#2
Meanwhile, the new cosmetic products are already causing regulatory concern. On Friday, federal agents sent by the FDA went to a San Jose, Calif., warehouse and seized thousands of tubes of Age Intervention Eyelash, which the FDA called an "unapproved and misbranded drug." The agency said it hadn't received any reports of patient injuries, but warned the product might be potentially harmful because it contains bimatoprost, the Lumigan ingredient.
#3
The agency said it hadn't received any reports of patient injuries...
Nannyism through bureaucratic projection. People have died from water poisoning. Can't wait for the raids to seize all those bottles of Aquafina, et al.
#4
perhaps now we'll concentrate on a drug to help those men suffering from a debilitating lack of back, nose, and ear hair. I know the wymyns are behind us on this 100%
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/20/2007 20:39 Comments ||
Top||
Two aircraft of the United States Marine Corps reached Dhaka early yesterday to provide medical services for the people in the cyclone-hit areas.
During a press briefing at the Armed Forces Division (AFD), General Staff Officer-1 Lt Col Mainullah Chowdhury said that two C-130 Hercules landed at Zia International Airport around Sunday midnight. There's a discussion going on at the government level to decide how they will work in the affected areas, he said replying to a query. Another US team which was already in the capital has joined the marines, he added.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/20/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Any news on how many aircraft with medics that Germany, France, Canada, Venezuela, Iran and the UN sent?
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
11/20/2007 9:41 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Canada has donated three million dollars so far:
Though my favorite part of the article concerns a local official, Rafiqul Islam who - you may need to sit down for this - is complaining that free food and shelter is not arriving fast enough. Heaven forbid anyone living in the path of cyclones that have killed a million million people at a go might, for example, learn to PREPARE for the next one.
No word on what World Socialist is contributing to the cause of "the impoverished masses" of Bangladesh.
JOHANNESBURG, Nov. 19 — The United Nations' top AIDS scientists plan to acknowledge this week that they have long overestimated both the size and the course of the epidemic, which they now believe has been slowing for nearly a decade, according to U.N. documents prepared for the announcement.
AIDS remains a devastating public health crisis in the most heavily affected areas of sub-Saharan Africa. But the far-reaching revisions amount to at least a partial acknowledgment of criticisms long leveled by outside researchers who disputed the U.N. portrayal of an ever-expanding global epidemic.
The latest estimates, due to be released publicly Tuesday, put the number of annual new HIV infections at 2.5 million, a cut of more than 40 percent from last year's estimate, documents show. The worldwide total of people infected with HIV — estimated a year ago at nearly 40 million and rising — now will be reported as 33 million.
Having millions fewer people with a lethal contagious disease is good news. Some researchers, however, contend that persistent overestimates in the widely quoted U.N. reports have long skewed funding decisions and obscured potential lessons about how to slow the spread of HIV. Critics have also said that U.N. officials overstated the extent of the epidemic to help gather political and financial support for combating AIDS.
"There was a tendency toward alarmism, and that fit perhaps a certain fundraising agenda," said Helen Epstein, author of "The Invisible Cure: Africa, the West, and the Fight Against AIDS." "I hope these new numbers will help refocus the response in a more pragmatic way."
Annemarie Hou, spokeswoman for the U.N. AIDS agency, speaking from Geneva, declined to comment on the grounds that the report had not been released publicly. In documents obtained by The Washington Post, U.N. officials say the revisions stemmed mainly from better measurements rather than fundamental shifts in the epidemic. They also say they are continually seeking to improve their tracking of AIDS with the latest available tools.
Among the reasons for the overestimate is methodology; U.N. officials traditionally based their national HIV estimates on infection rates among pregnant women receiving prenatal care. As a group, such women were younger, more urban, wealthier and likely to be more sexually active than populations as a whole, according to recent studies.
The United Nations' AIDS agency, known as UNAIDS and led by Belgian scientist Peter Piot since its founding in 1995, has been a major advocate for increasing spending to combat the epidemic. Over the past decade, global spending on AIDS has grown by a factor of 30, reaching as much as $10 billion a year.
But in its role in tracking the spread of the epidemic and recommending strategies to combat it, UNAIDS has drawn criticism in recent years from Epstein and others who have accused it of being politicized and not scientifically rigorous.
