Burials at Sea... etc.!
For sale: macabre relics of Titanic disaster

By Tim McLaughlin Fri Jun 22, 3:38 PM ET

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Hand-written accounts of the Titanic disaster's aftermath go on sale next week, including log entries describing how bodies of passengers who drowned were buried at sea with 50-pound (23-kg) weights attached.

A Christie's auction of memorabilia from various ocean liners is expected to draw up to $1 million.

Thursday's sale in New York will feature haunting reminders of the RMS Titanic, which sank in 1912 on its maiden voyage after striking an iceberg. Its deck chairs are not in the auction.

Gregg Dietrich, a Christie's vice president and maritime specialist, acknowledged the sale will have a grim side because some items detail the disaster's recovery operations.

"24 unidentified bodies committed to the deep. The Rev. Canon Hind officiating at burial service," can be read in pencil notations in a deck log from the MacKay-Bennett, the second rescue ship on the scene. "Attached 50-lb weight to each."

The deck log from the MacKay-Bennett is expected to bring $30,000 to $50,000, Christie's estimates.

Dietrich said interest in the Titanic persists nearly a century after it sank, partly because of the "grandiose proclamations" about its design and engineering.

"And it was the first disaster that was communicated worldwide by radio," Dietrich said.

The supposedly unsinkable ship sank quickly, leaving behind 360 bodies that were recovered. Of more than 2,200 people on board, around 700 survived.

The auction also will include an eight-page hand-written account of the disaster by survivor Laurie M. Cribb, a New Jersey native whose father perished.

A teenager at the time, Cribb's account details the moment the ship hit the iceberg, the chaotic evacuation, her separation from her father and watching the Titanic's lights go out.

"Most terrible shrieks and groans from the helpless and doomed passengers who were left on the wreck of the great ship," Cribb wrote.

Forcing people to think for themselves and direct their own destinies? Hasn't worked very well so far!
Why can't NATO go global, key U.S. lawmaker asks

By Susan Cornwell Fri Jun 22, 4:43 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - NATO should seriously consider expanding into a global alliance including democratic countries such as Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Israel, a senior member of Congress said on Friday.

Rep. Tom Lantos, a California Democrat, noted some non-member countries have carried big responsibilities as partners with the 26-nation North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Australia, for example, was one of the first to commit troops to the U.S.-led campaign in Afghanistan to oust the Taliban and hunt down al Qaeda after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.

"Would it not make the (NATO) Supreme Allied Commander feel more comfortable about upcoming global crises if he would have a NATO of a global reach?" Lantos, chairman of the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, asked at a hearing.

NATO's top operational commander, Gen. Bantz Craddock, and Assistant U.S. Secretary of State Daniel Fried noted NATO missions range from a presence in Afghanistan to conducting airlifts for African Union peacekeepers in Darfur.

"From a best military advice perspective, it would indeed be enormously helpful to have more democratic, peace-loving nations as part of the alliance," Craddock, a U.S. Army officer, told Lantos' panel.

NATO was created in 1949 to give the Atlantic community a common defense against the Soviet Union. Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has expanded eastward in Europe to take in several countries formerly in the Soviet orbit.

"Never say never," Fried said of Lantos' idea of a global alliance of democratic countries.

But right now, NATO is "not ready" to take such a step, he said. Instead, the alliance was developing partnerships "with nations like Australia and Japan and other nations willing and able to work with NATO."

There were, for example, 11 non-NATO countries contributing to the forces in Kosovo, along with 24 NATO members, Fried said. There were also 11 non-NATO partners participating with all 26 NATO members in the U.N.-mandated International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan.

Provided by: Johns Hopkins University: Restless Legs Syndrome

Provided by: Johns Hopkins University
David Neubauer, M.D.
Beat the Blues
Identifying Restless Legs Syndrome
Posted by David Neubauer, M.D. on Wed, Jun 20, 2007, 10:46 pm PDT

The medical community's recognition of restless legs syndrome (RLS) has evolved over the past few decades. For years, patients complained to their doctors that they experienced a very uncomfortable and distressing feeling in their legs in the evening when they tried to rest, and eventually their doctors considered RLS to be a disorder.

RLS often interferes with the ability to fall asleep easily. Usually, patients do not describe it as painful, but more like a "creepy-crawly" sensation that creates a strong and irresistible urge to move the legs. Moving does help, but only for brief moments. Once people suffering with RLS fall asleep, they tend to have involuntary leg kicks.

The cause of RLS is not completely understood; however, it is thought to be associated with the function of dopamine, a nervous system neurotransmitter. Long ago, it was recognized that people with anemia were more likely to develop RLS, which makes sense because iron plays a role in how dopamine operates in the brain. When patients come in with RLS, we check their blood levels of iron and ferritin, which represent the body's capacity to store iron.

