**IF YOU CAN'T ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE, CONTACT US AT rays.list@comcast.net and we'll be happy to send the full article.
=
Forwarded from Susan Frishkorn
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/21067.html
Published on Sunday, November 4, 2007 by The McClatchy Newspapers
Experts: No Evidence of Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program
by Jonathan S. Landay
WASHINGTON - Despite President Bush's claims that Iran is pursuing nuclearweapons that could trigger "World War III," experts in and out of governmentsay there's no conclusive evidence that Tehran has an active nuclear-weaponsprogram.
Even his own administration appears divided about the immediacy of thethreat. While Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney speak of an Iranianweapons program as a fact, Bush's point man on Iran, Undersecretary of StateNicholas Burns, has attempted to ratchet down the rhetoric.
"Iran is seeking a nuclear capability . that some people fear might lead toa nuclear-weapons capability," Burns said in an interview Oct. 25 on PBS.
"I don't think that anyone right today thinks they're working on a bomb,"said another U.S. official, who requested anonymity because of the issue'ssensitivity. Outside experts say the operative words are "right today." Theysay Iran may have been actively seeking to create a nuclear-weapons capacityin the past and still could break out of its current uranium-enrichmentprogram and start a weapons program. They too lack definitive proof, butcite a great deal of circumstantial evidence. Bush's rhetoric seemshyperbolic compared with the measured statements by his senior aides andoutside experts.
"I've told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, itseems like you ought to be interested in preventing them (Iran) from havingthe knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon," he said Oct. 17 at a newsconference.
more...
=
Sun-Sentinel.com
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/sfl-flavote1106nbnov06,0,2895499,print.story
Money issues dominate elections
Immigration, gay rights take back seat for voters this year
By IAN URBINA
The New York Times
November 6, 2007
WASHINGTON
When it comes to the state and local ballot measures before voters acrossthe country today, it is mostly about the money.
While hot-button issues like immigration and gay rights attracted the focusof measures in the past several elections, nuts-and-bolts concerns likehealth care financing, road projects and land-use regulations fill local andstate tickets this time.
Overall, Election Day is expected to be a calmer affair this year. There isonly one congressional race (a special primary in the 5th District in Ohio),and the presidential vote is a year away. Few close contests are expected asvoters choose governors in two states and mayors in five major cities.
There are 34 statewide propositions in six states being decided, down from204 in 37 states in 2006, and 39 the year before, according to theInitiative and Referendum Institute at the University of SouthernCalifornia, which tracks ballot trends. In 2006, 10 states had statewideballot initiatives concerning gay rights and three states had initiatives onmarijuana use. No states have ballot measures concerning either issue today.
In the Mississippi governor's race, John Arthur Eaves Jr., a Democrat andlong shot to win, is running an overtly religious campaign in the hope ofstealing some of the evangelical support behind the Republican incumbent,Haley Barbour, who is ahead in the polls and in fundraising.
more . . . . .
=
Sun-Sentinel.com
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/features/health/sns-ap-heart-drug,0,2632315,print.story
Bayer Halts Sales of Anti-Bleeding Drug
By ANDREW BRIDGES
Associated Press Writer
7:47 PM EST, November 5, 2007
WASHINGTON
Bayer AG halted worldwide sales Monday of its anti-bleeding drug Trasylol atthe request of U.S. and foreign health officials pending further analysis ofa Canadian study that suggests it's linked to a 50 percent higher risk ofdeath than the other drugs in the clinical trial.
The Food and Drug Administration asked the company to stop selling the drug,used to prevent excessive bleeding during heart bypass surgery, until itcould receive and review further results from the study. The study comparingthe safety and efficacy of the drug with two others was recently halted.
"FDA cannot identify a specific patient population where we believe thebenefits of using Trasylol outweighs the risk," said Dr. John Jenkins,director of the agency's Office of New Drugs, during a briefing Monday.
Bayer, based in Leverkusen, Germany, said it made the decision to suspendsales after talks with FDA, the German Federal Institute for Drugs andMedicine Products along with the Canadian health department.
In the U.S., Trasylol is the third prescription drug to be suspended fromsale this year.
more . . . . .
=
NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/us/politics/06cnd-vote.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print
Spending Is Focus of Nation's Ballot Measures
By IAN URBINA
November 6, 2007
WASHINGTON, Nov. 5 - When it comes to the state and local ballot measuresbefore voters across the country on Tuesday, it is mostly about the money.
While issues like immigration and gay rights were so much the focus ofmeasures in the past several elections, nuts-and-bolts concerns surroundinghealth care funding, road projects and land use regulations fill local andstate tickets this time.
Overall, Election Day is expected to be a calmer affair this year than last.There is only one Congressional race (a special primary in Ohio's FifthDistrict), the presidential vote is a year away and few close contests areexpected as voters choose governors in just two states and mayors in fivemajor cities.
There are 34 statewide propositions in six states being decided, down from204 in 37 states in 2006, and 39 the year before, according to theInitiative & Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California,which tracks ballot trends. In 2006, 10 states had statewide ballotinitiatives concerning gay rights and three states had initiativesconcerning marijuana use. No states have ballot measures concerning eitherissue on Tuesday.
In the Mississippi governor's race, John Arthur Eaves Jr., a Democrat andlong-shot to win, is running an overtly religious campaign in the hope ofstealing some of the evangelical support behind the Republican incumbent,Haley Barbour, who remains up in the polls and fund-raising.
more . . . . .
=
NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/us/06vote.html?pagewanted=print
Spending Trumps Social Issues at Ballot Box This Time
By IAN URBINA
November 6, 2007
WASHINGTON, Nov. 5 - When it comes to the state and local ballot measuresbefore voters across the country on Tuesday, it is mostly about the money.
