The US military is reviewing a video of a controversial helicopter attack on a group of people in Iraq in 2007, officials say.
The review comes after footage of the attack was published online by the website WikiLeaks, gaining 4.1 million YouTube viewings.
There are, however, no plans to reopen an investigation into the case, a US Central Command spokesman says.
So we know how the review is going to go, don’t we?
I’ve blogged in the past about Duke primate scientist Vanessa Woods and now I encourage readers to go visit her newest blog at Psychology Today Your Inner Bonobo where she writes about bonobos, sex, and whatever happens to be on her mind on any given day. Besides being one of my best friends, Woods is a fantastic and funny writer, and her forthcoming book Bonobo Handshake debuts in June. Here’s a sample from Tuesday:
‘Can animals be gay?’ – are you serious NYT? Having a story about same sex sex in animals then leaving out bonobos is like writing an article about big ears without mentioning elephants.The science of homosexuality in animals (or socio-sexual behavior) and then you talk about albatrosses?? that don’t even have a clitoris?? Or do they? the point is, even if they do have them, it’s not like you would ever notice. I know the albatrosses are the latest thing, and I love albatross and think it’s really cool the female raise babies together, but does that really compete with two females rubbing their clitorises together with ever increasing frenzy until they orgasm – which by the way helps them reduce social tension and …
Corbett Leads for Pennsylvania Governor
A new Quinnipiac poll in Pennsylvania finds Tom Corbett (R) ahead of each of all three top Democratic contenders for governor by double digits.
However, the survey also finds that Corbett is by far the best known of the contenders and that a majority “don’t know enough” about the various Democrats running.
Said pollster Peter Brown: “Once the primary is over and the Democrats have a candidate, presumably he will be able to introduce himself to the larger electorate and we’ll get a better idea of how the race actually stands. Corbett is certainly in the enviable position but the structure of the race will become clearer when he gets into a one-on-one comparison.”
Obama Signs Historic Treaty to Reduce Nuclear Weapons
President Obama and his Russian counterpart, Dmitri A. Medvedev, signed a historic treaty in Prague today to trim their strategic nuclear arsenals to their lowest levels in half a century, the New York Times reports.
“The treaty caps a turnaround in relations with Moscow that hit bottom in August 2008 during the war between Russia and its tiny southern neighbor, Georgia. When he arrived in office, Mr. Obama made restoring the relationship a priority, a goal that coincided with his vision expressed here a year ago of eventually ridding the world of nuclear weapons.”
The Washington Post notes Obama’s trip to Prague “is designed to set the stage for further efforts by the president to argue for reductions in the spread of nuclear weapons around the globe.”
Toomey Regains Lead in Pennsylvania
A new Quinnipiac poll in Pennsylvania finds Pat Toomey (R) has moved ahead of Sen. Arlen Specter (D) in a seesaw race for U.S. Senate, 46% to 41%.
Just a month ago, Specter held a seven point lead. The two men have swapped the lead by small margins since last fall.
Said pollster Peter Brown: “A Toomey-Specter race could continue swinging back and forth until November because most voters won’t begin to focus on it until after Labor Day. On paper, Sen. Specter is vulnerable in the general election because only 36 percent of voters say he deserves another term. But Toomey is so little known that the electorate is torn which way to go.”
MARKETING: As small-scale farming and micro eco-farming – urban to rural – continue to grow across the country, so must local food distribution systems. The local small farming and backyard farming communities need places to sell their food and fiber. Sometimes the best methods come from very good community models already in process. Here’s a link to the Agriculture Resources Committee (ARC) of the beautiful San Juan Islands of Washington State. They work to preserve farmland and create and support events that provide marketing outlets for their local farmers, including a springtime “Islands Farm and Feast.” Their model may have ideas and inspiration other communities can gain from. — www.MicroEcoFarming.com
How TV Superchef Jamie Oliver’s ‘Food Revolution’ Flunked out
After two months, kids hated the new meals, milk consumption plummeted, and many students dropped out of the school lunch program altogether.
After two months, kids hated the new meals, milk consumption plummeted, and many students dropped out of the school lunch program altogether.
Immigration Agents Are Going Rogue
Scandal over ICE-issued deportation quotas for field officers, calling into question whether Obama is truly focused on criminals and abusive employers.
Scandal over ICE-issued deportation quotas for field officers, calling into question whether Obama is truly focused on criminals and abusive employers.
The Tea Parties: Built on Fear, Violence and Race Resentment
Racism and xenophobia have been central to the Tea Party movement from the start; while not all of them are racist, they swim in a sea of white racial resentment.
Racism and xenophobia have been central to the Tea Party movement from the start; while not all of them are racist, they swim in a sea of white racial resentment.