Pregnancy also may cause RLS, but usually the symptoms improve after the baby is delivered. However, some women who have had several children eventually have persistent RLS. Patients with some kidney diseases are more likely to develop RLS, and it can be caused by the use of some medications, especially antidepressants and antipsychotics. It does tend to run in families.

A variety of medications have been prescribed to try to help RLS patients. For many years, sleep specialists have prescribed medications that enhance dopamine functioning in the brain. These dopamine agonists already were available for the treatment of Parkinson disease, which, for very different reasons, is also associated with abnormalities in brain dopamine activity.

Some of the pharmaceutical companies that made these medications did the required research studies to gain official FDA approval for the treatment of RLS. Now there is more awareness among the public and medical professionals about RLS, due to medication advertising and other media attention.

A common question about RLS is whether it is really an actual condition. Certain comedians recently have made fun of the disorder's name and have suggested that it is simply made up. Some people skeptical of the pharmaceutical industry believe that RLS was defined as a disorder just to sell pills. Obviously, none of them suffer with RLS or have family members with the disorder. Researchers are making steady progress in understanding the underlying causes of RLS.

Health care professionals should check to see whether their patients have RLS. One question is enough to see whether they might have it. A "no" answer rules it out. A "yes" answer should lead to further evaluation. Here's the question: "When you try to relax in the evening, or go to sleep at night, do you ever have unpleasant, restless feelings that can be relieved by walking or movement?"

There’s really no question about it — RLS is a serious problem for many people. Those with mild symptoms might not need any medication for their symptoms. Fortunately, treatments are available for people with more severe symptoms. If the approved dopamine agonists don’t help or cause bothersome side effects, there are several other medications that might be helpful.

Sometimes vitamins harm us...
FDA issues new safety rules for vitamins

By KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press Writer Fri Jun 22, 7:06 PM ET

WASHINGTON - For the first time, manufacturers of vitamins, herbal pills and other dietary supplements will have to test all of their products' ingredients. The Food and Drug Administration said Friday it is phasing in a new rule that is designed to address concerns that existing regulations allowed supplements onto the market that were contaminated or didn't contain ingredients claimed on the label.

Last year, the agency found that some supplements contained undeclared active ingredients used in prescription drugs for erectile dysfunction. In the past, regulators found supplements that didn't contain the levels of Vitamin C or Vitamin A that were claimed.

If, upon inspection, the FDA finds that supplements do not contain the ingredients they claim, the agency would consider the products adulterated or misbranded. In minor cases, the agency could ask the manufacturer to remove an ingredient or revise its label. In more serious cases, it could seize the product, file a lawsuit or even seek criminal charges.

Dietary supplements — pills, liquids or other products — are a $22 billion industry.

Most companies already test their raw ingredients, said Steve Mister, president and CEO for the Council for Responsible Nutrition, a trade association representing about 65 manufacturers.

"This raises the bar so that all have to comply," Mister said.

The new rule goes into effect Aug. 24 and will have a three-year phase-in that gives smaller manufacturers more time to comply. Even the largest of the manufactures won't have to comply until June 2008.

The rule applies to all domestic and foreign companies that manufacture, package and label supplements for sale in the U.S. It requires them to analyze the identity, purity and strength of all the ingredients that go into their products before they are distributed.

It also includes requirements for record keeping and handling consumer complaints.

Dr. Sidney Wolfe, who has testified before Congress on problems with dietary supplements, said the new rule does not ease his concern that unsafe supplements are too easy to bring to market.

"You still don't have to show the product is safe. You don't have to prove it works," said Wolfe, director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group.

Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports, called the rule a good step toward improving consistency in the ingredients that go into supplements.

"However, consumers still have no idea if a given product works, or whether it is dangerous," said Janell Mayo Duncan, senior counsel for Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports.

Congress limited the Food and Drug Administration's oversight of vitamins and other dietary supplements in 1994. The new rule is a product of that law, meaning that the rule took nearly 13 years to develop.

Under the old regulations, supplements were governed by the same rules that applied to producing foods, such as cans of soup.

"The final rule will help ensure that dietary supplements are manufactured with controls that result in a consistent product free of contamination, with accurate labeling," said Dr. Robert E. Brackett, director of FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.

___

On the Net:

FDA: http://www.fda.gov/

Yeah, religious bigottry kills, but is that all there is at stake? Just a caution...
Russia digs in heels against West's Kosovo plan

By Patrick Worsnip Fri Jun 22, 8:02 PM ET

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Russia refused to budge on its opposition to a new Western-backed draft U.N. resolution paving the way for Kosovo independence as the Security Council discussed the document for the first time on Friday.

Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said his delegation would not even take part in an experts' meeting set for next Monday to refine the text of the draft, saying it would deal only with details, not with core issues.

As the battle over the fate of the Serbian province spread to trying to win over undecided members of the 15-nation council, Western envoys claimed majority support but Churkin said Russia had significant backing.

The draft, put to the council on Wednesday, calls for another 120 days of negotiations to try to break a deadlock between Serbia and leaders of Kosovo's ethnic Albanian majority, who are increasingly impatient for independence.

