Other Political News

[Soldier4Christ]

Indo-US Nuclear Deal gets US Senate, House Committee Endorsement: American-Indian community jubilant


Indo-U.S. nuclear agreement successfully passed the most difficult first phase with an almost bi-partisan approval of the United States Senate and House committees this week assuring an easy ratification from the full Senate and the entire House.

The House International Relations Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted overwhelmingly to support the historic U.S.-India nuclear agreement.

The vote in the House committee was 37-5, and in the Senate 16-2, signaling that the agreement now enjoys strong bipartisan support in the United States Congress.

Swadesh Chatterjee, a founder of the U.S. India Friendship Council, a coalition of prominent Indian American individuals and associations, stated, “I am gratified by the strong support in both the House and the Senate for the deal. This shows the strength of our community. Our intense and systematic national lobbying effort helped to convince lawmakers that this deal is good and essential for America. Today, the Indian American community stands proud.”

This advocacy campaign marks the first time the Indian American community as a whole has come together to present a united front to American federal lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, the Republicans and the Democrats. The coalition put together by the US-India Friendship Council included, among others, the American Association of Physicians of Indian Origin, the Asian American Hotel Owners Association, the organization of Indian Institute of Technology Alumni here in the United States. The Council also worked with other well-known interest groups, especially the US-Indian Business Council, to maximize its impact.

Ray Vickery, former Under-Secretary of State in the Clinton Administration said, “I am convinced that the US-Indian Friendship Council made an enormous difference in securing passage of this agreement. I have been in Washington a long time. I have never seen the India American community as focused and mobilized as they were this time.”

[Soldier4Christ]

Stem cell legislation returning to Senate

Urged anew by Nancy Reagan, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist on Thursday revived a bill to expand funding for embryonic stem cell research.

President Bush's veto threat remained, said White House spokesman Ken Lisaius.

The bill would permit the government to pay for human embryonic stem cell research, a science that carries promise in the hunt for cures to diseases that afflict millions of people.

Polls suggest about 70 percent of Americans support the bill. Yet it has been stalled in the Senate since the House passed it last year.

Social conservatives liken the research to abortion because the process of extracting stem cells from a days-old embryo results in its death.

Two officials close to the developments said the former first lady, whose advocacy helped the bill win House passage, spoke with Frist last week and urged him to advance the bill.

[Soldier4Christ]

Despite SCOTUS Ruling, Schlafly Suggests Congress, White House Stand Firm on Gitmo

By Chad Groening
June 30, 2006

(AgapePress) - A pro-family activist says she was shocked by Thursday's decision by the Supreme Court that said President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military tribunals for Guantanamo Bay detainees. And a Pentagon advisor who recently returned from a second visit to "Gitmo" says there is absolutely no reason to close the federal detention facility there, as suggested by some liberals.

The case involving military tribunals stemmed from a complaint from a former bodyguard and driver for terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden. His lawyer argued that the U.S. should not be able to hold him indefinitely without access to courts and lawyers. But a 5-3 vote, the nation's highest court supported the detainee's contention. In the majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens said the proposed trials were illegal under U.S. law and the Geneva Convention. But Phyllis Schlafly of Eagle Forum thinks Congress needs to assert its authority in this matter.

"The founding fathers did not set up three co-equal branches," Schlafly points out. "The founding fathers put the Congress in control of the courts in that they can decide what kinds of cases the judges can hear and not hear." In fact, she notes, Congress had taken away the jurisdiction of the court over this matter -- something that was pointed out by Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito, the three dissenters.

That very fact was pointed out by Justice Clarence Thomas in writing for the minority. Thomas wrote that the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction over the issue, and that it "openly flouts our well-established duty to respect the executive’s judgment in matters of military operations and foreign affairs."

The Eagle Forum president admits she was surprised the decision came down the way it did. "I think maybe the court should not have heard this case," she shares. "They should have left this up to the Commander in Chief in wartime."

But Mrs. Schlafly does not think the decision will compel President Bush to release any of the dangerous prisoners being held at Gitmo. "These are really bad people who really need to be locked up," she says, "and to let them loose would be a terrible thing. I just do not believe the President's going to do that."

What does she expect the president to do? "He's going to gather all his lawyers around him and find out a way to outmaneuver the court, which is what I think he should do," she offers.

The president's press secretary, Tony Snow, has already indicated that White House lawyers intend to review the decision.

Shut It Down? No Way ...
Amidst a clergy group's accusations of torture being administered to detainees at Gitmo, some have called for the detention facility to be shut down. But Lt. Col. (U.S. Army Ret.) Bob Maginnis, who recently returned from his second visit to the facility and maintains all prisoners are being treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention, says there's no reason to do that.

Maginnis says he toured the facility at Guantanamo Bay, sampled the food, and witnessed some of the interrogations being conducted there. He contends the individuals being kept there are not legal prisoners of war because they do not conduct themselves according to the law and customs of war.

"They hide amongst the population, they explode improvised explosive devices, killing innocent men, women, and children in public places," he says. "They don't stand toe-to-toe and fight with us. They play by rules that no civilized people would play by."

For those reasons, Maginnis maintains the Gitmo detainees do not have to be treated as legal POWs. "If you are a true combatant, a prisoner of war, there are four criteria: being commanded by a person responsible for subordinates; having a fixed, distinctive sign, recognizable at a distance -- in other words, a uniform with insignia; carrying arms openly; and conducting operations in accordance with the arms and customs of war," he says. "These terrorists don't do that."

Consequently, he says, it is ridiculous for critics to demand the facility be shut down. "Don't ask us to open up Guantanamo and just release these [people]; they try to kill us every day down there," he says. Keeping such people "off the streets" should be America's number-one priority, he adds.

[Soldier4Christ]

Now it's our fault again.   

U.S. invited
Korea threat
Reports say bargaining with Iran
led to Pyongyang's missile test

Is testing the will of the world's lone superpower a profitable exercise?

Yes, say many analysts, who suggest it is more than a coincidence that North Korea began preparations for an intercontinental ballistic missile test in the direction of the United States less than two weeks after America and its allies offered Iran new incentives for backing away from its nuclear arms program.

G2 Bulletin sources in the Pentagon and in foreign intelligence and defense establishments say North Korea was just doing what should be expected following the major powers effort to appease – or buy off – Iran.

"Why wouldn't Pyongyang become just a little more bellicose?" said one foreign intelligence operative with expertise in Far East matters. "After seeing Iran getting a sweeter deal after threatening Israel's existence in a dozen different ways, it only makes sense that the squeaky wheel gets the grease. North Korea wants some grease, too."

Not only is this a lesson based on observation from afar, some say, but it could well be part of a calculated effort based on consultation between North Korea and Iran – strategic allies who both see America as the ultimate evil in the world.

"Iran has learned key insights from North Korea's negotiating and bargaining tactics, including the importance of maintaining strategic ambivalence over its nuclear program," Lee Chung Min, a Korean expert on Asian security, told the Associated Press. "Both are pariah states, fiercely nationalistic and mistrustful of the great powers. So, they probably share a common bond in terms of their world views, i.e., that nuclear weapons can provide prestige and power against a very hostile external environment."

Iran has been a longtime customer of North Korean missile technology, and both states were linked to the network of A.Q. Khan, the founder of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program who admitted passing nuclear technology to other countries.

North Korea pulled out of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 2003 after ejecting U.N. inspectors, resumed work at its plutonium-based reactor and shifted from denials or ambiguity to defiant affirmations that it made atomic bombs. Pyongyang is believed to have a nuclear arsenal of about eight or nine warheads.

Tehran is considering a Western incentives package offered June 6 that would require it to suspend uranium enrichment, a process that can produce fuel for electric plants or the material for nuclear warheads. The offer is similar to one North Korea accepted in 1994, though that deal later unraveled.

"The real lesson Iran learned from North Korea is that high-stakes brinksmanship brings rewards," arms control expert Mark Fitzpatrick wrote in Survival, a publication of the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Fitzpatrick said North Korea's withdrawal from the nuclear arms control treaty gives credence to Iranian threats to do the same, "especially when North Korea paid no discernible price for it."

[Soldier4Christ]

Okinawa local governments oppose sending missiles to Kadena


KADENA TOWN, Okinawa — Alarmed by reports that Patriot interceptor missiles may be deployed to Kadena Air Base, the three municipalities hosting the base issued a protest Wednesday.

“That the government proceeds with a plan to place Patriots (on Kadena Air Base) without any consultation with the local communities definitely forces local communities to accept the growth of the air base’s operations, which is absolutely unacceptable,” read a statement issued by a council formed by the mayors and council chairmen of Okinawa City and the towns of Kadena and Chatan.

In a broad agreement signed May 1 to realign U.S. troops, the United States and Japan announced that Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missiles would be deployed on U.S. bases in Japan, “becoming operational at the earliest possible time.”

Last week, amid reports North Korea was preparing to test-launch an intercontinental ballistic missile, a Japanese newspaper, quoting anonymous Japanese government officials, reported that the United States would deploy the missiles to either Kadena Air Base or the adjacent Kadena Ammunition Storage Area by the end of the year, along with 500 to 600 additional troops.

A Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman said the PAC-3 site locations haven’t been decided.

A spokesman for the 18th Wing on Kadena Air Base declined to comment Thursday on the missiles’ placement and the protest resolution.

Patriot missiles are designed to intercept ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and enemy aircraft.

[Soldier4Christ]

White House ponders NG nuclear warheads

The scientists who crack open the nation's nuclear weapons for a living are never quite sure what they will find inside.

Many of the warheads were designed and built 40 years ago, and their plutonium and other components are slowly breaking down in ways that researchers do not fully understand. With no new bombs in production, the government spends billions of dollars each year tending to its aging stockpile.

The Bush administration wants to revamp the entire arsenal with a weapon now on the drawing board named the Reliable Replacement Warhead.

The redesigned weapon is needed to ensure "a safe, secure, reliable and effective nuclear deterrent for the indefinite future," said Linton Brooks, chief of the National Nuclear Security Administration.

The administration ordered up a competition between Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory near San Francisco and Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. The two laboratories submitted their proposals for the weapon in March. The White House plans to pick a winner by November.

As envisioned, the next-generation nuclear weapon would have the same destructive power as existing ones, but be durable enough to last for decades.

The next bomb is also meant to be so secure that it has jokingly been dubbed the "nuclear doorstop" - useless for any other purpose, should it fall into the wrong hands.

The government and the labs refuse to discuss details of the two designs, citing national security. But they describe both proposals as "conservative" blueprints meant to assure reliability without violating a moratorium on full-scale nuclear testing in place since 1992.

"We're not going to come up with anything cutting-edge and stick it in the stockpile without testing," said David Schwoegler, spokesman for Lawrence Livermore's nuclear weapons program.

The United States has not built a nuclear warhead since 1991. The government spends about $5 billion a year maintaining the weapons, and engineers have patched problems by opening up warheads that were never meant to be opened. The accumulation of tiny engineering changes meant the bombs moved incrementally away from their original designs, with unknown effects.

The White House believes designing a replacement warhead is vital to preserving the nation's nuclear edge, particularly amid looming questions about North Korea, which reportedly possesses several nuclear weapons, and Iran, which the administration fears wants them.

The redesign project "means making sure that aging phenomena don't cause us any questions about nuclear reliability," Brooks said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. "It means making sure that we incorporate safety and security and use-control in a way we didn't know how to do when we designed the stockpile."

Critics, including some former nuclear weapons scientists, question the need to resume nuclear weapons production, at a cost of billions of dollars, when they believe the current stockpile is safe and reliable and can remain so for years.

They also question whether a next-generation bomb can improve reliability and safety if it cannot be tested. Congress has financed the research on the condition that the redesigned weapon reduce the need for testing.

Opponents fear the project could send the wrong signal to the world at a time when the United States and its allies are trying to curb the spread of nuclear technology.

Brooks said North Korea and Iran play into the project only "indirectly," explaining that the administration would press for the program anyway. "We didn't sit down and say, 'Look, there's problems in Iran. Let's go and invent a new design,'" he said.

The project also aims to improve safeguards against accidental detonation or use of the weapons by terrorists, Brooks said. It marks the first time that an American nuclear bomb has been designed with those goals as the top priority.

Proponents say a revamped weapon could help the United States to reduce the number of warheads held in reserve in case other weapons are found to be faulty.

A new weapons production line would be needed to produce the bomb. For instance, the Rocky Flats, Colo., plant that once made plutonium triggers for nuclear warheads was shuttered in 1989. Los Alamos can only build a handful per year; the administration is aiming for 10 next year.

The Livermore and Los Alamos labs set aside bomb-designing more than a decade ago in favor of maintaining the current stockpile.

Each year, the nation's nuclear arsenal loses about a half-dozen bombs from its reserve of several thousand as the Livermore and Los Alamos teams rip them apart in what is called "destructive analysis." Others are painstakingly dismantled and refurbished with new parts.

On Thursday, engineers gathered at a high-security plant near Amarillo, Texas, to toast a milestone: the first rebuild of a B-61 nuclear bomb. It's the oldest warhead in the arsenal, having been designed in the early 1960s and built into the 1970s.

The government is spending $470 million over nine years to refurbish the B-61s. That's money the Bush administration would rather channel into an overhaul of the entire arsenal and the mostly dormant nuclear-weapons complex.

Brooks sees the bomb-redesign project as making that complex more adaptable.

"Any weapon we have will sooner or later go through some type of modernization or have (some) problem to repair, and right now that takes a very long time," he said.

[Soldier4Christ]

UN chief 'linked to $10m Iraq oil bribe'

AN AGENT from South Korea who established a “secret backchannel” between a former UN Secretary-General and Saddam Hussein’s regime asked Iraq for $10 million “to take care of some people”, a New York court was told.

Iraq set aside $15 million for the bribery scheme and sent $3 million in cash to New York in the year the UN’s Oil-for-Food programme was set up, it was alleged.

It also heard that Iraq’s UN ambassador at the time believed that some of the money was destined for Boutros Boutros Ghali, then Secretary-General, although the prosecutors did not suggest that any of it reached him. Dr Boutros Ghali denies any wrongdoing.Samir Vincent, a businessman who has pleaded guilty to working secretly for Iraq, told the court that he had recruited Tongsun Park in 1992 because of his connections to Dr Boutros Ghali. Mr Park is on trial accused of acting as an unregistered foreign agent.

According to Mr Vincent, the secret backchannel was used to pass messages between the UN chief and Iraq. The court was told that Mr Vincent kept note of purported exchanges in which Dr Boutros Ghali allegedly told Iraq to put secret police with UN monitors and that he would try to “neutralise” the UN’s chief weapons inspector.

Mr Vincent said that he assumed that Mr Park was referring to Dr Boutros Ghali when he asked for $10 million to “take care of some people”. Nizar Hamdoon, Iraq’s UN ambassador who has since died, apparently took a similar view, telling Mr Vincent: “I guess he needs to take care of BB.”

[Soldier4Christ]

Doctors vote to oppose euthanasia


DOCTORS voted yesterday to fight any attempts to legalise euthanasia and physician-assisted dying.

It was a significant change of stance by delegates at the British Medical Association conference in Belfast - last year, they voted to adopt a neutral position, neither opposing nor supporting assisted dying. But grass-roots doctors mounted a campaign to get the issue debated again, leading to yesterday's turnaround.

Michael Wilks, the chairman of the association's ethics committee, said: "The BMA's position is now opposition to any assisted dying legislation.

"Over a period of a year, the profession has spent an enormous amount of time thinking about this and has clearly come to a decision that is different to that of the people here last year."

The debate heard from doctors who believe patients suffering unbearable pain should be helped to die in the UK rather than face travelling to clinics such as Dignitas in Switzerland.

Dr John Fitton, from Kettering, Northamptonshire, said: "It is both inhumane and disgraceful to have to be resourceful enough to travel to more enlightened countries for this service."

He said some doctors seemed to think patients should put up with pain at the end of their lives. "Some patients find themselves in places staffed by people who think suffering is a good thing, a beneficial challenge from some kind of divine entity," he said.

But Dr Andrew Davies, an oncologist from Cardiff, said that with proper end-of-life care, patients could be helped to die with dignity.

He said patients' main fears were that they were becoming a financial and emotional burden on their families. "My concern is that a right to die will become a duty to die, a duty to unburden their families," Dr Davies said.

Delegates voted to oppose physician-assisted suicide, in which a doctor prescribes drugs to allow a patient to kill themselves, and voluntary euthanasia, where doctors have to administer the drugs themselves, by 65 per cent to 35 per cent. They opposed involuntary euthanasia, involving incompetent patients and children, by a huge majority - 94 per cent to 6 per cent.

However, they rejected calls to ballot all members of the BMA on the issue.

Dr Peter Saunders, the campaign director of pressure group Care Not Killing, welcomed the BMA's decision to oppose assisted dying. He said: "I think perhaps it is a strong call for the leadership of the BMA to listen to grass-roots opinion and it has become evident over the past 12 months that the BMA has been out of touch with those at the coal face."

He said the main task now was to tackle the postcode lottery of good end-of-life care so everyone in the last stages of life could die without pain and suffering.

"We still have a massive job in helping the general public understand what palliative care can offer and the dangers of backing a bill that would allow euthanasia because of the pressure it would put on vulnerable people to request an early death because of the financial and emotional burden they feel it puts on other people," he said.

But Dignity in Dying, which supports voluntary euthanasia, was disappointed at the BMA vote. Deborah Annetts, its chief executive, said: "The vote in Belfast came amid extensive lobbying by very active and organised religious lobby groups. Millions of people in the UK will be deeply disappointed at what the religious lobby groups have done. The BMA must now engage on a doctrinaire basis in this debate instead of a neutral and professional one."

Direct euthanasia, involving a clinician giving a lethal drug by injection when the patient is not capable of doing so, is legal only in Belgium, Colombia, the Netherlands, Japan and one US state - Oregon.

In the past five years, more than 20 terminally-ill Britons have approached a Swiss-based charity that helps people who decide to commit suicide. Assisted suicide is not illegal in Switzerland as long as the drugs are self-administered and the person is making a rational decision.

[Soldier4Christ]

Some evangelicals starting to embrace Democrats

A convention of evangelical Christians gave standing ovations this week to Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., and Barack Obama, D-Ill.

And that's news, because pro-choice, pro-gay rights Democrats aren't usually favorites of evangelicals. But that could be changing as the Democratic Party tries to reconnect with "values voters," and some evangelical leaders try to extend religious debates beyond gay marriage and abortion.

"It's been terribly politicized and polarized. Moral values can't be narrowed to those two," said the Rev. Jim Wallis, leader of the Sojourners. His "progressive evangelical" group organized a three-day conference in Washington this week to lobby politicians on behalf of the poor. Six hundred clergy and their followers attended workshops, listened to speeches and visited their congressional representatives.

Influential politicians from both sides of the political spectrum came to speak about poverty as a moral issue, including Republican evangelical favorites such as Sens. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and Sam Brownback of Kansas.

But there was Dean, too, a star speaker, even though he once proclaimed the Book of Job his favorite part of the New Testament. (It's in the Old Testament.)

Democrats were eager to cast many of their traditional issues, such as Social Security, affordable healthcare and a higher minimum wage, as moral concerns. America needs "a social safety net that will take care of people. That is the mark of true Christianity," Dean said.

"The budget is a moral document," Clinton said.

Obama said Democrats shouldn't let the "fear of getting preachy" stop them from talking about issues in terms of morality.

"Keeping the environment pristine and green and passing it on, I think that's a faith issue," said Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C.

Some speeches even had the air of a revival, with supporters shouting, "Amen" and "All right, preach it!"

The DNC confirmed that this was part of a larger program to reach out to religious voters. "These are part of ongoing efforts. I think you will definitely see more of this on our part," DNC spokeswoman Amaya Smith said. "This is part of our overall strategy."

Wallis is adamant that his anti-poverty movement is nonpartisan.

"God is not a Republican or a Democrat," he said. "I want Republicans to talk about more than gay marriage and abortion. I want Democrats to talk about abortion and poverty in moral terms."

[Soldier4Christ]

Former NYPD Chief Kerik Pleads Guilty

NEW YORK -- Former police commissioner Bernard Kerik, whose rise from beat cop to nominee for Homeland Security head was derailed by ethics questions, dodged prison Friday in a plea bargain by admitting he took $165,000 in gifts from a company attempting to do business with the city.

Kerik, at a 10-minute hearing in state Supreme Court in the Bronx, pleaded guilty to a pair of misdemeanors under a deal that allows him to continue without interruption his new career as a security consultant in the Middle East.

Kerik acknowledged accepting $165,000 in renovations on his Bronx apartment from a company attempting to land city contracts _ Interstate Industrial Corp., a business reputedly linked to organized crime. And he admitted failing to report a $28,000 loan from a real estate developer as required by city law.

The transgressions occurred while Kerik was head of the city Correction Department.

In entering his plea, Kerik admitted speaking to city officials about Interstate, but never acknowledged a link between the renovations and his support of the company. Outside court, Kerik showed no sign of remorse and offered no apology.

"The last year and a half has been a tremendous burden," said Kerik, who must pay $221,000 in fines. "But today it's over. Now I can get on with my business."

City officials defended the deal with Kerik, saying he received the same treatment as any other defendant.

"He was arrested and booked, plain and simple," said Rose Gill Hearn, commissioner of the Department of Investigation. "He was fingerprinted and photographed, just like every other perp who gets arrested and processed by the agency he used to lead."

Kerik's close friend and former business partner, ex-mayor Rudolph Giuliani, said the guilty pleas do not diminish the former police commissioner's accomplishments.

"Bernard Kerik has acknowledged his violations, but this should be evaluated in light of his service to the United States of America and the City of New York," Giuliani said in a statement. Giuliani has said he was unaware of the Interstate links when he selected Kerik as police commissioner in 2000.

Kerik first drew national attention while leading the Police Department's response to the Sept. 11 terror attacks. By late 2004, President Bush wanted him for homeland security chief, but he withdrew after acknowledging he had not paid all taxes for a family nanny-housekeeper and that the woman may have been in the country illegally.

More problems surfaced last year when the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement filed court papers seeking to revoke Interstate Industrial's license to work on casinos in Atlantic City. The papers cited testimony by mob turncoats that owners Frank and Peter DiTommaso were associates of the Gambino organized crime family.

The civil complaint also detailed Kerik's cozy relationship with an Interstate official. In 1999, he sent a series of e-mails to the official that "indicated his lack of sufficient funds to both purchase and renovate his new Bronx apartment" and "indicated he would provide information to Frank DiTommaso regarding New York City contracts," the papers said.

In recent months, a grand jury has heard conflicting testimony from the DiTommaso brothers _ who denied paying for the renovations _ and from a contractor who said they picked up most of the tab.

As a result of Kerik's plea, a city jail facility in lower Manhattan _ the Bernard B. Kerik Complex _ is now named for someone saddled with a criminal record. Mayor Michael Bloomberg has not made a decision about whether the facility should be renamed, spokesman Stu Loeser said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Congress scurries to create legislation for military tribunals

Wasting little time, Congress is moving quickly to begin writing legislation to allow the creation of military tribunals, following a Supreme Court decision that repudiated the Bush administration's use of such tribunals to try Guantanamo detainees without authorization from Congress.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said he would introduce legislation on the tribunals after the 4th of July recess, which extends through next week. Democratic Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has said he wants to work with the White House on crafting a bill to punish terrorists using legal procedures.

And Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., introduced a bill Thursday night, just hours after the court's decision, that he said would balance the need for national security with the need for due process.

But not all lawmakers are sure that Congress should write new legislation. Some believe that civilian courts or courts-martial convened according to military law are sufficient to resolve the cases regarding the detainees.

"We should stay as close as possible to the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva Convention," said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., the assistant Democratic leader who serves on the Judiciary Committee.

Durbin said it is not clear whether the military tribunals that the administration created would be able to continue.

"That is going to be the challenge, whether we can create a separate tribunal and meet the guidelines the Supreme Court set," he said.

Sen. John Warner, R-Va., who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, plans to hold a series of hearings beginning the week of July 10 to examine what needs to be done and whether legislation is required, said John Ullyot, the committee's spokesman. He said the committee would hear from lawyers from every branch of the military service to determine the best way to move forward.

Specter said the Judiciary Committee would hold a hearing on July 11. His legislation would authorize the use of a military commission, or tribunal, for people charged with specific offenses.

Ullyot, however, said Warner has not formed a view as to whether legislation is necessary. "He wants to make sure we get it right," Ullyot said.

House leaders were less vocal about their plans, and it is not clear whether they will proceed as quickly as the Senate. The House Republican leadership may be waiting to consult with the White House.

Shortly after the decision, President Bush said he was looking forward to working with Congress to craft legislation authorizing the tribunals. But with congressional elections four months away, it is not clear how such a course would play out politically.

Democrats could try to use congressional hearings and any debate on tribunals to air their criticisms of the panels, of Bush's assertion of presidential powers and of the administration's fight against terror generally. At the same time, the White House and GOP leaders could portray Democrats as soft on terrorism, a political tactic that has proven effective in the past.

The congressional debate is likely to include a politically fraught argument on what procedures the tribunals should use and what sorts of rights should be accorded the defendants, whom the administration suspects of being terrorists.

In Thursday's Supreme Court ruling, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that Congress could legalize the administration's military tribunal system. The court also kept open the option of using the U.S. court system or the military justice system.

In a statement, Frist said he preferred the use of military tribunals to consider the cases of individual detainees.

"To keep America safe in the war on terror, I believe we should try terrorists only before military commissions, not in our civilian courts," he said.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the ruling would help Congress "get this system unstuck."

"I'm confident that we can come up with a framework that guarantees we comply with the court's order but at the same time none of the bad people are set free," McCain said Friday on NBC's "Today" show.

The U.S. military began sending people suspected of links to al-Qaida or the Taliban to the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba four years ago. Many of the nearly 500 prisoners have never been charged with a crime, and the court's ruling does not clarify their situation.

Despite the court's suggestion that it is up to Congress to create some sort of legal framework, however, there is little guarantee that lawmakers will agree on a plan and be able to move quickly during an extremely contentious election year.

Some members of Congress said they had repeatedly offered to work with the White House, only to be rebuffed.

"I introduced a bill more than four years ago that would have ensured the constitutionality of military tribunals and protected any convictions they might yield, while at the same time showing the world that we will fight terrorists without sacrificing our values," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee.

"My bill offered the president a bipartisan model of how to avoid this mess," Leahy said. "He refused to work with me or the Congress but insisted on going it alone."

[Soldier4Christ]

Senate committee approves global AIDS spending

The Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday approved a fiscal 2007 foreign spending bill that includes $3.4 billion for global AIDS efforts. Included in that total is $600 million for the United Nations–backed Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, double the amount President Bush had recommended be allocated to the fund. The foreign operations bill also would include about $1.9 billion for the Millennium Challenge Corporation, which aims in part to reduce poverty and improve economic conditions in developing nations, including those hit hard by AIDS. Committee members say the bill provides funding for most programs at levels similar to what was received in fiscal 2006. The House earlier this month approved spending $3.4 billion on global AIDS programs in fiscal 2007, including $445 million for the Global Fund.

[Soldier4Christ]

U.S. Senate Weighs Risks and Attractions of Medical Tourism

The U.S. Senate Committee on Aging spent some time Tuesday morning considering the subject of medical tourism. Thousands of Americans each year are finding travel abroad a reasonable alternative to the high cost of getting well at home.

Private health insurance offers Americans access to some of the world's best medical care . but millions of Americans, mostly working class people, can't afford coverage. As a result, some travel abroad for surgery and other care, paying a fraction of what it would cost here in the United States.

One of them is Howard Staab. Two years ago, he discovered he needed heart valve surgery. He didn't have health insurance. His partner, Maggi Ann Grace, told the Senate committee they got a cost estimate from a hospital near their home in North Carolina.

"The hospital bill alone was estimated at $100,000," she said. "The valve itself, the surgeon, cardiologist, anesthesiologist, radiologist, and pathologist - all billed separately - would bring the total closer to $200,000 - if there were no complications."

Instead, after considering their options, they flew to India, where Staab had a mitral valve replacement. The cost, including travel and all expenses for the both of them, was less than $7,000. Their doctor, [Naresh Trehan] at the Escorts Heart Institute in New Delhi, had spent years teaching and in practice in New York, and Staab says, compared with his experience in American hospitals, his hospitalization in India was superior.

"In the promptness, in the degree of expertise, the experience of the surgeons and staff. We had typically one to two nurses around the clock, push-button was answered within seconds. They offered and administered baths and massages, and changed the bedding daily. It was truly excellent care," Stabb said in an interview.

Not all the stories have a happy ending, however. In some cases, the result of medical tourism can be "disastrous outcomes" - that's the phrase used by Dr. Bruce Cunningham, who heads the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. "I'm personally well aware of cases which are reported in the media and which confront myself and my colleagues and other physicians of patients returning to this country with disfigurement and nearly fatal infections associated with unaccredited hospitals and unlicensed providers. Patients simply cannot make informed decisions about medical care or establish a proper patient-physician relationship from a travel brochure."

The plastic surgeons represented by Dr. Cunningham's organization might see surgeons in India or Thailand or Mexico as business competitors. Financial considerations, as well as medical quality, are a key part of this health care debate. And not just for patients and doctors.

Except for the very poor and the elderly, most Americans who have heath insurance get it through their jobs, so the cost of health care is also a concern for employers.

Blue Ridge Paper Products is a small manufacturing company. It has been employee-owned since 1999, and with a workforce of mostly men in their 40s and older, health care costs were getting out of hand. The company is unionized, and American unions have been among the strongest opponents of outsourcing. But company benefits director Bonnie Blackley said workers were enthusiastic at a presentation that explained a new health plan that would pay for medical treatments abroad.

"You could tell every slide that they showed, more and more people were going, 'Oh my gosh, we never knew about this.' We really had some excitement there," she recalled. "'This sounds like a good deal, sounds like excellent health care. It's affordable. This will save our company a lot of money.'"

But in the end, American patients and their families want the assurance that a foreign facility will be offering them or their loved ones the best possible care. As long ago as 1997, the Joint Committee on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, which certifies the quality of U.S. hospitals, set up an international affiliate. JCI, as it is known, certifies hospitals in about 25 countries, with highly credentialed doctors.

"Many of these hospitals offer board-certified surgeons who trained at U.S. teaching hospitals," said Arnold Milstein of the Pacific Business Group on Health, which represents large employers who spend a lot of money on health care for their workers. His group found that select accredited hospitals in India, Thailand and Mexico provided quality surgical care at costs 60 - 85 % lower than in U.S. hospitals. At the same time, he stressed that sending patients abroad is not the answer to the high cost of medical care in the United States. "The out-migration of Americans for surgical care is a symptom, not a solution," Milstein concluded.

The American healthcare system delivers high quality for those who can afford it, or those who have good insurance. For the rest, a hospital stay in Thailand or India, followed by recuperation at a five-star resort, is starting to look like just what the doctor ordered.

[Soldier4Christ]

US Senate spending plan would cut security funding for big cities
The bulk of the money targeted for the Coast Guard and border security programs

The Senate Appropriations Committee agreed Thursday to delay requirements for passports or other secure documents from travelers--including Americans-- entering the U.S. from Canada or Mexico until June 2009.

The committee also agreed to make a $12 million (euro9.58 million) cut next year for counterterror funding to cities under a spending plan approved by the Senate panel.

The proposed funding drop follows bitter protests from New York and Washington, D.C.,--two cities targeted in the 9/11 terror attacks after the Homeland Security Department last month slashed their annual share by 40 percent.

The changes were part of an overall $31.7 billion (euro25.3 billion) Homeland Security spending blueprint for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1. The plan wouldboost security funding by $715 million (euro570.68 million) more than what the White House requested, and $1.4 million (euro1.12 million) beyond current spending levels.

But it would reduce spending for the nation's high-risk big cities from the $757 million (euro604.2 million) in 2006 to $745 million (euro594.62 million) in fiscal 2007. The White House had requested $838 million (euro668.85 million) for such cities in 2007.

Last month, New York and Washington officials howled after watching their 2006 funding levels drop by 40 percent while cities like Omaha, Nebraska, got a boost.

Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a Democrat from New York, said the Senate spending plan does not cover needs for New York ''or anywhere else.'' ''This drop in funding starts us off already in a hole,'' Schumer said.

The spending plan also would delay a controversial border security program for 17 months as lawmakers said the Bush administration appears unable to meet its initial January 2008 deadline. The program would require passports or a small number of other tamper-resistant identification from travelers who now enter the U.S. from Mexico and Canada using birth certificates and drivers' licenses.

The bulk of the money in the spending plan is targeted for the Coast Guard and for transportation and border security programs.

Sen. Judd Gregg, who oversees the panel's homeland security spending, said the plan makes sure the funding ''is concentrated on the greatest threats facing our nation: border security, preventing the use of weapons of mass destruction, and intelligence gathering capacity.'' He said the plan will be considered by the full Senate as soon as lawmakers return from a weeklong July 4 recess.

The House approved a $32 billion (euro25.54 billion) Homeland Security spending plan in early June.

[Soldier4Christ]

Okinawa local governments oppose sending missiles to Kadena


KADENA TOWN, Okinawa — Alarmed by reports that Patriot interceptor missiles may be deployed to Kadena Air Base, the three municipalities hosting the base issued a protest Wednesday.

“That the government proceeds with a plan to place Patriots (on Kadena Air Base) without any consultation with the local communities definitely forces local communities to accept the growth of the air base’s operations, which is absolutely unacceptable,” read a statement issued by a council formed by the mayors and council chairmen of Okinawa City and the towns of Kadena and Chatan.

In a broad agreement signed May 1 to realign U.S. troops, the United States and Japan announced that Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missiles would be deployed on U.S. bases in Japan, “becoming operational at the earliest possible time.”

Last week, amid reports North Korea was preparing to test-launch an intercontinental ballistic missile, a Japanese newspaper, quoting anonymous Japanese government officials, reported that the United States would deploy the missiles to either Kadena Air Base or the adjacent Kadena Ammunition Storage Area by the end of the year, along with 500 to 600 additional troops.

A Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman said the PAC-3 site locations haven’t been decided.

A spokesman for the 18th Wing on Kadena Air Base declined to comment Thursday on the missiles’ placement and the protest resolution.

Patriot missiles are designed to intercept ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and enemy aircraft.