construction of four to five precursor chemical production facilities.
“Iran would provide the construction design and equipment to annually produce tens to hundreds of tons of precursors for VX, sarin, and mustard,” the cable said.
Those other guys are going to be upset when they see how much David Vitter got and how cheap they sold their soul....
Fear da Muslims!! This is such blul siht
Bill Gates and lab coats....
Throw the BUMS OUT!!
Interesting to see all the bug "invasions". New one of crickets in Texas.
Why the coming collapse of Greece will cause a financial doomsday
Posted on June 22, 2012
http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2012/06/22/why-the-coming-collapse-of-greece-will-cause-a-financial-doomsday/
June 22, 2012 – ECONOMY – If you want to be scared, truly terrified, listen to Mark J. Grant. He might be right. For the past two years, Grant, a managing director at a regional investment bank in Florida, has been predicting the bankruptcy of Greece and a cascade of chaos across the global economy, attracting quite a following on Wall Street in the process. “Greece will be forced to return to the drachma and devalue, and the default will cause bank runs and money flowing into Germany and the United States as the only viable safe haven bets,” he declared in the days before Sunday’s Greek elections, irrespective of which party would win. “Greece will default because there is no other choice regardless of anyone’s politics.” He then walked through the falling dominoes: “It will hit the [European Central Bank], the banks on the other side of the derivatives contracts, all of the Greek banks who are really in default at present and being carried by Europe as well as the nation, and the Greek default will spread the infection in many places that we cannot imagine because so much is hidden and tucked away in the European financial system.” Welcome to Doomsday, brought to you by Grant. He says he doesn’t think of it as such; he calls it “reality.” He told me, almost hopelessly, “There’s only so much money to go around.” In a January 13, 2010, report Grant forecast that Greece would default on its government debts, one of the first to publish such a prognostication. Grant could be the Nouriel Roubini (Dr. Doom) of the European crisis. Roubini, the New York University economist, said the subprime-debt sky was falling for a long time before it fell. Few people listened, in part, because nobody had ever heard of him. Then, of course, the sky fell. Now everybody has heard of him. Time will tell, but soon everybody could know Grant. The January 2010 report, written two years before Greece did indeed default, has made him the go-to forecaster of Europe’s collapse for some of the world’s largest investors. Nicknamed the Wizard, Grant, who works for Southwest Securities, sends out a daily report, often frightening in its detail and matter-of-factness, by email to a who’s who of the world’s biggest institutions, hedge funds and sovereign wealth funds. Subscribers like Bill Gross, a founder of Pimco, the world’s largest bond fund, pay thousands of dollars a year to receive Grant’s views in their in-boxes. Never one to sugarcoat his views, his success is partly a function of his plain-spoken way of making complex ideas simple. -SMH
Syria shoots down Turkish warplane: al-Manar TV
Posted on June 22, 2012
http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2012/06/22/syria-shoots-down-turkish-warplane-al-manar-tv/
June 22, 2012 – TURKEY - Syria shot down a Turkish warplane on Friday, Lebanon’s al-Manar television reported, risking a new crisis between Middle Eastern neighbors already at bitter odds over a 16-month-old revolt against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. “Syrian security sources confirmed to a Manar correspondent in Damascus that Syrian defense forces shot down the Turkish fighter jet,” the Hezbollah-owned channel said. Turkey, which had drawn close to Syria before the uprising against Assad, became one of the Syrian leader’s fiercest critics when he responded violently to pro-democracy protests inspired by popular upheavals elsewhere in the Arab world. Ankara has previously floated the possibility of setting up some kind of safe haven or humanitarian corridor inside Syria, which would entail military intervention, but has said it would undertake no such action without U.N. Security Council approval. Turkey said it had lost contact with one of its military aircraft off its southeastern coast, and a television station said it had crashed in Syrian territorial waters. CNN Turk television said Turkey was in contact with the Syrian authorities to get permission to conduct a search for the airmen, although there was no immediate official confirmation. Turkey’s military said a search and rescue operation was under way. It lost radar and radio contact with the plane after it left Erhac airport in the eastern province of Malatya. Two crew were aboard the F-4 jet, Turkish state news agency Anatolia said, citing Malatya governor Ulvi Saran. Hurriyet daily newspaper reported that the plane had gone down in international waters and that the two airmen had been found alive and well by Turkish forces. –Reuters
Hey BlackThought!!! Good to "see" you:)
Drone strikes threaten 50 years of international law, says UN rapporteur
US policy of using drone strikes to carry out targeted killings 'may encourage other states to flout international law'
Owen Bowcott in Geneva
Thursday 21 June 2012 12.54 EDT
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/21/drone-strikes-international-law-un
In his strongest critique of drone strikes yet, Christof Heynes said some may constitute war crimes. Photograph: Getty Images
The US policy of using aerial drones to carry out targeted killings presents a major challenge to the system of international law that has endured since the second world war, a United Nations investigator has said.
Christof Heyns, the UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings, summary or arbitrary executions, told a conference in Geneva that President Obama's attacks in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere, carried out by the CIA, would encourage other states to flout long-established human rights standards.
In his strongest critique so far of drone strikes, Heyns suggested some may even constitute "war crimes". His comments come amid rising international unease over the surge in killings by remotely piloted unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).
Addressing the conference, which was organised by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), a second UN rapporteur, Ben Emmerson QC, who monitors counter-terrorism, announced he would be prioritising inquiries into drone strikes.
The London-based barrister said the issue was moving rapidly up the international agenda after China and Russia this week jointly issued a statement at the UN Human Rights Council, backed by other countries, condemning drone attacks.
If the US or any other states responsible for attacks outside recognised war zones did not establish independent investigations into each killing, Emmerson emphasised, then "the UN itself should consider establishing an investigatory body".
Also present was Pakistan's ambassador to the UN in Geneva, Zamir Akram, who called for international legal action to halt the "totally counterproductive attacks" by the US in his country.
Heyns, a South African law professor, told the meeting: "Are we to accept major changes to the international legal system which has been in existence since world war two and survived nuclear threats?"
Some states, he added, "find targeted killings immensely attractive. Others may do so in future … Current targeting practices weaken the rule of law. Killings may be lawful in an armed conflict [such as Afghanistan] but many targeted killings take place far from areas where it's recognised as being an armed conflict."
If it is true, he said, that "there have been secondary drone strikes on rescuers who are helping (the injured) after an initial drone attack, those further attacks are a war crime".
Heyns ridiculed the US suggestion that targeted UAV strikes on al-Qaida or allied groups were a legitimate response to the 9/11 attacks. "It's difficult to see how any killings carried out in 2012 can be justified as in response to [events] in 2001," he said. "Some states seem to want to invent new laws to justify new practices.
