NewsSummary

Used to send a weekly newsletter. To subscribe, email me at ctmock@yahoo.com

Saturday, July 07, 2007

International Herald Tribune Editorial - Warming and your wallet

International Herald Tribune Editorial - Warming and your wallet
Copyright by The International Herald Tribune
Published: July 6, 2007


At long last, Congress is showing a willingness to confront global warming. The Senate's recent approval of higher fuel economy standards is a constructive step and key lawmakers are promising legislation this year that will, for the first time, limit the emission of greenhouse gases.

But for all the talk about warming, politicians have yet to educate their constituents about an unpleasant truth: Any serious effort to fight warming will require everyone to pay more for energy. Unless Americans understand and accept the trade-off - higher prices today to avoid calamity later - public support for real change is unlikely to build.

New taxes remain a political nonstarter, at least for now. The approach preferred by many lawmakers, businesses and environmental groups is to develop a cap-and-trade system. The government would impose a cap on the overall amount of carbon that could be emitted and at the same time allow regulated firms, like utilities and oil refiners, to buy and sell the right to those limited emissions. The big plus is that the nation would set an enforceable ceiling on carbon emissions, which would be lowered over time.

As Congress entertains several cap-and-trade bills, one fundamental point must be kept in mind. We are now using the atmosphere as a free dumping ground for carbon emissions. Unless we - industry and consumers - are made to pay a significant price for doing so, we will never get anywhere.

Doctors who kill

Doctors who kill
By Regina Dwyer
Copyright by The International Herald Tribune
Published: July 6, 2007


SEATTLE:

'Until yesterday," London surgeon Abhay Chopada told the International Herald Tribune last week, "if anyone had said that doctors were involved in terrorism, I would have said that was completely impossible."

Actually, it's not only possible but more common than Dr. Chopada realizes. And, as a physician myself, while I find it repulsive, it's not all that surprising.

Within the Arab terror world alone, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Al Qaeda's No. 2, trained as pediatrician. George Habash of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Hamas leader in Gaza, Mahmoud Zahar, also trained as medical doctors. So of course did the Nazi "angel of death," Josef Mengele.

In addition, there have been dozens of doctors convicted of murder and mass murder in famous public trials, including classic crimes of passion (Harvey Crippen in Britain and Jeffrey MacDonald in the United States) as well as various questionable "mercy" killings (Harold Shipman in Britain and America's "Dr. Death," Jack Kevorkian).

It's hard to find statistics on the occupations of murderers, so it's difficult to know exactly where doctors rank. The U.S. Department of Justice, for example, keeps tabs on thousands of aspects of the prison population and their victims, but they do not break out killers by occupation.

Doctors are no doubt far outnumbered as murderers by career criminals. But the wonder for most people is that a profession dedicated to life saving produces any killers at all.

Why do they do it? How can they do it? After all, the Hippocratic Oath - which most every physician is taught, if no longer sworn to - commands "first do no harm."

Can there be any greater harm than murder? Well, yes, some doctors would say. Endless, torturous suffering is worse than death. And the deaths of many are worse than the death of one. And the death of a culture or a country is worse than the death of a crowd at a nightclub.

In truth, doctors are taught that while death is the enemy, it is also natural and inevitable, and not necessarily evil per se. Death quite literally can't be stopped, so the goal instead is to minimize suffering and the amount of "needless" or "premature" death.

For the overwhelming majority of nurses and physicians, death remains a nasty adversary. But for the handful of practitioners who are inclined to turn homicidal, this familiarity with the Reaper, plus their training and practice, may make it easier, not harder, to kill.

Consider our training. On the first day of class at almost every medical school in the world, new students are presented a reeking cadaver to dissect.

Part of it is their first lesson in anatomy; most of it is their first lesson in getting used to death. Vomiting and fainting are not unusual first day reactions. But three months later they will be quite used to the sights and smells of death.

Consider our practice experience. Like the first day at medical school, a doctor's daily dealing with disease and death compels us to learn how to disregard death for our mental survival, and in part, at least, inures us to the suffering that comes with any illness, injury or surgery. We literally get used to it. If we don't, we quit or go mad.

Similarly, because experimentation is an essential element of medical science and progress, the regular killing of animals and the testing of potentially lethal drugs and procedures on humans is common practice. You get accustomed to seeing some very bad stuff.

Consider our ethics. They're quite real, but they are also very situational. We quite properly don't employ the same extreme measures to prolong the life of a terminal 95-year-old as we do when faced with a gravely ill child. When resources are limited, we try to get the most bang for the buck by focusing first on those who can be saved.

This is the philosophical basis for triage, the standard emergency room and battlefield crisis practice of separating patients who can be saved from those who, to save the salvageable, must be "sacrificed" by neglect. Triage has saved countless lives over the centuries, but it's a relatively small leap from sacrifice by neglect to just sacrifice.

For the homicidally inclined, "triage ethics" provide a handy rationalization for mere murder. Pretty soon, people who are suffering or merely inconvenient become unsalvageable.

Finally, consider our personalities. Most of us are grounded, normal people. But messianic and visionary delusions come naturally with the medical territory.

The everyday business of medicine creates a god complex in some practitioners that first blinds them, and then seduces them to view their deviltry as noble work toward higher purposes.

My guess is that at least some of the current doctor terrorists, when interviewed, will gamely defend the higher purpose of their attempted carnage.

In the end, we doctors are no different than the rest of you. We probably turn killer less often than most other occupations. But our ranks have and will always include the deeply flawed, the greedy, the delusional, bunglers, rationalizers and just plain sociopaths - like every other population.

Dr. Regina Dwyer is a retired physician living in Seattle.

Let a thousand democracies bloom

Let a thousand democracies bloom
By David Shambaugh
Copyright by The International Herald Tribune
Published: July 6, 2007


BEIJING:

As the 17th Congress of China's Communist Party approaches this autumn, party organizations in Beijing are abuzz with talk of democracy. Expect lots of "democracy" initiatives at the Congress. Some of these were signaled in an important speech by the party general secretary, Hu Jintao, to Politburo members and others at the Central Party School on June 25th.

While these initiatives do not constitute democratic institutions and procedures as recognized in real democracies, they nonetheless represent serious efforts to broaden what the Chinese describe as "inner-party democracy," "electoral democracy," and extra-party "consultative democracy." All of these forms go under the broad rubric of "socialist democracy" or "democracy with Chinese characteristics," as described in Hu's speech.

What do these terms mean in the Chinese political context? Recent discussions with high-level party organizations in Beijing offer some clues.

For the last several years, Hu Jintao has promoted "inner-party democracy" as a key to avoiding a similar sclerosis that beset the former Soviet Communist Party, the CPSU. The Chinese analysis of the Soviet Union's collapse pointed to many causes, but a central one was the top-down, inflexible nature of the CPSU.;

Hu's idea is to enliven the Chinese Communist Party, or CCP, from the bottom up, giving fuller scope to cadres to exchange views and provide input to policy deliberations - rather than just implementing and rubber-stamping decisions made at high levels. This parallels a serious effort to rebuild atrophied party committees and cells at the local level. The goal is to create a dynamic party apparatus, rather than an ossified and inflexible one.

What the CCP refers to as "electoral democracy" basically means that electoral slates of candidates for provincial and national party congresses include between 15 to 30 percent more candidates than can be elected. This is almost triple the quota from the past. The party is also experimenting with multiple candidates and contested election campaigns for local party committees at the village level. Eighty percent of village-level governments in China already have this practice, and party committees are now moving in the same direction.

Extra-party "consultative democracy" is the brainchild of the vice president of the Central Party School, Li Junru, and likely will find a central place in Hu Jintao's keynote address to the 17th Congress.

Consultative democracy is being practiced in three principle ways.

First, prior to party cadre appointments - at all levels of the system - there is now a six-week period in which other party members and the public can comment on the candidate's qualifications for appointment. There have apparently been a number of instances where the party's Organization Department has withdrawn projected appointments after negative reaction was received on certain candidates.

More generally, the Organization Department has been strengthening procedures for evaluation, training, and promotion of China's 45 million party and state cadres - in an attempt to increase competence, reduce corruption and improve governance.

The second mechanism is that local party committees are now to solicit feedback from their city and village constituencies prior to the adoption of significant decisions on public works projects and other issues. In some cases, local governments are required to open their budgets for public scrutiny.

The third mode of consultative democracy is called "multiparty cooperation." In addition to the ruling CCP, China has eight other so-called "democratic parties" - which are represented in the Chinese People's Political Consultative Congress, or CPPCC. Significant efforts are being made by CCP leaders to meet with these non-Communist politicians. China's new Health and Science & Technology ministers both come from the CPPCC and are not CCP members. Expect more such non-party appointments to State Council ministries.

China's National People's Congress also is expanding mechanisms for public comment on draft laws and regulations. For example, its Standing Committee held six separate sessions and received more than 10,000 public comments before finally adopting the controversial Property Law at its annual session in March.

These are all examples of the "democracy wave" sweeping China. The inner-party discourse and discussions among intellectuals has been extremely animated. Many are advocating adoption of far more sweeping democratic reforms, but for the time being do not expect China's Communist Party to go beyond those initiatives outlined above. Like other policy areas, the CCP believes in "incremental democracy." The party will proceed carefully and step-by-step. But at least they are taking some steps - and this deserves more recognition abroad than has been given to date.

David Shambaugh directs the China Policy Program at George Washington University, and is the author of "China's Communist Party: Atrophy and Adaptation."

How much pot can a sick person have? - Washington state deals with medical marijuana issues

How much pot can a sick person have? - Washington state deals with medical marijuana issues
By Curt Woodward
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune anfd The Associated Press
Published July 8, 2007


SEATTLE — This fall, public servants will convene meetings across Washington state to answer a pressing question: How much marijuana constitutes a two-month supply?

What may seem like an odd question for straight-laced government types to tackle is a serious attempt to shore up the state's medical marijuana law, which has been around for nearly a decade without defining the 60-day supply patients are allowed to have on hand.

Now, after years of attempts to amend the law, the state Health Department has been ordered to spell out how much marijuana makes up that theoretical two-month cache.

Prosecutors and police generally support the change, saying it should help officers determine whom to arrest.

The American Civil Liberties Union and some state lawmakers think it could be the beginning of even broader reforms by the state's Democratic-controlled Legislature.

But some patients wish the state wouldn't bother, spooked that the government will make the limits too restrictive and cause more arrests for people in frail health.

If the law is going to be changed, dissenters would rather see stronger protection from arrest or an allowance for group growing operations. Defining the 60-day supply, they say, is a do-nothing compromise aimed mostly at pleasing law enforcement.

"Once again, politics have trumped patients' rights. Once again, politics have trumped science," said Dale Rogers, head of Seattle's Compassion in Action Patient Network, which distributes medical marijuana.

Law OKd in 1998
Washington's medical marijuana law was approved by nearly 60 percent of voters in 1998, following closely behind California in the first wave of such measures nationwide.

Under the law, doctors are allowed to recommend marijuana for people who have "intractable pain" and several serious diseases, including cancer, AIDS and multiple sclerosis.

Marijuana patients can be prosecuted but may avoid conviction by proving a legitimate medical need. But nothing in state statutes shields a patient from prosecution under federal law, which does not recognize medical uses for marijuana.

Unlike the 11 other laws that protect medical marijuana users from a state criminal conviction, Washington has never set a limit for the amount of pot each patient is allowed to have.

In Oregon, patients are allowed up to 24 ounces of pot and two dozen plants at different stages of growth. New Mexico, the latest state to pass a medical marijuana law, plans to allow up to 6 ounces of marijuana, four mature plants and three immature seedlings.

"Law-enforcement officers in the field were put in the position of throwing their hands up in the air and saying, 'We'll let the judge and the jury sort that out,' " said Alison Holcomb, director of Washington ACLU's Marijuana Education Project.

An activist group highlighted the confusion around Washington's law last year when it asked county officials how many plants medical marijuana patients were allowed.

One county said the answer was easy: zero. Others had formulas that accounted for the different stages of plant growth.

"The truth is, nobody's number had any legal precedence or greater validity than your number or my number," said Tom McBride, executive secretary of the Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys.

In some cases, the gray area has been a legal shield, allowing patients and their doctors to argue in court over how much marijuana they need, said Douglas Hiatt, a defense lawyer.

"We can't have an outside health authority dictate to our doctors," Rogers said.

Amounts vary
Adding to the debate, marijuana varies in potency, and people use different amounts.

Ric Smith, a longtime medical marijuana user from Seattle, typically lights up before meals to treat the nausea that comes with his HIV medication.

Smith burns through anywhere from 7 grams to about an ounce a week. Without it, even the smallest disturbance can be too much to handle, he said.

"When you're at the top of the roller coaster and you just start over the other edge? It's that feeling, 24 hours a day," Smith said. "A pin drop, a bird flying by, ... anything will make you throw up."

Hiatt and others who will lobby health regulators will cite a marijuana dosing study led by Dr. Gregory Carter, a University of Washington rehabilitation-medicine specialist.

Following the study's guidelines, Hiatt said, patients should be allowed anywhere from a half-pound to 2.75 pounds of marijuana in two months. If the Health Department goes drastically lower, Hiatt said a lawsuit could follow.

"I know the people of Washington state didn't want lawyers and judges and prosecutors arguing about little piddly details like this," Hiatt said. "Is the person sick? Yes. Are they using it with a doctor's permission? Yes. Then leave them alone."

Man sues over gay marriage on bar exam

Man sues over gay marriage on bar exam
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 7, 2007

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS -- A man said he failed the Massachusetts bar exam because he refused to answer a question about gay marriage, and claims in a federal lawsuit that the test violated his rights and targeted his religious beliefs.

The suit also challenges the constitutionality of same-sex marriage, which was legalized in Massachusetts in 2003.

Stephen Dunne, who is representing himself in the case and seeks $9.75 million, said the bar exam was not the place for a "morally repugnant and patently offensive" question addressing the rights of two married lesbians, their children and their property. He said he refused to answer the question because he believed it legitimized same-sex marriage and same-sex parenting, which is contrary to his moral beliefs.

Dunne, 30, was denied a license to practice law in May after scoring 268.866 on the exam, just shy of the 270 passing grade.

----------

Items compiled from Tribune news services.

Latinos' growing clout has seized candidates' notice

Latinos' growing clout has seized candidates' notice
By Christi Parsons
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 8, 2007


WASHINGTON—Until this summer, the cooks, waiters and housekeepers of Las Vegas usually didn't see many contenders for the White House until well into an election season.

These days, though, members of the Culinary Workers Union are entertaining repeat visits from Democratic candidates. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) lyrically praised the role of service workers at the group's recent rally. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) promised to walk a picket line with them.

The scrupulous attention is testament to the rising influence of Latino voters, who make up almost half of the union's membership of 60,000, as well as almost 9 percent of Nevada's electorate.

That means the local's members could help choose the party's nominee in Nevada in its new role as an early-caucus state, and activists are trying to make the most of the opportunity.

"Our bread-and-butter working-class issues are going to get a good hearing in this election cycle," said Pilar Weiss, the Local 226 political director in Las Vegas helping organize the endorsement process.

The culinary workers aren't the only ones getting extra attention this summer, as candidates of both parties jockey for position in their runs for the White House. The increased foot traffic at the union events comes at a time when Latino voters around the country are poised to exercise unprecedented influence in the selection of the party nominees.

Latino voters increased their numbers by more than a third in the past decade and constituted more than 8 percent of the nation's eligible voters in 2006. Recent changes in the election calendar could give even greater voice to Hispanic voters in the 2008 presidential contest.

Several states with heavy Latino populations—Illinois, New York and California included—are moving their primaries and caucuses from later in the year to February. That means the vast majority of the country's Hispanic voters, galvanized by the recent national debate over immigration reform, will likely get to cast a primary vote while the contest for the nomination is still in play.

'An incredible difference'
"The Latino community is poised to make the most significant impact it has ever made in the history of this country," said Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.). "If people use the power they have, it will make an incredible difference not just in the election but in the lives of people."

Latino leaders aren't the only ones who recognize the potential. Presidential candidates from both parties are reaching out to the community for endorsements, contributions and volunteers.

Clinton has hired several staffers to work on Latino outreach. Leading her team is campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle, the daughter of Mexican immigrants and a native of Chicago's Pilsen neighborhood.

Democrat John Edwards, the former senator form North Carolina, is one of several candidates whose Web sites offer visitors the opportunity to read in Spanish. Also concentrating heavily on Latino audiences is Democratic New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a fluent Spanish speaker whose mother is Mexican.

In the Obama camp, a group of staffers from several departments meets weekly to talk about outreach to the Hispanic community. Obama has been conducting interviews with Spanish-language radio and TV stations, as well as with the newspapers El Mundo and El Tiempo, and his supporters in heavily Latino communities distribute bilingual literature. He has been heavily courting unions like the Culinary Workers in Nevada.

Republicans also are reaching out to Hispanic voters. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has run Spanish-language radio ads in Florida, where former state GOP Chairman Al Cardenas, a Cuban-American, is a high-profile supporter.

Sen. John McCain of Arizona has been speaking to Latino audiences and called on some of his Spanish-speaking Republican colleagues to act as surrogates for him at campaign events. Among the Republican candidates, McCain was the only open champion of the Senate's recently failed immigration reform bill, which would have created a pathway to citizenship for millions of immigrants now living in the country illegally.

Potential backlash
Many Latino activists were infuriated by the failure of that measure and, days later, only one of the Republican presidential candidates accepted a recent invitation to speak to the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials.

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) gave a solo address to the group, challenging the idea that all Latino voters are angry about the immigration bill's failure. Although group leaders gave him credit for showing up, many audience members said afterward that they disagreed with his advocacy for tougher border security.

Still, many Republican strategists insist that segments of the Latino community will vote Republican. By some accounts, roughly 40 percent of Latino voters supported President Bush for re-election in 2004, reflecting what GOP partisans say is a social and religious conservatism that runs deep within some parts of the community.

"The analysis on this question has really been oversimplified," said Kevin Madden, a spokesman for Romney. "Latino voters are not single-issue voters. They care about the economy, about the future of education in this country, about traditional marriage and a respect for the sanctity of life. We think these things resonate with those voters."

But Democrats believe the immigration debate is attracting Latino citizens to the Democratic camp, partly because, they believe, the rhetoric of the recent debate had an anti-Latino overtone.

"Immigrants are our neighbors, and they're part of our communities whether they're here legally or not," said Rep. Luis Gutierrez, an Illinois Democrat. "The tone of the debate made Latinos feel like this was about them personally."

Illinois impact?
He said he believes that message struck home in Chicago, where the metropolitan area is home to the country's third-largest Hispanic population. Latino voters make up more than 5 percent of the electorate in Illinois, and they wield considerable influence in Democratic primaries.

But Gutierrez also thinks that message resonated across the country and is energizing Latino voters to organize and get involved in the selection of their leaders all the way down the ballot.

At the recent Latino elected officials' conference in Florida, Democratic officials from throughout the country echoed the sentiment.

"The immigration issue has caught the imagination of Latino voters," said Rafael Anchia, chairman of the group's educational fund and a Democrat in the Texas Legislature. "They are focused on it, and it is serving as a rally cry for the next election cycle."

cparsons@tribune.com

Afghan civilians caught in crossfire - Casualties could undermine allies

Afghan civilians caught in crossfire - Casualties could undermine allies
By Kim Barker
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 8, 2007


KABUL, Afghanistan — The men told the same story, of how foreign troops bombed their villages long after the Taliban fighters had left, how the bombs killed women and children, goats and sheep, and how if they had one wish, it would be for the foreigners to leave.

One man said 60 civilians had been killed in the air strike June 29 in a village in southern Helmand province, one of the most remote and dangerous areas of Afghanistan. Another villager, likely a Taliban sympathizer, exaggerated that as many as 500 innocent people had died, according to video of the bomb's aftermath provided by Ariana TV station, one of the few media outlets to visit the insurgent stronghold.

"Our children are being killed," said Abdul Qader, who said he lost at least seven family members. "Our homes are being destroyed. We are bombed. They destroy us and they kill us. What should we do?"

The air strike, near the village of Hyderabad, came after fighting between the Taliban and Afghan soldiers supported by the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force. The video showed shrapnel-riddled tractors and mangled cars and homes that looked like piles of crushed crackers.

Such bombings and the allegations of civilian casualties, exaggerated or not, are now the biggest challenge facing foreign forces trying to prop up Afghanistan's government. More than any suicide bombing or insurgent offensive, this issue has the potential to undermine foreign troops and ultimately hurt the NATO mission in Afghanistan, Western diplomats and Afghan officials say.

In interview after interview, ordinary Afghans say they increasingly distrust NATO's motives and increasingly blame their government for failing to stem civilian casualties.

A recent United Nations report said 593 Afghan civilians have been killed by violence linked to insurgents this year. But more of those deaths—314—were caused by international or Afghan security forces than by insurgents, who caused 279 deaths. The number does not include the civilians who may have died in the Hyderabad fighting.

Most of the insurgents' victims were bystanders of suicide bombings, while most civilian deaths from Afghan and Western troops were casualties from combat operations

NATO officials say they always try to protect civilians and are increasing their efforts. They caution that any numbers are not necessarily accurate. Determining whether a corpse is a Taliban fighter or a farmer is not an exact science—there are no Taliban uniforms, no roster. Often, only children or women are certain to be civilians. And some of these areas are simply too dangerous to do a thorough investigation.

Officials also say any civilian deaths are not intentional and are always regretted.

"What we've all been saying in recent days—every ISAF soldier, every service person—is that we have to understand we are guests, and that's a status that's hard won in a country like Afghanistan and it's a status we'd like to keep," said Nicholas Lunt, the chief NATO civilian spokesman in Afghanistan. "And clearly, civilian casualties is an issue that could put that status at risk."

ISAF troops have made mistakes — shooting civilians after roadside bombings or when cars get too close to military convoys. But Taliban-led insurgents are targeting civilians to try to drive a wedge between average Afghans and international troops, military and Afghan officials said. Insurgents now deliberately attack from civilian areas, even hoping to draw fire, officials said.

A recent memo from the NATO commander in Afghanistan to lower-level military commanders reminded them of the need to protect civilians at all times and to use force with discretion, two NATO officials said. Another recent directive established a new policy in searching Afghan homes, long a sore spot with Afghans, according to a UN official and a military official. In the future, searches will need to be justified by more than just one piece of intelligence, the officials said.

In terms of winning hearts and minds, the NATO mission has a lot of ground to make up.

In the past few months, reports of civilian casualties have emerged every few days. At least 19 civilians were killed March 4 when U.S. Marines, fleeing a bombing near the eastern city of Jalalabad, opened fire. On June 17, seven children were killed by a U.S.-led coalition air strike in southeastern Paktika province.

Ghulam Reza and Ashuqullah Wafa, workers at a Kabul salt factory, were shot June 16 on the street in front of their factory, near NATO troops investigating an earlier suicide bombing. Their friend, Azizullah Mawlawizada, was killed. Reza, Wafa, witnesses and police blamed Western troops.

"Sometimes we think they are trying to invade our country, that they just don't like us," said Reza, 28, who has 5 inches of stitches on his back and X-rays showing the bullet in his right side. "I saw them. They didn't care. Sometimes, it comes to my mind that I am Muslim and they are not. And that is why they shot me and that is why they don't care."