If those talks fail, the resolution would put into effect an independence plan drawn up by U.N. envoy Martti Ahtisaari "unless the Security Council expressly decides otherwise."

Russia, which has veto power on the council, opposes independence for Kosovo's 2 million people unless its allies in Belgrade agree.

"In the consultation of the Security Council today, this was the first thing I said, that we should have no illusions that the current draft text is ... bringing us closer to an acceptable outcome of this process," Churkin told reporters.

FACT OF LIFE

He said Russia objected to the automatic application of the Ahtisaari plan if the fresh talks failed, which he said would give the Albanians, who have accepted the plan, no incentive to negotiate. Western envoys disagreed, saying they were open to any improvement on the plan the talks might yield.

A number of speakers in the council expressed views "which were quite similar to the points we were making, so we do not feel alone" Churkin said.

But British deputy ambassador Karen Pierce said: "Most council members now want to engage on this text and most council members support it."

The refusal of the Kosovo Albanians to negotiate anything short of independence was "a fact of life," she said. "We do not think it realistic or tenable for Belgrade to come with a proposal that does not accept that fact."

Kosovo, seen by Serbia as a cradle of its culture, passed out of Belgrade's control in 1999 when NATO bombing drove out Serb forces engaged in a brutal war with guerrillas in which thousands of ethnic Albanian civilians had died. The province has been under U.N. administration for almost eight years.

U.S. deputy ambassador Alejandro Wolff said it was hard to predict when the divided council would vote on the resolution.

Some diplomats have suggested a deal could emerge from talks between U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin at their July 2 meeting in Kennebunkport, Maine.

Justice is a word/concept this administration doesn't understand at all, or even care they don't!
Army officer says Gitmo panels flawed

By BEN FOX, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 25 minutes ago

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico - An Army officer who played a key role in the "enemy combatant" hearings at Guantanamo Bay says tribunal members relied on vague and incomplete intelligence while being pressured to rule against detainees, often without any specific evidence.

His affidavit, submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court and released Friday, is the first criticism by a member of the military panels that determine whether detainees will continue to be held.

Lt. Col. Stephen Abraham, a 26-year veteran of military intelligence who is an Army reserve officer and a California lawyer, said military prosecutors were provided with only "generic" material that didn't hold up to the most basic legal challenges.

Despite repeated requests, intelligence agencies arbitrarily refused to provide specific information that could have helped either side in the tribunals, according to Abraham, who said he served as a main liaison between the Combat Status Review Tribunals and the intelligence agencies.

"What were purported to be specific statements of fact lacked even the most fundamental earmarks of objectively credible evidence," Abraham said in the affidavit submitted on behalf of a Kuwaiti detainee, Fawzi al-Odah, who is challenging his classification as an "enemy combatant."

Abraham's affidavit "proves what we all suspected, which is that the CSRTs were a complete sham," said a lawyer for al-Odah, David Cynamon.

A Pentagon spokesman, Navy Lt. Cmdr. Chito Peppler, defended the process of determining which detainees should be held, saying the "procedures afford greater protection for wartime status determinations than any nation has ever before provided."

"Lt. Col. Abraham provides his opinion and perspective on the CSRT process. We disagree with his characterizations," Peppler said. "Lt. Col. Abraham was not in a position to have a complete view of the CSRT process."

Abraham said he first raised his concerns when he was on active duty with the Defense Department agency in charge of the tribunal process from September 2004 to March 2005 and felt the issues were not adequately addressed. He said he decided his only recourse was to submit the affidavit.

"I pointed out nothing less than facts, facts that can and should be fixed," he told The Associated Press in a telephone interview from his office in Newport Beach, Calif.

The 46-year-old lawyer, who remains in the reserves, said he believe he had a responsibility to point out that officers "did not have the proper tools" to determine whether a detainee was in fact an enemy combatant.

"I take very seriously my responsibility, my duties as a citizen," he said.

Cynamon said he fears the officer's military future could be in jeopardy. "For him to do this was a courageous thing but it's probably an assurance of career suicide," he said.

Abraham said he had no intention of leaving the service. "I have no reason to doubt that the actions I have taken or will take uphold the finest traditions of the military," he said.

The military held Combatant Status Review Tribunals for 558 detainees at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay in 2004 and 2005, with handcuffed detainees appearing before panels made up of three officers. Detainees had a military "personal representative" instead of a defense attorney, and all but 38 were determined to be "enemy combatants."

Abraham was asked to serve on one of the panels, and he said its members felt strong pressure to find against the detainee, saying there was "intensive scrutiny" when they declared a prisoner not to be an enemy combatant. When his panel decided the detainee wasn't an "enemy combatant," they were ordered to reconvene to hear more evidence, he said.

Ultimately, his panel held its ground, and he was never asked to participate in another tribunal, he said.