While hot-button issues like immigration and gay rights attracted the focusof measures in the past several elections, nuts-and-bolts concerns likehealth care financing, road projects and land-use regulations fill local andstate tickets this time.
Overall, Election Day is expected to be a calmer affair this year. There isonly one Congressional race (a special primary in the Fifth District inOhio), and the presidential vote is a year away. Few close contests areexpected as voters choose governors in two states and mayors in five majorcities.
There are 34 statewide propositions in 6 states being decided, down from 204in 37 states in 2006, and 39 the year before, according to the Initiativeand Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California, whichtracks ballot trends. In 2006, 9 states had statewide ballot initiativesconcerning gay rights and 3 states had initiatives on marijuana use. Nostates have ballot measures concerning either issue on Tuesday.
In the Mississippi governor's race, John Arthur Eaves Jr., a Democrat andlong shot to win, is running an overtly religious campaign in the hope ofstealing some of the evangelical support behind the Republican incumbent,Haley Barbour, who is ahead in the polls and in fund-raising.
more . . . . .
=
NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/nyregion/06plumb.html?pagewanted=print
Last Defendant Is Guilty in Attack on a Gay Man
By MICHAEL BRICK
November 6, 2007
In a case that has drawn intense scrutiny to the legal meaning of hatred,the last of four young men charged with selecting a gay man as a robberytarget and chasing him to his death in traffic pleaded guilty yesterday tomanslaughter and attempted robbery as hate crimes.
The defendant, Ilya Shurov, 21, agreed to serve 17 1/2 years in prison. Inexchange, prosecutors dropped charges of felony murder as a hate crime,which could have meant a life sentence.
"If there was no life sentence," said a defense lawyer, Hermann P. Walz, "wewould have rolled the dice."
Instead, the bargained plea brought a quiet end to a case replete with asudden flash of violence, a heady philosophical debate and a series ofsoap-opera turns in State Supreme Court in Brooklyn.
The victim, Michael J. Sandy, 29, a designer from Williamsburg, was luredfrom his home to a secluded lot in Sheepshead Bay on Oct. 8, 2006. He wasdirected to a beach known as a meeting place for gay sex, then beaten andchased into traffic. He was struck by a car and later died of his injuries.
more . . . . .
=
NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/us/politics/06moral.html?pagewanted=print
Romney Gets Major Backer on the Right
By MICHAEL LUO
November 6, 2007
Mitt Romney's presidential campaign announced yesterday an endorsement fromthe man whom some consider the father of the religious right, Paul M.Weyrich, chairman of the Free Congress Foundation and a founder of the MoralMajority.
Mr. Weyrich, who also founded the Heritage Foundation, had been critical oftalk this year among Christian conservative leaders about possibly boltingthe Republican Party and backing a third-party candidate if Rudolph W.Giuliani, a supporter of abortion rights, is the nominee.
Now it appears that Mr. Weyrich is backing up that criticism with action,lining up behind Mr. Romney, despite questions many Christian conservativescontinue to harbor about the candidate's relatively recent conversion toopponent of abortion from supporter of abortion rights, as well as concernsabout Mr. Romney's being a Mormon.
Mr. Weyrich wrote a recent article about the conditions under which creatinga third party might work. In an interview last month with The New YorkTimes, he said discussion about that at this stage was premature andfoolish. He has vigorously urged conservatives to unite behind a singlecandidate, rather than diluting power by splitting support.
Before Mr. Weyrich, Mr. Romney had lined up endorsements by socialconservatives like James Bopp Jr., a well-known abortion opponent; JaySekulow, a prominent Christian conservative; and Bob Jones III, chancellorof Bob Jones University. But Romney lacked the backing of an elder statesmanof the religious right, which Mr. Weyrich is considered.
more . . . . .
=
NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/business/media/06msnb.html?pagewanted=print
Cable Channel Nods to Ratings and Leans Left
By JACQUES STEINBERG
November 6, 2007
Riding a ratings wave from "Countdown With Keith Olbermann," a program thattakes strong issue with the Bush administration, MSNBC is increasinglyseeking to showcase its nighttime lineup as a welcome haven for viewers of asimilar mind.
Lest there be any doubt that the cable channel believes there is ratingsgold in shows that criticize the administration with the same vigor withwhich Fox News's hosts often champion it, two NBC executives acknowledgedyesterday that they were talking to Rosie O'Donnell about a prime-time showon MSNBC.
During the nine months she spent on "The View" before departing abruptlylast spring, Ms. O'Donnell raised viewership notably. She did so whilelamenting the unabated casualties of the Iraq war and advocating the rightto gay marriage, among other positions.
Under one option, Ms. O'Donnell would take the 9 p.m. slot each weeknight onMSNBC, pitting her against "Larry King Live" on CNN and "Hannity & Colmes"on Fox News.
But even without Ms. O'Donnell, MSNBC already presents a three-hour block ofnighttime talk - Chris Matthews's "Hardball" at 7, Mr. Olbermann at 8, and"Live With Dan Abrams" at 9 - in which the White House takes a regularbeating. The one early-evening program on MSNBC that is often mostsympathetic to the administration, "Tucker" with Tucker Carlson at 6 p.m.,is in real danger of being canceled, said one NBC executive, who, like thosewho spoke of Ms. O'Donnell, would do so only on condition of anonymity.
more . . . . .
=
NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/us/politics/06vote.html?pagewanted=print
Spending Trumps Social Issues on Ballots This Time
By IAN URBINA
November 6, 2007
WASHINGTON, Nov. 5 - When it comes to the state and local ballot measuresbefore voters across the country on Tuesday, it is mostly about the money.