NATO spokesman Maj. John Thomas said there was no evidence of any shots being fired at the scene, especially by ISAF troops. But Col. Mangal Zalmai, the commander of the police district, blamed foreign forces for shooting the three men.

The anger against foreign troops has grown to the point that any report of civilian casualties, even by the notoriously unreliable Taliban, is treated as fact. In a speech June 23, after more than 100 civilians had allegedly been killed by Western forces in a week, President Hamid Karzai tapped into the emotions of Afghans and lashed out at NATO. "Afghan life is not cheap, and it should not be treated as such," Karzai said.

"There is a big hatred in the heart of our people against NATO already," said Haji Abdul Khaleq Mojahed, a parliament member from southern Uruzgan province, near the site of several bombings that allegedly killed civilians. "If it grows bigger and bigger, I don't know what will happen."

Last week, a government team including Mojahed visited Qaleragh and nearby villages to investigate claims of civilian casualties. In total, 78 civilians were killed in fighting between insurgents and Afghan and foreign troops, he said. Only 10 were killed by the Taliban, he said.

While Afghan and NATO officials take time to investigate claims of civilian casualties, Taliban representatives quickly get in touch with reporters to push their own, often inflated claims, officials said.

"The first reports grab the headlines, and there isn't a lot of interest in further investigation," Thomas said.

There's also a reluctance to publicly defend NATO. In May, the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission spent a week investigating allegations that Afghan army and foreign troops had killed more than 55 civilians near the western town of Shindand. The commission found that fewer than half the victims were definitely civilians and that the force used was not indiscriminate. But that report has not yet been released in Afghanistan, primarily because of fears that Afghans won't like it and could retaliate.

A team of Afghan officials is now in the Gereshk district of Helmand province, investigating the recent bombing near Hyderabad, a Taliban hotbed where insurgents often are sheltered by villagers, officials said.

Right after the bombing, NATO officials said that fewer than a dozen people died, though they later acknowledged that could be low. The Taliban said 105 civilians had been killed. The government investigation results will not be released for days or even weeks.

By that point, the truth may not matter very much to Afghans. They have been conditioned to believe the worst.

kbarker@tribune.com

Thompson denies he lobbied for group

Thompson denies he lobbied for group
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune and The Los Angeles Times
Published July 7, 2007

Fred Thompson, the former Tennessee senator who has campaigned as an anti-abortion Republican, accepted a lobbying assignment from a family-planning group to persuade the first Bush White House to ease a controversial abortion restriction, according to a 1991 document and five people familiar with the matter.

A spokesman for the former senator denied that Thompson did the lobbying work. But minutes of a 1991 board meeting of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association show that the group hired Thompson that year.

His task was to urge the administration of President George H.W. Bush to withdraw or relax a rule that barred abortion counseling at clinics that receive federal money, according to the records and five people who worked on the matter.

The abortion "gag rule" was a major political flash point at the time. Thompson's lobbying would clash directly with the anti-abortion movement that he is now trying to rally behind his expected campaign for president. Thompson spokesman Mark Corallo denied that Thompson worked for the group.

In a telephone interview, he said: "There's no documents to prove it, there's no billing records, and Thompson says he has no recollection of it, says it didn't happen."

But Judith DeSarno, who was president of the family-planning association in 1991, said Thompson lobbied for the group for several months.

Contenders tap ring tones, texting to sell themselves

Contenders tap ring tones, texting to sell themselves
By Leora Falk
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 7, 2007

WASHINGTON -- When former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina speaks at a presidential campaign event, he often pulls out his cell phone and asks his supporters in the audience to do the same. When hands holding phones shoot up, Edwards urges his listeners to send his campaign a text message.

When supporters of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) want a new way to express their enthusiasm for him, they can go to his Web site and download ring tones for their phones. Then, whenever someone calls them, their phone will play a clip from one of Obama's speeches, or it will emit a cheer: "Go! Go! Go! Obama! Obama!"

With cell phones increasingly an all-in-one tool, campaigns are looking for ways to turn text messages into votes and the sometimes-annoying interruption of a cell phone ring into a campaign message. But political analysts conceded that with a medium so new, it is unclear how effective these mobile campaigns will be.

Not that that stops candidates from trying. Obama, Edwards and Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) all have text-messaging efforts, and several Republican campaigns are considering it.

A race to innovate

"That's the game here -- to innovate on all fronts," said Joe Rospars, new media director for Obama's campaign. The campaign offers text messaging, seven free ring tones and four versions of cell phone wallpaper with Obama's face or logo on it -- in addition to the campaign's Web site that allows users to create profiles, blogs and event invitations.

Joe Trippi, a senior adviser to the Edwards campaign, said cell phones will be increasingly important in the 2008 campaign. Trippi headed Howard Dean's campaign for the Democratic nomination in 2004, which was notable for its innovative reliance on the Internet for organizing volunteers and donors.

Dean alumni are "scattered across a whole host of campaigns that are determined to outwit each other on the Internet or mobile or whatever the platform is," Trippi said. He suggested that the presence of former Dean staffers in the Democratic campaigns is one of the reasons that the GOP front-runners lag the Democrats in use of technology.

Mindy Finn, the director of e-strategy for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, agreed that Republicans "are somewhat behind" in Web and technology campaigning. But she said the Romney campaign would launch text messaging "very soon, at a time that makes sense. ... It's a long campaign."

Trippi said the lag might hurt the Republicans come 2008. "Really aggressive competition is creating a much bigger grass-roots movement on the Democratic side," he said.

Trippi said the strongest impact of cell phones will come not from the campaigns but from that grass-roots movement.

"It's not really what comes from the campaign that matters anymore," he said, citing YouTube videos that are passed among friends, or the possible power of receiving multiple messages from friends urging attendance at a political rally.

That doesn't mean that the campaigns are not producing their own content. The Edwards campaign recently used cell phone messages to urge people to contribute money, allowing users to press one button to hear Edwards' recorded voice asking for a donation or another that connected them to a volunteer who facilitated over-the-phone donations. Clinton's campaign used text messaging to announce her campaign song.

Entree to youth vote

Polling suggests that younger people are most likely to use cell phones in innovative ways.

An April 2006 survey by the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that while 65 percent of cell phone users ages 18 to 25 used text messaging, that number dropped to 37 percent for ages 30 to 49. The same study found that 54 percent of English-speaking Hispanics used text messaging, while 42 percent of black and 31 percent of white cell phone users did. Those in the youngest age group also were the most likely -- at 85 percent -- to change their ring tones or cell phone background.

Germani Hardeman, 20, a junior at Spelman College in Atlanta, said she would "definitely" download the Obama ring tone. But Brianna Eaton, who just graduated from Rocklin High School in Rocklin, Calif., and is part of groups supporting Obama on the social networking site Facebook.com, said she thought the ring tones were "rather stupid" and would rather see the campaign focus on substance.

The campaigns stressed that they recognize that, when it comes time to vote, technology is not going to win elections. Peter Daou, the Internet director at the Clinton campaign, said technology is merely one more tool to allow supporters to organize and communicate.

"It's not about the bells and whistles," he said.

----------



lfalk@tribune.com

Domestic wiretaps ruled OK - Appeals court reverses '06 ruling, says plaintiffs lack legal standing

Domestic wiretaps ruled OK - Appeals court reverses '06 ruling, says plaintiffs lack legal standing
By Henry Weinstein
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune and The Los Angeles Times
Published July 7, 2007

A sharply divided federal appeals court in Cincinnati handed the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program a major legal victory Friday, ruling that the American Civil Liberties Union and several other plaintiffs did not have standing to challenge the program.

The 2-1 decision by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sent the case back to a federal trial judge in Detroit and ordered her to dismiss the case, reversing a ruling the judge had issued last year that the program was unconstitutional.

Justice Department lawyers had urged the panel to throw out the case, saying that a full-fledged review of the government initiative launched after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks would violate the "state secrets" doctrine. Established in 1953, it bars the discovery or admission of evidence that would expose information that the government maintains would harm national security.

At oral arguments in late January, Justice Department lawyer Gregory Garre argued that without such privileged information, none of the plaintiffs could establish standing to sue.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor had rejected the argument, saying that three publicly acknowledged facts about the government's surveillance program were sufficient to establish standing.

Taylor noted that the government had acknowledged, after the program was disclosed in a New York Times article in 2005, that it was eavesdropping on international telephone and e-mail communications in which at least one of the parties was suspected of having ties to Al Qaeda and that the surveillance was being conducted without warrants.

Taylor also ruled that the 4th Amendment prohibition against illegal searches and seizures was an absolute rule that required the government to obtain a warrant before conducting such surveillance.

But the 6th Circuit Court ruled that the plaintiffs had failed to show that they had been individually injured by the program, and therefore did not have standing to challenge the program in court.

Judge Alice Batchelder said the plaintiffs, who also included several lawyers and writers, could not "produce any evidence that any of their own communications have ever been intercepted" by the National Security Agency under the surveillance program.

Rather, Batchelder said, the plaintiffs had asserted "a mere belief" that their overseas contacts were the types of people being targeted by the NSA and consequently they had been subjected to illegal eavesdropping, and that the surveillance had led the NSA to discover and possibly disclose privileged information.

Justice Department lawyers also argued that the program was legal. They contended that when Congress authorized the use of military force after Sept. 11, it clearly contemplated that the president could conduct counterintelligence surveillance of the type used in the NSA program.

Garre asserted at the Jan. 31 oral argument in the 6th Circuit Court that it would be unprecedented for a U.S. court to say that a president did not have such power.

The plaintiffs said they had been injured by the surveillance program in three ways. They said it had hampered their ability to communicate with their overseas contacts because of their fear that the illegal surveillance might harm such contacts. The plaintiffs, particularly lawyers, said that made communicating with clients overseas more burdensome and costly, requiring them to travel overseas to meet with their contacts or to refrain from talking to them at all.

The plaintiffs also said the program had a "chilling effect" on their overseas contacts' willingness to talk to them.

And the plaintiffs asserted that the NSA had directly invaded their privacy.

But Batchelder, joined by Judge Julia Gibbons, said the plaintiffs conceded that "no single plaintiff can show [that he or she had been wiretapped]."

"Moreover, due to the State Secrets Doctrine, the proof needed ... to make such a showing is privileged," and therefore unavailable to the plaintiffs, Batchelder wrote.

The majority also rejected the plaintiffs' claims that their 1st Amendment rights had been violated. Judge Ronald Gilman dissented.

In a concurring opinion, Gibbons said the plaintiffs "can show nothing more than a fear [of] being subject to a government policy of surveillance." But Gilman's dissent said that the attorney plaintiffs in the case had "articulated an actual or imminent harm" flowing from the surveillance program. The program, Gilman wrote, "forces them to decide between breaching their duty of confidentiality to their clients and breaching their duty to provide zealous representation. Neither position is tenable."

ACLU legal director Steven Shapiro said the organization was "deeply disappointed by [Friday's] decision that insulates the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance activities from judicial review and deprives Americans of any ability to challenge the illegal surveillance of their telephone calls and e-mails. ... The Bush administration has been left free to violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which Congress adopted almost 30 years ago to prevent the executive branch from engaging in precisely this kind of unchecked surveillance."

Brian Roehrkasse, a Justice Department spokesman, said the department was pleased with the ruling, "which confirms that plaintiffs in this case cannot seek to expose sensitive details about the classified and important" surveillance program.

The White House also applauded the ruling, saying the administration had believed all along that Judge Taylor in Detroit had "wrongly decided the case."

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said he was troubled by the ruling.

"The court's decision is a disappointing one that was not made on the merits of the case, yet closed the courthouse doors to resolving it," he said. "I hope the Bush administration will finally provide the information requested by Congress regarding the constitutional and legal questions about this program so that those of us who represent the American people can get to the bottom of what happened and why."

Several other cases challenging the program are pending in federal court in San Francisco.

Flying the angry skies

Flying the angry skies
Flights are packed. Delays are rampant. Cancellations are all too common. Passengers are just furious during this summer of air travel discontent.'This is the new reality for travelers'
By Jon Hilkevitch
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 8, 2007


The evidence is quickly adding up: After more than a decade of troubled air travel, the summer of 2007 may be the most tortured yet, with congestion growing daily, and more frequent meltdowns that ripple across the nation, stranding passengers for days.

The airlines' on-time arrival performance in the first five months of this year was the worst in 13 years, the U.S. Department of Transportation reported Tuesday. Only three of every five flights departing O'Hare International Airport were on time over those months, ranking O'Hare last among the busiest U.S. airports. And that was before the weather got really bad.

Nor do the statistics capture the most distinctive dynamic of this summer's air woes—the moments when the nation's hub-and-spoke network of airports seem to seize up altogether, causing passengers to miss not just one flight, but the next and next and many more, because planes are full, or grounded, or both.

Some of the ingredients in this stew of frustration are familiar, such as a burst of bad weather in June that shut down hub after hub, and the labor troubles dogging some airlines.

Some are quirky, such as unrelated computer outages at the Federal Aviation Administration on June 8 and at United Airlines 12 days later.

But some result from attempts by the airlines to scratch out profits after years of losses, conditions that may not improve any time soon.

With a record 209 million passengers projected to pass through the nation's airports this summer, airlines are trying to keep airplanes as full as possible. When it works, the airlines make a modest profit and passengers get low-priced fares. But when things go wrong, airlines have little room to maneuver, and delays and cancellations multiply quickly.

As they keep a lid on costs, airlines have also postponed buying new planes, while keeping flight and ground crews to a minimum. When a plane breaks down, or a pilot calls in sick, flights are often scrubbed and the dominoes start falling again.

The FAA, too, is operating close to capacity, using aging technology that can barely handle the growing volume of traffic. Even on a blue-sky day, air-traffic controllers must sometimes create intentional delays to avoid being overwhelmed.

"It has been a horrendous summer, with flight delays rippling nationwide like never before and fears of having entire airline networks unravel," said Joseph Schwieterman, an airline expert at DePaul University.

"A canceled flight could mean a two-day wait instead of waiting for the next flight because so many flights leave full and there is no extra capacity," added Schwieterman, a former airline pricing analyst. "This is the new reality for travelers."

Flight delays are costing the struggling airlines $16 billion annually because of excess fuel consumption, inefficient use of aircraft and crews and other factors, according to the Air Transport Association, the trade group representing the major U.S. airlines. The vicious cycle of growing delays and higher operating costs will only increase the strain, according to the association, which sees no near-term improvements.

Tailspin in 2001
A busy, stormy summer in 2000 led to similar spasms of gridlock, threatening to suffocate the commercial aviation system. But the 2001 terrorist attacks drove passengers away, alleviating the crowding while sending the airlines' business into a tailspin.

Since then, the airlines have cut back and customers have returned. The number of individual trips by passengers has increased 12 percent since 2000, to 744 million, while the ranks of full-time airline employees have shrunk 36 percent.

And some airlines seemed unprepared for the speed at which a moderate disruption can now cascade into a full-blown crisis.

JetBlue Airways was caught flat-footed in February when an ice storm in the Northeast paralyzed the airline for almost a week, forcing more than 1,100 flight cancellations. JetBlue chief executive officer David Neeleman apologized profusely for poor customer service and offered travel vouchers to delayed passengers. But many stranded fliers vowed to never fly the low-cost airline again.

Northwest Airlines canceled about 1,000 flights in late June—inconveniencing tens of thousands of travelers—due in large part to pilot absenteeism, which was 80 percent higher than it was in June 2006, the airline said. Northwest emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on May 31 and its pilots are still angry over wage cuts.

Northwest said it would reduce its schedule starting in August and take other actions to increase its reserve of pilot flying hours.

Plan for problems
While land-based businesses often tout the strategy of keeping inventories at a minimum, the just-in-time principle does not always translate well for airlines. Still, industry officials say they have no choice, and warn passengers to get used to full planes and little margin for error. A last-minute passenger buying a full-fare ticket can be the difference between a flight operating in the red or the black.

"The carriers are doing what is right from the business perspective," insisted David Castelveter, spokesman for the airline association. "We don't have the luxury of having airplanes or employees sitting around waiting to deal with a disruption."

"Customers are going to have to make some adjustments. It's just no longer prudent for a passenger to take a morning flight to meet a cruise ship in the afternoon," Castelveter said.

About 85 percent of available airline seats will be sold this year between June 1 through Aug. 31, according to the Air Transport Association. Some flights may have more space than that, but on popular routes, every seat will be filled, with 2 million more people flying than last summer.

Bad weather causes about 75 percent of flight delays, according to the FAA.

"June was a very tough weather month for Chicago, New York, Dallas and cities in Florida. There was severe weather on most days," said Bob Everson, the FAA's tactical operations director for the Midwest. "We've reduced air-traffic delays about 6 percent using a combination of new tools this year allowing planes to fly around thunderstorms."

The FAA improvements in the Chicago region include expanding eastbound flight departure tracks out of O'Hare to four from two, resulting in more reliable options to the East Coast. But major gains won't arrive until the FAA and the airlines make the switch to satellite-based navigation, which will eventually replace many ground-based radars used in air-traffic control.

"Today, there's only so much that can be done when a big storm sits right over the top of the airport," Everson said.

Triathlon of woes
And when the computers go down, it can turn a simple flight to New York into a triathlon of cancellations, delays and rebooking for passengers, as Chicago teacher Michael McCarthy discovered on June 21, the day after United's main flight operations computer crashed.

The airline had assured the public that the schedule would be back close to normal that day. Their Web site showed McCarthy, 39, that his 2 p.m. flight to LaGuardia Airport was on time just before he jumped into a taxi outside his West Loop home to go to O'Hare.

Customers in bind
McCarthy's first hint of trouble was his discovery that a woman's name had been printed on his boarding pass. But he had plenty of time to fix that—by that time, his flight had been canceled because of mechanical problems, United said.

He was rebooked on a 4 p.m. flight, which actually boarded passengers at 5 p.m., pulled back from the gate and sat on the airfield until shortly before 9 p.m., when the flight was canceled.

He couldn't get his bag back, so McCarthy took a cab home empty-handed, and returned to O'Hare early the next morning. He finally departed on an 8 a.m. flight to spend a shortened weekend out of town with his wife.

"The airline industry is screwed up," he said. "You have no really good choices."

jhilkevitch@tribune.com

A sorceress for our time

A sorceress for our time
By Peter Aspden
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 7 2007 03:00 | Last updated: July 7 2007 03:00


An unlikely air of solemnity surrounds the release, in two weeks' time, of the seventh and final book in J.K. Rowling's series of stories about a bespectacled English schoolboy that has entranced the children of the world for the past decade.

Even the book's morbid title, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, seems to confirm rumours that the series will end in the deaths of one, or possibly more, of the leading characters. Ms Rowling has confessed that there are two deaths (and one reprieve) that she had not intended, as if the very plot-line of the Harry Potter saga had taken on a supernatural life of its own.

She will spend the evening of the book's publication signing copies in the studious surrounds of the Natural History Museum, where even the dinosaur skeleton must for once take second place in wonderment value to the unravelling of the final instalment of the Harry Potter phenomenon.

Ms Rowling is in understandably bitter-sweet mood over the ending of her opus, claiming to feel simultaneously "heartbroken and euphoric". Those feelings are bound to be magnified worldwide, where more than 325m books in the series have been sold, making their quietly spoken author a dollar billionaire at the age of 41.

As bookshops open their doors at one minute past midnight on July 21, expecting to sell 3m copies of Deathly Hallows in the first 24 hours alone, the plaudits for Ms Rowling will be heard all over again, praising the woman who has single-handedly revived children's reading and created one of the strongest brands in the history of entertainment.

Yet there has always been a churlish undercurrent of criticism beneath the adulation. In quantitative terms, no book has ever captured children's imaginations like Harry Potter. But critics say that, compared with the great children's books of the past, the Harry Potter stories fare badly, appearing derivative, modestly written and superficial.

"Ms Rowling's magic world has no place for the numinous," thundered novelist A.S. Byatt. "It is written for people whose imaginative lives are confined to TV cartoons and the exaggerated mirror-worlds of soaps, reality TV and celebrity gossip."

Some cultural pessimists have gone further still, lamenting the strange tendency of adults to become as obsessed with the Harry Potter books as their children. Here, they argue, was a perfect metaphor for dumbed-down, Blairite Britain: a nation choosing to escape into facile fantasy and revel in the hype, rather than knuckling down to issues of substance and gravitas.

The successes of Ms Rowling and Tony Blair dovetail with eerie coincidence. The first Harry Potter book was published in June 1997, a matter of weeks after a fresh-faced, new prime minister promised that things could only get better. That was certainly true of Ms Rowling, who had spent the previous years recovering from the sudden death of her multiple sclerosis-stricken mother and an unhappy marriage, and trying simultaneously to bring up a child and write her fledgling children's novel in the cafés of Edinburgh.

Mr Blair and Ms Rowling won instant acclaim for their novelty and charm. Although she had received only a modest advance from her publisher, Bloomsbury, for Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, Ms Rowling was buoyed by encouraging reviews and word-of-mouth-based sales figures.

But as the Harry Potter books became increasingly successful, it was clear we were in a new era: an age in which business and politics could build elaborate machines to promote their interests. Although Ms Rowling kept herself largely out of the limelight, the Harry Potter machine, which had now spawned a movie franchise, rolled on with consummate expertise in the art of self-aggrandisement.

The midnight store openings were part of the pattern, creating scenes not seen in Britain since the early days of Beatlemania. The young wizard embraced the globalised economy with equal gusto: the books were translated into more than 60 languages (including, with a touch of retro irony, ancient Greek and Latin). Harry and Tony became established global figures, seeming to sprinkle magic wherever they went, but supported by stolid armies of zealous propagandists.

One can take the analogy too far. In truth, Mr Blair was never a Harry Potter fan. Tellingly, however, two other members of the cabinet admitted to including Ms Rowling's books on their bedside tables: David Blunkett and Gordon Brown, who succeeded Mr Blair last month. Mr Brown's interest came as something of a surprise: did he really leaven his literary diet of Enlightenment philosophers and political scientists with bozos on broomsticks?

But Mr Brown had become good friends with Ms Rowling, largely through his wife, Sarah, and their families have spent much time together. That should not come as a great surprise. Quite apart from her obvious appeal as an outstanding British symbol of wealth, success and creativity, Ms Rowling's quietude, lack of ostentation and devotion to charitable causes (particularly towards one-parent families and multiple sclerosis sufferers) strikes a temperamental chord with the new prime minister.

Is it too fanciful to see, in the evolution of the Harry Potter books, that gradual darkening of tone that has matched the nation's impatience with the politics of flash and spin? Ms Rowling has always insisted that one of the most important characteristics of the Harry Potter books is their refusal to avoid difficult subjects such as death. The darkness was there from the start, she would say, with the death of Harry's parents. It is just that we were temporarily dazzled.

The fact is, notwithstanding the timing of her rise to prominence, Ms Rowling never did really fit into the feelgood Blairite story. She was never part of Cool Britannia, having nothing in common with the cocky strutters of Britpop or the irreverent heart-on-the-sleeve antics of the Young British Artists.

Harry Potter may have been a Blairite phenomenon, conquering the world with sleight of hand and boyish allure. But he has served his purpose, and that was only half the story anyway. Ms Rowling, dedicated, spotlight-shunning, modest and morally serious, is now poised to be the first cultural ambassador of the Brown administration. She is in many ways as impressive a phenomenon as her young hero. What she does next could tell us more than we might think about Britain's political future.

