...glimpse the machine in operation...
< ASST. NH HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER ENDORSES SENATOR CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT | Main | Shea-Porter asks House Armed Services Committee for Investigation >
Gravel Dismisses CNN, WMUR-TV And Union Leader Statement

Washington, D.C. March 19, 2007 Presidential candidate and former United States Senator Mike Gravel rejected a statement CNN, Hearst owned WMUR-TV and the Union Leader issued Friday, March 16th in justifying its censorship of Senator Gravel by excluding him from a planned debate of Presidential candidates. The Senator said,“This statement is woefully ignorant, void of sound judgment and Kafkaesque in its conclusion.” Gravel continued, “There are several points in the statement, the full text of which follows, that cannot go unchallenged. First, when the statement says that I have not demonstrated measurable public support, it reveals an abysmal ignorance of the dynamics of political campaigns that is truly hard to believe originated in such important media institutions. It is common knowledge that polling numbers at the outset of a campaign,ten months before the first of many state elections reflect little more than name recognition and are simply not measures of public support. This does not mean that other candidates do not have some public following but rather that such support has not been tested by the crucible of a long campaign in which these supporters are given a chance to assess other options. The only accurate measure of public support is election-day. Finally, for what it is worth,I have, in a recent Harris poll improved my standing from February to March and exceed, in one test, one of my rivals for the nomination who I believe has been invited to the New Hampshire debate”.
The Senator continued, “The statement said that there are literally dozens and dozens of declared presidential candidates. That is true but out of those dozens of candidates, how many are former United States Senators who have been given the stamp of legitimacy by the Democratic National Committee, SEIU, AFSCME, ABC, the Nevada Democratic Party, the Center for American Progress Action Fund etc? Only two, former Senator John Edwards and myself.

“Though this is not the only criteria for deciding the legitimacy of a candidate as other aspirants may have contributed distinguished public service as an appointed official or as an officer of an NGO or excelled as individual public figures such as Ralph Nader, the Reverend Jesse Jackson and the Reverend Al Sharpton making them eminently worthy, it is one indisputable criteria for defining a legitimate candidate.”

The Senator continued, “The statement confirmed that I had not received an invitation but said that I nor anyone else has been excluded from the debate. It went on to say that if I meet their criteria between now and the debate, I will be invited. What was Orwellian in my not meeting certain criteria which the media organizations would not divulge becomes Kafkaesque when I am now told that I have not been excluded and can still be invited if Imeet this mysterious criteria. CNN, WMUR-TVand the Union Leader sent out invitations weeks ago. I did not receive one. I am told I have not demonstrated measurable public support, which, besides being a galactic misunderstanding of polling numbers ten months before an election is also a self-fulfilling prophecy since being included in the debate would provide me and any other candidate who may have not been invited an important opportunity to secure such public support.”

Senator Gravel concluded, “CNN, Hearst’sWMUR-TV and the Union Leader have been important sources of news for their listeners and readers. Why they want to deprive their audiences of differing political voices that aspire to the highest level of public service by exercising a form of insidious censorship,unbecoming a free society and a state with the motto 'Live Free Or Die' is a mystery.”

Mike Gravel, a resident of Virginia, is a former two-term Senator from Alaska with a distinguished record that includes successfully ending the military draft with a five-month filibuster, releasing the Pentagon Papers risking both prosecution and jail, playing the leading role in making the Alaska pipeline a reality, and ending nuclear testing in Alaska. He is the driving force and author of the National Initiative for Democracy, a proposal to bring the ballot initiative lawmaking process––already proven in many states as an effective and necessary check on unresponsive representative government––to the Federal level.


STATEMENT BY CNN, WMUR-TV AND THE UNION LEADER
The three debate partners, closely following Federal Election Commission guidelines, established objective criteria to determine who we invite to the debates. Because there are literally dozens and dozens of declared presidential candidates, most of whom we have never heard of, we have to have a method of determining who is invited. Our criteria simply identifies candidates that have measurable public support for their campaign. Because Mike Gravel has not demonstrated measurable public support for his campaign to date, he has not received an invitation. But we have not excluded him (or anyone) from the debate. If he meets our criteria between now and the debate, he will certainly get an invitation.

Learn More

Gravel For President 2008
Posted on Tuesday, March 20, 2007 at 07:25AM by Registered CommenterNH INSIDER in Press Releases | Comments Off

Bush can't see conflict of interest when it slaps him in the face!
Bush picks executive as consumer watchdog
Critics see a conflict of interest in Michael E. Baroody, who works on behalf of the nation's manufacturers.
By James Gerstenzang, Times Staff Writer
March 2, 2007

WASHINGTON — President Bush said Thursday that he would nominate a senior executive of the largest organization representing the nation's manufacturers to head the government agency assigned to protect consumers from dangerous products.

Bush's choice of Michael E. Baroody, executive vice president of the National Assn. of Manufacturers, to be chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission drew an angry response from consumer advocates and predictions of a tough battle for Senate confirmation from the Democratic majority.

Critics, noting Baroody's work for an organization that aims to ease restrictions on a long list of companies making consumer goods, said the nomination would reflect an administration effort to restrict government regulations by executive order and action, rather than by congressional approval.

"I think it's shocking," said Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen, a watchdog group founded by Ralph Nader. "It's the fox in the chicken coop."

Claybrook, who led the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration under President Carter, said, "They wanted a hard-liner in the agency to push it into the deregulation mode."

The Consumer Product Safety Commission, established in 1974, issues safety standards for a wide range of products, including lawn mowers, toasters, toys, clothing and furniture — nearly all consumer products except motor vehicles and guns.

It investigates reports of dangerous products, issues recalls and shapes regulations. It also has the option of taking no action on complaints or investigations.

The panel has not had a chairman since July; only two of its five seats are filled. Under its regulations, the commission is unable to take formal action after more than six months without a quorum. It hit the mark in January.

Baroody, 60, was an assistant secretary of Labor and director of public affairs under President Reagan. He also was a speechwriter for Bob Dole when the Kansas senator was chairman of the Republican National Committee.

Both in government and out, Baroody has tangled with advocates of greater government regulation to protect public health and safety:

• In 1988, as assistant secretary of Labor, he defended the Reagan administration's record in protecting workers despite delays in issuing safety rules and efforts to weaken regulations.

• In 2000, he fought an ergonomics rule — put into place by the Clinton administration — that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration said was intended to prevent 300,000 workplace accidents and injuries.

• In 2001, speaking for the National Assn. of Manufacturers, he criticized a Supreme Court ruling rejecting arguments that the Environmental Protection Agency had acted unconstitutionally when it issued standards for limiting smog and soot.

Baroody's nomination must be considered by the Senate Commerce Committee before being voted on by the Senate.

"I intend to give his nomination thorough scrutiny," Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), a Commerce Committee member, said in a statement.

"Here was a golden opportunity to put a true champion of consumers onto a very important commission, and instead President Bush selected someone who represents the special interests," she said. "This administration seems incapable of doing anything in the public interest."

Republican lawmakers did not return calls seeking comment.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission has received no increases in funding, according to Democratic staff members on the Senate Commerce Committee, forcing it to reduce staff and workload because its budget mandates cost-of-living increases for employees.

One staff member, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Democratic senators were concerned that the commission's staff had been deprived of its expertise by what amounted to budget cuts imposed by the Bush administration.

