Not The End Of The Legislative Process

President Bush has just pledged to the American people that the legislative process will continue in an attempt to find a plan to bail out Wall Street that is acceptable to a majority in Congress.

The president's remarks were directed as much toward Congress as to the rest of the nation. Warning that the result of inaction is that the American people will suffer.

"The reality is that we are in an urgent situation," he said.

"If our nation continues on this course the economic damage will be painful and lasting."

Bush seems to be trying to redirect the focus of the bailout from Wall Street to the American people, many of whom feel resentment that the financial industry would be saved from ruin while they are left to struggle.


"We're facing." the president said, "a choice between action and the real aspect of economic hardship for many Americans."

Congress is in recess today for Rosh Hashana. But the president says members of his administration will be working with congressional leaders today in an attempt to get the legislative process back on track tomorrow.

"Congress must act," he declared.

"The sooner we address the problem the sooner we can get back on the path of growth and job creation."

It's clear that if a bailout plan stands any chance of succeeding, Americans must be convinced that it's really a bill to protect them, not Wall Street fat cats.

This is the fundamental problem with the way the first bill was pushed through the process so quickly. There was no time for the public to digest and understand it. Of course, no sooner was it presented to us than it was taken away as it failed in a rush to get it passed.

Let's hope that, whatever plan may be now forthcoming, the administration and Congress treats it like a fine bottle of red wine. Open it up. Let it breath. Give the nation an opportunity to smell the fragrance and swirl a taste before saying, "that's fine, thank you."

Did Hurt Feelings Torpedo Bailout Plan?

"The crisis is still with us."

So declared House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whose scathing speech near the end of the debate on the bill, blaming Pres. Bush for the economic crisis facing the nation, apparently convinced a dozen Republican members of Congress to vote "no" on a compromise bailout plan that had bipartisan support.

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) chided those who may have voted against the bill because of the Pelosi speech.

"Because somebody hurt their feelings they decided to punish the country," he charged.

"Give me those 12 names and I will go talk uncharacteristically nice to them."

There will be no revote today and Frank and other Jewish House members won't be available to conduct business Tuesday and Wednesday due to Rosh Hashona.

Frank says he recognizes that there are those Republicans who philisophically opposed the bill because they believe in a "free market ideology."

But he says the 12 members who voted no because of Pelosi's remarks represent the exact number that would be needed to reverse today's decision, which sent the Dow plummeting, at one point as of this writing, more than 700 points, to the lowest point drop in the history of the market.

No Movement On 9/11 Health Bill

Congress is doing a fine job quickly getting a bill through the process to bailout the ailing financial system in the United States. It's too bad it can't put a little bit of that effort toward helping those who were sickened as a result of the 9/11 attacks.

After all, it's "only" been seven years since the terrorists hit New York, Shanksville and Washington.

Today, four members of Congress from New York, two Republicans and two Democrats, are expressing "regret" that HR 7174, the revised bipartisan 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, will not be able to move to passage in these, the waning days of the current House session.

Democrats Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler, and Republicans Vito Fossella and Peter King, have issued a joint statement pledging to renew their efforts to get legislation passed during the next session.

The $11 billion bill would assure treatment of firefighters, medics, police officers, construction workers, clean-up crews, residents, people who work near Ground Zero and school children who are now sick as a result of exposure to toxins from the World Trade Center site. Although most live in the New York/New Jersey area, some 10,000 people from all 50 states responded to Ground Zero to assist in the search and rescue, recovery and clean up of the site. Many are sick. Others are concerned they will still fall ill.

In addition, more than 400,000 people are believed to have been exposed to toxins from the World Trade Center site. The Congress members say nearly 16,000 responders and at least 2,700 residents or people working in lower Manhattan are sick and receiving treatment. More than 40,000 responders are currently in medical monitoring; 71,000 more are enrolled in the WTC Health Registry.

The bill would have assured compensation for those who suffered economic losses as a result of their WTC-related illnesses.

Contractors and New York City are being sued by more than 10,000 people who claim they are sick as a result of Ground Zero toxins. The bill would shift the financial burden from them to the government. The four believe it's unfair that contractors who responded to a national emergency now face litigation because those who worked for them later fell ill.

The bill proposed providing medical monitoring and treatment to WTC responders and area workers, residents, students and others who were exposed to toxins released at Ground Zero. It would also reopen the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund to provide compensation for economic losses and harm as an alternative to the current litigation system and providing liability protections for the WTC contractors and New York City.

It's interesting, isn't it, that when the pressure is on, as it is now due to the economic crisis, Congress can act quickly and efficiently. Especially when members are looking to get out of town for the election recess. Yet attempts to provide compensation for those who are ill after responding to the nation's last crisis, the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, fail.

Today's Vote Fraught With Political Danger

Members of Congress are faced with a difficult situation today.

They've been told by Pres. Bush and some noted economists that if they don't vote for the Wall Street bailout plan that was hurriedly put together the past several days there will be panic in the financial world and banks won't be able to lend money to keep the economy rolling.

Yet there is widespread constituent dissatisfaction over the bailout. Many Americans resent the government spending $700 billion to save the financial institutions that approved and made loans that are now in default. But is doing nothing to help those who took out the loans.

It's a classic clash of class.

Leaders of both political parties worked out a plan that they insist sets limits. CEOs of troubled financial institutions would see their salaries capped. And there would be strict oversight to ensure that, this time, the money would be well invested.

If the investments fail, the financial institutions would pay the government back through fees or taxes in five years. Of course, presumably, if things continued to sour, they wouldn't be in a position to pay back the money. On the other hand, if there's an economic upswing, this could turn out to be a good investment for the government, which could later sell the assets it would be purchasing at a profit.

In the end, what was approved is a compromise. It's not exactly what the president first proposed. And it didn't include everything members of each party wanted.

The House is expected to vote on the proposal today. Congress is in recess tomorrow for Rosh Hashana. But the Senate would vote on the measure as early as Wednesday.

The haste in which this process is being conducted, perhaps, under the circumstances, necessary, puts the American people in a position of having to trust a Congress whose approval rating is already low, to do the right thing.

All of this, of course, does not occur in a vacuum. Wall Street's woes are causing tribulation in markets around the world. And this takes place in the middle of a presidential campaign. The Democrats say this is a financial crisis that took place during Pres. Bush's watch. The Republicans say Congress, which is controlled by the Democrats, was supposed to provide proper oversight.

Economists say, even if this bill passes and is signed into law this week, there will still be some back sliding of the economy. So even if it does what it is supposed to do, we're not out of the woods quite yet.

So for those of us who are not getting, directly, a piece of the $700 billion pie, the belt tightening continues. Hopefully, Wall Street will tighten its belt as well.

The bailout plan will be the focus of today's News Talk Online on Paltalk.com at 5 PM New York time. CLICK HERE to join in the conversation.

Bailout Plan Reached, Now What?

Congressional leaders announced they had reached a $700 billion Wall Street bailout plan early this morning. But few details were initially released.

