An explosive new book based on a daring six-month undercover operation exposing the subversive agenda of the Council on American-Islamic Relations reveals the Muslim group spent $160,000 in an unsuccessful effort to run top-rated nationally syndicated radio host Michael Savage off the air.
Internal CAIR documents uncovered in "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America" show that despite its high cost and the continued success of Savage's show, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad believed the campaign was "worth every penny," because, he says, the radio star lost at least $1 million in advertising.
Authors P. David Gaubatz and Paul Sperry recount how CAIR ran out of money before it could crack Savage's most loyal sponsors.
As WND reported, Savage sued CAIR in December 2007, two months after the Muslim lobby group began urging "people of all faiths" to contact Savage's advertisers to protest "anti-Muslim bigotry" on the air. CAIR cited Savage calling the Quran "a throwback document" and "a book of hate" and demanding CAIR be thrown out of the country for promulgating it.
Savage's copyright infringement and RICO lawsuit alleged CAIR illegally published singled-out quotes and audio excerpts from the show regarding Islam, misappropriated his words and used the clips for its own fundraising purposes, damaging the value of his copyrighted material. Judge Susan Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed the case, determining CAIR had a legal right to use excerpts of a public broadcast for purposes of comment and criticism. But Illston ruled in Savage's favor when CAIR attempted to extract attorneys fees. Savage declared Illston's November 2008 decision a "huge victory for me, personally, but also for the rest of America who is afraid of this lawsuit-happy group of intimidators."
In their new book, Gaubatz, a counter-terrorism investigator and former federal agent with vast experience in the Middle East, and Sperry, a veteran reporter on the war on terror and author of "Infiltration," document CAIR's role as a U.S. front for the Muslim Brotherhood's plan to transform America into an Islamic nation under the authority of the Quran.
In a chapter titled "Blackmailing Corporate America," the authors show how CAIR tries to intimidate major corporations and media figures, such as Savage.
An internal memo one of thousands of pages extracted by Gaubatz's son Chris, who posed as a Muslim convert and became a CAIR intern for six months showed CAIR considered broadening its campaign against Savage.
The effort against the talk-radio star included formation of a nonprofit called Hate Hurts America, which published on its website lists of advertisers along with contact information.
A CAIR staffer wrote in an internal memo that the "idea behind Hate Hurts America is great and has the potential to go far. However, I feel that if you want to continue with HHA and not lose momentum, the campaign needs to expand beyond Michael Savage to other bigoted talk show hosts."
The report noted that it's much easier to get the attention of large corporations rather than small firms or franchises, because large corporations like AT&T have a reputation at stake and "don't want to be associated with anything that might seem controversial."
The CAIR memo said, however, companies that are endorsed or directly promoted by Savage on the air, such as Life Lock or Swiss America, are "an absolute no" for targeting.
"They are loyal to Savage and there is a chance they might sue," the memo said.
False figure
As WND reported, the British government apparently seized on campaigns against Savage by CAIR and others when it used his name to provide "balance" to a "least wanted list" dominated by Muslim extremists. Savage's ban from entry to the U.K. prompted an invitation from the Cambridge Union to debate political correctness via a video link, but the society canceled his appearance, scheduled for tomorrow, citing "legal issues" among other problems. Anyone care to expand on these "legal issues"? Why do these folks run for cover like little girls behind mommy's "legal issues" skirt?
The chapter in "Muslim Mafia" covering Savage's ordeal with CAIR also shows how the Islamic group has tried to intimidate Hollywood and companies such as Nike, Bank of America and US Airways by citing a false figure of 7 million American Muslims who are ready and willing to boycott their services. Great! Bring it on! And while you're at it, why not boycott the whole country!
Despite widespread use of the figure in media, propagated by CAIR and others, the Pew Research Center recently estimated the American-Muslim population to be only about 2.35 million. Another loud-mouthed group with disproportionate influence. Too bad happy folks are so complacent and unrecognized. Seems to me a good government should be able to figure out how to tap these folks for opinions and give them their due weight.
The book also reveals CAIR recently has teamed up with the American Civil Liberties Union to consolidate resources on Muslim cases.
"Muslim Mafia" includes new revelations about CAIR's role in the "flying imams" case in 2006, in which six Muslim leaders were removed from an airline flight in Minneapolis after passengers and crew members reported what they believed to be suspicious behavior.
The book already has moved lawmakers on Capitol Hill to action.
U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., co-founder of the Congressional Anti-Terror Caucus, and other members of Congress including Reps. John Shadegg, R-Ariz., and Paul Broun, R-Ga. plan to hold a press conference today in Washington calling for an investigation and an end to political lobbying by front groups such as CAIR. Which I'm sure will create as much hullaballoo and, after final analysis, have as many teeth as the ACORN hullaballoo.
"Now we have proof from the secret documents that this investigative team has uncovered, coupled with the ones recently declassified by the FBI that [radical Islamists] agents living among us have a plan in place, and they are successfully carrying out that subversive plan," Myrick said.
#1
"Now we have proof (Snip)that [radical Islamists] agents living among us have a plan in place, and they are successfully carrying out that subversive plan," Myrick said.
and you're just now figuring it out?
Morons, it's as plain as the nose on your face, this is WAR and you don't seem to "GET IT" at all that the Muslim world wants YOU DEAD.
In the movie "Judgment Day" the aliens did NOT plan any kind of talks, they wanted Humanity dead, suvstitute MUSLIMS for ALIENS and the same is FACT, they want all "Humanity" DEAD (Except themselves)
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/15/2009 5:45 Comments ||
Top||
#2
These people have been on top of it, Redneck Jim. It's just that now they have enough evidence pulled together to lay out for those who've not been paying close attention. According to the article, the son of one of the authors spent six months undercover at CAIR headquarters as an intern, copying pertinent documents -- the kind of thing that makes CAIR lawyers blanch in a way that little else can.
President Obama, convening his fifth war council meeting in as many weeks, pressed his senior national security advisers Wednesday on the political situation in Afghanistan and the effort to train the country's security forces, officials said.
Allegations of fraud in the Afghan presidential election over the summer have raised questions about the legitimacy of Hamid Karzai's government, complicating U.S. efforts to partner with him. Meanwhile, the country's security forces are seen as ill-equipped to confront an insurgency that is gaining strength.
Such factors are figuring prominently in the debate over the Obama administration's strategy in Afghanistan, official say. Although the discussions also include making a decision on whether to deploy tens of thousands of additional U.S. troops, an administration official said the president was "very focused on the complexity of the situation" Wednesday -- looking past the military aspect of the equation and toward the civilian effort.
Another official said the focus on the civilian effort grew out of a sense that the United States needs to better cultivate Afghan leaders and institutions.
"We've been at war eight years, and we realize now we're starting from scratch because very little work has been done building a credible Afghan partner," said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the talks.
Obama has said he will make a decision on U.S. troop levels in the coming weeks, and White House officials said that timetable is still in effect, with another war council session scheduled for next week.
But in Britain, Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced Wednesday that he would send an additional 500 troops to Afghanistan -- triggering media reports there that U.S. allies had reached a preliminary conclusion about boosting troop levels.
