Israel's infrastructure minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer met Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu secretly in Zurich Wednesday, June 30 in an effort to alleviate the crisis in relations. The meeting took place with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's knowledge. It was kept dark from foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman, who issued a statement Wednesday night that he considered the meeting a betrayal of trust between the prime minister and himself.
debkafile reports that the secret rendezvous ended predictably without results because Turkey's campaign against Israel is in full flight and it refused to budge an inch from its demands for an Israeli apology over the flotilla incident, its removal of the sea blockade against the Gaza Strip and compensation to the nine Turks killed in the clash with Israel commandos aboard the Turkish Mavi Marmara on May 31.
The initiative for this rendezvous was taken in Ankara as a mark of the Israeli government's weakness.
As Ben-Eliezer headed for his meeting with Davutoglu, Erdogan's implacable anti-Israel campaign was underlined by foreign ministry spokesman Burak Ozgergin's vow in Ankara that very day: The (Turkish) public," he said, "will see in step after step (taken by Turkey) how Ankara gets Israel to admit its crimes."
He noted that Turkey had not once, but twice denied Israeli military planes entry to Turkish airspace.
debkafile's sources report that this verbal assault was consistent with the "revelation" unveiled Monday, June 28, by the Turkish MAZLUM-DER organization, also known as The Association of Human Rights and Solidarity for Oppressed Peoples, just before Erdogan flew home from Toronto where he attended the G20 summit and had a disastrous interview with US president Barack Obama.
The MAZLUM-DER spokesman Yasin Divrak suddenly alleged that the nine Turks who died in a clash aboard the Gaza blockade-busting Mavi Marmara on May 31 were killed by shots from Israeli helicopters. He strongly challenged the Israeli case and its video footage attesting to Israeli commandos fighting back when set upon with knives and axes by violent activists as they landed on deck.
The spokesman of MAZLUM-DER, which has an anti-Israel extremist record, presented four arguments to support his charge of Israeli war crimes:
1. Examinations of the bodies in Ankara showed that the victims were not killed by the commandos in self- defense but by helicopters, meaning that the Israelis shot first.
2. Autopsies showed some of the Turkish dead were shot several times in the head, i.e., from above, from the air. The Turkish "peace activists" were therefore "executed."
3. The returned Turkish bodies were washed in alcohol to conceal evidence of gunpowder or chemical substances allegedly used by the naval commandos.
4. In all the bodies except one, the fatal bullets were not found. One bullet was found lodged in the brain of the activist Ibrahim Bilgen. It was of type which the Turkish doctors and ballistic experts said they had never seen before. The spokesman implied that this particular bullet was left in place as an Israel warning of what Turkey should expect if more flotillas were sent to Gaza.
According to debkafile's Ankara sources, this piece of "evidence" is part of the dossier the Turks are stacking up for the international inquiry commission they intend demanding the UN General Assembly establish to investigate the flotilla incident. They need this extra probe to undermine the credibility and legitimacy of the public inquiry Israel has instituted by jurists and two international observers.
The Turkish prime minister is seriously on the warpath against Israel, after failing in their frigid interview in Toronto to persuade President Barack Obama to accept his alignment with the extremist Iran, Syria and Hizballah and his hostile breach with Israel.
Obama confronted him with two options: friendship with Washington or deepening his bonds with Tehran.
Erdogan returned home with his mind made up. He would not capitulate to Washington and he was more determined than ever to provoke a showdown with Israel.
One of his first steps, according to our Ankara sources, will be to go around UN General Secretary Ban Ki-moon and submit to the UN Assembly on behalf of Turkey, Iran and Syria a draft calling for an international committee to investigate Israel's conduct in its May 31 raid on the Turkish flotilla. They can count on an automatic anti-Israel majority for its passage.
Observers in New York expect a panel of the same make-up and anti-Israel bias as the one headed by South African justice Goldstone which was tasked with investigating Israel's 2009 campaign in the Gaza Strip.
The Turkish prime minister believes Ban will not demur and even the Obama administration may come around to it, although Washington originally praised Israel's public inquiry, to which two reputable foreign observers had been attached, as fully meeting the UN Security Council's requirements for a credible, impartial, transparent investigation.
Ankara's move is aimed at intensifying Israel's diplomatic isolation in the world body.
To pre-empt it, the Netanyahu government decided this week to expand the mandate of the flotilla investigation panel headed by retired Justice Jacob Turkel. The next cabinet meeting will empower the commission to subpoena witnesses, question them under oath, issue letters of caution and have free access to any evidence needed to execute its mission.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Turkey: We'll force Israel to take responsibility for its crimes
If Israelis in high official places were still slow to get the message of Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan's implacable anti-Israel campaign, they only had to listen to foreign ministry spokesman Burak Ozgergin's vow in Ankara Wednesday, June 30: The (Turkish) public," he said, "will see in step after step (taken by Turkey) how Ankara gets Israel to admit its crimes."
He noted that Turkey had not once, but twice denied Israeli military planes entry to Turkish airspace.
debkafile's sources report that this verbal assault was consistent with the "revelation" unveiled Monday, June 28, by the Turkish MAZLUM-DER organization, also known as The Association of Human Rights and Solidarity for Oppressed Peoples, just before Erdogan flew home from Toronto where he attended the G20 summit and had a disastrous interview with US president Barack Obama.
The MAZLUM-DER spokesman Yasin Divrak suddenly alleged that the nine Turks who died in a clash aboard the Gaza blockade-busting Mavi Marmara on May 31 were killed by shots from Israeli helicopters. He strongly challenged the Israeli case and its video footage attesting to Israeli commandos fighting back when set upon with knives and axes by violent activists as they landed on deck.
The spokesman of MAZLUM-DER, which has an anti-Israel extremist record, presented four arguments to support his charge of Israeli war crimes:
1. Examinations of the bodies in Ankara showed that the victims were not killed by the commandos in self- defense but by helicopters, meaning that the Israelis shot first.
2. Autopsies showed some of the Turkish dead were shot several times in the head, i.e., from above, from the air. The Turkish "peace activists" were therefore "executed."
3. The returned Turkish bodies were washed in alcohol to conceal evidence of gunpowder or chemical substances allegedly used by the naval commandos.
4. In all the bodies except one, the fatal bullets were not found. One bullet was found lodged in the brain of the activist Ibrahim Bilgen. It was of type which the Turkish doctors and ballistic experts said they had never seen before. The spokesman implied that this particular bullet was left in place as an Israel warning of what Turkey should expect if more flotillas were sent to Gaza.
According to debkafile's Ankara sources, this piece of "evidence" is part of the dossier the Turks are stacking up for the international inquiry commission they intend demanding the UN General Assembly establish to investigate the flotilla incident. They need this extra probe to undermine the credibility and legitimacy of the public inquiry Israel has instituted by jurists and two international observers.
The Turkish prime minister is seriously on the warpath against Israel, after failing in their frigid interview in Toronto to persuade President Barack Obama to accept his alignment with the extremist Iran, Syria and Hizballah and his hostile breach with Israel.
Obama confronted him with two options: friendship with Washington or deepening his bonds with Tehran.
Erdogan returned home with his mind made up. He would not capitulate to Washington and he was more determined than ever to provoke a showdown with Israel.
One of his first steps, according to our Ankara sources, will be to go around UN General Secretary Ban Ki-moon and submit to the UN Assembly on behalf of Turkey, Iran and Syria a draft calling for an international committee to investigate Israel's conduct in its May 31 raid on the Turkish flotilla. They can count on an automatic anti-Israel majority for its passage.
Observers in New York expect a panel of the same make-up and anti-Israel bias as the one headed by South African justice Goldstone which was tasked with investigating Israel's 2009 campaign in the Gaza Strip.
The Turkish prime minister believes Ban will not demur and even the Obama administration may come around to it, although Washington originally praised Israel's public inquiry, to which two reputable foreign observers had been attached, as fully meeting the UN Security Council's requirements for a credible, impartial, transparent investigation.
Ankara's move is aimed at intensifying Israel's diplomatic isolation in the world body.
To pre-empt it, the Netanyahu government decided this week to expand the mandate of the flotilla investigation panel headed by retired Justice Jacob Turkel. The next cabinet meeting will empower the commission to subpoena witnesses, question them under oath, issue letters of caution and have free access to any evidence needed to execute its mission.
He noted that Turkey had not once, but twice denied Israeli military planes entry to Turkish airspace.
debkafile's sources report that this verbal assault was consistent with the "revelation" unveiled Monday, June 28, by the Turkish MAZLUM-DER organization, also known as The Association of Human Rights and Solidarity for Oppressed Peoples, just before Erdogan flew home from Toronto where he attended the G20 summit and had a disastrous interview with US president Barack Obama.
The MAZLUM-DER spokesman Yasin Divrak suddenly alleged that the nine Turks who died in a clash aboard the Gaza blockade-busting Mavi Marmara on May 31 were killed by shots from Israeli helicopters. He strongly challenged the Israeli case and its video footage attesting to Israeli commandos fighting back when set upon with knives and axes by violent activists as they landed on deck.
The spokesman of MAZLUM-DER, which has an anti-Israel extremist record, presented four arguments to support his charge of Israeli war crimes:
1. Examinations of the bodies in Ankara showed that the victims were not killed by the commandos in self- defense but by helicopters, meaning that the Israelis shot first.
2. Autopsies showed some of the Turkish dead were shot several times in the head, i.e., from above, from the air. The Turkish "peace activists" were therefore "executed."
3. The returned Turkish bodies were washed in alcohol to conceal evidence of gunpowder or chemical substances allegedly used by the naval commandos.
4. In all the bodies except one, the fatal bullets were not found. One bullet was found lodged in the brain of the activist Ibrahim Bilgen. It was of type which the Turkish doctors and ballistic experts said they had never seen before. The spokesman implied that this particular bullet was left in place as an Israel warning of what Turkey should expect if more flotillas were sent to Gaza.
According to debkafile's Ankara sources, this piece of "evidence" is part of the dossier the Turks are stacking up for the international inquiry commission they intend demanding the UN General Assembly establish to investigate the flotilla incident. They need this extra probe to undermine the credibility and legitimacy of the public inquiry Israel has instituted by jurists and two international observers.
The Turkish prime minister is seriously on the warpath against Israel, after failing in their frigid interview in Toronto to persuade President Barack Obama to accept his alignment with the extremist Iran, Syria and Hizballah and his hostile breach with Israel.
Obama confronted him with two options: friendship with Washington or deepening his bonds with Tehran.
Erdogan returned home with his mind made up. He would not capitulate to Washington and he was more determined than ever to provoke a showdown with Israel.
One of his first steps, according to our Ankara sources, will be to go around UN General Secretary Ban Ki-moon and submit to the UN Assembly on behalf of Turkey, Iran and Syria a draft calling for an international committee to investigate Israel's conduct in its May 31 raid on the Turkish flotilla. They can count on an automatic anti-Israel majority for its passage.
Observers in New York expect a panel of the same make-up and anti-Israel bias as the one headed by South African justice Goldstone which was tasked with investigating Israel's 2009 campaign in the Gaza Strip.
The Turkish prime minister believes Ban will not demur and even the Obama administration may come around to it, although Washington originally praised Israel's public inquiry, to which two reputable foreign observers had been attached, as fully meeting the UN Security Council's requirements for a credible, impartial, transparent investigation.
Ankara's move is aimed at intensifying Israel's diplomatic isolation in the world body.
To pre-empt it, the Netanyahu government decided this week to expand the mandate of the flotilla investigation panel headed by retired Justice Jacob Turkel. The next cabinet meeting will empower the commission to subpoena witnesses, question them under oath, issue letters of caution and have free access to any evidence needed to execute its mission.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Jewish state’s relationship with the United States has suffered a “tectonic rift”.
A senior Israeli diplomat has warned that the Jewish state’s relationship with the United States has suffered a “tectonic rift”.
The sobering assessment comes a week before Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, meets President Barack Obama at the White House.
There had been hope the two could lay to rest a row that erupted between the two allies in March but the new comments have raised fears of long-term damage.
Michael Oren, Israel’s ambassador to Washington, told foreign ministry colleagues at a private briefing in Jerusalem that they were facing a long and potentially irrevocable estrangement.
Sources said Mr Oren told the meeting: “There is no crisis in Israel-US relations because in a crisis there are ups and downs. [Instead] relations are in a state of tectonic rift in which continents are drifting apart.”
[...]
According to Mr Oren, attempts to gain leverage over President Obama through some of his “pro-Israel” aides – believed to be a reference to Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief-of-staff, and Dennis Ross, a senior State Department official – had failed.
“It’s a one man show,” Mr Oren reportedly told his colleagues.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/27/israeli-diplomat-warns-that-rift-between-u-s-and-israel-may-be-long-lasting/#ixzz0s6qenULC
The sobering assessment comes a week before Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, meets President Barack Obama at the White House.
There had been hope the two could lay to rest a row that erupted between the two allies in March but the new comments have raised fears of long-term damage.
Michael Oren, Israel’s ambassador to Washington, told foreign ministry colleagues at a private briefing in Jerusalem that they were facing a long and potentially irrevocable estrangement.
Sources said Mr Oren told the meeting: “There is no crisis in Israel-US relations because in a crisis there are ups and downs. [Instead] relations are in a state of tectonic rift in which continents are drifting apart.”
[...]
According to Mr Oren, attempts to gain leverage over President Obama through some of his “pro-Israel” aides – believed to be a reference to Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief-of-staff, and Dennis Ross, a senior State Department official – had failed.
“It’s a one man show,” Mr Oren reportedly told his colleagues.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/27/israeli-diplomat-warns-that-rift-between-u-s-and-israel-may-be-long-lasting/#ixzz0s6qenULC
Friday, June 18, 2010
Gates: Iran could attack Europe with scores or hundreds of missiles
US defense secretary Robert Gates reported to a senate hearing Thursday, June 17 that the US had overhauled its missile defense plans following intelligence that Iran could fire "scores or hundreds" of missiles against Europe -in salvoes rather than one or two at a time. The new US program, designed to protect NATO allies in the region against short- and medium-range missiles, uses sea and land-based interceptors.
debkafile's military sources confirm that in addition to the thousands of ballistic missiles in Iran's arsenal, there are certainly many hundred that could be fired in salvoes. While referring to NATO allies, Gates did not mention Israel, which is located still closer to those missiles and far more prey to the devastation promised by Tehran.
Gates's new evaluation breaks away sharply from the propositions American military chiefs have been advancing in their strategic deliberations with Gulf and Israeli leaders. Until now, they made a point of playing down the missile menace posed from Iran claiming that it consisted of no more than a few score ballistic missiles and far less launchers.
The new intelligence assessment Gates now unveils means that the balance of strength has dramatically shifted in favor of Iran and against Israel.
When the "scores or hundreds" of Iranian missiles are topped up by 800 Scud Ds, which Syria managed in the last two months to position close to the Lebanese border and the 1,000 Iranian and Syrian medium-range missiles transferred to Hizballah in Lebanon, Israel is confronted with an daunting array of 3,000 missiles capable of striking every corner of the country.
debkafile's military sources, which have published these figures more than once in recent months, ask why it was left to the US defense secretary to lay the facts out on the table - and why now?
True, Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss asked Gates if he supported deploying missile defenses including plans for an upgraded SM-3 missile by 2020 in Europe - even if Russia objected. He answered in the affirmative. But he must also have had at the back of his mind the heightened US military preparations taking place in the Middle East and Mediterranean - apparently in readiness for the type of Iranian missile salvo he mentioned.
After all, Iran has not so far reacted to the new sanctions for its nuclear program imposed first by the UN Security Council, then the United States and Europe. Washington takes it for granted that the new penalties will not go by without some sort of reprisal from Tehran.
debkafile's military sources confirm that in addition to the thousands of ballistic missiles in Iran's arsenal, there are certainly many hundred that could be fired in salvoes. While referring to NATO allies, Gates did not mention Israel, which is located still closer to those missiles and far more prey to the devastation promised by Tehran.
Gates's new evaluation breaks away sharply from the propositions American military chiefs have been advancing in their strategic deliberations with Gulf and Israeli leaders. Until now, they made a point of playing down the missile menace posed from Iran claiming that it consisted of no more than a few score ballistic missiles and far less launchers.
The new intelligence assessment Gates now unveils means that the balance of strength has dramatically shifted in favor of Iran and against Israel.
When the "scores or hundreds" of Iranian missiles are topped up by 800 Scud Ds, which Syria managed in the last two months to position close to the Lebanese border and the 1,000 Iranian and Syrian medium-range missiles transferred to Hizballah in Lebanon, Israel is confronted with an daunting array of 3,000 missiles capable of striking every corner of the country.
debkafile's military sources, which have published these figures more than once in recent months, ask why it was left to the US defense secretary to lay the facts out on the table - and why now?
True, Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss asked Gates if he supported deploying missile defenses including plans for an upgraded SM-3 missile by 2020 in Europe - even if Russia objected. He answered in the affirmative. But he must also have had at the back of his mind the heightened US military preparations taking place in the Middle East and Mediterranean - apparently in readiness for the type of Iranian missile salvo he mentioned.
After all, Iran has not so far reacted to the new sanctions for its nuclear program imposed first by the UN Security Council, then the United States and Europe. Washington takes it for granted that the new penalties will not go by without some sort of reprisal from Tehran.
Obama's endless summer of spending
The White House kicked off a "recovery summer" public relations blitz yesterday to promote the alleged benefits of stimulus spending. The mood of self-congratulation was interrupted by a Labor Department report that found initial jobless claims for the week climbed by 12,000. A Conference Board survey showed the average wait in unemployment lines increased from 30 weeks at the start of the year to 34.4 weeks in May. It won't be a summer of love in those households.
Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. was enthusiastic, declaring the stimulus "an absolute success" on Wednesday. Before he and the president begin their victory lap, however, they should take a closer look at the numbers. The current recovery has been one of the worst for job creation on record. Private sector hiring has virtually ground to a halt, and the administration was embarrassed last month when it was reported that 90 percent of the jobs created in May turned out to be short-term Census Bureau hires - and even those numbers appear to be exaggerated.
The job losses for this recession have been far deeper in percentage terms than in any of the 11 recessions since the Second World War. Underemployment, home foreclosures, bankruptcy filings and the number of Americans on food stamps have all increased since the stimulus act was passed. If this is "absolute success" we would hate to see what the vice president would call failure.