Break Up The Banks
A fight is brewing in Washington – or, at the least, it ought to be brewing – over whether to put limits on the size of financial entities in order that none becomes “too big to fail” in a future…
Too Big to Fail – Business – Wall Street – Financial services – Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Shocker! Steve Rosen (That Steve Rosen) Backs Bibi, Not POTUS
Too funny. The GOP, party of flag-waving, guilt by association and if-you-aren’t-guilty-why-were-you indicted is now embracing Steve Rosen. I have never done this but, beyond linking to the GOP link, I am re-publishing excerpts from a piece I wrote about…
Middle East – Republican Party – Israel – Warfare and Conflict – Israel-Palestine
White House Walks Back Criticism of Israel & Paging Doctor Krauthammer
Could the Obama administration be getting cold feet about taking on Prime Minister Netanyahu. This is from Ha’aretz. Following weeks of tension between Israel and the United States surrounding Middle East peace efforts, on Friday a senior White House official…
Israel – Charles Krauthammer – Middle East – Politics – United States
Conservatives Falsely Claim New Obama Nuke Policy Prevents Nuclear Retaliation Against Chem/Bio Attack
Yesterday, the Obama administration released its Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), a congressionally-mandated report that outlines the administration’s nuclear strategy and nuclear arsenal policy. The new strategy, which did not contain any radical changes to previous administration’s policies, took a “middle course” and “keeps first-strike strategy.” The Wonk Room’s Max Bergmann noted yesterday that the right-wing […]
Yesterday, the Obama administration released its Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), a congressionally-mandated report that outlines the administration’s nuclear strategy and nuclear arsenal policy. The new strategy, which did not contain any radical changes to previous administration’s policies, took a “middle course” and “keeps first-strike strategy.”
The Wonk Room’s Max Bergmann noted yesterday that the right-wing freak out had already begun before any real details emerged from the new NPR. Now that the details are known, many conservatives are completely misrepresenting them. Led by the Drudge Report, the new talking point is that the U.S. will refuse to retaliate against a chemical or biological attack with a nuclear strike. To wit:
JOHN BOLTON: But it’s a big mistake because it basically says that for countries that have biological and chemical warfare capabilities, the Obama administration is not prepared to use nuclear weapons in retaliation.
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: Let me tell you one scenario they brought up exclusively, and that is if the United States is attacked by a country with a biologic or chemical weapons…the White House lawyers would ascertain if that country is in compliance with the NPT. … If it is, if it is kept up with the IAEA inspections, it gets immunity from the massive nuclear retaliation.
RALPH PETERS: [M]ost worrisome is the public declaration that, if the US suffers a biological, chemical or massive cyber attack, we will not respond with nukes.
“If there was a biological attack, which killed over a million Americans, is this president really saying we would not retaliate?” Newt Gingrich asked last night on Fox News. “That’s what he said,” host Sean Hannity replied. “I agree. It’s what he said,” Gingrich said. Watch the compilation:
First, nowhere in the NPR does it say that the U.S. will not “retaliate” against a chemical or biological attack. Of course, the U.S. reserves the right to act militarily in self-defense if attacked. Apparently, some conservatives, like Krauthammer, don’t seem to have confidence in the capabilities of American conventional forces to effectively retaliate. Instead, they would seemingly prefer keeping the option of outright annihilation against anyone on the table. Are conventional forces “a credible threat [of deterrence]?” Krauthammer asked. “Who knows,” he said.
Moreover, neither Obama nor the strategy itself said the U.S. won’t use nuclear weapons in the event of a chem/bio attack against a country that is violating the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. In fact, while the NPR “narrow[s] the conditions under which the United States would use nuclear weapons,” the President specifically stated that there are exceptions for “outliers like Iran and North Korea.”
Even former Bush administration Homeland Security official Fran Townsend refused to advance the right’s new false NPR talking point. “I think it is smart to actually explicitly articulate that the primary concern here right now…is the control of nuclear materials and preventing nuclear terrorism,” she said. Moreover, Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Adm. Mike Mullen said he “wholly endorses” the new NPR.
Both Mississippi And Georgia Have Confederate History Proclamations Without Any Mention of Slavery
Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) has been receiving significant attention this week for the fact that he has issued recognized April 2010 as Confederate History Month, but didn’t include any mention of slavery in his proclamation. He explained that he didn’t include a reference because slavery wasn’t one of the “most significant” aspects of […]
Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) has been receiving significant attention this week for the fact that he has issued recognized April 2010 as Confederate History Month, but didn’t include any mention of slavery in his proclamation. He explained that he didn’t include a reference because slavery wasn’t one of the “most significant” aspects of the conflict between the states.
However, McDonnell isn’t the only Southern governor to honor the Confederacy while omitting any mention of slavery — he joins Georgia and Mississippi.
The Confederate History and Heritage Month proclamations are being spearheaded by a group called the Sons of the Confederate Veterans. Other projects around the country include trying to erect a monument remembering South Carolina’s secession. Today, Calvin E. Johnson, Jr., who chairs the Confederate History and Heritage Month Committee for the Sons of Confederate Veterans, sent around a press release touting the group’s success:
In 2009, the Georgia General Assembly approved Senate Bill No. 27, signed by Governor Sonny Perdue, officially designating April permanently as Confederate History and Heritage Month.
In 1999, Texas Senate Resolution No. 526 passed designating April as Confederate History and Heritage Month.
Georgia’s Governor Sonny Perdue, Mississippi’s Governor Haley Barbour and Virginia’s Governor Robert F. McDonnell have all signed a proclamation designating April as Confederate History and Heritage Month for 2010.