Baroody also was president of the now-defunct National Policy Forum, a Republican-oriented policy research group. He is a graduate of the University of Notre Dame.

james.gerstenzang @latimes.com

Drat that Dreaded "DREAD!"
SoldierTech Home Page Defense Tech Military Equipment Shopping Home Page Shock & Awe

DREAD WEAPON SYSTEM: Devastating, Jam-Proof, and Silent


No heat, no recoil, no sound, no gunpowder, no flash -- just 120,000 rounds per minute of pulverizing power. The next generation of weapons systems has arrived: the DREAD centrifuge-powered weapon system.

DREAD Weapon System
Maximum firepower: Design for the DREAD Weapon System.

Email this page to friends

[Have opinions on this article? Go to the Discussion Forum to sound off.]

About DefenseReview.com



DefenseReview.com (DefRev) is an online tactical technology magazine that focuses on advanced tactical armament, tactical equipment/gear (including combat/tactical camouflage technology), and tactical training/instruction for military infantry forces. DefenseReview.com strives to provide the most up-to-date information on law enforcement (LE) SWAT/SRT and military Special Operations (infantry)/Special Warfare (SPECWAR) technology developments as quickly as we learn about them.

Visit DefenseReview.com


By David Crane
Editor, DefenseReview.com

Imagine a gun with no recoil, no sound, no heat, no gunpowder, no visible firing signature (muzzle flash), and no stoppages or jams of any kind. Now imagine that this gun could fire .308 caliber and .50 caliber metal projectiles accurately at up to 8,000 fps (feet-per-second), featured an infinitely variable/programmable cyclic rate-of-fire (as high as 120,000 rounds-per-minute), and were capable of laying down a 360-degree field of fire. What if you could mount this weapon on any military Humvee (HMMWV), any helicopter/gunship, any armored personnel carrier (APC), and any other vehicle for which the technology were applicable?

That would really be something, wouldn't it? Some of you might be wondering, "how big would it be," or "how much would it weigh"? Others might want to know what it's ammunition capacity would be. These are all good questions, assuming of course that a weapon like this were actually possible.

According to its inventor, not only is it possible, it's already happened. An updated version of the weapon will be available soon. It will arrive in the form of a tactically-configured pre-production anti-personnel weapon firing .308 caliber projectiles (accurately) at 2,500-3000 fps, at a variable/programmable cyclic rate of 5,000-120,000 rpm (rounds-per-minute). The weapon's designer/inventor has informed DefRev that future versions of the weapon will be capable of achieving projectile velocities in the 5,000-8,000 fps range with no difficulty. The technology already exists.

The weapon itself is called the DREAD, or Multiple Projectile Delivery System (MPDS), and it may just be the most revolutionary infantry weapon system concept that DefenseReview has EVER come across.

DREAD: The Skinny

Name:
DREAD Weapon System

Type of Equipment:
Multiple Projectile Delivery System

Killer Features:

* Fires .308 caliber and .50 caliber metal projectiles accurately at up to 8,000 fps (feet-per-second)
* Features an infinitely variable/programmable cyclic rate-of-fire (as high as 120,000 rounds-per-minute)
* Electrically powered and virtually silent
* Capable of laying down a 360-degree field of fire
* Mountable on any military vehicles, includes humvees and helicopters
* Weighs only 28 pounds
* Magazine capacities of at least 50,000 rounds of .308 Cal., or 10,000 rounds of .50 Cal. ammo

Related Links:
DREAD Centrifuge Weapon System (Centrifuge Gun)
Armed/Weaponized Infantry Robots for Urban Warfare and Counterinsurgency Ops
DefRev Update: Centrifuge Weapon System Tech for Future Warfare Applications
Robo-Soldier Ready for Combat Deployment to Iraq for Urban Warfare/CI Ops
Equipment Guide


The DREAD Weapon System is the brainchild of weapons designer/inventor Charles St. George. It will be 40 inches long, 32 inches wide, and 3 inches high (20 inches high with the pintel swivel mount). It will be comprised of only 30 component parts, and will have an empty weight of only 28 pounds. That's right, 28 pounds. The weapon will be capable of rotating 360 degrees and enjoy the same elevation and declination capabilities of any conventional vehicle-mounted gun/weapon.

The first generation DREAD (production version), derived from the tactically-configured pre-production weapon, will most likely be a ground vehicle-mounted anti-personnel weapon. Military Humvees (HMMV's) and other ground vehicles (including Chevy Suburbans) equipped with the DREAD will enjoy magazine capacities of at least 50,000 rounds of .308 Cal., or 10,000 rounds of .50 Cal. ammo.

But, what is the DREAD, really? How does it work? In a sentence, the DREAD is an electrically-powered centrifuge weapon, or centrifuge "gun." So, instead of using self-contained cartridges containing powdered propellant (gunpowder), the DREAD's ammunition will be .308 and .50 caliber round metal balls (steel, tungsten, tungsten carbide, ceramic-coated tungsten, etc...) that will be literally spun out of the weapon at speeds as high as 8000 fps (give or take a few hundred feet-per-second) at rather extreme rpm's, striking their targets with overwhelming and devastating firepower. We're talking about total target saturation, here. All this, of course, makes the DREAD revolutionary in the literal sense, as well as the conceptual one.

According to the DREAD Advantages Sheet, "unlike conventional weapons that deliver a bullet to the target in intervals of about 180 feet, the DREAD's rounds will arrive only 30 thousandths of an inch apart (1/32nd of an inch apart), thereby presenting substantially more mass to the target in much less time than previously possible." This mass can be delivered to the target in 10-round bursts, or the DREAD can be programmed to deliver as many rounds as you want, per trigger-pull. Of course, the operator can just as easily set the DREAD to fire on full-auto, with no burst limiter. On that setting, the number of projectiles sent down range per trigger-pull will rely on the operator's trigger control. Even then, every round is still going right into the target. You see, the DREAD's not just accurate, it's also recoilless. No recoil. None. So, every "fired" round is going right where you aim it.

DREAD weapon system ball ammo
It ain't a golf ball: The ball ammo used in the DREAD system.

One of the ammunition types the DREAD will be delivering downrange is the "Collision Cluster Round," or "CCR," that will be used to penetrate hard targets. The Collision Cluster Round (CCR) is explained in more detail on the munitions page of the DREAD Technology White Paper (links below). The DREAD Advantages Sheet also lists all the other advantages that the DREAD Weapon System enjoys over conventional firearms.

And, all this from a weapon that doesn't jam. Remember how at the beginning of the article I wrote "no stoppages or jams"? The DREAD won't jam because, according to its inventor, it can't jam. The DREAD's operating and feeding mechanisms simply don't allow for stoppages or jams to occur. It thus follows that the DREAD Centrifuge Weapon will be the most reliable metallic projectile launcher/ballistic device on the planet. DefRev is not at liberty to publish exactly why the DREAD can't jam, since Mr. St. George hasn't given us permission to describe the gun's operating and feeding mechanisms in any detail.

The only thing the DREAD's operator will really have to worry about is running out of ammo, which isn't likely. Any reasonably skilled gunner (Humvee, APC, Apache attack helicopter, etc.-- doesn't matter) should be able to avoid running through all 50,000 (or more) rounds of .308 Cal. or 10,000 (or more) rounds of .50 Cal. ammo prematurely, especially when he or she can dial down the DREAD's cyclic rate to 5,000 rpm or slower, if necesssary. Even if it becomes necessary to increase the DREAD's magazine capacity to upwards of 100,000 rounds (.308 Cal.) or 20,0000 rounds (.50 Cal.), and run the weapon all day and all night for weeks on end, this will have absolutely no effect whatsoever (positive or negative) on the reliability or durability of the weapon system. The DREAD is both heatless and frictionless, and doesn't generate any high pressures. So, there's virtually no wear and tear on the system, no matter how many rounds are fired through it back-to-back, even if it's run constantly on full-auto at 120,000 rpm, the whole time.

