Watchdevil

A Recession By Any Other Name

2008-03-03T15:24:00.000-08:00

The economy is undergoing a "slowdown" according to President Bush, a "recession" according to 61 percent of Americans. Regardless of the name, 83 percent of Americans rate the economy as only fair or poor, "and almost two thirds are pessimistic now and about the future." One large source of economic stress is the credit crisis, which has spread from the subprime mortgage sector to the U.S. credit card market. "If America's $14 trillion economy is a high-powered engine, credit is the motor oil that helps it run smoothly. When the lubricant is in short supply, the economy -- like an engine -- is more prone to knocks and stalling." "The squeeze is reaching beyond Wall Street to Main Street, hitting everything from the availability of student loans to credit-card interest rates to the prices of municipal bonds in retirees' portfolios." Today, the Washington Post reports that college students will see higher costs for loans -- and "some students may be denied private loans entirely" at community and for-profit schools -- because of the credit crisis. Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke acknowledged last month that the credit crunch is fueling the economy's downturn. "More expensive and less available credit seems likely to continue to be a source of restraint on economic growth," he said.

CREDIT CARDS -- THE NEXT FINANCIAL CRISIS:
A new report by Center for American Progress Senior Fellow Christian Weller and Research Associate Tim Westrich details how a rise in credit card defaults could produce an economic fallout on par with the mortgage crisis of last year. Lenders have tightened access to credit in the mortgage market, "forc[ing] families to look elsewhere to borrow money to pay for ever more costly necessities," including health care and college education. "[C]onsumers who once relied on home equity to make ends meet are now increasingly relying on credit cards," Weller and Westrich write. As a result, credit card debt reached a record high of $790.2 billion last November. Approximately "35 million customers can only afford to make the minimum payment every month, which means it could take years for them to pay off their debt," the report notes. That debt is increasing rapidly. Between April 2006 and December 2007 -- the same period during which the housing market was collapsing -- inflation-adjusted credit card debt increased four times faster than between March 2001 and March 2006. Weller and Westrich point out that "lenders package credit card debt into securities" in a process similar to the securitization of subprime mortgages. As such, "increased credit card debt could ultimately translate into higher loan default and thus a liquidity crisis similar to that in the mortgage market."

OPAQUE AND UNFAIR LENDING:
Despite these warning signs, credit card companies continue to aggressively target customers with less-than-perfect credit -- often the same victims of predatory subprime lending schemes. "Direct mail credit card offers to subprime customers in the United States jumped 41 percent in the first half of this year, compared with the first half in 2006," the Boston Globe reported. Travis Plunkett, legislative director of the Consumer Federation of America, said, "It's another sign that some credit card issuers are engaging in risky, irresponsible lending to vulnerable consumers." At the same time, "[c]ard issuers also are raising fees in anticipation of increased delinquencies as the economy slows. Industry-wide penalty fees rose to $18.1 billion last year from $17.1 billion a year earlier." Last month Bank of America "sent letters notifying some responsible cardholders that it would more than double their rates to as high as 28%, without giving an explanation for the increase."

POLICIES TO PROTECT BORROWERS:
Such abusive practices have led policymakers to seek greater checks on credit card companies to protect consumers. The Center for American Progress issued a 2006 paper recommending an incentive-based, credit card safety rating system modeled after the New Car Assessment Program's five-star safety rating. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) introduced a similar proposal, the Credit Card Safety Star Act, in December. Such a rating system would not preclude additional legislation that would eliminate other practices considered abusive or unfair. For example, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) has also introduced a credit cardholders' Bill of Rights, which includes provisions requiring card companies to give cardholders 45 days notice before raising interest rates and prohibiting card companies from arbitrarily changing the terms of their contract with a cardholder. Another bill sponsored by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) would prohibit card companies from charging interest on debt that is excessive.

Afghanistan Government Controls Only 30% Of The Country

2008-03-02T09:58:00.000-08:00

During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the 27th, Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell said that "[t]he Afghan government under President Hamid Karzai controls just 30 percent of the country," "the resurgent Taliban controls 10 percent to 11 percent of the country," and that "the majority of Afghanistan's population remains under local tribal control." Defense Intelligence Agency director Lt. Gen. Michael Maples told the same committee that "Pakistani military operations in the [region] have not fundamentally damaged al-Qaeda's position" and tribal areas in Afghanistan "remain largely ungovernable and, as such, they will continue to provide vital sanctuary to al-Qaida, the Taliban and regional extremism more broadly. "The last 12 months have seen the worst violence in Afghanistan since 2001, when U.S.-led forces ousted the Taliban from power.&nbsp More on the current state of Afghanistan here.

Senator John McCain Responds To FEC

2008-03-02T09:43:00.000-08:00

The back-and-forth continued this week between presumptive Republican nominee John McCain and the Federal Election Commission over John McCain's desire to opt out of the public financing system for the primary election. In a Feb. 25 response to FEC Chairman David Mason, McCain's attorney (who is a former FEC chairman himself) cited precedents for releasing McCain from the presidential campaign fund and its spending limits, because while McCain had qualified for taxpayer financing, he had not yet collected any money. Mason had also asked McCain's campaign to provide additional evidence that the promise of public financing was not used to secure a $4 million line of credit (which would be against the rules). The campaign provided a letter from its bank's attorneys, one of them a -- you guessed it -- former FEC chairman, saying that the bank was very careful not to factor public financing into its evaluation of the loan. Also this week, the Democratic National Committee complained to the FEC that McCain had broken the rules in a number of ways and shouldn't be released from the limits of the public financing system, which would limit his campaign to about $5 million in spending between now and the Republican convention. (When he ran for president in 2004, DNC chairman Howard Dean also pulled out of the public system after qualifying, which McCain's campaign cited in its letter to the FEC this week, but the DNC asserts that situation was different.) Of course, the FEC can't settle this matter right now because they don't have a quorum -- and not because all the former commissioners seem to have become election attorneys in private practice. Who's holding up the nominees in the Senate? Well, on the Democratic side, one of those senators has been Barack Obama. Small world.

*Correspondence between the FEC and the McCain campaign:
http://www.fec.gov/press/press2008/20080226notice.shtml

*Summary of the DNC's complaint: http://www.democrats.org/a/2008/02/dnc_to_file_com.php

Obama Was Top Fundraiser At $36 Million For January

2008-02-22T15:30:00.000-08:00

The candidates competing to be your next president raised $3.3 million per day last month, according to reports that those still in the running and those who dropped out filed last night with the Federal Election Commission. January brought the field's total haul since fundraising began to $685 million, $586 million of it now spent. With $36 million in January -- the most any candidate has ever raised in a month while still in competitive primaries -- Barack Obama was the top fundraiser, by far. Hillary Clinton came in with about $14 million, plus $5 million from her own pocket. (Had she not lent herself that money, she would have had less to spend going into Super Tuesday than John Edwards.) Republican John McCain collected $12.6 million and reported a total of $5.5 million in loans and other debts. Summary figures for the candidates have been updated on OpenSecrets.org. The Donor Lookup, Fundraising Over Time and State/Metro data are also new. Updates to the site, including categorization of January contributors by industry and employer, will continue into next week as we analyze the data.

*Race for the White House: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index.asp?cycle=2008

*Look up individual donors to presidential candidates: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/search_donor.asp

*Fundraising by state and metro area: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/pres_stateAll.asp?cycle=2008

*Fundraising over time: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/weekly.asp?cycle=2008

FUNDRAISING SUGGESTS TIGHT RACE IN OHIO, EDGE FOR CLINTON IN TEXAS
Following the money, you could have predicted how Tuesday's Democratic primaries in Wisconsin and Hawaii were going to turn out -- Barack Obama had a commanding fundraising lead over Hillary Clinton in both states. As for the Republican primary in Wisconsin (the GOP in Hawaii will assign delegates at a convention in May), the top Republican fundraiser last year was Tommy Thompson, the state's former governor, who ended his presidential campaign way back in August. John McCain was the top fundraiser among the remaining Republican candidates. Looking ahead to the next big contests, the fundraising in Ohio suggests a tight race between Clinton and Obama. And McCain was far outraised in the Buckeye State by dropouts Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. In Texas, Clinton has a wide lead over Obama among larger donors. Both Democrats have raised more in Texas than McCain has.

*Fundraising in Ohio: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/presstatetots.asp?State=OH

*Fundraising in Texas: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/presstatetots.asp?State=TX

*Presidential primary calendar: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/calendar.asp?cycle=2008

CONGRESSIONAL RETIREES THROW THEIR OWN PARTIES
For a group that doesn't plan to run for re-election in November, this year's exceptionally large class of congressional retirees has sure been raising and spending a lot of money. Last year the 26 House and Senate retirees -- almost all of them Republicans -- managed to spend $13.5 million from their campaign accounts and political action committees, or well over half a million dollars each. In some cases, it looks like they're paying for their own extended retirement parties.

*Read the full article: http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID=337

A Look Back

2008-02-22T15:21:00.000-08:00

"Not since the Depression has a larger share of Americans owed more on their homes than they are worth," reports The New York Times, as Congress weighs various proposals to help the "8.8 million homeowners, or 10.3 percent of the total," who "are underwater."

Despite his rhetoric against lobbyists and special interests, "virtually every one" of Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) "closest advisers" are "part of the Washington lobbying culture." McCain's campaign manager, chief political adviser, and other senior advisers are all current or former lobbyists. Some are still being paid by lobbying firms while working on the campaign.

Former Gitmo prosecutor Air Force Col. Morris Davis, who resigned over political interference in the military tribunals, has agreed to appear at a hearing for defendant Salim Hamdan. "I'm more than happy to testify," Davis said. He called it "an opportunity to tell the truth."

In "the first confirmed ground operation by the Turkish military into Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion," as many as 10,000 Turkish troops pursued separatist Kurdish rebels across the border into Iraq yesterday. The operation raises concerns of a wider conflict between Turkey and the Iraqi Kurds.

Influential Shiite cleric Moqtada Sadr ordered his Mahdi Army militia on Friday to extend a ceasefire for another six months. Those who honor Sadr's "pledge will be treated with respect and restrain," the U.S. military said.

Several hundred Serb demonstrators, "incensed by the U.S. recognition of Kosovo's independence, overran and burned part of the American Embassy in the Serbian capital of Belgrade on Thursday." The European Union said the attacks "risked harming efforts to bring the Balkan nation closer to the EU."

Yesterday, Congress held a bipartisan meeting to broker a compromise on surveillance legislation. Republican lawmakers, however, prevented their staffs from attending. House Speaker Steny Hoyer (D-MD) responded by noting conservatives want "to have a political issue rather than a strong new FISA bill in place as quickly as possible."

A "surge of immigrants" are going to court "to force U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to complete their background checks and act" on their citizenship applications, which are often delayed for several years. In 2005, there were 4,400 suits filed against USCIS "over delayed name checks," up from 270 in 2005.

And finally: Last weekend, Janet Huckabee, wife of former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, had a room booked at the MGM Grand hotel in Las Vegas. She was in town "to root for fellow Arkansan and friend Jermain Taylor," who was boxing against Kelly Pavlik. At the last minute, however, "plans changed" and Huckabee ended up staying at "the pride of Sin City, the Hooters Casino Hotel." "It was the only thing, quite frankly, that was available," said Huckabee.

Under The Radar

2008-02-18T15:10:00.000-08:00

SENATORS VOTE TO BAN WATERBOARDING, McCAIN NOT AMONG THEM:
The Senate approved an intelligence bill that bans waterboarding, "temperature extremes and other harsh tactics that the CIA used on al-Qaeda prisoners after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks." The measure will limit the CIA "to using 19 less-aggressive interrogation tactics outlined in a U.S Army Field Manual." CIA Director Michael Hayden recently acknowledged that the agency had used the tactic of waterboarding on at least three prisoners nearly five years ago. Other administration officials, such as Attorney General Mike Mukasey, have refused to say that waterboarding is torture. The White House has even left open the possibility of using the technique in the future. While Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has previously called waterboarding "very exquisite torture" and co-sponsored a bill to ban any military use of the technique, he voted against yesterday's Senate bill banning waterboarding -- effectively siding with President Bush, who has vowed to veto the bill.

REP. LEWIS LEADS IN EARMARKS, DESPITE FEDERAL INVESTIGATION:
Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA), under investigation for funneling money to a contributor's clients, "was among the top lawmakers securing money for special projects in this year's spending bills," according to Taxpayers for Common Sense. Lewis ranked second among all House members in "solo earmarks." Though the current status of the Lewis investigation is uncertain, in May 2006, "federal authorities in Los Angeles began looking into the relationship between Lewis and Washington lobbyist Bill Lowery, a former congressman from San Diego." In 2007, "Lewis collected $59,000 in donations from Lowery, members of his lobbying firm, and clients, some of whom received earmarks supported by Lewis." The investigation is an offshoot of the Randy "Duke" Cunningham case, in which the former congressman is serving jail time after pleading guilty to accepting bribes.

ADMINISTRATION SHUTS DOWN WEBSITE TRACKING U.S. ECONOMIC INDICATORS: With the U.S. economy faltering, conservatives have attempted to deflect attention from the crisis by blaming the media's negative coverage and insisting the United States is not headed toward a recession, despite what economists are predicting. The Bush administration's latest move is to simply hide the data. Forbes had awarded EconomicIndicators.gov one of its "Best of the Web" awards. As Forbes explains, the government site provides an invaluable service to the public for accessing U.S. economic data. Economic Indicators is particularly useful because people can sign up to receive e-mails as soon as new economic data across government agencies becomes available. While the data will still be available online at various federal websites, it will be less readily accessible to members of the public. The Bush administration has decided to shut down this site because of "budgetary constraints," effective March 1, even though Bush recently submitted a record $3.1 trillion budget to Congress for FY '09.

Progress Report: Labor Gets Screwed Again

2008-02-13T06:44:00.000-08:00

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) -- a bill authored by Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) and signed into law by President Clinton in 1993 -- grants eligible workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave per year in case of a serious health condition, or to care for a new child or sick family member. The law protects an employee's job during such an absence and provides various benefit and privacy protections. For nearly fifteen years, the law has made it easier for over 50 million American workers to provide a better balance between work, health, and family life. The FMLA currently allows employees up to two days after the beginning of a shift to notify their employers of their intention to claim time off. But the Labor Department recently proposed changes to the law that would add restrictions to the FLMA -- provisions benefiting employers and making it more difficult for workers to take advantage of the law. Some of the proposed changes include requiring workers to notify their bosses in advance when taking non-emergency leave, allowing employers to require "fitness-for-duty" evaluations for those who took FMLA time off, requiring employees to obtain medical certifications of their illnesses every year, and allowing businesses to exclude workers who took FMLA time from perfect attendance awards.

EMPLOYEES NEED MORE PROTECTIONS:
Even if the Labor Department's proposals -- which some businesses regard as welcome news -- are not adopted, the FMLA needs to expand in order to cover more American workers and to provide increased benefits. As it currently stands, the FMLA does not apply to businesses employing fewer than 50 people, a provision that allows the exclusion of nearly 40 million America workers from the law. Millions more are excluded because of rules not covering part-time workers and those who have not worked for their present employer for over one year. Yet "while unpaid leave has helped millions of families, there is little question that many employees have been unable to take time to care for a new child or an ill loved one because they cannot afford the lost pay." Indeed, a study released last year by Harvard University and McGill University found that the United States lags "far behind virtually all wealthy countries with regard to family-oriented workplace policies" such as maternity leave and paid sick days. According to the study, the United States is one of just five countries out of 173 "that does not guarantee some form of paid maternity leave." Expanding the FMLA is necessary because nearly "half of all full-time private sector workers (and three quarters of low-wage workers) in the U.S. get no paid sick days." Businesses also suffer in productivity and other workers face health risks when sick employees are forced to go to work. In fact, expanding employee benefits has overwhelming support: "95 percent of the public thinks it is unacceptable for employers to not provide paid sick leave" while "60 percent think it is illegal."

CONGRESS RESPONDS:
House, Education, and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller (D-CA) has said that the Labor Department proposal tightening the FMLA "clearly benefits employers at the expense of workers." Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, has also criticized the proposals, saying they "will make it more difficult for workers to use this leave when they need it" and "impose burdensome new paperwork requirements on both workers and heath providers." Hearings on the Labor Department's proposals will be held this week in both the House and Senate. The National Journal notes that, under a new administration, Congress "could do away" with the Labor Department rule change proposals in "early in 2009 under the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to withdraw regulations within 60 session days after they are published."

CALIFORNIA LEADS THE WAY:
On July 1, 2004, California's Paid Family Leave (PFL) Law went into effect. The law is a 100 percent employee-funded provision that provides workers in that state "with a maximum of six weeks of partial pay [55% of wages up to a maximum of $882 per week] each year while taking time off from work to bond with a newborn baby, newly adopted or foster child, or to care for a seriously ill parent, child, spouse or registered domestic partner." While five other states have proposed similar bills to provide some form of paid leave, California is currently the only state mandating comprehensive paid family leave. Nearly 85% of California adult residents in every segment of the population support paid family leave, and one survey of California businesses found that more workers returned to their jobs where employers offered leave benefits beyond what is required.

A Strike At Wal-Mart!