There are, however, reportedly, some safeguards to protect the taxpayers. The plan includes the establishment of an insurance program for mortgage-backed securities that was pushed through by House Republicans.

The concern here is that Congress rushed through this plan so quickly that there may be some key deficiencies.

Some financial analysts had insisted that it was necessary to expedite the process and get it done before Monday trading on the Asian markets. They said as the Asian markets lead, Wall Street will follow. A plan in place before trading began, they argued, stabilizes the markets.

Hopefully Congress has righted things enough that the markets will begin rebounding and the backward slide in the economy will cease. And, hopefully, there are guarantees that this financial history won't repeat itself.

If so, the focus will now likely shift toward the issue of retribution for those to blame. The FBI is investigating. The results of those efforts are at least as equally awaited as was the congressional bailout plan.

Who Won The Debate? Perhaps, The Voters

The first 2008 presidential debate is over and, the morning after the night before finds a raging secondary debate being conducted. Over who "won" last night's verbal dual.

In The McCain Obama 2008 Debate Room in Paltalk Studio A on Paltalk.com, voters were given the opportunity to share their own reactions. The lively discussion lasted into the wee hours of Saturday morning.

"Obama wiped the floor with McCain," one Democratic said.

"Everyone is saying McCain won," was the comment of a Republican.

But does it really matter who "won" the debate? Was that the purpose? To determine who is the better debater? Or is reason they debate to clarify their positions to the American people?

In some areas, the two, naturally, disagreed. In a few, there was agreement. And in several, what they agreed upon was that they "fundamentally disagreed."

There was also opportunity for each candidate to correct or clarify accusations made by the other.

If one was listening closely, one heard that John McCain and Barack Obama both basically favor a bailout of Wall Street and checks and balances to prevent a recurrence of the financial mess the nation faces. Details remained elusive. So they settled on differing over the reason for the crisis.

McCain made the most dramatic suggestion about how to better prioritize the federal budget as a result of the nation's financial woes, by cutting out huge amounts of spending ... a "spending freeze" is what he called it. Obama countered that would be "using a sledge hammer when you need a scalpel." This is the kind of fundamental difference that could help someone who is undecided determine who to vote for.

Another difference that contrasted the two had to do with their approach to taxation. McCain believes in the trickle down theory. Reduce unnecessary business taxes as an incentive to keep them in the United States and keep Americans employed. Obama favors a bottom up approach, reducing taxes for the bulk of the American people so they have more expendable income keeping those businesses going.

They of course, differed on Iraq. McCain insisting history has proven him right about Iraq and the surge. Obama believing the Iraq war effort diverted the nation's military attention from Afghanistan and northern Pakistan where those responsible for the 9/11 attacks still hide.

On other world issues, such as Iran, McCain scolded Obama, calling him "naive." There was strident discourse over Obama's oft ridiculed support of unconditional negotiations with world leaders, including Iranian Pres. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Obama, on the defense, insisted unconditional negotiations doesn't mean unprepared negotiations. "It doesn't mean," he said, "you invite them over for tea." McCain countered that unconditionally negotiating with the Iranians, who have made it clear they want to wipe Israel off the map, legitimizes their comments. "This," he asserted, "is dangerous."

I found the comments of the all important undecided voters during the post-debate discussion on Paltalk the most interesting. I wondered whether any of them had been swayed by what the candidates had said.

One participant, a woman from Louisiana, said she came away still undecided. She thought both men had made some good points. She also found herself in disagreement with other things each said. Her analysis suggested that, as a result of their televised face off, the positions of the two candidates were better defined. So in the end, maybe we can say who won. Perhaps the American voters, seeking clarification before the November election are the true debate winners.

Common Ground In Pre-Debate Debate

Democratic and Republican political strategists Hank Sheinkopf and Jeffrey Wisenfeld sounded like two brothers with different mothers as they verbally clashed on News Talk Online on Paltalk over whether Barack Obama or John McCain should be elected president. But on one issue they agreed completely.

"They should be put in jail," Democrat Sheinkopf declared, referring to those responsible for the nation's economic mess.

"Absolutely," responded Republican Wisenfeld.

Of course, on other issues, the partisans differed. Sheinkopf believes America is not well liked around the world, and that an Obama administration would go far to change that image.

Wisenfeld believes McCain is better suited to protect the nation from its enemies.

Wisenfeld also predicts that McCain will surprise those expecting Obama to handily win tonight's presidential debate. Time will tell whether that will happen. But, clearly, McCain has a lot more to gain, and Obama more to lose.

Rushing To Fix The Economy

Less than 24 hours after Pres. Bush called for quick congressional action on his economic bailout plan, competing counter proposals were introduced.

Wow, can Congress act quickly when it wants. How our elected representatives can introduce quick solutions to a complex and long-to-mature financial crisis while dragging its feet for years on other issues, like, for example, a revamping of the nation's health care system defies understanding.

As the government seeks to fix the problem one thing remains consistent. The nation was put in this position by people playing with other people's money. And the proposed bailouts would be with other people's money as well ... ours.

While everyone agrees the nation is in financial crisis and something needs to be done, everyone should take a deep breath and slow down for a moment.

Let's give economists opportunity to read, digest and respond to the various proposals. Let's give the commentators time to explain them to the public. Most importantly, let's give the public a chance to understand what's being proposed and to make their feelings known to their representatives.

And members of Congress ... do not forget that that's what you are. The people's representatives. Maybe you should be helping explain to your constituents the various options and hear what they have to say before you spend other people's money. Theirs.

Democratic, GOP Strategists On News Talk Online

Sheinkopf

Two political strategists, one Democrat, the other Republican, will be my guests Friday September 26 on News Talk Online on Paltalk.com to talk about the presidential race and John McCain’s decision to suspend campaigning due to the economic crisis facing the nation.

Hank Sheinkopf has been a political, public affairs and governmental relations consultant for nearly 30 years. He has worked on political campaigns and issue campaigns in four continents, 10 foreign nations, in addition to more than 600 domestic political and issue campaigns in 46 American states.

Sheinkopf was a member of President Clinton’s re-election media team producing ads for the only Democratic president re-elected since FDR.

Attorney Jeffrey Wisenfeld was an aide to then-U.S. Sen. Al D’Amato (R-NY) and was Republican New York Gov. George Pataki’s executive assistant in New York City, running the governor’s NYC office and coordinating relations with civic and geographic organizations in the Big Apple.

Wisenfeld was appointed a trustee of the City University of New York and is a former director of the United Nations Development Corporation.

To talk to Wisenfeld and Sheinkopf Friday September 26 at 5 PM New York time CLICK HERE. There is no charge.

Economists Oppose Bush Bailout Plan

Last night, Pres. Bush made an impassioned plea in an address to the American people for swift action on his Wall Street bailout plan. Which he says needs, and is getting, bipartisan support.

The president used dire language to underscore the need for quick action. Asserting that the "entire economy is in danger."