"The targeting is often operated by intelligence agencies which fall outside the scope of accountability. The term 'targeted killing' is wrong because it suggests little violence has occurred. The collateral damage may be less than aerial bombardment, but because they eliminate the risk to soldiers they can be used more often."
Heyns told the Guardian later that his future inquiries are likely to include the question of whether other countries, such as the UK, share intelligence with the US that could be used for selecting individuals as targets. A legal case has already been lodged in London over the UK's alleged role in the deaths of British citizens and others as a consequence of US drone strikes in Pakistan.
Emmerson said that protection of the right to life required countries to establish independent inquiries into each drone killing. "That needs to be applied in the context of targeted killings," he said. "It's possible for a state to establish an independent ombudsman to inquire into every attack and there needs to be a report to justify [the killing]."
Alternatively, he said, it was "for the UN itself to consider establishing an investigatory body. Drones attacks by the US raise fundamental questions which are a direct consequence of my mandate… If they don't [investigate] themselves, we will do it for them."
It is time, he added, to end the "conspiracy of silence" over drone attacks and "shine the light of independent investigation" into the process. The attacks, he noted, were not only on those who had been killed but on the system of "international law itself".
The Pakistani ambassador declared that more than a thousand civilians had been killed in his country by US drone strikes. "We find the use of drones to be totally counterproductive in terms of succeeding in the war against terror. It leads to greater levels of terror rather than reducing them," he said.
Claims made by the US about the accuracy of drone strikes were "totally incorrect", he added. Victims who had tried to bring compensation claims through the Pakistani courts had been blocked by US refusals to respond to legal actions.
The US has defended drone attacks as self-defence against al-Qaida and has refused to allow judicial scrutiny of the UAV programme. On Wednesday, the Obama administration issued a fresh rebuff through the US courts to an ACLU request for information about targeting policies. Such details, it insisted, must remain "classified".
Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU's national security project, said: "Something that is being debated in UN hallways and committee rooms cannot apparently be talked about in US courtrooms, according to the government. Whether the CIA is involved in targeted lethal operation is now classified. It's an absurd fiction."
The ACLU estimates that as many as 4,000 people have been killed in US drone strikes since 2002 in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. Of those, a significant proportion were civilians. The numbers killed have escalated significantly since Obama became president.
The USA is not a signatory to the International Criminal Court (ICC) or many other international legal forums where legal action might be started. It is, however, part of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) where cases can be initiated by one state against another.
Ian Seiderman, director of the International Commission of Jurists, told the conference that "immense damage was being done to the fabric of international law".
One of the latest UAV developments that concerns human rights groups is the way in which attacks, they allege, have moved towards targeting groups based on perceived patterns of behaviour that look suspicious from aerial surveillance, rather than relying on intelligence about specific al-Qaida activists.
In response to a report by Heyns to the UN Human Rights Council this week, the US put out a statement in Geneva saying there was "unequivocal US commitment to conducting such operations with extraordinary care and in accordance with all applicable law, including the law of war".
It added that there was "continuing commitment to greater transparency and a sincere effort to address some of the important questions that have been raised".
Strassel: Axelrod's ObamaCare Dollars Emails suggest the White House pushed business to the presidential adviser's former firm to sell the health-care law.
POTOMAC WATCHUpdated June 21, 2012, 7:29 p.m. ET
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304765304577480871706139792.html?mod=hp_opinion
Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod
Rewind to 2009. The fight over ObamaCare is raging, and a few news outlets report that something looks ethically rotten in the White House. An outside group funded by industry is paying the former firm of senior presidential adviser David Axelrod to run ads in favor of the bill. That firm, AKPD Message and Media, still owes Mr. Axelrod money and employs his son.
The story quickly died, but emails recently released by the House Energy and Commerce Committee ought to resurrect it. The emails suggest the White House was intimately involved both in creating this lobby and hiring Mr. Axelrod's firm—which is as big an ethical no-no as it gets.
Mr. Axelrod—who left the White House last year—started AKPD in 1985. The firm earned millions helping run Barack Obama's 2008 campaign. Mr. Axelrod moved to the White House in 2009 and agreed to have AKPD buy him out for $2 million. But AKPD chose to pay Mr. Axelrod in annual installments—even as he worked in the West Wing. This agreement somehow passed muster with the Office of Government Ethics, though the situation at the very least should have walled off AKPD from working on White-House priorities.
It didn't. The White House and industry were working hand-in-glove to pass ObamaCare in 2009, and among the vehicles supplying ad support was an outfit named Healthy Economy Now (HEN). News stories at the time described this as a "coalition" that included the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the American Medical Association, and labor groups—suggesting these entities had started and controlled it.
House emails show HEN was in fact born at an April 15, 2009 meeting arranged by then-White House aide Jim Messina and a chief of staff for Democratic Sen. Max Baucus. The two politicos met at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) and invited representatives of business and labor.
.A Service Employees International Union attendee sent an email to colleagues noting she'd been invited by the Baucus staffer, explaining: "Also present was Jim Messina. . . . They basically want to see adds linking HC reform to the economy. . . . there were not a lot of details, but we were told that we wd be getting a phone call. well that call came today."
The call was from Nick Baldick, a Democratic consultant who had worked on the Obama campaign and for the DSCC. Mr. Baldick started HEN. The only job of PhRMA and others was to fund it.
Meanwhile, Mr. Axelrod's old firm was hired to run the ads promoting ObamaCare. At the time, a HEN spokesman said HEN had done the hiring. But the emails suggest otherwise. In email after email, the contributors to HEN refer to four men as the "White House" team running health care. They included John Del Cecato and Larry Grisolano (partners at AKPD), as well as Andy Grossman (who once ran the DSCC) and Erik Smith, who had been a paid adviser to the Obama presidential campaign.
In one email, PhRMA consultant Steve McMahon calls these four the "WH-designated folks." He explains to colleagues that Messrs. Grossman, Grisolano and Del Cecato "are very close to Axelrod," and that "they have been put in charge of the campaign to pass health reform." Ron Pollack, whose Families USA was part of the HEN coalition, explained to colleagues that "the team that is working with the White House on health-care reform. . . . [Grossman, Smith, Del Cecato, Grisolano] . . . would like to get together with us." This would provide "guidance from the White House about their messaging."
According to White House visitor logs, Mr. Smith had 28 appointments scheduled between May and August—17 made through Mr. Messina or his assistant. Mr. Grossman appears in the logs at least 19 times. Messrs. Del Cecato and Grisolano of AKPD also visited in the spring and summer, at least twice with Mr. Axelrod, who was deep in the health-care fight.