Must-Have Gear

SMITH & WESSON KNIVES
Many law enforcement agencies use Smith & Wesson high-performance tactical tools -- an impressive legacy for the S&W Black Ops Folding Knives.


Here's the kicker: because it's electrically powered and doesn't use any powdered propellant for it's operation, the DREAD Centrifuge Weapon is virtually silent (no sound signature), except for the supersonic "crack" of the metal balls breaking the sound barrier when they're launched. This makes the direction that the rounds are coming from, and their point of origin (firing source), very difficult for enemy forces to identify. It also allows the operator to communicate easily with his team, or with his command structure, while he's still firing on the enemy (with the DREAD). With the DREAD, he won't have to fight to communicate over his own weapon's firing report. And, since the gun doesn't generate any muzzle flash or heat (it's heatless and frictionless, remember?), it doesn't produce any flash signature or heat signature. So, identifying the gun itself with IR (infrared) sensors will be impossible. The vehicle that the DREAD is mounted on is the only thing that will display a heat signature. That leaves you with a difficult-to-detect/locate weapon with a virtually endless suppy of ammo. Even if the DREAD-equipped vehicle does get identified and fired upon by the enemy, the risk of a catastrophic explosion from a bullet strike on the ammunition supply is zero, because the DREAD's ammunition doesn't contain any propellant. There's no gunpowder onboard to blow up. That just leaves the gas tank (vehicle's). Nothing's foolproof.

There's more. Since the DREAD/MPDS (Multiple Projectile Delivery System) is a centrifuge weapon, projectile velocity can be adjusted instantly back and forth between lethal and less-lethal/non-lethal modes. This means it can be utilized just as effectively for embassy security and peacekeeping roles. As an embassy security weapon, the less-lethal/non lethal mode would most likely be the way to go, in most cases. Less-lethal is usually adequate for any crowd control or riot control situations. However, let's say the crowd starts storming the gates, and now presents a lethal threat to the occupants inside. Well, just pull your Marines inside, switch your remotely-operated battery of DREAD's on over to lethal mode, and make survival above ground impossible for anyone outside the embassy. No one gets in. Same thing goes for military base security. Remote DREAD Centrifuge Gun Pods can be outfitted with heat and motion sensors, and left in unmanned areas. These remote pods can be either human-operated, or pre-programmed with both less-lethal/non-lethal and lethal protocols that will function automatically and not even require human operation. Mobile robotic platforms, including remote-controlled Unmanned Ground Combat Vehicles (UGCV's), could also be outfitted with DREAD systems. And, the list goes on. The technology application possibilities/potential uses are virtually endless.

So, what's the upshot? It's DefenseReview's opinion that, if the DREAD Weapon System works as advertised, it will have a profound impact on U.S. infantry warfare capabilities. It has the potential to literally change the way we fight on the ground, and perhaps even in the air. No question, it will revolutionize both ground and air vehicular armament and firepower capabilities. The DREAD will have a similarly profound impact on U.S. embassy security and military base perimeter security capabilities. This paradigm shift in firepower isn't limited to the ground and air, either. The DREAD's complete lack of recoil will allow it to be fired from space-based platforms, i.e. satellites, without knocking them off of their respective orbital paths. Zero recoil, plus 8,000 fps projectile speeds, 5,000-120,000 rpm capability, and huge on-board ammunition supplies, equals a viable and relatively inexpensive option for satellite defense (and enemy-satellite neutralization), and possibly even a fast-realizable armament solution/alternative for a U.S. Space-based defense network.

Must-Have Gear

STREAMLIGHT M-3 TACTICAL LIGHT
Streamlight's innovative M-3 Tactical Light, designed for the demands of military and law enforcement operations, is now a top choice of professionals nationwide.


Leader Propulsion Systems (LPS) just informed DefRev that it has signed up with a large U.S. "defense entity" (i.e., a large U.S. defense contractor) to fully develop the DREAD technology for both lethal and less-lethal applications. This strategic partnership will also enable Leader to begin developing a family of gas-operated lightweight weapons chambered in .50 BMG (12.7x99mm), .338 Lapua, .300 Winchester Magnum and 7.62x51mm Nato (.308 Win.). According to Leader, this new development program will result in a family of weapons that will utilize, according to the company, a "revolutionary" and proprietary recoil attenuation/mitigation system. This system will also be used in a man-portable 25mm lightweight weapon system that LPS will also be developing. Defense Review is not currently at liberty to disclose any additional information on the DREAD development program to our readers. However, once we are, we'll inform our readers immediately, and continue to do so regarding any new significant developments, so stay tuned.

About the Author: David Crane is a military defense industry analyst and consultant, and the owner/editor-in-chief of DefenseReview.com. He can be contacted by phone at 305-389-1721, or via email at david@defensereview.com.


[Have opinions on this article? Go to the Discussion Forum to sound off.]

Out of Retirement to fight inhumanity, injustice, war and opression again, like Kid Shaleen!
Comeback of Yusuf Islam (Cat Stevens)

By JIM KRANE, Associated Press Writer 41 minutes ago

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates - Yusuf Islam, the former
Cat Stevens, has quietly returned to music with a new album and concerts. And he's sounding a lot like ... Cat Stevens.

Thirty years after the folk singer converted to Islam, changed his name and dropped out of music, calling it un-Islamic, he has picked up the guitar once more. He has reconciled pop music with his faith and wants to use it to spread a message of peace.

"When I come out now, I sound quite similar. For some people, it's a welcome return to the sound of my voice and my music," says Islam, who as Cat Stevens sold 60 million albums with songs like "Wild World" and "Peace Train."

In an interview with The Associated Press, Islam said he's trying to make amends for dropping out all those years ago — and he admits he might have hurt some feelings. He said his break might not have been as complete had the press been more understanding about his conversion to Islam, he says.

"I walked away abruptly. Perhaps that had something to do with the reaction I received from the press at the time. I was given the cold shoulder," Islam says, smiling.

"Now it's the opposite. I don't feel that same hostility. People appreciate that I'm (making music again) for a really good reason: to make peace and try and make people happy."

"For some people (my disappearance) was a deep cut. I'm in a way trying to make amends. And the great thing is, I've still got music in me. It's a gift. Even I'm surprised," he said.

The 58-year-old, dressed in a blue denim button-down shirt, sleeves rolled to the elbow, spoke in a small Dubai office that doubles as a recording studio and the offices of Jamal Records, a label he co-owns. His salt and pepper hair is cropped short and tousled, and he sports a bushy gray-black beard and close-cropped mustache in the style of a pious Muslim.

So far, Islam's comeback has been low-key. A concert airs on BBC TV April 29, and he is considering taking part in the Live Earth concert series, to raise awareness about climate change, planned for July.

Late last year, Islam launched his first pop album since his conversion in 1977. Titled "An Other Cup," the folksy album includes a song he first wrote in 1968, "Greenfields, Golden Sands." The other tunes on the CD, with those familiar smooth voice and guitar chords, sound a lot like the old Cat Stevens.

As Yusuf Islam, he had previously only recorded a handful of spoken word records on Islamic topics, some with percussion.

Dubai, where the singer lives part of the year (he spends most of his time in his native London), is where Islam's return to music took place after his son bought a guitar in 2002.

"He brings it home and there's this guitar in the house," Islam says with a pause and a demure smile, eyes downcast. "I looked at it and, well, we just got back together again."

