Go Jan Brewer!
- Thread starter Mags
- Start date
I am going to take a swing at this based on the climate in DC.
SHe is going to get a "Payoff" of some sorts likened to that of the LA Purchase or the Cornhusker Cornholing. Troops, equipment and money.
but Bill Clinton will be the buffer
SHe is going to get a "Payoff" of some sorts likened to that of the LA Purchase or the Cornhusker Cornholing. Troops, equipment and money.
but Bill Clinton will be the buffer
Question to Jan Brewer:
"Do you want comprehensive immigration reform"?
Answer:
I want the border secured first. Let's build a fence!
You go girl!
(Let's make it electrified also)
"Do you want comprehensive immigration reform"?
Answer:
I want the border secured first. Let's build a fence!
You go girl!
(Let's make it electrified also)
I see Jan Brewer lied about her father's service in WWII and is back pedaling as fast as she can - the ole I misremember, another lie. I also see Obama had to hold her hand and lead her through what should have been obvious to her.
Mags, two questions: Were you pushing for immigration reform any time in the last 30 years?
Do you trust Jan Brewer & Sen. McCain, having both flip floped more than once?
You also might want to look up what the federal government has done in the last 15 months, in Arizona. I know, Obama should have solved this by now, what the heck was he thinking?
Mags, two questions: Were you pushing for immigration reform any time in the last 30 years?
Do you trust Jan Brewer & Sen. McCain, having both flip floped more than once?
You also might want to look up what the federal government has done in the last 15 months, in Arizona. I know, Obama should have solved this by now, what the heck was he thinking?
1620: The First Illegal Immigrants Arrive at Plymouth Rock
Perhaps the Native Americans should have built a fence to keep us out.
Trench
..................................................................
I would rather have no brains than no fawking heart .
hmm that didnt come out right
<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rcLEfMhTkHs&rel=0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rcLEfMhTkHs&rel=0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>
Sir Paul McCartney's cheap shot aimed at former President George W. Bush at a White House event on Wednesday has prompted House Minority Leader John Boehner to demand an apology from the Beatle.
McCartney literally gushed over President Obama throughout his East Room concert. ?Getting this prize would just be good enough, but getting it from this president?? McCartney said letting his praise trail off as if there were vast volumes left unsaid.
The prize McCartney was given is the Gershwin Prize for Popular Song, a lifetime achievement award bestowed by the Library of Congress.
McCartney ended the evening taking a baseless cheap shot at former President George W. Bush.
?After the last eight years, it?s great to have a President who knows what a library is,? McCartney quipped.
When did decorum go out of style?
?Like millions of other Americans, I have always had a good impression of Paul McCartney and thought of him as a classy guy, but I was surprised and disappointed by the lack of grace and respect he displayed at the White House,? Boehner told HUMAN EVENTS. ?I hope he'll apologize to the American people for his conduct which demeaned him, the White House and President Obama.?
McCartney is the third recipient of the Gershwin Prize. Hailing from England and having earned no university degrees of his own, the Beatle may not know W. was the first American president to earn a master?s degree in business administration. (The fact the MBA is from Harvard really irks the left.) Not to mention Bush is married to a librarian.
Sir Paul McCartney's cheap shot aimed at former President George W. Bush at a White House event on Wednesday has prompted House Minority Leader John Boehner to demand an apology from the Beatle.
McCartney literally gushed over President Obama throughout his East Room concert. ?Getting this prize would just be good enough, but getting it from this president?? McCartney said letting his praise trail off as if there were vast volumes left unsaid.
The prize McCartney was given is the Gershwin Prize for Popular Song, a lifetime achievement award bestowed by the Library of Congress.
McCartney ended the evening taking a baseless cheap shot at former President George W. Bush.
?After the last eight years, it?s great to have a President who knows what a library is,? McCartney quipped.
When did decorum go out of style?
?Like millions of other Americans, I have always had a good impression of Paul McCartney and thought of him as a classy guy, but I was surprised and disappointed by the lack of grace and respect he displayed at the White House,? Boehner told HUMAN EVENTS. ?I hope he'll apologize to the American people for his conduct which demeaned him, the White House and President Obama.?
McCartney is the third recipient of the Gershwin Prize. Hailing from England and having earned no university degrees of his own, the Beatle may not know W. was the first American president to earn a master?s degree in business administration. (The fact the MBA is from Harvard really irks the left.) Not to mention Bush is married to a librarian.