2008-02-10T15:46:00.000-08:00

In January 2008, at a Wal-Mart Dispatch Center in Shenzhen, China, 55 employees sat for two days in a meeting room to demand back overtime pay. Instead of paying overtime, Wal-Mart had given the employees "compensative rest". Wal-Mart's public relations department said that the company is in the process of researching the overtime problem and will be able to give a response at a later time. According to Pan Dungang of Guangdong's Wen Tian law firm using compensative rest instead of overtime pay is illegal. [Nanfang Daily via Sina, 1/4/08]

FIRST-EVER STRIKE AT WAL-MART MEXICO

Workers strike at three units of Mexico's Walmex [Reuters]
Wal-Mart de Mexico (Walmex), the country's biggest retailer, suffered its first-ever strike this week when 300 workers from two stores and a restaurant walked out for a day in a dispute over pay and conditions.

Drowning Liberty

2008-02-10T15:40:00.000-08:00

Great Lakes Danger Zones?

2008-02-10T15:33:00.000-08:00

An exhaustive federal study of environmental hazards in the eight Great Lakes states was supposed to be released last July, but the Bush administration has kept it under wraps - reportedly because it contained such potentially "alarming information" as evidence of elevated infant mortality and cancer rates.

The Center for Public Integrity published key excerpts of the report that top officials of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention thought was too hot for the public to handle.

Click here to read the investigation.

The Center is receiving tremendous recognition to our report, Iraq: the War Card - Orchestrated Deception on the Path to War. In only two weeks since its release, it has already generated a great deal of worldwide news coverage and citizen response.

Here are a few things people are saying about it:

"Sure to evoke passionate responses from supporters and opponents of the Iraq war..." (USA Today)
A nonprofit group pursuing old-fashioned accountability journalism..." (The Washington Post)
The Center "has done a real service to place nearly 1,000 of these in one easy-to-access location..." (Daily Kos)

To Torture Or Not To Torture

2008-02-10T14:41:00.000-08:00

CIA Director Michael Hayden has acknowledged for the first time publicly that the agency had used the tactic of waterboarding on at least three prisoners nearly five years ago. Waterboarding is an interrogation practice in which, "the victim's lungs fill with water until the procedure is stopped or the victim dies." As Malcolm Nance, a counterterrorism specialist who taught at the Navy's Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (SERE) school in California, told Congress, "Waterboarding is a long-standing form of torture used by history's most brutal governments, including those of Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, North Korea, Iraq, the Soviet Union and the Khmer Rouge of Cambodia." Yesterday, "after years of dodging and dissembling, the Bush administration boldly embraced" its record of torture and said it would "definitely want to consider" using it again. "It will depend upon circumstances," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said, adding that future acts of waterboarding would "need the president's approval," and the White House would notify "appropriate members of Congress."

LEGAL PARSING: In 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for waterboarding a U.S. civilian. "Water boarding was designated as illegal by U.S. generals in Vietnam 40 years ago." Former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge said in an interview this month, "There's just no doubt in my mind -- under any set of rules -- waterboarding is torture." But inside the Bush administration, such clarity has succumbed to legal parsing. "I would feel" waterboarding was torture "if it were done to me," Attorney General Michael Mukasey told Congress recently. But Mukasey, who promised to lead a legal review of the practice before being confirmed, is now refusing to brief Congress on the legality of waterboarding. Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell told the New Yorker in January, "Whether it's torture by anybody else's definition, for me it would be torture." But McConnell said his comments should not be interpreted to reflect an official administration position. When he said waterboarding was "torture," McConnell explained to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), he meant he just personally didn't like water up his nose.

FROM DENIAL TO OPEN ADVOCACY: For years, the White House had done its best to deny the obvious: that it had employed waterboarding against prisoners. When Vice President Dick Cheney told a conservative talk radio host in Oct. 2006 that it would be a "no-brainer" to "dunk" an individual in water if it would save lives, the White House tried to dispel any notion that Cheney was embracing waterboarding. Now the White House strategy has changed -- "the administration has apparently decided that this is a debate they can win out in the open." The switch comes as Congress is considering legislation that "if passed, would require all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies to abide by the Army Field Manual's prohibition against waterboarding." The White House said yesterday it wants to retain the option to use waterboarding, even while President Bush has frequently claimed "we do not torture." "Torture is illegal," Fratto said after McConnell's testimony. "We don't torture -- we maintain and as we have said many times that the programs have been reviewed, and the Department of Justice has determined them to be legal."

SPOTLIGHT ON THE SENATE: In December, the House passed an amendment that extends the current prohibitions in the Army Field Manual against torture to U.S. intelligence agencies and personnel. Senate Intelligence Committee ranking member Christopher Bond (R-MO) has said he would lead an effort to remove that requirement when the legislation reaches the Senate floor. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who in the past has made a series of statements against the use of waterboarding, has placed a hold on the anti-waterboarding bill. A number of key Republican swing votes -- including Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) -- will likely make the difference if the bill comes to a vote. McCain has previously called waterboarding a "horrible, odious" technique that "should never be condoned in the U.S."

Citizens United Sets It Sights On Obama

2008-02-10T14:18:00.000-08:00

InfoCision Management Corporation client Citizens United has produced a film now in distribution attacking Hillary Clinton called “Hillary, the Movie”. Citizens United has embarked on a legal battle to advertise their film unconstrained by campaign finance laws. A Federal District Court ruled that the group could not air advertisements without attaching a disclaimer and disclosing their donor list. Claims that the film should be treated as a documentary prompted "outright laughter from the judges".[2] Citizens United now has its sights set on a new target: Barack Obama.
The group has budgeted about $1 million to produce a documentary film about Mr. Obama that is set to be distributed this summer. At the moment, Citizens United has its researchers poring over Mr. Obama’s records as a community organizer, state legislator and United States senator in the same way that it lied and disregarded Mrs. Clinton’s record. And with the absolute purpose of playing upon the ignorance of the people InfoCision will be calling for donations to get the barely literate suckers to cough up their last dime.
Citizens United was co-founded by Floyd Brown^[1] in 1988 and currently headed by David Bossie. Its offices are on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C., near the White House. It has run smear ads of President Clinton's record on terrorism, and ads praising President Bush's terrorism record. Citizens United filed a Federal Election Commission complaint against Fahrenheit 9/11 using the same law it is now fighting against. "Obama is a completely clean slate,” David Bossie has said, “We will develop the image that we want the people to see. We’re doing the hard work of the research right now. The American people don’t know much about Obama, except that they like his speaking style.”

The Progress Report Of Not Much Progress

2008-02-05T17:53:00.000-08:00

President Bush took office in 2001 with an advantage few presidents have enjoyed: a $236 billion budget surplus. But Bush quickly "blew through" President Clinton's surplus. Now the next administration will have to pay the price for Bush's fiscal irresponsibility. With his new budget, Bush is trying to create the appearance of compensating for his fiscal exuberance, terminating or reducing 151 government programs -- while still producing near record deficits. While Bush's budget plan "has little chance of surviving in a Democratic Congress," he is in effect washing his hands clean of his economic mismanagement, delaying "until 2009 decisions on how to cope with short- and long-term financial problems." The next president will "inherit a fiscal meltdown,"Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND) said. Conrad and Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) are considering setting up "a bipartisan commission to help the next president and Congress deal with these issues, possibly through legislation."

IRRESPONSIBILITY OF BUSH'S TAX CUTS:
In 2001, Bush said his tax cuts would cost the government $1.3 trillion, but his 2009 budget -- which calls for making his signature tax cuts permanent -- indicates they would "cost the government more than $2 trillion in their second decade." Extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts would give the top one percent of households more than $1.1 trillion in benefits over the next decade, according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities -- more than the entire amount the government spends on elementary and secondary education or veterans' medical care. Without offsets, permanent tax cuts would increase deficits and add to national debt, "essentially doubl[ing] the size of the debt in 2050." Not surprisingly, Bush has not proposed adequate measures to pay for the cuts. Conrad noted the irony of preserving Bush's tax cuts while proposing devastating blows to Medicare and Medicaid. "We believe that is a very odd sense of priorities. That is not a sense of priorities that are shared by the American people," he said. The budget also includes $19.7 billion for SCHIP funding, but this would not "allow states to cover more uninsured children" and is still inadequate to maintain current programs.

EXORBITANT DEFICIT AND DEBT:
"Slumping revenues and the cost of an economic rescue package will combine to produce a huge jump in the deficit to $410 billion this year and $407 billion in 2009, the White House says, just shy of the record $413 billion set four years ago." This deficit will undoubtedly hamstring future administrations. For example, budget experts "agree that there is not enough money to be had" from conservative approaches to cut "wasteful federal spending." But the White House remains cheerful. "This budget is one that keeps spending under control," Bush trumpeted. And while Bush has attempted to embrace fiscal conservatism by cutting earmarks, his budget would only cut pork by $18 billion, a number "so small as to be of symbolic importance." Furthermore, unless the "economy rebounds" and revenue pours in, "deficits will push the cumulative federal debt past $12 trillion in the next five years." "I would suggest to you the debt is the threat," Conrad stated, saying Bush will likely see an "almost a doubling of the national debt on his watch."

THE SECRET BUDGET:
The "budget achieves balance by 2012," Bush said yesterday. But the forecast is likely to be worse than what the White House is saying. To achieve its deficit goals, the White House predicts the economy will grow at 2.7 percent rate this year, "higher than what private sector economists" anticipate and a full point higher than the Congressional Budget Office's projections. House Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt (D-SC) said a more likely scenario is a "deficit that remains in the $200 billion range in 2012." Moreover, billions in spending are unaccounted for in the budget. For example, Bush budgeted $70 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars -- but only accounted for costs up to the first half of FY2009. In reality, around $200 billion is expected to be spent. Furthermore, Bush did not take into account the costs "of assuring that higher alternative minimum tax rates originally aimed at several hundred very wealthy people don't hit tens of millions of middle-income earners." Conrad accused Bush of "hide-the-ball budgeting." Gregg concluded that this budget is "not a serious budget."

Wal-Mart And Salmonella

2008-02-05T17:47:00.000-08:00

In February 2007, the Center for Disease Control confirmed the presence of the dangerous germ salmonella in recalled peanut butter sold under the Wal-Mart Stores house brand Great Value. ConAgra Foods Inc. had recalled all Peter Pan and Great Value peanut butter made at its Sylvester, Ga., plant after federal health officials linked the product to a salmonella outbreak that had sickened at least 329 people from 41 states. [USA Today, 2/23/07]

See You On Rooftops

2008-02-05T17:44:00.000-08:00

Driven To Drink

2008-02-05T17:42:00.000-08:00

Always the Lowest Wal-Mart

2008-01-26T03:01:00.000-08:00

In a 2007 Wal-Mart report it was noted that nearly 5 percent of employees are on Medicare, about 2 percent were covered by Medicaid, and another 1 percent used an alternate state program. "I don't believe that our goal was ever to convince someone to move off of Medicare or their retirement plan . . . to Wal-Mart health-care coverage," said Linda M. Dillman, who oversees risk management and benefits for the retailer. Wal-Mart has tried to fight back against its negative public image by offering $4 generic prescription drugs. [Washington Post, 1/11/07]

Post War

2008-01-24T15:08:00.000-08:00

The Lord God helps me;
therefore I have not been disgraced;
therefore I have set my face like flint,
and I know that I shall not be put to shame;
he who vindicates me is near.
Who will contend with me?
Let us stand up together.
Who are my adversaries?
Let them confront me.
It is the Lord God who helps me;
who will declare me guilty?
All of them will wear out like a garment;
the moth will eat them up.

- Isaiah 50:7-9

Whistle While You Work

2008-01-24T14:58:00.001-08:00

It's A Open Secret

2008-01-24T14:44:00.000-08:00

Voting in South Carolina and Nevada last weekend narrowed the Republican field to six. After the two InfoCision Management Corporation clients, Rep. Duncan Hunter of California and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson both dropped out -- Hunter after receiving little support at the Nevada caucus and Thompson after coming in a distant third in the South Carolina primary. Hunter trailed all but one other Republican candidate at the end of the 3rd Quarter in fundraising, having raised a total of $1.9 million in the first nine months of the year. Thompson, who entered the race later than his competitors, raised a total $12.8 million. Thompson's most generous contributors included retirees, lawyers and the real estate industry. Hunter's included retirees, lawyers and lobbyists. He is retiring from Congress after this year.

*Presidential profile for Duncan Hunter: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00006983&cycle=2008

*Presidential profile for Fred Thompson: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00003136&cycle=2008

NUMBER OF PACS HAS INCREASED SLIGHTLY SINCE JULY
More than 4,200 political action committees are now registered with the Federal Election Commission, representing a 1.5 percent increase during the last six months of 2007, the FEC announced last week. The commission's semi-annual count of committees controlled by corporations, trade associations, labor unions and ideological groups has remained relatively constant for more than 20 years, hovering between 3,800 and 4,200 organizations. As new committees register, a roughly equal number close up shop. Corporate PACs remain the largest category, with 1,601 committees registered.

*FEC news release: http://www.fec.gov/press/press2008/20080117paccount.shtml

*OpenSecrets.org's PAC database: http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/index.asp

New Year- Always the Same Wal-Mart

2008-01-23T14:41:00.001-08:00

In January 2007, Wal-Mart released their health insurance coverage numbers for 2006 enrollment period. Wal-Mart reported it had 636,391 workers signed up for one of the company’s health-insurance plans during the fall enrollment period. However, Wal-Mart was quoted in newspapers the previous year citing employee coverage at 638,000. If the previous year’s count was accurate, employee enrollment declined 1.6 percent in the latest period. "That figure should never have been used," Wal-Mart spokesman Dan Fogleman said. [Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 1/12/07]

The Lords Prayer In Arabic

2008-01-23T03:45:00.001-08:00

Free Palestine Now

2008-01-23T03:43:00.001-08:00

Bank of China Shares Suspended

2008-01-22T02:40:00.000-08:00

The Shanghai Stock Exchange has suspended trading in shares of Bank of China, China's second biggest bank, saying the bank had failed to comment on an "important event".

The move comes after Bank of China stock tumbled on Monday after reports that the bank might post a 2007 loss because of a big write-down on billions of dollars of US sub-prime mortgage related investments.

"Bank of China failed to make a statement on an important event so trading in its shares will be suspended for all day on January 22," the Shanghai exchange said on its website on Tuesday without elaborating.

A subsequent statement from Bank of China released later on Tuesday said its board was "not aware of any reasons" for the recent sharp declines in its share price.

The Bank of China's Shanghai-listed local-currency A shares were suspended but its Hong Kong-listed H shares continued trading on Tuesday, falling 8.6 per cent by midday.

Meanwhile unease over Chinese exposure to the US sub-prime crisis hit shares in other mainland banks, with financial stocks leading falls on the Shanghai market on Tuesday.

By midday, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China had slipped 4.8 per cent, Communications Bank fell 2.9 per cent and China Construction Bank Corp. lost 4.6 per cent.

Analysts said the market had expected Bank of China to comment on the reports of heavy losses due to its exposure to US sub-prime lending.

Hong Kong's South China Morning Post said on Monday that Chinese banking regulators had warned the country's government that Bank of China and two other state banks would make provisions for all their assets hit by US mortgage defaults.

The report heightened concerns about China's exposure to the sub-prime crisis, which has hammered earnings of major European and Wall Street banks, prompting steep drops in share prices around the world.

Bank of China says its sub-prime related assets were worth $7.95bn at the end of September last year.

Chinese officials are increasingly voicing concern about the fallout of the US sub-prime crisis, backing away from earlier confident declarations that the country was largely insulated.

On Monday the semi-official China Business News reported that a government task force recently made an assessment of the potential impact of the sub-prime crisis on Chinese banks, with "not very positive" conclusions.

The Picture Tells The Story

2008-01-20T19:04:00.001-08:00

Always American Wal-Mart

2008-01-20T19:01:00.001-08:00

According to Wal-Mart’s SEC filing, CEO Lee Scott’s total compensation was $29.7 million. Scott’s salary is 900 times the pay of the average Wal-Mart worker despite pressure from regulators and shareholders to rein in excessive executive pay in the industry. [Arkansas Business Weekly, 4/20/07; Asia Times, 10/13/07]

Facing The Giants

2008-01-20T18:35:00.000-08:00

A church-produced evangelical Christian movie is aimed at evangelism and is inappropriate for public schools, Americans United for Separation of Church and State has told Alabama educators.

After receiving complaints, Americans United has urged officials at Tuscaloosa City Schools to stop showing the film "Facing the Giants."

"This movie is not educational; it's evangelistic," said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. "Parents and taxpayers expect our public schools to teach, not preach."

In a Jan. 15 letter, Americans United attorneys note that the film was shown repeatedly in classrooms last semester at Paul W. Bryant High School and that the school's principal plans to continue airing it in the future. The movie depicts the story of a losing high school football coach who turns his struggling team around by convincing them that "With God, all things are possible…."

"Facing the Giants was produced by a Baptist church to bring about a single result: Christian conversion.... [F]ederal courts have consistently held that public-school teachers cannot present religious messages to students or use teaching materials that do so," wrote Americans United Legal Director Ayesha N. Khan, Senior Litigation Counsel Alex Luchenitser and Litigation Counsel Heather Weaver.

The AU attorneys said public schools must be neutral when it comes to religion and may not provide religious instruction to children.

The letter cites an array of quotes from the film that are obviously aimed at proselytizing.

For example, the film's coach tells his players that "football is just one of the tools we use to honor God," and that "[God] sent his son Jesus to die for us so we can live for Him." In a locker-room pep talk, he urges his team "to remember what God has brought us…. As long as we honor God, nothing is impossible…. Give your best to God…. Give God the glory."

The film was produced by Sherwood Baptist Church in Albany, Ga. The Rev. Michael Catt, senior pastor of the church, told a gathering at the 2007 Values Voter Summit in Washington, D.C., that 3,000 people have been converted to Christianity by the movie.