For years, UNAIDS reports have portrayed an epidemic that threatened to burst beyond its epicenter in southern Africa to generate widespread illness and death in other countries. In China alone, one report warned, there would be 10 million infections — up from 1 million in 2002 — by the end of the decade.
Piot often wrote personal prefaces to those reports warning of the dangers of inaction, saying in 2006 that "the pandemic and its toll are outstripping the worst predictions."
But by then, several years' worth of newer, more accurate studies already offered substantial evidence that the agency's tools for measuring and predicting the course of the epidemic were flawed.
Newer studies commissioned by governments and relying on random, census-style sampling techniques found consistently lower infection rates in dozens of countries. For example, the United Nations has cut its estimate of HIV cases in India by more than half because of a study completed this year. This week's report also includes major cuts to U.N. estimates for Nigeria, Mozambique and Zimbabwe.
The revisions affect not just current numbers but past ones as well. A UNAIDS report from December 2002, for example, put the total number of HIV cases at 42 million. The real number at that time was 30 million, the new report says.
The downward revisions also affect estimated numbers of orphans, AIDS deaths and patients in need of costly antiretroviral drugs — all major factors in setting funding levels for the world's response to the epidemic.
James Chin, a former World Health Organization AIDS expert who has long been critical of UNAIDS, said that even these revisions may not go far enough. He estimated the number of cases worldwide at 25 million.
"If they're coming out with 33 million, they're getting closer. It's a little high, but it's not outrageous anymore," Chin, author of "The AIDS Pandemic: The Collision of Epidemiology With Political Correctness," said from Berkeley, Calif.
The picture of the AIDS epidemic portrayed by the newer studies, and set to be endorsed by U.N. scientists, shows a massive concentration of infections in the southern third of Africa, with nations such as Swaziland and Botswana reporting as many as one in four adults infected with HIV.
Rates are lower in East Africa and much lower in West Africa. Researchers say that the prevalence of circumcision, which slows the spread of HIV, and regional variations in sexual behavior are the biggest factors determining the severity of the AIDS epidemic in different countries and even within countries.
Beyond Africa, AIDS is more likely to be concentrated among high-risk groups, such as users of injectable drugs, sex workers and gay men. More precise measurements of infection rates should allow for better targeting of prevention measures, researchers say.
The death toll from Sundays natural gas pipeline explosion in the Eastern Province rose to 38 as a special technical panel set up by Saudi Aramco continued its probe yesterday to determine the reason for the blast and the subsequent fire, informed sources said.
Dr. Abdul Mohsen Al-Mulhim, director of King Fahd Hospital in Hofouf, said his hospital received seven Pakistanis injured as a result of the explosion. They were carrying out maintenance work at the Haradh-Othmaniya gas pipeline, 30 km from Hawiyah Gas Plant. At least 60 people were injured in the accident.
Abdallah Jumah, CEO of Saudi Aramco, accompanied by a number of his aides, visited the site of the accident to know the reasons for the explosion. Most bodies could not be recognized and required DNA tests to identify them.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
11/20/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Presumably 'just' a tragic industrial accident (they happen), but .....
Interesting that they have not made the typical US statement of 'this was not a terrorist incident' before they can possibly have any idea.
#2
This was not out in the 'empty quarter' but rather at either a compressor station or processing facility. As it occurred during a welding operation - probably either a cut-in or cut-out - I go with poor inerting and ventilation of a un-purged section of the line. Having so many people around a transit section doesn't sound as feasible as having a larger crew around a facility of some kind with lots of valving, compressors, spools-a-plenty, etc.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
11/20/2007 9:46 Comments ||
Top||
Diana, Princess of Wales, might have survived the car crash in which she died had French medical staff not squandered vital time, her inquest was told yesterday.
Thomas Treasure, a leading British surgeon, told the inquest that a window of opportunity may have existed to get her to hospital half an hour before she was taken there. Professor Treasure, a former president of the European Association for Cardiothoracic Surgery, said that medics had done very substantial good in the initial period after the accident but that once the Princess was in the ambulance time began slipping away.
The professor, who was asked to review records of the treatment given to the Princess for Lord Justice Scott Baker, the coroner, conceded that the combination of her internal injuries was extremely rare and serious but said it was theoretically possible that she might have been saved.