But he had already been moving back toward it, with a lot of study about the Prophet Muhammad's attitudes toward music. He said he learned that a guitar or similar instrument was introduced to Europe by a 7th century Muslim musician who brought it from Baghdad to Muslim-ruled Spain.

"For a long time I had doubts about music. There's a certain point of view among certain schools of thought in Islam that considers music too closely connected to hedonistic tendencies, you know, sex, drugs and rock and roll," he says.

"But when you take it out of one context and put it in another context, which is connected to healing, spirituality, morality and family values, it's wholesome good stuff," he said. "That's the kind of music the Prophet encouraged. And there's evidence of that. So I came a long way through the study of music."

Islam says he holds no grudges against U.S. immigration authorities who denied him entry into the United States in 2004 because his name appeared on a terror watch list. When he tried again in December, he got in no problem.

"It was worked out beforehand and I got a very warm welcome when I arrived that time," he said with a chuckle. "I do believe it was some cranky mistake in their computers. Once a person's name gets on that list nobody quite understands how to take it off. People are still suffering from that kind of thing."

But Dubai, he says, is a safe haven from the craziness afflicting the United States. He mentioned the massacre at Virginia Tech, where a deranged student killed himself and 32 others.

"We've just been reading about what's been going on in America. Can you imagine?" he says, a look of shock on his face. "There are certain comforts of living here in Dubai, the comforts of so many mosques and so much good food ... It's just that much more secure. And may God keep it safe."

Islam said his comeback has gotten a warm reception, and he wants to create a bridge to his old songs.

"A lot of people are nicely surprised to find it's the same style of writing and the same melodic approach to songwriting," he said. "A lot of my songs stand up today. They reflect the reality of my journey and my experience and my faults."

In the concert airing on BBC, Islam was backed by a 12-piece band at London's Porchester Hall, playing all the old hits. He did one other major gig since his hiatus, at New York's Lincoln Center in December, to an invite-only crowd.

He said there is interest in his music now because the "tremendous conflicts that have been created by extremists" have created a longing for the peaceful sounds and positive messages of his songs, old and new.

"I don't see it so much as a return as a fresh start. It's a new era. Forty years have passed since my first record and times have definitely changed," he said. "If
John Lennon were alive he'd probably be singing something similar."

___

On the Net:

http://www.yusufislam.com/

SAVE COUNTLESS LIVES! Arrest the Bush/Cheney/Bush/ Hole In The Wall Gang
Army officer criticizes generals on Iraq

By THOMAS WAGNER, Associated Press Writer Fri Apr 27, 8:46 AM ET

BAGHDAD - An active duty U.S. Army officer warns the United States faces the prospect of defeat in
Iraq, blaming American generals for failing to prepare their forces for an insurgency and misleading Congress about the situation here.

"For reasons that are not yet clear, America's general officer corps underestimated the strength of the enemy, overestimated the capabilities of Iraq's government and security forces, and failed to provide Congress with an accurate assessment of security conditions in Iraq," Lt. Col. Paul Yingling said in the article published Friday in the Armed Forces Journal.

Several retired generals have made similar comments, but such public criticism from an active duty officer is rare. It suggests that misgivings about the conduct of the Iraq war are widespread in the officer corps at a critical time in the troubled U.S. military mission here.

U.S. spokesman Lt. Col. Christopher Garver said Yingling was expressing "his personal opinions in a professional journal" and the military was focused on "executing the mission at hand."

Yingling served as deputy commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment. He has served two tours in Iraq, another in Bosnia and a fourth in Iraq's Operation Desert Storm in 1991. He attended the Army's elite School for Advanced Military Studies and has written for one of the Army's top professional journals, Military Review.

In the article published Friday, Yingling wrote that the generals not only went into Iraq preparing for a high-technology conventional war with too few soldiers, they also had no coherent plan for postwar stabilization. The generals also failed to tell the American public about the intensity of the insurgency their forces were facing, Yingling wrote.

"The intellectual and moral failures common to America's general officer corps in Vietnam and Iraq constitute a crisis in American generalship," he said.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has said the Iraqi government plans to take full control of security from the American-led forces before the end of the year. In February, coalition forces launched the Baghdad security plan, which calls for 28,000 additional American troops, as well as thousands of Iraqi soldiers, most of whom will be deployed in violent Baghdad.

Yingling appeared to welcome that change, but suggested it is too little too late.

"For most of the war American forces in Iraq have concentrated on large forward operating bases, isolated from the Iraqi people and focused on capturing or killing insurgents," he wrote. "In 2007, Iraq's grave and deteriorating condition offers diminishing hope for an American victory and portends an even wider and more destructive regional war."

During the past decade, U.S. forces have done little to prepare for the kind of brutal, adaptive insurgencies they are now fighting in Iraq and
Afghanistan, Yingling said.

"Given the lack of troop strength, not even the most brilliant general could have devised the ways necessary to stabilize post-Saddam Iraq," he wrote.

Yingling said he believes that no single civilian or military leader has caused what he regards as the current failure in Iraq.

He said Congress must reform and better monitor the military officer promotion system it has to choose generals. The Senate should use its confirmation powers to hold accountable officers who fail to achieve U.S. aims, he said.

"We still have time to select as our generals those who possess the intelligence to visualize future conflicts and the moral courage to advise civilian policy makers on the preparations needed for our security," he wrote.

The Armed Forces Journal and its Web site are published by Army Times Publishing Co., a part of Gannett Company, Inc., and the world's largest publisher of professional military and defense periodicals. The company's publications serve all branches of the U.S. military, the global defense community and the U.S. federal government.

___

On the Net:

The Armed Forces Journal: http://www.armedforcesjournal.com.

Free Speech that brought end to Nam being second guessed by the nazies!
http://www.amconmag.com/2007/2007_04_23/article4.html





April 23, 2007 Issue
Copyright ? 2007 The American Conservative

Working for the Clampdown

What might the president do with his new power to declare martial law?

by James Bovard

How many pipe bombs might it take to end American democracy? Far fewer than it would have taken a year ago.

The Defense Authorization Act of 2006, passed on Sept. 30, empowers President George W. Bush to impose martial law in the event of a terrorist ?incident,? if he or other federal officials perceive a shortfall of ?public order,? or even in response to antiwar protests that get unruly as a result of government provocations.

The media and most of Capitol Hill ignored or cheered on this grant of nearly boundless power. But now that the president?s arsenal of authority is swollen and consecrated, a few voices of complaint are being heard. Even the New York Times recently condemned the new law for ?making martial law easier.?

It only took a few paragraphs in a $500 billion, 591-page bill to raze one of the most important limits on federal power. Congress passed the Insurrection Act in 1807 to severely restrict the president?s ability to deploy the military within the United States. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 tightened these restrictions, imposing a two-year prison sentence on anyone who used the military within the U.S. without the express permission of Congress. But there is a loophole: Posse Comitatus is waived if the president invokes the Insurrection Act.

Section 1076 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 changed the name of the key provision in the statute book from ?Insurrection Act? to ?Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act.? The Insurrection Act of 1807 stated that the president could deploy troops within the United States only ?to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy.? The new law expands the list to include ?natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition??and such ?condition? is not defined or limited.

These new pretexts are even more expansive than they appear. FEMA proclaims the equivalent of a natural disaster when bad snowstorms occur, and Congress routinely proclaims a natural disaster (and awards more farm subsidies) when there is a shortfall of rain in states with upcoming elections. A terrorist ?incident? could be something as stupid as the flashing toys scattered around Boston last fall.