"We never got into it [film-making] to make money," Catt told the Summit pastors' breakfast. "We got into it to spread the gospel."

TV preacher Pat Robertson's "700 Club" reported last summer that Catt spoke at a Southern Baptist Pastors Conference in San Antonio and declared that all aspects of the movie were "bathed in prayer." (Robertson called the movie "magnificent.")

Americans United's letter urges the school officials to uphold the separation of church and state and to take prompt steps to ensure that the film is no longer shown to students in the Tuscaloosa City Schools District.

"Millionnaires' Amendment" On Trial

2008-01-20T18:19:00.000-08:00

After twice battling Rep. Tom Reynolds (R-N.Y.) and losing, Democrat Jack Davis is now challenging federal campaign finance law. The millionaire industrialist, who spent more than $2 million of his own money to unseat Reynolds in 2006, has persuaded the Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of the "millionaires' amendment." This measure in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 allows congressional candidates who face wealthy opponents to collect more money from individuals than the law would normally allow, ostensibly to even the odds. Davis says this provision protects entrenched incumbents from the only people who beat them: wealthy challengers. He says the additional disclosure requirements he faced limited his free-speech rights. The Supreme Court will consider a lower court's ruling that upheld the law, stating that it was Davis's choice to spend his own money and, in doing so, allow his opponent to collect more money from donors. The Supreme Court may also consider a case involving an anti-Hillary Clinton movie that the conservative group and InfoCision client Citizens United wants to advertise in key primary states. A three-judge panel said that advertising the movie should be considered direct advocacy against a candidate and, therefore, should be subject to campaign finance laws, including the disclosure of donors.
*Campaign contribution limits: http://www.opensecrets.org/basics/law/index.asp
*FEC primer on the millionaires' amendment: http://www.fec.gov/press/bkgnd/MillionairesAmendment.html
*2006 Reynolds-Davis race: http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.asp?ID=NY26&Cycle=2006
*2004 Reynolds-Davis race: http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.asp?ID=NY26&Cycle=2004
*Citizens United Political Action Committee: http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.asp?strID=C00295527&cycle=2008

The Black Box

2008-01-20T08:16:00.000-08:00

Throughout the '80s, Denise Matthews, who gained infamy as Vanity - the remarkably gorgeous girlfriend and pin-up protégé of music icon Prince - was the proverbial wet dream. He created the group Vanity 6 for her and produced the hit album of the same name. After leaving the Prince camp, she had two successful solo albums Wild Animal and Skin On Skin. One song from Wild Animal, called "Strap On 'Robbie Baby'" made the PMRC's infamous filthy 15 list, clocking in at number 4. By the mid-'90s, the sex-drenched rock star and actress cheated death, put away the lingerie and became a Christian Evangelist. She is preparing to release a self-published, tell-all memoir called The Black Box, to demonstrate how her life was transformed through faith in God. The following is a interview from the magazine Vibe.

When you began going around the country to preach, was it hard for folks to get past the fact that you were the same chick that was moaning "Nasty Girl" in her underwear?
Getting past my past? Well, that was a process, a very serious process indeed. My God. As a person, [I'm] constantly changing, trying to be better. Back when I was Vanity, it was all about being sexy, getting slimmer, and getting cuter. Things have changed. Now it's not the outward appearance, it's the inward man that I'm trying to change. And that's the message I bring to the people.

How often do you get the 'Aren't you Vanity?' line?
[Laughs] You know, it depends on where I'm at. If I'm going into a different city, like in the Midwest or back East, I get it quite a bit. Where I live today [Fremont, California], I believe that God chose this place for me because I don't get a whole lot of people that recognize me. And that doesn't bother me. The ones that do recognize me, I always switch [the question] that they give me to salvation.

Your book is very open about your wild partying lifestyle and past cocaine abuse. At one point you were nearly on your deathbed in 1994, blind and deaf, after suffering a stroke, kidney failure and a heart attack. What do you say to the cynical bastard that thinks that most celebrities find religion when it's convenient?
Well, we all make the mistake of thinking, and I did too so many times, that God did this to us. But we kill ourselves and choose who we want to be. I put the drugs in my mouth, I did the fornication, I had all the lust, and I chose the way of "sex sells." I wanted to be famous and rich. I chose to be Vanity.

Your turbulent romantic relationship with Prince, who gave you the name Vanity and created and produced Vanity 6, is the stuff of rock 'n' roll legend. Is it true that when you first met Prince at the American Music Awards in January of '82, that you arrived with Rick James and left with Mr. Nelson?
People have so many renditions of what I did [laughing]. I remember one time somebody said that the reason I left Prince was because I was having his baby [laughing]. Do they make this stuff up? You have to read my book to find out what really happened.

Are you shocked at Prince becoming a Jehovah's Witness? This from the same cat who basically inspired explicit lyrics stickers and was a walking sex act in high heels.
I believe that God is calling him (Prince) like he is calling many others. I cannot judge Prince's heart. Everything takes time, so my heart is just to pray for him and that he finds what he's looking for just as I pray for myself as I continue to find my own way because you can be on the path one day and then go off the wrong path the next.

Obviously, some fans are going to buy your book to read about your wild days as a sex symbol. But what do you really want readers to get out of The Black Box?
I think it's important to understand the title of my book. The black box is the only thing that survives a plane crash, and I want people to know that I'm a survivor. I go to wherever God calls me, wherever the church calls me to come to minister and preach the word of God. God told me, "Speak the kingdom of God with all your heart, mind, body, soul, and strength . . . seek the kingdom of God first." In the beginning I was planning on naming it Blame It On Vanity. . . Denise, but I wanted to separate myself from the sinful name that made me famous. Vanity means worthlessness, and that's the last thing I want to be known for. And I'm not worthless anymore. My name is Denise.

Concerned Women For America

2008-01-20T07:58:00.000-08:00

Marla Redfern of InfoCision Management Corporation, a telemarketing company based in Akron, Ohio, says that last Thursday, January 17^th, Robert Stuber, Director of Development for Concerned Women For America came to town. And we just thought it was really bad cold front.

Mr. Stuber was in town to review InfoCision’s current programs and listen to suggestions for CWAs first quarter fundraising efforts.

Concerned Women For America describes itself this way: “We are the nation's largest public policy women's organization with a rich 29-year history of helping our members across the country bring Biblical principles into all levels of public policy.”

They also claim: “The mission of CWA is to protect and promote Biblical values among all citizens - first through prayer, then education, and finally by influencing our society - thereby reversing the decline in moral values in our nation.”

The group was founded in 1979 by Beverly LaHaye, wife of Christian Coalition co-founder Timothy LaHaye, as a response to activities by the National Organization for Women and a 1978 Barbara Walters interview with noted feminist Betty Friedan.

Mrs. LaHaye was quoted in a 2004 speech at the CWA conference as saying, "Yes, religion and politics do mix. America is a nation based on biblical principles. Christian values dominate our government. The test of those values is the Bible. Politicians who do not use the Bible to guide their public and private lives do not belong in office."

Beverly LaHaye was best known for The Act of Marriage, a Christian sex self-help bestseller she co-authored with her husband, Tim, when she founded Concerned Women for America in 1979. In 2001, LaHaye hired Robert H. Knight and Peter LaBarbera, to launch CWA’s Culture & Family Institute.

She is married to Tim LaHaye. They have four children and nine grandchildren and live in the Los Angeles area. One of their sons, Lee LaHaye, is the chief financial officer of Concerned Women for America and has been alleged to be openly gay. The CWA have never rebutted the charge.

In 1992, Jerry Falwell's Liberty University gave Beverly LaHaye, Tim's wife, an honorary Doctorate of Humanities.

According to Marla Redfern, Concerned Women For America has been a client of InfoCision Management Corporation for over 10 years and is their Christian divisions second largest client. This year, InfoCision is hoping to surpass the $3.7 million they made last year from telemarketing for the group.

He Works Hard For The Money

2008-01-08T18:30:00.000-08:00

Pledge Of Allegiance

2008-01-08T14:18:00.000-08:00

The Pledge of Allegiance was written for the popular kid's magazine Youth's Companion by Christian Socialist author and Baptist minister Francis Bellamy on September 7, 1892. The owners of Youth's Companion were selling flags to schools, and approached Bellamy to write the Pledge for their advertising campaign. It was marketed as a way to celebrate the 400th anniversary of Columbus arriving in the Americas and was first published on the following day. The original wording appears as follows:

I pledge allegiance to my flag and to the republic for which it stands: one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

After a proclamation by President Benjamin Harrison, the Pledge was first used in public schools on October 12, 1892 during Columbus Day observances. This date was also significant as it was the dedication day of the World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago, Illinois. Bellamy thought that the pledge itself and the involvement of children across the country would be a fine show of national solidarity.

In 1923 the National Flag Conference called for the words my Flag to be changed to the Flag of the United States. The reason given was to ensure that immigrants knew to which flag reference was being made. The words "of America" were added a year later. The newly worded pledge got adopted officially on Flag Day, June 14, 1924.

In 1954, Republican U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy was leading the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations during the height of the Cold War anti-communist movement in the United States. Anti-communist ideology in the U.S. frequently identified the Soviet states with atheism; the Senate as well as the House, were still seeking to expose "godless Communist" infiltrators. So, several Christian anti-communists urged a bill to change the pledge further by including "God." Another amended pledge came by a joint resolution of Congress in 1954 with the addition of the words, "under God." The pledge now reads:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands: one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Unfortunately this pledge does not accurately reflect many Americans who do not believe in gods, and thus it can only stand as a biased an intolerant statement.

Although the first and second pledge offers a far better alternative than the last, has anyone noticed that the pledge first aims its allegiance to a flag and only secondly to the republic? This gives some reason why the flag presents so many problems with the prosecution of flag burners and with questions of law and the freedom of expression. Such problems would not exist with by simply removing the politically convenient wording:

I pledge allegiance to the United States of America: one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

This pledge can conform to any American whether he or she worships a god or has opted for agnosticism, atheism or unbelief.

Of course we would still perform the pledge in front of the flag, which represents the United States, but the pledge should honor only the United States, not a design on a piece of cloth.

The Power Of The American-Israel Public Affairs Committee

2008-01-07T12:15:00.000-08:00

As US presidential candidates battle it out to become the leader of the world's only superpower there is one subject on which they all, in public at least, agree - the US relationship with Israel.

To leading politicians on both sides of the partisan divide the special relationship is sacrosanct, largely due, critics say, to the power of pro-Israel lobby groups.

Those critics also say that pro-Israeli groups are set to play a major role in the forthcoming election battle, both in terms of funding candidates and by publicly criticizing any candidate critical of Israel or the US's relationship with it.

John Mearsheimer, who alongside Stephen Walt is the author of a controversial series of articles and a recent book on the Israel lobby, have said: "Almost all of the major candidates are falling over themselves to demonstrate how deeply committed they are to America's special relationship with Israel.

"Hardly a word of criticism is directed at anything Israel does and that is due to the activities of the lobby."

What is the pro-Israel lobby?

The lobby is made up of dozens of pro-Israel political action committees that draw a large part of their support from the US Jewish community and provide funding to presidential candidates.

But Christian Zionists, who are among the most vociferous supporters of Israel in the US, also play a major role.

They believe that by strengthening and supporting the state of Israel, they are more likely to bring about the "second coming" of Jesus as prophesied in the Bible.

At the lobby's vanguard is the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac), which works mainly in US congress.

It boasts its recent "victories" include the US decision to brand Iran's Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization, securing US aid to Israel and freezing US aid to the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority in 2006.

Money and power

Defenders of the Israel lobby say that the views of presidential candidates are really a natural reflection of the views of most Americans and that it has little influence over elections.

But money talks in politics and the figures tell a different story.

The Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), which monitors the role of money in US politics, says pro-Israeli groups and individuals have already donated more than $845,000 to presidential candidates in the 2008 campaign - 70 per cent of it to Democrats.

In the entire 2004 presidential campaign pro-Israel interests contributed at least $6.1 million to federal candidates and parties.

"Money translates into influence in Washington, so generally the interests that spend the most money are going to get the best access and results," says Massie Ritch, communications director at the CRP.

And it is outside of the presidential race and in congress, which holds the purse strings on the key area of aid to Israel, that the lobby makes its financial mark.

Aipac and other groups spent more than $1.5 million on federal lobbying in 2006 and more than $1.25 million in the first half of 2007, meaning that this year could be a record one for the lobby.

The pro-Israel lobby accounts for about one-quarter of all foreign policy lobbying on Capitol Hill, the CRP says.

Information flow

Arab efforts to put their case across are, in contrast, minimal.

The National Association of Arab-Americans and the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee reported spending just $80,000 on federal lobbying in 2006 and $40,000 in the first six months of 2007.

The financial power of the Israel lobby also allows it to provide one-sided information to US politicians not always familiar with the complexities of conflict in the Middle East.

Aipac provides educational trips to congressman and their staff - more trips than any other sponsor, according to the CRP.

"Members of congress and their staffs have been to Tel Aviv more often in recent years than they've been to Chicago," says Ritch.

Anti-Semitism charges

Aipac's defenders say that this is where the organization plays an important role, as an information source for politicians - including US presidential candidates.

But critics say that pro-Israel lobby groups go much further - as John Mearsheimer says: "The lobby monitors what the candidates say very closely."

In March, Democratic candidate Barack Obama gave a speech in the key primary state of Iowa where he said: "Nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people."

A local Aipac member immediately contacted the media to denounce the comment, describing it as "deeply troubling".

In July Jim Moran, a Democratic congressman who has criticized Aipac in the past, accused the organization of pushing for war on Iraq.

Seventeen members of congress immediately wrote a letter to Moran condemning him and saying that his remarks "unfortunately fit the anti-Semitic stereotypes some have used historically used against Jews".

Eric Cantor, the House of Representatives Republican Deputy Chief Whip, reportedly went further and was quoted as saying: "Unfortunately, Jim Moran has made it a habit now to lash out to the American-Jewish community.

"I think his remarks are reprehensible, I think his remarks are anachronistic, and hearken back to the day of Adolph Hitler."

In such a political climate it is easy to see why those seeking a job in the Oval Office are wary of speaking out for any change in the US relationship with Israel or against Aipac.

The charge of anti-Semitism is regularly used by the Israel and lobby and was one of the charges faced by John Mearsheimer.

"We are not anti-Semites and the book is not anti-Semitic," he says.

"Calling critics of Israeli policy or the US-Israel relationship is standard operating procedure for the lobby. It's the standard strategy they use to stifle criticism of Israel and to marginalize those critics."

Military action

Beyond the politics of elections, the lobby's critics say that pro-Israeli groups, after pushing for war on Iraq, are now advocating military action against Iran.

"If you look at who is pushing the US to use military force against Iran, the two driving forces are Israel and the Israel lobby," says Mearsheimer.

Jim Moran, in an interview with the Tikkun, a Jewish peace magazine, said US action against Iran is proposed only because it is a threat to Israel.

"No one's suggested that Iran is a potential threat to the United States," he told the magazine, "any more than Iraq could ever have been a threat to the United States."

"In effect, all the same groups and individuals who were pushing for war against Iraq are pushing for war against Iran."

Aipac, however, vehemently denies it is asking for anything other than sanctions.

"Aipac solely advocates sanctions as the best way to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons or the capability to make them." said Josh Block, an Aipac spokesman.

Real friendship

Mearsheimer argues that the US needs to normalize its relationship with Israel, treating it more like the UK, Germany or India.

He and other critics, from both inside and outside the Jewish community in the US, argue that Israel also suffers from its privileged position in terms of US aid.

They believe that the Israel lobby's support in the US encourages Israel to act without fear of international sanction.

This has emboldened Israeli leaders to sanction the illegal occupation of Palestinian land, the building of settlements and for the Israeli military to carry out numerous human rights abuses.

"If these presidential candidates were real friends of Israel as they claim to be, they would not only be criticizing Israel for its policies in the occupied territories ... they would be arguing that the US put significant pressure on Israel and the Palestinians to reach an agreement on a two-state solution," said Mearsheimer.

"That's what a real friend would do."

Walled Off Town Of Bethlehem's Struggles Continue

2007-12-29T15:01:00.001-08:00

A normally empty Manger Square was filled beyond capacity on Christmas day as thousands of Palestinians, dignitaries and foreigners descended on the little town of Bethlehem to welcome Michel Sabah the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem.

The Patriarch's yearly visit was meant to kick off Christmas festivities but this year, as in others, the spirit of the festive season is uniquely intertwined with the fate of all Palestinians, who say the city has suffered from years of Israeli occupation.

And like previous years, despite a boost in tourism, celebrations in Bethlehem have been marred by a poor economic and security situation.

While Bethlehem is the traditional birthplace of Jesus Christ atop a hill just 10km away from Jerusalem, the site of Christ's crucifixion, a 10-meter high concrete wall put up by Israel and several military checkpoints keep the two cities very much apart.

Fairy tale Christmas

It is such barriers and restrictions borne of Israeli occupation that has made Christmas bittersweet for Palestinians.

Maxim Sansour, founding board member of Open Bethlehem, an international campaign to address the state of emergency facing Bethlehem, said the city's greatest problems largely go unaddressed every Christmas.

He said: "Christmas comes and goes, but our problems remain."

Issues of growing Israeli settlements which lie immediately on the border of Bethlehem and demolitions of Palestinian homes on the outskirts of the city have made life difficult for Palestinians.

Sansour says Bethlehem will always continue to struggle as long as such Palestinian issues of statehood, economic viability and sustenance under occupation remain unaddressed.

Sansour also believes that visitors and pilgrims who do come show support but at the same time many are also in Bethlehem as part of "the fairy-tale story of Christmas".