Brown said he would deploy the additional troops only if NATO partners also send extra forces. The British military contingent in Afghanistan, which would reach 9,500 if the additional troops are deployed, is the second largest of the forces from the 41 nations that have contributed troops to the war effort.
In remarks before the House of Commons, the British prime minister suggested that his move to send additional combat troops is in line with the consensus emerging from Obama's policy review.
"I believe the decision we are announcing is consistent with what the Americans will decide," said Brown, who met last month with Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, and Gen. David H. Petraeus, the overall commander for the region.
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs denied a BBC report that Obama has settled on a "substantial increase" of U.S. forces -- up to an additional 45,000 -- that could be announced as soon as next week.
"The president has not made a decision, and when he does, I think that you can assume that the BBC will not be the first outlet for such a decision," Gibbs said. Nonetheless, he added that the British troop increase reflected a concerted effort among the administration and its partners.
Japan has told the United States it will end a naval refuelling mission backing its war in Afghanistan, a month before President Barack Obama visits Tokyo, a top defence official said Thursday.
The formal confirmation to the White House and Pentagon, days before Defense Secretary Robert Gates visits Japan, is part of efforts by the new centre-left government in Tokyo to recalibrate its security ties with Washington.
Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama, who took office last month, has said he wants "more equal" relations with the United States and that he opposes plans for a new US military air base to be built on southern Okinawa island.
Hatoyama, whose party in opposition spoke out against Japan abetting "American wars," has for months said it would not renew a naval refuelling mission in the Indian Ocean that was first launched in 2001.
On Wednesday, Parliamentary Defence Secretary Akihisa Nagashima, the third-ranking defence official, told the White House and Pentagon that the mission would not be renewed when its legal mandate expires in January.
"I explained that the special law will expire," Nagashima said in Washington after meeting Obama's National Security Adviser James Jones and Undersecretary of Defence Michele Flournoy.
The news comes as Obama is reviewing his strategy in Afghanistan, where recent elections were seen as widely flawed, and is weighing how many more American troops to deploy to the bloody conflict.
Hatoyama's Democratic Party of Japan, which ended more than half a century of almost unbroken conservative rule, has signalled a renewed emphasis on Japan's pacifist values and on civilian aid over military efforts.
In Afghanistan, Hatoyama has proposed new, non-military support for Kabul, such as job training for former Taliban soldiers.
Hatoyama, an admirer of Obama -- who visits Japan on November 12-13 -- has also said that he wants to work more closely with Washington on combating climate change and on nuclear non-proliferation.
The naval mission has supported US and other NATO forces in the Afghan conflict with refueling and logistical support, but it has drawn scorn at home from left-leaning politicians now in Hatoyama's ruling coalition.
The change of power in Tokyo has also revived debate on another long-simmering issue, the 47,000-strong US military presence in Japan that started with the superpower's post-World War II occupation.
A flashpoint has been the US Marine Corps Futenma Air Base, located in a crowded urban area, where residents have long complained of aircraft noise, the danger of accidents, and occasional frictions with service personnel.
Under a 2006 agreement which Japan, under a conservative government, struck with the United States's former George W. Bush administration, the base would be closed but replaced with a coastal facility to be built by 2014.
Hatoyama has in the past said he wants the replacement facility to be built outside Okinawa or even outside Japan, a proposal also favoured by two minor parties whose support he needs in the upper house of the Diet legislature.
The issue will be a key focus of the October 20-21 visit by Gates, the first by a US cabinet member since Japan's elections, said Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell on Wednesday in Washington.
Morrell said the United States remains committed to the 2006 agreement, under which thousands of US troops would also be moved to Guam.
"We think these are very complicated agreements that are beneficial to both of our countries, and to our long-term relationship, and to the security situation in the region," he said.
WASHINGTON: US Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry on Tuesday said he was "very wary" of sending more American troops to the region. Kerry said neither of the two extremes -- a nationwide counterinsurgency and nation-building effort in Afghanistan nor "walking away from the place" -- were do-able.
Kerry doesn't think any US military project is do-able, from Vietnam to date. He was against liberating Grenada, catching Noriega in Panama, liberating Kuwait, chasing al-Qaeda out of Afghanistan and liberating Iraq.
"The key in Afghanistan is we have got to figure out what is achievable, measured against the legitimate interests of the United States, primary among which is Al Qaeda," he said. "In Afghanistan itself we have to resolve the question of whether the Taliban are per se a threat to us."
I thought we had resolved that on 9/11 ...
Kerry will meet the top US and NATO military commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, and said he had many questions for the man who has recommended a radical change in US strategy there, backed by at least 40,000 more troops.
"I may decide that there is a do-able strategy that achieves the goals I set out, that requires some additional troops," Kerry told Reuters in an interview.
Isn't that the President's job?
"I don't know the answer to that question. I honestly don't. I am very wary of it because of past experience and because of some of the challenges that I see."
Kerry says the lessons of that war suggest that more troops should not be sent to Afghanistan without a clear exit plan. He said the US could not afford and its people would not accept a full nation-building effort in Afghanistan.
The Democrats never seize upon the obvious exit plan: win.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"The key in Afghanistan is we have got to figure out what is achievable, measured against the legitimate interests of the United States, primary among which is Al Qaeda," he said.
No, you twatwaffle- you figure out the objectives, and then apply whatever assets are necessary to achieve them. This is the logic of war.
"I am very wary of it because of past experience..."
Your 'past experience' taught you less than nothing, although it was valuable- the American people learned enough enough from your 'past experience' to soundly reject you for president.
"In Afghanistan itself we have to resolve the question of whether the Taliban are per se a threat to us."
Michael J. Totten has some pertinent thoughts on that subject. And he is a hell of a lot more trustworthy than you or your magic hat.
LIBYA has freed 88 Islamists with al-Qaeda links from Abu Slim prison in Tripoli.
"Forty-five members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) and 43 members of other jihadist groups were freed thanks to the efforts of the Islamic Foundation," lawyers' groups said in a joint statement with the Foundation, headed by Libyan leader Moamer Gaddafi's son Seif al-Islam.
"Apart from the LIFG members, the other people freed were former al-Qaeda members who were active in Afghanistan or Iraq," Saleh Saleh Abdessalem, an aide to Seif al-Islam, said.
Gathered in the prison courtyard, the detainees met journalists before greeting their families. Some broke down in tears.
Ibrahim Buhlig, 35, is free after 11 years in prison. He said he left Libya at the age of 16 to fight against Russian troops in Afghanistan. He was arrested in Saudi Arabia in 1998, then extradited to Libya.
According to Abu Hachem, his nom-de-guerre, the release program followed "talks with Seif al-Islam through the intermediary of (Libyan cleric) Ali Sallabi".
The Kadhafi Foundation said it is "working to strengthen peace in Libya", emphasising the "big success" of the dialogue with the LIFG, formed in secret in Afghanistan in the early 1990s and which came to public notice in 1995 when it launched an armed campaign against Kadhafi's regime.