The new law also empowers the president to commandeer the National Guard of one state to send to another state for up to 365 days. Bush could send the Alabama National Guard to suppress antiwar protests in Boston. Or the next president could send the New York National Guard to disarm the residents of Mississippi if they resisted a federal law that prohibited private ownership of semiautomatic weapons. Governors? control of the National Guard can be trumped with a simple presidential declaration.

The story of how Section 1076 became law vivifies how expanding government power is almost always the correct answer in Washington. Some people have claimed the provision was slipped into the bill in the middle of the night. In reality, the administration clearly signaled its intent and almost no one in the media or Congress tried to stop it.

The Katrina debacle seems to have drowned Washington?s resistance to military rule. Bush declared, ?I want there to be a robust discussion about the best way for the federal government, in certain extreme circumstances, to be able to rally assets for the good of the people.? His initial proposal generated a smattering of criticism and no groundswell of support. There was no ?robust discussion.? On Aug. 29, 2006, the administration upped the ante, labeling the breached levees ?the equivalent of a weapon of mass effect being used on the city of New Orleans.? Nobody ever defined a ?weapon of mass effect,? but the term wasn?t challenged.

Section 1076 was supported by both conservatives and liberals. Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the ranking Democratic member on the Senate Armed Services Committee, co-wrote the provision along with committee chairman Sen. John Warner (R-Va.). Sen. Ted Kennedy openly endorsed it, and Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), then-chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, was an avid proponent.

Every governor in the country opposed the changes, and the National Governors Association repeatedly and loudly objected. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, warned on Sept. 19 that ?we certainly do not need to make it easier for Presidents to declare martial law,? but his alarm got no response. Ten days later, he commented in the Congressional Record: ?Using the military for law enforcement goes against one of the founding tenets of our democracy.? Leahy further condemned the process, declaring that it ?was just slipped in the defense bill as a rider with little study. Other congressional committees with jurisdiction over these matters had no chance to comment, let alone hold hearings on, these proposals.?

Congressional Quarterly?s Jeff Stein wrote an excellent article in December on how the provision became law with minimal examination or controversy. A Republican Senate aide blamed the governors for failing to raise more fuss: ?My understanding is that they sent form letters to offices. If they really want a piece of legislation considered they should have called offices and pushed the matter. No office can handle the amount of form letters that come in each day.?

Thus, the Senate was not guilty by reason of form letters. Plus, the issue was not on the front page of the Washington Post within the 48 hours before the Senate voted on it. Surely no reasonable person can expect senators to know what they were doing when they voted 100 to 0 in favor of the bill? In reality, they were too busy to notice the latest coffin nails they hammered into the Constitution.

This expansion of presidential prerogative illustrates how every federal failure redounds to the benefit of leviathan. FEMA was greatly expanded during the Clinton years for crises like the New Orleans flood. It, along with local and state agencies, floundered. Yet the federal belly flop on the Gulf Coast somehow anointed the president to send in troops where he sees fit.

?Martial law? is a euphemism for military dictatorship. When foreign democracies are overthrown and a junta establishes martial law, Americans usually recognize that a fundamental change has occurred. Perhaps some conservatives believe that the only change when martial law is declared is that people are no longer read their Miranda rights when they are locked away. ?Martial law? means obey soldiers? commands or be shot. The abuses of military rule in southern states during Reconstruction were legendary, but they have been swept under the historical rug.

Section 1076 is Enabling Act-type legislation?something that purports to preserve law-and-order while formally empowering the president to rule by decree. The Bush team is rarely remiss in stretching power beyond reasonable bounds. Bush talks as if any constraint on his war-making prerogative or budget is ?aiding and abetting the enemy.? Can such a man be trusted to reasonably define insurrection or disorder? Can Hillary Clinton?

Bush can commandeer a state?s National Guard any time he declares a ?state has refused to enforce applicable laws.? Does this refer to the laws as they are commonly understood?or the laws after Bush fixes them with a signing statement?

Some will consider concern about Bush or future presidents exploiting martial law to be alarmist. This is the same reflex many people have had to each administration proposal or power grab from the Patriot Act in October 2001 to the president?s enemy-combatant decree in November 2001 to the setting up the Guantanamo prison in early 2002 to the doctrine of preemptive war. The administration has perennially denied that its new powers pose any threat even after the evidence of abuses?illegal wiretapping, torture, a global network of secret prisons, Iraq in ruins?becomes overwhelming. If the administration does not hesitate to trample the First Amendment with ?free speech zones,? why expect it to be diffident about powers that could stifle protests en masse?

On Feb. 24, the White House conducted a highly publicized drill to test responses to IEDs going off simultaneously in ten American cities. The White House has not disclosed the details of how the feds will respond, but it would be out of character for this president to let new powers he sought to gather dust. There is nothing more to prevent a president from declaring martial law on a pretext than there is to prevent him from launching a war on the basis of manufactured intelligence. And when the lies become exposed years later, it could be far too late to resurrect lost liberties.

Senators Leahy and Kit Bond (R-Mo.) are sponsoring a bill to repeal the changes, but it is not setting the woods on fire on Capitol Hill. Leahy urged his colleagues to consider the Section 1076 fix, declaring, ?It is difficult to see how any Senator could disagree with the advisability of having a more transparent and thoughtful approach to this sensitive issue.?

He deserves credit for fighting hard on this issue, but there is little reason to expect most members of Congress to give it a second look. The Section 1076 debacle exemplifies how the Washington establishment pretends that new power will not be abused, regardless of how much existing power has been mishandled. Why worry about martial law when there is pork to be harvested and photo ops to attend? It is still unfashionable in Washington to worry about the danger of the open barn door until after the horse is two miles down the road.

_____________________________________

James Bovard is the author of Attention Deficit Democracy and eight other books.

April 23, 2007 Issue

BORIS YELTSIN: 1931-2007

The catalyst behind the Soviet collapse
By Maura Reynolds, Times Staff Writer
April 24, 2007

MOSCOW — Boris N. Yeltsin, the burly, bearish peasant who struck the deathblow that shattered the Soviet Union and served as the first president of the shrunken, disorderly Russia that emerged, died Monday. He was 76.

Yeltsin, who had been plagued by heart and other health problems for many years, died of "cardiovascular insufficiency" at a Moscow hospital, Sergei Mironov, head of the Russian presidential administration's medical center, told reporters.

In a televised speech Monday evening, Russian President Vladimir V. Putin described Yeltsin as "a man thanks to whom a whole epoch began, a new democratic Russia was born, a state free and open to the world."

"He was a straightforward and brave national leader," Putin said. "And he was always extremely frank and honest when defending his positions."

Putin declared Wednesday a national day of mourning. The Kremlin press service announced that a memorial service would be held that day at Christ the Savior Cathedral in Moscow, followed by burial at the Novodevichy cemetery, where many prominent Russians are buried.

Yeltsin was the first leader in Russian history — medieval, imperial or Soviet — to be democratically elected. He was also the first to voluntarily relinquish power, resigning on New Year's Eve 1999 in favor of Putin.

A man of great ambition and periodic vision, Yeltsin wrenched his country out of more than seven decades of socialist economic planning and Communist Party rule. His forceful stands were key to freeing the Soviet Union's constituent republics, creating 15 countries stretching from Europe to China. He lifted state controls in Russia on artists, journalists, churches and scholars.

Then he, and Russia with him, floundered. Hobbled by illness, Yeltsin failed to build a stable, prosperous and democratic nation. Economic programs backfired or ran aground. The legal system languished, and corruption and crime flourished in the vacuum. Rapacious businessmen bled the country of cash. Yeltsin launched a ruinous war against the independence-minded republic of Chechnya.