While hot-button issues like immigration and gay rights attracted the focusof measures in the past several elections, nuts-and-bolts concerns likehealth care financing, road projects and land-use regulations fill local andstate tickets this time.
Overall, Election Day is expected to be a calmer affair this year. There isonly one Congressional race (a special primary in the Fifth District inOhio), and the presidential vote is a year away. Few close contests areexpected as voters choose governors in two states and mayors in five majorcities.
There are 34 statewide propositions in 6 states being decided, down from 204in 37 states in 2006, and 39 the year before, according to the Initiativeand Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California, whichtracks ballot trends. In 2006, 9 states had statewide ballot initiativesconcerning gay rights and 3 states had initiatives on marijuana use. Nostates have ballot measures concerning either issue on Tuesday.
In the Mississippi governor's race, John Arthur Eaves Jr., a Democrat andlong shot to win, is running an overtly religious campaign in the hope ofstealing some of the evangelical support behind the Republican incumbent,Haley Barbour, who is ahead in the polls and in fund-raising.
more . . . . .
=
WashingtonPost.com
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/05/AR2007110501659_pf.html
San Francisco Mayor's Race Offers Drama, but No Suspense
Oddball Group No Real Challenge to Popular Incumbent Newsom
By Karl Vick
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 6, 2007; A06
SAN FRANCISCO, Nov. 5 -- Less than a year after admitting to an affair withhis appointments secretary, a woman married to the campaign manager who wasalso his close friend, Gavin Newsom stands before the electorate of SanFrancisco on Tuesday, all but certain of winning a second term as mayor.
Handsome, Democratic and routinely described as "hot," Newsom, 40, handledhis indiscretion with Ruby Rippey-Tourk with savvy professionalism andimpressive gloss -- qualities increasingly used to describe the city itself.
The question is how to describe the other candidates on the ballot.
There is a homeless taxi driver named Grasshopper who sleeps in his cab.There is an elderly advocate for nudism whose candidacy prompted the Leagueof Women Voters to write a bylaw requiring clothes at their debates.
The man in the fuzzy purple top hat would be Michael Powers, proprietor ofthe Power Exchange sex club.
And, here, on the roof of the building he was fortunate enough to buy beforereal estate prices drove almost everyone he knows out of Baghdad by the Bay,stands Chicken John Rinaldi, in full rant.
more . . . . .
=
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/opinion/06tue1.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin
The Pakistan Mess
Editorial
November 6, 2007
By imposing martial law, Gen. Pervez Musharraf has pushed nuclear-armedPakistan further along a perilous course and underscored the failure ofPresident Bush's policy toward a key ally in the war on terrorism. Theevents should not have come as a surprise to administration officials. Thisis what you get when policy is centered slavishly on a single, autocraticruler rather than more broadly on his country.
The general, Pakistan's president, justified his crackdown as a defenseagainst Islamic militants, but his desperate and reprehensible actions -suspending the constitution, rounding up judges, beating and jailing lawyersand journalists - will embolden extremists. They will also fuel anger andmistrust among Pakistani moderates.
After winning a sham ballot last month, General Musharraf was awaiting aSupreme Court decision on whether his election, while still serving as armychief of staff, was legal. Jane Perlez and David Rohde reported in The Timesthat the dictator asserted military powers after getting word that the courtwould rule against him. A phone call at 2 a.m. Pakistan time from Secretaryof State Condoleezza Rice dissuaded the general from taking similar actionduring last summer's mass political protests, but this time nothing couldinduce him to back down.
Returning Pakistan to civilian government has been a declared goal of theUnited States since General Musharraf seized power in 1999 in a bloodlessmilitary coup. He has repeatedly broken promises to move in that direction,using his power vindictively and squandering popular support by forcingrivals into exile and intimidating anyone who tried to stand up to him. Mostof the time, Mr. Bush, who says he cannot win the anti-terrorism war withoutGeneral Musharraf but clearly can't win it with him either, acquiesced inhis misdeeds.
The Faustian nature of the bargain is more apparent than ever. Not only hasthe general proven less committed to the anti-terrorism fight than expected(Al Qaeda and the Taliban are resurgent on the border with Afghanistan), butnow he has abandoned any pretense of moving toward democracy. Mr. Bush seemsto have gained little leverage from the more than $10 billion in Americanaid that has fattened Pakistan's coffers since Sept. 11, 2001, much of itunaccounted for.
more . . . . .
=
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/opinion/06herbert.html?ref=opinion
Hillary's Tough Sell
Op-Ed Columnist
BOB HERBERT
November 6, 2007
The U.S. is in the midst of the most important presidential electioncampaign since World War II, and if there has ever been a time when womenvoters had the opportunity to decisively affect the nation's future, it'snow.
Hillary Clinton's historic candidacy has heightened the interest of womenvoters who would no doubt have been paying close attention to this electionin any event because of its classic lineup of issues, including the war inIraq, a highly uncertain economy and the makeover of the Supreme Court, withits implications for abortion, civil liberties and so on.
A national poll conducted for the Lifetime television network showed thatnearly 40 percent of women feel that voting in the 2008 election will bemore important than in previous years. And an overwhelming majority of womenwho are registered to vote say they plan to go to the polls.
But most of those voters are not yet committed to a particular candidate.
That means there's a treasure trove of potential votes out there amongwomen. But except for the recent flap over the treatment of Senator Clintonin last week's debate, the campaigns are nearly all being waged as if theonly votes that really matter are those of dimwitted guys fascinated by bigguns and insecure in their masculinity.
more . . . . .
=
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/opinion/06brooks.html?ref=opinion
Present at the Creation
DAVID BROOKS
November 6, 2007
Op-Ed Columnist
Amman, Jordan
What is Condi doing?