Al-Qaeda announced in November 2007 that the LIFG had joined the jihadist network.
The men's release comes at a time when Seif al-Islam is reportedly being proposed for Libya's second most important job,"coordinator of social and popular committees," a position equivalent to head of state.
Not that they'll give up their nukes if we are gullible enough to sign a peace treaty, but it's necessary ...
SEOUL, Oct. 14 (Yonhap) -- North Korea on Wednesday urged the United States to replace their armistice agreement with a peace treaty in order to settle the ongoing nuclear stalemate, putting Washington at the center of a nuclear deadlock ahead of expected bilateral talks.
"The nuclear issue on the peninsula can be fundamentally settled only when the U.S. repeals its hostile policy toward the DPRK and replaces the armistice agreement with a peace accord," the Rodong Sinmun, newspaper of the ruling Workers' Party, said in a commentary.
The North has long sought a peace treaty with the United States, who signed the armistice on behalf of the U.N. forces that fought in the war, claiming that the lack of it is proof of U.S. hostility toward its regime. "A peace accord should be concluded between the DPRK and the U.S. if the nuclear issue on the peninsula is to be settled," the paper said.
Since the U.S. signed the armistice on behalf of the UN -- because there are too many members to cram into one room to sign off -- should the peace treaty also be with the UN, not the U.S.?
The paper also slammed comments by Philip Crowley, U.S. assistant secretary of state, that the North would be further isolated for keeping its nuclear program. "(The paper) dismisses this (Crowley's remarks) as shameless, preposterous and brigandish sophism as the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula is a product of the U.S. hostile policy toward the DPRK," KCNA said.
"brigandish sophism" -- there's a nice turn of phrase ...
North Korea is boycotting the six-party denuclearization talks in protest at U.N. sanctions for its nuclear and missile tests earlier this year, although its leader Kim Jong-il recently expressed his willingness to return to dialogue on the condition that expected bilateral talks with the U.S. produce results.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
OTOH compare wid WMF > WILLINGNESS OF OBAMA ADMIN TO ALLOW TALIBAN PARTICIPATION IN AFPAK GOVT. HINTS AT COVERT US DESIRE FOR FUTURE VIETNAM-STYLE "HONORABLE WITHDRAWAL".
China may be concerned about North Korea's nuclear armament but worries more about the stability of the North Korean regime, an academic said Monday.
No kidding ...
Yun Duk-min, a professor of the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security, told an international seminar on South Korea-China-Japan relations in Seoul sponsored by Dongseo University's Japan Center, "China has been attentive to the resumption of the six-party nuclear disarmament talks rather than to the resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue. It merely talks about the principle of a peaceful resolution but offers no specific ideas."
What would we do without experts ...
Yun said while the North's nuclear and missile provocations hurt China's basic interests by sparking debate about nuclear armament in South Korea and Japan, Beijing is hesitating to apply pressure on Pyongyang. "In the event the U.S. recognizes North Korea as a de facto nuclear power like India and Pakistan, China worries if participating in strong sanctions will weaken its position."
Jin Jingyi, a professor at Peking University, ascribed the impasse in the six-party talks to the crashing of the geopolitical strategies of the countries involved. "So long as America's Northeast Asia strategy evolves around strengthening its alliances with Japan and South Korea, a resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue is unlikely," he said. "And if America does not cooperate with China, which is emerging as the leading power of the new Northeast Asia, the geopolitical significance of the Korean Peninsula will increase and leave the North Korean nuclear issue unresolved."
Cho Yang-hyun, a professor at the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security, said the new Japanese government will find it difficult to depart from the previous Liberal Democratic Party's North Korea policy unless external conditions like Washington-Pyongyang relations change. "The island country's Democratic Party administration will avoid a conciliatory attitude toward the North until the Upper House election in July next year," Cho said. "But there are chances for Pyongyang to attempt to improve relations with Tokyo through epoch-making concessions on a DP leadership visit to the North, a Tokyo-Pyongyang summit and the Japanese abductees issue."
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
TOPIX > NORTH KOREA WARNS SOUTH OF NAVAL INTRUSION.
The U.S. administration on Tuesday held off on condemnation of North Korea's short-range missile tests. Asked Monday whether the firing of short-range missiles violates UN Security Council Resolution 1874, a senior official with the U.S. State Department told reporters that the U.S. government was still thinking about the matter.
They're holding off condemnation of everything except the restoration of order in Honduras. And the Mad Mullahs in Iran ...
This official added whether the North violated the UNSC resolution will be determined based on analysis of aspects including how far the missiles flew.
The short-range KN-02 surface-to-surface missile fired is a kind of ballistic missile, which means the tests fell foul of the resolution's ban on "all activities related to its ballistic missile program."
Meanwhile, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Philip Crowley told reporters, "We are interested in seeing a resumption of the six-party process. We're interested in seeing North Korea recommit to its obligations that it's made in the past few years" to dismantle its nuclear program.
There is speculation that the U.S. government is trying to overlook the missile tests for the sake of getting the nuclear talks back on the road.
More to the point, they're overlooking the tests because Bambi doesn't need one more thing on his plate ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
North Korea on Wednesday expressed "regret" for the death of six South Koreans in the wake of a sudden discharge of water from a dam into the Imjin River in early September and offered condolences to their families.
Seoul said it considers the statement an apology. Cheong Wa Dae spokesman Park Sun-kyu said in a press briefing said North Korea "expressed the intention to improve relations." That ends one of several simmering disputes 38 days after the flooding occurred on Sept. 6.
A North Korean delegate made the statement at working-level inter-Korean talks about flood prevention in the Imjin River held at the joint Kaesong Industrial Complex on Wednesday morning. "We regret the unexpected death of people in South Korea as a result" of the flooding, the North Korean official said. "We offer deep condolences to their bereaved families."
The ministry quoted the delegate as saying the discharge was "inevitable" to prevent greater damage.
Kim Nam-sik, a South Korean delegate at the meeting and the director-general of the ministry's Inter-Korean Exchanges and Cooperation Bureau, said, "Although it's not a full explanation, we think the North gave us its an account in its own style of what actually happened on their side."
Meanwhile, the two delegations agreed to continue discussions on the prevention of floods and joint use of rivers shared by both sides. They agreed to discuss a schedule for the next meeting in written messages through liaison officers at the truce village of Panmunjom. To prevent similar incidents, the South Korean delegation asked North Korea for advance warning if it is going to discharge water from a dam, of the reason why and the amount of water to be discharged. The North Koreans accepted.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hmm. How does "regret" compare to "apology" in Korean, and for that matter Chinese, minds?
The long-simmering tension between insurers and congressional Democrats is erupting into open warfare, with lawmakers stepping up their push to revoke a key federal protection for the insurance industry.
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday called for an amendment to the health care reform bill that would remove the long-standing antitrust exemption for insurers, echoing a push by other Democrats to crack down on the industry.