Father Garret Edmonds, a Franciscan monk from California who works with pilgrim groups in Palestine and is spending his fifth Christmas in Bethlehem, said: "There are moments of hope but then everything returns to the status quo. It goes on and off like this all the time."

Father Edmonds also highlighted the increasing erosion of the Church and the increasing number of Christians choosing to emigrate from in Palestine.

"It's important to have a viable, living Church, but if things continue the way they are in 25 years there might not be a living church. Bethlehem could become one giant museum," he said.

Life under occupation

In 2006, Open Bethlehem released the results of a questionnaire which examined the reasons behind the high rate of Christian emigration from Bethlehem.

Of 2000 Palestinians surveyed in Bethlehem, 76 per cent said Israeli occupation was the main reason for leaving.

Sixteen per cent of the Christians in the city said they are in the process of emigrating, compared to eight per cent of the Muslims.

Many Palestinians also said that foreigners and pilgrims coming to Bethlehem do not experience daily life under occupation.

Palestinians who have Israeli permission to travel between Bethlehem and the West Bank say they are subjected to fingerprint and document scanning, full body searches, and long waits before they are let through.

Some are not even allowed to visit friends and family simply because they live on the wrong side of the wall or in some cases the soldier manning a checkpoint might not feel like letting them through.

Brother Jack Curran, Vice President of Development for Bethlehem University, said: "I have colleagues who haven't been to Jerusalem in years and I can come and go as freely as I want. I feel ashamed of the privilege I have and it's easy to take for granted, I always have to remember that."

"But it is also a privilege that the Palestinians deserve."

Brother Curran, a member of the Lasallian order, felt that Christmas in Bethlehem is not truly reflected because of what he says are the injustices being heaped upon the Palestinians daily.

"The story can't be told without looking seriously at these things," he said.

"Without foreigners," Curran explained, "it would also be a lot worse. We must act as the witnesses and truth tellers, but not just once a year."

Sustain support

Christmas generates a great deal of positive media attention for both Bethlehem and Palestine every year. It is a chance for the world to show the Palestinians some sympathy and solidarity but Sansour said that it never carries on.

"We love good feelings and the Palestinian people deeply appreciate the show of support, but it must be a sustained kind of support."

Bethlehem is a small town; according to the Palestinian Central bureau of Statistics its population in 2006 stood just shy of 30000, and has a very small and localized economy which is dominated by the tourist industry.

According to Open Bethlehem, tourism accounts for 65 per cent of Bethlehem's economy. In November, 80,000 visitors arrived in the city. This was boosted by a further 20,000 in the days leading to Christmas.

Sansour said that while tourism represents a significant portion of Bethlehem's economy many of the tourist operators are Israeli which means that most of the tourists who do come stay for only a short time and promptly return to Jerusalem.

"They come here, take their Disneyland photos and drink some tea from a local shop and go back to Jerusalem," Sansour said.

"Maybe they'll stop by and buy some wood carvings from a shop where the Israeli operators get a commission, but that's about it," he added.

Christmas surge

Most of Bethlehem's local businessmen wait all year just for the Christmas season to come in hopes of boosting their incomes and providing for their families.

It's not surprising given that the poverty rate stands at 60 per cent while unemployment stands at 55 per cent, a slight increase from last year but not overly significant according to George Saadeh, Bethlehem's deputy mayor.

Abed Ibrahim, who works at a sweets shop, said: "Christmas [is] the only time of the year that anyone makes any money."

"It's good for now. But next year it will be bad again until the next Christmas. Nothing will change," he said

Ibrahim added: "Fast dollars won't solve our business problems."

Ameer Jaber, who operates a stall selling boiled corn and roasted peanuts, feels the Palestinians need the kind of media exposure they received for Christmas year-round and not just in Bethlehem, but all over Palestine.

He said: "You foreigners come and help us, but then you leave when you have your pictures and reports, but we're still here and you'll have the same story next year unless we get your help."

China Invests 5 Billion In Morgan Stanley

2007-12-29T14:41:00.000-08:00

A state-controlled Chinese investment fund has taken a $5bn stake in Morgan Stanley, one of America's biggest investment banks, which earlier announced multi-billion-dollar losses.

The US bank and securities firm said on Wednesday that China Investment Corporation (CIC) would gain around a 9.9 per cent shareholding in it.

Earlier in the day, Morgan Stanley announced a net loss of $3.59bn for the fourth quarter.
The firm's financial picture darkened as it announced it was writing off $9.4bn.

Morgan Stanley mainly blamed this decision on loss-making mortgage investments, including subprime home loans granted to Americans with poor credit.

John Mack, the chairman and chief executive officer, said CIC's cash infusion would reinforce Morgan Stanley's stretched finances.

The Chinese fund controls a $200bn investment war chest.

New team

Mack said that he had put a new management team in place and would not accept a bonus for 2007.

Still, speculation mounted over whether Mack would keep his job amid the mounting losses.

"Huge writedowns caused the ouster of Merrill Lynch & Co CEO Stan O'Neal and Citigroup Inc CEO Charles Prince. May be Morgan Stanley will follow them," said Peter Cardillo, a market analyst at Avalon Partners.

China has been making increasingly aggressive investments in some of America's premier financial companies this year.

Its moves have alarmed some US politicians who believe the deals could threaten national security.

CIC acquired a $3bn stake in the Blackstone Group, a large private equity firm, earlier this year and China's CITIC Securities Co Ltd bought a six per cent shareholding in Bear Stearns, another US investment house, for $1bn in October.

Buying spree

Sovereign wealth funds operated by China, Singapore and Gulf Arab states are buying stakes in the US finance sector as Wall Street reels from a prolonged US housing downturn and heavy losses related to mortgage securities.

The mortgage losses and economic uncertainty have depressed the stock prices of many big banks in recent months, including Morgan Stanley.

Its shares were up over four per cent at $50.19 in mid-afternoon trading, but have tumbled from a peak this year of over $74 in June.

With the Morgan Stanley deal, China becomes one of the biggest shareholders in a US firm that traces its roots to 1854.

John Pierpont Morgan was considered the unofficial central banker of the US in the late 1800s and famed for helping reorganize the country's railroads.

A History Of Akrons The Chapel "Ex Gay" Ministry

2007-12-29T10:53:00.000-08:00

In 1973 John Evans, who is gay, and Rev. Kent Philpott, who is heterosexual, co-founded the original “ex-gay” ministry, Love In Action on the outskirts of San Francisco. Philpott soon wrote The Third Sex?, the first ever “ex-gay” book which touted six people who supposedly converted to heterosexuality through prayer.

Although time eventually revealed no one in his book actually had changed, the people reading it had no idea the stories were fallacious. As far as they knew, there was a magical place in California that had figured out the secret for making gays into straights. Inspired by his book, a few enthusiastic individuals spontaneously began their own “ex-gay” ministries.

Evans, however, denounced the program he co-founded after his best friend Jack McIntyre committed suicide in despair over not being able to “change”. Still, Love in Action survived because many people who read The Third Sex? came to California in hopes of changing.

As a result of Philpott’s book, within three years more than a dozen “ex-gay” ministries organically sprung up across America. As these ministries serendipitously became aware of each other, two leading “ex-gay” counselors at Melodyland Christian Center in Anaheim, California - Gary Cooper and Michael Bussee - decided to organize a conference where the “ex-gays” could meet each other and network.

In September 1976, Cooper and Bussee’s vision came to fruition as sixty-two “ex-gays” journeyed to Melodyland for the world’s first “ex-gay” conference. The outcome of the retreat was the formation of Exodus International, an umbrella organization for “ex-gay” groups worldwide.

The early Exodus meetings almost disintegrated the group because participants kept sleeping with each other. The group was rocked to its core a few years later when Bussee and Cooper acknowledged that they had not changed and were in love with each other. They soon divorced their wives, moved in together and eventually held a commitment ceremony.

In 1979, Seventh Day Adventist minister Colin Cook founded Homosexuals Anonymous (HA). But Cook’s “ex-gay” empire crumbled a few years later after he was scandalized for having phone sex and giving nude massages to those he was supposedly helping become heterosexual.

As acceptance for homosexuality grew in the late 1970’s, the “ex-gay” ministries had trouble attracting new recruits and growth of these programs stagnated. Then came AIDS. Unscrupulous ministry leaders were able to use the threat of AIDS to scare people into entering “ex-gay” ministries.

However, even as the epidemic spurred new growth, the “ex-gay” ministries remained relatively obscure in mainstream society. This dramatically changed in 1998 when the politically motivated Religious Right jumped on the “ex-gay” bandwagon launching a multi-million dollar newspaper and television ad campaign. They featured groups like Exodus because the traditional fire and brimstone rhetoric of the far right political groups made them seem mean-spirited and intolerant. By embracing the “ex-gays”, hateful men like Revs. D. James Kennedy, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson could claim they loved homosexuals and were just trying to help them.

But the ad campaign soon backfired after University of Wyoming student Matthew Shepard was murdered because he was gay. The groups who sponsored the anti-gay ads were held largely responsible for creating a climate where hate crimes, such as the Shepard incident, could flourish. Although these groups denied a connection, because of the negative fallout they postponed their “ex-gay” television ads for several months and the campaign lost steam.

Additionally, several of the “ex-gays” they paraded as proof of “change” were uncovered as frauds. The biggest example was “ex-gay” poster boy John Paulk who the ad campaign sponsors put on the cover of Newsweek with his “ex-lesbian” wife Anne under the large headline, “Gay for Life?” But in September 2000 Paulk was photographed cruising in a Washington, DC gay bar and was suspended as Chairman of Exodus and put on a temporary “hiatus” by Focus on the Family, where he ran their “Love Won Out” program.

The “ex-gay” ministries are still growing today despite their history of scandals and failures. The sad truth is, as long as people are made to hate themselves for being gay, these groups will exist. The best way to counter their negative influence is by highlighting the truth and revealing the failed history that “ex-gay” groups represent. Showing an honest portrayal of gay life also greatly diminishes the effectiveness of these groups. When people learn that God loves them for who they are and that they can be gay and happy, the appeal of these dangerous groups invariably wanes.

"Aussie Taliban"David Hicks Released From Prison

2007-12-29T09:42:00.000-08:00

David Hicks, the only Guantanamo inmate convicted of terrorism offenses by a US military tribunal, has walked free after more than six years in prison.

The 32-year-old left prison in his hometown of Adelaide on Saturday after he completed a nine-month-sentence in his native Australia struck under a plea deal.

Hicks was captured in Afghanistan in late 2001.

He spent five years in Guantanamo before becoming the first person to be sentenced under the alternate war crimes tribunals created by the Bush administration to try non-American captives.

The former kangaroo skinner admitted training with al-Qaeda and meeting its leader Osama bin Laden, whom he described as "lovely", according to police evidence given to the court.

Restricted movement

He was sentenced to seven years in prison in March, though all but nine months' prison time was suspended.

Hicks did not speak to reporters as he left prison in what constituted his first public appearance since being captured.

However, in a statement released by his lawyer, he thanked those who helped get him out of Guantanamo Bay, including the Australian public, and promised to uphold conditions of his plea deal and avoid doing "anything that might result in my return there."

Hicks will still be subject to a strict control order which includes a midnight-to-dawn curfew. He will not be allowed to leave Australia.

Under a plea bargain reached with US military authorities, Hicks agreed to a gag order which stops him from talking about his experiences for a year, ending on March 26.

He also forfeited any right to appeal his conviction and any money offered for interviews could be confiscated under Australian law.

Media reports last week said Hicks was unprepared for freedom, suffered agoraphobia and had retreated to solitary confinement in his Australian prison cell.

No apology

The Hicks case became a political issue in Australia where many activists and politicians criticised John Howard, the former prime minister, for allowing an Australian to spend years in a foreign prison without trial.

Under increasing pressure Howard raised the issue of Hicks with Dick Cheney, the US vice-president, when he was in Sydney earlier this year, and the tribunal proceedings against Hicks started soon afterward.

Kevin Rudd, Howard's successor, has recognised the plea deal and the strict conditions on Hicks' movements.

But in 2006 Rudds described Hicks' imprisonment as a "national obscenity" and that the Guantanamo prison should be closed.

No apologies

Terry, Hicks' father, had said on Friday his son would apologise for any wrongdoing he committed while in Afghanistan, but the statement contained no such apology.

Asked about the omission, Terry Hicks said his son had served his time and had nothing to be sorry about.

Around 20 supporters cheered at Hicks' release Saturday and held up signs that read, "Hicks is not a threat" - a reference to the strict controls on his movements.

Terry Hicks gave no indication of where his son would live or any plans for the future.

Israel Continues With Illegal Settlements

2007-12-27T14:12:00.001-08:00

An Israeli building program planned for East Jerusalem is set to overshadow a meeting between Israeli and Palestinian leaders.

Thursday's summit between Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister, and Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, is the first since the two agreed to renew peace talks at the US-sponsored Annapolis meeting last month.

The Jerusalem dispute has already clouded earlier meetings between negotiating teams.
Last month, Israel announced tenders for 307 new apartments in Har Homa, part of a ring of settlements built on confiscated Palestinian land in east Jerusalem.

Fighters captured

Meanwhile, in the occupied West Bank, Israeli soldiers captured two senior members of the Islamic Jihad group in raids on Thursday, Palestinian security sources and witnesses said.
Israeli troops arrested Mohammad Assayda near Nablus, the Islamic Jihad said.

Assayda, who was released from Israeli jail in September, is a lecturer at al-Najah University.Samer al-Saadi, another Islamic Jihad fighter, was captured in a separate raid in a refugee camp in Jenin, a Palestinian security officer told Reuters news agency.

Demand for halt

The Palestinians are demanding that Israel halt the Har Home housing project, in line with the peace roadmap which committed Israel to freeze settlement activity.
Israel, which annexed east Jerusalem in 1967 after capturing it along with the West Bank, does not accept demands to limit its construction there.
Israel views the Har Homa building project as distinct from settlement activity because it takes place in "unified" Jerusalem, rather than in the occupied West Bank.
The distinction is not accepted by Palestinians.
Al Jazeera's Ayman Mohyeldin, reporting from east Jerusalem, said Israeli settlement construction shows no sign of slowing down.
"The Knesset later today [Thursday] is expected to vote on the 2008 budget and in that budget is approximately $25 million that will go to the building of new housing units in the illegal settlements of Maale Adumim and Har Homa."

Freeze demanded

Abu Rdeneh, an aide to Abbas, said the Palestinian leader will ask Olmert for "a clear cessation of settlement activities" at Thursday's talks.

He said joint committees would begin discussing the main issues for a peace agreement at the meeting, "but there is a need to freeze the settlement activities in order to create the appropriate atmosphere to bring progress in the peace process".

Mark Regev, an Israeli government spokesman, said that Israel is committed to trying for a peace treaty with the Palestinians in 2008, as decided at Annapolis.

"This is an ambitious goal. It will demand our tenacity, our determination and both sides coming to the table in the spirit of seriousness," he said.

But Saeb Erekat, a senior Palestinian negotiator, said Israel's construction plan "kills the credibility of the peace process".

Egypt meeting

Egypt also criticised the Israeli intention to build new homes in east Jerusalem at a meeting on Wednesday in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheik between Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president, and Ehud Barak, the Israeli defence minister.

The talks focused on Israeli accusations that Egypt was not doing enough to prevent arms smuggling into Gaza, the Palestinian territory controlled by Hamas.

Barak said after the meeting that Israel and Egypt would continue to work together to resolve disagreements, but offered little evidence the sides had made progress on the issue.

Outcome at risk

Instead, Mubarak criticised the Israeli building programme as a threat to the Israeli-Palestinian process.

Suleiman Awwad, Mubarak's spokesman, said that "settlement activity will hijack the only outcome of the Annapolis conference".

Barak disagreed. "In our view, this is not part of the problem with the Palestinians," he said.

"We are not building new settlements."

Palestinians claim all of east Jerusalem as capital of a future state, while Israel claims all of the city as its capital.

Israel Kills At Least 6 During Raid Into The Gaza Strip

2007-12-22T03:17:00.000-08:00

Israeli tanks and troops have raided the central Gaza Strip, killing at least six Palestinian fighters, hospital officials said.

Palestinian witnesses said the Israeli forces advanced nearly one kilometre into the Gaza Strip on Thursday, just east of the Maghazi refugee camp.
Hamas, which has de facto control of Gaza, said three of the men killed by the Israeli forces were from Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, its armed group.

Islamic Jihad also said three fighters from their armed wing died in the raids.
Another 20 people were wounded in the fighting, Muawiya Abu Hassanein, director of emergency services in Gaza, said.
He said that Palestinian ambulances were prevented from reaching the scene of the incident to attend to more casualties.

Rockets fired

An Israeli military spokeswoman confirmed that a raid was undertaken, describing it as "a routine operation against terrorist threats".

Israel this week stepped up ground and air operations against Islamic Jihad, which has spearheaded cross-border rocket attacks from Gaza.

Hours after the Israel raid near Maghazi, three rockets were fired into the Israeli border town of Sderot, one of which landed 40m from a school, Israeli police said.

Twelve children were treated for shock, the police said.

Hamas said it fired 21 mortar bombs at Israeli border posts. There were no reports of casualties from those attacks.

NRCC Pledge $2 Million To Their Cash Strapped Party

2007-12-20T07:37:00.000-08:00

Republicans have pledged to give more than $2 million to their cash-strapped party fundraising arm to support candidates, according to officials at the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Minority Leader John A. Boehner of Ohio several weeks ago announced the formation of the fund, which would be earmarked for candidates rather than retiring the committee’s debt. Boehner and David Dreier of California, whom he tapped to round up support, each gave $500,000.