Fidel Castro claims Obama lives in fantasy world
By WILL WEISSERT (AP) ? 2 days ago
HAVANA ? Fidel Castro speculated Wednesday that a nuclear strike on Iran might help President Barack Obama win a second term in the White House and also suggested the United States could attack North Korea.
The former leader of Cuba, who has not been seen in public for nearly four years, also portrayed the U.S. president as a victim of fantasies planted in his mind by sinister advisers.
The column published by Cuban state media floated the idea that a nuclear attack on Iran ? perhaps even without U.S. authorization ? might help Obama win re-election in 2012.
"Could Obama enjoy the emotions of a second presidential election without having the Pentagon or the State of Israel, whose conduct does not in the least obey the decisions of the United States, use nuclear weapons against Iran?" he asked. "How would life on our planet be after that?"
It's a question he did not answer, nor did he elaborate.
Castro also referred to "the current danger North Korea could be attacked by the United States" because of "the recent incident that happened in that country's waters" ? apparently a reference to allegations that North Korea attacked and sank a South Korean warship, killing 46 sailors.
Castro, 83, said China might be able to block such an attack by using its veto in the U.N. Security Council, implying that Washington was likely to seek that body's authorization before a move against North Korea.
The government of North Korea has denied involvement in the torpedo attack near the countries' sea border in March. During a visit to Seoul last month, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the North should face international consequences for the sinking.
Castro often has praised Obama in recent years, but painted him as a pawn of the global capitalist machine on Wednesday.
"President Obama can give hundreds of speeches, trying to reconcile contradictions that are irreconcilable ... dreaming of the magic of his well-articulated phrases," he wrote.
But Castro said Obama "makes concessions to personalities and groups totally lacking in ethics and draws fantasy worlds that only fit in his head and that unscrupulous advisers, knowing his tendencies, plant in his mind."
....................................................................
if Castro is pissed at Obama
he must be on the right track
:00hour
By WILL WEISSERT (AP) ? 2 days ago
HAVANA ? Fidel Castro speculated Wednesday that a nuclear strike on Iran might help President Barack Obama win a second term in the White House and also suggested the United States could attack North Korea.
The former leader of Cuba, who has not been seen in public for nearly four years, also portrayed the U.S. president as a victim of fantasies planted in his mind by sinister advisers.
The column published by Cuban state media floated the idea that a nuclear attack on Iran ? perhaps even without U.S. authorization ? might help Obama win re-election in 2012.
"Could Obama enjoy the emotions of a second presidential election without having the Pentagon or the State of Israel, whose conduct does not in the least obey the decisions of the United States, use nuclear weapons against Iran?" he asked. "How would life on our planet be after that?"
It's a question he did not answer, nor did he elaborate.
Castro also referred to "the current danger North Korea could be attacked by the United States" because of "the recent incident that happened in that country's waters" ? apparently a reference to allegations that North Korea attacked and sank a South Korean warship, killing 46 sailors.
Castro, 83, said China might be able to block such an attack by using its veto in the U.N. Security Council, implying that Washington was likely to seek that body's authorization before a move against North Korea.
The government of North Korea has denied involvement in the torpedo attack near the countries' sea border in March. During a visit to Seoul last month, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the North should face international consequences for the sinking.
Castro often has praised Obama in recent years, but painted him as a pawn of the global capitalist machine on Wednesday.
"President Obama can give hundreds of speeches, trying to reconcile contradictions that are irreconcilable ... dreaming of the magic of his well-articulated phrases," he wrote.
But Castro said Obama "makes concessions to personalities and groups totally lacking in ethics and draws fantasy worlds that only fit in his head and that unscrupulous advisers, knowing his tendencies, plant in his mind."
....................................................................
if Castro is pissed at Obama
he must be on the right track
:00hour
Muslim praise for Obama dries up a year after Cairo speech
? Thu Jun 3, 7:42 pm ET
CAIRO , Egypt_A year ago Friday, President Barack Obama stood in Cairo and vowed "a new beginning" in a speech about how he'd change U.S. relations with the Muslim world. Egyptian vendors sold T-shirts portraying Obama in King Tut regalia, and Muslims throughout the region thrilled at his middle name: Hussein.