Continued on Page 49
#5
I'm not a physician, much less a specialist in emergency work; but I'd guess the French staff were following protocols that are usually appropriate. Most patients would live with on-the-scene treatment, but a few will die. Probably most would live with scoop-and-run too, but a few will die that needed on-the-scene care instead.
Monday morning quarterbacks at work here...
Posted by: James ||
11/20/2007 13:18 Comments ||
Top||
#6
She's (still) dead, Jim.
Give it up already; this is as tiresome as the never-ending Brittany, Paris, Rosie bullfest-o-thon......
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
11/20/2007 14:00 Comments ||
Top||
#9
There is a massive NIH database collecting stats on trauma and EMS recently being used as a model for cardiac events (this includes hospitals north of the border in Canada). Both use a Scoop and Run philosophy similar to the British as opposed to the French Stay and Play. A look at this data verses the French physicians on the scene approach (SMUR/SAMU) - also used in places such as Argentina and Brazil - would suggest the pros and cons of each system. Generalizing from one case such as Diana's is absurd. It may be that a Scoop and Run approach could have saved her had she reached an operating room sooner. It may also be that had EMS workers not attempted to stabilize her at the scene she might have died en route. Both happen all the time.
#10
Bein driven by a drunken Driver, speeding to get away from some photogs who were out to steal her soul, no seat belt worn, running into a column at 100 km/hr or so, palling around with an Egyptian playboy.....Lady Di did die from the result of some veddy veddy bad choices.
Posted by: Jack the Rat ||
11/20/2007 15:55 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Wrong moniker....
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
11/20/2007 15:55 Comments ||
Top||
#12
I understand that French emergency medicine didn't have the whole concept of the "golden hour" at the time of the accident. Don't know if they've changed their ways since.
Posted by: Mike ||
11/20/2007 16:38 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Mr Mules said yesterday: Its a good thing that we didnt actually find the owner of the white Fiat Uno, otherwise he would have become the Princesss killer.
Mr Mules was senior commander of the elite Paris Criminal Brigade, which originally gathered evidence into the crash in the French capital. In the early hours of August 31, 1997 soon after Dianas Mercedes ploughed into a pillar in the Alma tunnel Mr Mules found compelling evidence that the luxury saloon had collided with a white Fiat Uno seconds before impact.
Yet, 10 years on and despite extensive searches all over France, the Uno and its driver are still unaccounted for. We found that there were approximately 7,000 to 8,000 Fiat Unos and we examined 5,500 of them, said Mr Mules, who was speaking in Paris where he is now retired.
We checked all their cars and their owners, who had to tell us exactly where they were on the night of the crash, but we never found it.
The inability of the French police to find the Uno driver was highlighted in the British report into Dianas death, published last December.
It was also a subject to which Lord Justice Scott Baker, who is due to preside over the reconvened inquest into Dianas death as coroner later this year, said he wanted to return.
At a preliminary hearing at Londons High Court last month, the coroner said the whereabouts of the Uno driver was one of the key questions which he said would help him to make a decision on whether the Princess was murdered.
Two men were named as possibly being the drivers paparazzi photographer James Andanson, who has since died in mysterious circumstances, and French-Vietnamese security guard Le Van Thanh, who continues to deny any involvement.
Polls being conducted by GOP candidates appear to show a growing chance that underfunded hopeful Mike Huckabee could win the Iowa caucus, a victory that would upset the race and help Rudy Giuliani, according to Republican political advisers.
Heard him on Fox yesterday. If anybody else was listening, Huckabee's toast.
"It's not impossible that Huckabee could take the win from Mitt Romney in Iowa and make this thing a race," said one GOP adviser. The Giuliani campaign has some polling data that bear out Huckabee's rise and also show Sen. John McCain moving up as the race tightens.
Giuliani and Romney advisers, however, express little concern with Huckabee since he has mostly focused on New Hampshire and Iowa while they have sprawling organizations in the states that follow those two with primary elections and caucuses. Other GOP polling, however, shows Fred Thompson stalled or dropping, a situation that has some advisers to Romney and Giuliani fretting because each of those candidates had hoped he would rob primary and caucus votes from the other. "Thompson is dropping too fast for their good," said the adviser.
This article starring:
Fred Thompson
John McCain
Mike Huckabee
Mitt Romney
Rudy Giuliani
Posted by: Fred ||
11/20/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
so, Im wondering who Fred and Steve and seafor etc favor in the GOP race.