The infusion of cash included $400,000 from Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan and $250,000 from Rep. Wally Herger of California, who are competing to succeed retiring Rep. Jim McCrery as the top Republican on the Ways and Means Committee. McCrery, who announced earlier this month that he will not seek re-election next year, pledged $200,000.

Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee, Rep. Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin and Rep. John Mica of Florida each gave $100,000.

The NRCC had $3.6 million in debt and only $2.5 million in cash at the end of October, according to CQ MoneyLine. GOP officials say the new fund will give them a surplus.

“It will put us in the black for the first time,” said NRCC spokeswoman Julie Shutley.

She said recent special election wins in Virginia and Ohio spurred donations, though both districts have a strong Republican tilt.

“The energy and excitement surrounding the victories in two special elections this month is making for an early Christmas at the NRCC,” she said.

Settlement Activity Endangers Mideast Talks

2007-12-20T07:16:00.000-08:00

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said on Tuesday new Israeli settlement activity was posing an obstacle to revived Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts launched in the U.S. town of Annapolis last month.

Plans for new Israeli settlement building this month have drawn rare criticism from the United States, as well as the European Union, and raised fears of widening the rift in the first Israeli-Palestinian peace talks in seven years.

"I think the obstacle that hampers negotiations with the Israelis particularly concerns the construction of settlements. And we have said clearly that Israel must stop the construction and the expansion of settlements," Abbas told a news conference.

The first round of peace talks following Annapolis opened in discord last week after Palestinians demanded a halt to Israeli plans to build new homes at a settlement near Jerusalem known to Israelis as Har Homa and the Palestinians as Abu Ghneim.

One of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's closest confidants, Vice Premier Haim Ramon, told Army Radio that settlement growth was "largely limited" to the major settlement blocs, which Israel hopes to keep as part of any final peace deal with the Palestinians.

Ramon said Israel would compensate the Palestinians by giving them land in exchange for the settlement blocs, though he did not say how large these land swaps might be.

Abbas said some of Ramon's comments had not been helpful.

"What Ramon said on the continuation of the building of settlements is a declaration that does not serve the cause of peace. And if it's the official policy of Israel, I think we're heading towards real difficulties in the near future," Abbas said through a translator.

"Settlements must stop to prepare the path to proper talks, talks that can lead us to a definite solution to known questions such as Jerusalem, refugees, borders, security...to get to a real peace treaty between us and the Israelis," Abbas said.

"NO GUARANTEES"

Abbas was speaking in Paris the day after an international donors conference in the French capital raised pledges of $7.4 billion for the Palestinian Authority.

The Paris meeting was the financial sequel to the U.S.-sponsored conference in Annapolis last month, which relaunched formal peace talks with the goal of reaching an agreement on Palestinian statehood by the end of 2008.

Abbas was cautious on the likelihood of reaching the target. "We have no guarantee on this. It is possible that 2008 will be the year of peace and it's possible that it won't be."

"We have found agreement for the solution to come in 2008...If intentions are good, particularly from the Israeli side, I don't think there will be obstacles to realise this objective, the Palestinian state," he said.

Abbas said he supported a proposal French President Nicolas Sarkozy floated during the Paris conference to deploy an international force to help Palestinian security forces.

"We're very favourable to this idea launched by...Sarkozy. We hope it will soon be an international position," he said.

Former 'Ex-Gay' Minister Speaks Out

2007-12-20T05:43:00.001-08:00

Scott Harrison desperately tried to change his sexual orientation in various "ex-gay" ministries for eight years, three of them as a ministry leader in Southern California. Most of his experience with ex-gay groups — Christian organizations that see homosexuality as a choice that can be changed with proper therapy — was with Living Waters and Desert Stream, two curricula of a national ex-gay network that has more than 80 branches today. When Harrison joined in 1982, he felt ex-gay ministers were then a band of compassionate outsiders attending to the first AIDS victims. But by the end of that decade, Harrison had taken note of the movement's increasing radicalism, symbolized for him by the minister at the Vineyard Christian Fellowship in San Pedro, Calif., who performed an exorcism on him in an attempt to cast out the "demons" said to be the cause of his homosexuality. Harrison finally quit the movement in 1990 after deciding he could, after all, reconcile his sexuality with his Christian faith. Today, he speaks to parents of gay and lesbian children about the dangers he sees in the ex-gay movement. Harrison says the relatively recent alignment of Exodus International, one of the largest ex-gay groups with some 120 ministries in North America alone, with anti-gay Christian "dominionists" — people who want to impose Christian rules on the secular institutions of society — has led to ex-gay ministers pursuing a hard-line message with young people that can only end in mental anguish and failure.

Scott, how did you first get involved with the ex-gay movement?
I grew up in the '60s in a conservative evangelical home, in a Baptist environment. From a young age, I learned homosexuality was not only bad but was the worst sin a person could do. It was worse than murder. For me, the two options I saw, once I realized I was gay, were to commit suicide and go to heaven or to come out as gay and go to hell. [The ex-gay movement] offered a third option.

You started attending ex-gay ministries in 1982. Those were the early days of the movement. What was a typical meeting like?
They would open with a prayer. Andy Comiskey [founder of Living Waters/Desert Stream, a neo-Pentecostal ex-gay ministry], or whoever the particular person leading the session was, would present the teaching. These teachings later became the chapters in Comiskey's book, Pursuing Sexual Wholeness.

We were separated into small groups that would stay together for the entire duration of the class. It was a three-and-a-half-hour segment every Saturday. We would break up into our small groups, and we would do a discussion.

There would be praying to break "one-flesh unions." That was the language they used to describe anything that involved having sex that they considered sinful, whether it was premarital sex or homosexual behavior or someone having sex with someone who was in the occult.

The small groups were meant to create Platonic, healthy, same-sex relationships with other Christians. And so you got really close to these people who were in the group. You'd call them every day just to see how they were doing. It was really similar to a recovery group. Homosexuality was viewed as a temptation, not as an orientation.

Back in the 1980s, many Christian churches wanted nothing to do with ex-gay ministries. They saw them as shameful. What was your experience?
[The Vineyard Christian Fellowship in San Pedro, Calif.] was completely different from any evangelical church you've ever been to. There was a strong emphasis on social justice issues — feeding the homeless and doing whatever you could to help people. There was a strong emphasis on doing the things Jesus did and walking the talk.

So the first ex-gay movements considered themselves progressive?
Yes. This was at the beginning of the AIDS epidemic. If you were struggling with feelings of being attracted to the same sex, regardless of whether you accepted yourself as gay or lesbian, you often were asked to leave your church. People tried to cast demons out of you if it was a Pentecostal or charismatic church. Some said that just through reading the Bible would make you change.

So Desert Stream comes along, and it was fairly innovative. Comiskey had a marriage and family therapy degree. He was versed in psychology. [The program] integrated his brand of psychology with theology. It was seen [in Desert Stream] that sexuality was a gift from God, but certain expressions of sexual behavior are not proper and are not blessed by God. The message was a mixed message — it had progressed from a view you heard in evangelical churches, that homosexuals are all going to hell. It was a message that was hopeful, in a sense.

In 1987 you became an ex-gay minister. Why?
I still believed that change was possible or I wouldn't have done it. I didn't believe change was an easy process. People would have said, if you asked them in private, [that] the option was one of celibacy, as opposed to accepting oneself as gay and lesbian. When [ex-gay ministers] talked about change at that time, they were talking about behavior modification. A person submitted his or her life to God and believed in the power of Christ to transform all elements of his or her life. It was a hope that was held out there, that [one's] desires would become more and more heterosexual. I dated [women] a little bit but it just didn't happen.

A minister in your church performed an exorcism on you to root out your homosexuality. How did that happen?
There was a particular associate minister who was pretty out there. But the problem was he was also extremely intuitive. He would know stuff about you without you ever having told him.

When you're coming from a perspective that you believe God can give messages to people, words of prophecy, then it's very easy to become prey. This guy got a team of people together. One of the aspects that is pretty strong in Vineyard, still, is that they believe that people can be "demonized." Not meaning that a person is fully possessed by Satan, but that a person has given him or herself over to Satanic strongholds in his or her life, so that it may take an exorcism to release the various demons that this person has given over their lives to.

What happened as you went through it?
It was very intense, dramatic, group prayer. It lasted at least three hours. At the end, I was drenched in sweat. There were some real areas of psychological wounding. All I can really describe it as — because of how it happened and the incorrectness of the theology — is that it felt like a spiritual rape to me.

I'm not saying he [the minister] didn't have good intentions, but it amounted to a spiritual rape. The exorcism occurred that afternoon, and then we ran into the evening church service. I've got hearing issues. I'm fairly hard of hearing; I had hearing aids at the time. This person was convinced that God had given word that I was supposed to give up my hearing aids, that God would heal my hearing. He did this in front of 300 people. I was psychologically vulnerable. I didn't follow my better hunches. Even though it happened over 20 years ago, it's hard to still not blame myself. … I knew there wasn't a demon of homosexuality.

The [minister] said that if I let him crush my hearing aids, then God would give me back my hearing. He said he would pay for them if God didn't give me back my hearing. Then, he later reneged on that. For the next several weeks, I was faking that my hearing had been healed.

Nowadays, you speak to groups like PFLAG, Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, about ex-gay ministries. What do you tell them?
I always start out by saying what I am not doing is trying to bash people or say negative things about anyone who's involved with these ministries as a person. My goal is to educate people [as to] what their theology is, what they do and also what some of the things I see as dangerous [are] about the movement, both when I was involved and currently.

There's psychological damage when change doesn't occur, when sexual orientation remains homosexual. I certainly heard stories and knew people who committed suicide. I've seen what I believe is a higher incidence of risky behavior and alcohol and drug use among a lot of people who go through an ex-gay ministry. A lot of it is because of spiritual conflict that emerges going through that, feeling betrayed by God, feeling betrayed by the church.

Since you left in 1990, the ex-gay movement has become much more political, hiring lobbyists and meeting with lawmakers. How did this come about?
Around 1997, the ex-gay movement started to get funding from Focus on the Family [a huge Christian Right group led by James Dobson and based in Colorado Springs, Colo.] and from what I'll call other fundamentalist Christian organizations. Exodus International began receiving a lot of their funding from these organizations. As a result, [the ex-gay groups] began to tell a different story. Ex-gays became a vital part of the battle against gay and lesbian civil rights in society.

At the Exodus Revolution ex-gay conference this summer, you saw a speech by Michael Brown in which he encouraged people to "give up their lives" in the fight against homosexuality. What do you think of that?
When you have a keynote speaker like Michael Brown, to me that's unacceptable. It's preaching a message of Christians not just simply opposing gay civil rights and believing a spiritual revival is necessary for this country, but actually calling on Christians to lay down their lives in a spiritual revolution to set up civil laws based on one extreme interpretation of biblical laws from the Old Testament [that calls for the death penalty for homosexuals]. It's Christian Reconstructionism [a doctrine that calls for imposing harsh Old Testament laws on civil society], Christian dominionism. It's abhorrent, and it's dangerous, not just for LGBT people but for our entire society. Because if civil laws are based on [Brown]'s interpretation of the Bible, it's not going to be a democratic society.

Should ministries like Exodus exist?
Legally, I believe they should be allowed to exist. But I don't believe they should be state-sanctioned. Ex-gay ministries are primarily religious. They should not be allowed to go into public schools any more than representatives of a church, mosque or synagogue. But Exodus Youth [an Exodus International outreach group] is distributing brochures and flyers in public high schools. They are telling teenagers that they should be willing to sacrifice their sexuality because Jesus sacrificed his life for us. So they should be willing to give whatever God asks in exchange for salvation.

What's the problem with that message?
I don't think that's healthy for anyone, but especially not for high school students. Teenagers are idealistic. They're going to grab for that, believing they can actually change their sexuality, when we have plenty of evidence showing it's not possible. What's going happen when they don't change? More youth suicides, more youths engaging in risky behaviors, feeling betrayed by the church and by God and giving up on their faith. If I'd heard that message as a teenager, I don't know if I'd be here today.

I think the healthier option is to encourage them to accept themselves and find ways of maintaining a faith relationship while encouraging relationships that are healthier than promiscuity. For some people, that might be a monogamous same-sex relationship. For other people it might mean that they are celibate. Speaking from my own experience, I never witnessed anybody [in the ex-gay movement] who would acknowledge to me privately that they did not still have attractions towards people of the same sex. I can't tell you how many people come out of the ex-gay movement with their faith wrecked and they have to rebuild it from scratch.

Interview conducted by Casey Sanchez

A Tale Of How Halliburton/KBR Rape

2007-12-18T02:32:00.001-08:00

In July 2005, on her "fourth night in a Green Zone barracks in Baghdad," former Halliburton/KBR employee Jamie Leigh Jones says she "accepted a 'special drink' from male KBR employees," after which she doesn't "remember anything at all" until she "woke up naked," "bleeding," and "bruised." "I remember looking down and seeing the bruises between my inner thighs, at that moment my heart sank," Jones told an ABC-affiliate in Houston. According to Jones, "an examination by Army doctors showed she had been raped 'both vaginally and anally,'" but somehow "the rape kit" with her examination's results "disappeared after it was handed over to KBR security officers." After reporting her rape to KBR, Jones says "the company put her under guard in a shipping container with a bed and warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she'd be out of a job." After "at least 24 hours" in the container "without food or water," a "sympathetic guard" allowed her to call her family in Texas, who contacted Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX). Poe then contacted the State Department, "which quickly dispatched agents from the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad" to free Jones from the container. In the two years since Jones returned from Iraq, "the Justice Department has brought no criminal charges in the matter" and Poe says "neither the departments of State nor Justice will give him answers on the status of the Jones investigation." Frustrated by the government's inaction, Jones is now taking her case to the civil court system, but KBR is pushing for it to be heard in "private arbitration," without a "public record or transcript."

KBR'S 'INADEQUATE' DEFENSE: KBR, formerly known as Kellogg, Brown and Root and until 2006, a subsidiary of Halliburton, is "the largest" private "employer of Americans" in Iraq, with "nearly 14,000 U.S. workers." The company is aggressively resisting Jones's claims. In a memo to company employees, KBR CEO Bill Utt "disputes portions of Ms. Jones' version of the facts" and alleges "inaccuracies in the accounts of the incident in questions." In particular, KBR says "one of its human resources employees tended to Jones following the incident, provided her with food, and helped her contact her family." Jamie Armstrong, the human resources employee, confirmed to KBR's version of events to ABC News, but cautioned that "her memory may not be accurate" because "this happened several years ago." In his memo to employees, Utt emphasizes that the company "expressed" its "position in detail to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)," but the Houston Chronicle reports "that the EEOC's Houston office found KBR's investigation into Jones's allegations were 'inadequate and did not effect an adequate remedy.'" According to the Chronicle, KBR told the EEOC that "one of the men accused in the rape" said that Jones "consented to have sex with him." Jones's lawyers responded by to KBR's defense by saying that "attacking the victim is the oldest trick in the book."

CONGRESS STEPS UP: For the past two years, Poe has been championing Jones's case, pushing federal investigators to take action. "I think it is the responsibility of our government, the Justice Department and the State Department," Poe told ABC News. "When crimes occur against American citizens overseas in Iraq, contractors that are paid by the American public, that we pursue the criminal cases as best as we possibly can and that people are prosecuted." After ABC News reported on Jones's case last week, the House Judiciary Committee announced that it would hold a hearing on Jones's allegations next Wednesday. In the past week, multiple members of Congress have written to the Attorney General, Secretary of Defense, and Secretary of State urging them to "act immediately to investigate Ms. Jones's claims." In his letter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) raised concerns about a second KBR employee alleging sexual assault while working for the company in Iraq. "I am deeply troubled by recent reports that at least two women who worked in Iraq under contractors for the Department of Defense were sexually assaulted by male coworkers," Nelson wrote to Gates.

NOT AN 'ISOLATED CASE?': In her lawsuit, Jones asserts that "KBR and Halliburton created a 'boys will be boys' atmosphere at the company barracks which put her and other female employees at risk." "I think that the men who are there believe that they live without laws," Jones's lawyer Todd Kelly told ABC News. Another former KBR employee, Linda Lindsey, supports Jones's claims about the "boys will be boys" environment of KBR barracks in Iraq. "I saw rampant sexual harassment and discrimination," said Lindsey in a sworn affidavit for Jones's case. During an appearance on CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight last week, Poe said he does not think that Jones's alleged rape "is an isolated case of sexual assault against American citizens in Baghdad by coworkers," and he wants "the other victims to notify" his office immediately. In his letter to Gates, Nelson mentions "a second alleged assault, this time of a woman from Florida who reportedly worked for a KBR subsidiary in Ramadi, Iraq in 2005." Houston's CBS affiliate KHOU says "a North Carolina woman, who also said she was assaulted by a KBR contractor," will testify along with Jones on Wednesday, though the House Judiciary Committee has yet to release an official witness list.

World Bank says that aid and investment will be pointless

2007-12-16T16:13:00.000-08:00

International donors meeting in Paris on Monday have been asked to raise $5.6bn over the next three years in support of the Palestinian Authority.

This comes amid warnings about the deteriorating humanitarian conditions in the Palestinian territories and an irreversible unraveling of the economy unless Israel eases its restrictions on the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

While Palestinian officials were optimistic that the 90 participant countries and organizations attending the one-day Conference of Donors for a Palestinian State would be generous, Israel indicated no major rethink on its closure policies.