Matthew J. MacLean, another al-Odah lawyer, said Abraham is the first member of the CSRT panels who has been identified, let alone been willing to criticize the tribunals in the public record. His affidavit was submitted to a Washington, D.C., appellate court on al-Odah's behalf as well as to the Supreme Court.

"It wouldn't be quite right to say this is the most important piece of evidence that has come out of the CSRT process, because this is the only piece of evidence ever to come out of the CSRT process," MacLean said. "It's our only view into the CSRT."

In April, the Supreme Court declined to review whether Guantanamo Bay detainees may go to federal court to challenge their indefinite confinement. Lawyers for the detainees have asked the justices to reconsider. The Bush administration opposes the request.

___

Associated Press writer Matt Apuzzo in Washington contributed to this report.

Afternoon delight?
Naked couple die from S.C. rooftop fall

Wed Jun 20, 11:33 AM ET

COLUMBIA, S.C. - Police on Wednesday were investigating how a naked couple fell 50 feet from the roof of a downtown office building to their deaths.

The bodies were found on the road by a passing cabdriver around 5 a.m. Wednesday.

Clothing was discovered on the roof, leading authorities to suspect the man and woman, in their early 20s, may have been having sex. Their identities were not released.

"It's too early to rule out anything," Columbia police Sgt. Florence McCants said, but McCants said a preliminary investigation didn't show any sign of foul play.

EPA not adaquately empowered to confront the OIL based corporations/industries.
Critics question EPA's tighter ozone limits

By Deborah Zabarenko, Environment Correspondent Thu Jun 21, 11:52 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Environmental Protection Agency offered tighter standards for ozone pollution for the first time since 1997 but critics said on Thursday the proposal is more lax than what the EPA's own experts recommended.

The environment agency proposed the new rules for ground-level ozone -- damaging pollution also known as smog that is spawned by motor vehicle exhaust, power plants, gasoline vapors and chemical solvents -- late on Wednesday, suggesting an acceptable ozone range of 70 to 75 parts per billion over any eight-hour period.

That is lower than the current eight-hour standard of 80 parts per billion but higher than the 60 to 70 parts per billion unanimously recommended by the EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee last October.

The EPA plan also leaves open the possibility of no change in the current standard. No action will be taken until March 2008, after four public hearings around the United States.

Unlike stratospheric ozone, which forms a protective layer high above Earth's surface, ground-level ozone can make it hard to breathe and can aggravate asthma and other respiratory conditions. It also can damage vegetation, trees and crops, making disease and reduced crop yields more likely.

People most vulnerable to lung problems from ozone pollution include children and teens, the elderly, those with asthma and other lung diseases and those who work or exercise outdoors.

"Advances in science are leading to cleaner skies and healthier lives," EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson said in a statement. "America's science is progressing and our air quality is improving. By strengthening the ozone standard, EPA is keeping our clean air momentum moving into the future."

EXTENSIVE DEBATE

The American Lung Association applauded the proposal as a "step toward cleaner air" but said, "The agency's plan falls short of the goal recommended by its own scientific experts...

"Unfortunately, the tightest new standard proposed by the EPA barely touches the more protective levels recommended by these same independent scientists," the lung association said in a statement.

The new proposed ozone standard would fail to protect U.S. residents from air pollution as required under the Clean Air Act, according to the lung association.

However, the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association said in a statement that no change is needed in the current standard "because it is working as intended and air quality is improving."

The association also said U.S. states have not yet fully implemented the present standard and urged the EPA to help in this process before proposing a new one.

Edison Electric Institute, which represents 70 percent of U.S. electric power companies, sounded a similar note, saying in a statement, "The (EPA) agency needs to make sure that any additional requirements imposed on states and local communities ... will produce real public health benefits."

But Dr. David Ingbar of the American Thoracic Society called the proposed standards "unhealthy for America's kids, unhealthy for America's seniors and unhealthy for America.

"There will be an extensive debate between now and March 2008 when EPA takes final action," Vickie Patton of the group Environmental Defense said by telephone.

The EPA's proposal was made under a court-supervised settlement with the American Lung Association and the environmental groups Environmental Defense, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club.

Do it! Do it! Do it! Pleeeeaze!
U.S. Vote Could Close 'School of the Americas'

Aaron Glantz, OneWorld US 1 hour, 33 minutes ago

SAN FRANCISCO, Jun 21 (OneWorld) - The U.S. House of Representatives is poised to take what advocates are calling a historic vote this week to close the largest U.S. military training ground for soldiers from Central and South America.

The vote comes on the initiative of Congressman Jim McGovern (D-MA), who has offered an amendment to the Foreign Operations and Appropriations Bill that would prevent any U.S. tax dollars from funding the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation.

The institute is better known as the School of the Americas, which was its official name until the year 2000.

"Human rights abuses by graduates of the school have been widespread," argued Joao da Silva, communications coordinator for School of the Americas Watch, a grassroots group that raises awareness about the school's checkered past.