Texas’ resolution does mention slavery. Perdue’s proclamation does not, nor does the Georgia Senate bill (with the exception of a reference to “Georgia’s best new history museum chronicles the civil rights struggle of Georgia’s oldest African American community from slavery to the present”). Barbour’s 2009 proclamation also has no slavery mention, and we received no response from Barbour’s office to our request for a copy of the 2010 proclamation. Perdue’s office also didn’t respond to our request for an official copy of their 2010 proclamation.
Today, ThinkProgress spoke to Johnson, who said that he supported McDonnell’s decision to leave slavery out of the proclamation:
JOHNSON: No, I don’t think so [that he should have mentioned slavery], because really, there was slavery on both sides. That was the issue — some of the Union commanders owned slaves. So that wasn’t really the issue of the war. The issue of the war was states’ rights, a lot of which you’re hearing today. … I wouldn’t say it didn’t play any role, but remember that slavery was recognized by the U.S. Constitution. It was protected. You still had slavery even in the North back then — in Washington, DC. […]
TP: So Virginia’s proclamation didn’t need to apologize for slavery, you don’t think?
JOHNSON: I’m not saying it was right, but then again, both sides — No, I don’t think it should be in there. It was part, but like I said, it was on both sides — North and South. The reason it was more in the South, of course, was because the South was agricultural. But no, I don’t think it should have been in there, personally.
Matt Yglesias, Jack Balkin, and davenoon all point to historical evidence showing that the Civil War, indeed, was significantly about slavery.
Two Republican stars — Palin and Bachmann — align for first time
MINNEAPOLIS — Two of the country’s most popular Republicans teamed up Wednesday for a rollicking campaign rally, with Rep. Michele Bachmann (Minn.) and former Alaska governor Sarah Palin blasting congressional Democrats and Bachmann saying President Obama is doomed to a single term.
Lesser of two evils: Keeping Steele as RNC chair
Absent a truly devastating new revelation, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael S. Steele appears in no imminent danger of losing his job. But after another week of controversy over his leadership, the chairman’s longer-term prospects look far less secure.
Some black conservatives question tea party’s inclusiveness
A year ago Brandon Brice was one of the primary speakers at the tax day “tea party” rally in New York. The 27-year-old African American, who calls himself a hip-hop Republican, felt at home with the fairly diverse crowd of protesters, shouting into the microphone: “We tell the federal government that it does not tell us what to do!”
Rescue crews enter mine to search; mine company faulted on safety issues
MONTCOAL, WVa. — Rescue crews entered a West Virginia coal mine early Thursday to search for four miners still missing days after a deadly explosion, officials said, but it may be hours more before they reach the site — five miles underground — where the men are believed to be.
Mine company faulted on safety issues, regulators say
The company that owns the West Virginia coal mine where at least 25 workers died this week has pressed its employees for higher productivity rates, sometimes at the expense of safety, according to regulators, lawyers who have sued the company and documents.
To oversell or underplay — that is the question: Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer slings and arrows by acknowledging modest gains, or to claim immodest accomplishments in search of 67 votes in the Senate.
Since treaty foes will never be shy about predicting dreadful consequences, the case can be made to fight threat inflation by projecting outsized gains. The Nixon administration barreled down this slippery slope after signing the SALT I accords. Immediately after returning from the hoopla of the Moscow summit, President Nixon addressed a joint session of Congress where he encouraged prompt action on the accords to “forestall a major spiraling of the arms race.” National security adviser Henry Kissinger characterized the accords as being “without precedent in the nuclear age; indeed in all relevant modern history.” During the hearings on SALT, Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird who, like Nixon and Kissinger, surely knew better, testified that the Interim Agreement “stops the momentum of the Soviet Union in the strategic offensive weapon area.” Nixon’s International Economic Report sent to the Congress in 1973 characterized the administration’s dealings with the Kremlin as “a giant step toward a lasting peace.”
By claiming immodest gains and misrepresenting accomplishments, the Nixon administration handed cudgels to critics of arms control when a very different story unfolded in the next few years. The task of capping the arsenals that were free to grow under the Interim Agreement fell to the Ford and Carter administrations. It took five long years for SALT II to establish ceilings from which strategic arms reductions could subsequently occur. But Senate support waned during the drawn-out, dispiriting process of negotiating the treaty. The best that could be said of SALT II – aptly characterized by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General David Jones, as “a modest but useful step” – was insufficient balm at a time of deteriorating U.S. national confidence and growing Soviet adventurism.
The George W. Bush administration certainly did not feel compelled to make immodest claims on behalf of the 2002 Moscow Treaty. Russia was no longer a strategic competitor and key members of Team Bush were no fans of treaties. SORT barely qualified as such; its constraints were as flimsy as tissue paper. The Moscow Treaty had no verification measures integral to its reductions, which would come into effect for one second of one minute of the very day that the Treaty’s obligations would lapse. Nonetheless, Senate Democrats, then thankful for small favors, voted en masse to consent to ratify the Treaty, as did Senate Republicans previously counted as irreconcilable treaty foes.