But today's critics of the post-communist era look back on Yeltsin's rule as a period of democratic freedoms that are now being chipped away.

Two images capsulize his career: In August 1991, Yeltsin clambered atop a tank outside the Russian parliament, galvanizing popular resistance and squelching a coup by hard-liners seeking to overthrow Soviet President Mikhail S. Gorbachev. Communist rule ended within weeks, the Soviet Union within months.

More than eight years later, a contrite Yeltsin went on television and resigned, finally acknowledging that he had failed to deliver on his promises of democracy and prosperity.

"I want to ask your forgiveness," Yeltsin said. "I want to apologize for not making many of our dreams come true."

Yeltsin's contradictions were as sweeping as the changes he wrought on his countrymen. He believed he was promoting democracy but concentrated power in his own hands. He criticized Gorbachev for backtracking on reforms and bringing hard-liners into the Kremlin, then did the same. He abhorred the Communist Party and KGB but handpicked a former intelligence agent as his successor.

Gorbachev sent a letter Monday to Yeltsin's wife, Naina, in which he paid tribute to his successor, who was sometimes an ally and sometimes a rival.

"Our destinies crossed paths in the most difficult years," Gorbachev wrote, according to a copy released by his office. "Yes, there were differences between us, and they were big ones…. But in these minutes I am thinking about the fact that both of us wanted what was good for the country and its people."

*

Closed to criticism

Some observers have suggested that Yeltsin's fatal flaw was that he saw himself as the embodiment of Russian democracy. Not knowing how to build the institutions and social practices necessary for civil society, he concentrated on prolonging his reign and neutralizing his opposition. He ignored criticism. His governing style had more in common with that of the monarchs and tyrants who preceded him than with parliamentary democracy.

The West had a hard time knowing how to respond to Yeltsin. At first preferring the smooth rhetoric of Gorbachev, most Western leaders shied away from the brash Russian president. But after Gorbachev resigned, they embraced Yeltsin wholeheartedly, judging that his new nation would need a bold figure to lead it through the post-Soviet disarray.

Some came to regret that stance as Yeltsin became increasingly erratic and ill through two terms as president. But he had marginalized his rivals, and therefore any democratic alternative to his increasingly autocratic leadership.



Single page

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >>

Archbishop is consistently irresponsible!
Archbishop blasts Sheryl Crow appearance

By CHRISTOPHER LEONARD, Associated Press Writer Wed Apr 25, 10:24 PM ET

ST. LOUIS - Archbishop Raymond Burke denounced a Catholic charity Wednesday for scheduling a benefit-concert appearance by
Sheryl Crow, who supports abortion rights.

Burke submitted his resignation as chairman of the board for the Cardinal Glennon Children's Foundation, saying the decision to let Crow sing on Saturday left him no other choice.

"It's very painful for me," Burke said during a news conference Wednesday. "But I have to answer to God for the responsibility I have as archbishop.

"A Catholic institution featuring a performer who promotes moral evil gives the impression that the church is somehow inconsistent in its teaching," Burke said.

Crow is set to appear at the 19th annual benefit for the Bob Costas Cancer Center at Cardinal Glennon Children's Medical Center. Costas will host the event, which will also feature comedian
Billy Crystal.

Crow's publicist didn't return a message seeking comment Wednesday.

Event organizer Allen Allred said he was disappointed with Burke's decision, but that Crow would appear Saturday as scheduled.

"This is not an event that's about ideology," Allred said. "This is about helping kids."

Burke said it was a "scandal" to let Crow sing at the event and amounted to an act that could lead others to evil. He cited Crow's support for stem cell research and "procured abortion."

Crow appeared in television ads throughout Missouri last year asking voters to approve an initiative that enshrined the right to conduct stem-cell research in the state constitution.

Burke said he became aware of Crow's participation in the cancer benefit in February and asked other board members to cancel her appearance.

"They didn't accept my concerns," Burke said.

Allred said board members didn't honor Burke's request because they didn't want to play politics with performers at the annual event, which has featured big-name entertainers like Jay Leno in the past.

Costas released a statement supporting the board's decision.

"I have never applied a litmus test, Catholic or otherwise, concerning the politics or religious beliefs of any of the generous performers who have come to St. Louis to help this worthy cause, nor do I intend to ... ," Costas wrote.

Burke made national news during the 2004 U.S. presidential campaign by saying he would deny Communion to Democratic presidential nominee
John Kerry, a Catholic who supports abortion rights. He later clarified the statement to say Catholics can vote for such candidates if they believe the candidate's stance on other moral issues outweighs the abortion-rights stance.

___

Associated Press Reporter Cheryl Wittenauer contributed to this report.

...just 20.5 light-years away in the constellation Libra, a second home?
Scientists find most Earth-like planet yet

By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Editor Wed Apr 25, 4:02 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - European astronomers have spotted what they say is the most Earth-like planet yet outside our solar system, with balmy temperatures that could support water and, potentially, life.

They have not directly seen the planet, orbiting a red dwarf star called Gliese 581. But measurements of the star suggest that a planet not much larger than the Earth is pulling on it, the researchers say in a letter to the editor of the journal Astronomy and Astrophysics.

"This one is the first one that is at the same time probably rocky, with water, and in a zone close to the star where the water could exist in liquid form," said Stephane Udry of the Geneva Observatory in Switzerland, who led the study.

"We have estimated that the mean temperature of this super-Earth lies between 0 and 40 degrees Celsius (32 to 104 degrees F), and water would thus be liquid."

Most of the 200 or so planets that have been spotted outside this solar system have been gas giants like Jupiter. But this one is small.

"Its radius should be only 1.5 times the Earth's radius, and models predict that the planet should be either rocky, like our Earth, or covered with oceans," Udry said in a telephone interview.

It appears to have a mass five times that of Earth's.

The research team includes scientists credited with the first widely accepted discovery of a planet outside our solar system, in 1995.

Many teams are looking for planets circling other stars. They are especially looking for those similar to our own, planets that could support life.

That means finding water.

X MARKS THE SPOT

"Because of its temperature and relative proximity, this planet will most probably be a very important target of the future space missions dedicated to the search for extra-terrestrial life," Xavier Delfosse, a member of the team from Grenoble University in France, said in a statement.

"On the treasure map of the universe, one would be tempted to mark this planet with an X."

Gliese 581 is among the 100 closest stars to Earth, just 20.5 light-years away in the constellation Libra.

A light-year is the distance light travels in a year, about 6 trillion miles.

It is smaller and dimmer than the sun, so the planet can be close to it and yet not be overheated.

"These low-mass stars are the ones where we are going to be able to discover planets in the habitable zone first," said planet-hunter David Bennett of the University of Notre Dame in Indiana, who was not involved in the research.

Bennett cautioned that current temperature alone does not mean water still exists on the planet. It could have burned off ages ago, when the star was hotter than it is now.

Udry's team uses a method known as radial velocity, using the European Southern Observatory telescope at La Silla, Chile.

The same team has identified one larger planet orbiting Gliese 581 already and say they have strong evidence of a third planet with a mass about eight times that of the Earth.

Future missions, perhaps in 20 to 30 years, may be able to block the light from the star and take a spectrographic image of the planets. The color of the light coming from the planet can give hints of whether water, or perhaps large amounts of plant life, exist there.