The administration's "jobs" are an expensive form of workfare. Mr. Biden toured a $508 million Brooklyn Bridge makeover project on Wednesday where taxpayers contributed at least $30 million to save or create 150 jobs. That is $200,000 per job just from the stimulus money, not including other federal, state and local funding. On Monday Mr. Biden will tour a project in Midland, Mich., which will "stimulate" 1,000 jobs at a cost of $161,000 per job. Jared Bernstein, chief economist and senior economic adviser to the vice president, said last year that the overall average cost per stimulus job is closer to $92,000, which is still good work if you can get it.
The stimulus approach to economic recovery is not complicated. It is based on the belief that expensive make-work jobs funded by deficit spending will at some point lead to economic benefits beyond the fortunate few receiving the grants. It involves opening the spending spigots and then finding enough shovel-ready projects to spend the money on. It's a wonderful plan for those whose aspirations in life go no further than short-term employment involving shovels.
The country cannot afford to continue on this path, yet the president continues to propose more of the same. He is asking for a $140 billion Stimulus 2.0 package, claiming it is necessary to stave off the double-dip recession. This may be too much even for the Senate, which has proposed its own euphemistically named "Create Jobs and Save Benefits Act" that spends $165 billion to bail out mismanaged union pension funds. The powers that be in Washington apparently see government as an endless source of funding for their pet projects and political supporters.
It is easy to "create jobs" when one uses the Treasury as an unlimited checking account where the bills never come due. As we are now seeing in the economic collapse of European nations like Greece, the summertime party will come to an end.
© Copyright 2010 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. was enthusiastic, declaring the stimulus "an absolute success" on Wednesday. Before he and the president begin their victory lap, however, they should take a closer look at the numbers. The current recovery has been one of the worst for job creation on record. Private sector hiring has virtually ground to a halt, and the administration was embarrassed last month when it was reported that 90 percent of the jobs created in May turned out to be short-term Census Bureau hires - and even those numbers appear to be exaggerated.
The job losses for this recession have been far deeper in percentage terms than in any of the 11 recessions since the Second World War. Underemployment, home foreclosures, bankruptcy filings and the number of Americans on food stamps have all increased since the stimulus act was passed. If this is "absolute success" we would hate to see what the vice president would call failure.
The administration's "jobs" are an expensive form of workfare. Mr. Biden toured a $508 million Brooklyn Bridge makeover project on Wednesday where taxpayers contributed at least $30 million to save or create 150 jobs. That is $200,000 per job just from the stimulus money, not including other federal, state and local funding. On Monday Mr. Biden will tour a project in Midland, Mich., which will "stimulate" 1,000 jobs at a cost of $161,000 per job. Jared Bernstein, chief economist and senior economic adviser to the vice president, said last year that the overall average cost per stimulus job is closer to $92,000, which is still good work if you can get it.
The stimulus approach to economic recovery is not complicated. It is based on the belief that expensive make-work jobs funded by deficit spending will at some point lead to economic benefits beyond the fortunate few receiving the grants. It involves opening the spending spigots and then finding enough shovel-ready projects to spend the money on. It's a wonderful plan for those whose aspirations in life go no further than short-term employment involving shovels.
The country cannot afford to continue on this path, yet the president continues to propose more of the same. He is asking for a $140 billion Stimulus 2.0 package, claiming it is necessary to stave off the double-dip recession. This may be too much even for the Senate, which has proposed its own euphemistically named "Create Jobs and Save Benefits Act" that spends $165 billion to bail out mismanaged union pension funds. The powers that be in Washington apparently see government as an endless source of funding for their pet projects and political supporters.
It is easy to "create jobs" when one uses the Treasury as an unlimited checking account where the bills never come due. As we are now seeing in the economic collapse of European nations like Greece, the summertime party will come to an end.
© Copyright 2010 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
Issa has eye on subpoena team
HERSHEY, Pa.—Rep. Darrell Issa, the conservative firebrand whose specialty is lobbing corruption allegations at the Obama White House, is making plans to hire dozens of subpoena-wielding investigators if Republicans win the House this fall.
The California Republican’s daily denunciations draw cheers from partisans and bookings from cable TV producers. He even bought his own earphone for live shots. But his bombastic style and attention-seeking investigations draw eye rolls from other quarters. Now, he’s making clear he won’t be so easy to shrug off if he becomes chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in 2011.
Issa has told Republican leadership that if he becomes chairman, he wants to roughly double his staff from 40 to between 70 and 80. And he is not subtle about what that means for President Barack Obama.
At a recent speech to Pennsylvania Republicans here, he boasted about what would happen if the GOP wins 39 seats, and he gets the power to subpoena.
“That will make all the difference in the world,” he told 400 applauding party members during a dinner at the chocolate-themed Hershey Lodge. “I won’t use it to have corporate America live in fear that we’re going to subpoena everything. I will use it to get the very information that today the White House is either shredding or not producing.”
In other words, Issa wants to be to the Obama administration what Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) was to the Clinton administration — a subpoena machine in search of White House scandals.
Even if Republicans don’t take the House, Issa has other ambitions. Those close to him say he is eyeing a potential run for a leadership post, even though he’s a two-time loser for Republican policy chairman.
Issa also is trying to build his national brand, traveling to Pennsylvania for a summer Republican meeting. He basked in praise for his role in creating “Job-gate,” a mini scandal that forced the White House to admit that former President Bill Clinton tried to coax Rep. Joe Sestak out of the Democratic Senate primary in Pennsylvania by offering him an unpaid job.
After calling the White House “corrupt” and Obama’s presidency “failed,” Issa reiterated his claims that — despite a contrary assessment from most experts — the administration violated federal law with the Sestak imbroglio.
He also mentioned e-mail from White House deputy chief of staff Jim Messina to Colorado U.S. Senate candidate Andrew Romanoff about three possible administration jobs as the administration apparently tried to steer him away from a primary challenge against Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet.
Pages
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38697.html#ixzz0rCxy3bql
The California Republican’s daily denunciations draw cheers from partisans and bookings from cable TV producers. He even bought his own earphone for live shots. But his bombastic style and attention-seeking investigations draw eye rolls from other quarters. Now, he’s making clear he won’t be so easy to shrug off if he becomes chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in 2011.
Issa has told Republican leadership that if he becomes chairman, he wants to roughly double his staff from 40 to between 70 and 80. And he is not subtle about what that means for President Barack Obama.
At a recent speech to Pennsylvania Republicans here, he boasted about what would happen if the GOP wins 39 seats, and he gets the power to subpoena.
“That will make all the difference in the world,” he told 400 applauding party members during a dinner at the chocolate-themed Hershey Lodge. “I won’t use it to have corporate America live in fear that we’re going to subpoena everything. I will use it to get the very information that today the White House is either shredding or not producing.”
In other words, Issa wants to be to the Obama administration what Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) was to the Clinton administration — a subpoena machine in search of White House scandals.
Even if Republicans don’t take the House, Issa has other ambitions. Those close to him say he is eyeing a potential run for a leadership post, even though he’s a two-time loser for Republican policy chairman.
Issa also is trying to build his national brand, traveling to Pennsylvania for a summer Republican meeting. He basked in praise for his role in creating “Job-gate,” a mini scandal that forced the White House to admit that former President Bill Clinton tried to coax Rep. Joe Sestak out of the Democratic Senate primary in Pennsylvania by offering him an unpaid job.
After calling the White House “corrupt” and Obama’s presidency “failed,” Issa reiterated his claims that — despite a contrary assessment from most experts — the administration violated federal law with the Sestak imbroglio.
He also mentioned e-mail from White House deputy chief of staff Jim Messina to Colorado U.S. Senate candidate Andrew Romanoff about three possible administration jobs as the administration apparently tried to steer him away from a primary challenge against Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet.
Pages
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38697.html#ixzz0rCxy3bql
Elton John rocks Israel after other artists cancel
TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) - A concert by Elton John has given Israelis a boost after a string of cancellations by other world-famous artists.
The British rocker performed late Thursday in front of a screaming crowd of nearly 50,000 fans at a Tel Aviv stadium.
John, who wore blue-tinted sunglasses, told the audience those cancellations "ain't gonna stop me from playing here, baby."
Recent cancellations by the Pixies and Elvis Costello, who cited Israeli government policies, have added to Israel's growing sense of isolation.
John swiped at those artists, saying, "We do not cherry-pick our consciences," before hitting the opening chords of his 1972 hit "Crocodile Rock."
The British rocker performed late Thursday in front of a screaming crowd of nearly 50,000 fans at a Tel Aviv stadium.
John, who wore blue-tinted sunglasses, told the audience those cancellations "ain't gonna stop me from playing here, baby."
Recent cancellations by the Pixies and Elvis Costello, who cited Israeli government policies, have added to Israel's growing sense of isolation.
John swiped at those artists, saying, "We do not cherry-pick our consciences," before hitting the opening chords of his 1972 hit "Crocodile Rock."
Greenspan Says U.S. May Soon Reach Borrowing Limit
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said the U.S. may soon face higher borrowing costs on its swelling debt and called for a “tectonic shift” in fiscal policy to contain borrowing.
“Perceptions of a large U.S. borrowing capacity are misleading,” and current long-term bond yields are masking America’s debt challenge, Greenspan wrote in an opinion piece posted on the Wall Street Journal’s website. “Long-term rate increases can emerge with unexpected suddenness,” such as the 4 percentage point surge over four months in 1979-80, he said.
Greenspan rebutted “misplaced” concern that reducing the deficit would put the economic recovery in danger, entering a debate among global policy makers about how quickly to exit from stimulus measures adopted during the financial crisis. U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said this month that while fiscal tightening is needed over the “medium term,” governments must reinforce the recovery in private demand.
“The United States, and most of the rest of the developed world, is in need of a tectonic shift in fiscal policy,” said Greenspan, 84, who served at the Fed’s helm from 1987 to 2006. “Incremental change will not be adequate.”
Rein in Debt
Pressure on capital markets would also be eased if the U.S. government “contained” the sale of Treasuries, he wrote.
“The federal government is currently saddled with commitments for the next three decades that it will be unable to meet in real terms,” Greenspan said. The “very severity of the pending crisis and growing analogies to Greece set the stage for a serious response.”
Yields on U.S. Treasuries have benefitted from safe-haven demand in recent months because of the European debt crisis, a circumstance that may not last, said Greenspan, who now consults for clients including Pacific Investment Management Co., which has the world’s biggest bond fund.
Benchmark 10-year Treasury notes yielded 3.20 percent as of 12:11 p.m. in Tokyo today, down from the year’s high of 4.01 percent in April and compared with as high as 5.32 percent in June 2007, before the crisis began. Yields have remained low “despite the surge in federal debt to the public during the past 18 months to $8.6 trillion from $5.5 trillion,” Greenspan said.
The swing in demand toward American government debt and away from euro-denominated bonds is “temporary,” he said.
“Our economy cannot afford a major mistake in underestimating the corrosive momentum of this fiscal crisis,” Greenspan said. “Our policy focus must therefore err significantly on the side of restraint.”
“Perceptions of a large U.S. borrowing capacity are misleading,” and current long-term bond yields are masking America’s debt challenge, Greenspan wrote in an opinion piece posted on the Wall Street Journal’s website. “Long-term rate increases can emerge with unexpected suddenness,” such as the 4 percentage point surge over four months in 1979-80, he said.
Greenspan rebutted “misplaced” concern that reducing the deficit would put the economic recovery in danger, entering a debate among global policy makers about how quickly to exit from stimulus measures adopted during the financial crisis. U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said this month that while fiscal tightening is needed over the “medium term,” governments must reinforce the recovery in private demand.
“The United States, and most of the rest of the developed world, is in need of a tectonic shift in fiscal policy,” said Greenspan, 84, who served at the Fed’s helm from 1987 to 2006. “Incremental change will not be adequate.”
Rein in Debt
Pressure on capital markets would also be eased if the U.S. government “contained” the sale of Treasuries, he wrote.
“The federal government is currently saddled with commitments for the next three decades that it will be unable to meet in real terms,” Greenspan said. The “very severity of the pending crisis and growing analogies to Greece set the stage for a serious response.”
Yields on U.S. Treasuries have benefitted from safe-haven demand in recent months because of the European debt crisis, a circumstance that may not last, said Greenspan, who now consults for clients including Pacific Investment Management Co., which has the world’s biggest bond fund.
Benchmark 10-year Treasury notes yielded 3.20 percent as of 12:11 p.m. in Tokyo today, down from the year’s high of 4.01 percent in April and compared with as high as 5.32 percent in June 2007, before the crisis began. Yields have remained low “despite the surge in federal debt to the public during the past 18 months to $8.6 trillion from $5.5 trillion,” Greenspan said.
The swing in demand toward American government debt and away from euro-denominated bonds is “temporary,” he said.
“Our economy cannot afford a major mistake in underestimating the corrosive momentum of this fiscal crisis,” Greenspan said. “Our policy focus must therefore err significantly on the side of restraint.”
$7-a-gallon gas?
President Obama has a solution to the Gulf oil spill: $7-a-gallon gas.
That's a Harvard University study's estimate of the per-gallon price of the president's global-warming agenda. And Obama made clear this week that this agenda is a part of his plan for addressing the Gulf mess.
So what does global-warming legislation have to do with the oil spill?
Good question, because such measures wouldn't do a thing to clean up the oil or fix the problems that led to the leak.
The answer can be found in Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's now-famous words, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste -- and what I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before."
AFP/Getty Images
Obama: Using Gulf crisis to push unpopular cap-and-trade bill.
That sure was true of global-warming policy, and especially the cap-and-trade bill. Many observers thought the measure, introduced last year in the House by Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Edward Markey (D-Mass.), was dead: The American people didn't seem to think that the so-called global-warming crisis justified a price-hiking, job-killing, economy-crushing redesign of our energy supply amid a fragile recovery. Passing another major piece of legislation, one every bit as unpopular as ObamaCare, appeared unlikely in an election year.
So Obama and congressional proponents of cap-and-trade spent several months rebranding it -- downplaying the global-warming rationale and claiming that it was really a jobs bill (the so-called green jobs were supposed to spring from the new clean-energy economy) and an energy-independence bill (that will somehow stick it to OPEC).
Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) even reportedly declined to introduce their new cap-and-trade proposal in the Senate on Earth Day, because they wanted to de-emphasize the global-warming message. Instead, Kerry called the American Power Act "a plan that creates jobs and sets us on a course toward energy independence and economic resurgence."
But the new marketing strategy wasn't working. Few believe the green-jobs hype -- with good reason. In Spain, for example, green jobs have been an expensive bust, with each position created requiring, on average, $774,000 in government subsidies. And the logic of getting us off oil imports via a unilateral measure that punishes American coal, oil and natural gas never made any sense at all.
Now the president is repackaging cap-and-trade -- again -- as a long-term solution to the oil spill. But it's the same old agenda, a huge energy tax that will raise the cost of gasoline and electricity high enough so that we're forced to use less.
The logic linking cap-and-trade to the spill in the Gulf should frighten anyone who owns a car or truck. Such measures force up the price at the pump -- Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs thinks it "may require gas prices greater than $7 a gallon by 2020" to meet Obama's stated goal of reducing emissions 14 percent from the transportation sector.
Of course, doing so would reduce gasoline use and also raise market share for hugely expensive alternative fuels and vehicles that could never compete otherwise. Less gasoline demand means less need for drilling and thus a slightly reduced chance of a repeat of the Deepwater Horizon spill -- but only slightly. Oil will still be a vital part of America's energy mix.
Oil-spill risks should be addressed directly -- such as finding out why the leak occurred and requiring new preventive measures or preparing an improved cleanup plan for the next incident. Cap-and-trade is no fix and would cause trillions of dollars in collateral economic damage along the way.
Emanuel was wrong. The administration shouldn't view each crisis -- including the oil spill -- as an opportunity to be exploited, but as a problem to be addressed. And America can't afford $7-a-gallon gas.
Ben Lieberman is senior anal yst of energy and environmental policy in The Heritage Founda tion's Roe Institute.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/gallon_gas_9GlF3o1xIcIBelOV3k0RsK#ixzz0rCx8zHog
That's a Harvard University study's estimate of the per-gallon price of the president's global-warming agenda. And Obama made clear this week that this agenda is a part of his plan for addressing the Gulf mess.
So what does global-warming legislation have to do with the oil spill?
Good question, because such measures wouldn't do a thing to clean up the oil or fix the problems that led to the leak.
The answer can be found in Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's now-famous words, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste -- and what I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before."
AFP/Getty Images
Obama: Using Gulf crisis to push unpopular cap-and-trade bill.
That sure was true of global-warming policy, and especially the cap-and-trade bill. Many observers thought the measure, introduced last year in the House by Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Edward Markey (D-Mass.), was dead: The American people didn't seem to think that the so-called global-warming crisis justified a price-hiking, job-killing, economy-crushing redesign of our energy supply amid a fragile recovery. Passing another major piece of legislation, one every bit as unpopular as ObamaCare, appeared unlikely in an election year.
So Obama and congressional proponents of cap-and-trade spent several months rebranding it -- downplaying the global-warming rationale and claiming that it was really a jobs bill (the so-called green jobs were supposed to spring from the new clean-energy economy) and an energy-independence bill (that will somehow stick it to OPEC).
Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) even reportedly declined to introduce their new cap-and-trade proposal in the Senate on Earth Day, because they wanted to de-emphasize the global-warming message. Instead, Kerry called the American Power Act "a plan that creates jobs and sets us on a course toward energy independence and economic resurgence."
But the new marketing strategy wasn't working. Few believe the green-jobs hype -- with good reason. In Spain, for example, green jobs have been an expensive bust, with each position created requiring, on average, $774,000 in government subsidies. And the logic of getting us off oil imports via a unilateral measure that punishes American coal, oil and natural gas never made any sense at all.
Now the president is repackaging cap-and-trade -- again -- as a long-term solution to the oil spill. But it's the same old agenda, a huge energy tax that will raise the cost of gasoline and electricity high enough so that we're forced to use less.
The logic linking cap-and-trade to the spill in the Gulf should frighten anyone who owns a car or truck. Such measures force up the price at the pump -- Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs thinks it "may require gas prices greater than $7 a gallon by 2020" to meet Obama's stated goal of reducing emissions 14 percent from the transportation sector.