The final Senate tally on SORT was 95-0. The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, like SORT, offers the benefits of flexibility. But unlike SORT, its reductions can be monitored by intrusive, cooperative measures as well as by NTM. These verification provisions are essential for states that don’t entirely trust each other. They are also a necessary foundation for more encompassing and deeper reductions, for which stronger monitoring arrangements will be needed.
Despite claims to the contrary, New START does not inhibit the growth of U.S. conventional power projection capabilities that, unlike nuclear weapons, are militarily useful on battlefields. Nor will New START impede ballistic missile defense programs that, with or without the Treaty’s entry into force, will continue to be constrained by balky Democrats in Congress as well as by limitations imposed by technology, cost, and cost-effectiveness.
New START does not lend itself to extravagant claims, but it is an essential step on a long journey to reduce wretched excess and nuclear dangers. New START reconfirms the stubborn, post-Cold War fact that nuclear weapons have declining utility for major powers. Constituencies in both countries chafe against this trend line, and they will do their best to block entry into force. But dispassionate observers will understand that overheated arguments against the Treaty are baseless. The Senate vote on New START will therefore be yet another indicator of how well – or how poorly – the most powerful nation in the world projects itself internationally.
Article Tags: Ross McKitrick
This is the story of how I spent 2 years trying to publish a paper that refutes an important claim in the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The claim in question is not just wrong, but based on fabricated evidence. Showing that the claim is fabricated is easy: it suffices merely to quote the section of the report, since no supporting evidence is given. But unsupported guesses may turn out to be true.
Showing the IPCC claim is also false took some mundane statistical work, but the results were clear. Once the numbers were crunched and the paper was written up, I began sending it to science journals.
That is when the runaround began
Click to read (PDF) Circling the Bandwagons: My Adventures Correcting the IPCC by Ross McKitrick
Ah!.. Maybe it’s this fresh spring weather, but there’s not much better than the long rays of the new day’s sun stretching out across the kitchen each morning. Let’s check out these lucky-duck kitchens that face east – perfect for greeting the sun over breakfast:
First Lady Michelle Obama hits the cover of Good Housekeeping’s 125th anniversary issue.
General Motors ha presentado la última edición de su deportivo que marcó un antes y un depués, no es otro que el Viper. Esta versión se denomina Dodge Viper Final Edition y ha sido lanzada para despedirlo por todo lo alto.
Solo serán construidas 50 unidades de esta edición repartidas entre 20 Coupés, 18 Roadster y 12 ACR. Dodge ha dotado a este modelo de un tono gris que recubre toda la carrocería. En cuanto a la motorización, ninguna de las variantes recibirá cambios por lo que seguirá con el motor V10 y 600CV.
Una vez vendidas estas unidades, se espera que General Motors anuncie la nueva generación:
Related posts:
In a must-read interview (for Palm fans, anyway) at CNN Money, Palm CEO Jon Rubinstein candidly laid out Palm’s current situation, the missteps of the past year and a half, and why he’s still bully on Palm’s chances to survive and even thrive as an independent company.
Rubinstein speaks out about plenty of issues that we’ve hit here on PreCentral, from the ‘variety of hardware issues’ that plagued early Sprint adopters, to speed, to battery life, to the lower-than-expected sales at Verizon, to the challenges of launching after the Droid, to cash-on-hand, to inventory, to number of apps, to buyout rumors, to mom-focused commercials …if an investment analyst has complained about it in the past year, it’s pretty much here.
Rubinstein doesn’t candy-coat any of it and straight up says that Palm’s main goal right now is simply selling devices, getting ‘to scale.’ Unfortunately, Palm doesn’t have the cash for a huge marketing blitz to juice the numbers (they’re hoping to get ‘viral,’ which could be fun). Instead, Palm’s $590 million is going to R&D and to those next devices we’re all waiting for:
it may take us a while, but we will work our way through this, and we’re continuing to invest very heavily in engineering on both webOS development and on new product development.
Go on and read the whole thing and then let us know: doesn’t it feel good to have a CEO lay it all out? What do you think Palm’s next step should be?
Jim Carrey and Jenny McCarthy ended their five-year relationship this week and a friend of the couple blames Carrey’s long struggle with depression for prompting the shocking split.
According to Star Magazine, the two have been having problems for months due to Jim’s unwillingness to seek professional help.
“They always seem so happy in public yet they have had their share of breaks. Jenny has been very supportive of Jim, but he has refused to take medication that seems necessary for his condition,” the insider says. “The crazy highs and dark lows were just too much for her. It was such an emotional roller coaster for her. When he’d get really down, he’d just disappear. He would hide out in a hotel or one of his homes, not answering her calls.”
The 48-year-old actor announced the split on his Twitter page Tuesday, but insisted the split was amicable.
“Jenny and I have just ended our 5yr relationship. I’m grateful for the many blessings we’ve shared and I wish her the very best. S’okay! Be of good cheer folks! It’s a beautiful world, and we’re all gonna get what we need the most! (sic)” he wrote.
Jenny also addressed the breakup online, saying she was “grateful” for their time together and would continue to be “committed” to his daughter Jane, 22, who recently welcomed a baby boy.