Now, many Muslims in Egypt and the rest of the Middle East say they're dismayed that the promise of the speech has fizzled into U.S. policy-as-usual toward the region: civilian deaths in Afghanistan , an unstable Iraq , no pressure for reforms on Washington -friendly autocrats, no resolution for Guantanamo prisoners and no end in sight for the Israel-Palestinian conflict.
Israel's deadly raid in international waters on an aid flotilla en route to break the siege on Gaza - and Obama's tepid response, in comparison to the condemnation of other world leaders - cemented perceptions for many of unconditional U.S. support for Israel . Some Arab commentators and bloggers said Obama no longer deserves his Nobel Peace Prize.
"His speech at Cairo University was wonderful and raised hopes that America was on a real path to changing its policies," said Hassan Nafaa , a political science professor at Cairo University , where Obama spoke. "But Obama's practices afterwards guaranteed that he is weaker than he seemed during his speech."
Gallup surveys conducted between February and April of this year showed a dramatic decline in Arab countries' approval ratings of the U.S. administration. In Egypt , where he delivered the speech, the poll showed that Obama's popularity dropped by 18 percentage points. While some Middle Easterners said it was unfair to judge the president so early on issues that have persisted for decades, others said they definitely expected more in the year since his oratory olive branch to Muslims.
"There were a lot of illusions about Obama because he has African and Muslim roots," said Aya Mahmoud , 22, a student at Cairo University . "Turns out the speech was all just hype."
The White House is well aware of the level of frustration in the region, having monitored U.S. policy steps since the Cairo speech as well as how Muslims in the United States and abroad perceive those efforts.
Consulates and U.S. embassies in various countries held roundtables for months after the Cairo speech and forwarded input through the State Department . The White House's Office of Public Engagement has sought input from American Muslims. The administration monitors overseas press and international polling.
Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes told McClatchy that roughly once a month, Obama also asks his staff specifically for Cairo updates, to monitor progress.
"He said, 'I want to make sure that I'm keeping promises I made in this speech.' He's said that to me, to several of us, repeatedly," Rhodes said. "He knew this would raise expectations and an ambitious series of goals. We knew what we were getting into."
So far, Rhodes conceded, "We've made progress on some issues. We obviously have a lot further to go as well."
Rhodes touts being on target to remove combat troops from Iraq this year and reshaping U.S. rhetoric on Iran and Al Qaida so as not to emphasize the Muslim religion. He also said the administration has expanded education, science, business and technology outreach with Muslim nations as promised.
The centerpiece of Muslim grievances remains the longstanding Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which was exacerbated by Israel's continued construction of settlements on Palestinian lands, a key obstacle for progress on peace negotiations.
Obama also wants more progress between Israelis and Palestinians, Rhodes said, but believes he has made inroads and is committed to the effort.
"None of us expected we'd resolve it within a year of the Cairo speech," Rhodes said. Obama "doesn't give up on things he really cares about, and this is one of those things."
Rhodes said Obama remains committed to closing Guantanamo , a symbol of mistreatment for many Muslims, but couldn't give a deadline.
The fatal Gaza flotilla confrontation has only hardened many Muslims' anger toward Israel . Obama's been "too tolerant," said Diaa Rashwan , an analyst at the Cairo -based Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies , a state-backed research institute.
"The American administration's response was in no way appropriate" Rashwan said. "It did not show its other allies how much they cherish their relations. If the situation were reversed and Turkey had attacked Israel , the American response would not have been so passive."
Rhodes defended the White House stance. "There is no zero-sum equation as it relates to America's support for Israel and its security, and our outreach to the Muslim world and our support for Palestinian aspirations," he said.
The administration also continues to support the autocratic rulers in Egypt , Jordan and the Gulf countries, a fact widely noted by Arab commentators. In Central Asia , U.S.-led military operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan have killed Muslim civilians, drumming up support for militants.
In Cairo , Obama pledged "to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear." But many Muslims abroad feel that religious discrimination persists. Even the crowning of a Miss USA of Muslim and Arab descent - at first cheered on by fans in the Middle East - turned sour when the beauty queen was accused of having ties to the Hezbollah militant group.
May Meneisy, 21, a political science senior at Cairo University , was in the audience for Obama's appearance last year and recalled him as "charismatic and strong." She said there were more student exchange programs and intercultural dialogues - the West was once again interested in Egypt and other parts of the region.