I think its no secret that anyone who has any ounce of hawkishness on the Dem side is for Hilary over Obama or Edwards (Biden might be a possibility, if he wasnt such a dark horse, and lately saying foolish things about Iran)
To someone like me McCain is the obvious GOP choice, cause of his stalwartness on every international issue from Israel to Iraq to Iran to NKor to Russia, his personal background etc. But I understand some of y'all dont forgive McCain-Finegold, and consider him a devious traitor. Whatever. But how do you pick among Rudy, Thomson, and Romney?
#3
Huckabee? Great on pro-life, but other than that people need to wake the hell up. He is a nanny stater, and his record shows it. He is a big government tax & spender, basically a pro-life version of Dem Bill Richardson.
Ron Paul is more suited to be "L Ron Paul: and lead a cult like Scientology than he is to lead a modern nation in the world today. He associates with racists and anti-Semites, and endorses and supports crackpot conspiracists, and endorsed tinfoil beanie paranoids. Not to mention he is completely ideologically blind to the threats facing us, and somehow is stupid enough to think that isolationism is possible, much less proper.
Romney is a fake. He has flip flopped and triangulated like a Clinton. He is trying to buy the nomination, and is reflective of the "say anything do anything" country-club set in DC that screws us over once they get in office. I have encountered a lot of sleazy people pushing him, and I trust Romney as far as I could kick him. He epitomizes the rot that has happened at the core of the Republican Party as it drifts away from principles and patriotism, and toward raw power (like the Dems). He deserves the name Multiple Choice Mitt, and he comes across like a oily used Porsche salesman. I cannot bring myself to EVER vote for this man (I'd vote 3rd party before voting for him).
Guiliani? Putz. He is already talking "Virtual" fence. That's a non starter and indicates he is soft on border enforcement. His record shows he is in the pocket of the illegal alien amnesty crowd like Bush. I also do not trust him on judges - his record is piss poor. And guns and pro-life? Guiliani is flat out WRONG on those, and may as well be Hillary when it comes to those issues, his stands are very similar in spite of his attempts to wiggle away from his record. Guiliani only gets my vote if there is no other choice.
So that leaves me Thompson and McCain.
McCain has too long of a record that is too easily exploited against him, and has a record of having a tempter that can be exploited for dirt on him. He's just not the guy.
As many of you know I was touting Thompson here in March. And for a while it seemed that Fred was the guy. He has all the right stands, his Federalist approach is exactly what we need. He is strong on 2nd amendment rights, strict judges, border AND internal enforcement against illegal aliens, strong on winning the war on Islamic Fascism, strong on smaller but more efficient government, and strong on individual liberty. What's not to like? BUT...
He isn't campaigning worth a crap - he is the right guy philosophically, but nobody is hearing about it, and those grass roots organizers like me have been shunted aside and ignored. I had 300+ in Colorado ready to do the footwork. But we have gotten ZERO response form the campaign, and the numbers have withered away do less than 2 dozen, because there is simply NOTHING TO DO. The campaign never called us, never emailed us never acknowledged that we existed.
The new people that came in August to run the sow threw away all the internet support, threw away and neglected the grass roots except to send mailers to us begging for money, threw away his Youtube spots, threw away the podcasts, and threw away all the momentum we generated.
So now, unless someone in the Thompson campaign wakes the hell up, Fred is done.
And that leave me with precisely NOBODY I want to vote FOR on the Republican side. I will not be donating money, I will not be volunteering to do campaign work. I will only ultimately pull the lever AGAINST the Dems, because the porkers and powerbrokers in the Republican Party have failed to leave the Country Club and come back for us Sam's Club Republicans.
#4
OS I fear that Thompson blew it with the super seckret, stealth approach to the announcement. Too clever by 3/4.
Posted by: Thomas Woof ||
11/20/2007 18:51 Comments ||
Top||
#5
with Romney and Rudy, we need to pin them down with precise, non-Clintonian-parsable positions. That's not that hard to do - Ima Fred or Hunter guy, but they would make excellent checks as VP or Sec Def on both the front-runners, if they can't get the POTUS slot
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/20/2007 21:13 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Given the possibles, the worst trunk is better than the best donk, though McCain makes it a contest. So no matter whom the trunks nominate, I'll vote for him. The only question is how badly I'll bruise my nose.