"The health insurance's antitrust exemption is one of the worst accidents of American history," Schumer said. "It deserves a lot of the blame for the huge rise in premiums that has made health insurance so unaffordable. It is time to end this special status and bring true competition to the health insurance industry." As far as I am concerned, the healtcare debate is over with this quote. Kill this law and be done with it. Unless you have ulterior motives, that is. Another good companion piece of legislation would be to limit get-rich-quick medical malpractice suits to actual damages sustained plus attorneys' fees plus a reasonable amount for pain and suffering. No punitive damages except for maybe repeat offenders, which should go to a basket of non-governmental charities.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, introduced a bill last month to remove the anti-trust exemption and convened a hearing Wednesday, where Schumer called for eliminating the exemption as part of the health bill working its way through Congress.
Schumer's push comes on the heels of a controversial industry-sponsored report released over the weekend that makes the case that insurance premiums will go up by as much as $4,000 per family by 2019 if the Senate Finance Committee legislation is signed into law. The release of that report by the industry group America's Health Insurance Plans sparked angry blowback from Democrats in both chambers.
Top Democrats in the House also floated the idea during a meeting among party leaders Tuesday evening in Speaker Nancy Pelosi's Capitol suite, someone present said afterward.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) added his support to repealing the exemption at the Leahy hearing. "It's something that should have been done a long time ago," Reid said.
As for insurance companies, "There isn't anything we could do to satisfy them in this health care bill. Nothing," Reid said. "They are so anti-competitive. Why? Because they make more money than any other business in America today. . . .What a sweet deal they have."
The exemption, known as McCarran-Ferguson, cedes regulatory control of the industry, on the business side, to individual states. But repealing the antitrust exemption would give the federal government more authority to oversee the business side of health insurance companies — something states now have the sole authority to monitor.
And the push by Reid and Schumer signals that Democrats are planning to intensify their efforts to paint insurance companies as the villains in the health reform fight, something that could prove useful as President Barack Obama and others try to rally a skeptical public around a sweeping health reform measaure.
But the idea has been raised before, and Leahy said Wednesday he scheduled the hearing before AHIP released its report.
"I guess the insurance industry is stirring the pot," Schumer said, in response to suggestions from the industry that Leahy called the hearing in retaliation. "Maybe because the insurance industry blundered so badly on Monday, it gives us greater chance to pass it."
Health insurance officials dismissed the effort as a "political ploy."
"Health insurance is one of the most regulated industries in America at both the federal and state level," said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans. "McCarran-Ferguson has nothing to do with competition in the health insurance market. The focus on this issue is a political ploy designed to distract attention away from the real issue of rising health care costs."
Still, the push is likely to gather momentum as Democrats try to find a way to lash back at the insurance industry — whose report was viewed as a last-minute attempt to scuttle health care reform just days before Tuesday's critical Senate Finance Committee vote. The legislation there was approved 14-9, with Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine voting yes and giving reform efforts a boost.
Leahy's bill would repeal the exemption established in the 1945 McCarran-Ferguson Act for any companies engaged in price fixing or bid rigging - which are both already illegal. He has introduced similar legislation in other Congresses, including a broader repeal of the underlying law. Reid is a co-sponsor of the current bill.
In the House, where Democratic leaders are exploring the issue further, Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) has introduced legislation that would essentially end McCarran-Ferguson and give the federal government the right to regulate insurers at the national level.
#1
"The health insurance's antitrust exemption is one of the worst accidents of American history," Schumer said. "It deserves a lot of the blame for the huge rise in premiums that has made health insurance so unaffordable. It is time to end this special status and bring true competition to the alth insurance industry."
Shumer should first remove the federal government from the health care industry, which is an even bigger trust than what they granted the health insurance industry.
That act alone would cause prices to plummet immediately.
#2
a push by other Democrats to crack down on the industry
Translation, to ease the way for Obamacare by blackening insurers.
If you can't make your idea look good, make the opposition's idea look lie shit in the press.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/15/2009 5:35 Comments ||
Top||
#3
..a reasonable amount for pain and suffering
We've already set the value of a life. Simply cap it to the amount America pays to the family of our sons and daughters who give their last full measure of devotion in our defense.
#4
Perhaps I haven't thought it through entirely, but I have to say that I think Schumer's suggestion here is a a good one (did I really just say that?). I realize the timing of his suggestion makes it look like payback for the insurance companies coming out with the PWC report. However the reality is that the antitrust exemption that insurance companies have enjoyed since the passage of the McCarran-Ferguson Act has allowed the industry to operate as an oligarchy in many ways, which stifles competition and leads to higher costs. I believe that repealing the antitrust exemption is one of the steps necessary to reform the healthcare industry and control costs without adopting the dreaded public option. There are 3 initial steps that I would take, and not at the same time but sequentially. Do them one at a time and see what effect they have before moving on to the next one. So here are the steps and the order I would take them:
1. Make insurance plans and coverage portable across state lines.
2. Medical malpractice tort reform
3. Repeal the McCarran-Ferguson Act and remove the antitrust exemption for insurance cos.
These 3 steps could go a long way to providing a free-market, private sector solution to the healthcare cost problem without the government getting their grubby hands into the mix, which would be a disaster as everyone knows.
#5
Only one thing will minimize the problems we have with health care costs and insurance. Eliminate the tax deductibility of employer paid health insurance and make payment the responsibility of the individual receiving the treatment.
We need to get the fourth and fifth parties of the government and the employer out of the picture. Let people get their own insurance, let them pay their own bills, let them get reimbursement from the insurance company. Or let the market evolve new mechanisms. But this idea that employers or the government are adding any value to the process is ridiculous. The only problem is transition.
We don't have a problem with plastic surgery and we don't have a problem with automobile insurance.
#6
NO PUNITIVE DAMAGES - for any civil tort. Punishment, IMHO, should be determined before the fact by laws passed by elected representatives and not ex post facto by a jury. Monetary punishment should be paid to the relevant governmental treasury & not to an individual and his attorney.
Punitive damages are just a custom of the country that benefits a very few. Damages done to individuals & pain & suffering, are a different matter. Of course, this is a non-starter for a party in the pocket of trial lawyers.
#7
Reid said. "They are so anti-competitive. Why? Because they make more money than any other business in America today. . . .What a sweet deal they have."
Hogwash! The Health Insurance Industry has an average profit margin of 3-4%. The McCarran-Ferguson exemption hasnt been lifted because individual states insist on unique minimum mandates for insurance coverage. For instance some states mandate minimum coverage include cosmetic procedures where others do not. Its those states that have fought tooth and nail to keep this exemption not the insurance industry. Its a way to manipulate private insurance companies to match their state sponsored insurance plans. And you guessed it Union plans. In other words, if folks in New York were allowed to purchase less expensive insurance across state lines from say Alabama their stranglehold would collapse. But now theyre suggesting the Feds set those minimum requirements. If liberals at the Federal level mandate the baseline for private insurance companies nationwide you can bet your bottom dollar it will match the states that require the most generous packages. Which, of course, will also be the most costly. So this isnt an attempt to lower premium costs through anti-trust. Its a back door into driving private industry out of business.
#8
Medical torts should be heard by a separate court system.
Before you recoil from that, consider that we already have special courts for different purposes. For example, we have bankruptcy courts. The judges there have special skills in finance and bankruptcy law. We have admiralty courts. We have intelligence courts.