A 2009 PhRMA memo also makes clear that AKPD had been chosen before PhRMA joined HEN. It's also clear that some contributors didn't like the conflict of interest. When, in July 2009, a media outlet prepared to report AKPD's hiring, a PhRMA participant said: "This is a big problem." Mr. Baldick advises: "just say, AKPD is not working for PhRMA." AKPD and another firm, GMMB, would handle $12 million in ad business from HEN and work for a successor 501(c)4.
A basic rule of White House ethics is to avoid even the appearance of self-dealing or nepotism. If Mr. Axelrod or his West Wing chums pushed political business toward Mr. Axelrod's former firm, they contributed to his son's salary as well as to the ability of the firm to pay Mr. Axelrod what it still owed him. Could you imagine the press frenzy if Karl Rove had dome the same after he joined the White House?
Messrs. Axelrod and Messina are now in Chicago running Mr. Obama's campaign. Mr. Axelrod, the White House and a partner for AKPD didn't respond to requests for comment on their role in HEN, the tapping of Mr. Baldick, and the redolent hiring of AKPD. Until the White House explains all this, voters can fairly conclude that the President's political team took their Chicago brand of ethics into the White House.
Write to kim@wsj.com
Euro's big four seek way out of crisis in Rome
By Gavin Jones
ROME | Fri Jun 22, 2012 1:57am EDT
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/22/us-eurozone-meeting-idUSBRE85L07C20120622
(Reuters) - The leaders of Germany, France, Italy and Spain will try to find common ground in Rome on Friday to restore confidence in the euro zone ahead of a full EU summit next week, with German Chancellor Angela Merkel likely to be outnumbered.
Dangerously high borrowing costs for Spain and Italy have eased a little on market hopes for policy initiatives at the Brussels summit on June 28/29. If it falls short, both countries may be pushed closer to eventually needing sovereign bailouts.
Friday's meeting will search for ways to achieve fiscal and banking union in the euro zone and, more urgently, it may also be the occasion for Spain to formally request assistance of up to 100 billion euros for its struggling banks.
An audit released on Thursday found Spanish banks would need up to 62 billion euros in extra capital to weather adverse circumstances.
Merkel is expected to resist any pressure from Monti, French President Francois Hollande and Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy for less stringent euro zone fiscal policies or the issuance of common euro zone bonds.
While Spain's needs are most pressing - its medium term borrowing costs hit a euro era high at auction on Thursday - the political stakes may be higher for Italy's unelected technocrat prime minister, Mario Monti.
With his popularity sinking, the parties that back Monti in parliament are increasingly reluctant to support his reform proposals at home, but demand he get results in the European arena to ease the pressure on Italy's recession-bound economy.
"Monti knows he has to get his ducks in a row on the European side so he can tell the parties that he's sorted that part out, and now it's their turn to help sort out Italy," said James Walston, politics professor at the American University in Rome.
"Friday's summit is important for Monti in symbolic terms because it shows Italians that he is centre-stage."
Though hugely popular when he came to office in November, his approval rating has halved as tax hikes and pension cuts exacerbated an already severe recession, and his labor reform estranged both unions and the business establishment.
But for the markets, Monti remains the man most likely to tackle Italy's debt mountain and uncompetitiveness. If he comes under serious threat, Italy could quickly supplant Spain as the euro zone's main flashpoint.
BERLUSCONI MOVE
Monti's hand was weakened by comments on Wednesday by his predecessor, Silvio Berlusconi, who said the prospect of Italy quitting the euro was "not blasphemy" and that he failed to understand why it would hurt Italy's economy.
Berlusconi's People of Freedom party is one of the two main groups that guarantee Monti a majority in parliament.
"The best that Monti and Rajoy will get from Merkel at this meeting is talk," said Nicholas Spiro of Spiro Sovereign Strategy.
However, with 10-year Spanish bond yields having already fallen by more than 0.7 percentage points from recent highs, he said that ahead of next week's summit even vaguely supportive comments from Merkel may be enough to underpin the market.
The two hour meeting will start at 1200 GMT. It will be followed by a joint news conference by the four leaders. No joint statement is expected.
Monti, who presents himself as a mediator between France and Germany, has insisted for months that the euro zone must temper the German-led austerity drive with measures to foster growth.
That position is shared by Hollande and Rajoy, but when the Italian leader has tried to transform his pro-growth rhetoric into policy prescriptions for the euro zone his ideas have generally met a cool response from Merkel.
He proposed on the sidelines of this week's G20 summit using the euro zone's rescue funds to buy the bonds of Spain and Italy in the secondary market to bring down their borrowing costs.
Monti will raise it again in Rome.
Spain's Foreign Minister José Manuel Garcia-Margallo called the idea "intelligent", but Merkel played down the plan, which investors said might be counter-productive unless the European Central Bank stepped in decisively in support.
Other proposals from Monti, such as stripping some forms of public investment from budget deficit calculations, or commonly issued euro zone bonds, are also broadly supported by France and Spain but opposed by Germany, at least for now.
(Reporting By Gavin Jones, editing by Mike Peacock)
Inside the Supreme Court Health-Care Decision
Published: Thursday, 21 Jun 2012 | 11:18 AM ET
http://www.cnbc.com/id/47904279
By: Bill Murphy, Jr., INC
Medical care accounts for 18 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product — and it is taking up at least as much of the mindshare of plenty of American entrepreneurs and business owners.
At this very moment, the economic basis of the entire health-care system is up in the air, as a result of the imminent U.S. Supreme Court opinion in the health care reform law cases. Court observers expect the decision any day now, and most likely before the end of June.
"This is going to be one of the biggest decisions to come down in our lifetime," said Robert Litan, vice president for research and policy at the Kauffman Foundation. "The economic impact could be tremendous."
For American entrepreneurs and employees so far, the waiting has been the hardest part. That's because the decision is likely to have so many ramifications and third-order effects that it's nearly impossible for business owners to forecast all the possible outcomes.
"As the person responsible for setting up health care for our 70-employee company, what I want most is some certainty," said Josh King, vice president of business development and general counsel at Avvo.com, a company for which health care is the second-largest expense after salaries.
"While the [law] has its issues, at least it's a step toward more predictability in health care," King said. "If the court starts tearing it apart, I fear we'll have to spend more time thinking about health care and less trying to run and grow our business."
Here's how most observers expect the decision to play out — and what that means for this country's small and fast-growing companies.
Businesses With Fewer Than 50 Employees
First, an important caveat: Most of the employer provisions of the health care reform law apply only to businesses with 50 or more employees. So, if your business is smaller than that, you're mostly off the hook — and you won't be required to provide health insurance to your employees regardless of what the court decides.
But if your company is larger — or if you're already growing and expect to someday employ more than 50 people — there's a lot of unsettled business. Bigger firms that fail to offer their employees insurance could wind up paying government fees, which would kick in when employees obtain insurance independently. At the same time, the law would create exchanges and subsidies for individuals who buy insurance on the open market, and would also expand the Medicaid program.