#7
To someone like me McCain is the obvious GOP choice, cause of his stalwartness on every international issue from Israel to Iraq to Iran to NKor to Russia, his personal background etc.
#8
LH MCCcain chucked his credentials with the amnesty for illegals gambit. This stance like wise puts Guilliani on unstable for me. But I'll take him at his word on 'constructionist' judges and he brings the NE into play for the electoral college. If he can carry NY an PN it's for Billary
A growing focus on fresh ideas coupled with lingering doubts about Hillary Clinton's honesty and forthrightness are keeping the Democratic presidential contest close in Iowa, with Barack Obama in particular mounting a strong race against the national front-runner.
Why do those "fresh ideas" sound so routinely familiar?
Most Democratic likely voters in Iowa, 55 percent, say they're more interested in a "new direction and new ideas" than in strength and experience, compared with 49 percent in July -- a help to Obama, who holds a substantial lead among "new direction" voters.
This article starring:
Barack Obama
Posted by: Fred ||
11/20/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The fact that he has "lingerly doubts" about the Clintonistas should be enough to discount him entirely. Of course to say he is convinced of her lack of honesty might become a hate crime if she is elected. Maybe he's just playing it safe.
#3
Barack Obama is a poster child for the greatness and the weakness of the American experiment. Where else in the world could you find a less mature and unqualified prospective leader (outside Iran, Russia and Venezuela that is) who by America's greatness is given the opportunity to be the most important person in the world?
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
11/20/2007 9:54 Comments ||
Top||
NEW DELHI: Even as Pakistan gets further enmeshed in internal turmoil, the Indian Army has kicked off a massive combat and 'operational alert' exercise in the western sector to test its 'pro-active' conventional war strategy.
Codenamed 'Exercise Kamyaab', the wargame basically involves the Bhatinda-based 10 Corps, with its three infantry divisions, an armoured brigade and an artillery brigade in an exercise area roughly stretching from Fazilka right up to almost Bikaner.
"The exercise, which ends on November 27, will witness the participation of over 25,000 troops, apart from hundreds of tanks, artillery guns, infantry combat vehicles and the like," said a source.
The 10 Corps is tasked with both defeating 'enemy ingress' as well as undertaking 'shallow offensive thrusts' across the border, either independently or in conjunction with 'strike' formations.
The major part of the exercise is, of course, being held 'slightly away' from the international border with Pakistan so as not to raise any alarm bells. India and Pakistan, incidentally, have a long-standing agreement on advance notice on military exercises, manoeuvres and troop movements to prevent any crisis situation arising due to misreading of intentions.
Interestingly enough, another Indian exercise named 'Tatrashak', with elements from Army, Navy, IAF, Coast Guard and BSF, is also going to be launched along the Kutch coast on Wednesday, say sources.
The 10 Corps wargame is significant since the formation is part of the new Jaipur-based South Western Army Command (SWAC), created in 2005 to give the armed forces a greater offensive punch along the entire western front with Pakistan.
With the Mathura-based 1 'strike' Corps and the 10 pivot Corps under it, SWAC is responsible for offensive operations on the western front in conjunction with the formations under the Western Army Command (WAC) headquartered at Chandimandir.
Posted by: john frum ||
11/20/2007 15:20 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This is only 10 Corps, a "holding" formation.
Perv will only worry if the three Indian Strike Corps begin moving near his border.
Posted by: john frum ||
11/20/2007 15:51 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Lulz, that's just plain me.
Carry on.
Posted by: Thomas Woof ||
11/20/2007 18:58 Comments ||
Top||
(AKI) Four journalists have been arrested in a new wave of media arrests in Iran.
Abolfazl Abedini Nasr, journalist from the weekly Bahar Ahwaz, was arrested on Wednesday in Ahwaz, capital of the predominantly ethnic Arab province of Khuzestan on the Persian Gulf. Two years ago, Abedine Nasr spent five months in prison, and while he was busy with the recent lengthy strike of workers at the Haft Tappeh sugar factory, he was stopped twice by security police. His lawyers still do not know where the journalist is being held or on what charges.