Of course, doing so would reduce gasoline use and also raise market share for hugely expensive alternative fuels and vehicles that could never compete otherwise. Less gasoline demand means less need for drilling and thus a slightly reduced chance of a repeat of the Deepwater Horizon spill -- but only slightly. Oil will still be a vital part of America's energy mix.
Oil-spill risks should be addressed directly -- such as finding out why the leak occurred and requiring new preventive measures or preparing an improved cleanup plan for the next incident. Cap-and-trade is no fix and would cause trillions of dollars in collateral economic damage along the way.
Emanuel was wrong. The administration shouldn't view each crisis -- including the oil spill -- as an opportunity to be exploited, but as a problem to be addressed. And America can't afford $7-a-gallon gas.
Ben Lieberman is senior anal yst of energy and environmental policy in The Heritage Founda tion's Roe Institute.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/gallon_gas_9GlF3o1xIcIBelOV3k0RsK#ixzz0rCx8zHog
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Nightmare vision for Europe as EU chief warns
EU begin emergency billion-pound bailout of Spain
Countries in debt may fall to dictators, EC chief warns
'Apocalyptic' vision as some states run out of money
Democracy could ‘collapse’ in Greece, Spain and Portugal unless urgent action is taken to tackle the debt crisis, the head of the European Commission has warned.
In an extraordinary briefing to trade union chiefs last week, Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso set out an ‘apocalyptic’ vision in which crisis-hit countries in southern Europe could fall victim to military coups or popular uprisings as interest rates soar and public services collapse because their governments run out of money.
The stark warning came as it emerged that EU chiefs have begun work on an emergency bailout package for Spain which is likely to run into hundreds of billions of pounds.
Crisis point: Demonstrators protest cuts announced by the Government in Malaga last week in an echo of the Greek crisis
A £650 billion bailout for Greece has already been agreed.
John Monks, former head of the TUC, said he had been ‘shocked’ by the severity of the warning from Mr Barroso, who is a former prime minister of Portugal.
Mr Monks, now head of the European TUC, said: ‘I had a discussion with Barroso last Friday about what can be done for Greece, Spain, Portugal and the rest and his message was blunt: “Look, if they do not carry out these austerity packages, these countries could virtually disappear in the way that we know them as democracies. They've got no choice, this is it.”
More...Is Afghanistan actually worth fighting for? U.S. discovers $1trillion worth of gold, iron, copper and lithium
Unfair and unaffordable: Clegg's verdict as he promises action on Britain's 'gold-plated' £18bn-a-year public sector pensions
JOHN HUMPHRYS: Have the sceptics been proved right about Europe?
‘He's very, very worried. He shocked us with an apocalyptic vision of democracies in Europe collapsing because of the state of indebtedness.’
Greece, Spain and Portugal, which only became democracies in the 1970s, are all facing dire problems with their public finances. All three countries have a history of military coups.
Greece has been rocked by a series of national strikes and riots this year following the announcement of swingeing cuts to public spending designed to curb Britain’s deficit.
Spain and Portugal have also announced austerity measures in recent weeks amid growing signs that the international markets are increasingly worried they could default on their debts.
Dictatorships: An end to democracy in Europe could see a return of figures ruling dictatorships. General Franco was dictator of Spain until 1975; Georgios Papadopoulos led a military junta until 1973; and Antonio de Oliveira Salazar ruled as Portugese president until 1968
Other EU countries seeing public protests over austerity plans include Hungary, Italy and Romania, where public sector pay is to be slashed by 25 per cent.
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, who visited Madrid last week, said the situation in Spain should serve as a warning to Britain of the perils of failing to tackle the deficit quickly.
He said the collapse of confidence in Spain had seen interest rates soar, adding: ‘As the nation with the highest deficit in Europe in 2010, we simply cannot afford to let that happen to us too.’
Mr Barroso’s warning lays bare the concern at the highest level in Brussels that the economic crisis could lead to the collapse of not only the beleaguered euro, but the EU itself, along with a string of fragile democracies.
DICTATORSHIPSGREECE: Georgios Papadopoulos was dictator from 1967 to 1974.
The Colonel led the military coup d'etat in 1967 against King Constantine II amid political instability. He was leader of the junta which ruled until 1974.
Papadopoulos was overthrown by Brigadier Dimitrios Ioannidis in 1973. Democracy was restored in 1975.
SPAIN: General Francisco Franco led Spain from 1936 until his death in 1975. At the end of the Spanish Civil War he dissolved the Spanish Parliament and established a right-wing authoritarian regime that lasted until 1978. After his death Spain gradually began its transition to democracy.
PORTUGAL: Antonio de Oliveira Salazar's regime and its secret police ruled the country from 1932 to 1968. He founded and led the Estado Novo, the authoriatan, right-wing government that controlled Portugal from 1932 to 1974. After Salazar's death in 1970, his regime persisted until it eventually fell after the Carnation Revolution.
But it risks infuriating governments in southern Europe which are already struggling to contain public anger as they drive through tax rises and spending cuts in a bid to avoid disaster.
Mr Monks yesterday warned that the new austerity measures themselves could take the continent ‘back to the 1930s’.
In an interview with the Brussels-based magazine EU Observer he said: ‘This is extremely dangerous.
'This is 1931, we're heading back to the 1930s, with the Great Depression and we ended up with militarist dictatorship.
‘I'm not saying we're there yet, but it's potentially very serious, not just economically, but politically as well.’
Mr Monks said union barons across Europe were planning a co-ordinated ‘day of action’ against the cuts on 29 September, involving national strikes and protests.
David Cameron will travel to Brussels on Thursday for his first summit of EU leaders since the election.
Leaders are expected to thrash out a rescue package for Spain’s teetering economy. Spain is expected to ask for an initial guarantee of at least £100 billion, although this figure could rise sharply if the crisis deepens.
News of the behind-the-scenes scramble in Brussels spells bad news for the British economy as many of our major banks have loaned Spain vast sums of money in recent years.
Germany’s authoritative Frankfurter Allgemeine Newspaper reported that Spain is poised to ask for multi-billion pound credits.
Mr Barroso and Jean-Claude Trichet of the European Central Bank are united on the need for a rescue plan.
The looming bankruptcy of Spain, one of the foremost economies in Europe, poses far more of a threat to European unity and the euro project than Greece.
Greece contributes 2.5 percent of GDP to Europe, Spain nearly 12 percent.
Yesterday’s report quoted German government sources saying: ‘We will lead discussions this week in Brussels concerning the crisis. It has intensified to the point that the states do not want to wait until the EU summit on Thursday in Brussels.”’
At the end of last month the credit rating agency Fitch downgraded Spain, triggering sharp falls on stock markets.
On Friday the administration in Madrid continued to insist no rescue package was necessary. But Greece said the same thing before it came close to disaster.
Yesterday the European Commission and the statistics authority Eurostat met to consider Spain‘s plight as many EU countries consider the austerity package proposed by the Madrid administration insufficient to deal with the country‘s problems.
Print this article Read later Email to a friend
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1286480/EU-chief-warns-democracy-disappear-Greece-Spain-Portugal.html#ixzz0r0z3HJ6A
Countries in debt may fall to dictators, EC chief warns
'Apocalyptic' vision as some states run out of money
Democracy could ‘collapse’ in Greece, Spain and Portugal unless urgent action is taken to tackle the debt crisis, the head of the European Commission has warned.
In an extraordinary briefing to trade union chiefs last week, Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso set out an ‘apocalyptic’ vision in which crisis-hit countries in southern Europe could fall victim to military coups or popular uprisings as interest rates soar and public services collapse because their governments run out of money.
The stark warning came as it emerged that EU chiefs have begun work on an emergency bailout package for Spain which is likely to run into hundreds of billions of pounds.
Crisis point: Demonstrators protest cuts announced by the Government in Malaga last week in an echo of the Greek crisis
A £650 billion bailout for Greece has already been agreed.
John Monks, former head of the TUC, said he had been ‘shocked’ by the severity of the warning from Mr Barroso, who is a former prime minister of Portugal.
Mr Monks, now head of the European TUC, said: ‘I had a discussion with Barroso last Friday about what can be done for Greece, Spain, Portugal and the rest and his message was blunt: “Look, if they do not carry out these austerity packages, these countries could virtually disappear in the way that we know them as democracies. They've got no choice, this is it.”
More...Is Afghanistan actually worth fighting for? U.S. discovers $1trillion worth of gold, iron, copper and lithium
Unfair and unaffordable: Clegg's verdict as he promises action on Britain's 'gold-plated' £18bn-a-year public sector pensions
JOHN HUMPHRYS: Have the sceptics been proved right about Europe?
‘He's very, very worried. He shocked us with an apocalyptic vision of democracies in Europe collapsing because of the state of indebtedness.’
Greece, Spain and Portugal, which only became democracies in the 1970s, are all facing dire problems with their public finances. All three countries have a history of military coups.
Greece has been rocked by a series of national strikes and riots this year following the announcement of swingeing cuts to public spending designed to curb Britain’s deficit.
Spain and Portugal have also announced austerity measures in recent weeks amid growing signs that the international markets are increasingly worried they could default on their debts.
Dictatorships: An end to democracy in Europe could see a return of figures ruling dictatorships. General Franco was dictator of Spain until 1975; Georgios Papadopoulos led a military junta until 1973; and Antonio de Oliveira Salazar ruled as Portugese president until 1968
Other EU countries seeing public protests over austerity plans include Hungary, Italy and Romania, where public sector pay is to be slashed by 25 per cent.
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, who visited Madrid last week, said the situation in Spain should serve as a warning to Britain of the perils of failing to tackle the deficit quickly.
He said the collapse of confidence in Spain had seen interest rates soar, adding: ‘As the nation with the highest deficit in Europe in 2010, we simply cannot afford to let that happen to us too.’
Mr Barroso’s warning lays bare the concern at the highest level in Brussels that the economic crisis could lead to the collapse of not only the beleaguered euro, but the EU itself, along with a string of fragile democracies.
DICTATORSHIPSGREECE: Georgios Papadopoulos was dictator from 1967 to 1974.
The Colonel led the military coup d'etat in 1967 against King Constantine II amid political instability. He was leader of the junta which ruled until 1974.
Papadopoulos was overthrown by Brigadier Dimitrios Ioannidis in 1973. Democracy was restored in 1975.
SPAIN: General Francisco Franco led Spain from 1936 until his death in 1975. At the end of the Spanish Civil War he dissolved the Spanish Parliament and established a right-wing authoritarian regime that lasted until 1978. After his death Spain gradually began its transition to democracy.
PORTUGAL: Antonio de Oliveira Salazar's regime and its secret police ruled the country from 1932 to 1968. He founded and led the Estado Novo, the authoriatan, right-wing government that controlled Portugal from 1932 to 1974. After Salazar's death in 1970, his regime persisted until it eventually fell after the Carnation Revolution.
But it risks infuriating governments in southern Europe which are already struggling to contain public anger as they drive through tax rises and spending cuts in a bid to avoid disaster.
Mr Monks yesterday warned that the new austerity measures themselves could take the continent ‘back to the 1930s’.
In an interview with the Brussels-based magazine EU Observer he said: ‘This is extremely dangerous.
'This is 1931, we're heading back to the 1930s, with the Great Depression and we ended up with militarist dictatorship.
‘I'm not saying we're there yet, but it's potentially very serious, not just economically, but politically as well.’
Mr Monks said union barons across Europe were planning a co-ordinated ‘day of action’ against the cuts on 29 September, involving national strikes and protests.
David Cameron will travel to Brussels on Thursday for his first summit of EU leaders since the election.
Leaders are expected to thrash out a rescue package for Spain’s teetering economy. Spain is expected to ask for an initial guarantee of at least £100 billion, although this figure could rise sharply if the crisis deepens.
News of the behind-the-scenes scramble in Brussels spells bad news for the British economy as many of our major banks have loaned Spain vast sums of money in recent years.
Germany’s authoritative Frankfurter Allgemeine Newspaper reported that Spain is poised to ask for multi-billion pound credits.
Mr Barroso and Jean-Claude Trichet of the European Central Bank are united on the need for a rescue plan.
The looming bankruptcy of Spain, one of the foremost economies in Europe, poses far more of a threat to European unity and the euro project than Greece.
Greece contributes 2.5 percent of GDP to Europe, Spain nearly 12 percent.
Yesterday’s report quoted German government sources saying: ‘We will lead discussions this week in Brussels concerning the crisis. It has intensified to the point that the states do not want to wait until the EU summit on Thursday in Brussels.”’
At the end of last month the credit rating agency Fitch downgraded Spain, triggering sharp falls on stock markets.
On Friday the administration in Madrid continued to insist no rescue package was necessary. But Greece said the same thing before it came close to disaster.
Yesterday the European Commission and the statistics authority Eurostat met to consider Spain‘s plight as many EU countries consider the austerity package proposed by the Madrid administration insufficient to deal with the country‘s problems.
Print this article Read later Email to a friend
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1286480/EU-chief-warns-democracy-disappear-Greece-Spain-Portugal.html#ixzz0r0z3HJ6A
Sunday, June 13, 2010
President Pinocchio sells Obamacare
President Obama's nose grows longer every time he talks about Obamacare, especially when speaking to seniors. Obama told a group of seniors in suburban Maryland last week that "what you need to know is that the guaranteed Medicare benefits that you've earned will not change, regardless of whether you receive them through Medicare or Medicare Advantage." As the Wall Street Journal archly observed last week, "nothing about that sentence is true." Nonetheless, this claim has become the official position of the U.S. government, thanks to its repetition by the chief executive and his senior aides, and its inclusion by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in a four-color propaganda brochure mailed in May to millions of older Americans.
As Obama and HHS well know, Obamacare slashes $500 billion from Medicare over the next decade. That's why the Congressional Budget Office projects that one of every three participants in the highly popular Medicare Advantage program will be dropped. Others, including Medicare's own actuaries, expect as many as half of all Medicare Advantage participants to lose the benefit. As Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week in response to Obama's Maryland statement, seniors have been told repeatedly by the White House and congressional Democrats "that if they liked their plan they could keep it. Yet now we hear that millions of seniors will lose the Medicare Advantage benefits they have and like as a result of the Democrats' health care bill.. . . That's been the story all along about this bill -- a lot of promises that couldn't be kept. And that's why the story now isn't the bill itself, but the administration's broken promises."
Despite the facts, it is clear that we will be hearing the "you-can-keep-your-benefits-if-you-like- them" whopper and many more similar Obamacare prevarications in the days ahead. Obama couldn't get former South Dakota Sen. Tom Daschle as his Health and Human Services secretary because the former Senate majority leader-turned high-priced Washington lobbyist forgot to report all of his income to the Internal Revenue Service a few years ago. But that doesn't stop Daschle from being co-chairman of the upcoming $125 million public relations campaign funded by unions and liberal nonprofits to sell Obamacare -- again -- to the American people, 58 percent of whom favor its repeal. Curiously, Andrew Grossman, the hyperpartisan Democratic operative overseeing this campaign, believes that "when you treat people with respect ... you can move them." Such respect starts with telling people the truth, something which Obama and his health care allies don't often do.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/President-Pinocchio-sells-Obamacare-96163914.html#ixzz0qlXDWsqK
As Obama and HHS well know, Obamacare slashes $500 billion from Medicare over the next decade. That's why the Congressional Budget Office projects that one of every three participants in the highly popular Medicare Advantage program will be dropped. Others, including Medicare's own actuaries, expect as many as half of all Medicare Advantage participants to lose the benefit. As Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week in response to Obama's Maryland statement, seniors have been told repeatedly by the White House and congressional Democrats "that if they liked their plan they could keep it. Yet now we hear that millions of seniors will lose the Medicare Advantage benefits they have and like as a result of the Democrats' health care bill.. . . That's been the story all along about this bill -- a lot of promises that couldn't be kept. And that's why the story now isn't the bill itself, but the administration's broken promises."
Despite the facts, it is clear that we will be hearing the "you-can-keep-your-benefits-if-you-like- them" whopper and many more similar Obamacare prevarications in the days ahead. Obama couldn't get former South Dakota Sen. Tom Daschle as his Health and Human Services secretary because the former Senate majority leader-turned high-priced Washington lobbyist forgot to report all of his income to the Internal Revenue Service a few years ago. But that doesn't stop Daschle from being co-chairman of the upcoming $125 million public relations campaign funded by unions and liberal nonprofits to sell Obamacare -- again -- to the American people, 58 percent of whom favor its repeal. Curiously, Andrew Grossman, the hyperpartisan Democratic operative overseeing this campaign, believes that "when you treat people with respect ... you can move them." Such respect starts with telling people the truth, something which Obama and his health care allies don't often do.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/President-Pinocchio-sells-Obamacare-96163914.html#ixzz0qlXDWsqK
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Obama, GOP Bicker Over Doctors' Medicare Pay
President Barack Obama is asking Republican lawmakers to approve billions of dollars in new spending to avert a scheduled 21 percent cut in payments to doctors who treat Medicare patients.
If GOP senators don't allow the stalled proposal to pass, some doctors will stop treating Medicare recipients, Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday.
The Senate's top Republican, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said his party wants to avoid reducing physicians' fees, but do it without adding to the deficit — meaning spending cuts elsewhere.
The president noted that since 2003, Congresses led by Democrats and by Republicans alike have blocked similar proposed cuts in doctors' reimbursement rates. But now, he said, Republicans are "willing to walk away from the needs of our doctors and our seniors."
The "doc fix" is part of a large, Democratic-drafted bill that would extend several popular tax breaks while greatly increasing the tax that oil companies pay into a spill liability fund. Republican senators have focused their objections on the bill's tax increases, not the doctors' pay matter.
"Even in the face of public outrage, Democrats are showing either that they just dont get it on this issue of the debt, or that they just dont care," McConnell said.
For years, lawmakers from both parties routinely have said that would trim Medicare reimbursement rates as a way to save money and make their budget plans appear more frugal. Later, in a move that watchdog groups call cynical, the lawmakers routinely undo the proposed cuts in doctor payments, which are considered politically unpalatable.
Obama acknowledged that a better plan is needed.