Of course, there are many other provisions and exceptions. For example, even though companies with more than 50 employees would be required to provide insurance, they would also be allowed to skip paying the $2,000-per-employee government fee for the first 30 employees who didn't have health insurance. (If you're having trouble with that exception, rest assured that we had to think it through a dozen times before it made sense, too.) The truth is that once you get deep in the regulations —many of which haven't even been written yet —nobody really knows how things will settle out.
The Individual Mandate
Most of the legal attention has been focused on the so-called "individual mandate," which requires people to purchase health insurance, either through their employers or on the market. It was this provision that garnered the most pointed questions from the justices at oral argument in March.
"Can you create commerce in order to regulate it?" Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy asked at the time, apparently trying to figure out how the United States could justify requiring people to buy health insurance under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. He later added that he believed the government faced "a heavy burden of justification," and was "changing the relationship of the individual to the government."
Under the mandate, individuals who fail to acquire insurance would be subject to government fees — although the exact nature of those fees, and whether they would amount to taxes, penalties or something else — is one of the more esoteric but important issues in the case before the court.
Despite the 2,400-page law's complexity, the possible outcomes really fall into three categories. The court could strike down the law, uphold the law, or strike down some provisions. If that happens, it's most likely that the court would get rid of the individual mandate will while upholding the rest of the law.
What Happens if the Court Kills Obamacare?
Most experts don't seem to think the court will strike down the health-care law in its entirety. But it could happen.
And if it does, that outcome would amount to, "the greatest change for employers," according to Maureen M. Maly, a partner in the benefits and executive compensation practice at the law firm Faegre Baker Daniels in Minneapolis.
"Under this outcome, employers would need to undo, or at least reconsider, all of the changes that they have made since 2010," Maly said.
Having to turn back the clock to the day before the health-care reform law was enacted is the option most feared by entrepreneurs, according to the Small Business Majority, a lobbying group, which released a poll this month showing 56 percent of business owners surveyed wanted the act upheld.
However, a competing small business lobbying group, the National Federation of Independent Businesses, is one of the plaintiffs in the cases trying to overturn the law.
If the Supreme Court Upholds the Whole Thing
Let's also consider the possibility that the court could uphold Obamacare in its entirety —although most observers don't seem to think that's any more likely than the idea that it would strike the whole thing down.
"Even if they they uphold the whole thing, there's still some uncertainty," Litan said.
That's because while most of the law is supposed to go into effect in January 2014, and 18 months ahead of that deadline, the government has not yet developed most of the regulations that would implement the act.
For example, the law itself doesn't define how extensive a health care plan employers would have to offer; those details are supposed to be filled in by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Also, the law would require states to set up insurance exchanges so that individuals would have more bargaining power in dealing with insurance companies. But as Litan pointed out, many states have not done any of the groundzwork to set up the exchanges — especially those states with Republican majorities.
"What happens in all those states without exchanges?" Litan asked. The short answer is that the federal government is supposed to step in, but he added, "my understanding is that HHS is way behind the eight-ball. Each state is a different market, so there will be enormous burden on HHS to get these health exchanges in place."
All of that would almost would be impacted by the next milestone on the horizon--the November election — which could quickly turn into a referendum on the law itself.
Perhaps Most Likely: A Split Result
Perhaps the most likely scenario is that the Court might strike down the individual mandate, or the expansion of Medicaid included in it, or both — but that it would uphold the rest of the law.
And that would bring with it still more uncertainty.
"From the insurance companies' standpoint, [it would be] the worst outcome by far," Litan said, because insurance companies would still be required to provide coverage to high-risk applicants who ask for it, "but they would lose the risk-pooling aspects of Obamacare."
It might even mean fewer opportunities for individuals to purchase insurance on the independent market — ironically, the exact opposite of what the law originally intended.
Insurers have already begun lobbying Congress to fix that potential imbalance. But the current political environment in Washington makes it less than likely that Democrats and Republicans will work together. That could lead to still more uncertainty.
"If only the mandate is thrown out, look for insurance availability to dry up," said Bill Maruca, co-chair of the health law practice group at law firm, Fox Rothschild. "Insurers might not be willing to wait for political fixes...and simply drop out of the market."
Greeks line up for free food as turmoil in country mounts
Posted on June 22, 2012
http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2012/06/22/greeks-line-up-for-free-food-as-turmoil-in-country-mounts/
June 22, 2012 – GREECE - Starving Greeks queued around the block for free food handouts yesterday as the country’s politicians managed to end a crippling stalemate to form a coalition government. Young children as well as the elderly waited in line in Athens to collect the parcels of fruit and vegetables donated by farmers from Crete to help ease the devastating austerity faced by many Greeks. But as hungry people collected food, a few miles away a new conservative-led alliance was formed, vowing to renegotiate the country’s strict European bailout in a bid to breath economic life back into the debt-stricken country. Conservative Antonis Samaras was sworn in as prime minister and head of a three-party coalition that will uphold the country’s international bailout commitments. The move ends a protracted political crisis that had cast grave doubt over the country’s future in Europe’s joint currency and threatened to plunge Europe deeper into a financial crisis with global repercussions. Samaras, an American-educated 61-year-old economist, was sworn in three days after his party won the second national elections in six weeks but without enough votes to form a government on its own. His New Democracy party will join forces with the socialist PASOK party, which came in third place, and the smaller Democratic Left led by Fotis Kouvelis. Discussions on the lineup of ministers were expected to be completed by Wednesday night. ‘I will ask the new government that will be formed tomorrow to work hard so that we can offer tangible hope to our people,’ Samaras told reporters as he left the presidential mansion. Greek stocks rose marginally in response to the news, with Athens shares closing up 0.5 percent, limiting earlier gains. –Daily Mail
I thought he meant earth/enviromental changes....
Be safe and thanks for the updates!!
You may be safer than I am here in the States
Makes me wonder why all of this is being released now...
New reports shows the murder of environmentalists are on the rise
Posted on June 22, 2012
http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2012/06/22/new-reports-shows-the-murder-of-environmentalists-are-on-the-rise/
June 22, 2012 – EARTH – A new report from Global Witness reveals that the killing of environmentalists is on the rise. The report, which defines environmentalists as activists, journalists and community members who defend rights to land and forests, says that more than 700 environmentalists have been murdered in the last ten years. The report notes that in 2011 the number of killings was 106 people, a figure that has nearly doubled over the past three years. CBS News illustrates the growing problem with the case of Chut Wutty. Mr. Wutty was a Cambodian activist who tried to fight illegal deforestation. The environmentalist lost his battle, however, when he was shot by a military policeman in April as he investigated logging operations in the country’s abundant forests. CBS News also brings up the case of Nisio Gomes. Mr. Gomes, the chief of a Brazilian tribe, was killed by masked gun men in November. The chief was killed trying to protect his land from ranchers. “This trend points to the increasingly fierce global battle for resources, and represents the sharpest of wake-up calls for delegates in Rio. Over one person a week is being murdered for defending rights to forests and land,” said Billy Kyte, a campaigner at Global Witness, in a press release. Global Witness says that environmentalists are being killed at the rate of one per week. –Bunsen Burner
I like this site Wall :)
Thanks
Maybe the Raven should move his exile residence....