Three other journalists from the northern region of Ghilan on the Caspian Sea, have also been arrested. Arash Bahmani, Babak Mehdizadeh and Kouhzad Esmaili were arrested and imprisoned after being found guilty of "offending the authorities" and "spreading false and biased news". A year ago, the three journalists had covered the visit of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the north of the country, harshly criticising the government. Bahmani has been jailed for 16 months, while the other two have been sentenced to four months in prison.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
11/20/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#1
Talking about Iran and journalists, you need to read why we should allow Iran to have its nuke. My vote for the New American Idiot Journalist of the Year. I am sending to Norman Podhoretz to augment his high blood pressure as it is.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
11/20/2007 10:15 Comments ||
Top||
A legislative committee on Tuesday soundly rejected two gun-control measures just moments after Gov. Ed Rendell made a rare appearance before the panel to personally appeal to lawmakers to think of families torn apart by gun violence, not of lobbyists.
After Rendell spoke, the House Judiciary Committee debated little before defeating one bill to limit most handgun purchases to one per month and another bill to empower local governments to enact their own gun-control laws. The votes were 12-17 and 10-19, respectively. Legislators tabled a third bill that would require owners to promptly report lost or stolen guns.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
11/20/2007 13:27 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Well, we all know laws will keep lawbreakers from breaking the law!
Dumbasses....
Good for the Legislators to shitcan this piece of shit.
#2
Unfortunately, the majority of PA voters put Fat Eddie in the governor's office in the first place, and eventually they will vote for legislators who will disarm the citizens of PA. At that exact moment, I'm outta here, me...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
11/20/2007 13:58 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Rendell can blame this POS legislation's defeat on "lobbyists" all he wants; but it was really a grassroots effort by groups like the Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association that did the heavy lifting by reminding legislators that it is the citizens of Pennsylvania, not Fast Eddie, who will decided whether they get another term in office or not.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
11/20/2007 14:13 Comments ||
Top||
#4
People need to remember this whenthey go pull the lever in 2008.
WASHINGTON The Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether the District of Columbia can ban handguns in a case that puts justices squarely into the right-to-bear arms argument.
#1
Whether the following provisions D.C. Code secs. 7-2502.02(a)(4), 22-4504(a), and 7-2507.02 violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?
I wonder if the old men and women are competent enough to connect the dots?
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States,.Art I, Section 8
and the implementation of that authority through, Title 10 U.S.C.
311. Militia: composition and classes
How Current is This?
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
#2
Based upon some of the absolutely idiotic decisions in recent times, like the eminant domain case, etc, I have my doubts that the Supremes will think this one through. One can always hope, though.
/color me cynical
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
11/20/2007 16:09 Comments ||
Top||
#3
All they have to do is read what Thomas Jefferson said, "The Second Ammendement should never be construed as to deprive law abiding Citizens of their arms". But they won't. It'll be close. Anyone wanna bet which position Ruth Bader-Ginsberg will take?
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
11/20/2007 16:48 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Look at the 2nd amendment like this....Why would the government need an amendment to the constitution to ensure it's allowed to arm the militia?
#5
Why would the government need an amendment to the constitution to ensure it's allowed to arm the militia?
Because the malitias belong to the States. The Army belongs to the Federal government. The purpose of the Bill of Rights was to limit the powers of the Federal Government, in part by reserving rights to the states and individuals. In this case, the document is unfortunately ambiguous.
Note also that while the first amendment prohibited the establishment of a religion, this was limited to the Federal government. Several states continued to have established religions until 1831.
The real question is what was meant by the "malitia" at the time of drafting.
The Militia Act of 1792 was a series of statutes enacted by the second United States Congress in 1792. The act provided for the organization of state militias under the command of the President of the United States.
There were, in fact, two Militia Acts passed by the U.S. Congress in 1792. The first Act, passed May 2, 1792, provided for the authority of the President to call out the militias of the several states, "whenever the United States shall be invaded, or be in imminent danger of invasion from any foreign nation or Indian tribe."[1] The law also authorized the President to call the militias into Federal service "whenever the laws of the United States shall be opposed or the execution thereof obstructed, in any state, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by this act".[2] This provision likely referred to risings such as Shay's Rebellion or the Whiskey Rebellion in opposition to the judicial collection of debts and taxes.