Jim has been married twice: first to waitress Melissa Womer – Jane’s mother – who he split from in 1995. He later wed his Dumb and Dumber co-star Lauren Holly. They divorced in 1997. Jenny was also previously married: the former Playboy model was with actor-and-director John Mallory Asher for six years before they split in 2005.
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release April 8, 2010
PRESS GAGGLE
BY PRESS SECRETARY ROBERT GIBBS
AND DEPUTY NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR FOR STRATEGIC COMMUMICATIONS BEN RHODES
Aboard Air Force One
En Route Prague, Czech Republic
8:41 A.M. CEST
MR. GIBBS: Good morning. So we’re just going to take you quickly through the day, answer a few questions. We have not a ton of time because they’ve got to do a meeting in here with the President in a little more than about 10 minutes.
Q We could just stay.
MR. GIBBS: He appreciates the offer to share his conference room.
Just have Ben walk you guys through what the President has on his schedule, what he’ll see. I will say this — I’ll send around a post that went up on the White House blog overnight from Brian McKeon, who is with the Office of the Vice President, but also works for the NSC. Brian was formerly the chief counsel for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and will be heading up our efforts to see the treaty ratified through the Senate. So there’s a blog posted that discusses a little bit about what’s in the treaty, what the use of terms like unilateral language means, and some particulars around that.
The treaty will be made publicly available later today. We will post that.
Q Is that something you send around, or how does that get posted?
MR. GIBBS: I assume it’s rather large, so we’ll put it up
— I believe they’re going to put it up on the Internet. And then starting later today members of our negotiating team will begin briefing on the specifics of the treaty to the Senate.
I’ve said this a few times in my briefings and I’ll get you these exact years and votes, but if you look back at previous nuclear reduction treaties in the late ’80s, the early ’90s, and even as late at 2003, these are documents that enjoy vast bipartisan majorities — votes in the ’90s. We are hopeful that reducing the threat of nuclear weapons remains a priority for both parties.
So with that, let me have Ben walk you guys through a little bit of what you’ll see today.
MR. RHODES: Sure. And just to add to what Robert said, we’ll have fact sheets on different parts of the treaty, different key areas of the treaty that we should be able to share with you. And then I’d just also add, too, that the consultations with the Senate have been ongoing, so we’ve been in consultation obviously throughout this process. And today we’ll have a chance to brief on the full text of the treaty and the protocol.
So just to walk through the day, when we arrive we’ll go to the Prague Castle, where there will be a welcome ceremony with President Klaus. Obviously we’re being hosted by our very close friend and ally, the Czech Republic, and President Klaus will greet President Obama in a signing ceremony there.
Then the President will head right into his bilateral meeting with President Medvedev. This will be an opportunity of course to mark the conclusion of the START treaty, to discuss some issues related to that, but also to cover a broad agenda of issues between the United States and Russia on which we’re cooperating.
The President will have a smaller bilateral meeting with President Medvedev and then an expanded bilateral meeting with —
(the President comes in.)
THE PRESIDENT: I was going to say, he’s doing a really good job. (Laughter.) I was impressed. It sounded like he knew what he was talking about. (Laughter.)
Q Do you want to take over, Mr. President? (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: No, I’m good. (Laughter.)
MR. RHODES: So they’ll have a bilateral — I think we’ll have a spray at the top of that, but they’re obviously going to be making their statements later.
Then they’ll proceed to the signing ceremony, which is also at the Castle there. President Medvedev and President Obama will sign the treaty. Then they’ll both make statements and have a press conference. After the signing ceremony there’s a ceremonial lunch, and that is the United States, Russia and the Czech Republic will be at that lunch to mark the occasion.
Around this time, again –after the treaty is signed, I think that is when it will be released. And again, I expect it will be posted on the web, and we’ll see about having paper copies available. And again, this is the treaty and the protocol. So this will be the first time that that text has been made fully available.
Then there’s a bit of a break and at that time we’ll I think have the opportunity to brief you more fully on the treaty with some of our negotiating team who will be there with us, as well as the bilateral meeting that the President had with President Medvedev. I think we’re going to head back to the hotel and do the briefing there.
Then the final event of the day for the President is we are hosting a dinner for Central and Eastern European heads of state and heads of government. There will be 11 leaders there: Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Lithuania, Slovenia, Poland, the Slovak Republic, Latvia, Estonia, Romania, and then of course, the Czech Republic, and both the Prime Minister and the President will be there from the Czech Republic.
The President wanted to take this opportunity since he was in Prague to have a dinner and multilateral discussion with these 11 close allies of the United States, to, again, discuss a range of issues on which we cooperate closely with them from the global economy to European security, to how we’re cooperating around the world, in Afghanistan and other places. These are all, of course, NATO allies.
And that’s it. At that dinner I think we’ll have a pooled arrival and then the dinner itself will be a closed working dinner where they’ll have an opportunity to discuss a range of issues. I imagine we’ll have some kind of a readout to the dinner as well for you guys.
So that’s the day. And then the next morning, before we leave the President will have a bilateral meeting with the Czechs, with both the President and Prime Minister together, before we take off on Friday morning.