"They have engaged in torture and targeted killings of their enemies, and in this case the enemies were mostly trade unionists and human rights workers," da Silva said.

The School of the Americas was founded in 1946, primarily to prevent communism from spreading in Central and South America. During the 1970s and 1980s many right-wing military dictatorships came to power throughout Latin America; many of their leaders had attended the school.

Among the School of the Americas' more than 60,000 alumni are notorious dictators Manuel Noriega and Omar Torrijos of Panama, Leopoldo Galtieri and Roberto Viola of Argentina, Juan Velasco Alvarado of Peru, Guillermo Rodriguez of Ecuador, and Hugo Banzar Suarez of Bolivia.

According to School of the Americas Watch, graduates were also responsible for the El Mozote massacre of 900 civilians in El Salvador; the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero; and the massacre of 14-year-old Celina Ramos, her mother Elba Ramos, and six Jesuit priests in El Salvador; among hundreds of other human rights abuses.

Representatives of the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation, also known as WHINSEC, did not return phone calls by deadline.

"The School of the Americas is not very well known in the United States, but it's very well known in Latin America," said Christy Thornton, director of the New York-based North American Congress on Latin America, which publishes a leading journal on Central and South American Affairs.

"The School of the Americas is for many a symbol of U.S. imperialism. Closing it would help restore credibility to the U.S. in the eyes of the rest of the world," she added.

Thornton said the rise of anti-American left wing leaders like Venezuela's Hugo Chavez is in part a reaction against past U.S. support for authoritarian governments in the region.

In recent years, four countries have decided to withdraw their soldiers from WHINSEC. In 2004, Chavez stopped sending Venezuelan soldiers to the school, and last year Argentina and Uruguay announced they would end co-operation as well.

Last month, they were joined by Costa Rica, which does not have a standing army but had sent police officers there for training. The country's president, Oscar Arias, won the Nobel Peace Prize 20 years ago and has dedicated himself to international arms control.

Costa Rica's public safety minister Fernando Berrocal told Agance France Press that Arias made the decision with regard to "the most sacred principles of the country's history."

"We must understand that this decision does not in any way contradict our alliance with the United States in the struggle against crime and neither does it impede cooperation in security programs to professionalize our police," he said.

Opponents of the school are optimistic that their measure to close it will pass this year. School of the Americas Watch's da Silva said the Democratic tide at U.S. polls last November could prove decisive.

"Thirty-five representatives who opposed this last year lost their seats in the November midterms," he noted.

Last year, a similar measure to close the school failed by 15 votes in the House of Representatives. To cut off money for the school, measures would have to pass both the House of Representatives and Senate this year.

If Homeland Security owns us, and China, etc. owns Homeland Security, why are we taking it out on the Mexcans?
Senator raises China concerns on Blackstone

By Kevin Drawbaugh 2 hours, 56 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senator Jim Webb asked federal authorities on Wednesday to look into "national security implications" he said are posed by Chinese government involvement with Blackstone Group LP as it moves toward a stock offering expected to raise more than $4 billion.

Webb raised concerns in a letter to Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff.

In the letter, Webb said SEC records show Blackstone's holdings include military and satellite technology companies.

"If true, it is incumbent upon the SEC and the Committee for Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) to ensure that this technology not be acquired by the government of China," the Virginia Democrat wrote in the letter.

New York-based Blackstone, one of the nation's largest private equity firms, agreed in May to sell a $3 billion stake to China's state investment company ahead of the IPO.

Blackstone declined to comment.

Webb asked the SEC to delay the Blackstone IPO "until such time as serious questions about this transaction can be carefully examined and resolved."

He said he was concerned about "the enormity of this public offering, and the large investment from a foreign government."

An SEC spokesman declined to comment.

Webb said the Blackstone matter "falls squarely within CFIUS' mandate to assess whether foreign investment might threaten national security and to ensure the protection of sensitive United States information relating to national defense and critical infrastructure."

...in referrence to the article below...
[Ed: This article is incoherent. It confuses Nussle with someone from Ohio, maybe his predecesor (?) and profoundly screws up the entire presentation!]

Some of us in Iowa have been trying to get rid of this parasite for years, so this is not pleasing to us!
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
June 19, 2007

President Bush Nominates Congressman Jim Nussle as Director of the Office of Management and Budget
Roosevelt Room

[Ed: This article is incoherent. It confuses Nussle with someone from Ohio, maybe his predecesor (?) and profoundly screws up the entire presentation!]

Play Video Video (Windows)
RSS Feed Presidential Remarks
Play Audio Audio

2:49 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon. Welcome to the White House. I am here to say goodbye to a good friend, and introduce the newest nominee to my Cabinet. Recently Rob Portman came and told me that after 14 years of public service in Washington, he's ready to head home, to be with Jane and the family. I've known him for many years. There's no finer man in public service than Rob Portman. He's been a trusted advisor, and Laura and I are going to miss him.