:(
When Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase Bank (JPM), appeared before the Senate Banking Committee on June 13, he was wearing cufflinks bearing the presidential seal. "Was Dimon trying to send any particular message by wearing the presidential cufflinks?" asked CNBC editor John Carney. "Was he... subtly hinting that he's really the guy in charge?"
http://seekingalpha.com/article/671271-why-the-senate-won-t-touch-jamie-dimon-jpm-derivatives-prop-up-u-s-debt
Dang, I should have known better than to trust the likes of Fred Thompson, LOL
It is the revenue equivalent of death panels or the Halliburton conspiracy to start the Iraq war. :)
Can't believe Fred Thompson didn't include that in his answer LOL
http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2012/04/02/there-is-no-obamacare-tax-on-most-home-sales-really/
It is the unfounded rumor that never dies: You will have to pay a 3.8 percent federal health care tax on the sale of your house.
For all but a handful of taxpayers, this is not true. It is wrong. It is urban myth. It is the revenue equivalent of death panels or the Halliburton conspiracy to start the Iraq war.
This is one of those seemingly immortal Internet stories. You know the ones: They usually start with the assertion that, “They don’t want to know this but….” In the words of one blogger, “Obamacare will impose a 3.8 percent tax on all home sales and real estate transactions.”
Umm, no it won’t. Yes, the health law will impose a 3.8 percent tax on investment profits and other non-wage income starting in 2013. But that tax applies only to couples with adjusted gross income of $250,000 (or individuals with AGI of $200,000). About 95 percent of households make less than that, and will be exempt from the law no matter what.
In addition, couples who sell a personal residence can exclude the first $500,000 in profit from tax ($250,000 for singles). That would be profit from a home sale, not proceeds. So a couple that bought a house for $100,000 and sold it for $599,000 would owe no tax, even under the health law.
If that couple had AGI in excess of $250,000 and made a profit of $500,010, it would owe the new tax. On ten bucks. That would be an extra 38 cents.
The Tax Policy Center figures that in 2013 about 0.2 percent of households with cash income of $100,000-$200,000 would pay any additional tax under this provision. And they’d pay, on average, an extra $235. Keep in mind that is added tax on all sources of non-wage income, not just home sales.
Still, like Dracula, this rumor can’t be killed. Politfact tried to knock it down in 2010. A couple of months ago, my Tax Policy Center colleague Donald Marron did the same in a Tax Notes article called “Health Reform’s Tax on Investment Income: Facts and Myths.”
People who send Internet chain letters probably don’t read Tax Notes. Still, imagine Donald’s surprise when just last week he met a guy in Kansas City who insisted that the tax not only exists, but the rate is 7 percent (some sort of weird bracket-creep, I guess).
Now imagine my surprise when, after I wrote a TaxVox article the other day about the (real) tax provisions of the health law, I got an email from a frustrated housing industry tax specialist. “There is usually some confusion/disinformation associated with new tax rules,” he wrote, “but I’ve never seen an issue that has as much as this one.”
Things are going great:) Hoping same for you!!!
Shared it out:)
FYI - Did you know that if you sell your house after 2012 you will pay a 3.8% sales tax on it? That’s $3,800 on a $100,000 home, etc. When did this happen? It’s in the health care bill and goes into effect in 2013. Why 2013? Could it be to come to light AFTER the 2012 elections? So, this is “change you can believe in”? Under the new health care bill all real estate transactions will be subject to a 3.8% Sales Tax.If you sell a $400,000 home, there will be a $15,200 tax. This bill is set to screw the retiring generation who often downsize their homes. Does this make your November and 2012 vote more important? Oh, you weren’t aware this was in the Obamacare bill? Guess what, you aren’t alone. There are more than a few members of Congress that aren’t aware of it either.
A: That’s right. We’re finding out what’s in Obamacare. And don’t forget you pay that 3.8% even if you have no gain on the sale. And if you do have a gain your cap gains tax is going up from 15% to 20% PLUS the 3.8.
http://fredthompsonsamerica.com/2012/06/18/obamacare-home-tax-are-you-in-the-cfr-and-other-ask-fred-replies/
Did you know that if you sell your house after 2012 you will pay a 3.8% sales tax on it? That’s $3,800 on a $100,000 home, etc. When did this happen? It’s in the health care bill and goes into effect in 2013. Why 2013? Could it be to come to light AFTER the 2012 elections? So, this is “change you can believe in”? Under the new health care bill all real estate transactions will be subject to a 3.8% Sales Tax.If you sell a $400,000 home, there will be a $15,200 tax. This bill is set to screw the retiring generation who often downsize their homes. Does this make your November and 2012 vote more important? Oh, you weren’t aware this was in the Obamacare bill? Guess what, you aren’t alone. There are more than a few members of Congress that aren’t aware of it either.
A: That’s right. We’re finding out what’s in Obamacare. And don’t forget you pay that 3.8% even if you have no gain on the sale. And if you do have a gain your cap gains tax is going up from 15% to 20% PLUS the 3.8. Have a nice day AND VOTE
http://fredthompsonsamerica.com/2012/06/18/obamacare-home-tax-are-you-in-the-cfr-and-other-ask-fred-replies/
Lol, you are so right....
Attorney Gen. Holder says the panel chairman, Rep. Issa, is playing political games and I'm sure Issa thinks Holder and Obama are doing the same.
Unconstitutional Uses of Drones Must Stop
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/
By Rep. Ron Paul
June 19, 2012 "Information Clearing House" -- Last week I joined several of my colleagues in sending a letter to President Obama requesting clarification of his criteria for the lethal use of drones overseas. Administration officials assure us that a "high degree of confidence" is required that the person targeted by a drone is a terrorist. However, press reports have suggested that mere "patterns of behavior" and other vague criteria are actually being used to decide who to target in a drone strike. I am concerned that an already troublingly low threshold for execution on foreign soil may be even lower than we imagined.
The use of drones overseas may have become so convenient, operated as they are from a great distance, that far more "collateral damage" has become acceptable. Collateral damage is a polite way of saying killing innocent civilians. Is the ease of drone use a slippery slope to disregard for justice, and if so what might that mean for us as they become more widely used on American soil against American citizens?