So that the schedule, and I’ll take a couple of questions if anybody has any.
Q — expects the bilateral meeting with Medvedev to focus heavily on Iran. How much progress do you expect the President to be able to make on that issue with the Russians?
MR. RHODES: Well, the Russians have been a close partner with us throughout the process of the P5-plus-1 negotiations. I think you’ve seen President Medvedev be in line with President Obama in both his statements and his approach in terms of providing Iranians with an opportunity to change course but also saying that there will have to be consequences if they don’t.
The Russians are currently negotiating with us for a multilateral sanctions regime in New York, so currently we’re in multilateral negotiations where we believe we’ll have a sanctions resolution this spring. This will be an opportunity for them to discuss those negotiations and discuss recent developments as it relates to Iran, but again, those negotiations are now in a multilateral basis in New York. So while — it’s an important opportunity for them to consult and I think to continue to discuss the progress of those negotiations.
And again, what we’ve said and what I think we’d underscore again today is that when the President took office relations with Russia were at a — really at a post-Cold War low, and that in the pursuit of the START treaty I think says something about an important landmark in terms of arms control nuclear policy, but it also demonstrates that we believe we can work together with the Russians on issues of common interest. And that would of course include Iran. And we believe we’ve worked constructively with them on Iran. That would include Afghanistan. It would also include economic and trade issues that we’ll also be discussing as well.
So there will be a range of issues discussed, to include Iran. And we believe that, again, the Russians have been good partners throughout this process at the P5-plus-1.
Q What is issue number one? What’s issue number one? Is it Iran?
MR. RHODES: Well, first of all, I think really issue number one is coming here to sign this treaty. I mean, President Medvedev and President Obama really worked personally together on this. I mean, a lot of you travel with us. I mean, they — I think they met seven times bilaterally, both in Moscow but then on the margins of multiple summits. They spoke on the phone an additional seven times.
Q So is this eight?
MR. RHODES: This would be eight, yes. This should be their eighth meeting. So this is something that the two of them personally invested a lot of time and effort in. So I think it was important for them to mark that achievement.
The President, of course — so there’s a discussion of the kind of completion of that treaty and look to the future cooperation on these issues.
President Medvedev is obviously coming to the nuclear security summit, and obviously President Obama just released an important document in the Nuclear Posture Review, which we’ve consulted with the Russians in. So there’s a range of nuclear non-proliferation and security issues I think they’ll discuss.
Iran is obviously one of those, because as you’ve heard us say many times, for the non-proliferation regime to work effectively those who break the rules and fail to live up to their obligations have to be held accountable. So I think Iran will be discussed in that context of a shared commitment that they have to non-proliferation and nuclear security.
So it’s an important issue. I think there will be also a broader range of issues discussed. Russia is cooperating in Afghanistan. The recent terrorist attacks in Russia, President Obama was able to express his condolences personally to President Medvedev by the phone. I’m sure that he’ll have an opportunity to do that again in person today. And then some issues related to economic growth and the G20 as well.
Q And on Iran, what’s your best-case scenario coming out of this meeting, going into the meeting next week with Hu Jintao?
MR. RHODES: I think these are important opportunities to discuss Iran bilaterally; to discuss Iran’s continued failure to live up to their obligations. But again, what I would underscore is that we’re into a period of intense negotiations in New York. The Chinese are a part of those negotiations, as you’ve seen recently reported. So a lot of those — the details of that sanctions regime are being worked through in New York.
So this is an opportunity for the President to consult on a leader-to-leader basis with his Russian counterpart. He’ll have that opportunity with President Hu, and he also recently met with President Sarkozy. He talked to Prime Minister Brown on the phone. And I think we’ll also have an opportunity to talk to Chancellor Merkel. So I think he’ll be meeting with each of the leaders to discuss the progress that’s being made, but also the focal point of the negotiations right now is in New York, given the fact that all the P5-plus-1 is now at the table on this.
MR. GIBBS: I’d just underscore that — because this goes to both the relationship that we have bilaterally with Russia but also the engagement that the President has undertaken over the course of 15 months, has brought us to the point where, as Ben just said, the P5-plus-1 is all actively at the table negotiating this, something that — again, 15 months ago, the problem of Iran existed; what didn’t exist was an international framework in the P5-plus-1 to deal with it.
Through the President’s both engagement with these countries bilaterally, multilaterally, and by the offers that have been made to Iran that have been turned down, the world has been brought together at a point that it wasn’t at only a short time ago.
Q Well, I guess that’s the exact reason to ask these kinds of questions, is because you’ve got these intense negotiations, you’ve got all the parties at the table, so here the President is meeting with the two most important players in those negotiations in the span of, I don’t know, four days or five days, if I’m doing the math right. And so he’s got to want something out of that. It can’t just be, hey, there’s stuff happening in New York.
MR. RHODES: No, I think — look, I think — well, no, but the point of New York is that that’s where the details — I mean, we’re in a period of —
Q But this is how you get to the end, is leaders come together and they figure out ways you can break through those talks, right?