President George W. Bush introduces former Iowa Rep. Jim Nussle Tuesday, June 19, 2007 in the Roosevelt Room, as his nominee to be the new director of the Office of Management and Budget replacing outgoing director Rob Portman. White House photo by Debra Gulbas Fortunately, we found a good man to succeed him. Today I'm pleased to announce my nomination of Jim Nussle to serve as Director of the Office of Management and Budget. I'm proud to welcome Jim's wife, Karen, his mom and dad, Lori and Mark, and his mother-in-law, Eva Mae. Any man who invites his mother-in-law to a -- (laughter) -- has got to have good judgment. (Laughter.) We're going to ask a lot of Jim, and I thank you all for supporting him in this.

The job of OMB Director is one of the most important in our federal government. The Director has a central responsibility for implementing the full range of my administration's agenda, from defense programs that will keep the American people safe to energy initiatives that will break our dependence on foreign oil, to tax policies that keep our economy growing and creating jobs.

In all these areas, the OMB Director works to ensure that the American people get good value for every tax dollar they send to Washington. Jim Nussle is the right man to take on these challenges. For 16 years, Jim represented the people of Northeast Iowa in the United States Congress. As a member of Congress, Jim was a strong advocate for fiscal discipline, and a champion of tax cuts that allowed the American people to keep more of what they earn. In 2001, Jim became Chairman of the House Budget Committee. As a leader in Congress, Jim showed he can work with members of both sides of the aisle to get positive things done for America. Jim's name and knowledge command respect on Capitol Hill. And as OMB Director, he will use his expertise about the budget process to ensure that the taxpayers' money is spent with respect and with restraint.

In his new post, Jim will continue the important work carried out by Rob Portman. Over the past two years, Rob has served my administration in two important jobs. As the United States Trade Representative, Rob negotiated several new trade agreements and reenergized the Doha talks at the World Trade Organization.

And as OMB Director, he helped me achieve our goal of cutting the federal deficit in half, and doing it three years ahead of schedule. He's helped me put forward a plan to balance the budget by 2012, by restraining federal spending and keeping our taxes low. He's put Democratic leaders in Congress on notice that I will veto bills with excessive levels of spending. He has led my administration's efforts to curb the use of congressional earmarks and implement reforms that will make the earmark process more transparent.

President George W. Bush and outgoing director of the Office of Management and Budget Rob Portman, left, listen as former Iowa Rep. Jim Nussle addresses the media Tuesday, June 19, 2007 in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, thanking President Bush for nominating him to be the next director of the OMB. White House photo by Chris Greenberg I thank Rob for his service and good advice, and, most of all, his friendship. I want to tell his wife, Jane, that after 14 years of commuting to Washington, he's going to be back home in Ohio, especially on the weekends. Rob is a tough act to follow -- but that's why I picked Jim Nussle. He's a man of integrity, a man of vision, a man well-qualified to hold this job. I ask the Senate to act quickly on his nomination. When confirmed, he'll make an outstanding OMB Director.

Congratulations to you. (Applause.)

CONGRESSMAN NUSSLE: Thank you, Mr. President. Well, first, thank you, Mr. President for your kind words, your leadership, and especially for entrusting me with this responsibility. I'm truly humbled, and it is a privilege to stand here with you today and in the coming months. I won't let you down. I won't let you down.

I'd also like to thank Josh Bolten and Rob Portman. Their past work leaves me with very big shoes to fill. Josh, it's going to be great to be able to work with you again. And, Rob, I hope you're going to keep your cell phone handy, because I'm going to need to call you with a lot of questions, I'm sure.

In all seriousness, Rob, I want to thank you for your hard work, your leadership and leaving me with a fantastic team at OMB to help carry on your good work. I wish you and Jane and Jed and Will and Sally all the very best. Today really should be a celebration of your excellent example of public service, and I mean that as sincerely as I can say it.

Mr. President, I look forward to the awesome responsibility you've placed upon me. If I'm fortunate enough to be confirmed, I feel confident that my experiences in Congress and as the House Budget Chair have prepared me well for the challenges that lay ahead. I'm excited to help tackle our nation's priorities and work again with my friends and colleagues in the House and Senate.

I want to say also a few words about my home, Iowa, and also my family and the people who make up that great state. They've given me incredible opportunities throughout my life. My experience, my optimism -- and sometimes humor -- work ethic and success have all come from my family and friends and the people in Iowa, and I want to thank you for the incredible foundation that you've given me. And I'm going to need it in the coming months, I'm sure, your continued prayers and good wishes and friendship.

I want to thank my wife, Karen; my kids, Sarah and Mark; and my family, particularly my mom and dad, who are here today, Lori and Mark Nussle, and my mother-in-law, as the President mentioned, Eva Mae, who are all here today. And I truly wouldn't be standing here without your constant love and support. So thank you for that.