"I realize that simply kicking these cuts down the road another year is not a long-term solution," he said. "I am committed to permanently reforming this Medicare formula in a way that balances fiscal responsibility with the responsibility we have to doctors and seniors."
The president said he is "absolutely willing to take the difficult steps necessary to lower the cost of Medicare and put our budget on a more fiscally sustainable path. But I'm not willing to do that by punishing hardworking physicians or the millions of Americans who count on Medicare. That's just wrong. And that's why in the short-term, Congress must act to prevent this pay cut to doctors."
In the GOP weekly radio address, House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio called on Obama to rein in government spending and accused the president of "refusing to make the tough choices" when it comes to budget cuts. While Boehner did not mention the dispute over Medicare doctor payments, he renewed his attack on the new health care law, saying its "burdensome mandates and tax increases" are stalling economic recovery.
If GOP senators don't allow the stalled proposal to pass, some doctors will stop treating Medicare recipients, Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday.
The Senate's top Republican, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said his party wants to avoid reducing physicians' fees, but do it without adding to the deficit — meaning spending cuts elsewhere.
The president noted that since 2003, Congresses led by Democrats and by Republicans alike have blocked similar proposed cuts in doctors' reimbursement rates. But now, he said, Republicans are "willing to walk away from the needs of our doctors and our seniors."
The "doc fix" is part of a large, Democratic-drafted bill that would extend several popular tax breaks while greatly increasing the tax that oil companies pay into a spill liability fund. Republican senators have focused their objections on the bill's tax increases, not the doctors' pay matter.
"Even in the face of public outrage, Democrats are showing either that they just dont get it on this issue of the debt, or that they just dont care," McConnell said.
For years, lawmakers from both parties routinely have said that would trim Medicare reimbursement rates as a way to save money and make their budget plans appear more frugal. Later, in a move that watchdog groups call cynical, the lawmakers routinely undo the proposed cuts in doctor payments, which are considered politically unpalatable.
Obama acknowledged that a better plan is needed.
"I realize that simply kicking these cuts down the road another year is not a long-term solution," he said. "I am committed to permanently reforming this Medicare formula in a way that balances fiscal responsibility with the responsibility we have to doctors and seniors."
The president said he is "absolutely willing to take the difficult steps necessary to lower the cost of Medicare and put our budget on a more fiscally sustainable path. But I'm not willing to do that by punishing hardworking physicians or the millions of Americans who count on Medicare. That's just wrong. And that's why in the short-term, Congress must act to prevent this pay cut to doctors."
In the GOP weekly radio address, House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio called on Obama to rein in government spending and accused the president of "refusing to make the tough choices" when it comes to budget cuts. While Boehner did not mention the dispute over Medicare doctor payments, he renewed his attack on the new health care law, saying its "burdensome mandates and tax increases" are stalling economic recovery.
Saudi Arabia: We will not give Israel air corridor for Iran strike
Saudi Arabia would not allow Israeli bombers to pass through its airspace en route to a possible strike of Iran's nuclear facilities, a member of the Saudi royal family said Saturday, denying Earlier Saturday, the Times reported that Saudi Arabia has practiced standing down its anti-aircraft systems to allow Israeli warplanes passage on their way to attack Iran's nuclear installations, adding that the Saudis have allocated a narrow corridor of airspace in the north of the country.
Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf, the Saudi envoy to the U.K. speaking to the London-based Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat, denied that report, saying such a move "would be against the policy adopted and followed by the Kingdom."
According to Asharq al-Awsat report, bin Nawaf reiterated the Saudi Arabia's rejection of any violation of its territories or airspace, adding that it would be "illogical to allow the Israeli occupying force, with whom Saudi Arabia has no relations whatsoever, to use its land and airspace."
Earlier, the Times quoted an unnamed U.S. defense source as saying that "the Saudis have given their permission for the Israelis to pass over and they will look the other way.
"They have already done tests to make sure their own jets aren’t scrambled and no one gets shot down. This has all been done with the agreement of the [U.S.] State Department."
Once the Israelis had passed, the kingdom’s air defenses would return to full alert, the Times said.
Despite tensions between them, Israel and Saudi Arabia share a mutual hostility to Iran.
"We all know this. We will let them [the Israelis] through and see nothing,” the Times quoted a Saudi government source as saying.
According to the report, the four main targets for an Israeli raid on Iran would be uranium enrichment facilities at Natanz and Qom, a gas storage development at Isfahan and a heavy-water reactor at Arak.
Secondary targets may include a Russian-built light water reactor at Bushehr, which could produce weapons-grade plutonium when complete.
Even with midair refueling, the targets would be as the far edge of Israeli bombers' range at a distance of some 2,250km. An attack would likely involve several waves of aircraft, possibly crossing Jordan, northern Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
Aircraft attacking Bushehr, on the Gulf coast, could swing beneath Kuwait to strike from the southwest, the Times said.
Passing over Iraq would require at least tacit consent to the raid from the United States, whose troops are occupying the country. So far, the Obama Administration has refused this.
On Wednesday the United Nations passed a fourth round of sanctions against Iran in an attempt to force it to stop enriching uranium. But immediately after the UN vote, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vowed the nuclear program would continue.
Israel hailed the vote – but said sanctions were not enough and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has refused to rule out a raid.
Netanyahu's predecessor, Ehud Olmert, is believed to have held secret meetings with high-ranking Saudi officials over Iran.
an earlier Times of London report.
Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf, the Saudi envoy to the U.K. speaking to the London-based Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat, denied that report, saying such a move "would be against the policy adopted and followed by the Kingdom."
According to Asharq al-Awsat report, bin Nawaf reiterated the Saudi Arabia's rejection of any violation of its territories or airspace, adding that it would be "illogical to allow the Israeli occupying force, with whom Saudi Arabia has no relations whatsoever, to use its land and airspace."
Earlier, the Times quoted an unnamed U.S. defense source as saying that "the Saudis have given their permission for the Israelis to pass over and they will look the other way.
"They have already done tests to make sure their own jets aren’t scrambled and no one gets shot down. This has all been done with the agreement of the [U.S.] State Department."
Once the Israelis had passed, the kingdom’s air defenses would return to full alert, the Times said.
Despite tensions between them, Israel and Saudi Arabia share a mutual hostility to Iran.
"We all know this. We will let them [the Israelis] through and see nothing,” the Times quoted a Saudi government source as saying.
According to the report, the four main targets for an Israeli raid on Iran would be uranium enrichment facilities at Natanz and Qom, a gas storage development at Isfahan and a heavy-water reactor at Arak.
Secondary targets may include a Russian-built light water reactor at Bushehr, which could produce weapons-grade plutonium when complete.
Even with midair refueling, the targets would be as the far edge of Israeli bombers' range at a distance of some 2,250km. An attack would likely involve several waves of aircraft, possibly crossing Jordan, northern Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
Aircraft attacking Bushehr, on the Gulf coast, could swing beneath Kuwait to strike from the southwest, the Times said.
Passing over Iraq would require at least tacit consent to the raid from the United States, whose troops are occupying the country. So far, the Obama Administration has refused this.
On Wednesday the United Nations passed a fourth round of sanctions against Iran in an attempt to force it to stop enriching uranium. But immediately after the UN vote, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vowed the nuclear program would continue.
Israel hailed the vote – but said sanctions were not enough and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has refused to rule out a raid.
Netanyahu's predecessor, Ehud Olmert, is believed to have held secret meetings with high-ranking Saudi officials over Iran.
an earlier Times of London report.
Saudis air corridor is open, US, Israel self-immobilized on Iran
The Saudi air corridor offered Israel for an attack on Iran reported in the London Times of Saturday, June 12, was an old story rehashed by Riyadh in the hope of egging the US and Israel on to break free of their self-imposed restraints and halt Iran's drive for a nuclear bomb before it is too late.
debkafile's Middle East sources report the explosive developments of the last two weeks, primarily the meteoric rise of a thrusting partnership between the two non-Arab powers, Turkey and Iran, have badly rattled Arab capitals, especially when they see the Obama administration and Netanyahu government immersed in tying themselves and each other in knots over the format of an inquiry into Turkish flotilla incident.
The London Times reported that Saudi Arabia had conducted tests to stand down its air defenses to enable Israeli jets to make a bombing raid on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Riyadh was said to have agreed to allow Israel to use a narrow corridor of its airspace in the north of the country to shorten the distance for a bombing run on Iran. To ensure the Israeli bombers pass unmolested, Riyadh has carried out tests to make certain its own jets are not scrambled and missile defense systems not activated.
“The Saudis have given their permission for the Israelis to pass over and they will look the other way,” said a US defense source in the area. Sources in Saudi Arabia say, "It is common knowledge within defense circles in the kingdom that an arrangement is in place if Israel decides to launch the raid. Despite the tension between the two governments, they share a mutual loathing of the regime in Tehran and a common fear of Iran’s nuclear ambitions."
debkafile adds: Appearing in the week UN sanctions were approved against Iran, this report amounted to a Saudi no-confidence vote in its value.
Low expectations of the sanctions are no secret in Washington either. According to the New York Times, the Obama administration has prepared Plans A, B, C. and D, if sanctions fail to stop Iran's push for a nuke. No details were published, but the NYT quoted Barak Obama as noting in April: "…once Iran passes a certain point, it may be impossible to know when it has taken the last steps to manufacture a (nuclear) weapon."
This did not stop defense secretary Robert Gates speaking after a NATO meeting in Brussels on June 11, from whipping out the rusty device beloved of the Bush administration: "I think everyone agrees we have some more time, including the Israelis. …I would say the intelligence estimates range from one to three years."
In the Middle East meanwhile, events are rushing forward with explosive haste, impelled in the last ten days by the Turkish-led flotilla for breaking the Gaza blockade and the Israeli commando raid to intercept it.
The rise of the Turkish-Iranian alliance has not only thrust America and Israel to the wings the Middle East stage, but is deeply alarming Cairo, Riyadh, the Gulf emirate and even Syria. They suddenly see Prime minister Recep Erdogan and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad dictating the region's agenda with no one there to stop them.
Within days, the balance of power in the region has been reshuffled to extend way beyond Tehran's hand on Hizballah's levers in Beirut and the Palestinian Hamas in Gaza. Iran has acquired an important member of NATO as a proactive ally.
Gates' only comment on this development was: "I was disappointed by the Turkey vote on the Iranian sanctions. That said, Turkey is a decades-long ally of the US and a member of NATO. Turkey continues to play a critical part in the alliance."
Israel's Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and defense minster Ehud Barak are just as laggard in addressing the formidable new axis looming over the region and the Jewish state, in particular. They are too busy quibbling with Washington over the shape of the impartial commission the UN has demanded for probing Israel's actions against the Turkish-led flotilla of May 31 - though certainly not, perish the thought, Turkey's role or the Erdogan government's close ties with the IHH terrorists aboard the Turkish ship.
What Netanyahu and Barak have not told the public is that the dickering with the Obama administration has dragged out for five days because the US wants the impartial commission empowered to question the Israeli officers and soldiers who raided the Mavi Marmara in a clash which left 9 Turks dead, and several wounded including six Israel commandos.
If Obama has his way, Israeli soldiers will for the first time face questioning by American and European investigators. Israeli leaders understand that compliance would add fuel to the international campaign for de-legitimizing the Jewish state as a sovereign state and respectable member of the world community of nations. The Israelli Defense Forces would be further immobilized under a sustained international campaign to discredit them on the lines of the Goldstone report on the Gaza war - only this time Washington is taking the lead in the de-legitimacy campaign.
With no one apparently available for keeping Iran out of the nuclear club, Riyadh did what it could. Using the London Times platform, Saudi Arabia's princely rulers opened the door to positive action in order to lift morale in the oil kingdom and its army and remind Washington, Jerusalem and the other Middle East players that soft sanctions need not be the last word; they are offering Israeli bombers a corridor for striking Iran's nuclear facilities and chance to reshape the region's declining reality.
debkafile adds: The air corridor is now clearly open but still unused. There appears to be no one in Washington or Jerusalem willing or able to order the bombers to take off.
Top Stories
* US, France, UK practice aerial strikes against Iranian target
* US placates Erdogan, destabilizes Netanyahu
* Ahmadinejad: Iran's flotilla ready for clash with Israel
* Osama bin Laden hiding in Sabzevar, Iran
* Israel, Turkey, Gaza in covert sea war. Hamas frogmen thwarted
* Turkish troops deployed in Cyprus, top intelligence ranks Islamized
* Israeli troops board Rachel Corrie
* Mossad chief: Obama's perceived softness weakens Israel
debkafile's Middle East sources report the explosive developments of the last two weeks, primarily the meteoric rise of a thrusting partnership between the two non-Arab powers, Turkey and Iran, have badly rattled Arab capitals, especially when they see the Obama administration and Netanyahu government immersed in tying themselves and each other in knots over the format of an inquiry into Turkish flotilla incident.
The London Times reported that Saudi Arabia had conducted tests to stand down its air defenses to enable Israeli jets to make a bombing raid on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Riyadh was said to have agreed to allow Israel to use a narrow corridor of its airspace in the north of the country to shorten the distance for a bombing run on Iran. To ensure the Israeli bombers pass unmolested, Riyadh has carried out tests to make certain its own jets are not scrambled and missile defense systems not activated.
“The Saudis have given their permission for the Israelis to pass over and they will look the other way,” said a US defense source in the area. Sources in Saudi Arabia say, "It is common knowledge within defense circles in the kingdom that an arrangement is in place if Israel decides to launch the raid. Despite the tension between the two governments, they share a mutual loathing of the regime in Tehran and a common fear of Iran’s nuclear ambitions."
debkafile adds: Appearing in the week UN sanctions were approved against Iran, this report amounted to a Saudi no-confidence vote in its value.
Low expectations of the sanctions are no secret in Washington either. According to the New York Times, the Obama administration has prepared Plans A, B, C. and D, if sanctions fail to stop Iran's push for a nuke. No details were published, but the NYT quoted Barak Obama as noting in April: "…once Iran passes a certain point, it may be impossible to know when it has taken the last steps to manufacture a (nuclear) weapon."
This did not stop defense secretary Robert Gates speaking after a NATO meeting in Brussels on June 11, from whipping out the rusty device beloved of the Bush administration: "I think everyone agrees we have some more time, including the Israelis. …I would say the intelligence estimates range from one to three years."
In the Middle East meanwhile, events are rushing forward with explosive haste, impelled in the last ten days by the Turkish-led flotilla for breaking the Gaza blockade and the Israeli commando raid to intercept it.
The rise of the Turkish-Iranian alliance has not only thrust America and Israel to the wings the Middle East stage, but is deeply alarming Cairo, Riyadh, the Gulf emirate and even Syria. They suddenly see Prime minister Recep Erdogan and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad dictating the region's agenda with no one there to stop them.
Within days, the balance of power in the region has been reshuffled to extend way beyond Tehran's hand on Hizballah's levers in Beirut and the Palestinian Hamas in Gaza. Iran has acquired an important member of NATO as a proactive ally.
Gates' only comment on this development was: "I was disappointed by the Turkey vote on the Iranian sanctions. That said, Turkey is a decades-long ally of the US and a member of NATO. Turkey continues to play a critical part in the alliance."
Israel's Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and defense minster Ehud Barak are just as laggard in addressing the formidable new axis looming over the region and the Jewish state, in particular. They are too busy quibbling with Washington over the shape of the impartial commission the UN has demanded for probing Israel's actions against the Turkish-led flotilla of May 31 - though certainly not, perish the thought, Turkey's role or the Erdogan government's close ties with the IHH terrorists aboard the Turkish ship.
What Netanyahu and Barak have not told the public is that the dickering with the Obama administration has dragged out for five days because the US wants the impartial commission empowered to question the Israeli officers and soldiers who raided the Mavi Marmara in a clash which left 9 Turks dead, and several wounded including six Israel commandos.
If Obama has his way, Israeli soldiers will for the first time face questioning by American and European investigators. Israeli leaders understand that compliance would add fuel to the international campaign for de-legitimizing the Jewish state as a sovereign state and respectable member of the world community of nations. The Israelli Defense Forces would be further immobilized under a sustained international campaign to discredit them on the lines of the Goldstone report on the Gaza war - only this time Washington is taking the lead in the de-legitimacy campaign.
With no one apparently available for keeping Iran out of the nuclear club, Riyadh did what it could. Using the London Times platform, Saudi Arabia's princely rulers opened the door to positive action in order to lift morale in the oil kingdom and its army and remind Washington, Jerusalem and the other Middle East players that soft sanctions need not be the last word; they are offering Israeli bombers a corridor for striking Iran's nuclear facilities and chance to reshape the region's declining reality.
debkafile adds: The air corridor is now clearly open but still unused. There appears to be no one in Washington or Jerusalem willing or able to order the bombers to take off.
Top Stories
* US, France, UK practice aerial strikes against Iranian target
* US placates Erdogan, destabilizes Netanyahu
* Ahmadinejad: Iran's flotilla ready for clash with Israel
* Osama bin Laden hiding in Sabzevar, Iran
* Israel, Turkey, Gaza in covert sea war. Hamas frogmen thwarted
* Turkish troops deployed in Cyprus, top intelligence ranks Islamized
* Israeli troops board Rachel Corrie
* Mossad chief: Obama's perceived softness weakens Israel
Friday, June 11, 2010
Health overhaul to force changes in employer plans
WASHINGTON (AP) - Over and over in the health care debate, President Barack Obama said people who like their current coverage would be able to keep it.
But an early draft of an administration regulation estimates that many employers will be forced to make changes to their health plans under the new law. In just three years, a majority of workers—51 percent—will be in plans subject to new federal requirements, according to the draft.
Employers say it's more evidence that the law will drive up costs. Republicans say Obama broke his promise. But some experts believe increased regulation will lead to improved benefits for consumers.
"On the face of it, having consumer protections apply to all insurance plans could be a good thing for employees," said Alex Vachon, an independent health policy consultant. "Technically, it's actually improved coverage."
The types of changes that employers would be forced to make include offering preventive care without copayments and instituting an appeals process for disputed claims that follows new federal guidelines. The law already requires all health plans to extend coverage to young adult children until they turn 26. But such changes also nudge costs up.
The Obama administration said the draft regulation is an early version undergoing revision. Nonetheless, the leaked document was getting widespread interest Friday in lobbying firms that represent employers and insurance companies and on Capitol Hill.