Healthcare as horror movie

Healthcare as horror movie
By Christopher Caldwell
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 7 2007 03:00 | Last updated: July 7 2007 03:00


Americans are of two minds about their healthcare system. Only 38 per cent are satisfied with it, according to a New York Times poll taken earlier this year. A main source of worry is the uncertainty that besets the uninsured, whose numbers reach into the tens of millions. But when the same poll asked about the more concrete matter of how people's own healthcare works, respondents professed themselves delighted. Fully77 per cent were satisfied, a tally that compares favourably with other western countries.

One of the ways in which Michael Moore's latest documentary, Sicko, is disturbing is that it tries to show how the system fails even those who think they have a comfortable place within it. We meet a 79-year-old man who works loading a trash-compacter to pay for his wife's prescription drugs; a whistleblower from Humana, the health insurer, who 10 years ago told Congress that employees were promoted for their resistance to approving necessary procedures; and several workers who volunteered to work at Ground Zero after the attacks of September 11 2001 and who now suffer ailments ranging from teeth-grinding to what looks like emphysema. Mr Moore believes the rescue workers would be better off in Canada, Britain or France. He ends the movie with a stunt: taking them by boat for treatment in a hospital in Cuba.

Sicko is disturbing in another way. The movie is not communist propaganda. But in a playful, postmodern way, it is a homage to communist propaganda. Lengthy clips are spliced in from old Soviet socialist-realist films full of peasants harvesting grain - for parodic purposes, one assumes. Somewhat less parodically, Mr Moore makes dewy-eyed pronouncements from Cuba, ("They live in a world of we, not me," he says.) There is nothing wrong with making a movie that uses this style of argument. What is unsettling is how much people seem to like it. The warmth with which the movie has been received (certainly in the theatre where I saw it) shows that there is a steady, even growing taste for what propaganda does - inciting outrage rather than provoking reflection.

The US healthcare system is indeed suboptimal even for those it treats best. It is illogical. Corporations get a big tax deduction for insuring their employees, but the self-insured are not entitled to it. The principles for pricing hospital services are opaque. The indigent get charged more for hospital stays than the insured do. Pharmaceutical companies can pay doctors for drug endorsements and testimonials. Since all these problems are the result of market abuses within a system of over-regulation, there is no consensus on whether it is the market or the regulation that is to blame, as a look at recent policy books shows. There are plausible free-market solutions, such as those from David Gratzer, a Canadian physician, in The Cure. Jonathan Cohn, an editor at The New Republic, has written a plea for universal healthcare, Sick. Regina Herzlinger of Harvard Business School has summarised the problems sector-by-sector in a probing book called Who Killed Health Care? Whether one chooses a market or government solution, the challenges of paying for it grow steadily more complex as baby boomers age.

Mr Moore makes some constructive points. At least a dozen congressional staffers, he notes, have passed from legislating on healthcare into jobs at pharmaceutical companies, which usually involve lobbying their former colleagues. But it is difficult to isolate these gems amid the omissions, inconsistencies and preaching.

Mr Moore implies, for example, that Richard Nixon began the ruination of the healthcare system in February 1971 by supporting insurance plans on the cost-containing model developed by the entrepreneur Henry Kaiser, after the 1930s. However, he lauds Hillary Clinton's proposed 1993 healthcare reform, which used the same model. Average waiting lists in the Canadian medical system have stretched to months for certain procedures and have become the subject of Supreme Court cases there. But Mr Moore uses his own experience in one hospital waiting room to dismiss the talk of waiting lists as a canard. The US offers free healthcare to the inmates at Guantánamo because it is bound by conventions and civilised norms regarding custody of wards, not because it esteems al-Qaeda terrorists more highly than its own citizens.

What makes propaganda is never the argument so much as the spirit in which it is presented. It is not the US healthcare problem that is

Mr Moore's enemy, it is the complexity of it. He rejects subtleties. His goal is not to break through to those who do not agree with him but to drown out the doubts of those who do. Those who sit down to watch Sicko without a broad knowledge of the US healthcare system will leave the theatre with a shallower understanding of the crisis than the one they arrived with.

One should face up to the fact that this is the way Americans increasingly choose to get their information on all sorts of issues, not just healthcare policy. The appetite for slanted ideological dramas grows. Mr Moore is not alone in satisfying it. His anti-Bush documentary, Fahrenheit 9/11, was met with the anti-Kerry adverts of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Perhaps the internet has made this kind of journalism easier. Mr Moore has been described as a "tireless researcher", but you do not have to be, nowadays. He notes in his film that an online appeal for healthcare horror stories yielded 25,000 of them within a week. In a country of 300m people, any such appeal will provide enough anecdotal evidence to edit into a plausible and even rollicking case for pretty much anything - and to liberate a grateful populace from the heavy burden of level-headedness.

The writer is a senior editor at The Weekly Standard

We have much to gain from the 'great Arab doctor'

We have much to gain from the 'great Arab doctor'
By Clive Cookson
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 7 2007 03:00 | Last updated: July 7 2007 03:00


All week, commentators in Britain have been expressing outraged surprise that doctors, of all people, should have tried to commit mass murder in the cause of jihad.

Of course it is shocking for those in the National Health Service to hear of terrorist allegations about colleagues they thought were dedicated to healing. But it is naive for the world in general to imagine that the medical profession somehow contains "better" people who are less likely to kill for a cause than those in other walks of life.

Once one accepts that violent revolutionaries may come from relatively prosperous backgrounds, then doctors are an obvious recruiting ground for extremism - particularly in the Middle East, where medicine has long been one of the largest and most prestigious professions.

The great tradition of Islamic medicine, established during the Middle Ages, still resonates today in the Arab world.

At the same time, medicine is a geographically mobile profession, because people and their health problems are essentially the same around the world. A doctor who trains in Iraq or Jordan can transfer to the UK more easily than a lawyer or many types of academic. Several thousand foreign-trained Muslim doctors are working in the NHS, including many distinguished hospital consultants.

Medicine has a long history of involvement in revolutionary violence. Physicians who took part in the French revolution included Joseph Guillotin, eponymous promoter of the device that sliced the heads off an estimated 20,000 aristocrats and counter-revolutionaries, and Jean Paul Marat, a leader of the extreme Jacobin faction responsible for the reign of terror in 1793. A more recent advocate of "revolutionary medicine" wasDr Che Guevara, the Cuban guerrilla organiser.

Even more relevant to the events of the past week is the leadership provided by physicians in the Arab world's revolutionary movements of the late 20th century. George Habash, a paediatrician from a Christian Palestinian background, founded the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which became notorious for hijacking aircraft in the early 1970s. Several senior figures in Hamas and Islamic Jihad, including Mahmoud Zahar, Abdel Aziz Rantisi and Mohammed al-Hindi, trained in medicine.

The most obvious role model for medical involvement in al-Qaeda terrorism is Ayman al-Zawahiri, often described as deputy to Osama bin Laden. Mr Zawahiri came from a prominent medical family and trained as a surgeon in Egypt.

With hindsight, what is more surprising than the involvement of doctors in a terrorist plot is their incompetence in carrying it out. Doctors are practical people, with a scientific training, who might have been expected to explode a car bomb successfully, particularly if they were willing to blow themselves up in the process. The young men from humble backgrounds who carried out theJuly 7 attacks in 2005 were more effective suicide bombers than the two professionals who drove a vehicle laden with petrol and gas cylinders into the Glasgow airport terminal.

Also surprising - and obviously a great relief - is that the would-be bombers did not use their medical connections to include biological or radioactive materials in their car bombs. Although neither is a microbiologist or radiologist, one might have expected the bombers to have got hold of some bacterial or viral cultures or radio-isotopes from their hospitals. These would not have had to be lethal to spread alarm and magnify the psychological impact of the bombs, because people are so frightened of germs and radiation.

Doctors who are prepared to kill and injure in pursuit of what they see as a grand cause may feel that the Hippocratic oath - and the associated injunction to "do no harm" - applies to the way they treat their individual patients, rather than to actions outside their professional sphere. They are not contravening medical ethics in the same way as Harold Shipman and Josef Mengele, to take two extreme examples of doctors guilty of mass murder and torture of patients.

There is no reason to believe that those who combine medicine and militancy behave badly while they are on duty (though they may not be particularly good doctors - it emerged yesterday that two brothers arrested last weekend, Sabeel and Kafeel Ahmed, had applied on more than one occasion to work in Western Australia but were rejected because of concerns over their medical qualifications and references).

Yet anecdotal evidence suggests that some patients are cancelling medical appointments with doctors who have Arab or Islamic-sounding names. Certainly there are poisonous postings on websites warning people to avoid Arab doctors. "Now your once great Arab doctors can no longer be trusted," is a mild example.

The secondary effects of terrorism, both the disruption caused by additional security measures and the loss of social cohesion when certain sections of the population come under suspicion, are always more far-reaching than the original incidents. Any loss of public confidence in Arab or Muslim doctors - and discriminatory measures that would make it harder for physicians to come to work in Britain from the Middle East than from other parts of the world - would be a tragedy for the NHS. There are still "great Arab doctors" working in Britain today and, if we encourage them, there will be more in future generations.

The writer is the FT's science editor

From alienation to annihilation

From alienation to annihilation
By Stephen Fidler in London
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 6 2007 18:28 | Last updated: July 6 2007 18:28


Why do they do it? What is it that turns young men, some with good life prospects, into suicide bombers?

Scott Atran, a US academic who has conducted scores of interviews with families, friends and neighbours of suicide bombers, points to one common factor: publicity. “The difference between terror and other forms of violence . . . is publicity,” he says.

Publicity helps to provoke governments into overreaction and turns terrorists into media stars, and heroes in their own milieux, he says. Mr Atran’s conversations with children in the poor neighbourhood of Mezuak in the Moroccan city of Tetuan, show they dream of becoming either Ronaldinho, the Brazilian footballer, or Osama bin Laden.

The Moroccan authorities believe at least 30 suicide bombers in Iraq have come from Mezuak, home to just 19,000 people, 11 of whom have been confirmed through DNA sent to the authorities by the US. Five of the seven 2004 Madrid train bombers who blew themselves up when cornered by Spanish police also came from Mezuak.

The Madrid gang and other suicide bombers had another attribute so obvious it is almost always overlooked: they belonged to groups. According to some academics, terrorist cells are best understood by thinking of “bands of brothers” or “groups of guys” and examining the interaction among them.

According to the synopsis of a report by Mr Atran and two colleagues delivered to staff in the White House National Security Council in March: “Small group dynamics – rather than personality, ideology, education or income – is the prime factor in deciding which few, among millions of potential jihadis will actually go on to commit violence.”

evidence of top-down recruitment or brainwashing of plotters.

About 70 per cent of terrorists enlist in groups through friendship and about 20 per cent through kinship. The preferred cell size is eight members and consists of friends made between the ages of 15 and 30.

Neither is social deprivation a factor. A 2004 survey by Mr Sageman showed more than 70 per cent of jihadis were from middle or upper class backgrounds. More than 40 per cent were, like the group allegedly behind last week’s attacks in the UK, in the professions: teachers, lawyers and doctors.

Often within groups, there is a leader or hands-on figure, often not the most devout, who converts radical words to actions. In the Madrid group, this appeared to have been Jamal Ahmidan, who married a Christian and was a notorious drug smuggler.

Once in the group, what leads them to resort to terrorism and suicide? Christopher Heffelfinger, a senior analyst at the West Point military academy, has identified four steps on the road: introduction to the group; immersion in extremist doctrine; an initial effort to effect peaceful change; and, lastly, the step from non violence to violence.

Mr Sageman has described three generations of jihadis: the first the foreign mujahideen in Afghanistan and the second a younger generation of educated youths, such as those that hatched the September 11 plot in Hamburg. The third wave consists mostly of semi-skilled or marginalised people, such as those behind the Madrid bombings or the London attacks of July 7 2005.

On this nomenclature, the “medical cell” allegedly behind the attacks in London and Glasgow look like a late example of the second wave. Early reports suggest one of the suspects was radicalised before he came to Britain in 2004. It is thought he might have met four of the other suspects while living in Cambridge. Some were already, apparently, hardliners: two of the suspects were brothers, and one their cousin.

A former friend of one of the members of the group in Cambridge described it as being “small and selective”, containing only like-minded people associated with Hizb-ut-Tahrir, the radical group seeking to establish a Muslim caliphate. Hizb-ut-Tahrir denies it supports terrorism.

That picture of isolation from society has been noticed in other groups. Mr Atran describes the Hamburg plotters as “a group of intense and intimate friends who created a parallel universe of jihad by isolating their behaviour from the surrounding society”.

The 7/7 bombers had a ringleader – Mohammad Sidique Khan, a youth worker – but the other three all seem to have become extremists before falling under his influence. Khan and Shehzad Tanweer are thought to have received training in bomb-making in Pakistan – but Pakistan had nothing to do with their radicalisation.

Three of the four came from the same district of south Leeds in West Yorkshire in the north of England. An investigation of the group by Shiv Malik, described in an article in Prospect magazine last month, suggests the youths suffered a double identity problem. They were alienated from society at large but – much less understood – estranged too from their parents’ generation, whose attitudes derived largely from the tribal customs of a district in Kashmir from which they hailed. This clash was epitomised in their different views on marriage: the parents insisting on arranged marriages and their sons believing they should be able to marry any good Muslim girl.

But becoming an Islamist is not the same as turning to terrorism. Apart from any other factor, one determinant is opportunity.

Mr Heffelfinger, who has carried out a study of six suspects arrested in May for allegedly plotting to attack the Fort Dix army base in New Jersey, says they appear to have chosen their target capriciously: because one of their number had delivered pizzas there and was familiar with the base. “It was opportunity over any other motivation,” he says.

All these studies suggest that resorting to terrorism has multiple causes, responding to specific personal and cultural dislocations experienced by young men for which a violent, global movement seems to offer an answer.

Unfortunately, they do not suggest a typology in which those at risk of turning to terrorism can be picked out. “There is no predictive model,” says one British counter-terrorism official.

Gore deflects US election pleas

Gore deflects US election pleas
By Andrew Ward in Washington
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 6 2007 19:12 | Last updated: July 6 2007 19:12


With 16 months before the US elects a new president, the race for the White House has developed a strongly New York flavour.

The leading Republican hopeful is Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor, the Democratic frontrunner is New York Senator Hillary Clinton, and the current New York mayor, Michael Bloomberg, is considered a potential independent candidate.

But there is another place in the US that could yet steal centre-stage before next year’s poll.

For months, political enthusiasts in Tennessee have been fantasising about a match-up between two of the state’s best-known political sons: Al Gore and Fred Thompson.

One half of Tennessee’s dream ticket has edged closer to reality over recent weeks as Mr Thompson has emerged as an increasingly serious contender for the Republican nomination.

The senator-turned-actor, best known for his role as a gruff district attorney in the series Law and Order has become the focus of grassroots dissatisfaction with the party’s candidates, promoting himself as a straight-talking conservative in the mould of Ronald Reagan.

One poll this week showed him leading the Republican field even before he has declared his candidacy, while others put him in a strong second place behind Mr Giuliani. Formal announcement of his entry into the race is expected soon.

Mr Gore, by contrast, is proving much more resistant to calls to join the contest.

Polls show the former vice-president and former Tennessee senator in third place – behind Ms Clinton and Barack Obama but ahead of John Edwards – in spite of his repeated insistence that he will not make a second bid for the White House.

Mr Gore, who lost the disputed 2000 presidential election to George W. Bush, has been the focus of fresh speculation this week as he prepared for Live Earth, a series of concerts to be held around the world on July 7 to highlight climate change.

Some have seen his high-profile involvement in the concerts as a sign of a search for headlines in preparation for entering the race. But speaking during a round of television interviews to promote Live Earth, he offered no encouragement to those who would like him to run. “I don’t expect to be a candidate again ever,” he said. “I’ve kind of fallen out of love with politics.”

Mr Gore said he had not yet decided which Democratic candidate to endorse and would make his choice based on their policies for tackling climate change.

Larry Sabato, politics professor at the University of Virginia, says the continued speculation about Mr Gore reflects concern among some Democrats about the political risk of nominating the first woman or African-American presidential candidate. As a white, southern, male, Mr Gore would be a safer choice.

“Some Democrats are looking for an alternative to Clinton and Obama and they see Gore as the best option,” he says. “But they are going to be disappointed because there is zero possibility of Gore running.”

June jobs growth higher than expected

June jobs growth higher than expected
By Eoin Callan in Washington
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 6 2007 14:30 | Last updated: July 6 2007 16:27



US employers created more jobs than anticipated over the last three months, according to fresh government figures which suggest a turnround in the American economy.

The department of labour said on Friday that payrolls swelled by 132,000 in June and that 75,000 more jobs were created in the previous two months than initially thought. The unemployment rate held steady close to a six-year low at 4.5 per cent.

The surprisingly strong job creation over the last three months suggests US economic growth has recovered after a slowdown in the first quarter, when the economy expanded by 0.7 per cent - the weakest pace in more than four years.

Nigel Gault, an economist at Global Insight, said the pace of hiring ”adds to the evidence that the economy bounced back in the second quarter”.

The signs of renewed economic activity prompted investors to price in a lower likelihood of an interest rate cut, as they pushed the benchmark 10-year Treasury note to its biggest weekly decline in a year.

Interest rate futures suggested traders saw only a 9 per cent chance of a reduction in rates, a dramatic reversal from only seven weeks ago when market prices suggested a near-100 per cent chance of a cut.

The Federal Reserve – which held interest rates at 5.25 per cent last week – has differed from many market participants in recent months by consistently indicating it is less concerned about growth and more worried that a tight labour market could stoke inflation.

The figures released by the labour department on Friday showed average hourly earnings rose 6 cents or 0.3 per cent last month, indicating modest upward pressure on wages.

Janet Yellen, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, said in a speech that keeping rates on hold was the best route to faster growth and slower inflation.

”The virtues of this path are that it avoids exposing the economy to unnecessary risk of a downturn while, at the same time, it is likely to produce enough slack in goods and labor markets to relieve inflationary pressures,’’ she said.

Ms Yellen said recent market movements meant investors and the Fed ”have become more closely aligned, sharing the view that growth in the US is, and is likely to remain, healthy.’’

Ms Yellen indicated that policymakers’ concerns about business investment had receded but added that increased premiums on riskier assets ”could pose a downside threat to the global economy”.

Wall Street economists, meanwhile, were surprised by continued hiring in the construction sector seen in Friday’s figures as housebuilders added 12,000 workers despite a prolonged housing market slump.

But they also pointed to signs of potential economic weakness, as the retail sector cut 24,000 positions.

Economists at Capital Economics said the decline in retail jobs ”suggests that higher gasoline prices are now beginning to have a more marked negative impact on consumer spending”.

Fears about the impact of gas prices on consumer sentiment were underlined as crude prices hit an 11-month high of $75 a barrel.

Economists also said an unwelcome percentage of last month’s hiring was attributable to state and local governments, which added 40,000 staff and are not viewed as good indicators of economic activity.

The bulk of the hiring was in the service industries, as employers such as banks, hospitals, restaurants, added 135,000 workers last month after hiring 199,000 workers in May.

US concerns over China weapons in Iraq

US concerns over China weapons in Iraq
By Demetri Sevastopulo in Washington
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 6 2007 22:01 | Last updated: July 6 2007 22:01


The US has raised concerns with the Chinese government about the discovery of Chinese-made weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Richard Lawless, departing senior Pentagon official for Asia, on Friday said Washington had flagged the issue with Beijing. In recent months, the US has become increasingly alarmed that Chinese armour-piercing ammunition has been used by the Taliban in Afghanistan and insurgents in Iraq.

A senior US official recently told the FT that Iran appeared to be providing the Chinese-made weapons. He said Washington had no evidence that Beijing was complicit, but stressed that the US would like China to “do a better job of policing these sales”. Mr Lawless said the question of origin was less important than who was facilitating the transfer.

The concerns about Chinese weapons follow months of allegations from US officials that Iran is helping attack US troops in Iraq, and more recently Afghanistan, by providing technology for bombs that can destroy Humvees and other heavily armoured US vehicles.

Mr Lawless also expressed concern about North Korea’s missile programme. Last week, Pyongyang tested a new short-range missile that could target not only the US military base at Pyeongtaek but also Seoul. He said North Korea was close to being able to field the solid-fuel, highly mobile rocket.

Mr Lawless said the US military relationship with China was “overall, not bad”, but there was a need for more engagement between the militaries, particularly at the senior levels. “They have been more willing to engage, but it is in millimetres and increments,” he said.

He said the Pentagon was disappointed that China had not given Admiral Michael Mullen, chief of naval operations, the same kind of access that his Chinese counterpart received during a visit to the US. Adm Mullen, who has since been nominated as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, ended up not visiting China.

Mr Lawless also said it was important for China to hold talks with the US about its nuclear forces. A recent Pentagon report concluded Beijing was developing a more survivable nuclear force, including submarine-launched missiles, and mobile land-based missiles.

Since Presidents Hu Jintao and George W. Bush last year discussed increasing military exchanges, China has not responded to an offer for the commander of its strategic nuclear forces to visit US Strategic Command.

“There is a great shortfall in our understanding of China’s intentions,” said Mr Lawless, referring to the overall Chinese military build-up. “When you don’t know why they are doing it, it is pretty damn threatening . . . they leave us no choice but to assume the worst.”

Mr Lawless also suggested that the Pentagon had refused a request from Japan for extensive data on the F-22 fighter jet. Japan wants the data to consider whether the advanced fighter – which under current law cannot be exported – would meet its defence needs.

Mr Lawless said the Pentagon had offered Japan only basic data, which would not require a change in US law.

Friday, July 06, 2007

International Herald Tribune Editorial - American justice denied

International Herald Tribune Editorial - American justice denied
Copyright by The International Herald Tribune
Published: July 5, 2007


In the 1960s, Chief Justice Earl Warren presided over a U.S. Supreme Court that interpreted the Constitution in ways that protected the powerless - racial and religious minorities, consumers, students and criminal defendants. At the end of its first full term, Chief Justice John Roberts's court is emerging as the Warren court's mirror image.

Time and again the court has ruled, almost always 5-4, in favor of corporations and powerful interests while slamming the courthouse door on individuals and ideals that truly need the court's shelter.

President George W. Bush created this radical new court with two appointments in quick succession: Roberts to replace Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Samuel Alito to replace the far less conservative Sandra Day O'Connor.

The Roberts court's resulting sharp shift to the right began to be strongly felt in this term. It was on display, most prominently, in the school desegregation ruling last week. The Warren court, and even the Rehnquist court of two years ago, would have upheld the integration plans that Seattle and Louisville, Kentucky, voluntarily adopted. But the Roberts court, on a 5-4 vote, struck them down, choosing to see the 14th Amendment's equal-protection clause - which was adopted for the express purpose of integrating blacks more fully into society - as a tool for protecting white students from integration.

On campaign finance, the court handed a major victory to corporations and wealthy individuals - again by a 5-4 vote - striking down portions of the law that reined in the use of phony issue ads. The ruling will make it easier for corporations and lobbyists to buy the policies they want from Congress.t;

The flip side of the court's boundless solicitude for the powerful was its often contemptuous attitude toward common folks looking for justice. It ruled that an inmate who filed his appeal within the deadline set by a federal judge was out of luck, because the judge had given the wrong date - a shockingly unjust decision that overturned two court precedents on missed deadlines.

When Roberts was nominated, his supporters insisted that he believed in "judicial modesty," and that he could not be put into an ideological box. But Alito and he, who voted together in a remarkable 92 percent of non-unanimous decisions, have charted a thoroughly predictable archconservative approach to the law. Roberts said that he wanted to promote greater consensus, but he is presiding over a court that is deeply riven.

In the term's major abortion case, the court upheld - again by a 5-4 vote - the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, even though the court struck down a nearly identical law in 2000. In the term's major church-state case, the court ruled 5-4 that taxpayers challenging the Bush administration's faith-based initiatives lacked standing to sue, again reversing well-established precedents. In a few cases, notably ones challenging the Bush administration's hands-off approach to global warming and executions of the mentally ill, Justice Anthony Kennedy broke with the conservative bloc. But that did not happen often enough.

It has been decades since the most privileged members of society - corporations, the wealthy, white people who want to attend school with other whites - have had such a successful Supreme Court term. Society's have-nots were not the only losers. The basic ideals of American justice lost as well.

Boston Globe Editorial - Bush's white lie about Putin

Boston Globe Editorial - Bush's white lie about Putin
Copyright by The Boston Globe
Published: July 5, 2007


After fishing off Kennebunkport, dining on Maine lobster, and discussing a wide range of issues, President George W. Bush and President Vladimir Putin of Russia came out to meet the press on Monday. Asked whether he trusts the erstwhile KGB officer at his side, Bush gave an answer that was bound to dismay Russian democrats and independent journalists, human rights advocates, Georgians, Chechens and anyone else who has been caught on the wrong side of Putin's power.

"When you're dealing with a world leader, you wonder whether or not he's telling the truth," Bush said. "I've never had to worry about that with Vladimir Putin. Sometimes he says things I don't want to hear, but I know he's always telling me the truth. And so you ask, do I trust him? Yes, I trust him." In the realm of big-power diplomacy - where talk about truthfulness is usually a non sequitur - Bush's praise for Putin's sincerity amounts to a little white lie. This fib is defensible only insofar as Bush did not mean what he said about his Russian guest.

One justification for Bush's falsehood is that he had more important fish to fry. The most obvious source of discord was Bush's scheme to place components of a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic. This project is a fantasy, but it frightens the Kremlin because of the possibility that one day it could become part of an upgraded missile defense aimed at Russia. Or at least that is the fear Russian officials profess to have.

Russian specialists know that the current American missile defense system offers no protection against intercontinental ballistic missiles; its sensors cannot distinguish between live warheads and decoys outside the earth's atmosphere. Whether or not Bush understands this fatal flaw, his attachment to the missile defense illusion has ceded a valuable advantage to Putin on the chessboard of U.S.-Russian relations.

In return for accepting a compromise on missile defense in Europe - something like the siting of a radar station in southern Russia that Putin proposed at Kennebunkport - the Kremlin's chess master may demand suitable recompense. This could entail American receptivity to Russian influence in the old Soviet spheres of interest; accepting Russian preferences for routing oil and natural gas pipelines; allowing Russia to absorb secessionist provinces in Georgia and Moldova; or turning a blind eye to the Mafia-like, authoritarian state Putin has imposed on Russia.

There is a genuine need for Putin's cooperation, for example in international efforts to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. But there is no need to bribe Putin to acquiesce to a missile defense system that doesn't work. Instead of assuring the world about Putin's truthfulness, Bush should be driving sound bargains that accommodate the vital interests of Russia and the

A crisis of identity and the appeal of jihad

A crisis of identity and the appeal of jihad
By Peter R. Neumann
Copyright by The International Herald Tribune
Published: July 5, 2007


LONDON:

Following the recent wave of arrests in England and even Australia, everyone seemed surprised that most of the terrorist suspects were highly educated, some apparently from middle-class or privileged backgrounds. At least two of them had completed their medical training, with one about to become a neurosurgeon.

Why would such accomplished people want to become terrorists? Clearly, the profiles of the suspects do not fit the stereotype of the deprived, uneducated loner.

In the case of the IRA, the cliché turned out to be largely true. Many Irish Republican terrorists came from poor, working class neighborhoods, and few had any great prospects. Becoming involved in the "armed struggle" was the only way to achieve any degree of social status within their communities.

With Islamist militants, however, the sociological dynamics seem to be different. No researcher has yet been able to construct a single profile based on simple socioeconomic indicators that would accurately describe the "typical" jihadist. A senior British intelligence officer summed it up as follows: "The pattern is that there is no pattern."

Indeed, social scientists are overwhelmed by the diversity of backgrounds and attributes that can be found among known Islamist terrorists.

In fact, a fair number of them are highly educated, often holding advanced university degrees. Many seem to have trained in the sciences, with chemists, engineers and medical doctors playing a prominent role in jihadist movements across the world.

Mohammed Atta, the ringleader of the Hamburg cell that was responsible for the Sept. 11th attacks in the United States, had just completed his post-graduate degree in urban planning and was set to join the professional elite in his home country. And let's not forget Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's deputy, who trained as a medical doctor and whose family is among the most influential in Egypt.

So, if it's not the social and economic background, what connects the people who have become involved in jihadist terrorism? The Dutch domestic intelligence service recently published a study of jihadist recruitment in the Netherlands, which identifies three types of personalities that can be found in extremist cells.

First are the so-called new immigrants, who grew up in Middle Eastern and North African countries, came to Europe as students or refugees and had no previous involvement with jihadism before they arrived in the West. This applied to Mohammed Atta, but it could also be true for the suspects who have been arrested in recent days.

The second group are second or third generation "immigrants" whose parents or grandparents settled in European countries as "guest workers." Most are citizens of European countries and speak the language of their home country fluently.

Finally, there is a small but growing number of converts who have embraced militant Islamism shortly after they became Muslims.

Marc Sageman, an American psychologist who carried out an extensive study of the profiles of Al Qaeda members, found that, indeed, there is very little that would connect these groups in terms of quantifiable socioeconomic indicators.

What they share, however, is that they have all experienced tensions in their personal lives, or were faced with deep and sustained crises of identity that they resolved by embracing jihadism.

The "new immigrants" felt alienated and isolated when they left their home countries, and extremist Islam not only provided them with new friends but also with a new identity and a place in the world.

The children and grandchildren of immigrants frequently experience a tension between the traditional, cultural Islam of their parents and an unaccepting Western society. Extremism gives them an identity that allows them to rebel against both.

And the converts, by definition, have gone through a personal crisis that led them to adopt a new identity.

None of this will be of much help to the security service in constructing a profile of the "typical" terrorist suspect. But it provides a glimpse into the internal tensions through which some of these people have gone before committing themselves to jihad.

And it also explains why doctors and engineers are as vulnerable to jihadism as petty thieves and the unemployed. After all, personal crisis - a sense of being isolated and the search for identity - is not a privilege of the poor and uneducated.

Peter R. Neumann is director of the Center for Defense Studies at King's College London.

Chicago Sun-Times Editorial - Blab tab is running high as no budget deal emerges

Chicago Sun-Times Editorial - Blab tab is running high as no budget deal emerges
Copyright by The Chicago Sun-Times
July 6, 2007

State Senate Republicans have done some figurin' to come up with an idea of what the special session of the General Assembly is costing taxpayers. For example, they conclude that it costs $125 a day for hotel and meals for each lawmaker. Multiply that by 177 members of the Legislature and you come up with $22,125 per day. And the tab for keeping the doormen on the job at the state Capitol totals $2,500 a day.

This is necessary because the Democratic governor and the Democrats who run the General Assembly weren't able to get together on a state budget by their May 31 deadline. Now Gov. Blagojevich has called the lawmakers into special session, which started the new tab for taxpayers. Maybe he hopes that will put pressure on legislators to bow to his budget demands. But we expect the voters blame both him and lawmakers for this costly mess.

And why have all lawmakers in Springfield anyway? We know their only role is to approve whatever Blagojevich and the top legislative leaders agree on. Let them go home until a deal is struck.

At the low end of the daily bill is $400 to keep sound technicians on the job in case anyone has something worth saying. Given the dismal record of Blagojevich and the legislators toward resolving the state's finances, most of us would probably say just shut up and get the job done.

High-speed Internet hits home - African-Americans' usage is up sharply since '05, study says

High-speed Internet hits home - African-Americans' usage is up sharply since '05, study says
By Eric Benderoff
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 6, 2007

Adoption of high-speed Internet at home has almost tripled over the last two years among African-American users, a "phenomenal" increase that puts black usage much closer to the rate seen by whites and English-speaking Hispanics, according to a new study.

The "Home Broadband Adoption 2007" study from the Pew Internet & American Life Project found that high-speed Internet usage among African-American adults soared from 14 percent in 2005 to 40 percent this year. By comparison, home broadband usage among whites rose from 31 percent in 2005 to 48 percent this year.

The survey's authors note that high-speed Internet penetration among African-Americans is roughly equivalent to that seen for whites in 2006.

English-speaking Hispanics track very closely to white Americans in terms of home broadband usage, said Aaron Smith, one of the authors of the study, which was released this week.

The increase at home by African-Americans corresponds with "very aggressive marketing campaigns from cable and phone companies," Smith said. "Prices have dropped to $14.99 for DSL service."

The increased home usage does not surprise L.A. Seals, the district program coordinator for Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.), but he does call it "good news."

"New technologies provide new opportunities," Seals said, "and most of the job information is available online today."

But he noted Internet usage among African-Americans is also increasing thanks to mobile devices.

"It's still access, but many people are going online with their Sidekicks, not a computer," Seals said, pointing out T-Mobile's popular gadget used for sending e-mail and surfing the Web.

Nonetheless, aggressive marketing and promotion from companies like AT&T Inc., which provides high-speed Internet access for $15 a month, has clearly helped.

According to the most recent figures from the U.S. Census Bureau, African-American households had the lowest median income in 2005 ($30,858) among racial groups. The median income for non-Hispanic white households was $50,784.

The higher adoption among African-Americans "is not surprising to us," said Laura Hernandez, the phone company's executive director of multicultural marketing. "A key barrier to entry was cost. If we could make [digital subscriber line Internet service] more affordable, we expected more customers would sign up."

AT&T offers a tiered pricing structure for high-speed Internet access, with "basic" service starting at $15 a month and "elite" access, which offers significantly faster speeds, priced at $35 a month.

They are using the "Internet to get ahead," Hernandez said of African-Americans. "They are e-mailing and surfing and probably using social networks like everyone else, but it's with a real intent."

She called that intent "how I can better myself," a tone reflected in AT&T's marketing.

That is a very real concern, said one African-American community leader.

"There is a lot of interest in our community to get more people online," said Rev. Robin Hood, a pastor at Redeemed Outreach Ministries in Chicago's West Englewood neighborhood. "It's a necessity for doing just about anything.

"Even if you want to pay bills, you need to get online," he said. "I went to Walgreens a few months ago for some medicine and I gave them my e-mail address." Now he gets coupons and special promotions, a benefit he wouldn't otherwise receive if he wasn't online, Hood said.

"There's such a high demand to keep up," Hood said of African-Americans, so "no, the jump in usage doesn't surprise me at all. More still needs to be done."

Seals echoed that thought.

"People always talk about the digital divide, but as customers, we [African-Americans] are closing that," he said. "But we are not doing enough elsewhere, such as developing software for the Internet. There's a lot of room for growth."

Smith, of Pew, said affordable pricing for high-speed Web access is critical, but so is exposure to the Internet.

"As people get exposure to the technology, they tend to want it," he said.

The survey noted that rural Americans lag the rest of the nation when it comes to home broadband usage, with only 31 percent adoption this year.

"Rural residents are less likely to use broadband at work," Smith said. "That exposure at work is a key driver to get people to use broadband at home."

According to Pew data, 71 percent of adults use the Internet at least occasionally from some location. Of those adults, 94 percent surf the Web from home. The vast majority of those home users, 70 percent, use a high-speed connection while 23 percent still use a slower dial-up connection.

----------

ebenderoff@tribune.com

London leader cheers Chicago bid - Olympic athlete and chair of 2012 committee calls the Windy City 'the best-kept secret'

London leader cheers Chicago bid - Olympic athlete and chair of 2012 committee calls the Windy City 'the best-kept secret'
By Philip Hersh
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 6, 2007

GUATEMALA CITY -- Sebastian Coe has felt affection for Chicago since 1984, when he spent six weeks living with York High School coach Joe Newton and training on the Elmhurst school's track and the Butler National golf course. Coe went on to become the only man with two Olympic titles in the metric mile by winning the 1,500 meters in the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics.

Coe has been celebrated more recently for his role in turning around what had been a flagging London bid for the 2012 Olympics. Now he is chairman of the London 2012 Olympic Organizing Committee and a man to whom Chicago 2016 bid officials already have turned to for advice.

"Chicago is the best-kept secret," Coe said. "It's like living in a coastal city."

Over a Thursday breakfast here during the International Olympic Committee annual meeting, Coe offered further advice on how Chicago should let the Olympic world in on the secret. This is an edited transcript of that conversation.

Q What lessons can Chicago draw from the London experience?

A They have to explain their story, to explain why they are doing it. Simply put, it's not just about 16 days of Olympic or Paralympic sport. There has to be a lasting, sustainable legacy. From what we've gleaned from a short meeting [with Chicago's bid leaders], I think they understand that.

[Local] populations are much more sophisticated and demanding. Gone are the days when you were able to say to a local populace, "We're going to go for the Games," without explaining to them why and what the benefits are. There was a time when it was enough to be excited about the show coming to town.

In liberal democracies, there are many more tiers of scrutiny. People want to know what it's going to cost and what they are going to get for it and how it is going to be paid for.

Q Russian President Vladimir Putin played a dramatic role this week in helping Sochi win the 2014 Winter Games. Does the president of the United States have to commit to coming to Copenhagen in 2009 [when the 2016 Games site will be selected]?

A I think it's more than just attending. I think the IOC wants to know that it has really got political support. It is not just somebody standing up and saying we've got it.

The IOC wants to know there is a guarantor of last resort sitting at the table. Any American city that is really serious about this has got to recognize that you won't be able to stand up and say this is going to be entirely funded by the private sector. There has to be some local and national commitment.

And probably the American president is going to need to turn up and be seen [in Copenhagen].

Q Do you think the IOC membership understands well enough that there is a different system in place in the States, that Mayor Daley showing up would be enough?

A Most of the members are pretty sophisticated. The mayor is important and [so is] the recognition there are many other tiers where you need to get sign-off where an American president would have little if any impact.

Q Between now and the 2009 vote, what should Chicago avoid?

A Just don't make mistakes. (Laughs) It's a long campaign. There are no "six-weeks-to-thin-thighs type" approaches to this. You're out there for two years. Everything you do every day, it has got to be value-added, to be able to present the best case, getting the narrative across to as many people that can impact on that decision.

Selling and lobbying within the confines of what has become a much tighter protocol is one part of it. You have got to make sure that over the length of those two years you get out there, you use the international media, you get onto people's radar screen, and that's not always easy.

You really have to explain locally what you are doing and keep the domestic audience on board. And that's tougher in the States, I guess. If it's Chicago, you've got to get people excited about it in Portland.

Q Portland, Ore., and Portland, Maine?

A Yes. And in Washington. And Birmingham.

Q Why do cities thought of as early leaders often falter? (As Paris did in the 2012 race and Salzburg did for 2014.)

A It's hard to maintain that kind of momentum. Pacing is important for your own internal team and because every time you turn up somewhere, you want the message to be fresh and to get into peoples' comfort zone. It's not being out there too much but not doing too much by stealth. It's a campaign. You have to smell your way through it sometimes.

(London 2012 Chief Executive Paul Deighton, also at the breakfast, added, "Chicago is in an interesting position because of going through a U.S. Olympic Committee competition that really put them through their paces -- to think about what they are going to do and how they are going to do it beyond the other competitors. I don't know if I would describe them as an early leader or just as a city that had the opportunity to clarify its early planning because of the process the USOC put them through.")

Q How do you think they need to frame the involvement with Iraq?

A In the two years we were out there, I could probably count on less than one hand any conversation that remotely bordered on any international political dimension.

Q Were you helped by people's regard of you as a great Olympic champion? The leaders of the Chicago bid staff are corporate people.

A I'd like to think it wasn't a disadvantage, but I don't kid myself. You need a blend. It was a very well-blended team. It wasn't simply about having an athlete at the head of the bid committee.

You need an athlete presence. What was important for us was that it wasn't just ceremonial. When an evaluation team came through London and [Olympic decathlon champion] Daley Thompson and [Paralympic champion] Tanni Grey-Thompson were there, they were able to answer questions. It's much more than having expensive calling cards there.

The athletes not only lend you credibility but play a pretty important role. To get it right with the athletes, you are forced to get it right. You can't dump a substandard [Olympic] project on people who work for 10 or 15 years in order to do what they are doing.

----------

phersh@tribune.com

Abbott, Brazil in AIDS pact - Price of Kaletra drug to be slashed

Abbott, Brazil in AIDS pact - Price of Kaletra drug to be slashed
By Bruce Japsen
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 6, 2007

For more than a year the world's pharmaceutical giants have been battling to protect their patents in the face of threats by developing nations to make their own cheaper generic prescriptions if drugmakers do not cut their prices.

In what appears to have averted a potentially messy dispute with Brazil, North Chicago-based Abbott Laboratories confirmed Thursday that it has reached an agreement to sell its popular AIDS drug Kaletra to Brazil at a 30 percent discount from the previous price.

Abbott said Brazil agreed to the same $1,000-a-year price it offered earlier this year to that country and 44 other low-income and middle-income nations.

The agreement is significant because Brazil is one of an increasing number of countries playing hardball with the drug industry over prices they pay to treat their citizens who have HIV, as well as over costs for other medicines.

In May Brazil broke a patent held by Merck & Co. on its AIDS drug Stocrin by agreeing to import a cheaper generic version from a company in India. Brazil has threatened to take such actions against Abbott in the past.

Brazilian health officials, at a contract signing ceremony Wednesday in Brazil, cheered Abbott's move, while criticizing Merck for not coming to the country's terms two months ago. "Abbott created a positive atmosphere of discussion and cooperation with the government, which allowed us to reach an agreement," Brazil's Health Minister Jose Gomes Temporao told reporters alongside Abbott officials in Brasilia. "Other laboratories should follow Abbott's example."

Merck said Thursday it was "hopeful to reopen dialogue with the Brazilian government."

Brazil will now pay 73 cents a pill this year and 63 cents next year for Kaletra, compared to the $1.04 per pill that it has been paying, Abbott said. In the U.S. the per-pill price is generally over $5, or about $8,000 a year per patient.

Abbott remains at odds with Thailand in a high-profile dispute that has drawn the ire of the international AIDS community. Thailand has threatened to make generic copies of Kaletra, effectively breaking Abbott's patent protection.

In reaction Abbott has said it would not launch any new medicines in that country. "We are still in discussion with Thailand over making Kaletra tablets available there," said Abbott spokeswoman Jennifer Smoter.

Abbott over time has reduced the price of Kaletra offered to Thailand from $2,200 to $1,000 -- the same discount the company has provided since April to other developing countries.

Several AIDS groups have been protesting Abbott's moves in Thailand, suggesting that withholding the latest version of Kaletra -- which does not require refrigeration in its hot climate -- is putting patients' health at risk.

An Abbott official said the Brazil deal is good for participants.

"We wanted Brazil to benefit from the same price we offered to other countries with its level of economic development," said Heather Mason, Abbott's vice president of Latin American and Canadian operations. "The signing of this agreement symbolizes what can be achieved when governments and companies negotiate with the interests of patients in mind."

One leading U.S. AIDS group said Abbott and other drugmakers have a long way to go when it comes to its pricing practices.

"This 30 percent price reduction on top of Brazil's previously-negotiated 46 percent discount underscores to anyone who understands the most basic of mathematics just how random and arbitrary AIDS drug pricing by multinational drug companies can be," said Michael Weinstein, president of Los Angeles-based AIDS Healthcare Foundation.

Two years ago Abbott lowered the annual price of Kaletra to about $1,500 per patient per year in Brazil after the country threatened to break its patent. "[The price reductions] may seem significant for Brazil, but we still believe Abbott -- like most pharmaceutical companies -- can do far, far more to improve pricing and access to their lifesaving AIDS drugs around the world," Weinstein added.

Abbott bristles at the notion it is not doing enough for people with HIV around the world. Last week it said Chief Executive Miles White dedicated a regional hospital laboratory in Tanzania as part of $50 million in aid it and its foundation have given since 2001 to "improve Tanzania's health system and fight AIDS," a spokesman said.

----------

bjapsen@tribune.com



Lower cost for medication 73 cents

What Brazil will now pay per pill. It has been paying $1.04.

63 cents

What Brazil will pay next year under the Abbott deal.

$5-plus

Per-pill price for the AIDS drug in the U.S.

3 Rantoul plants set to close - Collins unable to sell; 535 jobs to be lost

3 Rantoul plants set to close - Collins unable to sell; 535 jobs to be lost
By Rick Popely
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 6, 2007

Three auto parts plants that employ 535 in the central Illinois town of Rantoul are set to close by July 20 because struggling supplier Collins & Aikman Corp. has been unable to sell the facilities.

Forty-five workers will lose their jobs Friday. A Collins & Aikman spokesman said Thursday that talks to sell the plants continue, but a written notice given Tuesday to workers and the Village of Rantoul said the plants "will ultimately need to cease production" by July 20, idling the remaining 490 employees.

"We're very disappointed," Village Administrator David Johnston said, calling the terse notice a "shock."

"We were all expecting the plants to be purchased," he said. "That's the only communication we've had from Collins & Aikman. They never called us. We'd like to know how something like this could fall apart."

Collins & Aikman, in Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection since June 2005, is being broken up and sold. A year ago, the Southfield, Mich.-based supplier was Rantoul's largest employer, with nearly 950 jobs, but layoffs since have reduced employment to 535.

In April, Collins & Aikman said it had agreed to sell the three Rantoul plants plus six others that make plastic interior parts to privately held Cadence Innovation LLC for $68 million. The sale was to be final by June 30. But negotiations with Cadence have stalled, Collins & Aikman spokesman David Youngman said, and the company had to transfer some of its Rantoul business to other suppliers because its customers, primarily General Motors Corp. and Chrysler Group, needed assurances they would continue to receive parts.

GM and Chrysler last week extended their parts agreements with Collins & Aikman through Aug. 31, but Youngman said they are exercising options to obtain the parts elsewhere.

"Our customers are looking to protect their production," Youngman said. "The negotiations to sell the facilities continue," but they will close if the talks fail.

The written notice to workers said Collins & Aikman doesn't foresee a sale to Cadence "or any other party in the immediate future."

"There are a number of unresolved issues with Cadence before we can move forward," Youngman said without elaborating.

Cadence did not return a call seeking comment.

As Collins & Aikman began removing tooling from the Rantoul facilities Tuesday, workers and village officials recognized that the struggles that have engulfed the supplier industry had reached central Illinois. Several suppliers, including Delphi Corp., formerly the largest; Dana Corp.; and Tower Automotive have entered bankruptcy the last two years.

"The ripples are finally hitting suppliers like Collins & Aikman here," Johnston said. "It's a tough pill to swallow, but we're a can-do community. It's another challenge we have to face."

Rantoul, a town of 13,000 about 20 miles north of Champaign-Urbana, has survived bigger hits to employment. The closing of Chanute Air Force Base in 1993 wiped out 3,500 jobs. Two of the three Collins & Aikman plants are at the former air base, which the village converted to an industrial park.

"This town didn't die then like a lot of people said it would," Johnston said, adding that he expects Rantoul will increase efforts to attract industry. "We'll adjust."

----------

rpopely@tribune.com

Stroger's cancer diagnosed prior to his nomination

Stroger's cancer diagnosed prior to his nomination
By David Mendell
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 6, 2007



Cook County Board President Todd Stroger said Thursday that prostate cancer had been diagnosed in him months before he was picked by Democratic Party leaders to be on the ballot in 2006, and that he did not publicly disclose the serious illness because he did not want to compound his mother's woes.

"To be honest, I really did not want to discuss it with my mother while she was going through her problems," Stroger told reporters, referring to the March 2006 stroke suffered by his father, then-County Board President John Stroger.

Todd Stroger, 44, spoke via conference call as he recuperated at his South Side home from surgery two weeks ago to remove his prostate gland.

He said he could not pinpoint exactly when the cancer was found because "I was doing so many things and those days are fuzzy." But he estimated that it was as early as April or May of last year. He was not placed on the ballot to replace his ailing father until July 2006.

Stroger said he did not tell his mother about the cancer until after his surgery last month.

Stroger's administration had said the diagnosis came only 10 months ago, putting it about August 2006. Stroger blamed that erroneous date on miscommunication among his public relations staff.

His medical condition was not grave and did not immediately threaten his life, Stroger said. Because of that, he said, it was not imperative that he inform Democratic Party officials or the public. He said he was suffering from a slow-growing cancer that could be treated without surgery, at least initially.

"What I had was something that would not truly affect me until sometime into the future if I didn't do anything at all," Stroger said. "It's not like a brain tumor that grows very quickly and you don't know what's going on. Prostate cancer generally takes some time to develop."

County Commissioner Tony Peraica (R-Riverside), who lost to Stroger in the fall election, said he did not buy Stroger's new timeline.

"His team knew a long time ago that it would have been damaging to him politically to disclose this and they chose to deceive the public until it would be of no consequence," Peraica said. "They have manipulated this information to their own political advantage and I think it is unfortunate."

Stroger said he was experiencing a little soreness but generally felt good. He said he would return to the office next week to resume an "abbreviated schedule."

He said he opted to be treated at Northwestern Memorial Hospital rather than at the county hospital bearing his father's name on the advice of a urologist at Stroger Hospital. The county doctor told Stroger that Dr. William J. Catalona was an expert at treating younger men with prostate cancer, Stroger said.

Asked about his father's condition, Stroger said only, "stable, but not improved."

----------

dmendell@tribune.com

Gay pastor dropped from clergy roster - Atlanta minister says he won't leave pulpit

Gay pastor dropped from clergy roster - Atlanta minister says he won't leave pulpit
By Giovanna Dell'orto
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune and The Associated Press
Published July 6, 2007

ATLANTA -- The openly gay pastor of Atlanta's oldest Lutheran church has been removed from his denomination's clergy roster.

But Rev. Bradley Schmeling said Thursday he will not leave the pulpit of St. John's Lutheran Church, a decision that could open the 350-member congregation to disciplinary action from the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.

"The congregation issued a call to me in 2000 and as far as we are concerned, that hasn't changed," Schmeling said. "I'm disheartened [the decision] gives the impression the church is more interested in rules than in compassion."

In a decision issued Monday, a 12-member appeals committee ruled 10-2 to immediately remove Schmeling from the clergy roster. An earlier panel's ruling had allowed the pastor to stay on the roster until Aug. 15.

By Evangelical Lutheran Church in America rules, Schmeling is now a lay person within the denomination who should not wear a stole or perform sacraments, said Emily Eastwood of the Minnesota-based gay-rights group Lutherans Concerned.

But the congregation's president, John Ballew, said nothing will change at St. John's, though the church hopes to remain within the Chicago-based ELCA.

"Our respect has only grown in the last 14 months," Ballew said. "For us, it means nothing."

Schmeling told St. John's and his bishop that he is gay before he was chosen as pastor in 2000. But last year, when Schmeling announced he had found a lifelong companion, Bishop Ronald Warren of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America's Southeastern Synod asked the 44-year-old pastor to resign.

When Schmeling refused, Warren started disciplinary proceedings against him, leading to a closed-door January trial in which a disciplinary hearing committee dealt with the case.

The acceptance of gay clergy has been at the core of a heated debate in many Protestant denominations. The ELCA, which has 4.9 million members, allows openly gay clergy, but only if they are celibate. Still, many Lutheran churches support ordaining partnered gays and perform same-sex blessing ceremonies despite the policy.

At the ELCA's most recent national meeting in 2005, a proposal failed that would have allowed synods to decide if they would accept a pastor in a same-sex relationship.

Credit crisis to worsen as banks cut and run

Credit crisis to worsen as banks cut and run
By Paul J Davies
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 6 2007 04:56 | Last updated: July 6 2007 04:56


The fallout from the crisis at two Bear Stearns hedge funds in the broader market for the complex securities they hold is likely to worsen, as investment banks cut their credit exposure to funds involved in the field.

It is far from certain how significant the direct impact of these cuts will be and even more uncertain are the knock-on effects to other areas of structured credit and debt markets beyond.

But some in the market say that whatever the outcomes, the current troubles in collateralised debt obligations of asset-backed securities are a sneak preview of what the next broad-based downturn in markets might look like.

CDOs of ABS pool together groups of bonds that are backed in turn by pools of mortgages or other loans. The pools are then sliced into different tranches with varying risk and sold onto investors. The products have been heavy buyers of the mortgage-backed securities that facilitated the boom in US subprime mortgage lending.

The Bear Stearns hedge funds were big holders of these instruments and the news two weeks ago that the funds were in serious trouble has led to much greater concern about the valuation of CDOs of ABS held by other funds.

According to bankers and hedge funds involved in these and similar markets, this has led investment banks to begin reassessing their exposure to funds that are investing in ABS and CDOs of ABS with borrowed money.

Matt King, analyst at Citigroup, has estimated that funds invested in CDOs of ABS are likely to see some significant increases in the amount of margin they are required to post against their investments.

This “margin” in simple terms governs the amount of leverage, or borrowed money, they can use in their investments.

For example, Mr King expects that for the safest AAA-rated slices of these deals, margin requirements would rise from about 2-4 per cent now to nearer 8-10 per cent.

At the other end of the scale, the riskiest equity tranches would see margin rates increase from 50-100 per cent, which is to say banks will not lend to funds investing in these slices of risk.

“Over the near term, the biggest risk [for CDOs of ABS] is probably that of forced selling driven by potential margin calls [’haircut’ increases] or investor redemptions,” Mr King says.

“We argue that this is likely to be a big problem only for a small number of people, but that its full effects may not yet have been seen.”

The few bankers involved in the hedge fund financing business who would speak off the record about this subject agreed that such moves were already happening, with some saying that margin increases across the board were coming for some funds.

It is a sensitive topic because forcing hedge funds to withdraw liquidity from these markets could contribute to further valuation concerns in CDOs of ABS and could have knock-on effects for the health of other areas such as collateralised loan obligations, which are also widely bought by CDOs of ABS.

The CDO markets already faces a further test of nerves once Bear Stearns releases the results of its revaluation of its funds’ holdings in about 10 days time.

However, others involved in the credit markets do not think that the banks’ moves are the start of a systemic cutting of liquidity. One London-based hedge fund specialising in credit says that the long-term trend continues to be greater liquidity from the top-tier banks because of their more sophisticated portfolio-based risk assessments and margining requirements.

These help to lower margining by taking account of the diversity of a hedge funds holdings.

Steve Dulake, European credit analyst at JPMorgan, says that for European credit funds, June and July look to be poorer performance months rather than setting the scene for a bad year.

“This would suggest that there’s perhaps a little too much chatter and concern regarding forced liquidation as a result of margin calls on the part of prime brokers.”

Others say that there are warnings for the broader structured credit markets in the problems at Bear Stearns.

“All we’ve seen here is a foretaste of what happens when funds invested in illiquid assets have to be unwound,” says Jonathan Laredo, partner at Solent a London-based specialist credit investor.

“If you want to think about what the next downturn is going to look like, this has been a foretaste. A lot of buyers are holding onto CLOs [similar illiquid assets] in the belief they can sell them when they need to,” Mr Laredo says.

How to defeat the jihadis in something other than a war

How to defeat the jihadis in something other than a war
By Philip Stephens
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 5 2007 19:08 | Last updated: July 5 2007 19:08


Britain’s new prime minister is eschewing talk of “a war on terror”. The attempted bombings in London and Glasgow have also seen Gordon Brown’s government avoid references to “Islamist terrorists”. Instead, ministers have denounced the attacks as acts of criminality. The talk is of a need to win hearts and minds in the wider Muslim community.

One interpretation of this change of language and tone is that Mr Brown is seeking to distance himself from his predecessor Tony Blair and from George W. Bush’s administration in Washington. Another, and the two are not mutually exclusive, is that the new government wants to formulate a broader strategy for the long war – sorry, struggle – against the violent extremism of al-Qaeda and its ilk.

Change is the mantra of the moment in London. In office for only nine days, Mr Brown’s administration has not been queasy about distancing itself from the perceived mistakes of its predecessor. These include Mr Blair’s closeness to the White House and his habit, like Mr Bush, of casting the confrontation with violent Islamism as an existential struggle between good and evil.

In so far as British officials have read the runes of Mr Brown’s overall approach to foreign policy, they have concluded that he probably wants a relationship with Mr Bush more akin to that of Germany’s Angela Merkel than that of his predecessor. The special relationship will endure, but with room for public candour.

Over at the Foreign Office, it has been noted that David Miliband, the new foreign secretary, was a strong critic last year of Mr Blair’s unflinching support for Israel’s war in Lebanon. This week Mr Miliband stepped out to applaud the role played by Hamas in the freeing of the kidnapped BBC journalist Alan Johnston. In parenthesis, friends add that Mr Miliband leans more naturally towards Europe than the US.

Whatever the motives of the new British government – and I suspect they are mixed – there is much to be said for an effort to reframe the struggle with extreme Islamism. The use of force can be only one dimension. Hearts and minds are critical in the effort to counter terrorism. Language and tone matter.

Mangled grammar apart (terror is a method not an enemy), the “war on terror” catchline has seemed to validate the jihadi claim of a clash of civilisations between Islam and the west. That in turn assists al-Qaeda and its affiliates in drawing the myriad conflicts in the Middle East into a single narrative of western oppression. Thus US policy has provided a unifying thread for groups across the region that have otherwise wholly different objectives and perspectives on Islam. The idea of one struggle encourages Shia terrorists to make common cause with Sunni, secular Muslims with fundamentalists. As my colleagues at the FT have been reporting in a series of articles this week, al-Qaeda has had considerable success in establishing an overarching ideological “order”, tapping into Islamist and other terrorist groups across the region.

There is more to this than words, of course. Language has driven policy. Terrorism in the Middle East is not monolithic. Even within avowedly violent groups there are often leaders ready to consider political accommodation. Hamas is one example. Put everyone in the same jihadi box and an opportunity is lost to isolate irredentist Islamists. There have been moments when the Bush administration might have recognised this. Two years ago, under the guidance of then state department official Robert Zelikow, there was a move to drop “war on terror”. Officials began experimenting with alternatives such as “the global struggle against violent extremism”.

Mr Zelikow, it was said at the time, wanted the US to develop a strategy that would discredit and demystify the extremists’ ideology and promote moderate Islam. Implicit was a recognition that the terrorists could not be defeated by purely military means – something that even Donald Rumsfeld, the then defence secretary, seemed ready to sign up to.

The initiative collapsed, though, when Mr Bush publicly slapped down his advisers. The war on terror had become his signature phrase. More than that, it provided the vital political cover for the war in Iraq. The phrase stayed. Even Democrats have seemed loathe to abandon it.

Mr Bush’s attachment to the war paradigm is no reason for Mr Brown to sign up. By 2009 the US will have a new president. If enough other leaders reframe the conflict as one much broader than a military confrontation Washington may eventually be persuaded to do likewise.

Above all the west needs to differentiate between al-Qaeda’s brand of irreconcilable extremism and the many other grievances, conflicts and stand-offs that fuel violence in the Muslim worlds. Some at least of these are susceptible to political solutions if they can be disentangled from violent Islamism.

So far so sensible. The intrinsic arguments for settlement, say, of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are stronger than they have ever been. It also makes strategic sense to deprive al-Qaeda of some of the oxygen of radicalism. It is more difficult, but rational, to admit that the war in Iraq has proved a highly effective recruiting sergeant for Islamist extremism.

But there is a dangerous line here that must not be crossed. To say that the west should better understand and address the conditions that nurture the extremism of al-Qaeda and other violent manifestations of Wahhabi Islam must never be to ignore what these terrorists actually stand for.

Few things give more succour to the terrorists than an apparent acceptance by some in the west – in non-Muslim and Muslim communities alike – that their violence is somehow a response to western intervention. That, if only foreign troops were withdrawn from Afghanistan and Iraq and the Palestinians given their own state, the Islamist fundamentalists would lay down their car bombs.

Even the most cursory examination of views that motivate the Islamist extremists says otherwise. Behind the demand for a Muslim caliphate lies a brutal totalitarian ideology that is violent, deeply anti-Semitic and casts all but fellow fanatics as worthless kafirs. This is a movement that will draw any grievance, valid or otherwise, to its cause but will not be satisfied by anything short of its medievalist vision of an intolerant society based on their corruption of Islam. Whatever we call it – war, struggle, confrontation – and however we label them – criminals, Islamist terrorists, jihadis – we need to be absolutely sure of one thing. They must be defeated.

philip.stephens@ft.com

European interest rates on the rise - British and European central banks stick to the script

European interest rates on the rise
By Chris Giles in London and Ralph Atkins in Frankfurt
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 5 2007 19:47 | Last updated: July 5 2007 19:47


European interest rates were on the rise yesterday after the Bank of England announced another increase in borrowing costs and the European Central Bank signalled that eurozone rates were likely to go up in September.

The Bank of England did nothing to confound market expectations of 6 per cent rates before the end of the year as it raised its main interest rate for the fifth time in a year to 5.75 per cent. It cited strong growth, limited spare capacity and indications businesses were poised to raise prices for the rise.

The ECB fears capacity constraints will push up inflation in the 13-member eurozone. Jean-Claude Trichet, the ECB president, also highlighted dangers posed by “vigorous monetary and credit growth in an environment of already ample liquidity”.

The similarity in the European central banks’ thinking was striking. While uncertain about the direction of inflation, they warned that rapid economic growth and limited spare capacity had heightened risks and demanded some action.

Economists and investors suggested the Bank of England would soon raise interest rates again to 6 per cent, a rate not exceeded since 1998. A Reuters poll showed that just over half of the 57 economists surveyed expected UK rates to hit this level by the end of the year.

The Bank of England’s statement gave no hints about future rises but stressed that although inflation would fall this year as gas and electricity prices fell, “most indicators of pricing pressure remain elevated”.

“The balance of risks to the outlook for inflation in the medium term continued to lie to the upside,” it added as it said that these risks had persuaded the majority on the nine-member monetary policy committee to vote for higher rates.

Andrew Smith, chief economist of KPMG, the accountants, said the MPC would relax only when growth slows. “This could well happen of its own accord as past rate increases bite – but if not, it is too early to call the peak of the rate cycle”.

Since December 2005, the ECB has lifted its main rate eight times to 4 per cent. No change was announced yesterday but Mr Trichet said he would not want to change market expectations on the timing of the next move. Markets had seen a two-thirds chance of a September rise, with October a less likely possibility.

A September rise would raise the possibility of a further increase this year – likely to be seen by many ECB governing council members as justified given strong data on eurozone activity. “I don’t see why they would slow down the pace right now,” said Erik Nielsen, economist at Goldman Sachs.

The ECB’s governing council will meet by teleconference in August, when much of Europe is on holiday, but Mr Trichet made clear that he could still brief the media soon afterwards.

British and European central banks stick to the script
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 5 2007 21:47 | Last updated: July 5 2007 21:47


The Bank of England’s rate rise on Thursday – a quarter of a percentage point to a six-year high of 5.75 per cent – may have been predictable, but it will give consumers pause for thought. The European Central Bank meanwhile kept rates steady at 4 per cent, but signalled that markets can expect a rise later this year. Despite some doubts over the future direction of UK and European inflation, the decisions were correct, albeit a month too late in the case of the BoE.

The UK rise came four weeks after Mervyn King, the governor, was outvoted 5-4 in the Bank’s decision to keep rates steady despite signs of persistent inflationary pressures. Back then, some voting with the majority were concerned about surprising markets. That clearly was not a problem on Thursday.

The signs that were apparent last month still exist today: growth is strong in the UK and most parts of the world, consumer spending remains high, and there are still ample supplies of money and credit. Add to that high oil prices and strong equity markets and you have a formula for an inflationary threat.

But alongside these pointers, there are two substantial British economic uncertainties on the horizon: first, even with strong domestic growth, the UK labour market looks surprisingly weak. Neither wages nor employment have kept pace with output growth. Yet business surveys point to companies itching to raise prices in the near future.

Second, the path of UK consumer spending could slow in the autumn as many homeowners are coming off fixed mortgages. Low interest rates in the back half of 2005 encouraged many consumers to take out new loans, many of them with guaranteed rates set for two years. As interest rates adjust upwards by as much as 1 to 1.5 percentage points, consumers might cut their spending in other areas. This holds particularly true with an already low savings rate and consumers borrowing against their homes to foot their bills.

Both factors mean that consumption could turn quickly in the months ahead and make future inflation and rate decisions less certain. If UK labour markets remain weak and increased mortgage rates have adverse effects on spending, the Bank may not want to raise rates to 6 per cent before the end of the year, as many expect.

But none of this should have prevented action. Self-sustaining growth – with no contagion from the sluggish US economy – calls for higher interest rates. The BoE has done its part. The ECB might follow suit when it gets its next chance.




Reasons to raise rates still further, and reasons not to
By Ralph Atkins in Frankfurt
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 6 2007 03:00 | Last updated: July 6 2007 03:00


With signs of an underlying improvement in the eurozone's economic performance, politicians may hope the European Central Bank will hold back from further interest rate increases in its battle against inflation.

At first sight it may seem obvious that if structural improvements have reduced immediate threats to price stability, the need to curb the economy is less urgent.
T
Alan Greenspan, when US Federal Reserve chairman, famously spotted a technology-driven trend rise in US productivity growth in the 1990s that would contain inflation. A recent improvement in eurozone productivity may prove lasting.

But even if eurozone "potential growth" - the pace at which the economy can expand without creating excessive inflation - has risen, there are differences of opinion at the ECB on the implications for borrowing costs. While some might see a case for caution in increasing interest rates, others would argue the opposite: that the US experience illustrates the dangers of keeping interest rates low in a rapidly expanding economy.

If investors see a region's growth prospects brightening they might increase investment, driving up asset prices and demand, thus creating inflationary pressures over the longer term. Delaying interest rate rises could lead to excessive investment and a credit boom, sowing the seeds of future instability, says Julian Callow, economist at Barclays Capital.

"It is quite a dangerous game for central bankers to play. It might seem the right thing to do in the short term but prove wrong in the longer term," he said.

For the ECB, fast-growing eurozone money and credit data are already flashing alarm signals. Lending to businesses, for instance, is increasing at near-record rates, reflecting merger and acquisition activity, including by private equity groups.

The central bank's other big fear is that fast growth is leading to higher wage settlements - concerns that will have been exacerbated by this week's rail strikes in Germany over pay demands of 7 per cent and more.

Moreover, if the ECB did raise its estimate of eurozone potential growth, currently about 2.25 per cent, it would probably be by a quarter point at most. Given the uncertainties surrounding such estimates, that is unlikely to lead to dramatic changes in ECB thinking.

Warning on Beijing's arms spending

Warning on Beijing's arms spending
By Virginia Marsh in Sydney
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 6 2007 03:00 | Last updated: July 6 2007 03:00


The pace and scope of China's military modernisation could create "misunderstanding and instability" in the Asia-Pacific region, Australia has warned in one of Canberra's toughest public statements yet on Beijing's growing strategic ambitions.

In a defence policy blueprint released yesterday by John Howard, the prime minister, Canberra highlights Australia's strengthening military ties with Japan and warns that the strategic competition be-tween the US and China needs to be carefully managed for the good of the Asia-Pacific region.

The new policy document reflects what some commentators consider a shift in Australian defence policy to emphasise trilateral ties with the US and Japan, a development arousing suspicion in Beijing.

While Australia has been the US's strongest military and political ally in the Asia-Pacific region since 1945, Canberra has been assiduous in recent years in building up a broad relationship with Beijing.

"It appears that [the Howard government] is moving to a policy under pressure from Washington and Tokyo to be less welcoming of China's growing power," said Hugh White, of the Australian National University. "I think that China will be very uncomfortable with it."

The defence blueprint, Australia's first since 2005, labels China's development of new capabilities such as the anti-satellite missile it tested in January as "disruptive" and says the region has benefited from the US being the predominant military power.

It warns against a change in the regional status quo, saying: "As China and India grow, and the United States rebalances its global commitments, power relations will change, and as this happens there is always a possibility of strategic miscalculation."

Responding to the paper in Beijing, the foreign ministry said: "The Chinese government has repeatedly stated that China will be unwavering in taking the peaceful course of development."

Australia has reacted swiftly to Japan's increased willingness to involve itself directly in global and regional security, a development that has altered regional dynamics.

In March, Mr Howard, whose government will this year raise defence spending by 10.6 per cent, signed a historic security co-operation pact with Shinzo Abe, his Japanese counterpart, and since then Canberra has held trilateral security talks with Washington and Tokyo. It is examining how it could contribute to a US-led regional ballistic missile defence system.

The three-way grouping has also opened a defence dialogue with India, with which Australia signed a security co-operation accord last year.

The paper says of Japan, formerly its most bitter wartime enemy: "Australia has no closer nor more valuable partner in the region . . . Australia welcomes its efforts to contribute more directly to regional and global stability."

The talks with India, aimed potentially at forming a quadrilateral security pact, have angered China, in particular, and in May it sent a formal diplomatic protest to the countries. Within Australia, the potential pact has been labelled by some commentators as smacking of outdated, cold war-style containment.

Australia steps up probe into UK bomb plot

Australia steps up probe into UK bomb plot
By Virginia Marsh in Sydney and agencies
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 6 2007 09:02 | Last updated: July 6 2007 11:07


Australia on Friday stepped up its investigation into last weekend’s failed car bombings in the UK with police launching fresh raids, seizing hospital computers and interviewing more doctors.

Q&A

Post a question now for international terror expert Gavin Proudley and Roula Khalaf, the Middle East editor.
“There are a number of people now being interviewed as part of this investigation,” said Mick Keelty, the country’s police chief. “It doesn’t mean that they’re all suspects but it is quite a complex investigation and the links to the UK are becoming more concrete.”

He said those being interviewed had included four Indian doctors who had since been released. The moves follow Monday’s arrest at Brisbane airport of Mohamed Haneef, a 27-year-old Indian doctor, as he was trying to flee the country on a one-way ticket. Dr Haneef is believed to be related to Sabeel Ahmed and Kafeel Ahmed, two of the seven individuals detained in the UK after the three failed car bombings in London and Glasgow.

The two brothers, who worked for the National Health Service in Britain, had also applied to work as doctors in Australia but were turned down because they lacked the necessary qualifications, Geoff Dobb, the president of the Australian Medical Association in Western Australia, told the Associated Press. Dr Haneef has yet to be charged but has had his detention order extended for the third time, for a further four days.

On Thursday a court judge in Queensland granted Australian police and a senior British counter-terrorism officer an extra 96 hours to question Dr Haneef.

He is the first person to be held under controversial new anti-terrorism laws that Australia passed in the wake of the 2001 terrorist attacks in the US.

Dr Haneef had been working at Queensland’s Gold Coast but Friday’s raids took place at two hospitals in Western Australia. Mr Keelty said police had seized hospital computers and were examining more than 30,000 files.

He added that police were examining Dr Haneef’s laptop computer and a Sim card mobile phone device he left with one of the British bomb suspects.

”We are largely focusing on the high-tech material, computer files, and obviously they take some time to work through, particularly if they are in a foreign language,” Mr Keelty told journalists.

The investigation had also been extended to a third Australian state of New South Wales, where another doctor was questioned. “The linkages are with people who are known to each other and that’s prompting the further inquiries,” said Philip Ruddock, Australia’s attorney-general.

Clinton and Obama back China crackdown

Clinton and Obama back China crackdown
By Eoin Callan in Washington
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 5 2007 22:02 | Last updated: July 5 2007 22:02


Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, the frontrunners for the Democratic presidential nomination, have agreed to co-sponsor legislation that would levy punitive duties on Chinese goods to cajole Beijing into revaluing its currency, according to aides.

The endorsement is a sign that trade with China is emerging as a hot political issue in the upcoming election and increases the prospect of the legislation passing with a veto-proof majority, analysts said.

The bipartisan legislation has been spurred by claims that China’s cheap currency makes its exports more attractive and is contributing to the record annual $232.6bn (£115.6bn) US trade deficit with the country.

The early pledge to vote for the bill will strengthen the candidates’ claims to be defending US manufacturers against what they argue is unfair competition.

A critical stance on US trade policy has become increasingly de rigueur for candidates as the Democratic presidential field tilts towards a populist stance on economic issues.

The bill, introduced by Senators Max Baucus, Chuck Grassley, Charles Schumer and Lindsey Graham, would permit US companies to seek anti-dumping duties on Chinese imports based on the undervaluation of the currency and calls for a trade case to be brought by the US at the World Trade Organisation.

Analysts said the sponsorship of the bill by the two leading candidates made it more likely the US would take a more aggressive stance towards Beijing on trade issues if the Democrats took the White House.

The Senators who introduced the legislation set out the case for the move on Thursday in the Financial Times, arguing that “a little pressure can go a long way to encouraging the right policies.” Although the Senators single out China, they say “tomorrow it could be another economy’s currency, with even more devastating effects”.

They said existing international currency policies are out of date and “pose a serious threat to the global trading system by violating the principles of the International Monetary Fund and the WTO”.

Brian Pomper, a former Democratic adviser, said China was becoming a proxy for US political anxiety about globalisation and that sponsorship of the bill was the most combative position yet taken towards Beijing by the two candidates.

Sandra Polaski, a trade analyst at the Carnegie Endowment, said US politicians were making China a scapegoat in the face of widespread economic insecurity among voters. “Opinion polls consistently show the American public has a balanced view of China. It is campaigning politicians who are turning the heat on Beijing,” she said.

In a separate letter sent recently to Hank Paulson, US Treasury secretary, Mr Obama warned that the “administration’s refusal to take strong action against China’s currency manipulation will also make it more difficult to obtain congressional approval” for free trade agreements.

The legislation could be voted on as early as the autumn and has been presented by its advocates as a WTO-compliant version of a more radical bill introduced in the last Congress by Senators Schumer and Graham that would have applied 27.5 per cent tariffs on Chinese goods and violated international trade rules.

Oil hits 11-month high of $75

Oil hits 11-month high of $75
By Javier Blas in London
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 6 2007 11:00 | Last updated: July 6 2007 11:00


Oil prices rose on Friday to $75 a barrel for the first time since August on renewed unrest in Nigeria’s delta oil producing region.

Low US petrol inventories and strong summer demand also contributed to the bullish sentiment.

Analysts said further price increases were likely as the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta, the group thought to be responsible for most of the attacks in the region, called off this week a one-month truce. Attacks by militants had cut about 25 per cent of Nigeria’s oil production.

Shell, Nigeria’s largest foreign oil producer, said recently that it would not re-start its production in a key sector of the delta region for the rest of 2007 as security concerns persist.

A raid on Tuesday on an oil rig operated by Shell, and the kidnap on Thursday of a three-year-old girl in the Nigerian oil city of Port Harcout added to the sense of increasing insecurity in the West African country.

ICE August Brent, the world’s benchmark, hit $75.10 a barrel in early morning trade and was later 28 cents higher at $75.03 a barrel. The price now is less than $5 a barrel below the all-time high of $78.48 a barrel of last summer.

The most heavily trader ICE September Brent contract rose to $75.21 a barrel in morning trade, while Nymex August West Texas Intermediate rose 12 cents to $71.93 a barrel.

The opposition of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries to raise its output quotas provided additional support to the market. Opec, the oil cartel, controls about 43 per cent of world’s oil production.

“Opec appears unwilling to contemplate raising output before its September meeting, a policy stance which will push prices higher as refiners around the world begin to compete more vigorously for crude to support higher runs over the coming months,” the Center for Global Energy Studies, a London-based consultancy, warned in a recent report.

US refineries last week increase their utilisation level to 90 per cent and supplied the highest level of petrol since records began in 1982. But analyst said that strong consumption could quickly drain US petrol inventories in spite of the extra supply.

The 4 of July Independence Day traditionally marks the summer peak in US petrol consumption.

Resilient construction boosts US employment

Resilient construction boosts US employment
By Eoin Callan in Washington
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 6 2007 14:30 | Last updated: July 6 2007 14:30



US employers created more jobs than expected last month as the unemployment rate held steady close to a six-year low, according to fresh government figures.

The Department of Labor said on Friday that payrolls swelled by 132,000 in June, while estimates for hiring during the previous two months were also revised up by 75,000.

Steady job creation has underpinned recent US economic growth and the latest figures make it less likely the Federal Reserve will alter its outlook for the economy or consider cutting interest rates.

Treasuries bonds fell sharply as investors priced in a lower likelihood of a cut in rates, pushing the benchmark 10-year note to its biggest weekly decline in one year.

Wall Street economists were surprised by continued hiring in the construction sector as housebuilders hired 12,000 workers despite a prolonged housing market slump. There was further weakness in the retail sector as stores cut 24,000 positions.

Economists at Capital Economics said the decline in retail jobs “suggests that higher gasoline prices are now beginning to have a more marked negative impact on consumer spending”.

They added that the positive signal from the employment report was weakened slightly by the large share of hiring by state and local governments, which added 40,000 staff and are not viewed as good indicators of economic activity.

The bulk of the hiring was in the service industries, as banks, insurance companies, and restaurants, added 135,000 workers last month after hiring 199,000 more workers in May.

Thursday, July 05, 2007

International Herald Tribune Editorial - The origins of food

International Herald Tribune Editorial - The origins of food
Copyright by The International Herald Tribune
Published: July 4, 2007


With imports of agricultural products rising sharply and sporadic scares about their safety, people surely have a right to know what country their food has come from. In the United States, unfortunately, they have little chance of finding out, due to the intransigence of meat importers and grocery retailers.

Lobbyists for both groups have blocked implementation of a 2002 law that requires country-of-origin labels on fresh fruits and vegetables, red meats, seafood and peanuts. Only the seafood part of the law has been put into effect, largely because Alaskan fishermen liked some of its provisions and had a powerful champion in the Senate.

With the recent questions about Chinese seafood, those labels mean that consumers can make informed choices at the seafood counter - something they should be able to do with all of their food purchases.

The Bush administration's Agriculture Department was hostile to the labeling from the start. That comes as no surprise given that many of its top officials had worked for a trade association representing meatpackers and ranchers that opposes labeling. The Republican-controlled Congress, with key members beholden to campaign contributions from agribusiness, twice delayed the starting date for mandatory labeling, ultimately pushing it back to September 2008.

Industry lobbyists raise a flurry of unpersuasive objections. They claim it would be too costly for American meat packers to segregate and track imported meat, and especially difficult to label ground meat which often comes from different cows. They also claim that labeling is a disguised form of protectionism, which implies that all foreign food is suspect. But these rationales are trumped by the simple argument that consumers have a right to know the origins of what they are buying. The required record-keeping should also help in tracking any dangerous products back through the supply chain to the source of contamination.

With the Democrats now in control of Congress, it is time to put an end to the excuses and delays, and finally implement the labeling requirement - preferably without waiting until late 2008. This could be done through the mammoth farm policy bill that will be up for a vote in coming months or through an agriculture appropriations bill.

If there are elements of the original law that are unnecessarily onerous and costly, these can be modified during the legislative process or during administrative rule-making to implement the law. But there should be no compromise of the basic principle that consumers have a right to know where their food comes from before popping it into their mouths.

International Herald Tribune Editorial - Looking inward and outward

International Herald Tribune Editorial - Looking inward and outward
Copyright by The International Herald Tribune

Published: July 4, 2007


Wednesday was a working day in the rest of the world, and, for that matter, a working day in the middle of the working week. The Fourth of July, a day that is central to America's sense of its own history, passes uncapitalized around the rest of the globe. It's a local holiday, after all, nevermind how large the American idea of local may be.

But the idea of freedom is not local. It is universal. Even in these very difficult times, four years deep into a war that has turned much of the world against the United States, when some political leaders seek to arrogate the idea of freedom as their own political preserve, the universal freedom described in the Declaration of Independence remains a fundamental truth.

America's own domestic history has made it clear how deeply acculturated that original idea of freedom really was, but also how difficult it has been, and still is, to win political and economic freedom for every American. The desire for freedom is part of human nature. But what matters as much as the principle of freedom is the practice of it.

Ideas have a way of recommending themselves by the behavior of the men and women who hold them, and this is no less true of nations. The question isn't simply whether we can project our ideal of freedom around the world. The question is whether, by who we are and how we behave, we can make the freedom that animates us compelling to others.

America looks inward on the Fourth of July - not in introspection, but in an easy, comfortable sense of historical gratification. Yet this is a good day to look outward as well.

It is a day to ask how good a job - from the world's perspective - America is doing living up to the principles enunciated in the Declaration of Independence, whether it has done enough to make those sonorous old rights seem like more than a limited case in a limited argument. The answer is more equivocal than we like to believe. But the ideal is one that must drive us all.

Reading between the lines - Michael Madigan also to blame for state's disorder

Reading between the lines - Michael Madigan also to blame for state's disorder
BY CAROL MARIN cmarin@suntimes.com
July 5, 2007

Disorder in the house
There's a flaw in the system
And the fly in the ointment's gonna bring the whole thing down ...

"Disorder in the House," lyrics by Warren Zevon

It's hard to beat great writing. If you were going to compose an anthem to the Illinois General Assembly, you couldn't do better than the brilliant, drug-soaked lyrics of the late, great Warren Zevon's "Disorder in the House."

Then again, if you were going to write a poison pen letter to the governor, it's best to study at the knee of the master of that genre, Michael J. Madigan.

When Gov. Blagojevich decided to seize the reins of his Democratic- controlled but totally disordered Springfield house (small "h") by ordering state legislators into "special session" that begins today, House (big "H") Speaker Madigan took quill to inkwell and summarily wrote off whatever momentum Blago sought to gain in solving our to-date insoluble budget problems.

Forgive a humble scribe for interpreting the words of the Steinbeck of the Southwest Side, but here's how I read the speaker's July 2 prose poem to the governor.

Madigan: "In response to your decision to call the General Assembly into a special session for the purpose of considering legislation related to the lease of the state Lottery and the issuance of new pension obligation bonds for the state retirement system, the House will convene itself into a Committee of the Whole . . . and will last as long as necessary."

Meaning: The whole Madigan gang joined by bloodthirsty Republicans will be dug in to greet you, stare you down and make you sweat.

Madigan: "It is our request that you stay for the duration of the hearing."

Meaning: Ground the state plane, pal, and turn on the lights in the governor's mansion.

Madigan: "Please know that we have selected the Committee of the Whole format specifically in response to repeated concerns you have raised about the members' level of participation in budget talks."

Meaning: You started this, hot dog.

Madigan: "This setting will also afford the media the opportunity to directly observe the budget negotiation process firsthand, another accommodation ... we are happy to make for you."

Meaning: Even hated media welcome at this point.

Madigan: Since January, "We have met in session for 57 days -- or more than eight full, seven-day weeks ... despite your general absence from the State Capitol during most of that time."

Meaning: All that jogging has given you fabulous abs.

Madigan's acid attack notwithstanding, the disorder in Illinois' legislative house is not all Blagojevich's fault. Yes, he has committed a boatload of political sins. Yes, he has squandered all his early promises of reform. Yes, to invoke a favorite phrase of his friend and ally, Senate President Emil Jones, the governor has "played to the cheers of the crowd" rather than quietly building a consensus within even his own party. But he has also led some new and innovative policies, most notably health care for kids.

House Speaker Madigan is a superb practitioner of tactical power politics. But take a long view for a second, as Kent Redfield, expert on public policy and state government at the University of Illinois Springfield, did and ask if we are better off with regard to state pensions or education than we were 30 years ago?

"The one constant in that whole period since he became head of the Democratic House caucus since 1980 is that Mike Madigan has been in power," Redfield said Tuesday. "I think the speaker is brilliant in terms of politics but cautious in terms of pushing a public agenda."

If Illinois is in dire budget, pension, transportation and educational straits today, doesn't Madigan take some of the rap too? And deserve a ration of the heat?

Yesterday Blagojevich responded with his own Fourth of July fireworks. In a letter, he told the Speaker he won't be showing up at Madigan's meeting, that he's not going to play the Speaker's game.

The macho headbutting and big egos of all of these boys-yes, boys-in leadership is toxic and embarrassing. Isn't it time to get some order in our house? Starting today?

Lawmakers' debate on oil measure is blocked - Clerics issue edict forbidding a vote

Lawmakers' debate on oil measure is blocked - Clerics issue edict forbidding a vote
By Tina Susman
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune and The Los Angeles Times
Published July 5, 2007

BAGHDAD -- Political infighting blocked lawmakers from opening debate Wednesday on legislation to oversee the oil industry as Iraqi and U.S. leaders called for reconciliation among Iraq's feuding factions.

An influential group of Sunni Muslim clerics, the Association of Muslim Scholars, joined the fray surrounding the oil bill Wednesday by issuing a fatwa, or religious edict, forbidding legislators from voting for it.

"Whoever does so will be exposed to God's wrath and will have committed the crime of collaboration with the enemy," said a statement from the group, a fierce opponent of the U.S. occupation.

The developments were an ominous sign for U.S. and Iraqi leaders, who have counted on passage of the legislation to show evidence of political progress before parliament starts a monthlong break July 31.

At a gathering Wednesday, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki urged lawmakers to trade the "language of confrontation" for the "language of cooperation," a message to legislators whose boycotts of parliament and squabbling have hobbled the government. Vowing that Iraqis will not "slack off," al-Maliki said they were "ready to take the steps that will take us to a brighter future."

Al-Maliki joined Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker and U.S. Army Gen. David Petraeus in addressing hundreds of guests who crowded into a former palace of ousted dictator Saddam Hussein inside Baghdad's fortified Green Zone for a U.S. Independence Day celebration.

Petraeus and Crocker harked back to the early days of America after the signing of the Declaration of Independence and said that time showed that there was nothing quick and simple about establishing a democracy in any country.

"It's not easy to stand united. We learned that lesson during our own nation's history and we are seeing that in Iraq today," Petraeus said.

Crocker echoed the sentiment but hinted at the disappointing pace of progress so far in Iraq. He recalled his last 4th of July in Iraq -- three months after the fall of Hussein in 2003 -- and described the days leading up to it as "those exuberant months after liberation, when all things seemed possible."

President Bush has sent an additional 28,500 U.S. troops to Iraq as part of his plan to stabilize the capital and give al-Maliki a better environment in which to bring about reform. So far, though, the parliament has proved incapable of overcoming its sectarian rivalries, and none of the legislation considered essential to national reconciliation has been passed into law.

The oil legislation is considered the most important, because of the potential wealth to be derived from the oil industry. The legislation comprises two bills, one of which is a framework to oversee management of the industry. The other covering revenue-sharing would lay out the mechanisms for distributing oil revenues.

The framework was passed by the Cabinet on Tuesday, but various political blocs immediately began objecting to it.

Kurdish lawmakers, who just days ago had expressed support for the measure, said they had not seen the draft that was passed Tuesday and could not guarantee their support for it. Sunni legislators have said the bill would open the industry to foreign investors, mainly U.S. oil companies, and deprive Iraqis of their due wealth.

The 44-member main Sunni bloc is boycotting parliament over an unrelated issue. That would make it difficult to give legitimacy to the oil legislation even if it passed.

Without their presence, Kurdish lawmaker Mahmoud Othman said it was not possible to debate the measure.

Hamas seeks political gain from hostage's release - Faction touts freeing of Briton as evidence that it's a credible political and diplomatic partner

Hamas seeks political gain from hostage's release - Faction touts freeing of Briton as evidence that it's a credible political and diplomatic partner
By Joel Greenberg
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 5, 2007

JERUSALEM -- The leadership of Hamas in the Gaza Strip literally dined out Wednesday on the release of British Broadcasting Corp. reporter Alan Johnston, sharing breakfast with him in front of television cameras shortly after he was freed following nearly four months as a hostage.

Ismail Haniyeh, the deposed Palestinian prime minister from Hamas, draped Johnston with a sash bearing the Palestinian colors, presented him a silver plaque and affixed a Palestinian flag pin on his lapel.

Under international boycott and isolated in the Gaza Strip, where it seized control last month in fighting with the rival Fatah faction, Hamas is trying hard to reap a political windfall from its success in freeing Johnston after 114 days in captivity.

Leaders and spokesmen of the Islamic group reached out to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, the Fatah leader, and to other nations, asserting that they intend to restore law and order to chaotic Gaza and that they are a credible partner for politics and diplomacy.

Haniyeh said Johnston's release showed "that the government is serious about imposing security, stability and order in this part of our homeland."

Reaching out to Fatah

He appealed to "the brothers in Ramallah," a reference to Abbas and his supporters in Fatah, to renew a political dialogue with Hamas, whose partnership with Fatah in a unity government unraveled in bitter factional fighting.

Mahmoud Zahar, a top Hamas leader who played a key role in the effort to free Johnston, said the release of the journalist had inaugurated a new era.

"We will not allow illegal actions against anyone," he said. "We are going to implement the law and we are not going to allow anyone to violate the security of the Palestinian people. We are going to put an end to the security problem."

Hamas has made a significant effort to win hearts and minds in Gaza by presenting itself as an authority capable of taming the rampant clan and factional violence that has plagued the coastal territory, most recently while Fatah and Hamas wrangled over control of the security forces.

After taking over Gaza, Hamas scored an initial success with the release of Salim Sabra, an engineer who had been held hostage in a personal feud for more than a year.

The release of Johnston was engineered after Hamas ratcheted up the pressure on the shadowy group that was holding him, the Army of Islam, arresting several of its members and surrounding its compound with scores of gunmen who manned checkpoints and took up positions on rooftops.

In the last phase of protracted negotiations, the kidnappers were warned that Hamas could use force, and a Muslim cleric was brought in to tell them that their actions contradicted Islam, said Ghazi Hamad, the spokesman for the Hamas-led government in Gaza.

Johnston told reporters that his kidnappers lost their confidence after Hamas took control of the Gaza Strip.

"That changed the atmosphere, completely," he said. "Hamas has a huge law-and-order agenda, and they want to stop the kidnappings. The kidnappers were nervous from that point, and that's when they made the video in which I put on this explosive vest." Johnston was seen in a video released last week warning against the use of force.

"Suddenly they were worried that Hamas had them in their sights," Johnston added later at a news conference. "I'm pretty sure that if Hamas hadn't come in and stuck the heat on in a big way I'd still be in that room."

Battling terrorist label

Hamad asserted that the release of Johnston showed that Hamas was different from the Al Qaeda-inspired group that had held the BBC journalist.

"The international community and especially the European Union should understand that Hamas is not a terrorist organization," Hamad said. "Hamas is working against the occupation here. It is not a radical organization fighting against the Christians or Europe. What happened to Alan Johnston should change their mind."

But Hamas, listed as a terrorist organization by the U.S., the EU and Israel, did not appear to win new credibility among its opponents.

Yasser Abed Rabbo, a top aide to Abbas, dismissed the release of Johnston as a "melodrama," a deal struck between groups who were former allies.

"They want to present Hamas as a reasonable partner, but we don't buy it," Abed Rabbo said. "You will never be accepted as someone who respects international law by releasing a journalist when at the same time you violate your own national law and legitimacy. They should accept Palestinian law and put an end to their coup" in Gaza.

A U.S. official said Hamas "still has a number of obligations to meet before it can be a partner that can be counted on and worked with." Hamas has rejected international demands to recognize Israel, renounce violence and abide by Palestinian accords with Israel.

Internally, Hamas still has to contend with the challenge posed by the Army of Islam, which is dominated by the powerful, heavily armed Doghmush clan.

Johnston said that in a conversation with the leader of the group on the first night of his captivity, he learned that it had a "jihadi agenda" and considered him as "a prisoner in the war between Muslims and non-Muslims."

"They were not so interested in Israel-Palestine," Johnston said. "They were interested in getting a knife into Britain in some way."

The kidnappers had demanded the release of militant Islamic prisoners held in Britain and Jordan, including a radical cleric with ties to Al Qaeda.

Captivity was "always frightening," Johnston said, "because I didn't know how it was going to end.

"It's an amazing thing to be free."

----------

jogreenberg@tribune.com

War foes turning to tax resistance - More peace activists snub IRS in gesture popularized by Thoreau, Joan Baez

War foes turning to tax resistance - More peace activists snub IRS in gesture popularized by Thoreau, Joan Baez
By John Christoffersen
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune and The Associated Press
Published July 5, 2007

NEW HAVEN, Conn. -- When the United States invaded Iraq more than four years ago, war opponent David Gross asked his bosses for a radical pay cut, enough so he wouldn't have to pay taxes to support the war.

"I was having a hard time looking at myself in the mirror," Gross said. "I knew the bombs falling were in part paid with my tax dollars. I had to actually do something concrete to remove my complicity."

The San Francisco technical writer was making close to $100,000 a year. He didn't know exactly how big of a pay cut he would need to fall below the federal tax threshold, but later figured out he would have to make less than minimum wage.

His employer turned him down and he quit. Gross, 38, now works on a contract basis, and last year he refused to pay self-employment taxes.

War tax resistance, popularized by Henry David Thoreau in the 19th Century and by singer Joan Baez and others during the Vietnam War, is gaining renewed interest among some activists.

"Clearly this year we definitely had more people calling, sending e-mails about how they decided to start resisting," said Ruth Benn, coordinator of the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee in New York.

Based on the committee's mailing list and reports from numerous groups it works with around the country, Benn estimates 8,000 to 10,000 Americans refuse to pay some or all of their federal taxes over war objections.

Internal Revenue Service officials say they don't have figures for that specific category, but earlier this year they reported an overall non-compliance rate of 16.3 percent and estimated the annual tax gap at about $345 billion.

Peace activists are considering a mass tax-resistance campaign next April to step up pressure to end the war in Iraq, Benn said.

Gross said he now manages to live on about $15,000 per year by carefully tracking his spending.

He acknowledged the tax resistance movement is too small to stop the war, "but I think what we're doing is showing the way for people in the anti-war movement," Gross said.

The IRS said that while taxpayers have a right to express their opinions, they still have an obligation to pay their taxes. Tax resisters place an undue burden on taxpayers who pay their fair share of taxes, IRS spokeswoman Dianne Besunder said.

John Ubaldi, spokesman for Move America Forward, which supports the military and the war on terror, said the government would not be able to function if everyone opposed to a program stopped paying taxes.

"They're showing the terrorists that America is not committed," Ubaldi said.

The IRS considers it a frivolous argument when a taxpayer cites disagreement with the government's use of tax money as the reason for not paying taxes.

A new federal law increases the penalty for frivolous tax returns from $500 to $5,000. The IRS says it investigates promoters of frivolous arguments and refers cases to the Justice Department Justice for criminal prosecution.

Unlike the days when Thoreau was sent to prison in a tax protest against the Mexican-American War, modern war tax protesters rarely go to prison, according to tax resisters. The IRS may take their money from wages and bank accounts -- with penalties and interest -- after sending a series of letters.

"They're very polite, which makes it a little boring," said Rosa Packard of Greenwich, Conn., a longtime anti-war tax protester.

But Randy Kehler, who has refused to pay federal income taxes since 1976 to protest U.S. military policy, was evicted with his wife from their home in Colrain, Mass., in 1989 for non-payment of more than $45,000 in taxes, interest and penalties. Kehler was also jailed for nearly 3 months for contempt of court.

Their tax fight was the subject of a 1997 documentary, "An Act of Conscience," narrated by actor Martin Sheen.

Financial Times Editorial Comment: US economic news shows neither gloom nor doom

Financial Times Editorial Comment: US economic news shows neither gloom nor doom
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 4 2007 21:29 | Last updated: July 4 2007 21:29



There are a few scratches on the surface; some long-established features are lacking; but the fundamentals are largely intact. No, not the iPhone. Another much hyped yet reliable standard bearer of global commerce: the US economy. Despite recent setbacks, inflation and output data show that the US appears to be doing fine – without much reason for undue concern, still less irrational exuberance.

Jitters in global credit markets may have captured the headlines of late, but other news suggests that the US economy remains resilient. Core inflation is slightly down at 1.9 per cent. That goes hand-in-hand with the Federal Reserve’s decision to leave rates at 5.25 per cent and to drop a reference to core inflation being “somewhat elevated”. Final output growth for the first quarter of 0.7 per cent is low but expectedly so, and second-quarter figures will likely see a large increase.

Neither piece of data is cause for celebration. While the Fed rightly claims that core inflation has “improved modestly” it is still worried that the expected “sustained moderation in inflation pressures” may not materialise. Unemployment is already low; further downward pressures could send inflation higher again.

Gross domestic product will likely bounce back in the second quarter after an unusual lull in the first. This is partly an illusion created by fickle data. First-quarter GDP data shows an inventory correction combined with a surprise decline in both government spending and net exports over the New Year period. Second-quarter data will likely reverse these unexpected jumps. Taking the average over six months would suggest an annualised growth rate of perhaps two per cent.

That rate is still below the US long-term growth potential, and housing is, again, the culprit. Weakness in that sector may have chopped off as much as one percentage point of annualised GDP growth in the first quarter.

More hopefully, corporate spending appears to be gaining strength and the labour market is remarkably robust. All that, of course, also creates inflationary pressures. Luckily, there is some evidence that consumption has moderated, which reduces risks of overheating later.

The US may still be thrown off course, either by continued bad news from housing or an overly sharp tightening of credit markets. Until then, the Fed is right to maintain its focus on inflation. The economy is bouncing along a relatively steady underlying growth path. It would be surprising to find a crash in the near future – or, sadly, a dramatic, sustained acceleration.

A peculiar race for the White House

A peculiar race for the White House
By Clive Crook
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 4 2007 18:36 | Last updated: July 4 2007 18:36


With a year and a half still to go, the race for the US presidency is already one of the oddest that anyone can recall. To call it wide open hardly does it justice. Although the contest is joined, plausible heavyweights have yet to announce; the incumbent is a liability to his party; for Democrats and Republicans alike, the front-runner divides rather than unites; the eventual winner may be a woman, a black man, a Mormon or conceivably even an independent.

Emphasising this fluidity, some of the candidates have just announced how much money they raised in the second quarter.

John McCain’s showing was so poor that it prompted instant speculation that he would withdraw. His campaign has had to sack a third of its staff. His strategy will have to be discarded, and devised afresh. Not long ago, Mr McCain was regarded as the strong front-runner for the Republican nomination. Since then, his unflinching support for the war in Iraq has unsettled even Republican supporters – but more than that, he has paid the price for sponsoring the Senate’s recently abandoned immigration reform. On both issues, whether he liked it or not, he was aligned with the president.

A lesson that will not be lost on other Republican contenders is that closeness to President George W. Bush is worth less than zero in party support. In light of that, it will be interesting to see the rivals struggle to calculate the optimum distance. The air is already thick with semi-coded disavowals.

Rudolph Giuliani, the Republican front-runner, implicitly contrasts his ruthless competence with the administration’s lack of it. But he splits his party, just as Hillary Clinton divides hers. This is the dynamic that mght make a space in either primary for a lower-ranked contender, or even a complete outsider.

Fred Thompson is as good as running and will give Mr Giuliani a fight. Mitt Romney lags in national polls but has a ton of money and is strong in Iowa and New Hampshire, which vote early. Barack Obama is a credible challenger to Mrs Clinton, and John Edwards’s faltering campaign may give Mr Obama another tranche of anti-Clinton support. As those battles drag on, Al Gore might see an opportunity and so might Michael Bloomberg.

Pending the official arrival of Mr Thompson, the contest between Mrs Clinton and Mr Obama is the most intriguing. Mr Obama’s fundraising in the second quarter was extraordinary. Again, he out-raised Mrs Clinton’s supposedly unstoppable machine in raising money for the primary battle – this time by more than $10m. He is tapping hundreds of thousands of individuals, each of them making a relatively modest donation. This devoted following ensures that he remains a potent force.

The peculiar thing, though, is that just as Mr Obama is outperforming Mrs Clinton in what was supposed to be her strongest event (fundraising), she is outperforming him in what was supposed to be his. In each of the Democratic debates so far, Mrs Clinton has outshone Mr Obama. I would like to see the United States elect a black man as president, and the idea of a Clinton dynasty does not appeal, so I lean towards preferring Mr Obama as the Democratic nominee. Having declared that prejudice, I give victory in the debates up to now to Mrs Clinton, hands down.

Mr Obama’s performance in those events has been treated very kindly by many commentators. The problem is not that he is vague. I stand by what I argued here in April: he should stay vague as long as possible, to avoid splitting his centrist supporters from his leftist supporters. The problem is that he is awkward, tentative, defensive, unconfident and over-complicated. It is fine to be vague, I insist, as long as you convey an easy mastery of the material. He does not. He is an extremely able man, with real intellectual depth. If you doubt it, read his books. I dare say he has in fact mastered the issues. He just does not look as though he has.

Mrs Clinton, in fact, is following my advice much more effectively. She is vague, all right. There has been no word of a detailed healthcare plan, for instance, just a shrewd admission that she bears scars from the fiasco of Hillarycare in her husband’s first term. For the most part, she is letting other people say that Hillarycare was not as disastrous as it has been made out to be.

Despite being vague for now about her healthcare intentions, she has come over in the debates as the master of that issue and of every other issue. She leaves people certain that she understands it all, and has considered every proposal and every objection to every proposal. Her expertise is assured, but also carried lightly: no lecturing, no show of arrogance. This is something that few expected her to pull off.

But can she be liked? She may not have to be. (Margaret Thatcher was not much liked; the British elected her because they thought she was necessary.) Still, it would help if those high negative ratings subsided. If she can keep this up, my guess is they will. At least, give her credit for trying. All that winning charm, all those relaxed smiles: it is exhausting to contemplate the hours in rehearsal. The effort seems to be paying off.

From frontline attack to terror by franchise

From frontline attack to terror by franchise
By Stephen Fidler and Roula Khalaf
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 5 2007 03:00 | Last updated: July 5 2007 03:00


In late 2004, a 1,600-page treatise outlining a vision of a new al-Qaeda was posted on jihadi websites. The Call for a Global Islamic Resistance was drafted by Abu Musab al-Suri, a Syrian mechanical engineer who had fought alongside Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and had long been considered a leading ideologue for al-Qaeda.

Its central theme was that al-Qaeda should be less of an organisation and more of an order, in which a central base would provide primarily ideological guidance to semi-autonomous cells around the world.

Al-Suri, who was captured in Pakistan in 2005, personified the global jihadi, with a career that spanned continents. Experts say his treatise has influenced jihadis through the internet, particularly in Europe. Whether by coincidence or design, his vision of the post-September 11 al-Qaeda has become a reality.

Six years after terrorists struck New York and Washington, al-Qaeda as an organisation has been severely undermined, its haven in Afghanistan destroyed and many of its leaders captured or killed. But the violent fanaticism it promotes has not only survived, it has proliferated - helped, many experts say, by the US-led "war on terror".

The al-Qaeda order indeed appears to be thriving, with new footholds emerging just as old ones are being suppressed. While crackdowns in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, for example, seem to have reduced the jihadi threat for now, frontlines are opening in North Africa and Lebanon.

Attacks by al-Qaeda-inspired militants have not reached the scale of September 11 but they have multiplied in number and diversified in geographic reach. Arab security officials say self-recruitment, largely via the internet, is replacing the radicalisation that once took place in mosques and religious schools.

According to western officials, an al-Qaeda core remains holed up in Waziristan on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, providing logistic support and training to some; and offering nothing more than inspiration to others.

Iraq has established itself as the most important new frontier. It plays the role of Afghanistan in the 1980s, a magnet for militants looking for jihad, or holy war. The US invasion and continued military presence, meanwhile, have provided a powerful narrative for recruiting jihadis in the Middle East and in Europe. Even more alarmingly, according to counter-terrorism officials, al-Qaeda in Iraq is aspiring to act as a regional base, sending militants to wage attacks abroad - including against tourist resorts, for example, in India.

"Strategically Iraq is the new source of manpower, a platform to operate against the west and a source of high-level expertise from former Iraqi army officers," says a western official.

Officials fear that al-Qaeda-inspired militants are looking to set up frontlines in Africa, Syria and the occupied Palestinian territories. Even in Iran, officials have seen indications that "al-Qaeda facilitators" are passing messages and money between the leadership in the Pakistan area and various jihadi groups. If so, it is not clear whether these operatives are there with the complicity of Iranian authorities, which consider the Sunni al-Qaeda a threat to Iran's Shia Islamic republic but also benefit from al-Qaeda's fight against the US in Iraq.

"Al-Qaeda as an operational organisation has become exceptionally weak because of sustained law enforcement and intelligence but al-Qaeda as an ideological organisation has achieved unprecedented and tremendous success," says Rohan Gunaratna, author of Inside al-Qaeda. "The biggest contribution of al-Qaeda is in shaping the future orientation of these [various] groups."

Some counter-terrorism officials, however, say that al-Qaeda central command is staging its own comeback, from its Waziristan base. Since a deal was reached between the Pakistani authorities and tribal chiefs last year, pressure on al-Qaeda operatives has lessened. The leaders have become better able to organise and communicate and, therefore, more capable of reaching out to jihadi groups elsewhere. Officials are concerned this could shift the focus of their attacks away from domestic acts and on to western targets.

"It's taken al-Qaeda a long time to rebuild external links. Over the past two years it has succeeded," says Gavin Proudley, chief of intelligence at Quest, a London-based consultancy.

Al-Qaeda leaders are encouraging groups to rebrand themselves as franchises, highlighting their links with central command. The first success came in Algeria, where the established Salafist Group for Call and Combat last September became "al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb".

So far, however, the link has been of greater propaganda than operational value, with no sign that attacks are being directed from Pakistan. But the GSPC is said by European and US officials to be running training camps in remote desert regions of the Sahel, bringing together militants from North Africa and beyond. This suggests it could represent a danger beyond its borders, and one that could extend to Europe.

Curiously, it is in the UK that al-Qaeda's Pakistan leadership so far has been able to make more direct inroads. In every plot uncovered, one element - either direction or money or knowhow - came from overseas, often from Pakistan, say UK officials.

There are reports that a closer relationship is emerging between core al-Qaeda and the organisation in Iraq. Mowaffak al-Rubaie, Iraq's national security adviser, says the June 2006 killing of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the former leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, dealt a serious blow to the group but also removed an independent-minded terrorist who had clashed with the Pakistani-based leaders. Since then, say Mr al-Rubaie and other experts, Zarqawi's replacement, Abu Ayoub al-Masri, an Egyptian, has brought the organisation back into the fold. Moreover, western officials say that Iraq's al-Qaeda has been partly supporting the core financially.

Iraq is not a haven for al-Qaeda sympathisers, as Afghanistan was under the Taliban regime. Al-Qaeda there is under a constant security clampdown and is rejected by the majority Shia, the minority Kurds and many Sunni Arabs. But experts say Iraq has magnified al-Qaeda's destructive reach, raising the prospects of a blowback effect, as better trained militants return to their home countries.

"Algeria is one example that illustrates that there's a correlation between home-grown Islamists and those coming back with skills and techniques learned in Iraq. And how does that apply to Europe? Well it's right on Europe's back door," says a senior US military officer.

In all this, it hardly matters, many experts say, whether Osama bin Laden is dead or alive. Christopher Heffelfinger, a senior analyst at West Point in the US, says: "I actually think he may be dead. But it's irrelevant. His ambition was to set up an Islamic awakening. I think he's done that."

Radicalising wave crosses the Atlantic

Radicalising wave crosses the Atlantic
By Stephen Fidler
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 5 2007 03:00 | Last updated: July 5 2007 03:00


There is little doubt from the rhetoric of al-Qaeda's leadership that the US remains its number one target. But the greatest risk of being killed by a terrorist is elsewhere.

The wave of radicalisation of young Muslims triggered by September 11 2001 and its aftermath has washed up on the other side of the Atlantic, leaving the countries of Europe as the western societies most at risk.

Within Europe, the UK appears to face the gravest threat. For the fourth successive year, British police and security services have been overwhelmed by the number and scale of the plots they have encountered. Peter Clarke, Britain's top anti-terrorism policeman, overspent his £100m budget last year by £21m.

In 2004, for the first time, the security services began to hear British groups talking of suicide attacks, and the discovery of two big plots turned the focusaway from north African groups and towards home-grown terrorists. Suicide bombers scored their first success on London's transport system the following year.

Polls show at least 100,000 people support terrorist attacks in the UK. Officials concede that they face a greater problem than any other country in Europe.

They describe a highly organised process of radicalisation among some British Muslims. Radicalisation is taking place in prisons, universities, mosques and perhaps even, as the failed attacks of the past week suggest, in hospitals.

The scale of the threat is amplified, officials say, by the ability of the radicals to travel to Pakistan.

Some 400,000 journeys are made there every year from Britain. The Pakistani government may be right in saying the problem is British - because most home-grown terrorists appear to be radicalising in the UK. But training in Pakistan may give lethality to their ambitions. Without bomb-making expertise gained in Pakistan by Mohammed Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer, the gang's suicide packs might never have exploded in London on July 7 2005.

The picture in continental Europe is different. There, say specialists, the threat comes less from the links with Pakistan and more from north Africa.

Anxieties about the seriousness of this threat have grown since last September 11, when Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda's number two, announced the formation of al-Qaeda of the Islamic Maghreb. Into this new group would be subsumed Algeria's Salafist Group for Call and Combat, known by its French initials, GSPC.

According to Baltasar Garzón, aSpanish judge and terrorism expert, the announcement suggests an attempt by al-Qaeda to regionalise struggles largely conducted previously by groups operating within national boundaries.

"I believe the biggest jihadist threat to continental Europe - not least for Spain - is al-Qaeda of the Islamic Maghreb [AQIM]," he said in May. "It's clear that investigations in various European countries show the most active groups - practically the only ones active in this field - are those with connections to the Maghreb."

He said the threat to Spain became clearer on December 20 2006 when Mr Zawahiri described the Spanish enclaves in Morocco of Ceuta and Melilla "as territory occupied by the crusaders that should be reclaimed by Islam".

According to the US-based Jamestown Institute, a group calling itself Ansar al-Islam in the MuslimDesert said on June 28 it would work alongside AQIM to "regain the lands of Andalusia", referring to the parts of the Iberian peninsula that were conquered by Muslims in the eighth century.

It was the second statement from the previously unknown group. Although there is no indication it was more than propaganda, it will reinforce concerns in Spain that it is among the chief targets in Europe for al-Qaeda. Those fears are echoed in France andItaly.

Jean-Louis Bruguière, a French judge, said last month Iraq was now playing the role that Afghanistan, Bosnia and Chechnya all have done in the past: as a training ground for jihadists.

"We are up against a new generation. These are Islamists from Europe and the Maghreb . . sent to Iraq to fight but also to train and commit attacks in Europe."

Struggle to vanquish the 'icon of jihad'

Struggle to vanquish the 'icon of jihad'
By Steve Negus, Iraq Correspondent
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 5 2007 03:00 | Last updated: July 5 2007 03:00


Once one target among many, al-Qaeda was last month designated by US commanders in Iraq as their number one enemy.

Offensives such as Arrowhead Ripper, a sweep by 10,000 troops of the Diyala valley north of Baghdad, are now aiming to break the power of the Iraqi franchise.

The US military blames al-Qaeda for the bomb attacks on civilians which feed Shia militia reprisals and continue Iraq's cycle of violence. Remove the radicals, they say, and peace with the more pragmatic Sunni groups becomes possible.

But some analysts question whether al-Qaeda really does have a monopoly on such attacks, and whether it is as pervasive a force as it is often portrayed.

The US military estimates that there are 5,000 "fully-fledged members" of al-Qaeda in Iraq, 5 per cent of whom are non-Iraqi, out of 20,000 or more insurgents.

Al-Qaeda itself said last October that it commanded 12,000 active fighters, with another 10,000 in training, in a statement declaring its links with an umbrella group, the so-called Islamic State of Iraq.

Analyst Anthony Cordesman, however, who describes al-Qaeda as an "informal, overlapping . . . group of networks", says both reporters and coalition spokesmen may exaggerate its importance: "When in doubt, you blame suicide bombings on foreign volunteers or al-Qaeda."

Although dozens of groups issue statements, the Islamic State in Iraq is one of the most prominent names.

Along with the Ansar al-Sunna group, it is usually said to represent a more extreme, religiously-oriented trend within the insurgency, espousing pan-Islamic jihad against the US presence in the region.

Other movements, such as the Islamic Army in Iraq and the Mujahideen Army, despite their religious-sounding names, are considered to have a more Iraqi Sunni nationalist orientation, focused on pushing out foreign forces and bringing down the Shia-dominated government.

Al-Qaeda's press statements claim attacks on "Crusaders" (US forces), "apostates" (Iraqi government forces), the "followers of Tareq al-Hashemi" (Sunni tribal militias, named after the Sunni Arab vice-president), and the "Army of the False Messiah" (the Shia Mahdi Army militia).

Notably absent from al-Qaeda's communiqués are the devastating attacks on civilian and Shia religious targets.

Kathleen Ridolfo, who co-authored a report on jihadist media published by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty in June, says that the Sunni nationalists make a point of rejecting such attacks, but al-Qaeda and other like-minded groups may subtly try to justify them.

"If you dig deeply through the debates within Islam over whether or not you can target or sacrifice civilians for the greater cause of striking the enemy, then proponents of the Islamic state will argue that you can," she says.

Regardless of its real strength, however, al-Qaeda does seem to have benefited from its leaders' talent for brand-name promotion.

The movement has its genesis in al-Tawhid wa al-Jihad, a radical network that US officials say began around the time of the 2003 US-led invasion. It became a household name in mid-2004 as its black banners cropped up in Sunni cities witnessing insurrection, and videotape of its leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi executing hostages was broadcast. The movement quickly capitalised on its notoriety. US military spokesmen often described Tawhid leaders as distributors of cash and other patronage, often obtained from donors outside Iraq, to smaller insurgent groups, persuading them to accept the organisation's "franchise". Tawhid scored a big coup in late 2004 when Mr Zarqawi negotiated its entry into the international al-Qaeda network.

A report released last year by the Brussels-based International Crisis Group says that this "centralising" process happened throughout the insurgency: "Progressively, as a result of fierce competition, smaller, less effective groups disappeared or merged with more successful, well-established and prestigious ones, such as [al-Qaeda, Ansar al-Sunna, and the Islamic Army]."

Despite the merger, the international al-Qaeda may have had little control over the Iraqi movement under Zarqawi and it certainly had reservations about some of its tactics, criticising Zarqawi's gruesome killing methods, including decapitating prisoners on video.

Iraqi officials and al-Qaeda experts say, however, that relations between the Iraqi franchise and al-Qaeda's leaders have significantly improved since Zarqawi's death in 2006 in a US air strike.

He was replaced by Abu Ayoub al-Masri - an Egyptian believed to have much closer ties to the core Afghan- and Pakistan-based leadership like Zawahiri, and who appears to be trying to alter his group's reputation as a foreign-dominated band of terrorists.

Mr Masri's "charm offensive" may also have made an impact on the movement's video publications - prisoners are shot, rather than beheaded. In April, according to the RFE/RL report, the movement put out a video called "The Mujahideen's Commitment To The Safety Of Muslims", showing fighters calling off an attack on a US convoy because civilians were nearby.

The propaganda campaign came as al-Qaeda's extremism seemed to be alienating other groups. This year, groups such as the Islamic Army in Iraq have lashed out at al-Qaeda for murdering other insurgents who did not accept its authority, and reportedly fought pitched battles with al-Qaeda militants in Sunni areas.

But Islamist websites suggest that considerable pressure has been brought on the Islamic Army to mend its fences with al-Qaeda - and other insurgent organisations may be reluctant to be perceived to be in direct conflict with a movement that has branded itself as an icon of jihad.

Al-Qaeda's combination of ideological cohesion and institutional decentralisation means that the US military still faces an uphill battle to isolate and defeat them.