He needs to sell the $700 billion plan to the American people, because so many citizens are phoning and writing their representatives saying they are opposed to it. And many, on both sides of the congressional aisle, are expressing reservations.

A poll suggests that about one-third of Americans support the plan. One-third oppose it. And the final third are confused about it and undecided.

Among those not confused are 166 economists from colleges and universities across the United States who are in the second third, and are staunchly opposed.

They've signed a letter addressed to the House and Senate, explaining why it's not good for the nation.

While they agree with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's assessment that the current financial situation is "difficult" and there is need for "bold action" to ensure that the economy will continue to function, they see three "fatal pitfalls" in his plan.

First, they say in their letter, it is unfair.

"The plan is a subsidy to investors at taxpayers’ expense," they write. "Investors who took risks to earn profits must also bear the losses."

This is a theme that's oft repeated by non-econonomists, regular Americans who are wondering why they have to foot the bill. Why give money, their money, they ask, to the very people who created this mess? And what about the victims of these bad lending decisions? Those who face foreclosures on their homes? No one is offering to bail them out.

The economists suggest in the letter that it's possible to make new loans to creditworthy borrowers without bailing out institutions whose choices "proved unwise."

The economists also feel the Paulson plan is ambiguous.

"Neither the mission of the new agency nor its oversight is clear," they write.

Finally, they argue, the plan fails to address long-term effects, which, they note, will be with us for generations. "For all their recent troubles, America's dynamic and innovative private capital markets have brought the nation unparalleled prosperity," the letter says.

"Fundamentally weakening those markets in order to calm short-run disruptions is desperately short-sighted."

For these reasons, the economists are urging Congress to slow down the process, hold hearings and "carefully consider the right course of action."

This is a point we all can agree upon. The administration, for some reason, is trying to to ram this down the nation's throat.

"The government's top economic experts warn that, without immediate action by Congress, America could slip into a financial panic and a distressing scenario would unfold," Bush said last night.

Immediate action. That's the advice of the government's top economic experts.

The 166 economists who signed the letter to Congress would beg to differ.

The bailout plan will be the topic on today's News Talk Online on Paltalk.com at 5 PM New York time. CLICK HERE to join in the conversation.

Can We Protect Our Borders And Our Rights At The Same Time?

Sometimes I feel like I'm speaking a different language than some of my fellow Americans.

Today was one such day.

The discussion on News Talk Online on Paltalk.com was about a government policy, kept hidden until it was revealed through a Freedom Of Information Act request, authorizing Customs agents to peruse the personal and business documents of any person entering the United States. And to make copies as well. In the name, of course, of national security.

Even my own online producer and show screener, Boaz Frankel, didn't seem to get it when I suggested this is an invasive policy. One that takes away rights under the guise of protecting us from those who would, if they could, well, take away our rights.

The fear mongering over terrorism is becoming a bit frightening in and of itself.

Not that we shouldn't be vigilant. Of course we should. Not that the threat isn't real. Of course it is. But let's just not willingly and voluntarily give up our rights in the name of protecting them.

One caller, Malik from Indianapolis, an attorney, points out that all persons in the United States are afforded Constitutional rights. That includes foreign nationals suspected of being terrorists.

While some Americans have a hard time wrapping their brains around that one, one would think they would at least recognize that the rights of U.S. citizens are protected by the Constitution.

Producer and political correspondent Alan Jasie painted a great picture when he said that, when he travels to nations that lack our freedoms, he's always happy to know that he regains his Constitutional rights when he re-enters the United States. Regains them, it seems, only after his passport is stamped and the Customs agent says, "welcome to America." Until then, the government seems willing to withhold his, and our rights. Just in case we may be carrying documents it may find interesting reading.

No Border Crossing Privacy

Privacy concerns

Now, in addition to being able to scan your laptops when you enter the United States, Customs agents are being permitted to read and even copy your personal documents.

Details of the relaxed regulations are contained in documents procured in a Freedom Of Information Act request filed by the Asian Law Caucus and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

The rules, according to the obtained documents, were actually relaxed last summer without public debate.

"For more than 20 years, the government implicitly recognized that reading and copying the letters, diaries, and personal papers of travelers without reason would chill Americans' rights to free speech and free expression," Shirin Sinnar, ALC staff attorney, said in a press release. "But now customs officials can probe into the thoughts and lives of ordinary travelers without any suspicion at all."

In February, ALC and EFF sued the Department of Homeland Security for failing to disclose its policies on searching and questioning travelers at U.S. borders. ALC, a San Francisco-based civil rights organization, received more than two dozen complaints since last year from U.S. travelers, mostly of Muslim, South Asian, or Middle Eastern origin, who said they were grilled about their families, religious practices, volunteer activities, political beliefs, or associations when returning to the United States from travels abroad.

The travelers said that CBP agents examined their books, handwritten notes, personal photos, laptop computer files, and cell phone directories, and sometimes made copies of this information.

While it is, of course, important, for Homeland Security to fight terrorism in the United States, the personal and business documents of U.S. citizens ought not become the domain of law enforcement without sufficient reason. And there should be public checks and balances to ensure that abuses don't take place.

The fact that Homeland Security relaxed these rules under the radar, with no announcement nor opportunity for public comment or congressional review makes the decision suspicious.

If, in fact, the ability to read our personal writings and view our photographs was so necessary in the war on terrorism, why did it take until 2007 to change the rules? Why weren't they modified in late 2001 or early 2002 after the September 11 attacks?

When we talk about the "war on terrorism" it is implied that we are trying to protect the nation against attack from those who would, if given the opportunity, change our way of life and take from us the very freedoms we hold so dear. Why would we give up those freedoms, then, ostensibly, to protect them?

Are protecting our freedoms and adhering to the Constitution of the United States and fighting terrorists mutually exclusive? If so, this nation faces a peril far greater than the economic crisis currently at hand.

We'll be discussing this issue on today's News Talk Online on Paltalk.com at 5 PM New York time. To join in the conversation CLICK HERE.

--

Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/auvet/2701334423/

FBI Probe Into Financial Crisis Reported

Many people have been clamoring for a criminal investigation into the near collapse of the U.S. financial system. Now, apparently, their pleas are being answered.

The Associated Press is reporting that the FBI is investigating Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and AIG for possible fraud.

The AP says Lehman Brothers is also under investigation.

While criminal charges, if they eventually come, won't make whole those who have been damaged by poor investment decisions, the investigation at least signals that the law applies to everyone in the United States.

Now if we can only find a way to make the bailout plan as equitable!

GOP Voter Supression Campaign Charged

Investigative reporter and blogger Brad Friedman who probes election fraud allegations is charging that Republicans across the nation are engaged in a campaign to suppress votes in Democratic enclaves.

Friedman, during an appearance on News Talk Online on Paltalk.com, alleged that the Democrats are engaged under attack but are oblivious to the fact that they are under siege and are not doing much to stop the tactics.