"What we are getting here is a clear indication that most plans will have to change," said James Gelfand, health policy director for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "From an employer's point of view that's a bad thing. These changes, whether or not they're good for consumers, are most certainly accompanied by a cost."
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said it showed that Obama's assurance that Americans would be able to keep the plans they currently have was "a myth" all along.
"Since its passage, Republican arguments against the bill have been repeatedly vindicated, even as the administration's many promises about the bill have been called into question again and again," McConnell said. "So Democrats may have passed this bill, but the debate is far from over."
An administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the rules are still being written, said the final version will uphold Obama's promise, accommodating employers' desire for flexibility while protecting consumers from runaway costs.
Employer provided coverage is the mainstay of the nation's health insurance system and is expected to remain so even after the new health care law is fully phased in.
The main issue in the 83-page regulation is how to deal with what the government calls "grandfathered" health plans.
Those are plans that predated the health care law and are exempt from many, but not all, of its consumer protections. Lawmakers created the special category to deliver on Obama's promise that people can keep the coverage they have if they like it.
But health plans change frequently. Premiums and copayments keep rising. Coverage is expanded for some services and restricted for others. Lawmakers asked regulators to spell out how much an employer can change a plan and still claim it to be grandfathered, exempting it from closer federal regulation.
Employers say the draft rules are too inflexible. Generally plans can lose their protected status by increasing copayments and deductibles above certain limits. Gelfand said medical inflation alone would push many employers over the line.
How employers react to the final rules will be critical. If major companies start dropping health care benefits, opting instead to pay the government a penalty, Democrats would face a political backlash.
Stronger consumer protections can mean higher costs for employers. But whether there's a tipping point ahead is still unclear.
But an early draft of an administration regulation estimates that many employers will be forced to make changes to their health plans under the new law. In just three years, a majority of workers—51 percent—will be in plans subject to new federal requirements, according to the draft.
Employers say it's more evidence that the law will drive up costs. Republicans say Obama broke his promise. But some experts believe increased regulation will lead to improved benefits for consumers.
"On the face of it, having consumer protections apply to all insurance plans could be a good thing for employees," said Alex Vachon, an independent health policy consultant. "Technically, it's actually improved coverage."
The types of changes that employers would be forced to make include offering preventive care without copayments and instituting an appeals process for disputed claims that follows new federal guidelines. The law already requires all health plans to extend coverage to young adult children until they turn 26. But such changes also nudge costs up.
The Obama administration said the draft regulation is an early version undergoing revision. Nonetheless, the leaked document was getting widespread interest Friday in lobbying firms that represent employers and insurance companies and on Capitol Hill.
"What we are getting here is a clear indication that most plans will have to change," said James Gelfand, health policy director for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "From an employer's point of view that's a bad thing. These changes, whether or not they're good for consumers, are most certainly accompanied by a cost."
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said it showed that Obama's assurance that Americans would be able to keep the plans they currently have was "a myth" all along.
"Since its passage, Republican arguments against the bill have been repeatedly vindicated, even as the administration's many promises about the bill have been called into question again and again," McConnell said. "So Democrats may have passed this bill, but the debate is far from over."
An administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the rules are still being written, said the final version will uphold Obama's promise, accommodating employers' desire for flexibility while protecting consumers from runaway costs.
Employer provided coverage is the mainstay of the nation's health insurance system and is expected to remain so even after the new health care law is fully phased in.
The main issue in the 83-page regulation is how to deal with what the government calls "grandfathered" health plans.
Those are plans that predated the health care law and are exempt from many, but not all, of its consumer protections. Lawmakers created the special category to deliver on Obama's promise that people can keep the coverage they have if they like it.
But health plans change frequently. Premiums and copayments keep rising. Coverage is expanded for some services and restricted for others. Lawmakers asked regulators to spell out how much an employer can change a plan and still claim it to be grandfathered, exempting it from closer federal regulation.
Employers say the draft rules are too inflexible. Generally plans can lose their protected status by increasing copayments and deductibles above certain limits. Gelfand said medical inflation alone would push many employers over the line.
How employers react to the final rules will be critical. If major companies start dropping health care benefits, opting instead to pay the government a penalty, Democrats would face a political backlash.
Stronger consumer protections can mean higher costs for employers. But whether there's a tipping point ahead is still unclear.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Honk if You're an Aggressive Driver
You've seen that driver. Maybe you've been that driver. The one who zooms past the speed limit, weaves from lane to lane, tailgates, and even runs a stop sign or two.
Maryland and several other states—Pennsylvania, Virginia and Georgia among them—are out to get these aggressive drivers, particularly during the summer.
Under a program called "Smooth Operator," police in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia will conduct week-long blitzes this summer, ticketing motorists who indulge in "aggressive driving." In Maryland, for example, getting written up can cost a driver up to $500.
Last year, police officers in the state wrote 207,000 tickets for aggressive driving, says Vernon Betkey, head of the state's highway safety agency. The most recent crackdown started earlier this month.
So do drivers become less aggressive when they know the law is watching? Data from Maryland suggest that stepped up enforcement hasn't turned the tide.
In 1999, the state attributed 3,113 crashes to aggressive driving, or about 3.2% of all crashes. In 2008, Maryland linked 6,111 crashes, or about 6.4% of all crashes to aggressive driving.
Other studies show mixed results. A 2004 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration study of two separate "aggressive driving" enforcement campaigns—one in Tucson, Ariz., and the other in Indianapolis. Crashes linked to aggressive driving in Indianapolis actually increased by 6% during a six-month, federally subsidized program during 2000 called "Rub Out Aggressive Driving." But in Tucson, aggressive driving offenses decreased by 8% during a similar six-month program.
The NHTSA study's authors expressed bewilderment over the results, which measured speed and crashes attributable to aggressive driving.
"Why didn't the considerable efforts of both programs have greater inhibiting effects on driving behavior?" the study's authors asked. "It is possible that the programs were more effective than indicated by the data presented here, but our measures are insensitive to the change in driving behavior. Or, perhaps we expect too much."
Perhaps we do. As a transplanted Detroiter who drives occasionally on the highways and byways of the Washington metro area, I frequently find myself thinking about some "aggressive" behavior to speed my trip. Highways in the Washington-Baltimore corridor are among the nation's most congested. It is a local custom to drive the speed limit—or even a bit slower—while in the passing lane.
Of course, those people are obeying the law. But they are also obstructing people who choose to drive a little faster—maybe they're late, or maybe they have adopted the "limit plus 5 mph" approach to obeying the posted speed signs.
Aggressive driving isn't the same thing as road rage. The distinction: Aggressive driving is tailgating a slowpoke, then accelerating abruptly, exceeding the speed limit and weaving through traffic to get past him. "Road rage" would be a criminal act—such as bumping the offending car, or brandishing a weapon.
Road rage got a lot of publicity a few years back. But it's a tiny problem, according to NHTSA research. Just less than half of one percent of the total number of people injured or killed on the highway in the year 2000 were listed as victims of a road rage incident.
"Aggressive driving" is a more difficult matter. What one person views as rude, risky, anti-social behavior is for another a sensible response to fellow motorists who are clogging up an already overloaded system. During the 1990s, the number of miles traveled by U.S. motorists increased by 27%, but the number of miles of roadway increased by only 1%. If you find yourself complaining that the highways are more crowded than they were in the good old days, you are a curmudgeon. You are also right.
Of course, there are peaceful (or at least less rude) ways to deal with people who squat in the passing lane. Anyone who's ever been on a German autobahn knows how drivers from the land of Porsches and AMG Mercedes handle people who commit the left-lane faux pas: They flash their halogen headlights. You move over.
More Americans could take a forgiving approach to driving, instead of approaching it as blood sport. The next time someone misjudges a freeway merger and gets in your path, try just letting them in. You might get a break the next time.
While we wait for the U.S. to be transformed into a nation of motoring Gandhis, beware: There will be five aggressive driving ticket blitzes between now and September, Mr. Betkey says.
So if you are driving in Maryland or Virginia this summer and want to hot dog it on the road, you may make an involuntary $500 contribution to a needy state treasury.
Maryland and several other states—Pennsylvania, Virginia and Georgia among them—are out to get these aggressive drivers, particularly during the summer.
Under a program called "Smooth Operator," police in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia will conduct week-long blitzes this summer, ticketing motorists who indulge in "aggressive driving." In Maryland, for example, getting written up can cost a driver up to $500.
Last year, police officers in the state wrote 207,000 tickets for aggressive driving, says Vernon Betkey, head of the state's highway safety agency. The most recent crackdown started earlier this month.
So do drivers become less aggressive when they know the law is watching? Data from Maryland suggest that stepped up enforcement hasn't turned the tide.
In 1999, the state attributed 3,113 crashes to aggressive driving, or about 3.2% of all crashes. In 2008, Maryland linked 6,111 crashes, or about 6.4% of all crashes to aggressive driving.
Other studies show mixed results. A 2004 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration study of two separate "aggressive driving" enforcement campaigns—one in Tucson, Ariz., and the other in Indianapolis. Crashes linked to aggressive driving in Indianapolis actually increased by 6% during a six-month, federally subsidized program during 2000 called "Rub Out Aggressive Driving." But in Tucson, aggressive driving offenses decreased by 8% during a similar six-month program.
The NHTSA study's authors expressed bewilderment over the results, which measured speed and crashes attributable to aggressive driving.
"Why didn't the considerable efforts of both programs have greater inhibiting effects on driving behavior?" the study's authors asked. "It is possible that the programs were more effective than indicated by the data presented here, but our measures are insensitive to the change in driving behavior. Or, perhaps we expect too much."
Perhaps we do. As a transplanted Detroiter who drives occasionally on the highways and byways of the Washington metro area, I frequently find myself thinking about some "aggressive" behavior to speed my trip. Highways in the Washington-Baltimore corridor are among the nation's most congested. It is a local custom to drive the speed limit—or even a bit slower—while in the passing lane.
Of course, those people are obeying the law. But they are also obstructing people who choose to drive a little faster—maybe they're late, or maybe they have adopted the "limit plus 5 mph" approach to obeying the posted speed signs.
Aggressive driving isn't the same thing as road rage. The distinction: Aggressive driving is tailgating a slowpoke, then accelerating abruptly, exceeding the speed limit and weaving through traffic to get past him. "Road rage" would be a criminal act—such as bumping the offending car, or brandishing a weapon.
Road rage got a lot of publicity a few years back. But it's a tiny problem, according to NHTSA research. Just less than half of one percent of the total number of people injured or killed on the highway in the year 2000 were listed as victims of a road rage incident.
"Aggressive driving" is a more difficult matter. What one person views as rude, risky, anti-social behavior is for another a sensible response to fellow motorists who are clogging up an already overloaded system. During the 1990s, the number of miles traveled by U.S. motorists increased by 27%, but the number of miles of roadway increased by only 1%. If you find yourself complaining that the highways are more crowded than they were in the good old days, you are a curmudgeon. You are also right.
Of course, there are peaceful (or at least less rude) ways to deal with people who squat in the passing lane. Anyone who's ever been on a German autobahn knows how drivers from the land of Porsches and AMG Mercedes handle people who commit the left-lane faux pas: They flash their halogen headlights. You move over.
More Americans could take a forgiving approach to driving, instead of approaching it as blood sport. The next time someone misjudges a freeway merger and gets in your path, try just letting them in. You might get a break the next time.
While we wait for the U.S. to be transformed into a nation of motoring Gandhis, beware: There will be five aggressive driving ticket blitzes between now and September, Mr. Betkey says.
So if you are driving in Maryland or Virginia this summer and want to hot dog it on the road, you may make an involuntary $500 contribution to a needy state treasury.
Friday, June 4, 2010
Those troublesome Jews- Charles Krauthammer
The world is outraged at Israel's blockade of Gaza. Turkey denounces its illegality, inhumanity, barbarity, etc. The usual U.N. suspects, Third World and European, join in. The Obama administration dithers.
But as Leslie Gelb, former president of the Council on Foreign Relations, writes, the blockade is not just perfectly rational, it is perfectly legal. Gaza under Hamas is a self-declared enemy of Israel -- a declaration backed up by more than 4,000 rockets fired at Israeli civilian territory. Yet having pledged itself to unceasing belligerency, Hamas claims victimhood when Israel imposes a blockade to prevent Hamas from arming itself with still more rockets.
In World War II, with full international legality, the United States blockaded Germany and Japan. And during the October 1962 missile crisis, we blockaded ("quarantined") Cuba. Arms-bearing Russian ships headed to Cuba turned back because the Soviets knew that the U.S. Navy would either board them or sink them. Yet Israel is accused of international criminality for doing precisely what John Kennedy did: impose a naval blockade to prevent a hostile state from acquiring lethal weaponry.
Oh, but weren't the Gaza-bound ships on a mission of humanitarian relief? No. Otherwise they would have accepted Israel's offer to bring their supplies to an Israeli port, be inspected for military materiel and have the rest trucked by Israel into Gaza -- as every week 10,000 tons of food, medicine and other humanitarian supplies are sent by Israel to Gaza.
Why was the offer refused? Because, as organizer Greta Berlin admitted, the flotilla was not about humanitarian relief but about breaking the blockade, i.e., ending Israel's inspection regime, which would mean unlimited shipping into Gaza and thus the unlimited arming of Hamas.
Israel has already twice intercepted ships laden with Iranian arms destined for Hezbollah and Gaza. What country would allow that?
But even more important, why did Israel even have to resort to blockade? Because, blockade is Israel's fallback as the world systematically de-legitimizes its traditional ways of defending itself -- forward and active defense.
(1) Forward defense: As a small, densely populated country surrounded by hostile states, Israel had, for its first half-century, adopted forward defense -- fighting wars on enemy territory (such as the Sinai and Golan Heights) rather than its own.
Where possible (Sinai, for example) Israel has traded territory for peace. But where peace offers were refused, Israel retained the territory as a protective buffer zone. Thus Israel retained a small strip of southern Lebanon to protect the villages of northern Israel. And it took many losses in Gaza, rather than expose Israeli border towns to Palestinian terror attacks. It is for the same reason America wages a grinding war in Afghanistan: You fight them there, so you don't have to fight them here.
But under overwhelming outside pressure, Israel gave it up. The Israelis were told the occupations were not just illegal but at the root of the anti-Israel insurgencies -- and therefore withdrawal, by removing the cause, would bring peace.
Land for peace. Remember? Well, during the past decade, Israel gave the land -- evacuating South Lebanon in 2000 and Gaza in 2005. What did it get? An intensification of belligerency, heavy militarization of the enemy side, multiple kidnappings, cross-border attacks and, from Gaza, years of unrelenting rocket attack.
(2) Active defense: Israel then had to switch to active defense -- military action to disrupt, dismantle and defeat (to borrow President Obama's description of our campaign against the Taliban and al-Qaeda) the newly armed terrorist mini-states established in southern Lebanon and Gaza after Israel withdrew.
The result? The Lebanon war of 2006 and Gaza operation of 2008-09. They were met with yet another avalanche of opprobrium and calumny by the same international community that had demanded the land-for-peace Israeli withdrawals in the first place. Worse, the U.N. Goldstone report, which essentially criminalized Israel's defensive operation in Gaza while whitewashing the casus belli -- the preceding and unprovoked Hamas rocket war -- effectively de-legitimized any active Israeli defense against its self-declared terror enemies.
(3) Passive defense: Without forward or active defense, Israel is left with but the most passive and benign of all defenses -- a blockade to simply prevent enemy rearmament. Yet, as we speak, this too is headed for international de-legitimation. Even the United States is now moving toward having it abolished.
But, if none of these is permissible, what's left?
Ah, but that's the point. It's the point understood by the blockade-busting flotilla of useful idiots and terror sympathizers, by the Turkish front organization that funded it, by the automatic anti-Israel Third World chorus at the United Nations, and by the supine Europeans who've had quite enough of the Jewish problem.
What's left? Nothing. The whole point of this relentless international campaign is to deprive Israel of any legitimate form of self-defense. Why, just last week, the Obama administration joined the jackals, and reversed four decades of U.S. practice, by signing onto a consensus document that singles out Israel's possession of nuclear weapons -- thus de-legitimizing Israel's very last line of defense: deterrence.
The world is tired of these troublesome Jews, 6 million -- that number again -- hard by the Mediterranean, refusing every invitation to national suicide. For which they are relentlessly demonized, ghettoized and constrained from defending themselves, even as the more committed anti-Zionists -- Iranian in particular -- openly prepare a more final solution.
letters@ charleskrauthammer.com
But as Leslie Gelb, former president of the Council on Foreign Relations, writes, the blockade is not just perfectly rational, it is perfectly legal. Gaza under Hamas is a self-declared enemy of Israel -- a declaration backed up by more than 4,000 rockets fired at Israeli civilian territory. Yet having pledged itself to unceasing belligerency, Hamas claims victimhood when Israel imposes a blockade to prevent Hamas from arming itself with still more rockets.
In World War II, with full international legality, the United States blockaded Germany and Japan. And during the October 1962 missile crisis, we blockaded ("quarantined") Cuba. Arms-bearing Russian ships headed to Cuba turned back because the Soviets knew that the U.S. Navy would either board them or sink them. Yet Israel is accused of international criminality for doing precisely what John Kennedy did: impose a naval blockade to prevent a hostile state from acquiring lethal weaponry.
Oh, but weren't the Gaza-bound ships on a mission of humanitarian relief? No. Otherwise they would have accepted Israel's offer to bring their supplies to an Israeli port, be inspected for military materiel and have the rest trucked by Israel into Gaza -- as every week 10,000 tons of food, medicine and other humanitarian supplies are sent by Israel to Gaza.
Why was the offer refused? Because, as organizer Greta Berlin admitted, the flotilla was not about humanitarian relief but about breaking the blockade, i.e., ending Israel's inspection regime, which would mean unlimited shipping into Gaza and thus the unlimited arming of Hamas.
Israel has already twice intercepted ships laden with Iranian arms destined for Hezbollah and Gaza. What country would allow that?
But even more important, why did Israel even have to resort to blockade? Because, blockade is Israel's fallback as the world systematically de-legitimizes its traditional ways of defending itself -- forward and active defense.