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Militia Act of 1792
The second Act, passed May 8, 1792, provided for the organization of the state militias. It conscripted every "free able-bodied white male citizen" between the ages of 18 and 45 into a local militia company overseen by the state. Militia members were required to arm themselves at their own expense with a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 rounds of ammunition, and a knapsack. Men owning rifles were required to provide a powder horn, 1/4 pound of gun powder, 20 rifle balls, a shooting pouch, and a knapsack.[3] Some occupations were exempt, such as congressmen, stagecoach drivers, and ferryboatmen. Otherwise, men were required to report for training twice a year, usually in the Spring and Fall. Two types of milita companies emerged by 1830: Volunteers and Enrolled. Volunteer militia companies were popular, prestigious, and often exclusive, with members possessing political or social connections. Each company designed its own uniforms, marched in parades, and held banquets, balls, etc. Enrolled companies consisted of men who wanted no part of the system, and training days often were drunken parties, with few members possessing working firearms and the required equipment.
The last four sentences especially bring a new perspective to things.
Despite calls from Iran and Venezuela - OPEC's steadfast bashers of the U.S. government - experts say there's little chance the cartel will shift from pricing oil in dollars to something like the euro.
At a summit of leaders from Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries members in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, over the weekend, Venezuelan head Hugo Chavez and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad indicated the historic link between crude oil and the dollar should be severed. "They get our oil and give us a worthless piece of paper," Ahmadinejad was quoted by the Associated Press. "Some said producing countries should designate a single hard currency aside from the U.S. dollar ... to form the basis of our oil trade." Well, then give me all those worthless pieces of paper.
Chavez echoed this sentiment Sunday on the sidelines of the summit, telling the news agency "the empire of the dollar has to end." "Don't you see how the dollar has been in free-fall without a parachute?" Chavez said, calling the euro a better option. Chavez. Carter. Economy.
The effect that switching from pricing oil in dollars to euros might have on the American currency is hard to say, but it's possible it could further drive down the value of the dollar and hence make oil more expensive for U.S. customers. "That's the political weapon Iran and Venezuela are trying to leverage," said Peter Tertzakian, chief energy economist at ARC Financial, a Calgary-based private equity firm.
And given that the dollar has declined rapidly over the last few years, there are more people in the euro zone area and the relative stability diversification offers, there are some good reasons for wanting to switch from the dollar to the euro or, even better, a basket of currencies.
But rising oil prices, the close relationship between Saudi Arabia and the U.S., and the fact that oil benchmarks such as West Texas intermediate and England's Brent are priced in dollars make it unlikely OPEC will switch anytime soon.
While the dollar has fallen over 50 percent versus the euro since 2002, oil prices are nearly 5 times higher over the same time period. "If you're a producer, that's precisely what you'd want it to do," said Paul Horsnell, head of commodities research at Barclays Capital in London.
Horsnell said the fact that oil prices have risen much faster than the dollar has kept most of the OPEC nations happy. "There was a major lack of agreement in making [switching currencies] an issue," he said. That could be because oil OPEC heavyweight Saudi Arabia is known for keeping the interests of the United States in mind. Yeah, whenever it aligns with their interests.
Talk abounds of the tight relationship between the Saudi royal family and the U.S. government. Some say the United States, in an unwritten agreement dating back to the early days of Saudi oil, promised to guarantee the security of the desert kingdom in exchange for the Saudis making sure crude stays priced in U.S. dollars. Some say, indeed. Most don't.
Whether that's true or not, analysts said Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah was not moved by the euro arguments. "He shut down Chavez like a noisy kid in a class," said Fadel Gheit, a senior oil analyst at Oppenheimer. "They know where the power lies, and it's not with Chavez or" the Iranians. Dang. I missed it!
Gheit said Saudi Arabia is the only country whose opinion really matters. That's because the country is the only one with any capacity to pump more oil. So, if it wanted to, it could simply turn the taps some more, watch the price of oil fall, and let the budgets of other OPEC countries dry up.
Pricing oil in a currency besides dollars would also pose a technical challenge. For one, oil-producing countries peg their crude to worldwide benchmarks like the stuff that comes from Texas or England's North Sea. Doesn't the US pump about 60% of its own oil? That would stand in the way of switching to another currency, too, I would think.
In order for OPEC to price oil in another currency, it would need to set its own price, as opposed to relying on the benchmark prices that are set in the free market - a practice the cartel has worked 20 years to avoid.