Q I guess are you guys hoping that when the bilat ends today that President Medvedev says something specific to push —
MR. GIBBS: He’s there. We’re at that point. We’re no longer coming out of these meetings where people are looking for whether the Russians or whether the Chinese are at a point where —
Q (Inaudible.)
MR. GIBBS: I understand, but — and I don’t —
MR. RHODES: — negotiate the specifics of a sanctions resolution.
MR. GIBBS: They’re not going to come out of here today and say, we’ve reached an agreement on — because —
MR. RHODES: It’s a bilateral meeting, and —
Q But can they make any progress on Iran today? Are they hoping to?
MR. GIBBS: I think they’ll discuss it, but again, I don’t — again, they’re at a point where what wasn’t possible many months ago now is. But again, I don’t expect any pronouncements today coming out of this meeting. I do think the meeting upcoming with the Chinese leader is important and demonstrates, again, the approach that we’ve taken to bring all our partners, including the Chinese, into these negotiations, and to have his important participation in the nuclear security summit, which, in many ways, builds off both the Nuclear Posture Review and the START treaty that we signed today, moving the agenda on reducing the threat of nuclear weapons forward.
MR. RHODES: I’d just add to that, I mean, echoing what Robert said, President Medvedev has been clear for a time — we would come out of these meetings, and he’s been supportive of the need to move to sanctions if the Iranians continue to fail to live up to their obligations. So we believe the Russians are onboard with the sanctions effort.
I think that you’ve heard the President express the importance of getting this done. Of course, it’s an opportunity for them to discuss the importance of holding Iran accountable. But what I would also say, though, is that, just echoing what Robert said, these consultations further isolate the Iranians. I think the Nuclear Posture Review we released, which focused upon the Non-Proliferation Treaty as the central dividing line between those states that will have a negative security assurance and those states that don’t, further isolates the Iranians and sends a message to them that they will not find greater security through the pursuit of a nuclear weapon.
So there’s a range of actions we’re taking, of course, ongoing unilateral sanctions that we have on the Iranians, whose enforcement we’ve tightened, and then of course these multilateral efforts at the United Nations, which, again, we believe should and will conclude this spring.
So I think there’s a whole range of ways in which the international community is working to isolate Iran. And I think that they’ll cover that broad range in their discussions. But of course the sanctions regime that is being negotiated will be a topic. But again, as Robert said, the Russians are already committed to the notion of holding Iran accountable through the multilateral sanctions regime, and that’s being worked hard in New York too.
So I’m not trying to downplay. I’m just — we believe that they have —
Q So you’ve got everybody onboard with maybe — with talking about sanctions. Then you’ve got the really hard process of what do they look like; what can everybody agree on they’ll say and they’ll do. And that’s the really difficult part that you’re in right now.
MR. GIBBS: Right, and quite frankly it will play out in many places. You know, Bill Burns and others actively engaged with their counterparts in the P5-plus-1; Ambassador Rice at the United Nations; as well as the President and his counterparts.
So these are discussions that are happening I would say simultaneous, but it will be 3:00 a.m. on the East Coast, so maybe that would be too cute by half.
We’ve got about one or two more minutes and then we’ve got to get the —
Q Has the President been briefed on the situation in Kyrgyzstan and will that be playing any part in the discussions with various leaders?
MR. RHODES: Yes, the President has been kept informed about the situation in Kyrgyzstan throughout the day — the day and a half. And I do expect that that would come up, given the fact that both the United States and Russia have relations with Kyrgyzstan so I expect it will be a topic of discussion.
Q How much of a fight are you guys expecting in the Senate for the START treaty?
MR. RHODES: Well, again, I think when the agreement was announced — and again, I said this, I don’t want to pre-judge votes here, but obviously the very strong statement that Senator Lugar issued about moving this process through the Senate quickly, which I know is important to many, including President Obama — as I said, this is an issue that President Obama got involved in as a senator through a partnership with Senator Lugar. Brian McKeon as I said, on the Vice President’s staff and working with the NSC, will head up our efforts to get this through the Senate.
And I would say again, this is an issue that, from Reagan to Clinton to Bush, has enjoyed bipartisanship. It’s why leaders like Secretary of State Kissinger, George Shultz, Sam Nunn, Bill Perry put out supportive statements upon our conclusion a few weeks ago of this treaty.
So I think it’s the President’s hope and expectation, one, that the Senate will ratify this treaty this year, and secondly, that what has always been a strong bipartisan issue will continue to be so. And I’ll send around the votes. Again, the last three prominent nuclear reduction treaties that have gone through the Senate have passed with no less than 93 votes. So we’ll get an opportunity to see.
MR. RHODES: I’d just add one thing to that. Secretary Gates said this when the treaty rolled out, but we’ve consulted with the Senate throughout this. A couple of issues were of interest to a number of senators, included the missile defense and the stockpile management. The treaty places no constraints on the development of our missile defense in Europe. And similarly we’ve made significant investments in the stockpile that we’re very confident that we can actually strengthen the infrastructure of the stockpile and have a reliable nuclear deterrent with these reductions in deployed weapons and launchers.