This is the question that's been floating around foreign policy circles overthe past few months. It is then followed by more specific questions: Why isSecretary of State Condoleezza Rice spending her remaining time in officebanging her head against the Israeli-Palestinian problem? Why has shebothered to make eight trips to the region this year? What can possibly beaccomplished when the Israeli government is weak and the Palestinian societyis divided?
It took a trip to the region for me to finally understand that this peaceprocess is unlike any other. It's not really about Israel and thePalestinians; it's about Iran. Rice is constructing a coalition of thelosing. There is a feeling among Arab and Israeli leaders that anIran-Syria-Hezbollah-Hamas alliance is on the march. The nations that resistthat alliance are in retreat. The peace process is an occasion to gather the"moderate" states and to construct what Martin Indyk of the BrookingsInstitution's Saban Center calls an anti-Iran counter-alliance.
It's slightly unfortunate that the peace process itself is hollow. It's likehaving a wedding without a couple because you want to get the gueststogether for some other purpose. But that void can be filled in later. Themain point is to organize the anti-Iranians around some vehicle and thenreshape the strategic correlation of forces in the region.
Iran has done what decades of peace proposals have not done - broughtIsrael, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, the Palestinians andthe U.S. together. You can go to Jerusalem or to some Arab capitals and thediagnosis of the situation is the same: Iran is gaining hegemonic strengthover the region and is spreading tentacles of instability all around.
The Syrians, who have broken with the Sunni nations and attached themselvesto Iran, are feeling stronger by the day. At least one-third of Iraq isunder Iranian influence. Hezbollah is better armed and more confident nowthan it was before its war against Israel. Hamas is being drawn closerinside the Iranian orbit and is more likely to take over the West Bank thanlose its own base in Gaza.
more . . . . .
=
The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/05/AR2007110501594.html
Self-Inflicted Wounds
By Alberto Mora and John Shattuck
Tuesday, November 6, 2007; A19
The question of whether waterboarding constitutes torture is a no-brainer.Our nation and many others have recognized for decades that it does. Onedoesn't have to have been "read into" the details of a classified program,as President Bush has suggested, to reach a judgment about thisinterrogation technique. Common sense is the only tool needed to understandthat inducing the sensation of drowning -- i.e., of dying -- is torture.
Remarkably, in his recent confirmation hearing to be attorney general, JudgeMichael Mukasey declined to say whether waterboarding is torture. There aretwo explanations for this. Mukasey himself stated that he was without enoughinformation to make the call. But some believe his unwillingness to do somay also be based on a concern that it could increase the potentialliability for those who have engaged in this practice or authorized it.
Both explanations demonstrate the corrosive effects of the decision to adoptcruelty and -- as with waterboarding -- even torture as weapons of war. Thefirst shows the tendency, pioneered by the Justice Department that Mukaseyhopes to lead, to redefine torture to make "legal" what was, and is,illegal. The second shows how concern about accountability for the abuse ofdetainees is now acting as a stimulus for ratification of cruelinterrogation policies and practices. In this confluence, we risk permanentdamage to our legal system and to the principle of accountability.
But there are also greater risks. There is no more fundamental right,whether under U.S. law or under human rights principles, than a person'sright to be free not only from torture but also from cruel treatment, thelower level of abuse under law. If we were to legitimize cruelty -- as thosewho espouse waterboarding would wish us to do -- we would do violence to theconcept of inalienable and inviolable personal rights. The protectionafforded by law to core human dignity would be shattered, with incalculabledamage to our nation's deepest values, founding principles andconstitutional order.
And we risk much more yet.
more . . . . .
=
The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/05/AR2007110501595.html
Rudy's Torture Talk
By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, November 6, 2007; A19
On the playground, lo these many years ago, I was shooting baskets when anolder boy ordered me off the court. This was just like the movies, Ireasoned, and so I stood my ground and instantly got punched right in themouth. I went down, and as I did, I remember thinking this was not at alllike the movies. It hurt. It really hurt.
The realization that life is not a movie has inexplicably yet to occur toRudy Giuliani, despite the horrors of Sept. 11. Mistaking something he musthave seen in the movies for real life, he mocked the alleged softies whocondemn torture of any kind, saying of sleep deprivation, "They talk aboutsleep deprivation. I mean, on that theory, I'm getting tortured running forpresident of the United States. That's plain silly."
It's not silly, though, to Orson Swindle. He spent six years and four monthsas a prisoner of war in North Vietnam and was subjected to beatings andsleep deprivation. One time, he went about 20 days without sleep. I askedhim if he considered it torture.
"Oh, yes."
Swindle's account of his sleep deprivation lacks precision. Some of the timehe was hallucinating, and so he relied on the reports of others to determinehow long he was forced to stay awake. His jailers wanted him to write apropaganda letter to Sen. Edward Kennedy. Ultimately, Swindle did. In theend, people being tortured usually give their jailers what they want -- thetruth, a lie, something in between. Torture can be an unreliableinterrogation tool.
more . . . . .
=
The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/05/AR2007110501678.html
Working With a Dictator
President Bush's feeble response to Pakistan's coup mocks the 'freedom
agenda.'
Tuesday, November 6, 2007; A18
PAKISTANI PRESIDENT Pervez Musharraf claims that he suspended theconstitution and imposed de facto martial law Saturday to save his countryfrom Islamic extremists. But his crackdown has been directed almost entirelyat Pakistan's moderate, secular and pro-democracy opposition -- the verypeople who could offer a political alternative to the Taliban and al-Qaeda.At least 500 lawyers, judges, political party leaders, human rightsactivists and journalists have been arrested. Independent televisionstations have been shut. Lawyers who tried to demonstrate against therepression in front of the Supreme Court yesterday were attacked by securityforces.