Furthermore, experts say it's simply bad to change a system that been in place for so long. "The dollar is like the Microsoft Windows of the oil world," said Tertzakian. "It's just hard to switch out of it."
And even if OPEC did switch its oil pricing to another currency, some doubt whether the dollar would really take a hit.
The amount of oil OPEC sells on the world market is somewhere around $1.5 billion per day, said Jeffrey Currie, the head of commodity research at Goldman Sachs in London. Compare that, he said, to the more than $3 trillion that change hands in currency markets every day. "You're talking about a value that's just too small to show up on the radar screen," said Currie. "It isn't enough to materially change the currency markets." Whatever the case, even if the markets never could switch away from the dollar in a million years, the mere thought that it could be done sure seems to have some of the nutcases bubbling right to the top and bringing their alliances into sharp focus.
#2
Much like fighting the law, if you fight the markets, you will loose.
Posted by: Mark E. ||
11/20/2007 9:40 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The amount of oil OPEC sells on the world market is somewhere around $1.5 billion per day, said Jeffrey Currie, the head of commodity research at Goldman Sachs in London.
Compare that, he said, to the more than $3 trillion that change hands in currency markets every day.
Yeah, yet another reason not to worry. It's like getting upset that the British pound's worth about $2; so what?
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
11/20/2007 9:46 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Many stories exist of oil producing countries pricing their fuels for home consumption well below the "market price" charged abroad. This was done to pacify the locals. Many stories also exist of what happened when circumstances caused that artificially low price to rise.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
11/20/2007 14:08 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Uh, lessee... Oil priced in dollars, check. Boeing jets, F-16s and most munitions priced in dollars, check. As dollar falls you get more $ / bbl. For the saudis, what's not to like? People also fail to consider that lots (though a small overall percentage) of those oil dollars return here when saudi buys American made stuff...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
11/20/2007 14:12 Comments ||
Top||
#6
This thing about Saudi loyalty to the US seems a little hard for me to swallow. Loyalties, especially in that part of the world, can change quickly. Aren't these the same Saudis that had that little "embargo" thing back in 1973?
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
11/20/2007 15:45 Comments ||
Top||
#8
No loyalty. Every percentage point they talk down the dollar is a percentage point off their accumulated wealth. Better to raise prices until the infidels surrender. More like twisting the knife while grinning at you.
The Sauds have spare oil production capacity which they have declined to put on the market since 2002. Rising prices strengthen muslims and oil producing dictatorships and weaken the west. The Saudis (unlike Washington) have no blinders on when it comes to which side of civilization they are on. When the Saudis again feel truly threatened (i.e. Iran) then they will crash the price of oil like they did in the mid 1980's.
Posted by: ed ||
11/20/2007 15:56 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Fred ||
11/20/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
File this under crap.
I had bad beer, and tossing it onto the ground is a hate crime.
This is too Orwellian to even think about. It is a brain drain. May as well surrender to the brave lions of islam if the richest segments of society are going to back such BS as "hate crimes" legislation. Then I conclude anarchy as the cure as all men are already created equal.
What a joke.
You men are doing a good job of lawfare, huh?
Such simple people with large voices. Curse you ABC.
#2
Illegal aliens are potential targets of hate crimes. Maybe the increase in that population of potential victims accounts for (some of) the increase in number of hate crimes?
And does it count when members of the victim class hang the nooses on their OWN office doors, etc?
On a per capita basis it would appear the Jews are still the #1 victims of hate crimes. I wonder what the split is now on the perps of these anti-Semitic hate crimes - is the increase from old-fashioned Neo-Nazi haters, or the more currently fashionable Islamofascist haters? Or can Muslims not be guilty of hate crimes by some sort of bureaucratic definition?
#5
Glenmore - don't leave out the usual white neo-marxist socialist fraudulent academic intellectual that has seized our universities under the guise of 'academic freedom'. The pro-Paleo "ignore the butchery of Israeli citizens" academics just ooze the vile Antisemitism usually associated with the common gutter variety of street thug smugly hiding behind the institution of tenure.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Polls being conducted by GOP candidates appear to show a growing chance that underfunded hopeful 
A growing focus on fresh ideas coupled with lingering doubts about Hillary Clinton's honesty and forthrightness are keeping the Democratic presidential contest close in Iowa, with 
(AKI) Four journalists have been arrested in a new wave of media arrests in Iran.