The author of Brad Blog says Republicans are trying to preclude, for example, college students, from voting by making it difficult for them to prove their residency. One tactic is to demand that the young voters, who trend toward supporting Democrat Barack Obama, show they are receiving utility bills at their claimed residences. Impossible, of course, when living in a dorm.

Friedman, who says he is a non-partisan, is involved in or supports several organizations designed to reveal attempts to suppress voting. Among them Save Voting, Standing For Voters and Poll Workers For Democracy.

He says, that in general, the nation's voting system is, "in worse shape than in 2000." He points to problems with touch screen voting systems - even those that include paper trails - that don't assure that votes are properly counted.

Even paper ballots, which many tout as a solution to election fraud problems, are not necessarily dependable, he charges, especially those that are counted by electronic optical scan systems that can, he says, be manipulated.

Suit Charges Absentee Voter Applications Denied

Brunner

In Michigan, a lawsuit by the Democrats charges that the Macomb County Republican Party chairman is illegally trying to challenge voters whose homes have been foreclosed as a way to suppress votes for Barack Obama.

In neighboring Ohio, another key state in the presidential election, it's the Republicans who are leveling charges at the Democrats.

John McCain campaign adviser William Todd charges in a lawsuit that Democratic Ohio Secretary of States Jennifer Brunner is failing to honor applications for absentee ballots on the grounds that a required box isn't checked off on the forms.

The box affirms that the person filing the application is a qualified voter. The Republicans, who printed the forms, say it's not necessary to check the box. Presumably, if a person's name appears on the voter rolls, that individual is already deemed "qualified" to vote.

We all know that presidential elections are partisan and can be bitter. But the state secretary of state, who oversees elections in the Buckeye state, is supposed to act in a non-partisan manner and ensure that the rights of all voters are ensured.

We've previously seen allegations of voter disenfranchisement in Ohio. Allegations are still swirling today over the possible tampering of the electronic voting network in the 2004 presidential election.

The integrity of the vote must be assured. And not just the ballots that are cast on election day. It's estimated that a full third of the votes cast will be done by absentee ballot this year.

There are too many people, already, who feel so frustrated by the political process that they are sitting out this election. Let's make sure that those who do vote do so with the full assurance that their ballots will be counted.

Protecting voter's rights will be the topic of News Talk Online on Paltalk.com today at 5 PM New York time. To join in the conversation CLICK HERE.

George Will Blasts McCain

Cox - scapegoat?

It's no secret that John McCain was not the first choice of the conservatives in the Republican Party. But most of those who supported Mike Huckabee or Fred Thompson or Rudy Giuliani during the primaries have gotten in line behind McCain. McCain shored up their support by choosing Sarah Palin as his running mate.

But not all conservatives are so willing to embrace McCain as, at least, the anti-Obama. Conservative columnist George Will, for example.

In his op-ed today in the Washington Post, Will blasts McCain for his reactions to the financial crisis facing the nation. And opines that, neither McCain nor Barack Obama are suited to be president of the United States.

Will is particularly upset that McCain puts the blame on the situation on the head of Security and Exchange Commission Chairman Chris Cox, who the Wall Street Journal previously described as "McCain's scapegoat."

Will doesn't go so far as to endorse Obama. But he certainly isn't offering a ringing endorsement of McCain either.

Bailout Resentment

As the details of the government's proposed bailout of Wall Street start to emerge, there's a corresponding chorus of discontent being raised by the American people.

Even those who understand the need for the bailout are expressing their displeasure.

The $700 billion plan would empower the Treasury Department to buy bad mortgages from banks. Treasury would then negotiate prices and resell those mortgages (a risky proposition) freeing the banks that backed the poor loans to start lending money again.

Of course, those whose homes have been foreclosed get nothing. The big guys on Wall Street get a pass. And that's what's frustrating so many people.

News Talk Online political correspondent Alan Jasie took a walk down Wall Street after the show and spotted a guy getting into a Cadillac Escalade. Not a Lincoln Town Car. A Cadillac Escalade. Whose driver whisked him away, presumably for a luxury ride home.

With the rest of us parking even our efficient cars in favor of public transportation in and out of the city, the Escalade is, arguably, a symbol of the excesses of Wall Street that got us into this mess in the first place.

Partisanship was set aside today as callers to News Talk Online on Paltalk.com expressed their frustration over the mess we're in today. Democrats, Republicans and independents all asked why those who are responsible seem to be escaping retribution. Several want to know what Congress plans to do to ensure that this doesn't happen again. And caller after caller asked, why are the corporations being bailed out while individuals who are suffering from their decisions are being left to fend for themselves.

Jasie notes that it's really more than $700 billion in taxpayer's money here. He calculates that it's costing $85 billion more to bail out AIG. Another $25 billion to save Fannie and Freddie. And $29 billion in assistance in the JP Morgan absorption of Bear Stearns. But what's another $150 billion or so among friends?

The other question is, of course, have the people who play with other people's money learned anything? If the guy taking the Escalade limousine home from work on The Street is any indication, maybe not.

Blogger Who Reports On Voter Fraud, Disenfranchisement On News Talk Online On Paltalk

Friedman

Brad Friedman, who reports on votes that don't get counted and voters who are discouraged from casting their ballots will be my guest tomorrow, Tuesday September 23, on News Talk Online on Paltalk.com.

Friedman will detail attempts by a state GOP official in Michigan to block those whose homes have been foreclosed from voting in the November election.

The state Democratic Party has taken the Republican Party to court in the Great Lakes state to try and block the attempted challenge, based on an argument that a person whose home has been foreclosed no longer can prove residency in the election district. House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) is also investigating.

Friedman's Brad Blog has broken stories about the White House website scrubbing, the Tom Feeney/Clint Curtis/Yang Enterprises Vote-Rigging Scandal" (about which a documentary film, Murder, Spies & Voting Lies, featuring Brad and his year's-long effort to investigate and report the story, has now been made); the story of the phony GOP front group, American Center for Voting Rights and the e-voting machine "sleepover" controversy in San Diego's Busby/Bilbray U.S. House special election. He has also reported about whistle blowers like FBI translator Sibel Edmonds and has covered concerns about the integrity of the products developed by various electronic voting machine companies. Friedman has addressed U.S. Election Assistance Commission, the Texas state legislature and many other governmental and non-governmental organizations.

Friedman appears regularly on ABC News and CNN and has been the subject of several documentary films.

He is also a frequent contributor to the Huffington Post and has written articles and editorials for The Guardian , Mother Jones, Editor & Publisher, ComputerWorld, Columbus Free Press, Salon.com, TruthOut.org, Harvard's Nieman Foundation of Journalism and Hustler magazine.

To talk to Friedman on News Talk Online on Paltalk at 5 PM New York time Tuesday September 23 CLICK HERE. There is no charge.

Paltalk is the largest multimedia interactive program on the Internet with more than 4 million unique users.

News Talk Online is syndicated by CRN Digital Talk Radio to an additional 12 million households.