"Unfortunately, this shift did not occur on the political level as well."
..............................................................
now the muslims are pissed at Obama
imagine that
:00hour
? Thu Jun 3, 7:42 pm ET
CAIRO , Egypt_A year ago Friday, President Barack Obama stood in Cairo and vowed "a new beginning" in a speech about how he'd change U.S. relations with the Muslim world. Egyptian vendors sold T-shirts portraying Obama in King Tut regalia, and Muslims throughout the region thrilled at his middle name: Hussein.
Now, many Muslims in Egypt and the rest of the Middle East say they're dismayed that the promise of the speech has fizzled into U.S. policy-as-usual toward the region: civilian deaths in Afghanistan , an unstable Iraq , no pressure for reforms on Washington -friendly autocrats, no resolution for Guantanamo prisoners and no end in sight for the Israel-Palestinian conflict.
Israel's deadly raid in international waters on an aid flotilla en route to break the siege on Gaza - and Obama's tepid response, in comparison to the condemnation of other world leaders - cemented perceptions for many of unconditional U.S. support for Israel . Some Arab commentators and bloggers said Obama no longer deserves his Nobel Peace Prize.
"His speech at Cairo University was wonderful and raised hopes that America was on a real path to changing its policies," said Hassan Nafaa , a political science professor at Cairo University , where Obama spoke. "But Obama's practices afterwards guaranteed that he is weaker than he seemed during his speech."
Gallup surveys conducted between February and April of this year showed a dramatic decline in Arab countries' approval ratings of the U.S. administration. In Egypt , where he delivered the speech, the poll showed that Obama's popularity dropped by 18 percentage points. While some Middle Easterners said it was unfair to judge the president so early on issues that have persisted for decades, others said they definitely expected more in the year since his oratory olive branch to Muslims.
"There were a lot of illusions about Obama because he has African and Muslim roots," said Aya Mahmoud , 22, a student at Cairo University . "Turns out the speech was all just hype."
The White House is well aware of the level of frustration in the region, having monitored U.S. policy steps since the Cairo speech as well as how Muslims in the United States and abroad perceive those efforts.
Consulates and U.S. embassies in various countries held roundtables for months after the Cairo speech and forwarded input through the State Department . The White House's Office of Public Engagement has sought input from American Muslims. The administration monitors overseas press and international polling.
Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes told McClatchy that roughly once a month, Obama also asks his staff specifically for Cairo updates, to monitor progress.
"He said, 'I want to make sure that I'm keeping promises I made in this speech.' He's said that to me, to several of us, repeatedly," Rhodes said. "He knew this would raise expectations and an ambitious series of goals. We knew what we were getting into."
So far, Rhodes conceded, "We've made progress on some issues. We obviously have a lot further to go as well."
Rhodes touts being on target to remove combat troops from Iraq this year and reshaping U.S. rhetoric on Iran and Al Qaida so as not to emphasize the Muslim religion. He also said the administration has expanded education, science, business and technology outreach with Muslim nations as promised.
The centerpiece of Muslim grievances remains the longstanding Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which was exacerbated by Israel's continued construction of settlements on Palestinian lands, a key obstacle for progress on peace negotiations.
Obama also wants more progress between Israelis and Palestinians, Rhodes said, but believes he has made inroads and is committed to the effort.
"None of us expected we'd resolve it within a year of the Cairo speech," Rhodes said. Obama "doesn't give up on things he really cares about, and this is one of those things."
Rhodes said Obama remains committed to closing Guantanamo , a symbol of mistreatment for many Muslims, but couldn't give a deadline.
The fatal Gaza flotilla confrontation has only hardened many Muslims' anger toward Israel . Obama's been "too tolerant," said Diaa Rashwan , an analyst at the Cairo -based Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies , a state-backed research institute.
"The American administration's response was in no way appropriate" Rashwan said. "It did not show its other allies how much they cherish their relations. If the situation were reversed and Turkey had attacked Israel , the American response would not have been so passive."
Rhodes defended the White House stance. "There is no zero-sum equation as it relates to America's support for Israel and its security, and our outreach to the Muslim world and our support for Palestinian aspirations," he said.