Legion/WWII cluelessness that regularly sacrifices it's children to their cluelessness must die! We can't take anymore!
McCain attempts to breathe new life into campaign

By Steve Holland 1 hour, 42 minutes ago

PORTSMOUTH, New Hampshire (Reuters) - Faced with questions about his age and all-out support for the
Iraq war, Republican U.S. Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record) pitched his experience in seeking to breathe fresh life into his presidential campaign on Wednesday in New Hampshire.

On a cool, gray day in the state that holds the country's first presidential primary election next January, the 70-year-old formally launched his bid to succeed George W. Bush as president in the November 2008 race with a speech in Portsmouth and later, in Manchester.

He would become the oldest person to be elected president.
Ronald Reagan won in 1980 at age 69.

McCain, a cancer survivor, wore a dark sweater and no tie and confronted the age question head on as he takes on a younger Republican field that includes former New York
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who has now overtaken him in the most national polls, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

"We face formidable challenges, I'm not afraid of them. I'm prepared for them. I'm not the youngest candidate. But I am the most experienced," he told a crowd of several hundred cheering supporters.

McCain is trying to recreate the magic of his 2000 campaign when he beat Bush in New Hampshire by 18 percentage points. His bus, the "Straight Talk Express," motored him across the state trying to rev up support and convince voters he is basically the same candidate now.

"I'm the same," he told reporters who asked if he was more conservative now than then. "I'm exactly the same as I was -- a slight bit older, but the same as I was."

After starting his campaign months ago as the presumed front-runner, McCain has trailed Giuliani and Romney in all-important campaign fund raising, a problem he blamed on himself -- "I didn't work as hard as I should."

This week McCain replaced his finance director and scheduled more fund-raising events to coincide with a campaign swing that takes him to South Carolina on Thursday then on to Iowa, Nevada and his home state of Arizona.

A leading reason for McCain's troubles has been his vigorous support for the unpopular Iraq war at a time when many Americans are weary of the conflict and eager to return U.S. troops home.

"We all know that the war in Iraq has not gone well. We've made mistakes and we have paid grievously for them," he said. "We have changed the strategy that failed us, and we have begun to make a little progress."

But McCain, who spent five years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, was unsparing in his criticism of how the war was conducted initially, saying the country should never undertake a war without a comprehensive plan for success.

"We did not meet this responsibility initially. And we must never repeat that mistake again," McCain said.

"What about a good reason?" a man shouted from the crowd.

Without mentioning names, McCain seemed to take shots at Giuliani, who was New York mayor during the September 11 attacks, and Bush by raising questions about American preparedness for terrorist attack or national calamity, an apparent reference to Hurricane Katrina.

Americans will not accept, he said, "that firemen and policemen are unable to communicate with each other in an emergency because they don't have the same radio frequency" or the "government's failure to deliver bottled water to dehydrated babies or rescue the infirm from a hospital with no electricity" or take care of wounded veterans.

Outside the barricades surrounding the Portsmouth event, a small group of protesters held up signs with slogans including "U.S. Out of Iraq."

From Digg, Mexico City is taken over by the True God!
Mexican capital legalizes abortion, defies church
Tue Apr 24, 2007 7:00pm ET162

By Catherine Bremer and Adriana Barrera

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - The Mexican capital legalized abortion on Tuesday, defying the church but delighting feminists in the world's second-largest Roman Catholic country.

Mexico City lawmakers voted 46 to 19 to pass a leftist-sponsored bill allowing women to abort in the first three months of pregnancy.

The abortion vote split Mexico and prompted a letter last week from Pope Benedict urging Mexican bishops to oppose it.

Riot police kept rival groups of rowdy demonstrators apart outside the city's assembly building. Weeping anti-abortion protesters played tape recordings of babies crying and carried tiny white coffins.

Until Tuesday, only Cuba, Guyana and U.S. commonwealth Puerto Rico allowed abortion on demand in Latin America.

Church leaders threatened to excommunicate leftist deputies, mostly from the Party of the Democratic Revolution, who voted in favor of lifting the abortion ban, which will remain in force in the rest of the country. Continued...

? Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved.

< Previous 1 | 2 Next >

Realtors, who needs them? Economists, who needs them? What are they good for?
Existing home sales plunge in March

By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer Tue Apr 24, 11:29 AM ET

WASHINGTON - Sales of existing homes plunged in March by the largest amount in nearly two decades, reflecting bad weather and increasing problems in the subprime mortgage market, a real estate trade group reported Tuesday.

The National Association of Realtors reported that sales of existing homes fell by 8.4 percent in March, compared to February. It was the biggest one-month decline since a 12.6 percent plunge in January 1989, another period of recession conditions in housing.

The drop left sales in March at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 6.12 million units, the slowest pace since June 2003.

The steep sales decline was accompanied by an eighth straight fall in median home prices, the longest such period of falling prices on record. The median price fell to $217,000, a drop of 0.3 percent from the price a year ago.

The fall in sales in March was bigger than had been expected and it dashed hopes that housing was beginning to mount a recovery after last year's big slump. That slowdown occurred after five years in which sales of both existing and new homes had set records.

David Lereah, chief economist at the Realtors, attributed the big drop in part to bad weather in February, which discouraged shoppers and meant that sales that closed in March would be lower. Existing home sales are counted when the sales are closed.

Lereah said that the troubles in mortgage lending were also playing a significant part in depressing sales. Lenders have tightened standards with the rising delinquencies in mortgages especially in the subprime market, where borrowers with weak credit histories obtained their loans.

Ian Shepherdson, chief economist at High Frequency Economics in Valhalla, N.Y., said the dismal March performance reflected in part better sales in January and February, which were driven by warmer-than-normal temperatures in the previous months.

"This looks awful but it is surely just a reversal of the favorable weather effects which boosted January and February sales," he said.

There was weakness in every part of the country in March. Sales fell by 10.9 percent in the Midwest. They were down 9.1 percent in the West, 8.2 percent in the Northeast and 6.2 percent in the South.

"The negative impact of subprime is considerable," Lereah said. "I expect sales to be sluggish in April, May and June."

Lereah said he didn't expect a full recovery in housing until 2008. He predicted that sales of existing homes would drop by about 3 percent this year with the decline in sales of new homes an even steeper 15 percent.

He said that the median price for homes sold in 2007 would fall by 1 percent to 3 percent, which would be the first price decline for an entire year on the Realtors' records, which go back four decades.

The steep slump in housing over the past year has been a major factor slowing the overall economy. It has subtracted around 1 percentage point from growth since mid-2006.

Bleed him out, boys!
World Bank committee rejects Wolfowitz hearing

By Lesley Wroughton 28 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A special committee looking into whether
World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz breached rules by approving a promotion for his girlfriend has declined to meet with his lawyer, raising concerns it is rushing to judgment, the lawyer said on Tuesday.

"I have heard indirectly they will not meet with me, which is very disappointing and it raises questions about whether Mr Wolfowitz is really going to be treated fairly," the lawyer, Robert Bennett (news, bio, voting record), told Reuters.

"I hope it doesn't mean that, but I am concerned," said Bennett, a high-profile lawyer whose clients have included former president
Bill Clinton.

Bennett said he was worried there was a "rush to judgment" over Wolfowitz, whose appointment to the presidency in mid-2004 was controversial because he was a U.S. deputy defense secretary and architect of the war in
Iraq.

Wolfowitz has apologized for his handling of the promotion and pay rise for Shaha Riza, who was moved by the bank to a job at the State Department after an ethics committee raised potential conflict of interest issues.

The bank's staff association has said the high-paying promotion broke bank rules and called for Wolfowitz to resign, while some European member countries have questioned whether he should keep his job.