Mr. Musharraf is waging war not against extremism but against democracy. Heacted because he feared the Supreme Court was preparing to rule that hisorchestrated reelection as president last month was unconstitutional. He wasseeking to escape from commitments made to Pakistan's secular politicalleaders and to the Bush administration that he would step down as armycommander by Nov. 15 and hold free and fair parliamentary elections earlynext year.
The choice the United States and other Western governments now face is notbetween Mr. Musharraf and the terrorist forces he has sporadically combatedsince 2001. It is between a deeply unpopular, ineffective and politicallyexhausted military ruler who is trying to extend his tenure by force and oneof the Muslim world's largest and most liberal civil societies. PresidentBush has rightly said that democracy is the best antidote to thetotalitarianism of Islamic extremists. Mr. Musharraf's own record is proofthat autocratic governments only make extremism stronger.
There should be no question as to which side the United States is on. Yet sofar the administration has hedged its bets. It has called Mr. Musharraf'smeasures "extreme" and said it "cannot support emergency rule." But Mr. Bushsaid yesterday that "we want to continue working with him" oncounterterrorism, and officials have made clear that aid directed at thatcollaboration -- which is most of the U.S. aid Pakistan receives -- will notbe affected. The general probably will regard that stance as an acquiescenceto his coup -- as will most Pakistanis and the millions of other Muslimsaround the world who are watching the U.S. response.
The United States should explicitly and fully support Pakistan's civilianpoliticians and judges. Such a stance need not cause the downfall of Mr.Musharraf; he still has the option to back down, restore the constitutionand schedule elections. But as things stand, if he manages to withstand thealmost universal domestic opposition to his coup, the United States will beblamed for propping him up -- and for taking the wrong side in a crucialtest of its seriousness about fighting extremism with democracy.
=
The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/05/AR2007110501681.html
The View From the Waterboard
A former Justice lawyer did his homework -- and raised a red flag.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007; A18
ATTORNEY GENERAL nominee Michael B. Mukasey may have his doubts about whatconstitutes waterboarding and whether it is illegal. Daniel Levin has nosuch questions.
Mr. Levin was acting head of the Justice Department's Office of LegalCounsel in 2004 when he volunteered to be waterboarded, according to aremarkable Nov. 2 report by Jan Crawford Greenburg and Ariane de Vogue ofABC News. In the midst of revising the Justice Department's legal rationaleon interrogation methods after the repudiation of the infamous "torturememo," Mr. Levin wanted to experience waterboarding, or simulated drowning,to determine whether it triggered the legal definition of torture. Afterbeing subjected to the technique at a Washington area military installation,Mr. Levin concluded that waterboarding could be illegal unless performedunder the strictest supervision and in the most limited of ways. Mr. Levinfinished drafting the new legal memorandum in December 2004.
According to the ABC report, Mr. Levin's findings did not sit well with theadministration. Then-White House Counsel Alberto R. Gonzales insisted thatMr. Levin add a footnote to the memo that made clear that the revised memodid not make the administration's previous opinions illegal. Mr. Levin wasforced out of the Justice Department a few months after Mr. Gonzales wasconfirmed as attorney general in early 2005.
Mr. Levin, now in private practice with a Washington law firm, declined todiscuss the matter. But his name can be added to the roster of accomplishedconservative lawyers, including former deputy attorney general James B.Comey and former Office of Legal Counsel chief Jack L. Goldsmith, who foundthemselves fighting to sustain the rule of law in an administration toooften eager to suspend it. If Mr. Mukasey is confirmed, as we believe heshould be, the eradication of this kind of disregard for principle and lawshould be his first priority.
=
The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/05/AR2007110501599.html?hpid=moreheadlines
At Least 4,000 Suspected of Terrorism-Related Activity in Britain, MI5Director Says
By Kevin Sullivan
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, November 6, 2007; A15
LONDON, Nov. 5 -- British security officials suspect that at least 4,000people are involved in terrorism-related activities in Britain and thatal-Qaeda's "deliberate campaign" against Britain poses the "most immediateand acute peacetime threat" to the nation in a century, the head ofBritain's domestic spy agency said Monday.
"Terrorist attacks we have seen against the U.K. are not simply random plotsby disparate and fragmented groups," said Jonathan Evans, director generalof Britain's Security Service, commonly known as MI5. "The majority of theseattacks, successful or otherwise, have taken place because al-Qaeda has aclear determination to mount terrorist attacks against the United Kingdom."
Addressing the Society of Editors in Manchester, England, Evans said thatsecurity agents are watching about 2,000 suspected terrorists in Britain andthat they suspect "there are as many again that we don't yet know of." Theremarks by Evans, who took over as head of MI5 in April, amplified thethreat described a year ago by his predecessor, Eliza Manningham-Buller, whosaid that agents were tracking 1,600 people in at least 200 cells.
The public speech by Manningham-Buller was a rarity for the secretiveagency, but Evans has been a slightly more public figure and has defendedhis agency against criticism in unprecedented postings on its Web site.Noting that his speech Monday, to a media group, was still "fairly unusual,"Evans said he was speaking because MI5 has "a responsibility to keep thepublic informed about the threats they face and what we are doing to counterthem."
The rise in the number of identified terrorism suspects in Britain is partlyattributable to increased efforts by security services to track plotters,Evans said. British agencies have refocused on potential domestic terroristssince suicide bomb attacks on the London public transit system in July 2005killed 52 passengers. In the past 18 months, British officials have brokenup alleged plots to bomb transatlantic jetliners and detonate car bombsoutside a crowded central London nightclub.
more . . . . .