The administration also continues to support the autocratic rulers in Egypt , Jordan and the Gulf countries, a fact widely noted by Arab commentators. In Central Asia , U.S.-led military operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan have killed Muslim civilians, drumming up support for militants.
In Cairo , Obama pledged "to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear." But many Muslims abroad feel that religious discrimination persists. Even the crowning of a Miss USA of Muslim and Arab descent - at first cheered on by fans in the Middle East - turned sour when the beauty queen was accused of having ties to the Hezbollah militant group.
May Meneisy, 21, a political science senior at Cairo University , was in the audience for Obama's appearance last year and recalled him as "charismatic and strong." She said there were more student exchange programs and intercultural dialogues - the West was once again interested in Egypt and other parts of the region.
"Unfortunately, this shift did not occur on the political level as well."
..............................................................
now the muslims are pissed at Obama
imagine that
:00hour
I can't figure out who is more "mentally challenged"--these clueless movie stars or those that take anything they say at face value.
You have the grift above-
The fact of the matter--
Last week we told you here on the grapevine about Karl Rove's annual reading competition with Mr. Bush. Rove wrote in The Wall Street Journal that in 2006 the president read 95 books, and 51 in 2007, along with reading the bible cover to cover each year.
It's not clear how many of the books came from a library. :SIB
I'd wager--"W" has read more books than all 4 beatles--"H" and all his brothers and sisters--combined
listen DTBlackgumby
reading 95 books is one thing
comprehension is something totally differant
doogy duh
kinda like you're understanding of what you read
I think that would be a fair analysis.
reading 95 books is one thing
comprehension is something totally differant
doogy duh
kinda like you're understanding of what you read
I think that would be a fair analysis.
Reports accuse WHO of exaggerating H1N1 threat, possible ties to drug makers
By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 4, 2010; 3:52 PM
European criticism of the World Health Organization's handling of the H1N1 pandemic intensified Friday with the release of two reports that accused the agency of exaggerating the threat posed by the virus and failing to disclose possible influence by the pharmaceutical industry on its recommendations for how countries should respond.
The WHO's response caused widespread, unnecessary fear and prompted countries around the world to waste millions of dollars, according to one report. At the same time, the Geneva-based arm of the United Nations relied on advice from experts with ties to drug makers in developing the guidelines it used to encourage countries to stockpile millions of doses of antiviral medications, according to the second report.
The reports outlined the drumbeat of criticism that has arisen, primarily in Europe, of how the world's leading health organization responded to the first influenza pandemic in more than four decades.
"For WHO, its credibility has been badly damaged," wrote Fiona Godlee, the editor of the BMJ, a prominent British medical journal, that published one of the reports. "WHO must act now to restore its credibility."
A spokesman for the WHO, along with several independent experts, however, strongly disputed the reports, saying they misrepresented the seriousness of the pandemic and the WHO's response, which was carefully formulated and necessary given the potential threat.
"The idea that we declared a pandemic when there wasn't a pandemic is both historically inaccurate and downright irresponsible," said WHO spokesman Gregory Hartl in a telephone interview. "There is no doubt that this was a pandemic. To insinuate that this was not a pandemic is very disrespectful to the people who died from it."
The first report, released in Paris, came from the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, which launched an investigation in response to allegations that the WHO's response to the pandemic was influenced by drug companies that make antiviral drugs and vaccines.
"The parliamentary assembly is alarmed about the way in which the H1N1 influenza pandemic has been handled, not only by the World Health Organization (WHO), but also by the competent health authorities at the level of the European Union and at national level," the 18-page draft report states.
"It is particularly troubled by some of the consequences of decisions taken and advice given leading to distortion of priorities of public health services across Europe, waste of large sums of public money, and also unjustified scares and fears about health risks faced by the European public at large," according to the report.
The second report, a joint investigation by the BMJ and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which is based in London, criticized 2004 guidelines the WHO developed based in part on the advice of three experts who received consulting fees from the two leading manufacturers of antiviral drugs used against the virus, Roche and GlaxoSmithKline.
"We are left wondering whether major public health organizations are able to effectively manage the conflicts of interest that are inherent in medical science," the report states.
Hartl dismissed those charges.
"WHO would say categorically that it believes that it has not been subject to undue conflict-of-interest. We know that some experts that come to our committees have contact with industry. It would be surprising if they didn't because the best experts are sought by all organizations," Hartl said. "We feel that the guidelines produced were certainly not subject to undue influence."