Get Paltalk programming updates by subscribing to our Twitter feed at www.twitter.com/paltalk. The Paltalk Twitter feed also appears on this blog.

Pakistani Troops Fire On U.S. Helicopters

For the second time in a week, Pakistani troops have fired on U.S. military helicopters that have flown into that nation's airspace, forcing the choppers to make hasty retreats to Afghanistan.

Relationships have been strained between the United States and Pakistan over U.S. military incursions into the country in pursuit of al Qaeda and Taliban operatives without the permission of the government.

The Pakistani government is particularly upset over "collateral" deaths of civilians particularly during bombing raids.

The United States has promised to seek permission of the government before violating Pakistan's borders. But if this claim by the Pakistani government is correct, that promise is, obviously hollow.

Media reports have indicated that the U.S. is concerned that any military action planned will be telegraphed to the terrorists by intelligence or military elements of Pakistan who are sympathetic to their cause.

While the United States should be engaging the Taliban and al Qaeda no matter where they may be, it needs to recognize that the war is not with Pakistan, an ally, but with these terrorist elements. A channel of communication that protects the integrity and safety of the mission, yet satisfies the concerns of the Pakistani government, needs to be established.

McCain Shows Willingness To Reach Across Party Lines

Cuomo

Last night's 60 Minutes featured extensive interviews with both presidential candidates.

Two things that John McCain said jumped out.

First, that he would remove the political arm of the Republican Party from the White House and re-locate it at the Republican National Committee.

Second, that he'd name Andrew Cuomo chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission to help guide the nation out of the current financial mess.

An interesting thought, coming from a Republican candidate for president. Because Cuomo, the New York state attorney general and former Housing and Urban Development secretary in the Clinton administration is a Democrat.

It shows that, perhaps, the GOP campaign theme country first may have been more than a slogan, and that McCain still shows his bipartisan maverick tendencies. A quality that may politically heal this nation should he become the next president of the United States.

Wall Street Bailout

No government bailout here

Those of you who are concerned that Barack Obama's candidacy is representative of, not a liberal philosophy but socialism, might want to take a close look at the government's Wall Street bailout plan. You might see a real example of socialism - corporate socialism - there.

Congress is being urged by the Treasury Department to act quickly on its proposal to inject $700 billion dollars into the financial market. The figure represents the largest government bailout since the Great Depression.

On Friday, Henry Stern, founder of NY Civic, was my guest on News Talk Online on Paltalk to talk about 24 questions that he believes need to be asked and answered about the financial crisis gripping the nation. Question number one was, and I paraphrase, who is responsible for this near collapse of the financial markets and how will they pay?

The proposed bailout makes Sterns' question academic. Because the people he described as the "fat cats" on Wall Street will now remain both fat and sassy.

Everyday as the worker bees of New York head for the subways, trains, buses, highways and ferries to begin the long, difficult and often expensive commute back home, scores of black luxury cars clog the streets of New York's financial district, waiting for the chosen ones who manage other people's money, to drive them home. Sometimes they head out at the same time as the rest of us. But sometimes they stop for a nice meal at a fancy, expensive steak house or a drink or two at a strip club with clients before being chauffeured to their abodes for a quick night's sleep before heading back in to play with other people's money once again. To them, this may be a necessary cost of business. But to those who have given up the ferry as too expensive in favor of the train, or stopped driving their cars and started taking the bus because of high gasoline prices, the sleek, shiny Lincolns are a symbol of excess. The kind of Wall Street excess that led to today's proposed bailout.

Meanwhile, people who shouldn't have qualified for mortgages for homes that were really beyond their reach face foreclosure. The people who irresponsibly approved their mortgages get a government bailout. But they still lose their homes.

The BBC reported several months ago that tent cities and the number of people living in recreational vehicles are both growing in the United States. These are people who have lost their homes and have no money to buy another or to even rent an apartment.

I'm wondering if there will be a proportional reduction in the number of black cars double parked along Wall Street. My guess is, there will not.

--

Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/televiseus/379806410/

Pakistan Explosion Kills 40

An explosion outside the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad has killed some 40 people. The blast was felt several miles away.

Authorities say a massive truck bomb bomb was to blame.

This is not the first time that the Marriott has been attacked. But this time, the six-story building was destroyed.

Witnesses say the fire was at first confined to a room or two but that it quickly spread consuming the entire structure.



The Marriott is an American based company. It is suspected that it was targeted as an American interest.

The attack comes just days after the Pakistani government complained about U.S. military incursions into the north of the nation in search of Taliban and al Qaeda operatives. Those missions had been conducted without the prior approval of the Pakistani government.

The United States has since agreed to seek Islamabad's permission before sending troops into Pakistan from neighboring Afghanistan.

It is not known whether the bombing is related to the U.S. military actions. It also took place shortly after Pakistan's new president, Asif Ali Zardari, addressed Parliament for the first time. He was dining with other dignitaries at the nearby residence of the prime minister when the bombing, the most deadly terrorist attack in Pakistani history, took place.

The death toll was expected to increase.

This underscores both the need of the U.S. government to work more closely with Pakistan in its attempts to located terrorists in that nation. But it also is a sign to Pakistan's new government that it must not be ambivalent on the issue of terrorism but must mount an aggressive campaign to thwart it.

Venezuela Expels Human Rights Workers

Yesterday we reported that Human Rights Watch had released a report critical of the Venezuelan government. Now two HRW workers in Venezuela have been expelled.



HRW says the expulsion underscores the Chávez administration’s increasing intolerance of dissenting views. Ordered to leave the country were José Miguel Vivanco, Americas director at Human Rights Watch, and Americas deputy director Daniel Wilkinson.

The order came just hours that they released a report that describes how the government of President Hugo Chávez has weakened democratic institutions and human rights guarantees in Venezuela.

“Chávez’s expulsion of Human Rights Watch’s team is further evidence of Venezuela’s descent into intolerance,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “Chávez may have kicked out the messenger, but he has only re-enforced the message – civil liberties in Venezuela are under attack.”

Vivanco and Wilkinson were intercepted at their hotel in Caracas and handed a letter accusing them of anti-state activities. Their cell phones were confiscated and their requests to be allowed to contact their embassies were denied. They were put into cars, taken to the airport and put on a plane to Sao Paulo, Brazil.

Racial Attitudes Could Determine Presidential Race

Race an issue

A new AP/Yahoo poll suggests that in a close race for the presidency, race could determine who wins.

The poll suggests that enough Democrats feel uncomfortable with the thought of a black president that they might not vote for Barack Obama.

The poll finds that a full one-third of white Democrats have negative feelings toward black people.

Interestingly, this is not something that one hears discussed much publicly. There’s far more open discourse about Obama’s religious ties. Including allegations that he is or was a Muslim (false) or concerns about his association with a radical Christian preacher.

The poll indicates that, sadly, racial prejudice still lies below the surface in the United States. Americans seem willing to accept blacks in the sports and entertainment fields. But when it comes to the highest office in the land, too many apparently feel that race is a major issue.