Tzipi Livni, Israel's foreign minister, is expected to tell the donors that "we would like to support and bolster the Palestinian Authority, but not at the expense of the security of Israel", the Israeli media said on Sunday.

Samir Abdallah, the Palestinian planning minister, said that he expected "full support" for the Palestinians' $5.6bn aid request.

"I think that all signs coming from here and there tell us that we get full support," he told the AP news agency in Paris.

Promised funding

The German and the British governments have put aside a combined $780 million, while the US has raised its promised funding to $540m, pending a congressional clearance that ties its approval to guarantees on money not falling into the hands of "extremists".

The Palestinians will face a challenge convincing the West to provide aid to both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, which is facing Israeli and international sanctions after Hamas took full control of the territory in June.

Meanwhile, the UN has urged donors to raise $462m to meet humanitarian needs in the Palestinian territories in 2008.

"In addition to continuing fatalities from direct Israeli-Palestinian conflict, 2007 saw a dramatic increase in deaths and injuries due to internal Palestinian violence," a statement released by about 40 UN organizations and non-governmental groups operating in the Gaza Strip and West Bank said.

"The poverty rate stands at 57 per cent and food insecurity affects 34 per cent of the population."

On Thursday, the World Bank asked Israel to reverse its closure policies, warning that increased aid money and economic investment in the Palestinian economy would be futile unless the restrictions are eased.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), on Friday, also condemned Israel, saying security concerns did not justify the severe restrictions.

"The Palestinian territories face a deep human crisis, where millions of people are denied their human dignity. Not once in a while, but every day," the ICRC said.

Israeli restrictions

Israel currently controls Gaza's borders along with its air and sea space.

In addition, more than 700 checkpoints and roadblocks cover all areas of the West Bank, preventing Palestinians' freedom of movement. All exits in and out of Gaza are blocked by Israeli forces.

So far only Britain has said it will link disbursement of aid to improved conditions on the ground, including an easing of Israeli restrictions and Palestinian government reform.

Salam Fayyad, the Palestinian prime minister and a former International Monetary Fund economist, has been actively campaigning to convince Palestinians at home and international donors that the government has established a transparent accountability system to stem mismanagement and corruption.

He says that he is doing his best not to disappoint the donors, who have seen more than $10bn in aid largely go to waste since 1993 because of mismanagement and Israeli attacks.

Fayyad has already won the support of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for a three–year economic plan that includes promises to trim the oversized public payroll and reduce hundreds of millions of dollars in utility subsidies.

The IMF has said that the plan is ambitious, but achievable.

The plan being presented aims to assure donors that they are not expected to prop up the Palestinian Authority indefinitely, even though the bulk of the aid, $3.9 billion, would go towards the government's budget deficit.

The balance is to shift gradually to development projects, under a scenario that has Israel easing restrictions and enabling the Palestinian private sector to recover.

Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, however, would have to dispel fears among Palestinians about the Gaza Strip being excluded from getting aid.

In statements prior to their departure to Paris, Palestinian officials said they were seeking help for all Palestinians.

A Wal-Mart Grows In China

2007-12-13T04:23:00.000-08:00

'It takes two to tango,' Beijing tells US [Financial Times]
If setting global trends is any benchmark, the US-China top-level dialogue which begins its third meeting on Wednesday at a near-replica of the Forbidden City outside of Beijing, can already be marked down as a success. Launched last year on the initiative of Hank Paulson, the US Treasury Secretary, the format has been replicated by Europe and Japan, which have both now established forums to engage with China at a senior level.

Wal-Mart aims higher in China [China Daily]
Wal-Mart will open its 100th store in China, the retailer announced yesterday. Wal-Mart Stores Inc, the world's biggest retailer, said it would continue expanding here at more than 30 percent annually. The US retail giant now has 94 stores in China, and was preparing to open more, Terrence Cullen, vice-president of development for Wal-Mart in China, told a news conference in Beijing yesterday.

Wal-Mart opens new store in China [CCTC (China)]
US retail giant Wal-Mart has added another store in its drive to expand in China's huge market. The new branch in central China's Hunan province is the retailer's 94th on the Chinese mainland. Walmart has the goal of opening 100 stores on the Chinese mainland. The latest outlet brings the company a step closer. The US trade deficit with China has hit a new record, fueling complaints in US Congress about China's trade practices. But according to senior US commerce officials who attended the store's opening celebrations, increasing China's consumer's base will eventually help bridge the gap between the two countries and better balance trade.

Jewish Right Wing Radicals Plant 'Symbolic' Outpost

2007-12-10T03:09:00.000-08:00

Israeli right-wing activists have gathered outside the occupied West Bank's largest settlement to set up a symbolic outpost. About 200 protesters climbed a hill outside the walls of the Maale Adumim on Sunday, confronting Israeli police officers.

Israeli expansion in this area is particularly contentious due to its proximity to Jerusalem. Organizers said those attending the demonstration were sending a message to the Israeli government but that they would not stay there for any length of time. "We didn't come here to build, but to protest," Arieh Eldad, an MP from the right-wing National Union party, said. The Land of Israel Faithful, a far-right Israeli settler group which was involved in the demonstration, announced it would set up several new outposts throughout the West Bank.

Annapolis pledge

The demonstration comes three days before an Israeli and Palestinian steering committee is due to convene to oversee peace negotiations that were relaunched in the US in November. Before last month's conference in Annapolis, Maryland, Ehud Olmert, Israel's prime minister, pledged to dismantle settlement expansion.
More than 100 settlements already cover the occupied West Bank and are illegal under international law.

Baruch Marzel, an activist at the demonstration, told Al Jazeera's David Chater that the demonstrators would not observe any pledge by Olmert to dismantle settlements in the West Bank.
"Olmert and Abu Mazen [Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas] aren't relevant. They can't do anything, not for good or bad," he said.
"Today [Abbas] is collaborating, tomorrow he'll help Hamas and become an enemy. Olmert is so weak that he isn't able to move one outpost.
"After 35 years of building settlements, I can tell you that here - where we have built a very large Jewish neighbourhood - it will prevent a Palestinian state."

E1 corridor

Arieh Itzhaki, one of the event's organisers, said that the E1 corridor, which runs from Jerusalem to Maale Adumim through the occupied West Bank, should be retained by Israel.

"If E1 falls into Palestinian hands it will be dangerous for the future of the state of Israel," he said.

The Palestinians have said that if Israel begins construction in the mostly uninhabited E1 area and forms a link from Jerusalem to Maale Adumim, it would effectively split the West Bank in half.

If such contiguity along the corridor were to be established by Israel, the West Bank would be separated from east Jerusalem, which the PLO seeks as the capital of a future Palestinian state.

Yariv Oppenheimer, the head of Peace Now, Israel's anti-settlement group, said: "The settlers wish to isolate Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank and prevent Palestinians living in the north of the territory from travelling south in order to bury the vision of two states for two peoples."

Watchdog Group Files Complaint Against Liberty University

2007-12-05T15:02:00.000-08:00

Liberty University Chancellor Jerry Falwell Jr. violated federal tax law by using school resources to endorse Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, Americans United for Separation of Church and State told the Internal Revenue Service.

In a complaint filed with the federal tax agency, Americans United noted that Falwell hosted the candidate at Liberty University and then sent an email message on Liberty University letterhead endorsing Huckabee.

In a “Liberty News Alert” dated Dec. 1, 2007, Falwell wrote, “Recently, Governor Mike Huckabee called to brief me on the progress of his campaign for the presidency. I invited the Governor to speak to the Liberty University students in Convocation on November 28. He graciously accepted. I was so impressed with the Governor’s sincerity and his positions on the issues that are important to conservative Christians that I personally endorsed Governor Huckabee before he left Lynchburg.”

Falwell goes on to say, “My father strongly supported Governor Huckabee when no one thought that he had any chance to succeed in the presidential race. I believe with all my heart that, if my father had witnessed Governor Huckabee’s surge in the polls and his ascension to first place in the Iowa polls, he would have endorsed Governor Huckabee without hesitation.”

The alert was accompanied by an article from a university-run online publication implying that Huckabee is God’s candidate.

Americans United sent a letter to IRS officials today, asking them to investigate the matter. The letter notes that on Nov. 19, the IRS issued a press statement reminding charities and churches about the ban on politicking and asks the tax agency to back that up with enforcement in this case.

“Falwell surely knows that these types of political endorsements are illegal,” remarked the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “Tax-exempt religious institutions may not be used to support or oppose candidates for public office.”

Falwell seems to be following in the footsteps of his late father Jerry Falwell Sr. In 1993, Falwell Sr.'s Old Time Gospel Hour had its tax exemption retroactively revoked for the years 1986 and 1987 and the ministry was required to pay $50,000 because of involvement in partisan politics.

Pastors and heads of 501(c)(3) non-profit groups are free to endorse candidates as private individuals, but the Internal Revenue Code does not allow them to use institutional resources, such as official publications, Web sites and other forms of communication, to back or oppose candidates.

“Falwell seems determined to misuse tax-exempt resources, just like his father did,” said Lynn. “The IRS needs to step in and break this chain of flagrant disregard for the law.”

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

Israel Continues To Build Illegal Settlements

2007-12-05T14:52:00.000-08:00

Israel has approved plans to build more than 300 new homes on Jewish settlement sites in occupied east Jerusalem, drawing quick Palestinian condemnations that the move will undermine peace talks.

The new housing is to expand the Har Homa settlement, built on land Israel seized near Jerusalem 40 years ago.

Construction of new Jewish settlements on occupied Palestinian territories was supposed to stop immediately as part of Israel's commitment to restarting peace efforts after the Annapolis conference.

Ahmed Qurei, the chief Palestinian negotiator, on Tuesday called it an "attempt to obstruct negotiations" after Israel's housing ministry said the government had invited construction firms to bid for contracts to build the dozens of houses and shops.

A spokesman for Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minster, insists the plan to build does not breach an undertaking at Annapolis to honour commitments under the 2003 "road map" to peace.

These include halting Jewish settlement on Arab land. But Israel does not view the site it calls Har Homa - and Palestinians call Abu Ghneim - as part of the West Bank territory Palestinians want for a state.

Saeb Erekat, a fellow Palestinian negotiator, said the administration of Mahmoud Abbas, the president, wrote to Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, and other capitals, noting that both sides agreed at Annapolis to US adjudication in disputes over the road map.

"This is a real test for all of us," he said. "We urge you to have the Israeli government revoke this order because it will be a severe blow to all those who took part in Annapolis."

A tender posted on the Israel Land Authority's website and dated December 2, invited firms to bid to build 307 "residential and/or commercial and/or hotels and/or leisure" units.

An Israeli housing ministry spokeswoman said it was part of a 20-year-old plan.

That annexation is not recognised internationally, but Israel has housed thousands of Jews in such developments, lying between East Jerusalem and Palestinian towns in the West Bank.

Abbas said at Annapolis he wanted East Jerusalem as capital of a state he hopes can be established by a treaty before Bush steps down.

Asked whether the new housing plan was a rebuff to Abbas's plans, Olmert's spokesman, Mark Regev, said: "Not at all.

"Israel makes a clear distinction between the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which falls under Israeli sovereignty."

But Nimer Hammad, an aide to Abbas, said: "It will undermine the credibility of the United States as a sponsor of the peace process and the effort of the Annapolis conference."

Bush hailed the success of the Annapolis meeting in seeing Abbas and Olmert agree to launch full peace negotiations after a seven-year stalemate. But few observers believe a deal can be clinched by the end-2008 target date embraced at the meeting.

Negotiators plan to meet in Jerusalem on December 12.

Core issues in dispute are the status of millions of Palestinian refugees, security, the borders of the new state and the fate of Jerusalem, which Israel wants, undivided, as its capital.

Addressing a sceptical domestic audience, Olmert has this week played down the importance of any deadline for ending talks and has stressed that Israel wants Abbas to make good on his road map commitments to curbing violence by Palestinian fighters before it signs any treaty.

As Halliburton CEO, Cheney Evaded Law To Do Business With Iran

2007-11-27T17:06:00.000-08:00

In an interview published yesterday with Fortune magazine's Nina Easton, Vice President Dick Cheney conceded that as Halliburton CEO, he had opposed unilateral sanctions on Iran, even though he now strongly supports them. Cheney explained that as a private sector official, he didn't have any responsibility to "worry about" the impact of his company's dealings with the country. What Cheney conveniently neglects to mention is that Halliburton evaded U.S. law in order to deal with Iran. The International Emergency Economic Powers Act authorizes the president to block transactions and freeze assets to deal with rogue nations. In 1995, President Clinton signed an executive order barring U.S. investment in Iran's energy sector. To evade U.S. law, Halliburton set up an offshore subsidiary that engaged in dealings with Iran. In 1996, Cheney blasted the Clinton administration for being "sanction-happy as a government." "The problem is that the good Lord didn't see fit to always put oil and gas resources where there are democratic governments," Cheney explained of his desire to do business with Iran. As the Bush administration now presses for tougher sanctions against Iran, Cheney should concede that Halliburton violated the spirit of the law and encourage other U.S. companies not to follow his lead.

Wal-Mart Extends Its Influence

2007-11-27T17:01:00.000-08:00

Wal-Mart Extends Its Influence to Washington [Washington Post]
"Wal-Mart is willing to spread its money wherever it thinks it can buy protection for its poor business practices," said David Nassar, executive director of Wal-Mart Watch.

Wal-Mart partners with opponents [United Press International]
Wal-mart's quest to improve its image means partnering with opponents the U.S. firm ignored just a few years ago, The Washington Post reported. One example is Wal-mart's partnership with Conservation International, which has joined with Wal-mart to oppose deforestation in Brazil, the Post reported.

WAL-MART FORCED TO REVEAL TAX DOCUMENTS IN NORTH CAROLINA

Wal-Mart Loses Bid To Seal Court Papers In State Tax Dispute [Wall Street Journal]
A North Carolina state judge rejected an attempt by Wal-Mart Stores Inc. to block public access to certain court documents in a tax dispute with state authorities. The retailer asked a state court in North Carolina last month to have some future filings in a prominent tax dispute case sealed from public view. The company's action followed a page-one article in The Wall Street Journal that detailed how Wal-Mart paid its outside auditor, Ernst & Young LLP, to design complex strategies to cut its state-tax bills.

Wal-Mart loses court papers bid in tax dispute [Reuters]
A North Carolina state judge rejected an attempt by Wal-Mart Stores Inc to block public access to certain court documents in a tax dispute with state authorities, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday in its online edition.

Judge: Wal-Mart can't seal filings in multimillion-dollar NC case [Fayetteville Observer (NC)]
Wal-Mart filed a lawsuit last year against the North Carolina Department of Revenue seeking an income tax refund of more than $30 million. The company said it was overcharged by the department, but state officials said Wal-Mart used tax shelters to obscure its true earnings in North Carolina.

A WAL-MART THANKSGIVING

What Do Wal-Mart's Employees Have to be Thankful For? [Huffington Post]
That do Wal-Mart's employees have to be thankful for this season? Perhaps not as much as they would like.

Windfalls Of War II

2007-11-19T13:28:00.000-08:00

The Center for Public Integrity has a follow up to its highly acclaimed 2003 Windfalls of War, which profiled U.S. contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan, their staff has worked to expose further information about what’s behind those contracts. Here’s a snapshot of what they learned in the new report, Windfalls of War II:

Government contracts – and the money behind them – are growing exponentially. U.S. government contracts for work in Iraq and Afghanistan have grown more than 50% annually, from $11 billion in 2004 to almost $17 billion in 2005 and more than $25 billion in 2006. Read more.

Missing contracts and a lack of serious scrutiny. While the dollar amounts and complexity of war-related contracting has been going up, oversight has been going down, according to the Government Accountability Office. Example: The Federal Procurement Data System does not include any of the millions of dollars in contracts originating in Baghdad. Read more.

Government contract allocations are hidden. The Center’s 2003 report was the first to show that Halliburton was the largest single contractor in Iraq. That is still true today—the former Halliburton subsidiary, KBR, Inc. (once known as Kellogg, Brown and Root) again earns the top spot among individual companies and subsidiaries. But that firm’s $16 billion is overshadowed by $20.4 billion in contracts that went to unidentifiable “foreign contractors,” representing about 45% of the money awarded to the top 100 contractors. Read more.

To read more about Windfalls of War II, please click here.

Arafat as a hero

2007-11-18T04:15:00.000-08:00

What is it about heroes that attracts and draws us? This week the Palestinians everywhere in their thousands remembered Yasser Arafat on his third death anniversary. Watching the milling crowds in the West Bank and elsewhere in the Occupied Territories, I ask myself this question.

Arafat was a hero and a great one at that. He was a giant among men. Abu Ammar, as he was popularly known, was the first and perhaps last Palestinian leader to unify and rally his people behind him like a rock-solid wall of resistance. It was his larger than life personality and unflinching idealism that helped turn Palestine into a global cause. Even those who did not agree with Arafat couldn’t help admire and respect him.

That includes the Islamists of Hamas, who were dead against the Oslo Peace Accord Arafat inked with the Israelis with the blessings of the Americans, but respected the late leader. It had less to do with the force of Arafat’s charismatic personality than the decisive role he had played in the Palestinian struggle. Like I wrote in an emotional full-page tribute three years ago the day Arafat died, the late leader was a Walking Palestine.

His whole life and struggle had been the chronicle of his people’s struggle during the past six decades. Few leaders, with the exception of Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela, have so powerfully and eloquently epitomised their people’s aspirations and rights. If you ever saw any of those fiery speeches by Arafat on television, you’d know what I mean. It’s thanks to the sheer magnetism of his personality that people like me, growing up in distant India, identified with the Palestinian cause. Not because I happen to be a Muslim. Many of my friends who didn’t share my faith admired Arafat. He was very close to Indian leaders and boisterously embraced the late Indira Gandhi, (he called her sister) whenever he visited India, which was often.