This dramatic increase in the use of drones and the lowered threshold for their use to kill foreigners has tremendous implications for our national security. At home, some claim the use of drones reduces risk to American service members. But this can be true only in the most shortsighted sense. Internationally the expanded use of drones is wildly unpopular and in fact creates more enemies than it eliminates.
Earlier this month a former top terrorism official at the CIA warned that President Barack Obama's expanded use of drones may actually be creating terrorist "safe havens." Robert Grenier, who headed the CIA's counter-terrorism center from 2004 to 2006, told a British newspaper that, "[the drone program] needs to be targeted much more finely. We have been seduced by them and the unintended consequences of our actions are going to outweigh the intended consequences."
After a drone strike in Yemen last month once again killed more civilians than suspected al-Qaeda members, a Yemeni lawyer sent a message to President Obama stating "Dear Obama, when a U.S. drone missile kills a child in Yemen, the father will go to war with you, guaranteed. Nothing to do with Al Qaeda." These are the unseen victims of the president's expanded use of drones, but we should pay attention and we should ask ourselves how we would feel if the tables were turned and a foreign power was killing innocent American children from thousands of miles away. Would we not feel the same?
The expanded use of drones overseas has been matched with the expanded use of drones in the United States, which should alarm every American who values the Constitution and its protections against government interference in our private lives. Recently, the governor of Virginia welcomed the expanded use of drones in his state because they "make law enforcement more productive." I find that attitude chilling and am sure I am not alone.
Do we want to live in a country where our government constantly flies aircraft overhead to make sure we are not doing anything it disapproves of? Already the Environmental Protection Agency uses drone surveillance to spy on farmers and ranchers to see if they are in compliance with regulations. Local law enforcement agencies are eyeing drone use with great anticipation. Do we really want to live under the watchful eye of "Big Brother"? It is terrifying enough to see how drones are being misused abroad. We must curtail the government's ability use drones right away lest the massacres in Yemen and Pakistan turn out to be crude training exercises for what the administration has in mind on our own soil.
UN Investigator Criticizes US Drone War
By Daphne Eviatar
June 19, 2012 "Information Clearing House" -- Citing a "dramatic increase" in the United States' use of targeted killings in the last few years, the UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Killings has just released a report decrying the lack of accountability in the U.S. overseas killings by unmanned drones.
"Disclosure of these killings is critical to ensure accountability, justice and reparation for victims or their families," UN investigator Christof Heyns said in his followup to a 2010 UN report criticizing U.S. practices.
"The (U.S.) government should clarify the procedures in place to ensure that any targeted killing complies with international humanitarian law and human rights and indicate the measures or strategies applied to prevent casualties, as well as the measures in place to provide prompt, thorough, effective and independent public investigation of alleged violations."
Citing Pakistani Human Rights Commission figures, Heyns said thousands have been killed in 300 drone strikes in Pakistan alone since 2004. About 20 percent of the dead are believed to be civilians, according to the Pakistani commission, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, and the New America Foundation. Although U.S. officials dispute those figures, a new ProPublica report finds that the United States' own estimates of civilian casualties contradict one another.
Human rights law requires that nations make every effort to arrest a suspect, in line with the "principles of necessity and proportionality on the use of force," Heyns said in his report, adding that the United States had failed to respond to the concerns of his predecessor, Philip Alston.
"The Special Rapporteur again requests the Government to clarify the rules that it considers to cover targeted killings ... (and) reiterates his predecessor's recommendation that the government specify the bases for decisions to kill rather than capture 'human targets' and whether the State in which the killing takes places has given consent," Heyns said.
Reuters reports that U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said on Monday that it was "unclear that all persons targeted are combatants or directly participating in hostilities."
Human Rights First has similarly questioned the covert U.S. targeted killing program and last month sent a letter to President Obama asking him to clarify its legal basis and confirm that the United States is complying with international law.
The Obama administration has repeatedly defined its authority to kill suspected terrorists more broadly than international law allows. White House counterterrorism advisor John Brennan said recently that the U.S. may kill all "members" of al Qaeda, the Taliban and "associated forces" regardless of their actual participation in hostilities against the United States. The New York Times reported last month that U.S. officials were considering all military-age males in a strike zone "combatants" and therefore targetable.
Daphne Eviatar - Senior Counsel, Human Rights First's Law and Security Program
Follow Daphne Eviatar on Twitter: www.twitter.com/deviatar
The Genius of Mutual Indebtedness
"By any objective criteria the Euro has failed, and in fact there is a looming, impending disaster."
By Nigel Farage
Video Posted June 19, 2012
Nuremburg Rallies Circa 1930s?
Sleeping Through the Coup
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article31631.htm
By Philip Farruggio
“The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting.” - Milan Kundera
June 19, 2012 "Information Clearing House" -- Let’s face it, most of our fellow Americans are just that: Forgetting. How many out there have been narcotized by this newest installment of the infamous Presidential Horserace? In 2008 we had the rallying cry of ‘Hope and Change ‘from the 8 repressive years of the Bush gang. Military spending was at an all time high up to that point. We had false flag invasions and occupations of two sovereign nations. In Iraq alone we had over a dozen permanent military bases. Four thousand of our young soldiers, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians were dead. Perhaps two or three times those numbers included the permanent disabilities or slow death caused by our depleted uranium weapons, lack of sustainable drinking water and electricity (for the Iraqis… our guys at least got the very best in accommodations) … you get my drift. We imprisoned many men and women incommunicado at Gitmo for years with no hearings and no trials. Mr. Obama came in and many out there were ready for some real viable change. It never occurred. Read my lips: We will never fully end our military presence in both Iraq and Afghanistan! Whether it is a Romney or an Obama, the occupations will continue at some level or another. Whether it is an Obama or a Romney, the military industrial sharks will keep getting the bulk of our hard earned tax dollars (from previous columns of mine you should know that over 50 cents of each federal tax dollar collected goes down this sewer).
While this is all happening, where are our dear friends and neighbors? Call me crazy, but when I tune into an NBA playoff game and see the stands filled with people all wearing the same colored tee shirts and chanting those same mantras… Nuremburg rallies circa 1930s. Yes, the same passion and the same similar obedient mindset scare the hell out of me. Just like with what occurred after September 11, 2001 throughout America… obedience and hatred right out of Orwell’s 1984. If you dared to doubt the official government explanation of what brought those three buildings down (I include the very suspicious Bldg # 7)… you were a ‘terrorist lover ‘. When the Bush gang illegally and disingenuously took us into a war on Iraq… dissent meant treason. Phil Donohue had his truly fair and balanced cable talk show taken off the air right as we were ready to bomb the hell out of Iraq. As the fusillade continued, little lemming newscaster (?) Katie Couric shouted out through the halls of NBC “Marines Rock! “. Most Americans rallied round the now tarnished flag and did what Bush Jr. told them to do: “ Go out and shop! “ When brave American patriots called for hearings on the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, or questioned the 9/11 Commission whitewash… again we were the traitors to this cause. Now, 9 years later, because we have no military draft, our 18 to 30 something young folks just want to party with their newest electronic gadgets.