Several other experts also defended the agency.
"Twenty-twenty hindsight can always second guess the decisions of public health officials," said Jeffrey Levi, executive director of the Trust for America's Health, a private nonprofit group. "But this kind of condemnation of public health officials who made the most prudent decisions based on available knowledge could well backfire in future emergencies: I fear that public health officials will draw the lesson that they should wait for greater scientific certainty before responding in the future -- and we could pay for that overcaution with many lives lost."
In response to the criticism, the WHO has launched two investigations, including one by an independent panel of experts led by Harvey Fineberg, who heads the Institute of Medicine at the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.
"These reports raise questions about potential, inappropriate influences on WHO decision-making in the assessment and response to the 2009 H1N1 pandemic and, more generally, question practices employed by WHO to guard against conflict of interest among its expert advisers," Fineberg said in an e-mail. "These topics are among those that will be fully considered by our review committee."
.................................................................
WHO the fawk can we even trust anymore.
money grubbing rat bastids
glad I didnt fall for it . no flue shots for my family
By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 4, 2010; 3:52 PM
European criticism of the World Health Organization's handling of the H1N1 pandemic intensified Friday with the release of two reports that accused the agency of exaggerating the threat posed by the virus and failing to disclose possible influence by the pharmaceutical industry on its recommendations for how countries should respond.
The WHO's response caused widespread, unnecessary fear and prompted countries around the world to waste millions of dollars, according to one report. At the same time, the Geneva-based arm of the United Nations relied on advice from experts with ties to drug makers in developing the guidelines it used to encourage countries to stockpile millions of doses of antiviral medications, according to the second report.
The reports outlined the drumbeat of criticism that has arisen, primarily in Europe, of how the world's leading health organization responded to the first influenza pandemic in more than four decades.
"For WHO, its credibility has been badly damaged," wrote Fiona Godlee, the editor of the BMJ, a prominent British medical journal, that published one of the reports. "WHO must act now to restore its credibility."
A spokesman for the WHO, along with several independent experts, however, strongly disputed the reports, saying they misrepresented the seriousness of the pandemic and the WHO's response, which was carefully formulated and necessary given the potential threat.
"The idea that we declared a pandemic when there wasn't a pandemic is both historically inaccurate and downright irresponsible," said WHO spokesman Gregory Hartl in a telephone interview. "There is no doubt that this was a pandemic. To insinuate that this was not a pandemic is very disrespectful to the people who died from it."
The first report, released in Paris, came from the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, which launched an investigation in response to allegations that the WHO's response to the pandemic was influenced by drug companies that make antiviral drugs and vaccines.
"The parliamentary assembly is alarmed about the way in which the H1N1 influenza pandemic has been handled, not only by the World Health Organization (WHO), but also by the competent health authorities at the level of the European Union and at national level," the 18-page draft report states.
"It is particularly troubled by some of the consequences of decisions taken and advice given leading to distortion of priorities of public health services across Europe, waste of large sums of public money, and also unjustified scares and fears about health risks faced by the European public at large," according to the report.
The second report, a joint investigation by the BMJ and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which is based in London, criticized 2004 guidelines the WHO developed based in part on the advice of three experts who received consulting fees from the two leading manufacturers of antiviral drugs used against the virus, Roche and GlaxoSmithKline.
"We are left wondering whether major public health organizations are able to effectively manage the conflicts of interest that are inherent in medical science," the report states.
Hartl dismissed those charges.
"WHO would say categorically that it believes that it has not been subject to undue conflict-of-interest. We know that some experts that come to our committees have contact with industry. It would be surprising if they didn't because the best experts are sought by all organizations," Hartl said. "We feel that the guidelines produced were certainly not subject to undue influence."
Several other experts also defended the agency.
"Twenty-twenty hindsight can always second guess the decisions of public health officials," said Jeffrey Levi, executive director of the Trust for America's Health, a private nonprofit group. "But this kind of condemnation of public health officials who made the most prudent decisions based on available knowledge could well backfire in future emergencies: I fear that public health officials will draw the lesson that they should wait for greater scientific certainty before responding in the future -- and we could pay for that overcaution with many lives lost."