Mr. President, thank you for the opportunity, and I'm ready to get to work. Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT: Good job.

DIRECTOR PORTMAN: Jim is going to need some of that Iowa humor, so if you could -- (laughter) -- that would be good.

Mr. President, first, thank you very much for your kind words and for the opportunities you've given me, and the honor to be able to serve in your Cabinet, both as the Budget Director and the Trade Negotiator. And congratulations to you, Jim.

This is a great opportunity at OMB to make a big difference. It can also be a tough job sometimes. Although my title was Director of OMB, other titles sometimes came my way -- Dr. No. (Laughter.) Tightwad. (Laughter.) Budget hawk. Penny-pincher. (Laughter.) And some not suitable for a television audience. (Laughter.)

But, actually, I want to sincerely thank my colleagues in the Cabinet. I want to thank the Chief of Staff, Josh Bolten, and my colleagues here at the White House, and also my former colleagues from the Hill, for their friendship, for their support and for the way we were able to work together to be sure we were spending the taxpayers' dollars as well as possible.

Mr. President, your leadership on fiscal matters has resulted in lower taxes, responsible spending and a growing economy. You proposed a balanced budget and others followed suit. You proposed earmark reforms, and Congress is now adopting those goals. You have shown courage by taking on the toughest budgetary challenge there is, and that's the unsustainable growth and important entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare.

You've broken new ground in bringing more transparency and accountability to federal spending. I've enjoyed the opportunity to help you shape some of these pro-growth and fiscally responsible policies, and I very much appreciate the confidence you've shown in me to take on some tough challenges.

Some of those challenges go back to my tenure as U.S. Trade Representative, where you set an aggressive agenda to bring down global trade barriers and negotiate trade agreements with allies. We are now opening new markets, and American exports are growing twice as fast as imports. Just as I was proud to represent the United States around the world on trade, I've been very proud to promote your focus on fiscal discipline.

It's difficult to leave such important and meaningful work. But it is now time to go home to Ohio. After 14 years of commuting to Washington, D.C. from Cincinnati every week, it's now time to put my family first. I want to thank my wife, Jane, who is here today, for her love and support and patience. I want to thank my children, Jed, Will and Sally. My family has been very understanding of the intense demands and the unique rewards of public service. In many respects, as the President said when he first nominated me for USTR, they, too, are in public service.

Mr. President, as you know, I felt this was the right time to make a change so that you would have a new director in place as the new budget season begins. And you have made a terrific choice. Jim is a friend and former colleague of mine, as you said, widely respected Chairman of the House Budget Committee. He's a public servant of integrity, knowledge and skill. He knows the budget. He knows the Congress. And he knows how to get things done for the American people.

Thank you again, Mr. President, for the honor of serving you and this great nation.

THE PRESIDENT: Good job. Thank you, all.

END 2:59 P.M. EDT

Profitiers vrs sentimentalists...
Skyscrapers threaten Tower of London

By RAPHAEL G. SATTER, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 22 minutes ago

LONDON - It has withstood assaults from renegade barons, rampaging peasants, and Nazi bombers, but the Tower of London, one of Britain's top tourist attractions, is once again under siege.

This time the peril is from skyscrapers that threaten to ruin the view of the turreted tower, prompting the world's top cultural body to consider adding the 900-year-old fortress to its list of endangered world heritage sites.

Built on the orders of William the Conqueror in the late 11th century, the 90-foot tall stone building long dominated the city's panorama — a symbol of royal authority meant to inspire awe in rebellion-minded Londoners and would-be invaders.

But by the time the tower was named a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1988, the city had sprawled past it. Today, hemmed in by a noisy highway and overrun by tourists, the landmark no longer casts quite the same shadow in an area dominated by glass-canopied office buildings and hypermodern skyscrapers like the Norman Foster building known as "The Gherkin."

The World Heritage Committee will hand down its verdict on the tower sometime after its meeting in New Zealand on Saturday. The body says further construction could undermine the tower's profile even further.

The Historic Royal Palaces, an independent charity which maintains the building at the southeastern edge of London, says there are eight planned projects that could affect the tower's visual integrity. Among them is the Shard of Glass, which at 1,016 feet would be Britain's tallest skyscraper when completed in 2011.

The Shard might be visible from the tower's courtyard, diluting the sense of isolation visitors feel when they enter the fortress, said John Barnes, conservation and learning director for the Historic Royal Palaces.

But some argue the juxtaposition of old and new enhances the tower's mystique.

"In a way (the skyscrapers) add symbolically to what the buildings were about," said Alex Bux, a senior adviser to the mayor of London. "The tower was always a fortress on the edge of London — the capital city — and was always in tension with London as the capital city."

New buildings help give London fresh appeal, said Tom Hall, travel editor for Lonely Planet Publications.

"I think lots of people assume that visitors to London only want to see the old, (that) they only want to come look at the Tower of London or visit Madame Tussauds, and I don't actually think that is the case," he said. "One of the things that keeps people coming back to London is that it is a city constantly reinventing itself."