Ever notice how none of the ( so called ) television or radio news talk shows will discuss this obscene military spending or our 800+ foreign bases in over 100 different countries… to the tune of over 500 billion dollars a year? Believe in conspiracies? Well, that must be the mother of all of them. We have a concerted effort by the entire mainstream media (and even most independent ones) to not dare mention that we are a military empire that is bankrupting our economy! No mention at all. They go on and on about the Republicans vs. Democrats on almost any other issue but that one and the other two key issues of public funding of elections and Medicare for All. Alas, the two party con job and their media whores are embedded with the powers that be. The fact that our housing market is in disarray and American workers are being treated more and more like feudal serfs… Silence! Please read Chalmers Johnson’s book The Sorrows of Empire from cover to cover. He explains it better than this writer can.
“Voice or no voice the people can always be brought to do the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” - Hermann Goering.
Philip A Farruggio is son and grandson of Brooklyn, NYC longshoremen. He is a free lance columnist (found on the fine Dandelion Salad, Activist Post, Dissident Voice and Smirking Chimp sites), an environmental products sales rep and an activist. Since 2010, Philip is a spokesperson for the 25% Solution Movement to Save Our Cities by cutting military spending 25%. Philip can be reached at paf1222@bellsouth.net
The State Department Goes Bad
By Lawrence Davidson
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article31641.htm
June 19, 2012 "Information Clearing House" -- The State Department is that branch of government that has responsibility for foreign policy. Every U.S. embassy and consulate is an extension of the State Department. U.S. citizens traveling abroad, be it on a short vacation to Canada or Mexico or an extended venture for business or study to anywhere on the globe where the U.S. has diplomatic relations, can rely on assistance in an emergency from the State Department. Well, almost anywhere.
How about Israel? In theory there is no difference between the behavior of State Department personnel in Israel and anywhere else. If you go to the State Department’s website and look under Israel, Entry and Exit Difficulties it will tell you how to contact the embassy or consulates, in case of need, depending on where in the country you are. Thus, if you are stuck at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion airport you should contact the consular section of the U.S. Embassy (972) (3) 519-7575. If you are stuck at the Allenby Bridge border crossing you have to ring up the consulate in Jerusalem (972) (2) 630-4000. But, again, that’s theory.
In practice, however, the behavior of the State Department’s diplomatic personnel in Israel is quite different than that of diplomats in other countries. In fact, like everything else touching on Israel, U.S. diplomatic practice has been corrupted by the power and influence of the Zionist lobby in Washington.
Take the recent case of Sandra Tamari. Ms Tamari is a Quaker, the mother of two children, an American citizen of Palestinian descent, and also a member of the St. Louis Palestine Solidarity Committee. She traveled to Israel at the end of May 2012 to “participate in an interfaith delegation involving Palestinians and Israelis working for peace and coexistence.” She was stopped at Ben Gurion Airport and “aggressively questioned for over eight hours before being taken to a detention center and deported back to the United States. During the questioning, Israeli security demanded that she show them her personal email account and accused her of being a terrorist.”
Given her situation, Ms Tamari attempted to contact the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv. It took a couple of hours for her to actually get someone to speak to. This someone was Mr. Chris Kane, a General Service Officer. According to Ms Tamari’s account here is how part of the conversation went:
Tamari: They are threatening to deny me entry and to deport me.
Kane: Are you Jewish?
Tamari: No
Kane: Have you been here before? …..
Tamari: Yes, several times. I am a Palestinian with family in the West Bank.
Kane: Oh, you have family in the West Bank. Then there is nothing I can do to help you. In fact if I interceded on your behalf, it will hurt your case with the Israelis. …….
Tamari: I don’t understand. You are saying you can’t speak with them. You have no influence….
Kane: ….They won’t harm you. You will be sent home on the next flight out. I hope I have been of good service to you.
Tamari: Frankly, you have done nothing for me.
Kane: Well, at least you can say I did it kindly.
As comical and Kafkaesque as this exchange might sound, it is not particularly unusual. Americans active in the cause of Palestinian rights are often stopped at border points controlled by Israel. Often they are harassed. Sometimes they are deported. Whatever the case, an appeal to the U.S. Embassy or the Jerusalem consulate will not get you help.
Why is this so? The politicians who make up our national elected officials from the President on down are committed to the Zionist point of view. With rare exceptions, this has been the case for at least 65 years. That has been long enough to purge the State Department of almost anyone who is sympathetic to the Arabs in general and the Palestinians in particular. If, by mistake, someone does end up in the Tel Aviv embassy with a bit of heart and shows it in an actual attempt to help someone like Tamari, it will go down as a blot on their service record. He or she would probably find themselves quickly reassigned to Nepal or Iceland.
The situation can get much worse than that experienced by Ms. Tamari. When, in March 2003, 23 year-old Rachel Corrie, an American citizen from Olympia Washington, was murdered by the Israeli army while trying to stop a home demolition the State Department did little. Indeed, if it were not for the public protest of Corrie’s parents and their supporters, it is likely the Department would have done little beyond issuing regrets. As it was, it took over a year for the State Department to issue a call for an independent investigation of the incident. Nor has State ever applied sufficient pressure on the Israelis to bring such an investigation into reality.
Again when, in May 2010, Israeli soldiers murdered a 19 year-old American citizen, Furkan Dogan, during an illegal raid, carried out in international waters, on a humanitarian aid flotilla bound for Gaza, the State Department’s reaction was muted at best. There was a tendency on the part of Washington to stall and then rationalize Israeli actions. In Congress, the flotilla participants were labeled terrorists.
This behavior on the part of our elected officials and appointed diplomats is a function of corruption. I remember often being challenged by Zionists who would ask, why do you attack Israel? Aren’t there many other nations which you could complain about? My answer, then and now, speaks to problems we face both in the federal government in general and the State Department in particular. It goes like this:
“The fact is that Zionist influence spreads far beyond Israel’s area of dominion and has, for a long while now, exerted a corrupting power within many of the political institutions of Western governments, and particularly that of the United States. In other words, unlike the Russians or the Chinese and other such governments, the Israelis and their supporters directly influence the policy makers of our own country and this often results in our abetting Israel’s crimes. This makes it imperative that Zionist Israel be singled out as a high priority case from among the many other oppressive regimes that may be candidates for criticism and protest.”