Medical malpractice courts would not have juries, but they would have judges who are tried in the special law and procedures. They could pick experts (in addition to experts provided by plantiff and defense) and get themselves educated on matters of medicine.
Do that and you won't need to worry about caps on damages, etc. The problem will largely solve itself. I point out that the bankruptcy courts by and large work -- the judges are fair, companies and individuals get through the system, and while bankruptcy lawyers make a good living, they generally don't circle for the big kill (John Edwards would never have made it as a bankruptcy lawyer).
Medical issues, like bankruptcy issues, can be highly technical. We shouldn't burden ordinary citizens with being on the juries of such cases. Put medical torts into a special court system.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 10:41 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Dr. White, I'd avoid bankruptcy courts as an example. My experience is that they are among the most corrupt courts; a close community of attorneys whose only alternative is immigration law and politically connected trustees who pick the carcass clean for their own benefit before stiffing the creditors. Perhaps I feel this way because the judge we dealt with was bonking the judge next door in chambers instead of dealing with economic issues he dodged until retirement when he found the trustees had exhausted their percentage.
#11
Sounds like Schumer is trying to make the donk's plan palatable--just window dressing. This is particularly true if what DepotGuy said concerning a 3-4% industry profit margin is indeed correct. If Schumer says anything I'm suspect about it--I just don't trust the guy. He doesn't like the 2nd Amendment. How many of the other Amendments does he not like or support?
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) voiced his suspicion that the Obama administration is continuing some of the stonewalling practices of the George W. Bush administration when it comes to providing full intelligence briefings to the relevant committees in Congress.
Since the intel committees still leak like sieves, this isn't surprising ...
Feingold quizzed the incoming deputy director of national intelligence (DNI) during his confirmation hearing Tuesday as to his interpretation of who should receive intelligence briefings in Congress. Feingold asked whether David Gompert, the nominee for the position, believed that the section of the law requiring intelligence officials to brief Congress on covert activity requires those briefings to be exclusive to the Gang of Eight rather than the entire Intelligence panels.
It neither mandates it nor precludes it, Gompert responded, adding that he had discussed the issue with his lawyers at DNI after a meeting with Feingold last week.
I think thats not a reasonable [interpretation], Feingold quickly retorted.
He then asked whether Gompert believed the real question about how much Congress should be briefed should focus on how and when, and not whether, it should be briefed.
And certainly not whether the Congress can be trusted to keep its mouth shut ...
Gompert then tried to provide some assurance. I would agreed with [DNI Dennis] Blair that it is not whether to provide clear notifications [to Congress], but how, he said. I think being open with you and providing full and timely briefings is part of keeping that public trust which helps makes us be more effective.
Feingold said he has trouble assessing whether the Obama administration is using the Gang of Eight process properly because hes not a member of that elite group.
That's what really galls him ...
The Gang of Eight consists of the Democratic and Republican leaders in the Senate and House and the leading Democrat and Republican on the Senate and House Intelligence committees. Feingold is a member of the Intelligence Committee, but not its chairman.
In June, Feingold voted against the nominations of Stephen Preston to be the CIAs general counsel and Robert Litt to be the DNIs general counsel because he believed they misread the National Security Acts congressional notification provisions. Specifically, Preston and Litt determined that, even though the Gang of Eight provision is only in Section 503, which covers covert action, and not in Section 502, which covers other intelligence activities, the authority to brief only the Gang of Eight could be read into the latter.
Gomperts response to Feingold appeared to show an alignment with Prestons and Litts interpretation.
Feingold has been complaining for years about the way the intelligence community has kept Congress informed, but the issue became even more sensitive during the summer when Democrats began complaining that the CIA had not kept them informed about a secret counterterrorism program because then-Vice President Dick Cheney was trying to conceal it from Congress.
Even though it wasn't a program and it never did anything ...
The public furor quickly focused on Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and what she knew and when she knew it after Republicans claimed she was briefed as a member of the Gang of Eight. CIA Director Leon Panetta informed all of the members of the Intelligence committees after he found out that they had not been kept informed about the program in a timely manner.
While Feingold has applauded the efforts the Obama administration has made to end torture, he has repeatedly complained that the Obama administration has failed to provide enough disclosure to members and staffers on the Intelligence committees. While he has said the new administration is clearly more open than the Bush regime, earlier this year he accused the intelligence community of continuing to stonewall and roadblock information to the Intelligence panels.
In a related point, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said the administration and intelligence community have an opportunity to fix over-classification problems. He warned Gompert that he would continue to scrutinize which information is declassified and why that power and those decisions remain controlled by the executive branch of government.
Feingold has become one of the presidents most vocal Democratic critics. A week ago Feingold scolded the White House for failing to show up to an oversight hearing to answer questions about executive-branch czars.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
ISLAMABAD: The World Food Programme (WFP) on Thursday announced that it would continue its humanitarian operations in the country.
Until the next big kaboom ...
We have to balance the safety of our staff with our mandate to feed people. This is the worst single loss of life in the history of WFP, Amir M Abdulla, WFP deputy executive director said at a news conference. He was referring to the suicide attack on the WFP office in Islamabad which resulted in the deaths of five UN staff members. What is important here is that we find a secure and workable balance between protecting our staff and carrying out our mandate to feed the hungry in Pakistan, he said.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hopefully, whatistheirname will continue booming them.
WASHINGTON/LAHORE: US Senator John Kerry and Americas special envoy to the region Richard Holbrooke are scheduled to arrive in Islamabad, as Washington tries to step up its campaign against extremism in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Kerry would also be visiting Afghanistan and would return to the US early next week, said Tomeika Bowden, a spokeswoman for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee which Kerry heads. The US senator is expected to consult Islamabad on the Kerry-Lugar bill that is being criticised in Pakistan.
A private TV channel quoted sources that Holbrooke is coming to Pakistan to address Islamabads concerns over the Kerry-Lugar bill. He is expected to meet several opposition leaders and government officials.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
We could get lucky, Kerry could freeze pakistan solid, seems he does that where ever he preaches "Global Warming".
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/15/2009 5:50 Comments ||
Top||
#2
What will my 'great' state of Massachusetts do without any Senators representin' us in da Senate? We're doomed! Please come back, Captain Hairdo!
#3
Nothing good will come of this... even if Holbrooke wants to put the foot down on the Pak leadership, war-hero John F Kerry will undercut him. As a matter of fact, he already has- see today's story above:"Kerry wary of sending more US troops to Afghanistan."
Nice job, senator. Not that we expected anything different.
NEW DELHI: India urged China on Wednesday to stop development projects in Azad Jammu and Kashmir, the latest salvo prompted by a decades-long border dispute between the Asian giants.
We hope that the Chinese side will take a long-term view of the India-China relations, and cease such activities in areas illegally occupied by Pakistan, an Indian Foreign Ministry statement said. India was reacting to a comment by Chinese President Hu Jintao reported by the official news agency Xinhua that China was glad to carry on the Pakistani projects.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I'm wondering who a 2 front (Kashmir and AP/Bangla/Burma) China/India war favours?