Today, the United States, never a big supporter, seems to have dumped the Palestinian cause. Instead, it’s always and unquestioning, reaching out to Israel. But then, like someone argued, a nation has no permanent friends and foes; only permanent interests. Arafat lived dangerously all his life pursuing the impossible dream of freedom for his people, driven and chased all over the Middle East and the world, from Egypt to Lebanon and from Tunis to Ramallah. But he remained a fighter, a mujahid, to the very last — never giving up on hope and never giving in to the occupation and all that it represented. More importantly, he refused to sell and surrender what belonged to his people — their dreams, their hopes, their aspirations and their right to their land.

Even when Israel made him a prisoner in his Ramallah headquarters. Even when he was repeatedly attacked by the mighty forces of Israel and eventually became a victim of its conspiracies. In the end, Arafat died without realising his dream of an independent Palestine. But that can’t take away from him the glory of his achievements as a leader. Not only the history of Palestinian struggle will always revolve around Abu Ammar but wherever and whenever people fight for freedom, they will always look up to Arafat. Arafat’s stature as a leader is all the more augmented by the pygmies who have succeeded him. But then every pretender to the greatness can’t be great.

It is the ability of ordinary men and women to rise above their extraordinary circumstances that makes them great. They are ordinary people of flesh and blood like me and you. What makes them extraordinary is their ability to rise and respond to extraordinary situations and challenges. It’s this quality that turns ordinary people into Gandhi, Mandela, Arafat and Aung San Suu Kyi. It’s this power that enables a frail old man — or naked fakir as Churchill contemptuously called him — bring the British empire to its knees. I was very young when Mandela completed 25 years in prison, which was more than my life then on earth. It fascinated me no end then how one could spend all his life behind the bars for one’s beliefs. But then this is why Mandela is a hero. He spent a total of 27 years in the Robin Island prison. Suu Kyi has spent nearly two decades as a prisoner in her own home, cut off from her family and rest of the world.

Both Mandela and Suu Kyi need not have gone through all this. Mandela could have chosen to live in freedom by ignoring what went on around him. Suu Kyi could have gone back to UK where her husband and children lived (her husband died of cancer in 1999 and she couldn’t attend his funeral). They could have chosen to compromise with their circumstances and go with the tide, as most of us do. But then this is what distinguishes great men and women from the rest of us. They swim against the current! What adds to Mandela and Suu Kyi’s stature is the fact that both remain untouched by the bitterness and unpleasantness of it all.

After his release in 1990, Mandela not only forgave his tormentors, the ruthless apartheid regime, he went on to heal the divide between the black and white South Africans. And Suu Kyi remains the picture of hope and optimism for a new Burma despite what she has gone through. Just look at her face. God’s angels couldn’t be more serene and dignified. We all need our heroes. They appeal to our good side, persuading us a fairer and better world is possible. They offer us hope to go on when we are weighed down by our own cynicism and mundane, existential issues.

So Martin Luther King Jr was a hero when he refused to accept the indignities heaped on his people. Buddha was a hero when he dumped the kingdom he had inherited for the kingdom of heaven. Moses was a hero when he challenged the Pharaoh leading his people to the promised land. Jesus was a hero when he chose to say the truth as it is and pay the ultimate price for it. In fact, all the prophets had been heroes of their people and times. Whether they were chosen by God for their greatness or they were great because they were the chosen ones hardly matters. What matters is they left the world a better place than the one they had inherited.

This is why, I think, the greatest hero of them all was the Last Prophet. Not because I believe in him; but because he combined and epitomised all the great qualities that we so admire and love in heroes. He was a complete hero and leader of the world in every sense of the term. No other individual has influenced and changed the world in such a short time. Muhammad Bin Abdullah, peace be upon him, was born an orphan and never learned how to read and write. He was 40 when the Quran was first revealed to him.

And when he died at the age of 63, the whole of Arabia and the two great empires of the day, Persia and Rome, lay at his feet. This was the most peaceful revolution in the world and he accomplished all this within two decades. What makes the Prophet of Islam truly great is his incredibly multifaceted personality. He was a Messenger of God, philosopher, warrior, noble friend, ideal husband and father, gracious host and a great leader of men. This is why Michael Hart picked up the unlettered man from Makkah to lead his list of hundred individuals who scripted history and changed the world. As Hart says in his book: The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History. “He was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels. It is this unparalleled combination of secular and religious influence which I feel entitles Muhammad to be considered the most influential single figure in human history.”

A world without heroes would be so dull. That’s why every age gets its share of extraordinary men and women. And here’s a man who remains a hero for all times – past, present and future.

Kerry Answers Wager to Debunk SBVT Smear

2007-11-16T17:08:00.000-08:00

Senator John Kerry wrote a letter to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth financer T. Boone Pickens, accepting his million dollar challenge to give $1 million to the person who proves wrong a single fact asserted by the right wing smear group. Kerry does not seek the million dollars for himself, but rather for the Paralyzed Veterans of America to help veterans returned home from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Pickens keynoted a dinner recently, sponsored by the American Spectator in Washington D.C., at which he announced that he would pay $1 million to anyone who could prove wrong a single allegation asserted by the so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth in 2004.

Now Kerry is taking Pickens up on his offer.

Please find the text of Kerry’s letter below:

T.Boone Pickens
8117 Preston Rd
Dallas TX 75225

Mr. Pickens,

It has come to my attention through the accounts of individuals who were in attendance at the American Spectator’s Robert L. Bartley Dinner & 40th Anniversary Gala as well as through the public accounts, that you personally “staked one million dollars” that “no one” could “prove anything the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth said in 2004 was false” (RedState.Com) and offered “a million dollars to anyone who could prove wrong anything the Swiftboat Veterans charged about Kerry.” (AmericanThinker.com)

I welcome the opportunity to prove that you are a man of your word and that the so-called “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth” lied. While I am prepared to show they lied on allegation after allegation, you have generously offered to pay one million dollars for just one thing that can be proven false. I am prepared to prove the lie beyond any reasonable doubt.

I would request that your check be made payable to the Paralyzed Veterans of America which is doing incredible work every day to meet the needs of veterans returned home from Iraq and Afghanistan. My hope is that by sending this money to such a dedicated organization – founded for veterans, by veterans – some good can come out of the ugly smears and lies of the orchestrated campaign you bankrolled in 2004 in an attempt to discredit my military record and the record of the men who served alongside me on the Swift Boats of the Mekong Delta.

Todays Cartoon

2007-11-16T02:48:00.000-08:00

Caught in More Lies: Kathleen Willey

2007-11-15T16:05:00.000-08:00

In a November 14 column discussing Kathleen Willey's new book Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton, Joseph Farah -- founder and editor of the right-wing news website WorldNetDaily -- asserted: "Many of us who crossed the Clintons -- whether it was because of what we wrote or whether it was because we didn't yield to unwanted sexual attacks -- feared for our lives as a result of winding up on their 'enemies list.' " He also claimed that "there were real-world consequences to being on the Clintons' enemies list," such as "losing jobs," "threats and harassment," "invasion of privacy," "break-ins and dead pets and flat tires," and "audits from the Internal Revenue Service." Farah added, "I am convinced, as is Willey, it could mean untimely death." Media Matters for America has documented numerous examples of media figures portraying the Clintons and their staff as ruthless and even violent.

In the book, Willey rehashes disproven conspiracy theories regarding former deputy White House counsel Vince Foster's 1993 suicide and suggests possible parallels between Foster's death and the suicide of her husband, Clinton fundraiser Ed Willey Jr., as well as the reported suicide attempt charged with fraud and violating campaign finance laws in California. World Ahead Publishing, which published Target, and WND Books, WorldNetDaily's publishing imprint, became partners in October 2006. Also, in an interview with WorldNetDaily discussed in a November 5 article, Willey asserted that she "[m]ost definitely" suspects that her husband was murdered and that she "ha[s] suspicions" the Clintons were involved. of Norman Hsu, a fundraiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) who was

Farah also asserted that Willey's book "is perhaps the best expose of the personal, moral bankruptcy of both Clintons" and claimed that the book showed that President Clinton is "capable of just about anything -- including rape." As Media Matters has noted, on the March 15, 1998, edition of CBS' 60 Minutes, Willey alleged that Bill Clinton fondled her against her will in 1993 during a private White House meeting in which she asked for a paid position in the administration. Clinton denied making any sexual advance toward Willey. As the report by independent counsel Robert Ray noted, "Because the alleged incident arose in an employment context, Judge Susan Webber Wright ruled the allegations could be explored during discovery in Jones [v. Clinton]," the lawsuit in which former Arkansas state employee Paula Jones claimed that Clinton sexually harassed her.

Ray's report, however, concluded that "Willey's Testimony to the Grand Jury About the Alleged Incident Differed Materially from Her Deposition Testimony Given in Jones v. Clinton," noting that Willey "said at her deposition ... that [Clinton] did not fondle her." Ray also found that Willey contradicted herself on whether she had told others about the alleged incident and asserted that Willey gave false information to the FBI.

2007-11-12T18:15:00.000-08:00

In 2006, Wal-Mart was responsible for $27 billion in U.S. imports from China and 11% of the growth of the total U.S. trade deficit with China between 2001 and 2006. Wal-Mart's trade deficit with China alone eliminated nearly 200,000 U.S. jobs in this period [Economic Snapshots, 6/27/07].

PUBLIC OPINION POLL: CONSUMERS SKEPTICAL OF WAL-MART'S NEW ADVERTISING

What Wal-Mart Savings Claim Doesn't Tell You [Advertising Age]
Consumers aren't buying Wal-Mart's new "Save Money. Live Better" ad campaign, according to a survey to be released today by Wal-Mart Watch, which found that only 4% of people believe that Wal-Mart saves the average family $2,500 annually.

LEE SCOTT HIGHEST PAID EXECUTIVE IN ARKANSAS

Wal-Mart , Alltel officers state’s highest-paid execs [Arkansas Democrat Gazette]
Four Wal-Mart employees were among the 10 highest-paid executives - H. Lee Scott at $ 23 million, John Menzer at $ 12. 2 million, Michael Duke at $ 10. 8 million and Eduardo Castro-Wright at $ 6. 5 million.

A Big Salary With a Big Stipulation: Share It [New York Times]
Some experts on philanthropy think that other companies should follow Bear Stearns’s model. "If you’re a corporation like Wal-Mart, think of what an impact that could make," said Peter Singer, a professor of bioethics at Princeton University.

WAL-MART'S HOLIDAY PROFIT OUTLOOK, HIRING RATES LOOKING BAD

Wal-Mart Earnings May Slow as Chief Scott Cuts Holiday Prices [Bloomberg News]
Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world's biggest retailer, may report its smallest profit increase in five quarters after Chief Executive Officer H. Lee Scott lowered prices to lure shoppers squeezed by rising gasoline costs and mortgage payments.

Holiday hiring time not joyful [Chicago Tribune]
Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the nation's biggest retailer, said it will employ between 20,000 and 25,000 seasonal workers nationally, half the number the company said it would hire last year.

Neoconservatives and International Relations

2007-11-12T04:01:00.000-08:00

With little notoriety, a major political storm is brewing over the ratification of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). On one side, an impressive coalition has formed, uniting the Bush administration, business groups, environmentalists, oil companies, a large bipartisan majority of U.S. senators, and 155 different nations under one tent. On the other side, a small contingent of knee-jerk isolationists is threatening to sink a seemingly non-controversial treaty that would "create a system for negotiating drilling, mining, and fishing rights." Revealing their core distrust of multilateralism, a familiar cadre of right-wing voices such as former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, neconservative hawk Frank Gaffney, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), and others are aggressively attempting to thwart passage of the UNCLOS treaty. "The opposition to the Law of the Sea is based entirely on a visceral hatred for multilateral cooperation," writes Scott Paul, deputy director of government relations for Citizens for Global Solutions. "Its champions detest all forms of international organization and believe the purpose of international law is to constrain U.S. behavior." The same far-right ideologues who have argued that the United States should feel unencumbered by international law to go to war, torture, and pollute are now raising their heads in opposition to the UNCLOS treaty. For that reason, the convention is the "the perfect issue for progressives to rally around," writes The American Prospect's Kate Sheppard, because "it reveals the outrage from the outer edges of the right for what it really is: anti-cooperative isolationism that is both unfounded in fact and counter to American interests." Moreover, winning the battle over the Law of the Sea is an important step toward restoring America's international reputation and paving the path for future international agreements on climate change, weapons proliferation, and a host of other issues.

THE NEED FOR UNCLOS: Beginning in 1973 and ending in 1982, representatives from 160 nations met regularly under U.N. auspices to "hash out concerns about military navigation rights, territorial boundaries, environmental protections, and use of the ocean's resources." The convention also established tribunals that would resolve disputes that might arise between nations' interpretation of their sea rights. Since 1982, the Law of the Sea has languished without U.S. ratification. But new leadership in the Senate has bolstered hopes of passage. Seventy percent of the earth's surface is covered by ocean, and the mission of UNCLOS is to preserve marine resources for future generations. The treaty binds all nations to protect the "marine environment, protect fish stocks, and prevent pollution with as much care as the U.S. does." Former Republican Secretaries of State James Baker and George Schultz write that the longer the United States delays ratification, the more it "compromises our nation's authority to exercise its sovereign interests, jeopardizes its national and economic security, and limits its leadership role in international ocean policy." The UNCLOS would help address such issues as the current scrambling over the Arctic's mineral and energy reserves, helping stave off military confrontations that could arise.

HELD CAPTIVE BY THE FAR RIGHT: The far right has engaged in hyperbolic misrepresentations and fear-mongering to rally the activist base against the treaty. CNN's right-wing pundit Glenn Beck characterized it as a "socialist, globalist, elitist" accord. Inhofe, who annually leads an effort to defund the United Nations, called it the "greatest raid on sovereignty" in his lifetime. Bolton has been lobbying lawmakers to oppose the treaty, despite the fact that just a couple of years ago, he repeatedly advocated for it. Gaffney has formed the Coalition to Preserve American Sovereignty, which is stoking fear in the right-wing base over the impact of a multi-national sea accord. Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-MS) has pledged his opposition, explaining, "I'm not going to get in a twit about what the Swiss or Belgians may think about us." Sens. John Sununu (R-NH), Norm Coleman (R-MN), and George Voinovich (R-OH), who all voted for the Law of the Sea in 2004, are now reconsidering their votes in a clear pander to the activists. Even the Republican presidential candidates are chiming in. "Let's stop the Law of Sea Treaty," former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) said recently at the Values Voters Summit, drawing an ovation from religious conservatives.

A TEST FOR PROGRESSIVES: The battle of the UNCLOS treaty is a defining issue for progressives, both because it reveals the failed unilateralist approach and restores the principles of global cooperation. "You have an agreement that's endorsed by a Republican president, the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Coast Guard, an overwhelming number of senators from both political parties, business groups, trade associations, and you already have 155 countries that are party to the treaty. It seems like if you can't get that through, I don't know what kind of treaty you can get through the Senate," said Spencer Boyer, director of international law and diplomacy for the Center for American Progress. Scott Paul, who has been spearheading the awareness campaign on the left, adds, "Winning the ratification battle would seriously de-fang the same pugnacious nationalists who are on the opposite side of almost every important foreign policy issue facing the U.S."

There They Go Again

2007-11-09T02:11:00.000-08:00

During the "Grapevine" segment of the November 6 edition of Fox News' Special Report, Fox News Washington managing editor and host Brit Hume asserted: "The Clintons' ability to withhold information from the public extends not just to the Clinton Presidential Library it seems, but also to the University of Arkansas library as well. Four enormous binders of data about the Clinton presidency -- and [Sen.] Hillary Clinton's [D-NY] role in it -- apparently will not be released to the public by the university library before next year's election." However, Hume provided no evidence of "[t]he Clintons' ability to withhold" from the public documents held by the University of Arkansas library. Indeed, as Hume later acknowledged: "The Clinton campaign says it has not had any contact with the University of Arkansas about delaying the release of the papers." In a November 6 ABCNews.com article on the papers, which Hume cited during his report, ABC News senior national correspondent Jake Tapper reported: " 'It's not a conspiracy,' [Tom] Dillard [head of the University of Arkansas Special Collections Department] told ABC News. No representative of the Clintons has been in touch with the Library, he said. 'No, absolutely not. No political campaign has been in touch with us. Nor have any individuals been in touch with us asking us to do anything different from what we would normally do.' "

Additionally, Hume claimed:

HUME: Last month, the library said the papers would not be made public until 2009 because they were not yet processed. But the library's annual report for '05-'06 says the processing is, quote, "nearing completion," and, one year later, the library newsletter said the Blair papers were, quote, "previously processed."

While Hume claimed that the university library's newsletter said the "papers were, quote, 'previously processed,' " the newsletter simply stated that university archivist Kerry Jones "previously processed the papers of the late Diane Blair." Tapper wrote that this "implied the job has been completed." However, Tapper also quoted Dillard saying: "All I can say is that was a preliminary estimation and neither of the collections that were reported on are finished, neither Blair nor Congressman Hutchinson's papers"; "They're just not ready."

The newsletter reported:

The Special Collections Department is gearing up to begin processing its largest manuscript collection, the papers of former U. S. Congressman John Paul Hammerschmidt. These records, more than 1,400 boxes of materials, document Hammerschmidt's 26-year tenure as the representative for Arkansas' third district, 1967-1993.