Although being listed as an endangered heritage site will not directly halt nearby construction projects, citing the Tower would be a "huge embarrassment" for the British government, according to Barnes. Other sites listed as being in danger include Everglades National Park in Florida, the Iranian city of Bam and the Katmandu Valley in Nepal.

Barnes said the Historic Royal Palaces was working to address UNESCO's concerns, and Britain's Department of Culture Media and Sport has also submitted a report to UNESCO detailing efforts made to protect the fortress's skyline.

Whatever UNESCO's decision, construction is unlikely to deter the approximately 2 million people who tour the tower each year.

"People want to still come and see it," Mike Rutter, a social studies teacher from Dallas, said at the tower, "even if they have to go through a maze of buildings to get there."

___

On the Net:

Tower of London web site: http://www.hrp.org.uk/webcode/tower_home.asp

UNESCO World Heritage: http://whc.unesco.org

Shard London Bridge: http://www.shardlondonbridge.com

Clinton campaign video...
Clinton spoofs Sopranos to unveil campaign song

By Jeremy Pelofsky Tue Jun 19, 8:18 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton spoofed the final episode of the hit series "The Sopranos" in a video telling supporters the winning anthem for her 2008 U.S. presidential campaign was Celine Dion's "You and I."

Canadian Dion's song had been a write-in idea but received the most votes out of the more than 200,000 cast, beating out "I'm a Believer" by Smash Mouth, "Beautiful Day" by Irish rockers U2 and Canadian Shania Twain's "Rock This Country!" among others.

In a scene reminiscent of the HBO television show's unresolved ending, the candidate's video shows her sitting in a diner as her husband, former President Bill Clinton, joins her and the song "Don't Stop Believin"' by the rock band Journey plays from a jukebox.

Actor Vince Curatola, who played a mob boss named Johnny "Sack" Sacramoni on "The Sopranos," makes a cameo appearance, too, glaring menacingly at the couple as he walks past them in the restaurant near the Clinton home in Chappaqua, New York.

"So what's the winning song?" Bill asks.

"You'll see," the New York senator responds.

"My money is on 'Smash Mouth,' everybody in America wants to know how it's gonna end," he says.

The candidate puts a coin in the music player on the table and says, "Ready?"

But instead of the Dion song belting out of the machine, the video released on Tuesday cuts to a black screen -- like the Sopranos. It then lists a page on her Web site (www.hillaryclinton.com/song) to reveal the song and make a fund-raising pitch.

Some fans were unhappy with the last Sopranos episode because the final scene cut to a black screen, leaving viewers uncertain as to whether the TV mobster had been rubbed out in a diner as his family gathers for a meal.

"It shows a little bit of humor," said Carol Darr, director for the Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet at George Washington University.

"I don't think it's going to get the play of 'Obama Girl,"' Darr said, referring to the "I've got a crush ... on Obama" song that swoons for Clinton's rival, Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama, and has received more than 1 million views on YouTube.

(Additional reporting by Steve Gorman in Los Angeles)

Change name Viet-Nam to Iraq...additional pages available on FP site...
By Shawn Brimley, Kurt Campbell

Page 1 of 4
July/August 2007
What happens when you take a 40-year-old CIA memo on losing a war and replace the word “Vietnam” with the word “Iraq”? The result is a set of conclusions that are just as true today.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3866

MEMORANDUM:
TO: CIA Director Gen. Michael V. Hayden
FROM: Kurt Campbell and Shawn Brimley
RE: The Consequences of Losing in Iraq

American policymakers and intelligence analysts are currently struggling to consider the potential repercussions of failure in Iraq. Forty years ago, an earlier generation of U.S. policymakers were thinking about the implications of defeat in another conflict—Vietnam.

During the summer of 1967, then CIA Director Richard Helms asked for a quiet review of the global political and strategic consequences of an American failure in Vietnam. The result was a classified memorandum circulated on Sept. 11, 1967, “Implications of an Unfavorable Outcome in Vietnam,” which detailed a lengthy list of potential dark outcomes and worrisome prospects.

Excerpts from this document—with only minor edits—offer eerie parallels to the very different set of circumstances the United States faces today in Iraq. In considering the Iraq war’s endgame, the U.S. government would be wise to review its own notes.
Next >>
Photo: AFP

1
2

3

4
next

FOREIGN POLICY welcomes letters to the editor.
Readers should address their comments to fpletters@CarnegieEndowment.org.

Shop at FP
Subscribe to FP
Login

Username
Password







| Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Contact Us | Site Map | About CEIP | Subscribe |


FP Logo
1779 Massachusetts Avenue, NW | Washington, DC 20036 | Phone: 202-939-2230 | Fax: 202-483-4430
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
All contents ?2007 ForeignPolicy.com. All rights reserved.
Site design by bevia.com; Programming by Enovational Design