QUETTA: The Taliban are currently living in Quetta and need to be eliminated before they consolidate their grip in Balochistan and start to use the province as a base to launch more terror attacks, US Consul General Stephen G Fakan has said.
Even the Pak governor believes even as he calls it a lie.
It would be unreasonable to say the Taliban do not exist in Quetta, the official posted at the Karachi Consulate told a press conference in Quetta on Wednesday. Everybody is saying the Taliban live and operate from Quetta. The Quetta shura comprises people who devise policies for the Taliban while sitting in Quetta, he added. He said Pakistani officials would be requested to do more and Islamabad should do more to fight the war against terrorism and extremism.
Quoting officials, he said some people in the Balochistan government had confessed the Taliban had moved from Quetta to Karachi and Islamabad without any restrictions. They pose a greater threat to the people of Pakistan than they do the interest of the US. There is a need to take immediate action against the Taliban before they move from FATA to Balochistan and become powerful enough to use the province as a base for more terrorist activities in the future ... We want to curb extremism wherever its is present, he added.
The US consul general said no Balochistan government official had requested the US to play any role in sending Afghan refugees back to their country. It is not that easy to locate Taliban hideouts in Quetta. We hear they keep coming (to Quetta) and going (to Afghanistan). Sometimes they are here and sometimes they go to the north. When the Taliban was removed from Afghanistan and FATA, it began to move to Quetta, he added.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Something people in the know have been harking on about for 8 years .
Posted by: Oscar ||
10/15/2009 6:38 Comments ||
Top||
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Wednesday said that "diplomatic sensitivities" led his government to ban Israel from a joint NATO air force drill, French news agency AFP reported.
"There is military cooperation between Turkey and Israel...but currently there are diplomatic sensitivities that we have to take into consideration," AFP quoted Edrogan as telling the Dubai-based channel Al-Arabiya. "We have taken the conscience of our people into consideration when we decided.... I had to be the voice that expresses the existence of my people and my people were rejecting Israel's participation.
"We discussed it with the responsible parties
Do tell. Really -- tell us who those responsible parties are.
and said yes, these drills will take place but Israel will not take part in them," he said.
Meanwhile, a Turkish newspaper reported Wednesday that the reason Turkey banned Israel from this week's NATO air force exercises was "yet another delay in the delivery of unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs," and not Turkish opposition to Israel's Gaza offensive, the newspaper Today's Zaman quoted a senior Turkish air force official as saying.
Huh? That seems counterproductive to ever getting them.
I was wondering about that myself ...
On Sunday, Foreign Ministry sources said that Turkish military officials had approached the Israel Defense Forces recently with a surprising demand that Israel refrain from participating in the drill, due to the IDF's activity in Gaza. The exercise was canceled after the U.S. and Italy pulled their participation.
The Turkish official told Today's Zaman that the deal struck between Israel and Turkey was supposed to involve a shipment of Israeli-made spy drones, known as Herons, to Turkey, but that the shipment did not arrive on time.
"Turkey needs those vehicles in its fight against terror. What led to the recent crisis between Turkey and Israel was the delay in the delivery," the official said.
Several years ago, Turkey signed a deal to purchase 10 Herons from Israel Aerospace Industries and Elbit for a sum of $180 million. Israeli media reported that Turkey was considering scrapping the deal when Israel failed to meet production deadlines, but Turkish Defense Minister Vecdi Gonul said in May that Turkey would not break the contract. The Israeli company later announced that it would deliver four Herons in August, followed by another two and then the last four by the end of October.
The Turkish army has yet to use two of the 10 drones, which arrived in Turkey last November after an almost two-year delay, due to persistent technical problems, the Turkish paper reported.
The report went on to quote Turkish government spokesperson and Deputy Prime Minister Cemil Cicek as saying that a proposal for the cancellation of the drill came from the General Staff as a response to yet another delay in the delivery of the Israeli UAVs to Turkey. "The proposal for cancellation came from the General Staff, not the government. However, there was no disagreement between the two bodies on the decision," Cicek was quoted as saying.
The report stressed that the Turkish government had no hand in the decision to cancel the exercise. "The Anatolian Eagle [exercise] is an organization of the Turkish Armed Forces. It is up to the air forces and the General Staff to decide on which countries will participate in the exercises. The government has not interfered in the decision," Cicek was quoted as saying.
The Turkish-Israeli crisis reached a peak on Jan. 29 after Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan walked out of a panel discussion in Davos in protest of Israel's offensive in the Gaza Strip.
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu also commented on the recent drill crisis and called on every country to refrain from any act that could harm the atmosphere of peace and stability in the region.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#4
I'm pretty cool with being an european myself, just as are the israeli - sorry, G(r)om, but that's just true, either you like it or not, you are *WHITE*, IE european, unless you side with the far right and acknowledge the notion that joooooos are NOT white, are NOT european, have nothing to do with european History, european civilization, european spirit, in which case, I refer you and them to an amiable divorce and a swift repatriation of all those unhappy jews to Israel... IE, you basically acknowledge that ye olde RAUS was right, after all, to put it bluntly -, or white americans, northern or southern.
Of course, given your own bent, YMMV... but, in any case, that's how our (and your) "ennemies" see us (and you), "westerners", "whites",... IE whitey, basically, and that's all that count, denial or not.
And, no, AFAIK, turks DON'T self-identify with Europe, they DON'T self-identify with europeans, in fact, I guess they would take this as some kind of an insult to their preceived self-identity.
Seems to be inline with the historical Euro enabling of the Paleoterrorists.
The USA have a rather long history of enabling the paleos too, just see G(r)om's take on that, and the USa have a long history of institutional antisemitism as well, no different than that of most if not all other european countries. In fact, I even am led to think, given what I've read, than antisemitism actually was more internalized in anglo-saxon and or protestant countries than in some supposedly intrinsically antisemitical countries like Germany, Poland or France, whihc actually were some kind of "safe-havens" (as compared to say russia) for jews, hence the relativelly large, secure and long-standing jewish populations there. Might be wrong, of course, but I'm kinda tired of that old saw about how the europeans are "different" and "racist" and "antisemitica"...
Hum, also am trying to kick off my addiction to antidepressant (after kicking off my long-standing risperdal habit), so this might expalin why this kind of comments really bugs me right now, whereas I just don't care usually.
#5
I'm pretty cool with being an european myself, just as are the israeli - sorry, G(r)om, but that's just true, either you like it or not, you are *WHITE*, IE european, unless you side with the far right and acknowledge the notion that joooooos are NOT white, are NOT european, have nothing to do with european History, european civilization, european spirit, in which case, I refer you and them to an amiable divorce and a swift repatriation of all those unhappy jews to Israel... IE, you basically acknowledge that ye olde RAUS was right, after all, to put it bluntly -, or white americans, northern or southern.
What goes around comes around, anonymous5089. If you don't want Israelis to hate Europe, Europe should stop behaving toward Israel in a hateful manner. As to all your ravings about being "white" etc... and kultur---who told you that you own it?