(1) Forward defense: As a small, densely populated country surrounded by hostile states, Israel had, for its first half-century, adopted forward defense -- fighting wars on enemy territory (such as the Sinai and Golan Heights) rather than its own.
Where possible (Sinai, for example) Israel has traded territory for peace. But where peace offers were refused, Israel retained the territory as a protective buffer zone. Thus Israel retained a small strip of southern Lebanon to protect the villages of northern Israel. And it took many losses in Gaza, rather than expose Israeli border towns to Palestinian terror attacks. It is for the same reason America wages a grinding war in Afghanistan: You fight them there, so you don't have to fight them here.
But under overwhelming outside pressure, Israel gave it up. The Israelis were told the occupations were not just illegal but at the root of the anti-Israel insurgencies -- and therefore withdrawal, by removing the cause, would bring peace.
Land for peace. Remember? Well, during the past decade, Israel gave the land -- evacuating South Lebanon in 2000 and Gaza in 2005. What did it get? An intensification of belligerency, heavy militarization of the enemy side, multiple kidnappings, cross-border attacks and, from Gaza, years of unrelenting rocket attack.
(2) Active defense: Israel then had to switch to active defense -- military action to disrupt, dismantle and defeat (to borrow President Obama's description of our campaign against the Taliban and al-Qaeda) the newly armed terrorist mini-states established in southern Lebanon and Gaza after Israel withdrew.
The result? The Lebanon war of 2006 and Gaza operation of 2008-09. They were met with yet another avalanche of opprobrium and calumny by the same international community that had demanded the land-for-peace Israeli withdrawals in the first place. Worse, the U.N. Goldstone report, which essentially criminalized Israel's defensive operation in Gaza while whitewashing the casus belli -- the preceding and unprovoked Hamas rocket war -- effectively de-legitimized any active Israeli defense against its self-declared terror enemies.
(3) Passive defense: Without forward or active defense, Israel is left with but the most passive and benign of all defenses -- a blockade to simply prevent enemy rearmament. Yet, as we speak, this too is headed for international de-legitimation. Even the United States is now moving toward having it abolished.
But, if none of these is permissible, what's left?
Ah, but that's the point. It's the point understood by the blockade-busting flotilla of useful idiots and terror sympathizers, by the Turkish front organization that funded it, by the automatic anti-Israel Third World chorus at the United Nations, and by the supine Europeans who've had quite enough of the Jewish problem.
What's left? Nothing. The whole point of this relentless international campaign is to deprive Israel of any legitimate form of self-defense. Why, just last week, the Obama administration joined the jackals, and reversed four decades of U.S. practice, by signing onto a consensus document that singles out Israel's possession of nuclear weapons -- thus de-legitimizing Israel's very last line of defense: deterrence.
The world is tired of these troublesome Jews, 6 million -- that number again -- hard by the Mediterranean, refusing every invitation to national suicide. For which they are relentlessly demonized, ghettoized and constrained from defending themselves, even as the more committed anti-Zionists -- Iranian in particular -- openly prepare a more final solution.
letters@ charleskrauthammer.com
Thursday, June 3, 2010
The Mexican government is opening a satellite consular office on Catalina Island
The Mexican government is opening a satellite consular office on Catalina Island -- a small resort off the California coast with a history of drug smuggling and human trafficking -- to provide the island's illegal Mexican immigrants with identification cards, The Washington Examiner has learned.
The Mexican consular office in Los Angeles issued a flier, a copy of which was obtained by The Examiner, listing the Catalina Island Country Club as the location of its satellite office. It invites Mexicans to visit the office to obtain the identification, called matricular cards, by appointment.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a Republican whose district includes Catalina Island, said handing out matricular cards will exacerbate an already dangerous situation.
"Handing out matricular cards to Mexicans who are not in this country legally is wrong no matter where it's done," he said. "But on Catalina it will do more damage. It's a small island but there's evidence it's being used as a portal for illegals to access mainland California."
Rohrabacher added, "If there were a large number of Americans illegally in Mexico and the U.S. consulate was making it easier for them to stay, Mexico would never permit it."
Mexican officials with the consular office in Los Angeles could not be reached immediately for comment. The matricular consular identification card, is issued by the Mexican government to Mexican nationals residing outside the country, regardless of immigration status. The purpose is to provide identification for opening bank accounts and obtaining other services. But the cards are usually used to skirt U.S. immigration laws, since Mexicans in the country legally have documents proving that status, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said.
In 2004 testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, FBI officials called the card an unreliable form of identification. The agency said that Mexico lacks a centralized database for them, which could lead to forgery, duplication, and other forms of abuse.
Officers with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said their agency was asked by Mexican officials not to enforce U.S. immigration laws on the island while the cards were being issued.
"It amazes me every time that the Mexican government has the gall to tell us what to do," said an ICE official, who asked not to be named. "More surprisingly is how many times we stand by and let them. This is just an example of one of hundreds of requests we've had to deal with."
In April, Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies seized a boat carrying large quantities of marijuana and detained three Mexican nationals who said they were being smuggled into the United States.
The island has a sizable Mexican migrant population. Most are undocumented low-income workers.
1:15pm UPDATE:
Mexican government officials have moved their satellite consular office from the Catalina Island Country Club to a Catholic Church – citing protection under the Geneva Convention.
Read Sara's update here
Follow Sara Carter on Twitter
scarter@washingtonexaminer.com
More from Sara A. Carter
•Mexican consulate moves illegal immigant ID card handout
•Mexico opens California office to provide ID for illegals
•Venezuela's Chavez backing leftist guerrillas in Mexico
•Al Qaeda reaps recruits from Somali refugees in Yemen
•Afghan leader warns that U.S. effort against Taliban is failing
Giannoulias’ embellishment
“I don’t know why he feels the need to embellish the record and not tell the truth,” Alexi Giannoulias recently said of his opponent Mark Kirk. But now it would be fitting...
—Dan Halper
Ambinder’s willful blindness on the Romanoff job offers
In his “nothing-to-see-here” post on the White House job offers to Andrew Romanoff, Marc Ambinder really stretches the limit for me. His zeal to defend the White...
—David Freddoso
Five ways Obama may tax you to pay for the government's 'reinvention of journalism'
Bureaucrats at the Federal Trade Commission have just released a new "staff study" containing a host of recommendations on how the federal government can put itself at the...
—Mark Tapscott
On Romanoff, Obama has no idea
President Barack "the Buck Stops with Me" Obama likes to say he's "taking full responsibility" whenever he's talking about something he knows people won't really blame him...
—David Freddoso
More Beltway Confidential posts...
Today’s Featured Writers
Cal Thomas
Sinking 'climate change'
Mark Tapscott
Five ways Obama may tax you to pay for the government's 'reinvention of journalism'
David Freddoso
Ambinder’s willful blindness on the Romanoff job offers
Gregory Kane
Lacrosse teams prime target for media's white-bashing
Chris Stirewalt
Morning Must Reads -- The “Woe is O” tour continues
Meghan Cox Gurdon
Mothers who don't get that boys will be boys
Mexico opens California office to provide ID for illegals
Gores have lots of loot to split
Obama pays price for thinking Bush was a dunce
Obama's 'Chicago Way' plunders the private sector
Ayers, Dohrn helped organize flotilla group
Robert Gibbs raises the Sestak stonewall
In speech to students, Obama frets about end of American dream
Mexican consulate moves illegal immigant ID card handout
Paul McCartney insults George W. Bush, inadvertently reveals own ignorance
Romanoff confirms -- White House suggested three jobs, produces email evidence
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Mexico-opens-California-office-to-provide-ID-for-illegals-95434969.html#ixzz0pqFGh3XN
The Mexican consular office in Los Angeles issued a flier, a copy of which was obtained by The Examiner, listing the Catalina Island Country Club as the location of its satellite office. It invites Mexicans to visit the office to obtain the identification, called matricular cards, by appointment.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a Republican whose district includes Catalina Island, said handing out matricular cards will exacerbate an already dangerous situation.
"Handing out matricular cards to Mexicans who are not in this country legally is wrong no matter where it's done," he said. "But on Catalina it will do more damage. It's a small island but there's evidence it's being used as a portal for illegals to access mainland California."
Rohrabacher added, "If there were a large number of Americans illegally in Mexico and the U.S. consulate was making it easier for them to stay, Mexico would never permit it."
Mexican officials with the consular office in Los Angeles could not be reached immediately for comment. The matricular consular identification card, is issued by the Mexican government to Mexican nationals residing outside the country, regardless of immigration status. The purpose is to provide identification for opening bank accounts and obtaining other services. But the cards are usually used to skirt U.S. immigration laws, since Mexicans in the country legally have documents proving that status, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said.
In 2004 testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, FBI officials called the card an unreliable form of identification. The agency said that Mexico lacks a centralized database for them, which could lead to forgery, duplication, and other forms of abuse.
Officers with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said their agency was asked by Mexican officials not to enforce U.S. immigration laws on the island while the cards were being issued.
"It amazes me every time that the Mexican government has the gall to tell us what to do," said an ICE official, who asked not to be named. "More surprisingly is how many times we stand by and let them. This is just an example of one of hundreds of requests we've had to deal with."
In April, Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies seized a boat carrying large quantities of marijuana and detained three Mexican nationals who said they were being smuggled into the United States.
The island has a sizable Mexican migrant population. Most are undocumented low-income workers.
1:15pm UPDATE:
Mexican government officials have moved their satellite consular office from the Catalina Island Country Club to a Catholic Church – citing protection under the Geneva Convention.
Read Sara's update here
Follow Sara Carter on Twitter
scarter@washingtonexaminer.com
More from Sara A. Carter
•Mexican consulate moves illegal immigant ID card handout
•Mexico opens California office to provide ID for illegals
•Venezuela's Chavez backing leftist guerrillas in Mexico
•Al Qaeda reaps recruits from Somali refugees in Yemen
•Afghan leader warns that U.S. effort against Taliban is failing
Giannoulias’ embellishment
“I don’t know why he feels the need to embellish the record and not tell the truth,” Alexi Giannoulias recently said of his opponent Mark Kirk. But now it would be fitting...
—Dan Halper
Ambinder’s willful blindness on the Romanoff job offers
In his “nothing-to-see-here” post on the White House job offers to Andrew Romanoff, Marc Ambinder really stretches the limit for me. His zeal to defend the White...
—David Freddoso
Five ways Obama may tax you to pay for the government's 'reinvention of journalism'
Bureaucrats at the Federal Trade Commission have just released a new "staff study" containing a host of recommendations on how the federal government can put itself at the...
—Mark Tapscott
On Romanoff, Obama has no idea
President Barack "the Buck Stops with Me" Obama likes to say he's "taking full responsibility" whenever he's talking about something he knows people won't really blame him...
—David Freddoso
More Beltway Confidential posts...
Today’s Featured Writers
Cal Thomas
Sinking 'climate change'
Mark Tapscott
Five ways Obama may tax you to pay for the government's 'reinvention of journalism'
David Freddoso
Ambinder’s willful blindness on the Romanoff job offers
Gregory Kane
Lacrosse teams prime target for media's white-bashing
Chris Stirewalt
Morning Must Reads -- The “Woe is O” tour continues
Meghan Cox Gurdon
Mothers who don't get that boys will be boys
Mexico opens California office to provide ID for illegals
Gores have lots of loot to split
Obama pays price for thinking Bush was a dunce
Obama's 'Chicago Way' plunders the private sector
Ayers, Dohrn helped organize flotilla group
Robert Gibbs raises the Sestak stonewall
In speech to students, Obama frets about end of American dream
Mexican consulate moves illegal immigant ID card handout
Paul McCartney insults George W. Bush, inadvertently reveals own ignorance
Romanoff confirms -- White House suggested three jobs, produces email evidence
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Mexico-opens-California-office-to-provide-ID-for-illegals-95434969.html#ixzz0pqFGh3XN
N.Y. State Hammers Drivers With Slew Of New Fees
7The new license plates that have begun popping up on the streets of New York are a money raiser for the state, but that's not they only way the state is sticking it to motorists. There are higher fees for just about everything.
It may be no coincidence that the state's new license plates are called "Empire Gold" because the new plates -- with their higher fees -- will turn out to be a gold mine for the state.
"Makes me feel like taking money from my pockets, literally," said Anthony Acevedo of the Lower East Side.
New York's 9 million drivers are furious because in a rush to raise money -- and to make it seem like they weren't raising taxes -- the Legislature increased fees on just about everything having to do with driving.
* The cost of license plates went from $15 to $25
* Driver licenses from $50 to $64.50
* Car registrations from $44 to $55
* And when you register your car you have to pay a county "use tax" of $10 to $60
And there's another new fee you probably don't know about. If you live in the Metropolitan Transportation Authority region it will cost you an extra $50 to register your car for the privilege of driving you pay a transit surcharge.
"That's terrible, especially what they're doing with all the cuts," said Ernesto Castillo of Mill Basin.
Castillo looked stunned when he came out of the Department of Motor Vehicles on Thursday. It cost him $205 to register his car.
"I was shocked. I remembered the last time I renewed it was $160," Castillo said.
CBS 2 HD then asked Raymond Leslie of the West Side, "Did you find out it cost you a whole lot more than the last time?"
Leslie: "Sure did. I don't know, maybe 50 percent more."
"Hopefully all of us can get together and do some kind of protest and get them to lower it down," added Scot Steinberg of the Upper West Side.
Some might call that wishful thinking because the hard truth about the Legislature is that it will raise motor vehicle fees whenever they think they can get away with it, knowing that few will give up their cars.
For now, motorists who have the old blue and white plates can keep them without paying a new fee.
It may be no coincidence that the state's new license plates are called "Empire Gold" because the new plates -- with their higher fees -- will turn out to be a gold mine for the state.
"Makes me feel like taking money from my pockets, literally," said Anthony Acevedo of the Lower East Side.
New York's 9 million drivers are furious because in a rush to raise money -- and to make it seem like they weren't raising taxes -- the Legislature increased fees on just about everything having to do with driving.
* The cost of license plates went from $15 to $25
* Driver licenses from $50 to $64.50
* Car registrations from $44 to $55
* And when you register your car you have to pay a county "use tax" of $10 to $60
And there's another new fee you probably don't know about. If you live in the Metropolitan Transportation Authority region it will cost you an extra $50 to register your car for the privilege of driving you pay a transit surcharge.
"That's terrible, especially what they're doing with all the cuts," said Ernesto Castillo of Mill Basin.
Castillo looked stunned when he came out of the Department of Motor Vehicles on Thursday. It cost him $205 to register his car.
"I was shocked. I remembered the last time I renewed it was $160," Castillo said.
CBS 2 HD then asked Raymond Leslie of the West Side, "Did you find out it cost you a whole lot more than the last time?"
Leslie: "Sure did. I don't know, maybe 50 percent more."
"Hopefully all of us can get together and do some kind of protest and get them to lower it down," added Scot Steinberg of the Upper West Side.
Some might call that wishful thinking because the hard truth about the Legislature is that it will raise motor vehicle fees whenever they think they can get away with it, knowing that few will give up their cars.
For now, motorists who have the old blue and white plates can keep them without paying a new fee.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Turkey mulls military escort for Irish blockade-buster vessel
Five planes flew out of Israel Wednesday night, June 2, carrying hundreds of foreign passengers and nine bodies from the Turkish-led flotilla Israeli commandos raided and prevented from breaking the Gaza blockade two days ago. After surrendering to Turkey's ultimatum to release all the passengers, including the seven members of Islamist terrorist groups who assaulted the Israeli boarding party, debkafile reports the Netanyahu government faced a fresh ultimatum from Ankara: Lift the Gaza blockade at once.
In his televised message to the nation Wednesday night , Netanyahu pledged "to continue to uphold our right to self-defense against terror," but gave no specific undertaking to preserve the blockade.
Our counter-terror sources confirm that for the first time ever, the government in Jerusalem flouted legal and judicial opinion and sent out of Israel's jurisdiction a pack of terrorists who were filmed attacking Israeli soldiers without trial, together with the bodies of unidentified assailants without giving the investigating authorities a chance to carry out autopsies and find out if they were wanted for security offensives.
After Israel gave way on this, the Erdogan government upped the pressure with further ultimatums.
After declaring it was vital to prevent hundreds of Iranian ships reaching Gaza with thousands of heavy ballistic missiles for Hamas, Netanyahu faced a fresh Turkish demand to lift the blockade on Gaza without delay.
Furthermore, the Irish vessel Rachel Corrie, which was left out of the flotilla after it developed technical trouble, was discovered to have changed course from a direct route to Gaza and headed for a stopover at a Turkish port. debkafile's counter-terror sources disclose suspicions in the Israeli government and naval command that the Irish ship would take aboard a new batch of trained Turkish IHH terrorists and head for the Gaza Strip. They might even be the same IHH activists who attacked Israeli commandos on the Marmara and were deported Wednesday.
Erdogan has resolved that this group which he personally sponsored will reach Gaza Port by hook or by crook. It is also feared in Jerusalem that he may attach an escort of Turkish warships and air force jets to accompany the Rachel Corrie and make sure the ship breaks through the blockade to its destination.
The Irish ship was first scheduled to anchor Saturday, June 5, but its detour to Turkey will delay its arrival by a couple of days.
In his televised message to the nation Wednesday night , Netanyahu pledged "to continue to uphold our right to self-defense against terror," but gave no specific undertaking to preserve the blockade.
Our counter-terror sources confirm that for the first time ever, the government in Jerusalem flouted legal and judicial opinion and sent out of Israel's jurisdiction a pack of terrorists who were filmed attacking Israeli soldiers without trial, together with the bodies of unidentified assailants without giving the investigating authorities a chance to carry out autopsies and find out if they were wanted for security offensives.
After Israel gave way on this, the Erdogan government upped the pressure with further ultimatums.
After declaring it was vital to prevent hundreds of Iranian ships reaching Gaza with thousands of heavy ballistic missiles for Hamas, Netanyahu faced a fresh Turkish demand to lift the blockade on Gaza without delay.
Furthermore, the Irish vessel Rachel Corrie, which was left out of the flotilla after it developed technical trouble, was discovered to have changed course from a direct route to Gaza and headed for a stopover at a Turkish port. debkafile's counter-terror sources disclose suspicions in the Israeli government and naval command that the Irish ship would take aboard a new batch of trained Turkish IHH terrorists and head for the Gaza Strip. They might even be the same IHH activists who attacked Israeli commandos on the Marmara and were deported Wednesday.