According to Timothy G. Nutt, the manuscripts and rare books librarian in the Special Collections Department, a staff of three processing archivists as well as an intern from the Honors College have been hired to process the collection. Leading the processing is Felicia Thomas, who previously worked on the papers of another former third-district congressman, Asa Hutchinson. Other processors are Kerry Jones, who previously processed the papers of the late Diane Blair, and Case Minor, a history graduate student. Will Puddephatt, an Honors College junior majoring in German and history, will serve as the project intern.

The library's '06-'07 annual report, which appears to cover the time period from June 30, 2006, to June 30, 2007, indicated that library staff worked on the Blair papers during that period:

The Libraries had the assistance of four Honors College interns this year in Special Collections. They assisted manuscript processors in working on various manuscript projects, including the Diane Blair Papers, the John Paul Hammerschmidt Papers, the Fay Jones Collection, the Larry Vonalt Papers, Cynthia Rodes Smith Correspondence, Henry and Katie Wood Collection, John M. Page Correspondence, the 20th Century Club Collection.

From the November 6 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume:

HUME: The Clintons' ability to withhold information from the public extends not just to the Clinton Presidential Library it seems, but also to the University of Arkansas library as well. Four enormous binders of data about the Clinton presidency -- and Hillary Clinton's role in it -- apparently will not be released to the public by the university library before next year's election.

ABC News reports the information was compiled by Clinton friend Diane Blair for a book, but Blair never wrote it and passed away in 2000. The Clintons have one copy of the papers, the other's at the university.

Last month, the library said the papers would not be made public until 2009 because they were not yet processed. But the library's annual report for '05-'06 says the processing is, quote, "nearing completion," and, one year later, the library newsletter said the Blair papers were, quote, "previously processed."

The Clinton campaign says it has not had any contact with the University of Arkansas about delaying the release of the papers.

OSHA Investigates Wal-Mart

2007-11-07T03:36:00.000-08:00

OSHA's Wal-Mart Investigation [BusinessWeek]

The Labor Dept.'s Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) has opened an investigation into a whistleblower complaint against Wal-Mart Stores (WMT). OSHA sent a letter to Chalace Epley Lowry, the employee involved, saying the agency is "notifying the party named in the complaint about the filing of the complaint" and "conducting an investigation into your allegations," according to a copy of the letter reviewed by BusinessWeek.

FINAL RESOLUTION: ROEHM, WAL-MART END BATTLE, RELEASE STATEMENTS

Wal-Mart ad executive drops lawsuit [Associated Press via BusinessWeek]
A former Wal-Mart Stores Inc. ad executive says she won't refile a breach-of-contract lawsuit against the company. She also acknowledged that allegations of ethical breaches she made in her original suit, which was dismissed, contained inaccuracies.
Wal-Mart, former exec call truce [CNN Money]
Fired ex-Wal-Mart marketing executive Julie Roehm and Wal-Mart have called a truce and dropped lawsuits against each other.
Statements of Roehm, Jacobs In Wal-Mart Employment Case [Wall Street Journal]
A spokesman for Julie Roehm issued the following statement today: In August, a Michigan judge dismissed Julie Roehm's lawsuit against Wal-Mart, honoring a provision in Ms. Roehm's contract that requires any lawsuit to be filed in Arkansas.
Ex-Executive of Wal-Mart Drops Suit on Severance [Associated Press via New York Times]
"I just decided not to pursue it," the executive, Julie Roehm, said yesterday by telephone. She would not elaborate beyond a prepared statement that her lawsuit had gone beyond her effort to recover $1.5 million in severance pay.
Battle Between Wal-Mart, Roehm Is Over [Advertising Age]
Nearly a year after it began, the fierce legal and public realtions battle between Wal-Mart and Julie Roehm appears to be at an end, with the embattled former marketing executive coming out of it having gained nothing.

Never Too Young

2007-11-02T02:06:00.000-07:00

TINY TOTS OPEN THEIR PIGGY BANKS TO CANDIDATES You're never too young to make a campaign contribution, according to the Federal Election Commission, and bundlers are capitalizing on this loophole more than ever this election cycle. Because the FEC has not set any age limit on donations and doesn't ask donors' ages, parents looking to give more than the $2,300 limit per election are breaking open their kids' piggy banks (or trust funds) and contributing more in their names, listing their occupation as "student" in most cases. Having given $2.9 million already in the first nine months of this year, students (many of whom are over 18 and eligible to vote) have surpassed the $2.8 million in contributions they gave to presidential candidates in the entire 2004 election cycle. Democrats are collecting 69 percent of the money. Hillary Clinton has collected the most from students -- at least $836,000.

*Read more about 3rd Quarter contributions from students, along with other Q3 observations: http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID=312

*Read the Washington Post article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/23/AR2007102301882.html

MILITARY CONTINUES TO GIVE TO PAUL, OBAMA:
Despite his anti-war stance, or perhaps because of it, Ron Paul has collected more money from members of the U.S. military than any other presidential candidate, including John McCain, a Vietnam War prisoner who backs the administration's policy in Iraq. Paul has brought in at least $53,670 from the uniformed services since the campaign's start, compared to McCain's $40,000. Democrat Barack Obama, who opposed the resolution to go to Iraq from the start, is the number-two recipient with at least $45,200. (Obama had been ahead of Paul after the 2nd Quarter.) The contribution record of the military has become less Republican since the Iraq war began, and some donors say they're contributing to express dissatisfaction with the Bush administration's handling of the war and foreign policy. Tallying donations exceeding $200, Democrats have received 35 percent of the total $319,000 in contributions from uniformed service members this year. By comparison, in 2000, the last presidential race before the Iraq war began, Democrats received only 18 percent of contributions from the military.

*Read a Capital Eye story from September about military giving: http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID=300

BATTLE OF THE SEXES:
Hillary Clinton, the lone woman in the presidential field, is bringing in more money from female donors than any other candidate. But she doesn't have the largest number of female donors. That distinction belongs to Democrat Barack Obama, who has so far collected money from at least 22,045 women giving more than $200, compared to Clinton's 17,539. (Only donors who give more than $200 are itemized in campaign finance reports, so it's impossible to determine a gender breakdown for smaller donors.) Clinton is nearly tied with Democrat Dennis Kucinich in the percentage of total funds coming from women -- about 44 percent for both of them. Among Republicans, a larger number of women have given to Mitt Romney than any other candidate in the party, 8,801 donors giving a total of $12.1 million, or about 32 percent of his total. But with about 35 percent of his funds from women, dropout Sam Brownback's receipts from females make up the largest percentage of his total compared to all other GOP candidates.

*Presidential contributors by gender: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/donordemCID_compare.asp?cycle=2008&cand1=N00000019&cand2=N00009638

The siege of Gaza is going to lead to a violent escalation

2007-11-01T14:59:00.000-07:00

Seumas Milne
Thursday November 1, 2007
The Guardian

There is, it seems, an unbridgeable gap between the western world's apparent recognition of the dangers of Palestinian suffering and its commitment to do anything whatever to stop it. This week the collective punishment of the people of Gaza reached a new level, as Israel began to choke off essential fuel supplies to its one and a half million people in retaliation for rockets fired by Palestinian resistance groups. A plan to cut power supplies has only been put on hold till the end of the week by the intervention of Israel's attorney general.

Both moves come on top of the existing blockade of Gaza imposed by Israel since last year's election of Hamas and the confiscation of hundreds of millions of dollars of taxes it is obliged to pass on as part of previous agreements. And instead of being restrained by the US or European Union, both have deepened the crisis by imposing their own sanctions and withdrawing aid. The result has, inevitably, been further huge increases in unemployment and poverty. But far from discouraging rocket attacks, they have risen sharply - though the ratio of Palestinian to Israeli deaths has been running at more than 30 to one, compared with four to one at the height of the intifada five years ago.

The UN's senior official in Gaza, Karen Koning-Abu Zayd, yesterday branded Israel's intensification of the Gaza siege as a violation of international law: despite its withdrawal two years ago, Israel continues to control all access to the Gaza Strip and remains the occupying power both legally and practically. Not that the situation is much better in the occupied West Bank. Despite the US and Israel's fatal backing for the Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas and his emergency government of a non-existent state, Israeli demolitions, land seizures, settlement expansion, assassinations, armed incursions, segregated road-building and construction of the land-grabbing separation wall continue apace in the territory where Abbas's nominal writ supposedly runs.

There are now 563 checkpoints in the West Bank, squeezing this already constricted piece of land into apartheid-style cantons, and making free movement or normal economic activity entirely impossible. All this is in contravention of international law; much of it directly violates UN security council resolutions, such as resolution 446 against Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. But, whereas the occupied people face sanctions and international isolation, the occupiers pay no penalty at all. On the contrary, they are aided and armed to the hilt by the US and its allies.

Given the speed at which Israel continues to create facts on the ground, it's no surprise that even Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, warned a few days ago that the "window for a two-state solution" could be closing. But it is of course her government that has underpinned this takeover at every stage. And having preached democracy as the salvation of the Middle East, the US and its allies demonstrated what that meant in practice when it greeted the winners of the Palestinian elections with a political and economic boycott.

Unless Hamas recognised Israel, renounced violence and signed up to agreements it had always opposed, the western powers insisted, the Palestinian electorate would be ignored. No such demands, needless to say, have been made of Israel. The US and Israel then went one step further, funding and arming a section of the defeated Fatah leadership in an attempt to overthrow Hamas's administration. When that failed, the US encouraged Abbas to impose an unconstitutional administration of his own and blocked any power-sharing with Hamas, which is the precondition for Palestinian advance.

Instead, the US is gearing up for a peace conference in Annapolis, Maryland, from which Hamas is excluded and which almost nobody believes offers any prospect of real progress towards a settlement. Its main appeal to the Bush administration is perhaps that it can be seen to be doing something about the Israel-Palestine conflict at a time when it needs to corral its Arab allies for the coming confrontation with Iran. For the Palestinians, it's maybe just as well that the Israeli government is resistant to any timetable for statehood - let alone serious negotiation on Jerusalem, refugees and final borders - as any agreement that such a weak leadership could now secure would not stand a chance of being accepted by its people.

Already, Hamas and the other non-Fatah Palestinian parties are preparing to stage their own conference in Damascus to coincide with the Annapolis jamboree. Their aim is to challenge the right of Abbas, who has never had any of the legitimacy of Yasser Arafat, to represent the Palestinian people in negotiations over its future. While they were prepared to accept him as a negotiator for a national unity government, there will be no acceptance of deals made by a figure many Palestinians now regard as simply operating under US and Israeli licence.

Nor should there be any interest in such a setup for anyone who wants to see a lasting settlement of the conflict. As in previous periods when political progress has been blocked, there are clear signs that pressures for a return to wider resistance are building up on the Palestinian side. The head of Israel's Shin Bet security service, Yuval Diskin, said on Monday that he did not expect a new intifada if Annapolis failed because the Palestinian public was "exhausted and lacks leadership". It's true that any new upsurge in violence is likely to be different from in the past. But Palestinians are also well aware that it was the first intifada that led to the Oslo agreement, for all its weaknesses, and the second intifada that triggered Sharon's withdrawal from Gaza.

Hamas has mostly held back from armed action against Israel in the past couple of years, though it has allowed attacks by others. That may be about to change. This week Israel's defence minister, Ehud Barak, declared that "every passing day brings us closer to a broad operation in Gaza", while Hamas leader Ahmad Nimr told a rally that the movement was now ready to "strike inside the heart of Israel, the occupation entity" if Israel did not stop its killings in Gaza. Hamas has a variety of options - including rocket attacks on Israeli cities from the West Bank over the much-vaunted security barrier - that could dramatically escalate the conflict. The wider international interest in a just settlement could not be more obvious.

Ann Coulter: The "irreligious" are "trying to stir up trouble with the religious"

2007-11-01T14:47:00.000-07:00

On the October 30 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, co-host Alan Colmes said to his guest, conservative author and pundit Ann Coulter: "I haven't spoken to you since you made your infamous comment saying that people like me need to be 'perfected,' " adding, "So how about embracing one of the great Christian virtues, as Jesus discussed, humility, and apologizing to all those people you offended by that comment?" Colmes was referring to Coulter's statement, documented by Media Matters for America, on the October 8 edition of CNBC's The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch that "we" Christians "just want Jews to be perfected." Responding to Colmes, Coulter stated: "[I]f you're going to go around citing all the people I have offended, Alan, I have 1,000 Orthodox rabbis supporting me." Later, Colmes asserted: "You claim 1,000 Orthodox rabbis support you. I don't know who they are, but I can tell you, you know the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Congress, and many others have condemned you for that. Do you care?" Coulter responded: "I wear it as a badge of honor. It's like citing the National Organization of Women to tell me how all women feel. The point is: This is the same old fight we see all the time with the irreligious trying to stir up trouble with the religious."

Coulter's response on Hannity & Colmes echoes remarks she made on the October 15 broadcast of Townhall Radio's The Michael Medved Show, where -- as Media Matters documented -- she claimed: "This is just the irreligious against the religious," while responding to criticism surrounding her comments on The Big Story. Coulter made a similar statement later that same evening on Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, as Media Matters also documented.

Coulter's assertion that "I have 1,000 Orthodox Jews supporting me" is an apparent reference to an October 15 article published on LifeSiteNews.com -- a "non-profit Internet service dedicated to issues of culture, life, and family" that "emphasizes the social worth of traditional Judeo-Christian principles" -- which quoted Rabbi Yehuda Levin, a spokesman for the Rabbinical Alliance for America and the Union of Orthodox Rabbis of the United States and Canada, saying: "She said nothing that in any way indicates anti-Semitism." The article characterized Levin as a "spokesman for some 1000 orthodox rabbis" and also quoted him as saying: "It is a fact that millions of Christians believe in evangelizing and preaching the gospel and it is their belief for a Jew to accept the tenets of Christianity and accept the divinity somehow completes them and brings them to perfection," and noted that "Levin stressed, 'That's obviously not our belief, that's not the traditional Jewish belief at all.'"

During the show, following Colmes' assertion that Coulter "doesn't want to own up to" her October 8 statement, Coulter said: "I gave a beautiful description of the Old Testament and the New Testament, but it's very frightening to secularists."

All American Wal-Mart

2007-10-31T14:41:00.000-07:00

WAL-MART WITHHELD IMPORTANT RECALL INFORMATION, CPSC SAYS

CPSC: Wal-Mart Recall Lacked Information [Associated Press via International Herald Tribune]
A federal consumer product watchdog agency said Tuesday that a unilateral recall of lead-tainted toy animals by Wal-Mart Stores Inc. lacked some information that consumers need, including how many toys were sold, when they were sold and at what other retailers.

LEGISLATORS CALL FOR CPSC HEAD'S RESIGNATION

Two legislators call for CPSC acting chair Nord to resign [MarketWatch]
Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown and Conneticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro, both Democrats, Tuesday called for the resignation of Nancy Nord, acting chairwoman of the Consumer Products Safety Commission.
House speaker wants product safety chief to go [Reuters]
The top Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives called on Tuesday for the nation's chief product safety regulator to resign, following a wave of recalls this year of millions of lead-tainted toys made in China.
CPSC head says she won't resign [Associated Press]
The head of the Consumer Product Safety Commission said Wednesday she won't heed Democratic lawmakers' calls for her resignation.

Israel Escalates Threats To Invade Gaza

2007-10-31T02:53:00.001-07:00

Israel has escalated threats to invade the Gaza Strip over Palestinian rocket fire after planned economic sanctions drew objections from legal experts and foreign powers.

Since occupation forces withdrew from Gaza in 2005, Israel has mounted regular raids and air strikes on the territory, but has failed to stop rocket fire over the border.

And Hamas's de facto rule of the strip since June, following infighting with rival Fatah, has only stoked calls in the Jewish state for a big military sweep.

Late on Tuesday, Israeli aircraft bombed a police station in southern Gaza, killing at least four Hamas policemen, hospital officials said.

The Israeli military confirmed its forces carried out the shelling in Abasan village, near the city of Khan Younis. An earlier air attack on the Jabalya refugee camp wounded six civilians, according to hospital sources.

Speaking to reporters earlier, Ehud Barak, Israel's defence minister, said: "Every passing day brings us closer to a broad operation in Gaza.

We are not looking forward to it [and] we would be happy if circumstances prevented it."

'Collective punishment'

Israel, which controls official Gazan border crossings, began reducing the amount of fuel pumped to Gaza this week. It also wants to reduce power supplies, but has put that on hold.

The sanctions, which were put together by Barak, prompted UN and EU delegates to urge Israel not to impose "collective punishment", illegal under international law, on Gaza's 1.5 million residents.

Israel's attorney-general also opposes cutting electricity supplies to Gaza on humanitarian grounds.

Britain said on Tuesday it was "deeply concerned" by reports that Israel had reduced Gaza's fuel supply and was considering electricity cuts, and had spoken to the Israeli government about the matter.

Makeshift Palestinian rockets have killed two Israelis this year.

Hamas has not claimed recent attacks, but Israel's military says Hamas is carrying out an arms build-up that will make it a serious fighting force.

Weighed against an invasion of Gaza is a US-organised peace conference in November between Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister, and Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, who affectively only rules the occupied West Bank.

While Olmert may want calm, he is also under pressure from right-wing coalition partners to hit Hamas hard.

Haim Ramon, Israel's vice prime minister, when asked about a possible Gaza invasion, said: "The present situation will not last."

"I prefer that we use sanctions. I believe that the implementation of sanctions will be effective. But we have our doubts about it."

In the interview with Reuters news agency, he added: "If they stop sending rockets over, our need for the weapons of sanctions, or other weapons, will not be an issue."