Lawrence Davidson is professor of history at West Chester University in West Chester PA. His academic work is focused on the history of American foreign relations with the Middle East. He also teaches courses in the history of science and modern European intellectual history.
Another comment of interest:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?381221-Lawyers-for-Ron-Paul-LIVE-NOW!!!!!!!!/page4
The best I can tell you, the civil lawsuit is to get a ruling that the RNC MUST unbind ALL delegates and MUST adhere to ALL RNC rules as they are now. They are also preparing to have Federal Marshals at the convention protecting ALL Ron Paul delegates and because our delegates will be under the protection of a Federal Judge any wrong doings or "false arrests" by local police will be handled by the Federal Marshals.
Any evidence accumalated that prove election fraud will be filed for a RICO case.
RDM
Obama: China, Russia not signed on for Assad's removal
By Jeff Mason and Dominic Evans | Reuters – 11 hrs ago.
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-china-russia-not-signed-assads-removal-011318861.html
LOS CABOS, Mexico/BEIRUT (Reuters) - Russia and China have not agreed to any plan for the removal of President Bashar al-Assad from power but do recognize the danger of an all-out civil war in Syria, U.S. President Barack Obama said on Tuesday as Assad's forces bombarded the city of Homs and clashed with rebels.
International efforts to halt the violence are deadlocked because Russia and China, which wield vetoes in the U.N. Security Council, have blocked tougher action against Assad. They say the solution must come through political dialogue, an approach most of the Syrian opposition rejects.
British Prime Minister David Cameron said Putin had shifted his view of Assad during talks with Obama and other world leaders at the Group of 20 summit in Los Cabos, Mexico, and that discussions were now focused on a transition of power in Syria.
But Putin immediately seemed to contradict that notion, telling reporters at the end of the summit: "We believe that nobody has the right to decide for other nations who should be brought to power, who should be removed from power."
Russia has been the staunchest backer of Assad and his military crackdown against militants and protesters in Syria, including supplying arms to the Syrian government.
Speaking at the summit, Obama said Assad has lost all legitimacy and that it was impossible to conceive of any solution to the violence in Syria that leaves him in power. Obama conceded he had failed to make a breakthrough with the leaders of Russia or China despite intensive talks.
"I wouldn't suggest that at this point the United States and the rest of the international community are aligned with Russia and China in their positions, but I do think they recognize the grave dangers of all-out civil war," he told reporters.
He said it is important for the world community to work with the United Nations and international mediator Kofi Annan "on what a political transition would look like. ... But I don't think it would be fair to say that the Russians and the Chinese are signed on at this point."
Alarmed but apparently impotent to resolve the crisis, the outside world is deeply divided in its response to an increasingly sectarian conflict that threatens to become a proxy war for regional powers.
The United Nations estimates more than 10,000 people have been killed in 15 months of violence and unrest.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Francois Hollande, Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan and Cameron were present with Obama for the talks with Putin.
"There remain differences over sequencing and the shape of how the transition takes place but it is welcome that President Putin has been explicit that he does not want Assad remaining in charge in Syria," Cameron told reporters.
"What we need next is an agreement on a transitional leadership which can move Syria to a democratic future that protects the rights of all its communities," Cameron added.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Cameron's statement that Putin does not want Assad to remain in power "does not correspond to reality."
The chief U.N. monitor for Syria told the Security Council that his military observers were repeatedly targeted by hostile crowds and gunfire at close range last week before his decision to suspend operations, U.N. diplomats said.
Separately, a cargo ship off the British coast carrying weapons bound for Syria has apparently turned back towards Russia, Britain's Foreign Secretary said, calling again for a halt to arms shipments to Assad.
The Curacao-flagged cargo ship Alaed, last seen off the north-west coast of Scotland this week, was believed to carrying Russian weaponry to Syria, according to an insurer that said it had withdrawn coverage for the vessel.
The Pentagon said Russia's military was preparing to send three ships to Syria but noted that Moscow's stated intention was to send supplies and personnel to its naval facility in the Mediterranean port of Tartus.
Western nations and their Sunni Muslim allies in the Gulf and Turkey seek Assad's overthrow but are wary of intervention, while Russia, China and Shi'ite Iran - Assad's strategic ally - have protected Assad from a tough international response.
SOUNDS OF EXPLOSIONS
A resident in Homs said the sound of explosions could be heard across the city, and activists also reported shelling in the Damascus suburb of Douma and fighting between soldiers and rebels in northern Aleppo province near the border with Turkey.
The violence is the latest wave of relentless bloodshed that led United Nations observers - who were sent to Syria to monitor a ceasefire deal brokered by international mediator Kofi Annan - to halt operations on Saturday.
General Robert Mood of Norway, chief U.N. monitor for Syria, told the 15-nation Security Council behind closed doors that his 300-strong unarmed observer force was targeted with gunfire or by hostile crowds at least 10 times last week, U.N. diplomats present at the meeting told Reuters on condition of anonymity.
Mood said that "indirect fire" incidents in which gunfire struck within 300-400 meters (yards) of observers occurred on a daily basis, envoys said. Last week, nine vehicles of the observer mission, known as UNSMIS, were struck or damaged, they added.
One diplomat said Mood spoke of "several hundred indirect fire incidents."
Some Western diplomats have suggested that there was little point in having UNSMIS remain in Syria when Assad's government has not only ignored Annan's peace plan but has stepped up its military assaults to seize rebel-held territory.
UNSMIS' 90-day mandate expires on July 21 and it is unclear whether the council will extend it.
Activists say at least 2,000 people have been killed in Syria since Annan's April 12 ceasefire deal, intended to be the first stage in a political plan to resolve Syria's 15-month-old crisis, was supposed to put an end to the killing.
"There are many buildings and houses completely destroyed (in Homs), and many injuries in the field hospitals which need surgery," said one resident of Syria's third biggest city, who gave his name as Nidal.
"There are many martyrs and no medicine."
Activists said violence flared across the country on Tuesday and state media said rebels blew up two oil pipelines.
SANA news agency said an "armed terrorist group" attacked a oil derivatives pipeline linking Homs and Damascus in the Sultaniya area of southern Homs, causing a fire and heavy smoke that residents said was visible from the centre of the city.
A crude oil pipeline in the eastern province of Deir al-Zor was also blown up. SANA quoted an oil ministry source as saying pumping was expected to resume in the next few days, adding that the same pipeline had been targeted twice in the last two weeks.
(Additional reporting by Luke Baker, Gleb Bryanski in Mexico, Phil Stewart and David Alexander in Washington, Jonathan Saul in London, Thomas Grove in Moscow, and Lou Charbonneau at the United Nations; Editing by Will Dunham)