Putting The Financial Crisis In Perspective

Former New York City Councilman and retired Parks Commissioner Henry Stern, who runs a civic watchdog group, has posted on his site, www.nycivic.org, 24 questions that should have been asked, and answered, before the critical wounding of the financial system in the United States.

“Some people were asking the questions,” Stern said during his appearance on News Talk Online on Paltalk.com. “But not enough people were listening.”




All of this could have been averted, he believes, with good government regulating. But, since the government is trillions of dollars in debt, it certainly didn’t provide much of a role model. The banking and financial investment community, Stern agrees, was just following the U.S. government’s lead.

The crisis shouldn’t be such a big surprise to Wall Street executives and Washington regulators.

“This is not like the Titantic,” Stern says. They certainly should have seen it coming.

Yet the Federal Reserve and regulatory agencies were slow to react. Ironically leading to more federal intervention now than would have been required to avert the crisis.

Stern believes things will get better no matter who is elected president of the United States. But, in this area, he feels John McCain, who he sees as a maverick who is not obligated to anyone, is better positioned to help resolve the problem.

As for the housing industry and the American dream of home ownership, Stern says it’s becoming elusive to many.

“You can’t go on building more houses that people cna’t afford,” he says, suggesting that many Americans should rethink their housing lifestyle.

“Apartments,” he says, “are a sensivle way of living.”

In spite of the signs that things would eventually collapse, more houses were built in the United States. Why? “You have a home building lobby as well,” Stern explains.

“All these pressures on a Congress and White House that doesn’t stand up,” Stern says, led to the economic crisis the nation suffers today.

The Nation’s Financial Crisis Topic Of Today’s News Talk Online On Paltalk

The president of the United States today addressed the American people, promising to find solutions ot the financial crisis facing the nation.

The president says that, now that we know what the problem is, it’s time to do something about it. A little like closing the barn door after the animals get out. But, at least the government is doing something.

Bush says this is an issue that transcends party politics, though you’d not quite know that listening to the presidential candidates on the stump.

The president believes the economy should rest on the free enterprise system. That the government should limit its interference except when absolutely necessary. This, he says, is one of those times.

“In recent weeks, the federal government has taken a series of measures to help promote stability in the overall economy. To avoid severe disruptions in the financial markets and to support home financing, we took action to address the situation at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The Federal Reserve also acted to prevent the disorderly liquidation of the insurance company AIG. And in coordination with central banks around the world, the Fed has injected much-needed liquidity into our financial system,” he said.

Now, he says, it’s time for Congress to act, by passing legislation authorizing the government to purchase illiquid assets, such as troubled mortgages, from banks and other financial institutions.

“This,” he said, “is a decisive step that will address underlying problems in our financial system. It will help take pressure off the balance sheets of banks and other financial institutions. It will allow them to resume lending and get our financial system moving again.”

The nation’s financial instability and the government’s response will the the topic on today’s News Talk Online on Paltalk.com. Joining us to talk about the questions that need to be asked will be former New York City Council member and retired New York City Parks Commissioner Henry Stern. Stern is founder and president of NY Civic, a civic watchdog group. In the last five years, he has written 362 articles on public policy. He sends them to a list of people who have requested them, which now includes 14,000 subscribers.

To join in the conversation at 5 PM New York time CLICK HERE. There is no charge.

Paltalk is the largest multimedia interactive program on the Internet with more than 4 million unique users.

News Talk Online is syndicated by CRN Digital Talk Radio to an additional 12 million households.

Get Paltalk programming updates by subscribing to our Twitter feed at

www.twitter.com/paltalk. The Twitter feed also appears on this blog.

Changing UK Demographics

Munshi

I was listening to the conversation in a Muslim room on Paltalk last night and heard a guy in the UK predict that Sharia law was on the way. He advised non-Muslims in Britain that, pretty soon, they’ll either have to convert to his religion or pay Muslims for the privilege of living in “their” country.

While this may be a bit overly optimistic from a pan-Islamist’s point of view, he was correct that the demographics of the UK are changing. And that there is a growing Muslim influence. Unfortunately, in some cases, there’s also an increase in Islamic militancy.

We’ve already seen homegrown terrorist attacks in Britain. And reports of open defiance of the police by young, militant, Muslims. Something that our Paltalk friend also, proudly, commented on.

“The police are afraid to make arrests in some neighborhoods now,” he boasted.

This undoubtedly is distressing to people whose British ancestry stretches back centuries and who have strong nationalistic feelings. Perhaps this is part of the problem. Here, in the United States, Muslims seem to assimilate more naturally than in the UK. We, of course, have a tradition of pluralism and acceptance, though sometimes reluctantly, of new waves of immigrants. As we like to say, we are, mostly, a nation of immigrants.

The most recent sign of the undercurrent of disenfranchisement in the UK comes with today’s sentencing of a teenager to two years in prison for gathering information on his computer to produce napalm weapons for an upcoming terrorist attack. Hammaad Munshi was only 16-years-old when he was arrested. A coming-of-age time in his life, when he should have been thinking of girls and university or a trade and a future. Instead, he obsessed over making napalm bombs. He becomes the youngest person to be convicted under Britain's Terrorism Act. He was recruited by two adult terrorists who were also convicted.

Munshi’s grandfather, a well known Muslim scholar, said in a statement that the family respected the court’s ruling, but, like any other family, is “deeply upset” over his grandson’s situation.

Recently, there have been new efforts by British officials to reach out to the kingdom’s Muslim enclaves. But, clearly, there is a distrust on both sides of a cultural and religious divide. Like it or not, that schism must be bridged. If not, there will be continued heartache on both sides of the breach.

Human Rights Watch Blasts Chavez

Chavez

Venezuelan Pres. Hugo Chavez comes under fire in a new report issued by Human Rights Watch which details scores of human rights violations in his country.

The report outlines government repression of political opponents, in the courts, of the media and of organized labor.

It notes that 10 years ago, when Chavez took power, the new constitution could have been used to increase human rights. Instead, it says, things went in the opposite direction as he sought to counter political opposition and consolidate power.

The crackdown, the report suggests, began in 2002, when there was a short-lived coup against Chavez. This includes restrictions on journalists ability to express themselves, regulations limiting workers’ ability to associate and blockades hampering the work of human rights activists.

The government has gotten away with this, Human Rights Watch says, because there’s been no credible judicial oversight.

--

Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fernandolugoapc/2766731570/

Former Pakistani Official Condemns U.S. Incursions

A former Pakistani ambassador to the United Nations is criticizing the United States for military incursions into his country in search of al Qaeda and Taliban forces who have sought refuge there.

Munir Akram says, if the U.S. military wants to enter Pakistan it needs the support of the government there.

“Pakistan must defend its territory,” Akram declared during his appearance today on New Talk Online on Paltalk.com.