In response to the criticism, the WHO has launched two investigations, including one by an independent panel of experts led by Harvey Fineberg, who heads the Institute of Medicine at the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.
"These reports raise questions about potential, inappropriate influences on WHO decision-making in the assessment and response to the 2009 H1N1 pandemic and, more generally, question practices employed by WHO to guard against conflict of interest among its expert advisers," Fineberg said in an e-mail. "These topics are among those that will be fully considered by our review committee."
.................................................................
WHO the fawk can we even trust anymore.
money grubbing rat bastids
glad I didnt fall for it . no flue shots for my family
Claim: Ellen being gay hurt 'Idol' ratings
A Christian news site is making headlines by claiming Ellen DeGeneres is responsible for the ratings erosion of Fox's "American Idol."
Christian Newswire director Gary McCullough says the sexual orientation of the newest "Idol" judge was the reason "Idol" ratings were down about 9% this season.
McCullough said he predicted that "Idol" ratings would drop after DeGeneres was announced as a judge and says Fox has paid the price:
"At this moment in entertainment history, network television is on a pro-homosexuality bender," McCullough wrote. "The producers of 'American Idol' chose to be a part of this push; it was a huge mistake. The consequences of this choice were a drop in market share and a reduction in advertising dollars ... it actually drives away a significant market share of parents and teens who used to watch the show together, until mom and dad decided that the subtle promotion of an 'alternate lifestyle' to their kids was not worth the entertainment trade off."
"Perhaps next we will see the pro-pedophilia group NAMBLA use its influence in Hollywood to have 'Dancing with the Stars' seat Roman Polanski as a judge," he added.
....................................................................
of course it had nothing to do with the reduced talent or Simon leaving after this year.
Ellen is gay and responsible :142smilie
A Christian news site is making headlines by claiming Ellen DeGeneres is responsible for the ratings erosion of Fox's "American Idol."
Christian Newswire director Gary McCullough says the sexual orientation of the newest "Idol" judge was the reason "Idol" ratings were down about 9% this season.
McCullough said he predicted that "Idol" ratings would drop after DeGeneres was announced as a judge and says Fox has paid the price:
"At this moment in entertainment history, network television is on a pro-homosexuality bender," McCullough wrote. "The producers of 'American Idol' chose to be a part of this push; it was a huge mistake. The consequences of this choice were a drop in market share and a reduction in advertising dollars ... it actually drives away a significant market share of parents and teens who used to watch the show together, until mom and dad decided that the subtle promotion of an 'alternate lifestyle' to their kids was not worth the entertainment trade off."
"Perhaps next we will see the pro-pedophilia group NAMBLA use its influence in Hollywood to have 'Dancing with the Stars' seat Roman Polanski as a judge," he added.
....................................................................
of course it had nothing to do with the reduced talent or Simon leaving after this year.
Ellen is gay and responsible :142smilie
U.S. concerned by case of jailed Kuwaiti blogger
Buzz up!0 votes Send
WASHINGTON (Reuters) ? The U.S. State Department said on Thursday it had concerns about the case of a Kuwaiti blogger on trial for allegedly insulting Kuwait's head of state and had raised the matter with the Kuwaiti government.
Separately, the sister of blogger and journalist Mohammad Abdul-Kader al-Jassem said the charges against him were political and called for his release.
Al-Jassem, who faces up to 18 years in prison if convicted according to his lawyers, was detained on May 11 after a complaint against him was issued by the office of Kuwait's Emir Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah.
"We are concerned about this case and have raised our concerns with the government of Kuwait," U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley told Reuters.
"The ability of citizens and journalists of any country to freely and vigorously discuss, debate and critique the actions of governments does not threaten national interests," he added. "It ... makes governments better and more accountable."
Al-Jassem is also accused of spreading false news that could harm Kuwait's national interests.
His trial opened on May 24 and the court banned Kuwaiti media from publishing reports about the case.
Kuwait, the world's fourth-largest oil exporter, has the freest press among Gulf Arab states but its ruler is protected from criticism by the constitution. Many writers have been fined or imprisoned for defamation.
"We demand his release and the dropping of all charges against him," his sister Sabiha Abdul-Kader al-Jassem told Reuters during a visit to London. "The charges are all political because of his criticism of the government."