=
The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/05/AR2007110500524.html?hpid=sec-politics
Final Warning for Administration
House, Seeking Documents on Firings, Nears Contempt Vote
By Dan Eggen Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writer and
Tuesday, November 6, 2007; A17
The House Judiciary Committee sent a final warning to the White Houseyesterday to provide Democrats with access to disputed documents andtestimony, pushing the House closer to a vote on contempt citations for twoadministration officials.
In a letter to White House counsel Fred F. Fielding, Judiciary CommitteeChairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), gave the Bush administration untilFriday to work out a deal on documents and testimony relating to last year'scontroversial removal of nine U.S. attorneys. If Fielding refuses the latestrequest, the House could vote as early as next week on the contempt charges,Democratic aides said.
The committee also filed a formal, 102-page contempt report with the Houseclerk that lays out its request for testimony from former White Housecounsel Harriet E. Miers and for documents controlled by White House Chiefof Staff Joshua B. Bolten.
Bush administration officials immediately signaled they do not intend tonegotiate, arguing that internal deliberations involving Miers and Boltenare covered by executive privilege. White House spokeswoman Dana Perinoaccused Democrats of seeking to "waste time again on another diversion"rather than pass meaningful legislation.
"It's been very clear that this is a futile attempt on their part becausethey know that it won't go anywhere," Perino said.
more . . . . .
=
The Miami Herald
http://www.miamiherald.com/851/story/297188.html
Pakistan closer to chaos
By HASSAN ABBAS
Posted on Tue, Nov. 06, 2007
Desperate to hold onto power, Pervez Musharraf has discarded Pakistan'sconstitutional framework and declared a state of emergency. His goal? Tostifle the independent judiciary and free media. Artfully, thoughshamelessly, he has tried to sell this action as an effort to bring aboutstability and help fight the war on terror more effectively. Nothing couldbe further from the truth. If Pakistan's history is any indicator, hisdecision to impose martial law may prove to be the proverbial straw thatbreaks the camel's back.
Musharraf appeared on the national scene on Oct. 12, 1999, when he ousted anelected government and announced an ambitious ''nation-building'' project.Many Pakistanis, disillusioned with Pakistan's political class, remainedmute, thinking that he might deliver. The Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attackson America brought Musharraf into the international limelight as he agreedto ditch the Taliban and support the U.S.-led war on terror.
Although U.S. leaders viewed Musharraf as an agent of change, he has neverachieved domestic political legitimacy, and his policies were seen as rifewith contradictions. For example, he made alliances with Islamist politicalforces (who in 2004 voted for constitutional changes legitimizing hisposition and actions). At the same time, he sidelined moderate politicalleaders while claiming that he stood for ``enlightened moderation.''
Last March, Musharraf took his boldest step, removing the chief justice ofthe Supreme Court, Iftikhar Chaudhry. To the surprise of many, hundreds ofthousands of ordinary people demanded the rule of law and the supremacy ofthe constitution, emboldening the judiciary and changing the country'spolitical dynamic. In a historic ruling that Musharraf had little choice butto accept, the Supreme Court itself reinstated the chief justice in July.
Subsequently, the energized judiciary continued ruling against governmentdecisions, embarrassing the government -- especially its intelligenceagencies. Government officials were held accountable for actions that wereusually beyond the reach of the law, ranging from beatings of journalists toillegal confinement for ``national security.''
more . . . . .
=
The Miami Herald
http://www.miamiherald.com/851/story/295984.html
In whose hands is the war-making power?
By GEORGE F. WILL
Posted on Mon, Nov. 05, 2007
Americans are wondering, with the lassitude of uninvolved spectators,whether President Bush will initiate a war with Iran. Some Democraticpresidential candidates worry, or purport to, that he might claim anauthorization for war in a Senate resolution labeling an IranianRevolutionary Guard unit a terrorist organization. Some Democraticrepresentatives oppose the president's request for $88 million to equip B-2stealth bombers to carry ''bunker-buster'' bombs, hoping to thereby impede apresidential decision to attack Iran's hardened nuclear facilities.
While legislators try to leash a president by tinkering with a weapon, asufficient leash -- the Constitution -- is being ignored by them. They arederelict in their sworn duty to uphold it. Regarding the most momentousthing government does -- make war -- the constitutional system of checks andbalances is broken.
Congress can, however, put the Constitution's bridle back on the presidency.Congress can end unfettered executive war-making by deciding to. That mightnot require, but would be facilitated by, enacting the Constitutional WarPowers Resolution. Introduced last week by Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., ittechnically amends, but essentially would supplant, the existing War PowersResolution, which has been a nullity ever since it was passed in 1973 overPresident Nixon's veto.
Jones' measure is designed to ensure that deciding to go to war is, as theFounders insisted it be, a ''collective judgment.'' It would prohibitpresidents from initiating military actions except to repel or retaliate forsudden attacks on America or American troops abroad, or to protect andevacuate U.S. citizens abroad. It would provide for expedited judicialreview to enforce compliance with the resolution and permit the use offederal funds only for military actions taken in compliance with theresolution.
It reflects conclusions reached by the War Powers Initiative of theConstitution Project. That nonpartisan organization's 2005 study notes thatCongress' appropriation power augments the requirement of advanceauthorization by Congress before the nation goes to war. It enables Congressto stop the use of force by cutting off its funding. That check is augmentedby the Anti-Deficiency Act, which prohibits any expenditure or obligation offunds not appropriated by Congress, and by legislation that criminalizesviolations of the act.
more . . . . .
=
The Miami Herald
http://www.miamiherald.com/living/columnists/leonard_pitts/story/293752.html
Today it's staph -- tomorrow, who knows
By LEONARD PITTS
Posted on Sun, Nov. 04, 2007
You might want to wash your hands after reading this.