Some callers suggested that this is a Pakistani problem, because that nation hasn’t secured its border with Afghanistan. But Akram noted that the United States has a similar issue protecting its border with Mexico.

“The real problem,” he says, “is in Afghanistan.” Where, he says, the NATO strategy is failing.
He says the way the military is conducting itself is “creating enemies.”

There have been news reports suggesting that the United States is increasingly distrustful of both the Pakistani military, some of whom are regarded as rouge forces in support of the Taliban, and the intelligence services, which are suspected of leaking information to the enemy.

Akram, who, of course, has heard the allegations, says there is “no evidence of rouge forces.”
He says Pakistan has about 100,000 troops deployed along a 2,500 km border of mountains, hills and deserts. He says the terrain makes it difficult to root out terrorists. “There is no access, no roads,” he says. “It’s difficult to identify and capture” the enemy. But he insists Pakistani troops have been making a dent.

Most disconcerting to him, he says, are the air attacks conducted by the United States. Attacks that, he says, invariably result in civilian casualties.

There aren’t Akram argued, sufficient NATO forces on the ground, forcing the military to rely on aerial bombardments that kill innocent people, alienating the population.

Iran A Continuing Threat To The World

Three experts on Iran briefed reporters today at a conference sponsored by The Israel Project. Called as a precursor to Iranian Pres. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit next week to the opening session of the United Nations General Assembly.

All three expressed concerns about Iran’s human rights violations, its exportation of terror and its development of nuclear weapons.

Michael Ledeen, a former White House national security adviser, says Iran has been, for years, engaged in proxy wars against the United States and Israel. And is directly involved in destabilizing neighboring Iraq.

He advocates supporting the Iranian people in the overthrow of their government. He notes that 70-80 percent of Iranians strongly disfavor their government.

Lily Mazahery, founder and president of the Legal Rights Institute represents some of the most high profile political dissidents, human rights activists and victims of human rights violations around the world. Something, she say, at which Iran excels.

Mazahery says there are daily hangings and beatings of political dissidents, those charged with leaving the Muslim religion, those accused of adultery and of homosexuals.

“Not even children,” she says, “are spared” the death penalty in Iran, which she says, as the dubious distinction of being at the top of the world’s child execution list.

Mazahery says 200 people, including children, have been executed thus far this year in Iran.
Nuclear physicist Peter Zimmerman, former chief scientist of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, says it’s possible Iran can develop a nuclear bomb by the end of next year. He favors stronger :creative sanction” that he says would, “attack Iranian weaknesses.”

One suggestion: embargoing the sale of refined petroleum to Iran. Iran ships crude out, but lacks the refinement capability to satisfy the nation’s voracious appetite for oil.
He also favors disallowing Iranian teams from participating in international sporting events and kicking Iran out of the international telecommunications system including the international electronic banking system.

As for when Iran might really develop a nuclear device, Zimmerman says the world will get a warning. It will be, he predicts, the day the International Atomic Energy Agency is kicked out and Iran withdraws from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
–
Photo credit: Gary Baumgarten

Are Star Wars In Our Future?

Could the next big military battleground be in outer space? Some experts say the possibility truly exists, and it’s something that should be avoided at all costs.

This isn’t a fight between humanoids and aliens we’re talking about here. Rather it’s a potential fued with fellow earthlings, over satellites that nations are using to spy on one another.

In a just released report, the Council on Foreign Relations raises the alarm that the United States and China may be inching toward an extraterrestrial showdown.

Last year, China successfully tested an anti-satellite weapon. Earlier this year, the United States destroyed an out-of-control U.S. satellite. These two events, the CFR report suggests, shows that the stuff of science fiction could soon become reality.

What if, the report authors ask, China turned its new space age weaponry on U.S. spy satellites?
“The strategic reverberations of that collision have shaken up security thinking in the United States and around the world,” writes Bruce MacDonald, an independent consultant in technology and national security policy and currently senior director to the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States.

Within 14 months, China and the United States both demonstrated the capability to destroy satellites, “heralding the arrival of an era where space is a potentially far more contested domain than in the past, with few rules,” he writes.

“Both countries have interests in avoiding the actual use of counter-space weapons and shaping a more stable and secure space environment for themselves and other space-faring nations,” says the report.

If an attack were made on U.S. spy satellites, the authors say, the U.S. military here on terra firma would be dealt a serious intelligence and strategic setback and, obviously, adversely affect U.S. Chinese relationships.

A Convincing Argument About Iran’s Threat To World Stability

Top Israeli investigative reporter Ronen Bergman presented a tough-to-dispute case about Iran’s nuclear and conventional threat to peace in the world during his appearance today on News Talk Online on Paltalk.com.

Iran, though its surrogates, has its tentacles in the Middle East, in Africa, in Europe and in the Americas. And, he adds, Iran is unquestionably pursing nuclear weapons. If that happens, he argues, a nuclear arms race will be unleashed on the Middle East.

The story of Iran’s fight with the rest of the world, and the 30-year war waged with Iran by the Mossad and the CIA, is revealed in his page turning book, The Secret War With Iran. A book that reads like a novel but is, nevertheless, fact.

Former Pakistani Ambassador To UN To Talk About US Military Raids Into His Country On News Talk Online On Paltalk

Akram

The United States military has been going after al Qaeda and Taliban operatives in northern Pakistan without the prior approval of the Pakistani government, straining relationships between the two allies.

Joining us on News Talk Online on Paltalk.com to discuss this new policy and its affect on U.S. Pakistani relations tomorrow will be former Pakistani UN Ambassador Munir Akram, who warns that dangerous consequences could be result.

Akram says because it must, of course, defend its nation’s sovereignty, the U.S. military could be pushing the Pakistani army into an alliance with the Afghan Taliban.

“The dangers associated with this move by the U.S. Army are both real and immanent,” Akram says.

“The unilateral incursions by the U.S. into Pakistan seem to have broken the consensus within the Pakistan military to support the U.S. anti terror campaign. Unless reversed, it could lead to an openly hostile relationship between Pakistani and U.S. forces along the border and even result in overt hostilities between them.”

To talk to Akram at 5 PM tomorrow September 18, CLICK HERE. There is no charge.

Paltalk is the largest multimedia interactive program on the Internet with more than 4 million unique users.

News Talk Online is also syndicated by CRN Digital Talk Radio to an additional 12 million households.

Get Paltalk programming updates by subscribing to our Twitter feed at www.twitter.com/paltalk. The Twitter feed also appears on this blog.

Attempt To Keep Voters From Casting Ballots In Michigan Alleged

I really didn’t believe this when I heard it first discussed on Patalk.

Republicans in Michigan trying to block people whose homes are foreclosed from voting? No way, I thought. Just some Democratic propaganda to whip up sentiment against the Grand Old Party.

Although the state Republican official who allegedly first suggested this insists he was misquoted, it indeed is being reported in Michigan that such a tactic was proposed. In fact, the Obama camp takes it seriously enough to file suit to block it.

Let’s examine the mindset that would cause a country Republican chairman in Michigan to allegedly propose such a tactic. Michigan is hard hit by the economic crisis facing this nation. The economy in the Great Lakes state is, well, in the toilet.

Lots of people have defaulted on their mortgages. Many of them from inner city communities like Detroit. Many of them African-Americans.

The have-nots in Michigan aren’t pointing fingers of blame at the Democratic governor. They’re letting the buck stop on George W. Bush’s desk. So it’s safe to assume that many people who are in danger of or who have lost their homes are at least contemplating voting for Barack Obama.

This is, of course, not the first time the Democrats and Republicans fought over voter eligibility (weren’t there a few skirmishes in Florida over the right of some people in Democratic enclaves to vote?). But this reported proposal is pretty blatantly improper. And if it’s really being attempted, the courts certainly would find it to be illegal.

This story raises, of course, the broader concern over the integrity of the election process. How many polling locations will be short on machines or ballots this year? How many names will have disappeared off ballots? How many allegations of tampered machines or improper vote tallying will there be? How many people will be turned away at polls?

These questions, and more, were asked during the last two presidential elections. Given the choices Americans have for president (sorry to tell you partisans but a lot of people just aren’t overly enamored with either ticket) the last thing this nation needs is another reason to discourage people from participating in the process.

Chertoff Returns To Texas

National Guard in Galveston

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff is back in Texas today observing recovery efforts in the aftermath of Hurricane Ike.

His first stop was Houston to meet with local officials at the emergency operations center. He was then due to travel to Galveston to meet with local officials and also visit with evacuees in Harris County.

Galveston’s mayor has been critical of what he believes is a poor response by FEMA, reminiscent of the criticism leveled at the agency, which is part of Homeland Security, following Hurricane Katrina.

Simmering Yemen

Today’s deadly car bomb attack on the U.S. Embassy in Yemen is just the latest in a series of terrorism attacks in that nation.

At least 16 people are reported dead, including civilians, terrorists dressed as police officers and Yemeni security guards. Business was reportedly continuing inside the Embassy following the second such attack in six months. One person, A Yemeni security guard, was killed in the first attack.



A group calling itself the Islamic Jihad in Yemen is claiming responsibility and vowing further attacks on foreign interests in the nation.

In addition to the two attacks on the U.S. Embassy, Japanese tourists were held captive in Yemen earlier this year. A gunman opened fired on a mosque in the country in May. And bombs were set off near the Italian Embassy in April.

With Friends Like These …

Rove

Sometimes it’s hard to tell who one’s political friends and allies are and who are one’s real enemies.

Take former Bush administration political guru Karl Rove, for example, who attacked John McCain’s ads for their lack of truthfulness.

Then there’s Republican commentator Peggy Noonan, who, while she thought the microphones were off at while on the set of MSNBC at the GOP convention declared “it’s over” for the Republicans; a reference to Sarah Palin’s nomination.

Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, a McCain adviser, said that McCain and Sarah Palin are not qualified to be CEOs.

Lynn Forester de Rothschild, who is on the Democratic National Committee’s Platform Committee and who supported Hillary Clinton is now backing John McCain.

Of course, so is Joe Lieberman, who once ran for vice-president as a Democrat.

And at both political conventions, lesser known members of opposite parties were trotted out to speak about their support of that convention’s candidates.

Strange political bedfellows indeed this year.

--

Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/chicagopublicradio/2824584419/

Shocked Audience Listens To Story Of 2 Murdered Girls

Members of the News Talk Online on Paltalk.com audience were stunned today as they listened to Gail Gartrell, great-aunt of two Texas girls murdered on New Year’s Day. Shot to death, police say, by their own father, 50-year-old Yaser Abdel Said, an Egyptian native, in what Gartrell says were honor killings.

Honor killings because 16-year-old Amina and 18-year-old Sarah Yaser Said dated boys in the United States where the family lived.

Said, who is charged with capital murder, has been a fugitive ever since the killings.

There was some debate over whether honor killings are a byproduct of religious or cultural upbringing. But there was uniformity in the compassion callers and posters showed for the family. Their horror and dismay over what happened to these girls was expressed repeatedly during the show.



Some in the audience posted comments blamed the Islamic religion for this crime. But Gartrell believes Muslims who support honor killings are in a minority. She also fears incidents like this one will result in an Islamophobia backlash if mainstream Muslims don’t speak out.

In fact, as I researched this story, I found several Muslim organizations that are publicly advocating against such barbarism.

Whether the motivation for honor killings is religious or cultural matters little. The girls are dead. The father a fugitive from justice.

The United States is pluralistic and many rich traditions and customs are introduced into our society by those moving here from afar. But those who embrace ideals of honor killings or “female circumcision” really should reconsider their decisions to emigrate here. Because our society does not condone murder or genital mutilation.

I join those in my audience in praying that Said is captured and stands trial. And I once again thank Gail Gartrell, who has had her life threatened for charging that these were honor killings, for courageously telling her story.

Author Of Secret War With Iran On News Talk Online On Paltalk

Bergman

In the years since 9/11, the U.S. war on terror has focused on al-Qaeda, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Coverage of Iran has been devoted almost exclusively to its nuclear ambitions. Yet, as Ronen Bergman’s groundbreaking reporting in his new book, The Secret War With Iran, shows, for 30 years, Iran has been the world’s leading sponsor of global terror and stands as the most formidable sponsor of terror in the world today. Bergman will be my guest on News Talk Online on Paltalk.com tomorrow, Wednesday September 17.

Bergman, one of Israel’s top investigative reporters, gained unprecedented access to extra-ordinary sources from top to bottom in the Mossad and intelligence agencies around the world. Based on over 10 years of research and more than three hundred exclusive interviews with key intelligence figures, he reveals that Iranian terrorist masterminds have crisscrossed the globe, conducting bombings and assassinations with impunity — even renting apartments and planning bombing attacks in New York City.

Bergman reports that Iran’s proxy, Hizballah, has virtually taken over southern Lebanon and threatens Israel with high-powered weaponry supplied by Iran. Iran and Hizballah worked closely with al Qaeda and other Sunni terrorist groups in developing their terrorist operations, and Iranian commandos trained Iraqi insurgents in the crafts of suicide bombing and the building of the roadside bombs that have killed so many U.S. troops in Iraq.

He writes that in response, and largely beneath the public’s radar, a vast clandestine war has been fought with Iran and Hizballah on one side and the CIA, Israel’s Mossad, and their European counterparts on the other. The full story of that secret war, told for the first time here, will fundamentally change the debate about U.S. national security priorities.

To talk to Bergman at 5 PM New York time Wednesday September 17 CLICK HERE. There is no charge.

Paltalk is the largest multimedia interactive program on the Internet with more than 4 million unique users.

News Talk Online is also syndicated by CRN Digital Talk Radio to 12 million additional households.

Get Paltalk programming updates by subscribing to our Twitter feed at www.twitter.com/paltalk. The Twitter feed also appears on this blog.