She added: "What I want to say to the world is that Mohammad Abdul-Kader al-Jassem is a lawyer and author ... and cannot in any way break the law in anything he does or writes. He practiced his right, the right we in Kuwait have been used to, freedom of expression, freedom to write, freedom to publish."
Sabiha Abdul-Kader al-Jassem said she was dismayed at the lack of tolerance of free speech in her country.
"We are astonished at what is happening because we grew up not having these kinds of detentions ... we grew up with freedom of expression," she said.
Sabiha Abdul-Kader al-Jassem, a retired planning official, said her brother's criticism of the government on his website and in several books was motivated by a love of his country, not designed to campaign for a change of regime.
On his website, he criticized the ruling al-Sabah family and accused Prime Minister Nasser al-Mohammad al-Sabah of mismanagement and corruption.
In April, he was sentenced to six months in prison for defaming the prime minister, but the court suspended the sentence pending an appeal. Two other cases against him are being heard in courts.
The blogger went on a hunger strike in protest against his detention, but health concerns forced him to end it. His sister said he had open-heart surgery in 1992 and had undergone other cardiac treatment since then.
...................................................................
DTBlackgumby
good thing you dont live in Kuwait
you would have been jailed 50 months ago
:142smilie
Buzz up!0 votes Send
WASHINGTON (Reuters) ? The U.S. State Department said on Thursday it had concerns about the case of a Kuwaiti blogger on trial for allegedly insulting Kuwait's head of state and had raised the matter with the Kuwaiti government.
Separately, the sister of blogger and journalist Mohammad Abdul-Kader al-Jassem said the charges against him were political and called for his release.
Al-Jassem, who faces up to 18 years in prison if convicted according to his lawyers, was detained on May 11 after a complaint against him was issued by the office of Kuwait's Emir Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah.
"We are concerned about this case and have raised our concerns with the government of Kuwait," U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley told Reuters.
"The ability of citizens and journalists of any country to freely and vigorously discuss, debate and critique the actions of governments does not threaten national interests," he added. "It ... makes governments better and more accountable."
Al-Jassem is also accused of spreading false news that could harm Kuwait's national interests.
His trial opened on May 24 and the court banned Kuwaiti media from publishing reports about the case.
Kuwait, the world's fourth-largest oil exporter, has the freest press among Gulf Arab states but its ruler is protected from criticism by the constitution. Many writers have been fined or imprisoned for defamation.
"We demand his release and the dropping of all charges against him," his sister Sabiha Abdul-Kader al-Jassem told Reuters during a visit to London. "The charges are all political because of his criticism of the government."
She added: "What I want to say to the world is that Mohammad Abdul-Kader al-Jassem is a lawyer and author ... and cannot in any way break the law in anything he does or writes. He practiced his right, the right we in Kuwait have been used to, freedom of expression, freedom to write, freedom to publish."
Sabiha Abdul-Kader al-Jassem said she was dismayed at the lack of tolerance of free speech in her country.
"We are astonished at what is happening because we grew up not having these kinds of detentions ... we grew up with freedom of expression," she said.
Sabiha Abdul-Kader al-Jassem, a retired planning official, said her brother's criticism of the government on his website and in several books was motivated by a love of his country, not designed to campaign for a change of regime.
On his website, he criticized the ruling al-Sabah family and accused Prime Minister Nasser al-Mohammad al-Sabah of mismanagement and corruption.
In April, he was sentenced to six months in prison for defaming the prime minister, but the court suspended the sentence pending an appeal. Two other cases against him are being heard in courts.
The blogger went on a hunger strike in protest against his detention, but health concerns forced him to end it. His sister said he had open-heart surgery in 1992 and had undergone other cardiac treatment since then.
...................................................................
DTBlackgumby
good thing you dont live in Kuwait
you would have been jailed 50 months ago
:142smilie
I'm shocked !
She's gay ? I never knew :0004
Who the fuck cares what this jack ass has to say, really? He's a fucking singer, big deal, If Barry O'Soetero had some balls, well he would have to ask Michelle first, he would say something about some fucking Euro Trash asshole bashing a former President. Like Gee Wiz or not, Paul certainly isn't a picture of pureness ya think ?
Oh no, Illuminati bashed the sacred cow ! A knighted citizen of the U.K. BFD ! SHow some class Sir Paul
................................................................
I think he showed alot of class
He is the beatles
free ride for Paul
pretty smart about Bush too