#6
Dude, I don't own it, I'm a mestizo (bit chinese, heck, even a bit polish jew, and all), I'm not a white power guy... I wrote that WE Own it. WE. Meaning, including the joooooooooos as well. Simple as that.
And I don't rave, I rant.
#7
If you don't want Israelis to hate Europe, Europe should stop behaving toward Israel in a hateful manner
I don't really care about Israel hating Europe, not more than french (mostly) hating or just dilsiking the USA, that the USA having some real f*cked up stereotypes about the french, or that any given african ethnic group being an ass about other african ethnic groups... it's all part of the game, in fact, I think ethno-differentialism is a pretty basic, healthy, even fact of the human psyche, it's just it should be kept in line and shouldn't be an excuse for or being harnessed into harming others - hating them is fine, who cares, as long as you don't mess with them? Life goes on. Sticks & stones.
One thing I may be misreading about you is why you don't seem to have the same level of antipathy toward russia than toward Europe (that, I think we all get here) and, to a lesser degree, the USA? Shades of your own background?
Why this blindspot (I might be misreading you, though)? It's not a trick question, I'm interested.
#8
One thing I may be misreading about you is why you don't seem to have the same level of antipathy toward russia than toward Europe (that, I think we all get here) and, to a lesser degree, the USA? Shades of your own background?
I'm beginning to understand how Rush Limbaugh feels right now.
The daily Al Quds Al Arabi, published in London, just announced the death of Ayatollah Ali Khameneï, Suprem leader of the Iranian Islamic Republic.
The daily said the Suprem leader died on October 14, after entering the hospital on Monday October 12. The daily said Ali Khamenei was "exhausted" by the overwork caused by the crisis that developed in the country since last June. He is said to have spent the last two days in the coma.
In a brief statement, Iranian officials denied the death of Khameneï.
Iranian sources in Teheran told us the Bassidji (local security forces) were deployed in the capital, early this morning.
Posted by: anonymous5089 ||
10/15/2009 10:20 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#1
What's Bambi going to do if the people of Iran take to the streets to celebrate Khamenei's death?
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 10:34 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Probably mourn a great statesman Steve
I hope this is the spark that implodes Iran on itself . Alas the left will say Bambi saved them
Posted by: Oscar ||
10/15/2009 10:45 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I wonder how long it will take for the Iranian propaganda machine to announce the big mullah's passing was a Zionist assassination? Or a plot from the West?
By the end of the afternoon, contradictory rumours continued to circulate on the health of the Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Sources near the power in Tehran denied the Supreme leader was dead but sources in the Iranian opposition told us he actually passed away on Wednesday and the Iranian power want to hide it for a moment to control the streets and enforce security in the country.
It must be underlined that the official website of Mr Khameneï published today an article saying: Faithful people of northern provincial cities of Chaloos and Noshahr Wednesday presented a deep bond between nation and leadership as they gathered to welcome Islamic Revolution Leader Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei amid heavy rain. But it actually proves nothing
Al Quds al-Arabi, an Arabic newspaper based in London published a information coming from a German press agency which was quoting Iranian opposition sources saying the Supreme Leader was dead. Later, al-Quds deleted the article from its front page but forgot to delete one comment on the story
Agencies and media in Azebaidjan and Egypt relayed the same information.
It seems that the rumor began to spread in the United States.
The Guardian wrote tonight in London that the latest rumor "about Khamenei's possible death has been picked up by a number of respected bloggers and media organisations including ABCs Georges Stephanopoulos, The Jerusalem Post and Pravda. The Guardian stated: As there are so many restrictions on foreign reporting in Iran the truth is difficult to verify. But the interest and speculation about Iran has been intense, particularly on Twitter. And the British newspaper concludes: Of course there is an easy way for the clerical regime in Tehran to put a stop to the current hysteria. But the ayatollah has yet to appear to declare that the reports of his death are exaggerated. Until he does, the chances are the rumours will spread.
As far as tonight, we cannot confirm or deny the death of Ali Khameneï, but we confirm that the security forces in Tehran have been reinforced today.
#6
How does this change the power struggles in Iran?
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
10/15/2009 14:55 Comments ||
Top||
#7
As posted previously:
"Precisely because there are no obvious successors to Khamenei, the prospect of the
supreme leadership being replaced by a shura (consultative) council is discussed with
increased frequency. The idea is not new and was considered after Khomeini's death, since
many believed the supreme leadership was "a robe designed only for Khomeini." As president,
Khamenei himself once told a Western reporter that no one individual could ever replace
Khomeini as Supreme Leader, predicting instead a council of three or five religious leaders
would have to rule.
Who would be selected to compose the shura council is the key question. Constitutionally
the selection process falls under the jurisdiction of the Assembly of Experts, an 86-cleric karim sadjadpour body headed by Rafsanjani and composed largely of septuagenarian, conservative clerics.
Reformists talk about a triumvirate composed of Rafsanjani, Khatami, and Mehdi Karroubi,
a moderate cleric who served as speaker of the parliament and narrowly lost to Ahmadinejad
in the first round of the June 2005 elections. This would be unacceptable to hardliners, who
would prefer conservatives like AyatollahsMesbah Yazdi, Shahroudi, and Jannati, a member
of the Guardian Council, who are equally unacceptable to moderates.
Aside from the difficulties of reaching a consensus regarding the makeup of the shura
council, the replacement of the Supreme Leader with a shura council is currently impeded
by the Islamic Republic's constitution, which states specifically that the Leader be an individual.
But political expediency trumps the constitution in the Islamic Republic; a constitutional
amendment adjusting the requirements for Supreme Leader is precisely what enabled
Khamenei to become Leader.
While the fight for succession is highly unpredictable and could get fierce, in some ways
Khamenei's weakness has ironically been the Islamic Republic's strength; if his reign has
proven one thing, it's that the Islamic Republic's stability is not contingent upon having a popular,
charismatic Leader. The predictions frequently made during the Khomeini era--that
the Leader's death would bring about the regime's demise--are no longer made with regards
to Khamenei."
10/13 -- This report comes from a person who is in a position to know such things. As I know very well (having been gulled into wrongly announcing Khamenei's death a while back), it is easy to be misled, and Khamenei has had previous medical emergencies in the past. Nonetheless, it's always smart to apply the Reagan Caution: Trust, but verify.
Here is what he/she says:
Yesterday afternoon at 2.15PM local time, Khamenei collapsed and was taken to his special clinic. Nobody -- except his son and the doctors -- has since been allowed to get near him. His official, but secret, status is: "in the hands of the gods".
Reportedly this collapse is natural. Many would like him to move to his afterlife but reportedly the collapse was not 'externally induced' [no poisioning].
His condition had already seriously deteriorated over the last months, aggravated by his nervous condition due to [1] his inability to solve the problems created by his manipulation of the election results and the refusal of [a large part of] the population to accept this, plus [2] his loss of religious authority by means of the repeated condemnations of events by senior clerics
Reportedly the principal aims of Khamenei of the last couple of weeks, if not months, were to ensure [1] a positive reputation as his legacy and [2] the physical survival of his family members and their wealth, reportedly now largely in Syria and in Turkey (remember the truck convoy of $8.5 billion in cash and gold that was seized by the Turks?).