The U.S. government has backed Wolfowitz and urged leading European countries to withhold judgment until the World Bank's 24-nation board decides on his future.

The board appointed the committee last week to consider conflict of interest, ethical and reputation issues, amid concerns among members that the controversy would damage the reputation of the poverty-fighting agency.

The countries have urged a speedy resolution.

Board sources told Reuters there was no need for lawyers since the committee was looking into "administrative procedures and not legal issues."

Bennett said on Monday he was worried the committee would base its decisions on selective documents and that Wolfowitz's side of the story deserved a hearing.

He also said the bank's treatment of Riza was "grossly unfair" because she had not been given the chance to defend herself properly.

In Ottawa, Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty cautioned the board should be allowed to complete its work.

"I've discussed this issue with a number of the members of the World Bank ... there are some differences of opinion but I think we share with a number of countries that we believe in due process," Flaherty told reporters in Ottawa.

PROMISES OF CHANGE

In an e-mail to staff on Tuesday, Wolfowitz appealed for patience and said he was making "major changes" to address concerns over his management.

"I understand the importance of coming to closure - in a timely manner - on the issue involving me, and would ask for your continued patience in allowing time for the Board to do its work," Wolfowitz said.

Trying to mend rifts with staff, Wolfowitz said he had met with the bank's regional vice presidents who were "candid in their feedback to me on the challenges facing the bank and I appreciate this."

Among the changes that Wolfowitz has promised is the role of aides he brought with him to the bank from the
Pentagon and White House, Kevin Kellems and Robin Cleveland.

Wolfowitz has acknowledged tensions among bank staff over the aides, whose appointments raised concerns that he relied on his own inner circle for advice.

In the e-mail, Wolfowitz urged staff to focus on their work: "We have an enormous agenda of work ahead of us over the coming months, including projected delivery of some 180 projects and a big corporate agenda which requires the full energy of each of you."

Even the holy screw up now and then!
Former Apple CFO settles with SEC

By Michael Kahn 2 hours, 3 minutes ago

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Apple Inc.'s (Nasdaq:AAPL - news) former finance chief settled with U.S. regulators on Tuesday over backdated stock options grants, saying he had relied on statements by Chief Executive
Steve Jobs in handling the grants at the company.

The U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission said it would not pursue action against Apple after reaching a settlement with former Chief Financial Officer Fred Anderson and filing charges against former General Counsel Nancy Heinen.

Anderson agreed, without admitting or denying the allegations, to pay about $3.5 million in fines and disgorgement of profits.

In a statement issued by his lawyer, Anderson said he warned Jobs about an executive stock option grant in January 2001, saying the grant would have to be priced based on the date of the actual Apple board agreement.

"He was told by Mr. Jobs that the Board had given its prior approval and the board would verify it," the statement from Anderson's lawyer, Jerome Roth, said. "Fred relied on these statements by Mr. Jobs and from them concluded the grant was being properly handled."

In its suit against Heinen, the SEC accused her of also participating in fraudulent backdating of stock options granted in 2001 to Jobs and other senior executives.

Heinen's lawyer said in a statement it was unfair to single his client out for enforcement action among executives in more than 170 companies swept up in a stock option scandal.

"To suggest that Ms. Heinen engaged in fraud is to misunderstand the facts of what happened," Miles Ehrlich said in a statement. "Nancy did not backdate stock options, and she didn't deceive anyone either inside or outside the company."

Apple, the maker of the popular iPod digital music players and
Macintosh computers, is among dozens of companies under scrutiny for their accounting of stock options granted to executives. The company said in December it would take an $84 million charge for improperly dating more than 6,400 stock options.

The main issue for many companies is whether they improperly dated stock options grants to take advantage of a temporary decline in the underlying share price.

The SEC complaint alleges Heinen lied to auditors, created false documents -- including one from a board meeting that regulators charge did not occur in 2001 -- and circumvented company controls.

But the agency also said it would not file an enforcement action against Apple in connection with its stock options investigation, citing the company's "extraordinary" cooperation.

"Apple's cooperation consisted of, among other things, prompt self-reporting, an independent internal investigation, the sharing of the results of that investigation with the government, and the implementation of new controls designed to prevent the recurrence of fraudulent conduct," the SEC said in a statement.

Apple shares were up 0.6 percent at $94.08 in afternoon trading on Nasdaq.

(Additional reporting by Nichola Groom in Los Angeles, Julie Vorman in Washington and Duncan Martell in San Francisco),

Nothing does my heart more good than Catholics righteously disobeying stupid, fascist Vatican edicts!
Mexico City to legalize abortion in landmark vote

By Greg Brosnan and Catherine Bremer 46 minutes ago

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexico City lawmakers are almost certain to legalize abortion in the capital of the world's second-largest Roman Catholic country on Tuesday in direct defiance of the Pope.

Leftist lawmakers dominate Mexico City's local assembly and will vote on allowing women in the capital to abort in the first three months of pregnancy.

Riot police stood between rival groups of demonstrators outside the assembly building as the debate began. Weeping anti-abortion protesters played tape recordings of babies crying and carried tiny white coffins.

In Latin America, only Cuba, Guyana and U.S. commonwealth Puerto Rico allow abortion on demand. Mexico and many other countries permit it in special cases, including after rape, if the fetus has defects or if the mother's life is at risk.

The abortion vote has split Mexico and inspired a letter from
Pope Benedict urging Mexican bishops to oppose it.

Church leaders have threatened to excommunicate deputies from the Party of the Democratic Revolution who vote in favor of lifting the abortion ban, which will remain in force in the rest of Mexico.

"They will get the penalty of excommunication. That is not revenge, it is just what happens in the case of serious sins," said Felipe Aguirre Franco, the archbishop of Acapulco.

City deputies from President Felipe Calderon's conservative National Action Party, or PAN, tried delaying tactics that might delay the vote until early Wednesday morning.

Leftists, who hold more than half of the assembly's 66 seats, threw out a PAN motion aimed at derailing the abortion bill.

Opinion polls show Mexico's population of 107 million, of whom some 90 percent are Catholic, is split over the issue.

PROTESTS

Supporters of abortion, who are well-represented in the liberal-minded capital, say 2,000 women die each year in Mexico, often poor women who have to resort to unhygienic back-street clinics.

"Yes to abortion, no to hypocrisy," read a poster held by Teresa Rivera, 57, who said she had a clandestine abortion when younger and was dumped in the street still anesthetized by the abortionist. "Excommunicate me," said another banner held by a woman in her 20s.

"There are children dying of hunger, that is a worse sin," said Julia Klug, 54, dressed in a fake cardinal's outfit.

Mexico City lawmakers have recently stirred up controversy by allowing gay civil unions and considering a euthanasia law. Further alarming the anti-abortion camp, Mexican lawmakers have filed a proposal in Congress for a national abortion law.

Anti-abortion campaigners say the fetus three months into pregnancy is a human being.

"At 12 weeks, its heart is beating, it has little arms, little legs. It's innocent, it can't say, 'Don't take my life away,"' said protester Graciela Nunez, 46.

Conservatives published a full page of symbolic death notices for unborn children in a newspaper on Tuesday.

Abortion opponents have collected the 36,000 signatures they need to ask the city assembly for a referendum on abortion but any vote would not be binding on lawmakers.

Calderon, a practicing Catholic, has largely avoided speaking on the issue but First Lady Margarita Zavala entered the debate at the weekend, condemning abortion in a rare political comment.

Opponents may challenge the abortion law in the Supreme Court if it passes.

(Additional reporting by Adriana Barrera and Andrew Winning)