After all, many other folks touched this paper (or screen, as the case maybe) before you, and you don't know where their hands have been. For all youknow, the last person to touch the paper was carrying Entamoeba histolyca, aparasite that causes amebiasis. You could end up with stomach cramps, bloodystools and an abscess on your liver. And that's assuming the disease doesn'tspread to your lungs and brain.
Or maybe the last person to use the computer recently came into contact withAfrican green monkeys. You could contract Marburg hemorrhagic fever. Itbrings rash, vomiting, chills, chest pain, sore throat, fever and diarrhea.And jaundice, pancreatic inflammation and severe weight loss. And deliriumand shock. And liver failure and multi-organ dysfunction. And then you mightdie.
You think I'm trying to scare you? You're right. Why should I be the onlyjournalist in America who isn't?
Consider what happened about two weeks back when every news organization inthe country suddenly, simultaneously, discovered that staph infections killpeople. You could not turn on the television or pick up any publication thisside of TV Guide without encountering alarmist stories about Staphylococcusaureus. Like flocks of birds that turn in the same direction at the sametime in response to some invisible stimulus, it was as if every news editorin the country got the same memo at the same time: This is staph week.
Most of the stories were about MRSA, i.e., Methicillin ResistantStaphylococcus aureus, a staph strain that does not respond to commonantibiotics. This made the so-called super-bug a headline magnet. You knowhow many times staph was mentioned in U.S. newspapers in the first two weeksof October? According to a computer search: 155. Know how many times it wasmentioned between the 15th and the 31st? 1,650.
more . . . . .
=
The Palm Beach Post
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/business/content/business/epaper/2007/11/05/m1bz_medicareplans_1105.html
Time to choose a medicare plan
The plan that works this year may not be the one that works next year,advocates warn seniors.
By PHIL GALEWITZ
Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
Monday, November 05, 2007
Naomi Gandle, 79, likes her Medicare HMO because it provides her coveragefor her expensive anemia drug. Her husband, Saul, 83, likes the plan becauseit gives him a free gym membership.
The Delray Beach couple has been with Humana Inc. for three years and has nointerest in considering other insurers or changing health plans. "I see noreason to go anywhere else," said Naomi Gandle.
stare down the Nov. 15 start date for enrolling in Medicare drug and healthplans - for coverage that will take effect Jan. 1 - health-care advocatesfor older people say far too many share the Gandles' attitude and as aresult may not be getting the best deal when it comes to choosing a Medicaredrug or health plan.
"The plans count on the complacency of people to not go back and see if thesame plan that works for you this year, works next year," said Deanne Beebe,spokeswoman for the Medicare Rights Center in New York. "But the same plancan be very different one year to the next."
And this year, once again, the choices are overwhelming. Comparing plans isconfusing. Moreover, for 2008, the most popular companies are raising theirprices.
For example, UnitedHealthcare's lowest drug plan premium for 2008 is $21.70per month, compared with $12.30 in 2007. Humana's lowest drug plan premiumfor 2008 is $22.90 compared with $15.90 in 2007.
more . . . . .
=
The Palm Beach Post
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/health/content/business/epaper/2007/11/05/a13bz_medicareqa_1105.html
Medicare Part D Q&A
Monday, November 05, 2007
What is Medicare Part D?
In 2003, Congress passed a law that for the first time gave a drug benefitto all seniors. Before the law was implemented in 2006, Medicare did notcover outpatient drugs.
Do I have to buy it?
No. But if you don't have drug coverage and put off buying a plan, the pricewill be higher later.
How do I select a plan?
It's best to go to the www.medicare.gov Web site, where you can type yourmedications into a Web program and it will tell you how much you would payunder each plan. If you don't have a computer, call (800) 633-4227 or go theMedicare Answers Prescription Savings centers for one-on-one counseling.
Call (561) 688-1211 or (772) 467-0008.
more . . . . .
=
The Palm Beach Post
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/business/content/business/epaper/2007/11/05/a13bz_medicaremistakes_1105.html
Medicare plan mistakes
Monday, November 05, 2007
Five common mistakes people make when choosing a Medicare health or drugplan:
1. Staying with the same plan every year. Plans change costs and benefitsevery year, so the same plan that worked for you one year may not be thebest for you the next.
2. Choosing the same plan as your spouse. Whether a plan is best for youdepends on which prescription drugs you take or which plan your doctors orhospital is in. Thus, a plan that works for one may not be best for another.
3. Choosing a plan based on name recognition. It's easy to go with a planthat has familiar names like AARP or Aetna, but some of the best deals maybe with companies that are less well-known.
4. Choosing a plan without using the plan-finder tool at www.Medicare.gov.Trying to analyze more than 100 plans is nearly impossible without thecomputer software program available on the Medicare Web site. That's becausethe program matches the drugs you take with the plans' costs and benefits.If you can't access the Internet, find a relative or an advocacyorganization to assist, such as the Area Agency on Aging. To schedule anappointment with the Medicare Answers Prescription Savings (MAPS) program ofthe agency, call (561) 688-1211 or (772) 467-0008.
5. Not signing up for a Medicare drug plan because you don't think you needit. You will have to pay a 1 percent monthly penalty on top of your regularpremiums for every month you were eligible but didn't opt in. Over time,that can mean paying hundreds of dollars a year extra in insurance costs.Remember, this is insurance. Just because drug costs are low now doesn'tmean they won't go up next year.
=
The Huffington Report
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20071105/black-ceos/
Black CEOs: a Tiny Group Shrinks More
ELLEN SIMON |
November 5, 2007 05:53 PM EST |
NEW YORK - It's getting lonelier at the top for black CEOs.