If he dies it is expected that immediately a bloody clash will develop between the powers behind Rafsanjani, who will immediately claim temporary religious authority and overall control, and the powers behind Achmadinejad who will scramble in order to regain control and ensure their survival.
UPDATE (Wednesday Oct 14th): According to a bulletin from the Greens (Moussavi/Karroubi et al), there are widespread rumors in the Tehran Bazaar that Khamenei has died. The Greens say they cannot confirm it, but that there is an "abnormal atmosphere" in the streets, which almost certainly means there are more security people than usual.
The bazaar will apparently be closed tomorrow, and perhaps Friday as well, pending developments.
#3
There's a pre-islam event in Persian history that translates to something like "The Night they Killed all the Priests". Perhaps a traditionalist is on the loose?
#4
UMMMMM, you're right strange wording, I'd expect "In Allah's Hands" But not "in the hands of the gods".
(Perhaps they think he's UNWORTHY"?)
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/15/2009 13:49 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The Iraqi Parliment has postponed voting for a week. Ali Sistani has to be present for that. I do not know if he has left Iraq yet, but if you see his mug in QOM, you can probably count that as a positive indicator that Khameni has passed.
MOSCOW -- Denting President Obama's hopes for a powerful ally in his campaign to press Iran on its nuclear program, Russia's foreign minister said Tuesday that threatening Tehran now with harsh new sanctions would be "counterproductive."
It isn't that Bambi and Hilde got played, it's how easily ...
The minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, said after meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton here that diplomacy should be given a chance to work, particularly after a meeting in Geneva this month in which the Iranian government said it would allow United Nations inspectors to visit its clandestine nuclear enrichment site near the holy city of Qum.
"At the current stage, all forces should be thrown at supporting the negotiating process," he said. "Threats, sanctions and threats of pressure in the current situation, we are convinced, would be counterproductive."
Mr. Lavrov's resistance was striking given that, just three weeks before, President Dmitri A. Medvedev said that "in some cases, sanctions are inevitable." American officials had hailed that statement as a sign that Russia was finally coming around to the Obama administration's view that Iran is best handled with diplomacy backed by a credible threat of sanctions.
It also came after the Obama administration announced that it would retool a European missile defense system fiercely opposed by Russia. That move was thought to have paid dividends for the White House when Mr. Medvedev appeared to throw his support behind Mr. Obama on Iran, though American officials say the Russian president was also likely to have been reacting to the disclosure of the secret nuclear site near Qum.
Nice going Bambi, we sure got a lot out of the Rooskies for having hung the Poles and Czechs out to dry ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It's merely a public display of the intellectual supremecy Russia has over the 5th graders running our government.
I would have paid to listen to my KGB mirror laugh at Hillary at her speech. Russians are well studied and know more about our country than we do. They certainly know more about our Constitution. They are like a cat playing with a mouse. Their stature shall begin to build and build fast as ours diminish.
Good job America, you destroyed yourself on foolish notions that Russians used to have which they promised to bury US with.
#2
It's merely a public display of the intellectual supremecy Russia has over the 5th graders running our government.
Too bad noob presidents like Noobama get to pick their own advisors. Might not hurt to have a few more experienced advisors from previous administrations laying around. The russians have had their leadership in place for years, so they're going to play the noobs for chumps every time.
#3
(1) Russians like selling weapons---it makes them feel they haven't, quite, descended to the level of being totally dependent on their oil exports.
(2) Since they are totally dependent on their oil exports, they like troubles in ME = rise in the price of oil.
(3) Russia sees Iran as strategic partner---the way USA sees Saudia (and with the same inability to see the drawbacks).
(4)Russians really, really hate Saudia for inciting & financing Jihad in Russia and its "near abroad".
(5) Russians really despise Obama---and the country which elected him.
(i)The contempt of old KGB grads like Putin & Co to western left has no bounds.
(ii) Russia on race is where USA was in 1920.
#6
Hum, Grumpy G(r)om, agreed on the rationalizations, though I did express myself badly : you're all set to find excuse for russia being blantantly your country's ennemy, because, AFAIK, you've got an hard-on (excuse my french) for Motherland - just like many euro wingnuts, by the way.
This was not really relevant to iran, actually, I was just wondering if you'd find the same kind of "attenuating circumstances" to Europe, somehow excusing its actions by pointing out its own interests and its blindspots and all, but that was mostly rethorical.
#8
I don't understand much, that I'll acknowledge readily, but you do justify their position. Why don't you do the same for the paleos? For the EUcrats? For iran? All actually have justifiable reasons (if only to them) to base their actions on. Why only take the time for russia, instead of lumping them with the EU?
Israel accused the Lebanese army on Tuesday of turning a blind eye to the rebuilding by Hezbollah of its military infrastructure, one day after an official in the Shi'ite militant group reportedly died in a blast at one of its arms caches in south Lebanon.
The Israeli ambassador to the world body, Gabriela Shalev, made the accusation in a formal complaint she passed on to the UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, and to the president of the Security Council.
She said the explosion in the village of Tayr Filsi constituted a grave violation of the United Nations resolution that ended the Second Lebanon War between Israel and Hezbollah. Resolution 1701 called for the disarmament of Hezbollah and banned paramilitary forces south of the Litani River.
The IDF released a video on Tuesday that the army said proved Hezbollah stored weapons at the site.
Things I've read elsewhere indicate Israel knows the locations of two hundred or so Hizb'allah weapons caches. May I suggest that spontaneous things happen with no apparent cause?
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/15/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#7
One thing about george is, is he a muslim? He should have converted, if only nominally, after his marriage and his re-marriage, given that it is an almost absolute (unspoken) pre-requesite for marrying someone from the Master Religion.
Is his schtick just a greed/ambition/destructive left thing (IE a whore and/or a run-of-the-mill nihilist from the Enlightened Elites), or is he fully on the other side? Any idea?
Would you be referring to Atheism by any chance? Noticeably in recent years is almost a discernable disdain towards anyone who is religious, by the ultra left, or even a religious shiftiness based on convenience or expediency, if you ask me. Just look at the show "Weeds" you cant turn around in that show without knocking into a joke about the Jews or anyone who is religious in general. Okay, tangent over.
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.
North Korea on Wednesday expressed "regret" for the death of six South Koreans in the wake of a sudden discharge of water from a dam into the Imjin River in early September and offered condolences to their families.
The daily Al Quds Al Arabi, published in London, just announced the death of Ayatollah Ali Khameneï, Suprem leader of the Iranian Islamic Republic. 
MOSCOW -- Denting President Obama's hopes for a powerful ally in his campaign to press Iran on its nuclear program, Russia's foreign minister said Tuesday that threatening Tehran now with harsh new sanctions would be "counterproductive."
Israel accused the Lebanese army on Tuesday of turning a blind eye to the rebuilding by Hezbollah of its military infrastructure, one day after an official in the Shi'ite militant group reportedly died in a blast at one of its arms caches in south Lebanon. 