So we’re confident that based upon our consultations with the Senate throughout this process that the final product of this treaty is very much in line with some of the issues that were expressed just by senators.
Q Do you think before the August recess —
MR. GIBBS: I don’t know that I would set a timetable of before August.
All right. Thanks, guys.
END 9:03 A.M. CEST
We had earlier covered the news of TurboHercules filing antitrust charges against IBM. That incident was in response to IBM when it laid charges against TurboHercules. IBM says, TurboHercules violates 173 of IBM’s patents.
Now, IBM has clearly denied those charges. This attitude of IBM has upset the whole of the Open-Source community. Back in 2005, IBM assured them with promises of not using its patents to trouble Open-Source. But now, it is acting otherwise.
In a letter dated 11th March, 2010, IBM’s Mark Anzani, vice president and CTO for System z technology wrote,
Your suggestion that TurboHercules was unaware that IBM has intellectual property rights in this area is surprising. Your product emulates significant portions of IBM’s proprietary instruction set architecture and IBM has many patents that would, therefore, be infringed.
According to this statement, TurboHercules which is a ten year old company is stealing. That is partly outrageous on part of IBM but it can be justified to some extent.
Firstly, IBM has made wide monetary contributions to the growth and promotion of Open-Source and expects at least some trust from the community.
Secondly, the multiple statements released by IBM are contradictory and are prone to critical attack. Though, this does not definitely make them guilty.
Another statement from IBM makes them look like the good guys when they say,
Since TurboHercules is a member of organizations founded and funded by IBM competitors such as Microsoft to attack the mainframe, we have doubts about TurboHercules’ motivations and qualifications, and we will be interested to learn if that company will comply with the rules of the Open Source community.
However, IBM is acting in its own interest largely and this action is a clear attempt to save all the investment it had made into the mainframe business. Though, IBM surely does not get to call who is not fit to be a part of the Open-Source world.
[ Via: eWeek and linuxinsider ]
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_______________________________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 7, 2010
DAILY GUIDANCE AND PRESS SCHEDULE FOR
THURSDAY, APRIL 8, 2010
The President will arrive in Prague in the morning. The arrival at Prague Ruzyně Airport is open press.
The President will then travel to Prague Castle, where he will be greeted upon arrival by President Klaus of the Czech Republic. The President will then take a family photo with President Klaus and President Medvedev of Russia. These events are open press.
The President will then hold a bilateral meeting with President Medvedev. There will be a pool spray at the top. They will then hold an expanded bilateral meeting. This meeting is closed press.
Following the meetings, President Obama and President Medvedev will sign the New START Treaty. They will then hold a press conference. This is open press.
President Obama and President Medvedev will then attend a lunch hosted by President Klaus. The President will deliver toast remarks. There will be travel pool coverage of the President’s remarks.
In the evening, the President will host a dinner for Central and Eastern European heads of state and government from Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia at the Ambassador’s residence. The President will greet leaders on arrival. There will be travel pool coverage of the arrivals. The dinner is closed press.
Out-of-Town Travel Pool
Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg
Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP
TV Corr & Crew: CNN
Print: Washington Post/AFP
Radio: NPR
CEST
9:25AM THE PRESIDENT arrives in Prague, Czech Republic
Prague Ruzyně Airport
Open Press
9:45AM THE PRESIDENT arrives at Prague Castle and is greeted by President Klaus of the Czech Republic
Prague Castle
Open Press
9:55AM THE PRESIDENT takes family photo with President Klaus and President Medvedev of Russia
Prague Castle
Open Press
10:05AM THE PRESIDENT holds bilateral meeting with President Medvedev
Prague Castle
Travel Pool spray at the top
10:45AM THE PRESIDENT holds expanded meeting with President Medvedev
Prague Castle
Closed Press
11:50AM THE PRESIDENT and President Medvedev attend New START Treaty signing ceremony and hold a press conference
Prague Castle
Open Press
1:00PM THE PRESIDENT and President Medvedev attend ceremonial lunch hosted by President Klaus; THE PRESIDENT delivers toast remarks
Prague Castle
Travel Pool spray for toast
6:30PM THE PRESIDENT greets Central and Eastern European leaders on arrival
Ambassador’s Residence
Travel Pool Coverage
7:15PM THE PRESIDENT hosts dinner for Central and Eastern European leaders
Ambassador’s Residence
Closed Press
##
In the latest issue of Rolling Stone, actress Lea Michele, 23, reveals that she isn’t as straight-laced as the giddy character she portrays on television’s Glee: the star has nine tattoos!
Lea, who plays overachieving Rachel Berry on the hit show, even convinced series co-stars Jenna Ushkowitz (Tina) and Kevin McHale (Artie) to have matching tattoos of the word “Imagine” inked on their left feet.
“I’m known to be the instigator to do some more risky stuff – so we have little tattoos on our feet now… It made a lot of sense that night.”
Her other body art includes a blue butterfly on her right foot drawn by her cousin, a butterfly on her back which she got with her mother, and a bird on her hip. Lea also has two musical notes from Queen’s “Bohemian Rhapsody” on her left shoulder and a tattoo on her thigh in memory of her grandfather, who died in 2009.