Only four blacks will be left running Fortune 500 companies after StanO'Neal's abrupt retirement from the top spot at Merrill Lynch & Co. lastweek and Time Warner Inc. Dick Parsons' announcement Monday that he willretire at the end of the year.
That leaves Aylwin Lewis at Sears Holding Corp., Kenneth Chenault atAmerican Express Co., Ronald Williams at Aetna Inc. and Clarence Otis atDarden Restaurants Inc. as the only black chief executives among this listof the nation's largest companies.
To some, the departures of O'Neal and Parsons underscore that all CEOs,whatever their race, have a short shelf life.
"In the best situations, these are not jobs you hold on to for more thanfive to seven years," said Alfred Edmond Jr., editor-in-chief of BlackEnterprise magazine. "The bulletproof CEOs of the '80s _ those days are longgone, even for white men."
more . . . . .
=
Boston Globe
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/11/05/advocates_tout_rising_support_for_child_health_plan/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+Today%27s+paper+A+to+Z
Advocates tout rising support for child health plan
By John Donnelly
Globe Staff / November 5, 2007
WASHINGTON - Democrats and healthcare advocates are expressing increasingconfidence that their emphasis on expanding children's health insurance - ameasure already vetoed once by President Bush - has succeeded in puttinghealthcare on the national agenda.
more stories like thisThey point to a new round of polls that found widepublic support for the child health program.
Proponents say the difference between the Republican and Democraticpositions is stark, giving voters a clear choice on what many call the mostimportant domestic issue in next year's presidential election.
Bush, along with every Republican candidate for president, opposes adding$35 billion over five years to the State Children's Health InsuranceProgram, known as SCHIP, saying it will lead to socialized medicine.
Every Democratic candidate for president supports the expansion to cover anadditional 4 million children who currently do not have health insurance,saying it is government's role to provide health coverage for the neediest.
more . . . . .
=
USA TODAY
http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/11/could-hillary-w.html
Could Hillary win the religious vote?
Despite her genuine Methodist upbringing and honest-to-God faithcredentials, the skepticism toward her among believers is deep and enduring.
Her best hope among values voters: That they stay home on Election Day.
By Paul Kengor
"I'm sorry, I know it sounds judgmental, but I just can't believe she's aChristian, and I think all her talk of faith is pure politics."
That was talk-radio host Robert Mangino from Youngstown, Ohio, and hisresponse was a common one among conservatives who recently interviewed meabout the faith of Hillary Clinton.
I responded: "Well, she has gone to church regularly since childhood, andsurely wasn't playing politics when she was baptized as an infant and goingto Vacation Bible School."
I continued my case: "You know, she has openly professed the basicfundamentals of the Christian faith - from belief in the resurrection to theTrinity - prays, reads the Bible, studies the Methodist Church's Book ofDiscipline, frequently attends and has even led Bible studies."
My interviewer was unconvinced. Our conversation reminded me of anassessment by the late Jerry Falwell at the September 2006 "Values VotersSummit:" "I certainly hope that Hillary is the candidate (in 2008). Becausenothing will energize my (constituency) like Hillary Clinton. If Luciferran, he wouldn't."
more . . . . .
=
The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/04/AR2007110401111.html?nav=rss_print
Republican Nomination Most Open in Decades
By Jon Cohen and Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, November 5, 2007; A01
For the first time in nearly 30 years, there is no breakaway front-runnerfor the Republican nomination as the first votes of Campaign 2008 loom, anda new Washington Post-ABC News poll underscores how open the GOP raceremains.
Former New York City mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani maintains a double-digit leadover his main rivals, but most of his supporters back his candidacy only"somewhat," and he has yet to gain momentum among key primary voting groupsor to distinguish himself as the best candidate for the party. Adding to themurkiness of the picture is that Republicans continue to be less satisfiedwith their candidate options than Democrats are with theirs.
In the new poll, a third of Republicans and Republican-leaning independentssaid they would vote for Giuliani if their state's primary or caucus wereheld today. That puts him 14 percentage points ahead of Sen. John McCain(Ariz.) and 17 points ahead of former senator Fred D. Thompson (Tenn.).
Eleven percent said they would vote for former Massachusetts governor MittRomney, and 9 percent support former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee.
Not since 1979 has the leading Republican candidate had less than 40 percentsupport in national polls in the November heading into an election year.That year Ronald Reagan was the early poll leader, as Giuliani is today, andhe went on to win the Republican nomination and the presidency.
more . . . . .
=
The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/04/AR2007110401490.html?nav=rss_nation
Evangelical Democrat Stirs the Pot in Miss.
By Peter Whoriskey
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, November 5, 2007; A03
JACKSON, Miss. -- A wealthy evangelical Christian, John Arthur Eaves Jr., isrunning a campaign for governor that is rife with what Jesus might do.
He talks about banishing "the money changers" from state politics and abouta health-care proposal focusing on the "least among us" -- just as Jesuswould -- and the cornerstone of his stump speech is familiar to anyone whoknows the bit in Matthew 6:24 about "Ye cannot serve God and Mammon."
"The most important question in this campaign," he said at a typicalcampaign stop here last week, "is 'Who do you serve?' "
He is running against Republican incumbent Haley Barbour, he answers,because he wants "to serve my creator."
The 41-year-old plaintiff attorney is waging what might be the most overtlyChristian-inspired statewide race in a long time. But what is most startlingto Bible Belt voters here, where faith-based appeals most often come fromthe religious right, is that Eaves is a Democrat.
more . . . . .
=
[Send your comments about articles to rays.list@comcast.net]
#####
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment