Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Right Wing Extremist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (30252)	11/19/2002 8:56:56 AM
From: lorne	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 59480

US must disarm: Carter Date: November 18 2002 The former United States president Jimmy Carter says the US, which has taken the lead in urging such countries as Iraq and North Korea to destroy their weapons of mass destruction, should also disarm. "One of the things that the United States Government has not done is to try to comply with and enforce international efforts targeted to prohibit the arsenals of biological weapons that we ourselves have," Mr Carter told CNN. "The major powers need to set an example," Mr Carter said, as the US confronts Iraq over its possession of such banned weapons. "Quite often the big countries that are responsible for the peace of the world set a very poor example for those who might hunger for the esteem or the power or the threats that they can develop from nuclear weapons themselves. "I don't have any doubt that it's that kind of atmosphere that has led to the nuclearisation, you might say, of India and Pakistan." Mr Carter, winner of this year's Nobel Peace Prize, for his efforts in seeking negotiated settlements to head off violent conflict, also said that the US gave only a thousandth of its gross national product for international aid, while the average European country gave four times as much. "For every time an American gives a dollar, a citizen of Norway gives 17 dollars," he said. "Foreign aid in this country has a bad name, but in other countries, it's a right thing for the government to do." The US had given many countries cause for resentment and scorn, he said. "There is a sense that the United States has become too arrogant, too dominant, too self-centred, proud of our wealth, believing that we deserve to be the richest and most powerful and influential nation in the world. "I think they feel that we don't really care about them, which is quite often true." smh.com.au

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (30252)	11/19/2002 11:34:01 AM
From: PROLIFE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 59480

GOP Wins Senate Homeland Bill Fight Nov 19, 11:21 AM (ET) By JIM ABRAMS ( WASHINGTON (AP) - The Senate defeated an attempt by Democrats to kill what they called special interests measures in a homeland security bill, bringing a lame-duck Congress close to granting President Bush's demand for a new Cabinet agency to protect Americans from terrorists. The Senate voted 52-47 to reject an amendment that would have removed from the bill seven provisions that Democrats said were favors to friends of Republicans. The president and his key advisers actively lobbied wavering senators to defeat the amendment, saying its approval could doom passage of the bill this year. With the amendment out of the way, the Senate was set to finish work on the legislation Tuesday, ending five months of contentious debate on how to carry out the most monumental reorganization of the federal government in over half a century. The House last week provisionally finished its work for the year, and now can approve minor technical changes in the Senate version without calling lawmakers back to Washington. "The terrorists are not going to wait for a process that goes on days, weeks or months," said Senate GOP Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi. "...We need to get this done and we need to do it now." Had the Democratic amendment prevailed, House leaders would have had to decide whether to accept that version or initiate new negotiations. Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, who will be the House majority leader in January, said Monday he was willing to call the House back into session to defend the president's position. Most Democrats, while supporting the homeland security bill, balked at what they said were last-minute inclusions of special interest favors unrelated to the nation's security. "It's the Senate's last chance to show the American people that we are serious about placing some controls on this massive new bureaucracy," said Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., leading opponent of the legislation. The most controversial provision would have protected pharmaceutical companies from lawsuits over the side effects of vaccines they create. The protections would have been retroactive to lawsuits already in court. Democrats said that among the lawsuits that would have been thrown out were those involving claims that mercury-based preservatives used in vaccines cause autism in children. The bill also includes liability protections for makers of airport screening equipment and airport security firms and weakens an amendment offered by the late Sen. Paul Wellstone, D-Minn., that would have barred companies that set up offshore tax havens from getting federal homeland security contracts. Bush proposed the new department last June, saying the agency that will combine 170,000 federal workers from 22 existing agencies was needed to provide a united front against the terrorist threat to the nation. It would be the biggest federal government reorganization since Harry Truman created the Defense Department in 1947. The House approved the legislation by a wide margin in July, but Senate debate stalled for months, first over the labor rights of employees in the new agency and now, over special interest provisions. The Senate, trying to wrap up its work for the year, could also vote Tuesday on a bill that would have the government cover up to $90 billion annually in insurance claims from any future terrorist attacks. The terrorism insurance bill has been one of the president's top priorities for more than a year. He says many new construction projects have been slowed because builders must pay exorbitant terrorism insurance premiums or find that such insurance is unavailable. Under the bill, approved by the House last week, for the next three years taxpayers would cover up to 90 percent of insured losses from major attacks, with the insurance industry covering up to the first $15 billion in annual claims. --- The Homeland Security bill is H.R. 5005. The terrorism insurance bill is H.R. 3210