Erdogan has resolved that this group which he personally sponsored will reach Gaza Port by hook or by crook. It is also feared in Jerusalem that he may attach an escort of Turkish warships and air force jets to accompany the Rachel Corrie and make sure the ship breaks through the blockade to its destination.
The Irish ship was first scheduled to anchor Saturday, June 5, but its detour to Turkey will delay its arrival by a couple of days.
NY Nearly Goes Broke Again, Delays Paying Bills
New York state delayed paying $2.5 billion of bills as a short-term way of staying solvent but its cash crunch could get even worse in August and September, Budget Director Robert Megna said on Tuesday.
"Had we not done that, I think we would have been close to broke," Megna told reporters in Albany. This is the third time since December the cash-poor state has withheld funds.
This time, the state's general fund, which counts everything but federal aid and some specific revenues, ran in the red by about $500 million to $600 million, Megna told reporters.
The state was able, however, to borrow from other funds, including the short-term investment fund. About $1.5 billion of the withheld funds must be paid to schools in June. The rest of the total could be paid in July.
"The next big bottleneck is in August and September," Megna said, adding that tax revenues have recently improved slightly, which is a slight bright spot.
Democratic Governor David Paterson's $135 billion budget has not been enacted by the legislature though it was due on April 1.
Megna said that the longer the budget battle grinds on, the less time there is to wring out savings. Paterson and the Democratic-led legislature must close a $9.2 billion deficit.
They are feuding over how deeply to slash health and education programs. The legislature has enacted several short-term spending measures to avoid a shutdown.
Paterson, who is not running for re-election in November, is now mulling whether to lay off state workers. He expects to leave the final decision to his successor.
RELATED LINKS
Current DateTime: 12:46:00 02 Jun 2010
LinksList Documentid: 37463316
US Manufacturing, Construction GrowIs Mortgage Mediation the Answer?Are Home Builders on a Cliff?
Megna said layoff plans cannot be finalized until the state sees how many of its workers opt for early retirement under a new incentive plan.
About 4,000 to 5,000 employees took the last early retirement plan, he said. "We have to do at least as well as we did the last time," Megna said. Paterson's budget relies on getting $250 million of savings from the public workforce.
Megna did not completely reject a Senate Democratic plan to refinance tobacco bonds by replacing them with personal income tax debt, which likely would have lower interest rates.
"At this point, we're still listening," he said, adding that one advantage of tobacco bonds is that they are not state debt.
Further, Paterson has made it clear he does not want to borrow any money and "That's our starting point," Megna said.
"Had we not done that, I think we would have been close to broke," Megna told reporters in Albany. This is the third time since December the cash-poor state has withheld funds.
This time, the state's general fund, which counts everything but federal aid and some specific revenues, ran in the red by about $500 million to $600 million, Megna told reporters.
The state was able, however, to borrow from other funds, including the short-term investment fund. About $1.5 billion of the withheld funds must be paid to schools in June. The rest of the total could be paid in July.
"The next big bottleneck is in August and September," Megna said, adding that tax revenues have recently improved slightly, which is a slight bright spot.
Democratic Governor David Paterson's $135 billion budget has not been enacted by the legislature though it was due on April 1.
Megna said that the longer the budget battle grinds on, the less time there is to wring out savings. Paterson and the Democratic-led legislature must close a $9.2 billion deficit.
They are feuding over how deeply to slash health and education programs. The legislature has enacted several short-term spending measures to avoid a shutdown.
Paterson, who is not running for re-election in November, is now mulling whether to lay off state workers. He expects to leave the final decision to his successor.
RELATED LINKS
Current DateTime: 12:46:00 02 Jun 2010
LinksList Documentid: 37463316
US Manufacturing, Construction GrowIs Mortgage Mediation the Answer?Are Home Builders on a Cliff?
Megna said layoff plans cannot be finalized until the state sees how many of its workers opt for early retirement under a new incentive plan.
About 4,000 to 5,000 employees took the last early retirement plan, he said. "We have to do at least as well as we did the last time," Megna said. Paterson's budget relies on getting $250 million of savings from the public workforce.
Megna did not completely reject a Senate Democratic plan to refinance tobacco bonds by replacing them with personal income tax debt, which likely would have lower interest rates.
"At this point, we're still listening," he said, adding that one advantage of tobacco bonds is that they are not state debt.
Further, Paterson has made it clear he does not want to borrow any money and "That's our starting point," Megna said.
Morris: Obama doesn’t have a clue
Conservatives are so enraged at Obama’s socialism and radicalism that they are increasingly surprised to learn that he is incompetent as well. The sight of his blithering and blustering while the most massive oil spill in history moves closer to America’s beaches not only reminds one of Bush’s terrible performance during Katrina, but calls to mind Jimmy Carter’s incompetence in the face of the hostage crisis.
America is watching the president alternate between wringing his hands in helplessness and pointing his finger in blame when he should be solving the most pressing environmental problem America has faced in the past 50 years. We are watching generations of environmental protection swept away as marshes, fisheries, vacation spots, recreational beaches, wetlands, hatcheries and sanctuaries fall prey to the oil spill invasion. And, all the while, the president acts like a spectator, interrupting his basketball games only to excoriate BP for its failure to contain the spill.
The political fallout from the oil spill will, indeed, spill across party and ideological lines. The environmentalists of America cannot take heart from a president so obviously ignorant about how to protect our shores and so obstinately arrogant that he refuses to inform himself and take any responsibility.
All of this explains why the oil spill is seeping into his ratings among Democrats, dragging him down to levels we have not seen since Bush during the pit of the Iraq war. Conservatives may dislike Obama because he is a leftist. But liberals are coming to dislike him because he is not a competent progressive.
Meanwhile, the nation watches nervously as the same policies Obama has brought to our nation are failing badly and publicly in Europe. When Moody’s announces that it is considering downgrading bonds issued by the government of the United States of America, we find ourselves, suddenly, in deep trouble. We have had deficits before. But never have they so freaked investors that a ratings agency considered lowering its opinion of our solvency. Not since Alexander Hamilton assumed the states’ Revolutionary War debt has America’s willingness and ability to meet its financial obligations been as seriously questioned.
And the truth begins to dawn on all of us: Obama has no more idea how to work his way out of the economic mess into which his policies have plunged us than he does about how to clean up the oil spill that is destroying our southern coastline.
Both the financial crisis and the oil come ever closer to our shores — one from the east and the other from the south — and, between them, they loom as a testament to the incompetence of our government and of its president.
And, oddly, to his passivity as well. After pursuing a remarkably activist, if misguided and foolhardy, agenda, Obama seems not to know what to do and finds himself consigned to the roles of observer and critic.
America is getting the point that its president doesn’t have a clue.
He doesn’t know how to stop the oil from spilling. He is bereft of ideas about how to create jobs in the aftermath of the recession. He has no idea how to keep the European financial crisis contained. He has no program for repaying the massive debt hole into which he has dug our nation without tax increases he must know will only deepen the pit.
Some presidents have failed because of their stubbornness (Johnson and Bush-43). Others because of their character flaws (Clinton and Nixon). Still others because of their insensitivity to domestic problems (Bush-41). But now we have a president who is failing because he is incompetent. It is Jimmy Carter all over again.
Who would have thought that this president, so anxious to lead us and so focused on his specific agenda and ideas, would turn out not to know what he is doing?
Morris, a former adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of Outrage, Fleeced and Catastrophe. To get all of his and Eileen McGann’s columns for free by e-mail or to order a signed copy of their latest book, 2010: Take Back America — A Battle Plan, go to dickmorris.com. In August, Morris became a strategist for the League of American Voters, which is running ads opposing the president’s healthcare reforms.
America is watching the president alternate between wringing his hands in helplessness and pointing his finger in blame when he should be solving the most pressing environmental problem America has faced in the past 50 years. We are watching generations of environmental protection swept away as marshes, fisheries, vacation spots, recreational beaches, wetlands, hatcheries and sanctuaries fall prey to the oil spill invasion. And, all the while, the president acts like a spectator, interrupting his basketball games only to excoriate BP for its failure to contain the spill.
The political fallout from the oil spill will, indeed, spill across party and ideological lines. The environmentalists of America cannot take heart from a president so obviously ignorant about how to protect our shores and so obstinately arrogant that he refuses to inform himself and take any responsibility.
All of this explains why the oil spill is seeping into his ratings among Democrats, dragging him down to levels we have not seen since Bush during the pit of the Iraq war. Conservatives may dislike Obama because he is a leftist. But liberals are coming to dislike him because he is not a competent progressive.
Meanwhile, the nation watches nervously as the same policies Obama has brought to our nation are failing badly and publicly in Europe. When Moody’s announces that it is considering downgrading bonds issued by the government of the United States of America, we find ourselves, suddenly, in deep trouble. We have had deficits before. But never have they so freaked investors that a ratings agency considered lowering its opinion of our solvency. Not since Alexander Hamilton assumed the states’ Revolutionary War debt has America’s willingness and ability to meet its financial obligations been as seriously questioned.
And the truth begins to dawn on all of us: Obama has no more idea how to work his way out of the economic mess into which his policies have plunged us than he does about how to clean up the oil spill that is destroying our southern coastline.
Both the financial crisis and the oil come ever closer to our shores — one from the east and the other from the south — and, between them, they loom as a testament to the incompetence of our government and of its president.
And, oddly, to his passivity as well. After pursuing a remarkably activist, if misguided and foolhardy, agenda, Obama seems not to know what to do and finds himself consigned to the roles of observer and critic.
America is getting the point that its president doesn’t have a clue.
He doesn’t know how to stop the oil from spilling. He is bereft of ideas about how to create jobs in the aftermath of the recession. He has no idea how to keep the European financial crisis contained. He has no program for repaying the massive debt hole into which he has dug our nation without tax increases he must know will only deepen the pit.
Some presidents have failed because of their stubbornness (Johnson and Bush-43). Others because of their character flaws (Clinton and Nixon). Still others because of their insensitivity to domestic problems (Bush-41). But now we have a president who is failing because he is incompetent. It is Jimmy Carter all over again.
Who would have thought that this president, so anxious to lead us and so focused on his specific agenda and ideas, would turn out not to know what he is doing?
Morris, a former adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of Outrage, Fleeced and Catastrophe. To get all of his and Eileen McGann’s columns for free by e-mail or to order a signed copy of their latest book, 2010: Take Back America — A Battle Plan, go to dickmorris.com. In August, Morris became a strategist for the League of American Voters, which is running ads opposing the president’s healthcare reforms.
Turkey, Israel near clash after terror cell exposed on flotilla. Israel flies embassy families out
debkafile reports: Early Wednesday, June 2, US president Barack Obama stepped into the fast-deteriorating flotilla crisis to stop it from spinning out of control. In secret phone calls, he asked Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu to release all the remaining passengers without delay as well as the six ships. He then tried to reason with the incandescent Turkish prime minister Recep Erdogan, who had just branded the Israeli raid a "bloody massacre."
Offering deep condolences for the loss of life aboard the flotilla, the US president said better ways must be found to bring humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza without undermining Israel's security. He supported the UN Security Council's call for "a credible, impartial and transparent investigation" of the event, but refused to condemn Israel or take the inquiry out of its hands.
debkafile reports from Ankara that Erdogan declined to be talked round, declaring that if America did not punish Israel for insolently "trampling on human honor", Turkey would.
Overnight, Israel began evacuating diplomats' families from Turkey. Diplomatic and consular staff were left in place in Ankara and Istanbul and told along with security firms to stand by for departure.
Netanyahu called the second security cabinet meeting in two days after the first on Tuesday approved the continued blockade of Gaza against all attempts to break it.
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad again threatened Israel with destruction for any action it may take anywhere and its Western supporters with international trial as war criminals.
Israel is preparing for Ankara's next steps that would defy President Obama's bid to find a way out of the crisis between the two former allies. In Jerusalem, Erdogan's accusations were deemed an unfounded and unjustified assault considering the evidence that he had consorted with terrorists, including an al Qaeda offshoot, to bring Israel under pressure in support of the Palestinian extremist Hamas.
This evidence released by the IDF Monday night, June 1, described how the Turkish Marmara, the flotilla's lead vessel, had been commandeered by terrorists indirectly supported by the Ankara government's subsidy to the Turkish Insani Yardim Vakfi - IHH, which is listed by the American CIA as an al Qaeda-linked Islamist terrorist organization with bases in Turkey, Bosnia and Bulgaria.
Those passengers attested to more than a hundred members of terrorist organizations aboard acting like a quasi-military group with a command hierarchy, whose leader forced the other four or five hundred passengers to fall into line behind them. The group was split into sub-sections, each in charge of a section of the ship before and after it set sail from Istanbul. Its members were all armed with an assortment of chains, iron bars and knives as well as night goggles and gas masks.
Although they appeared to hail from different terrorist organizations from various countries, they were all ordered to say they belonged to the IHH.
The group kept the ship to a strict military regiment, including round-the-clock guards in the different sections of the Marmara.
When the ship was brought to Ashdod port and the passengers removed early Tuesday, the IHH members were found without identification papers of any kind. Either the Turkish authorities at Istanbul were instructed to let them embark aboard the Marmara without documents or they threw them overboard before the ship docked at Ashdod. Each had an envelope stuffed with thousands of dollars.
debkafile's intelligence sources disclose that, when first brought in, the Turkish terror activists refused to answer questions. By Tuesday nightfall, a few began talking and admitted to being members of IHH and its ties with al Qaeda's Balkan outfit. Throughout the interrogations, Israel intelligence was in contact with colleagues in Western services for help to identify them by means of fingerprints and other physical features.
Our counter-terror sources report that Israel must now decide whether to prosecute some of the activists, including Israeli Arabs, on board the Marmara, on charges of collaborating with an international terrorist organization.
During Tuesday, Israel began deporting the 679 passengers - including 128 for Arab and Muslim countries through Jordan. The rest will be flown out within 48 hours. Three Turkish jets were due to collect them Wednesday. Eight Israel trucks brought assistance products from the ships to Gaza Tuesday; another 10 will make deliveries Wednesday.
Israel intelligence agencies too have questions to answer - principally, how they missed spotting the terrorist presence aboard the putative aid-for-Gaza convoy and let a naval force undertake the mission to divert the ships to Ashdod, without preparing them for a violent confrontation with a determined, well-organized group of violent men.
Offering deep condolences for the loss of life aboard the flotilla, the US president said better ways must be found to bring humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza without undermining Israel's security. He supported the UN Security Council's call for "a credible, impartial and transparent investigation" of the event, but refused to condemn Israel or take the inquiry out of its hands.
debkafile reports from Ankara that Erdogan declined to be talked round, declaring that if America did not punish Israel for insolently "trampling on human honor", Turkey would.
Overnight, Israel began evacuating diplomats' families from Turkey. Diplomatic and consular staff were left in place in Ankara and Istanbul and told along with security firms to stand by for departure.
Netanyahu called the second security cabinet meeting in two days after the first on Tuesday approved the continued blockade of Gaza against all attempts to break it.
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad again threatened Israel with destruction for any action it may take anywhere and its Western supporters with international trial as war criminals.
Israel is preparing for Ankara's next steps that would defy President Obama's bid to find a way out of the crisis between the two former allies. In Jerusalem, Erdogan's accusations were deemed an unfounded and unjustified assault considering the evidence that he had consorted with terrorists, including an al Qaeda offshoot, to bring Israel under pressure in support of the Palestinian extremist Hamas.
This evidence released by the IDF Monday night, June 1, described how the Turkish Marmara, the flotilla's lead vessel, had been commandeered by terrorists indirectly supported by the Ankara government's subsidy to the Turkish Insani Yardim Vakfi - IHH, which is listed by the American CIA as an al Qaeda-linked Islamist terrorist organization with bases in Turkey, Bosnia and Bulgaria.
Those passengers attested to more than a hundred members of terrorist organizations aboard acting like a quasi-military group with a command hierarchy, whose leader forced the other four or five hundred passengers to fall into line behind them. The group was split into sub-sections, each in charge of a section of the ship before and after it set sail from Istanbul. Its members were all armed with an assortment of chains, iron bars and knives as well as night goggles and gas masks.
Although they appeared to hail from different terrorist organizations from various countries, they were all ordered to say they belonged to the IHH.
The group kept the ship to a strict military regiment, including round-the-clock guards in the different sections of the Marmara.
When the ship was brought to Ashdod port and the passengers removed early Tuesday, the IHH members were found without identification papers of any kind. Either the Turkish authorities at Istanbul were instructed to let them embark aboard the Marmara without documents or they threw them overboard before the ship docked at Ashdod. Each had an envelope stuffed with thousands of dollars.
debkafile's intelligence sources disclose that, when first brought in, the Turkish terror activists refused to answer questions. By Tuesday nightfall, a few began talking and admitted to being members of IHH and its ties with al Qaeda's Balkan outfit. Throughout the interrogations, Israel intelligence was in contact with colleagues in Western services for help to identify them by means of fingerprints and other physical features.
Our counter-terror sources report that Israel must now decide whether to prosecute some of the activists, including Israeli Arabs, on board the Marmara, on charges of collaborating with an international terrorist organization.
During Tuesday, Israel began deporting the 679 passengers - including 128 for Arab and Muslim countries through Jordan. The rest will be flown out within 48 hours. Three Turkish jets were due to collect them Wednesday. Eight Israel trucks brought assistance products from the ships to Gaza Tuesday; another 10 will make deliveries Wednesday.
Israel intelligence agencies too have questions to answer - principally, how they missed spotting the terrorist presence aboard the putative aid-for-Gaza convoy and let a naval force undertake the mission to divert the ships to Ashdod, without preparing them for a violent confrontation with a determined, well-organized group of violent men.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
A shocking story of Israeli survival
When the going gets tough, the not-so-tough call in the cliches. The world's "leaders" are shocked! — shocked! — when Israel defends itself. Actually, they're "shocked" just like Claude Rains, the police inspector in "Casablanca," was shocked to learn that gambling was going on in the casino at Rick's Cafe.
Ban Ki-moon, the secretary-general of the United Nations who rarely sees Third World evil, shocking or otherwise, says he was "shocked" by the Israeli navy's stopping a convoy that was attempting to break through the blockade of Islamist terrorists in Gaza. The governments of Sweden, Greece and Jordan were so "shocked" that they recalled their ambassadors to Israel to get the inside dope to further fuel their "shock." Tony Blair, who is some sort of "peacemaker"-at-large in the Middle East, was "shocked," too. If he is, it's only because he hasn't been in the Middle East long enough to unpack his Gladstone. France was not just a little bit "shocked," but "profoundly shocked." There was so much "shock" in the air that the manufactured mourning became electric.
The convoy of six ships carried not only thousands of tons of supplies, but hundreds of "activists," and when the smoke cleared, a dozen or so activists — the count varied through the day — had been rendered inactivists capable of no further mischief. The European Union demanded an official inquiry, so profound was its "shock." The United Nations went into emergency session to recover from its own "shock."
These usual suspects went riding off in several directions even before they could mount their horses, but an investigation, official or otherwise, is not really necessary. Verdict now, facts later. The Associated Press, which once took pride in its reporting but is awash now only in activists and pundits, set out the story line: "Dozens of activists and six Israeli soldiers were wounded in the bloody predawn confrontation in international waters. The violent takeover dealt yet another blow to Israel's international image, already tarnished by war crimes accusations in Gaza and its three-year-old blockade of the impoverished Palestinian territory."
The account of the Israeli commandos tells a different story. The Mava Marmara, the lead ship in the armada, was told to change course and not land in Gaza. When it ignored the warning, Israeli marines and commandos boarded the ship, some by rope ladders from helicopters. A fierce fight erupted on deck, and only after taking casualties and fearing for their lives did the commandos fire back, trying to aim first at the feet of the "peace activists."
Israel is at war, fighting for its very existence, surrounded by hostile Islamic regimes, some more hostile than others. Not all the hostile regimes approve, or so they say, of the Islamist campaign of extinction of Israel by attrition. None of these hostile regimes will do anything to persuade, or compel, the Palestinians to give up the Islamist dream of destroying Israel in a second Holocaust. This is the reality in the Middle East, and everyone in Washington, London, Paris and the other capitals of the West knows it. Who could be shocked when the Israelis do what they think they must do to survive?
The facts on ground and sea are, as usual, ignored in the din of rioting in the streets and diplomatic argle-bargle, with the usual simplistic media telling of the story: The "activist" armada of "peace" ships was intended only to relieve the suffering of women, children and maybe even an occasional cute kitten or puppy. The less appealing but more accurate account is that the "activist" account is bunk.
Adequate supplies of food, medicine and other necessary goods are delivered regularly to Palestinians in Gaza — and by the Israelis. The government in Jerusalem quickly invited reporters to the Kerem Shalom crossing to see, and photograph, the convoys of trucks delivering these goods to Gaza. The Israelis even offered to transfer the goods from the "activist" boats as soon as they could be unloaded and inspected. The sponsor of the "activist" armada, the Turkish Humanitarian Relief Foundation, is regarded by Israel as a radical Islamist organization, part of a global fundraising operation for Hamas. If the Israelis allow such flotillas to deliver supplies to Gaza, other ships will follow, not with rice and beans but with explosives, rifles and long-range Iranian Fajr-5 missiles.
But the attack of the "peace" ships was intended for an even larger and more important purpose — to undermine Israeli determination to continue the struggle for its survival. This won't shock anyone who's paying attention.
• Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.
Ban Ki-moon, the secretary-general of the United Nations who rarely sees Third World evil, shocking or otherwise, says he was "shocked" by the Israeli navy's stopping a convoy that was attempting to break through the blockade of Islamist terrorists in Gaza. The governments of Sweden, Greece and Jordan were so "shocked" that they recalled their ambassadors to Israel to get the inside dope to further fuel their "shock." Tony Blair, who is some sort of "peacemaker"-at-large in the Middle East, was "shocked," too. If he is, it's only because he hasn't been in the Middle East long enough to unpack his Gladstone. France was not just a little bit "shocked," but "profoundly shocked." There was so much "shock" in the air that the manufactured mourning became electric.
The convoy of six ships carried not only thousands of tons of supplies, but hundreds of "activists," and when the smoke cleared, a dozen or so activists — the count varied through the day — had been rendered inactivists capable of no further mischief. The European Union demanded an official inquiry, so profound was its "shock." The United Nations went into emergency session to recover from its own "shock."
These usual suspects went riding off in several directions even before they could mount their horses, but an investigation, official or otherwise, is not really necessary. Verdict now, facts later. The Associated Press, which once took pride in its reporting but is awash now only in activists and pundits, set out the story line: "Dozens of activists and six Israeli soldiers were wounded in the bloody predawn confrontation in international waters. The violent takeover dealt yet another blow to Israel's international image, already tarnished by war crimes accusations in Gaza and its three-year-old blockade of the impoverished Palestinian territory."
The account of the Israeli commandos tells a different story. The Mava Marmara, the lead ship in the armada, was told to change course and not land in Gaza. When it ignored the warning, Israeli marines and commandos boarded the ship, some by rope ladders from helicopters. A fierce fight erupted on deck, and only after taking casualties and fearing for their lives did the commandos fire back, trying to aim first at the feet of the "peace activists."
Israel is at war, fighting for its very existence, surrounded by hostile Islamic regimes, some more hostile than others. Not all the hostile regimes approve, or so they say, of the Islamist campaign of extinction of Israel by attrition. None of these hostile regimes will do anything to persuade, or compel, the Palestinians to give up the Islamist dream of destroying Israel in a second Holocaust. This is the reality in the Middle East, and everyone in Washington, London, Paris and the other capitals of the West knows it. Who could be shocked when the Israelis do what they think they must do to survive?
The facts on ground and sea are, as usual, ignored in the din of rioting in the streets and diplomatic argle-bargle, with the usual simplistic media telling of the story: The "activist" armada of "peace" ships was intended only to relieve the suffering of women, children and maybe even an occasional cute kitten or puppy. The less appealing but more accurate account is that the "activist" account is bunk.
Adequate supplies of food, medicine and other necessary goods are delivered regularly to Palestinians in Gaza — and by the Israelis. The government in Jerusalem quickly invited reporters to the Kerem Shalom crossing to see, and photograph, the convoys of trucks delivering these goods to Gaza. The Israelis even offered to transfer the goods from the "activist" boats as soon as they could be unloaded and inspected. The sponsor of the "activist" armada, the Turkish Humanitarian Relief Foundation, is regarded by Israel as a radical Islamist organization, part of a global fundraising operation for Hamas. If the Israelis allow such flotillas to deliver supplies to Gaza, other ships will follow, not with rice and beans but with explosives, rifles and long-range Iranian Fajr-5 missiles.
But the attack of the "peace" ships was intended for an even larger and more important purpose — to undermine Israeli determination to continue the struggle for its survival. This won't shock anyone who's paying attention.
• Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.
FDA clears Amgen's bone-strengthening drug, Prolia-
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday approved Amgen's bone strengthening drug, Prolia, for postmenopausal women at risk for fractures, a potential blockbuster market.
The injectable drug is given once every six months to increase bone mass and strength.
Analysts think Prolia should bring Amgen billions in revenue after it is launched. Sales of the company's former top sellers, the anemia drugs, Aranesp and Epogen, have dropped in recent years due to safety concerns and label restrictions.
Pill-based osteoporosis drugs, such as Fosamax and Zometa, have been available for more than a decade. But Amgen Executive Vice President Dr. Roger Perlmutter said many women can't tolerate those drugs or have trouble remembering to take a daily medication.
Amgen said in a statement that Prolia is the first drug to target a cellular pathway that breaks down bones.
One out of every two women over age 50 will break a bone in their lifetime due to osteoporosis, which causes bones to become brittle, according to an FDA statement.
An analysis cited by Amgen estimates that osteoporosis-related fractures will cost the U.S. health care system $25 billion annually by 2025.
FDA approved the drug based on a 7,000 patient study conducted by Amgen that showed reduced vertebrae and hip fractures in postmenopausal women.
Common side effects with the drug included back pain, high cholesterol and urinary bladder infections.
Thousand Oaks, Calif.-based Amgen will be required to distribute patient guides explaining the drug's risks.
Global sales of osteoporosis treatments topped $8 billion last year, including hundreds of vitamin brands and drugs like GlaxoSmithKline PLC's Boniva and Merck & Co. Inc.'s Fosamax.
With eight other pills and injectable medicines on the market, analysts say Prolia's success likely will hinge on its price.
Prolia will cost $825 per injection, which the Amgen says is competitive with existing treatments.
Shares of Amgen rose $1.74, or 3.4 percent, to $50.76 in afterhours trading.
(This version CORRECTS Corrects price to '$825' in second to last graph; ADDS detail and UPDATES stock.)
Buzz up! 22 SendShare this page
DeliciousTwitterMyspaceDiggStumbleUponFacebook
The injectable drug is given once every six months to increase bone mass and strength.
Analysts think Prolia should bring Amgen billions in revenue after it is launched. Sales of the company's former top sellers, the anemia drugs, Aranesp and Epogen, have dropped in recent years due to safety concerns and label restrictions.
Pill-based osteoporosis drugs, such as Fosamax and Zometa, have been available for more than a decade. But Amgen Executive Vice President Dr. Roger Perlmutter said many women can't tolerate those drugs or have trouble remembering to take a daily medication.
Amgen said in a statement that Prolia is the first drug to target a cellular pathway that breaks down bones.
One out of every two women over age 50 will break a bone in their lifetime due to osteoporosis, which causes bones to become brittle, according to an FDA statement.
An analysis cited by Amgen estimates that osteoporosis-related fractures will cost the U.S. health care system $25 billion annually by 2025.
FDA approved the drug based on a 7,000 patient study conducted by Amgen that showed reduced vertebrae and hip fractures in postmenopausal women.
Common side effects with the drug included back pain, high cholesterol and urinary bladder infections.
Thousand Oaks, Calif.-based Amgen will be required to distribute patient guides explaining the drug's risks.
Global sales of osteoporosis treatments topped $8 billion last year, including hundreds of vitamin brands and drugs like GlaxoSmithKline PLC's Boniva and Merck & Co. Inc.'s Fosamax.
With eight other pills and injectable medicines on the market, analysts say Prolia's success likely will hinge on its price.
Prolia will cost $825 per injection, which the Amgen says is competitive with existing treatments.
Shares of Amgen rose $1.74, or 3.4 percent, to $50.76 in afterhours trading.
(This version CORRECTS Corrects price to '$825' in second to last graph; ADDS detail and UPDATES stock.)
Buzz up! 22 SendShare this page
DeliciousTwitterMyspaceDiggStumbleUponFacebook
Soaring costs force Canada to reassess health model
TORONTO (Reuters) – Pressured by an aging population and the need to rein in budget deficits, Canada's provinces are taking tough measures to curb healthcare costs, a trend that could erode the principles of the popular state-funded system.
Ontario, Canada's most populous province, kicked off a fierce battle with drug companies and pharmacies when it said earlier this year it would halve generic drug prices and eliminate "incentive fees" to generic drug manufacturers.
British Columbia is replacing block grants to hospitals with fee-for-procedure payments and Quebec has a new flat health tax and a proposal for payments on each medical visit -- an idea that critics say is an illegal user fee.
And a few provinces are also experimenting with private funding for procedures such as hip, knee and cataract surgery.
It's likely just a start as the provinces, responsible for delivering healthcare, cope with the demands of a retiring baby-boom generation. Official figures show that senior citizens will make up 25 percent of the population by 2036.
"There's got to be some change to the status quo whether it happens in three years or 10 years," said Derek Burleton, senior economist at Toronto-Dominion Bank.
"We can't continually see health spending growing above and beyond the growth rate in the economy because, at some point, it means crowding out of all the other government services.
"At some stage we're going to hit a breaking point."
MIRROR IMAGE DEBATE
In some ways the Canadian debate is the mirror image of discussions going on in the United States.
Canada, fretting over budget strains, wants to prune its system, while the United States, worrying about an army of uninsured, aims to create a state-backed safety net.
Healthcare in Canada is delivered through a publicly funded system, which covers all "medically necessary" hospital and physician care and curbs the role of private medicine. It ate up about 40 percent of provincial budgets, or some C$183 billion ($174 billion) last year.
Spending has been rising 6 percent a year under a deal that added C$41.3 billion of federal funding over 10 years.
But that deal ends in 2013, and the federal government is unlikely to be as generous in future, especially for one-off projects.
"As Ottawa looks to repair its budget balance ... one could see these one-time allocations to specific health projects might be curtailed," said Mary Webb, senior economist at Scotia Capital.
Brian Golden, a professor at University of Toronto's Rotman School of Business, said provinces are weighing new sources of funding, including "means-testing" and moving toward evidence-based and pay-for-performance models.
"Why are we paying more or the same for cataract surgery when it costs substantially less today than it did 10 years ago? There's going to be a finer look at what we're paying for and, more importantly, what we're getting for it," he said.
Other problems include trying to control independently set salaries for top hospital executives and doctors and rein in spiraling costs for new medical technologies and drugs.
Ontario says healthcare could eat up 70 percent of its budget in 12 years, if all these costs are left unchecked.
"Our objective is to preserve the quality healthcare system we have and indeed to enhance it. But there are difficult decisions ahead and we will continue to make them," Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan told Reuters.
The province has introduced legislation that ties hospital chief executive pay with the quality of patient care and says it wants to put more physicians on salary to save money.
In a report released last week, TD Bank said Ontario should consider other proposals to help cut costs, including scaling back drug coverage for affluent seniors and paying doctors according to quality and efficiency of care.
WINNERS AND LOSERS
The losers could be drug companies and pharmacies, both of which are getting increasingly nervous.
"Many of the advances in healthcare and life expectancy are due to the pharmaceutical industry so we should never demonize them," said U of T's Golden. "We need to ensure that they maintain a profitable business but our ability to make it very very profitable is constrained right now."
Scotia Capital's Webb said one cost-saving idea may be to make patients aware of how much it costs each time they visit a healthcare professional. "(The public) will use the services more wisely if they know how much it's costing," she said.
"If it's absolutely free with no information on the cost and the information of an alternative that would be have been more practical, then how can we expect the public to wisely use the service?"
But change may come slowly. Universal healthcare is central to Canada's national identity, and decisions are made as much on politics as economics.
"It's an area that Canadians don't want to see touched," said TD's Burleton. "Essentially it boils down the wishes of the population. But I think, from an economist's standpoint, we point to the fact that sometimes Canadians in the short term may not realize the cost."
($1=$1.05 Canadian)
Ontario, Canada's most populous province, kicked off a fierce battle with drug companies and pharmacies when it said earlier this year it would halve generic drug prices and eliminate "incentive fees" to generic drug manufacturers.
British Columbia is replacing block grants to hospitals with fee-for-procedure payments and Quebec has a new flat health tax and a proposal for payments on each medical visit -- an idea that critics say is an illegal user fee.
And a few provinces are also experimenting with private funding for procedures such as hip, knee and cataract surgery.
It's likely just a start as the provinces, responsible for delivering healthcare, cope with the demands of a retiring baby-boom generation. Official figures show that senior citizens will make up 25 percent of the population by 2036.
"There's got to be some change to the status quo whether it happens in three years or 10 years," said Derek Burleton, senior economist at Toronto-Dominion Bank.
"We can't continually see health spending growing above and beyond the growth rate in the economy because, at some point, it means crowding out of all the other government services.
"At some stage we're going to hit a breaking point."
MIRROR IMAGE DEBATE
In some ways the Canadian debate is the mirror image of discussions going on in the United States.
Canada, fretting over budget strains, wants to prune its system, while the United States, worrying about an army of uninsured, aims to create a state-backed safety net.
Healthcare in Canada is delivered through a publicly funded system, which covers all "medically necessary" hospital and physician care and curbs the role of private medicine. It ate up about 40 percent of provincial budgets, or some C$183 billion ($174 billion) last year.
Spending has been rising 6 percent a year under a deal that added C$41.3 billion of federal funding over 10 years.
But that deal ends in 2013, and the federal government is unlikely to be as generous in future, especially for one-off projects.
"As Ottawa looks to repair its budget balance ... one could see these one-time allocations to specific health projects might be curtailed," said Mary Webb, senior economist at Scotia Capital.
Brian Golden, a professor at University of Toronto's Rotman School of Business, said provinces are weighing new sources of funding, including "means-testing" and moving toward evidence-based and pay-for-performance models.
"Why are we paying more or the same for cataract surgery when it costs substantially less today than it did 10 years ago? There's going to be a finer look at what we're paying for and, more importantly, what we're getting for it," he said.
Other problems include trying to control independently set salaries for top hospital executives and doctors and rein in spiraling costs for new medical technologies and drugs.
Ontario says healthcare could eat up 70 percent of its budget in 12 years, if all these costs are left unchecked.
"Our objective is to preserve the quality healthcare system we have and indeed to enhance it. But there are difficult decisions ahead and we will continue to make them," Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan told Reuters.
The province has introduced legislation that ties hospital chief executive pay with the quality of patient care and says it wants to put more physicians on salary to save money.
In a report released last week, TD Bank said Ontario should consider other proposals to help cut costs, including scaling back drug coverage for affluent seniors and paying doctors according to quality and efficiency of care.
WINNERS AND LOSERS
The losers could be drug companies and pharmacies, both of which are getting increasingly nervous.
"Many of the advances in healthcare and life expectancy are due to the pharmaceutical industry so we should never demonize them," said U of T's Golden. "We need to ensure that they maintain a profitable business but our ability to make it very very profitable is constrained right now."
Scotia Capital's Webb said one cost-saving idea may be to make patients aware of how much it costs each time they visit a healthcare professional. "(The public) will use the services more wisely if they know how much it's costing," she said.
"If it's absolutely free with no information on the cost and the information of an alternative that would be have been more practical, then how can we expect the public to wisely use the service?"
But change may come slowly. Universal healthcare is central to Canada's national identity, and decisions are made as much on politics as economics.
"It's an area that Canadians don't want to see touched," said TD's Burleton. "Essentially it boils down the wishes of the population. But I think, from an economist's standpoint, we point to the fact that sometimes Canadians in the short term may not realize the cost."
($1=$1.05 Canadian)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)