Al-Qaeda No. 2 appears in new video

Al-Qaeda No. 2 appears in new video
© Reuters Limited
Thu Jul 5, 2007 12:42AM BST


Al-Qaeda’s No. 2 commander appeared on Wednesday in a new video on a Web site used by Islamist militant groups, urging unity in jihad and calling for the overthrow of “corrupt” Muslim governments in the region.

The English version of the title posted on the site was ”The Advice of One Concerned” and the video showed the Egyptian cleric Ayman al-Zawahri wearing a white robe, speaking in Arabic with English sub-titles.

The US-based SITE Institute, which monitors Islamist Web sites, released a transcript that appeared to match the 95-minute video produced by al-Qaeda’s media arm as-Sahab and monitored on the Internet by Reuters in Dubai.

Zawahri expounded at length in the video on what he calls the corruption of the Saudi Arabian royal family, condemned Palestinian concessions to Israel and criticized the Egyptian government as an ally of the United States.

The video was edited in a sophisticated way, incorporating clips from al Jazeera, US public television and other international news stations. At one point it invokes evidence from American journalist Bob Woodward’s book on Iraq, “Plan of Attack.”

It was unclear when Zawahri was speaking, but the video said it was produced in the Muslim lunar month which corresponds to mid-June to mid-July.

Zawahri lashed out at those who did not accept the “Islamic State of Iraq,” and said that it was crucial to the revival of an Islamic Caliphate.

US commanders say tribal leaders are increasingly turning against al-Qaeda, but Zawahri said there was growing support from the Iraqi people. “Today, the wind -- grace of Allah - is blowing against Washington,” he said.

In the transcript, Zawahri called for unity in Iraq. “The Mujahideen of Islam in Iraq of the Caliphate and Jihad are advancing with steady steps toward victory....” he said.

“The first thing which our beloved brothers in Iraq must realize is the critical nature of unity,” he said, calling on all Muslims to support the fight there and elsewhere.

He said the “long-term” plan for the movement consisted of fighting to change “corrupt and corruptive regimes” and “hurrying to the fields of jihad like Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia for jihadi preparation and training.”

In another similar passage he also mentioned north Africa, scene of recent attacks claimed by al-Qaeda.

He said there was no “single recipe for change” but that “force must be an element in the pursuit of change,” whether through a military coup, a popular uprising or civil disobedience against corrupt governments.

Gay Artists Open First Exhibition

Gay Artists Open First Exhibition
By Paul Varnell
Copyright by The Chicago Free Press
July 4, 2007


The Gay and Lesbian Artists Network/Chicago drew an impressive crowd of
200-250 viewers to the opening of "The First 40," its first group exhibition at the
North Lakeside Cultural Center, June 21. The title refers to the number of
pictures planned for the exhibition.

The exhibition was designed "to introduce GLANC to the general public,"
Curator David Joseph explained. "It showed the wide variety of art coming out of
the gay community in Chicago."

The show included paintings, watercolors, photography, pottery, sculpture,
stained glass, and constructions, illustrating the diverse media in which gay
and lesbian artists are currently working. The different styles of the paintings
alone--from representational to pop to abstract--indicate the range of
artistic traditions the artists draw on.

Joseph vigorously resisted the idea that there was any style or sensibility
that gay artists had in common. "Absolutely not," he said firmly.

The exhibition was not juried in advance. Instead, each artist was ask to
submit one piece that he or she thought representative of their work and showed
it to advantage. A committee of four independent judges used a two-step judging
process in which they selected what they thought was the best piece in each
of four categories--figurative, abstract, photography, and 3-dimensional--then
ranked those four pieces.

First prize was won by Rob Bondgren for "On Leave 2," a beach scene showing a
man in army fatigues, his shirt open and pants unzipped, smirking at the
viewer. Second prize was awarded to Pate Conaway for an untitled work consisting
of a wicker-like basket woven out of a single long green extension chord.

Third prize was won by David Joseph for "I Dream of Flowers (#2)" a painting
showing indistinct white objects on a red background. Jennifer Tobitz received
an "Honorable Mention" for "Hope in a Land of No Hope" an emotionally
manipulative photograph of an expressionless black woman.

The judging panel was composed of Jean Leigh, artist and owner of the Leigh
Gallery; Michelle Fire, art collector and owner of Big Chicks and Tweet; Nathan
Mason, Curator of Special Projects, Chicago Department of Cultural Affairs;
and Niki Nolan of the Interactive Arts and Media Department at Columbia
College. The judges served on a volunteer basis.

Judge Nathan Mason agreed with curator David Joseph that there was no
discernible gay sensibility or other commonality among the art works. Mason also
emphasized that although Bondgren's implicitly homoerotic "On Leave 2" won first
prize, the decision was not based its homoerotic content. "The judges thought
it was the best painting technically," Mason said. "We all admired its
painterly quality."

Other pieces worth singling out for attention could include Andrea Kaspryk,
"Reclining Nude Meditating," which may have an ancestor in Tamara de Lempicka's
"Beautiful Rafaela" (1927); art historian Michael Worley's mythological
painting "Perseus with the Head of Medusa," Daniel Nolan's painting of an
indistinct townscape viewed from above that may owe something to Cezanne; Pat Daley's
subtly amusing "Biker," a painting of a biker in a leather jacket with the
implausible gang name "Hell's Calligraphers;" and Becky Flory's "Good Measure No.
2," a whimsical wooden sculpture of carpenter ants engaged in building
construction, one working on a ladder, the other holding a blueprint.

GLANC is working on plans for an October exhibition at the new Center on
Halsted during Chicago Artists Month, according to Joseph, but details have not
been settled.

The current exhibition will be on display until a closing reception on Aug. 3
from 7-10 p.m. Many of the artist will be in attendance at that event.

*****

"The First Forty," an exhibition by the Gay and Artists Network-Chicago at
the North Lakeside Cultural Center, 6219 N. Sheridan Rd, 2nd floor. Open
Mon.-Fri. 9 a.m-5 p.m., Sat. 10:30-12:30, other times by appointment. Call (773)
517-7619.

Wednesday, July 04, 2007

When more is not better - Efforts to reduce risky multiple births yield mixed results

When more is not better - Efforts to reduce risky multiple births yield mixed results
By Shari Roan
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune and The Los Angeles Times
Published July 4, 2007

Last month, Brianna Morrison gave birth to six babies in Minneapolis. Less than a day later, Jenny Masche delivered six babies in a Phoenix hospital.

Both women had been treated for infertility and had used fertility-enhancing drugs.

The two families expressed joy, but many fertility doctors were dismayed. For years, doctors have been pushing to lower the rate of multiple births due to fertility treatment. Not only had two headline-grabbing births occurred in the same week, but several recent scientific papers revealed mixed results in the eight-year effort to reduce the U.S. multiple-birth rate.

One paper, published in May in the reproductive journal Fertility and Sterility, found that although the rate of higher-order multiples (triplets or more) has declined, the rate of twin births has increased.

"Higher-order multiples are not considered a success of assisted reproductive technology," says Dr. Anne Lyerly, chairwoman of the ethics committee for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Twin births, although seldom as medically complicated as higher-order multiples, are not ideal either, she says. "Success is really defined now as a singleton gestation."

The organization released a June statement in the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology on the ethical issues related to multiple-gestation pregnancies. It urged doctors to strive to avoid them and to clarify for patients the risks that arise in such pregnancies.

Using fewer embryos

Most of the decline in multiple births is because doctors have begun limiting the number of embryos transferred during in vitro fertilization to as few as possible -- ideally, just one.

But fertility drugs that induce or enhance ovulation remain "the loose cannons in the armamentarium used to induce pregnancies," according to an editorial by Dr. Howard Jones, a fertility specialist in Norfolk, Va., that was published in March in Fertility and Sterility.

"With IVF, there is great progress. But with infertility drugs, it's cruder and more unpredictable," says Dr. Steven Ory, president of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

In multiple-gestation pregnancies, women have increased risk of gestational diabetes, bleeding and pre-eclampsia (dangerously high blood pressure). Infants born as multiples are almost always premature and have higher rates of low birth weight, cerebral palsy, developmental delays, birth defects and death. The cost of multiple births can easily top $100,000.

The recent sextuplet births are no exception to such perils.

Four of the Morrison babies have died, and the others are in critical condition. The babies were born after only 22 weeks.

The Masche babies were born after 30 weeks' gestation and are in better shape. Jenny Masche suffered acute heart failure following delivery because of blood lost during the Caesarean section. "We sort of wince when these stories occur," Ory says. "We're certainly hopeful for the patients. But the public is largely unaware of the problems and complications many of these families face."

The public often sees only the celebrated side of multiple births, such as the recent 10th birthday party for the Boniello sextuplets of New York who, at the time of their births, were only the third set of U.S. sextuplets to survive.



Lower risk with IVF

Women undergoing IVF today face a much lower risk of multiple pregnancy than they once did. As IVF techniques have improved, doctors are finding they can achieve high pregnancy rates -- especially in women younger than 35 -- while transferring only one or two embryos to the uterus.

But fertility drugs used to induce ovulation are cheaper than IVF and are still used by many women. One cycle of IVF can cost $10,000 while fertility drugs can cost a few hundred dollars. Because the results can be harder to control than IVF, the drugs can carry a higher risk of multiple births. The May Fertility and Sterility study estimated the percentage of multiple births due to ovulation induction drugs at 21 percent for twins, 37 percent for triplets and 62 percent for quadruplets.

Fertility drugs are given to a woman who does not ovulate so that her ovaries will release at least one mature egg. Conception can occur naturally, via artificial insemination, or the eggs can be used in IVF.

Medical tie stuns Britain - Several sources link 8 in health care as suspects in attacks

Medical tie stuns Britain - Several sources link 8 in health care as suspects in attacks
By Tom Hundley
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 4, 2007

LONDON -- Already reeling from the news that at least three of the suspects arrested in last week's failed terrorist attacks in London and Glasgow are doctors, Britons now are trying to cope with the possibility that all eight of those arrested so far were employed by the publicly funded National Health Service.

Although British police have said they believe the attacks were planned by Islamic militants, authorities have not yet officially named any of the suspects. But several have been named in media reports relying on police sources, hospital officials, co-workers, relatives and neighbors.

"Like others, we were shocked to hear of the recent attempted bombings," said Dr. Hamis Meldrum, chairman of the British Medical Association. "The news that members of a caring profession may be involved in these atrocities was even more appalling."

Unlikely suspects

One suspect, Mohammed Asha, is a 26-year-old neurosurgeon and Jordanian citizen of Palestinian descent. He graduated from the University of Jordan in Amman in 2004 and won a place at the University of Birmingham's medical school the following year. He began working for the NHS in Shrewsbury and Telford in 2006 and recently moved to the University Hospital of North Staffordshire, 35 miles from Liverpool.

He and his wife, Marwah Da'na Asha, a lab technician at the same hospital, were arrested by police late Saturday on a highway about 12 miles from their home.

Azmi Mahafzah, one of Mohammed Asha's instructors in Jordan, said he knew him during his studies and training from 1998 to 2004. "I didn't even have the impression that he was religious," he told The Associated Press. "He is not a fanatic type of person."

His father, Jameel Abdul-Qader Asha, told the Los Angeles Times that his son had been more interested in science than religion. "He didn't have time to scratch his head," he said. "All he did was study."

Two other suspects have been identified as Bilal Abdullah and Khalid Ahmed. Abdullah, an Iraqi, obtained his medical degree in Baghdad in 2004 and began working for the NHS in Scotland the same year. He served as a locum, or temporary substitute doctor at the Royal Alexandra Hospital near Glasgow, specializing in the treatment of diabetes, according to co-workers.

Ahmed is a doctor at the same hospital, according to the British Broadcasting Corp. He is believed to have driven the Jeep Cherokee that slammed into the Glasgow Airport terminal Saturday in an unsuccessful suicide bombing attempt, while Abdullah was a passenger in the car.

A fourth doctor, Mohammed Haneef, 27, an Indian national, was arrested by Australian police Monday at Brisbane Airport in Queensland as he tried to board a flight to India with a one-way ticket, Australian authorities said.

Like Asha and at least one other suspect, Haneef had been living in the Liverpool area until September when he accepted a position as registrar at the Gold Coast Hospital in Southport, near Brisbane.

"He was very quiet, unassuming; he spoke with an English accent," said Steve Bosher, Haneef's landlord in Australia.

Bosher said by phone that Haneef and his wife lived unobtrusively in their two-bedroom apartment. "They were obviously very religious," he said. "She wore a head scarf, but he was a doctor. He dressed the way you expect a doctor to dress."

'Gobsmacked' by arrest

Bosher said Haneef's wife had returned to India several weeks ago. When he learned of his tenant's arrest, Bosher said he was "gobsmacked."

Queensland Premier Peter Beattie said Haneef "was regarded by the hospital as, in many senses, a model citizen -- excellent references and so on."

Another suspect arrested in Liverpool on Sunday trained at the same medical school in India as Haneef, according to British media reports.

Two others arrested since the plot began to unravel and whose names have not been made public appear to have worked as junior doctors or medics for the NHS in Royal Alexandra in Glasgow, according to British media reports. They have been described as Saudi nationals.

Shock, outrage and unease greeted the news that so many suspects are in the medical profession. But the British Medical Association's Meldrum said he hoped that a backlash against foreign doctors could be avoided.

"Overseas doctors have made an invaluable contribution to the NHS over the years and it would be dreadful if the trust that exists between patients and doctors, whatever their background, was harmed by these events," he said in a statement.

The British health-care system relies heavily on doctors who receive their training abroad. The General Medical Register shows that 128,000 of Britain's 277,000 doctors have degrees from foreign medical schools.

As shocking as it is for doctors to have possibly been involved in a terrorism plot that could have killed or maimed hundreds, it is not unheard of for highly educated people to be drawn to extremist organizations. Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's top deputy in Al Qaeda, is a medical doctor.

On Friday, London police defused two large car bombs targeted at the heart of the city's theater and entertainment district. The following day, Ahmed and Abdullah allegedly drove the Jeep Cherokee packed with propane canisters into the main terminal of Glasgow Airport.

The vehicle burst into flames, but it did not explode. The only serious injury was sustained by the driver, who was seen pouring gasoline over himself. He is now being treated for serious burns in the same Glasgow hospital where he once treated patients.

Police were reportedly hot on the trail of Abdullah and Ahmed based on information they gleaned from cell phones left in the London car bombs. The cell phones were supposed to serve as detonators.

Two more suspects were arrested on suspicion of terrorism offenses Tuesday in Blackburn, an industrial town near Manchester, but it was unclear if these arrests are connected with the London and Glasgow incidents.

Heathrow bomb scare

London remained on edge Tuesday after a bomb scare at Heathrow Airport shut down one of its four terminals for several hours. Rush-hour commuters in the city also were delayed when police carried out a controlled explosion at the Hammersmith Underground station after a suspicious package caused alarm.

----------



thundley@tribune.com

GOP field is trailing in run for the money - In reversal, Dems are fundraising leaders

GOP field is trailing in run for the money - In reversal, Dems are fundraising leaders
By Jill Zuckman and Naftali Bendavid, Washington Bureau Tribune staff reporter John McCormick contributed to this report from Iowa
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 4, 2007

WASHINGTON -- One day after Sen. John McCain scaled back his campaign operation for lack of funds, Mitt Romney proved once again that he has the deep pockets necessary to pay for his presidential campaign, while Rudolph Giuliani demonstrated a knack for bringing in big money.

But unlike most presidential contests, Republicans are lagging sharply behind Democrats in fundraising. That disparity signals an energized Democratic base compared with Republicans, who are dispirited after losing control of Congress and watching President Bush's job approval ratings plummet under the weight of the Iraq war.

"Public opinion polls say Democrats are much more excited about their candidates than Republicans are about theirs," said Stephen Wayne, a government professor at Georgetown University. "There is a belief that it will be a Democratic year. So if you are enthusiastic about your candidates and you think you are going to win, those are two reasons that Democrats are doing much better at this point."

Romney's campaign announced Tuesday that the former Massachusetts governor raised $14 million in the second quarter of this year and lent himself $6.5 million of his own money.

At the same time, Giuliani officials crowed that the former New York City mayor had raised $17 million for the same period, the most of any Republican candidate, with $15 million of that to be used for the primary campaign rather than the general election. Romney's funds are strictly for the primary, usually considered the true measure of financial strength at this stage of the campaign.

But the figures are dwarfed by those of the Democrats. Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois announced this week that he had raised $32.5 million in the second quarter, and Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York has brought in $27 million, meaning the top Democrats are close to doubling the fundraising of their GOP counterparts.

That gap, analysts said, suggests far more excitement among rank-and-file Democrats for their top candidates. In the meantime, Republicans' lack of enthusiasm for their current hopefuls has sparked an interest in former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson.

Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, attributed the GOP's money struggles to a broad malaise within the party. Republican voters, he said, "are depressed. Things are going poorly. Immigration split the party, Iraq is splitting them more than they're admitting. You've got a third of Republicans unhappy with Bush administration policies in Iraq, and I would predict flatly that number will increase."

Still, the Republican campaigns portrayed their fundraising numbers as healthy and a sign of momentum.

"Since joining Team Rudy, I have been increasingly encouraged by the response to Rudy's message across the country," said Anne Dunsmore, Giuliani's deputy campaign manager. "That strong support translates into an increase in the number of events, donors and dollars, which will allow us not only to compete and win the primary but to win the general election."

Momentum seen

Romney's aides similarly portrayed their total as a sign of growing support. "Gov. Romney's momentum is the result of his message, which is centered around changing the status quo and transforming Washington," said campaign spokesman Kevin Madden.

The most important figure, however, is how much cash each campaign currently has in the bank -- that is, income minus expenditures. Giuliani said he has $15 million and no debt; Romney reported $12 million, and McCain, once considered the Republican front-runner, has just $2 million.

Altogether, Romney has raised $43.9 million this year, making him the leading money-raiser among Republican candidates. Discounting his own contributions, he has raised $35 million so far this year, purely for the primaries. Giuliani and McCain are raising funds for both the primaries and the general election. Giuliani has raised a combined $32 million for the year. And McCain trailed them both, with a combined $24.3 million.

While Giuliani's fundraising has been increasing, however, Romney's total fell short of the first quarter, when he brought in $20.6 million and lent himself $2.35 million.

Romney may need as much money as he can get because he is burning through it. The Nielsen Co. said Monday that Romney has placed more local television ads than all the other presidential candidates combined. Romney has run his ads in seven markets, including Iowa and New Hampshire.

Those ads, however, appear to have paid off. Romney has boosted his profile, as well as his poll numbers, in early voting states.

The excitement gap between the parties is being reflected in other ways. Obama, for example, has reported receiving contributions from 258,000 people, suggesting a broad base of support. Romney's campaign said its contributions came from 80,000 individuals, and McCain officials said 72,000 people contributed to their effort. Neither Giuliani's nor Clinton's campaigns released the number of their donors.

Low satisfaction

Lawrence Jacobs, a political scientist at the University of Minnesota, cited a recent poll showing that while two-thirds of Democrats were satisfied with their candidates, a similar number of Republicans were dissatisfied with theirs.

It is this displeasure that has fueled a drive to bring Thompson into the race.

The fundraising disparity is particularly notable because Republicans usually out-raise Democrats, relying on a greater number of relatively well-off contributors willing to write them checks. But this year, rank-and-file Democrats' frustration with years of Republican rule, combined with a sense of optimism that they might win the presidential election, has capsized the usual pattern.

"Can you remember a cycle like this? I can't," Sabato said. "I can't remember Democrats out-raising Republicans without an incumbent."

----------



jzuckman@tribune.com

nbendavid@tribune.com

5,500 aerial shells bring lots of oohs, aahs

5,500 aerial shells bring lots of oohs, aahs
By Emma Graves Fitzsimmons
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 4, 2007


More than a million people packed the downtown lakefront for a view of Tuesday's fireworks on the eve of the 4th of July. It may not have been the nation's biggest Independence Day show, but city officials said it was the "first and best," noting that the show's producer, Melrose Pyrotechnics, recently snagged first place at an international fireworks competition in Montreal.

The annual lakefront extravaganza Tuesday featured 500 additional shells, bringing the total to 5,500 shells. The explosions were set to a 20-minute concert that included such classic, patriotic musical pieces as the "1812 Overture" and "Stars and Stripes Forever."

The city's Independence Day fireworks display joined forces with Taste of Chicago in 1981. The fireworks came about 9:30 p.m. after a concert by the Grant Park Orchestra and other events throughout the day to accommodate the sea of people arriving early to stake out a spot.

"It is a battle like the Old West -- everyone is searching for a place to claim for themselves," observed Cindy Gatziolis, a spokeswoman with the Mayor's Office of Special Events.

Madhur Lindi and his wife, Rupali, were among the early arrivals for the fireworks display. The Woodridge couple spent the day munching on pizza and enjoying ice cream at the Taste and managed to find a spot on the grass along the lakefront in Grant Park about an hour before the fireworks began.

"If the boats on the lake have the front-row seats [for the fireworks], than we're in the second row," Madhur Lindi said.

For Jorge Arceo, the owner of a Mexican restaurant near Midway Airport, this year's 4th of July lakefront celebration took on special meaning.

"It's special because my wife who is from Mexico will soon be taking her test to become an American citizen," he said as he watched the fireworks with his wife, Analine, 31; his two sons, Jorge, 5, and Joshua, 2; and about a dozen friends and other family members. "My wife is out here celebrating being an American just like everyone else."

City officials had worried rain showers might interrupt the celebration, but it held off, until after the show when a light sprinkle began to fall. It was a perfect warm, but breezy night for the outdoor gathering of families and friends parked on blankets and lawn chairs.

As one might expect, the fireworks were especially thrilling for youngsters in the crowd. Cindy Rivera, 8, of Plainfield, grabbed her father Jose's arm and shouted, "Look Daddy, it's raining stars," as the fireworks exploded.

The show came during a week in which local officials had beefed up security following terrorist threats in Britain.

Special precautions had been taken at Union Station and by CTA officials, and Chicago police monitored the huge crowds in and around the downtown area from a command center in the Loop.

An abbreviated version of the fireworks display will take place Wednesday and Thursday for those who missed Tuesday night's big show.

-----------

efitzsimmons@tribune.com

Hilton selling to Blackstone - Hotel giant agrees to deal for $26 billion

Hilton selling to Blackstone - Hotel giant agrees to deal for $26 billion
By Kathy Bergen, Tribune staff reporter.
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune and The Associated Press
Published July 4, 2007

Hilton Hotels Corp., a global behemoth with a strong presence and long history in Chicago, will be purchased by the Blackstone Group LP in a deal valued at about $26 billion, the companies said Tuesday.

The deal is a testament to the unbridled buying spree sweeping through the private-equity market.

Blackstone, which owns more than 100,000 hotel rooms in the U.S. and Europe, is staking out a much larger footprint in the hotel industry market with this deal, which is due to close in the fourth quarter.

The New York-based private-equity firm said it plans to invest in Hilton and does not anticipate any significant divestitures after the deal, in which it will pay $18.5 billion in cash and assume $7.5 billion of debt.

Beverly Hills-based Hilton, which was headquartered in Chicago earlier in its history, owns, manages or franchises more than 2,800 hotels and 480,000 rooms in 76 countries and territories. Those properties employ 100,000 people.

In Chicago the company owns the Hilton Chicago and the Hilton Chicago O'Hare. In addition it manages the Palmer House Hilton, the Drake and the Conrad, and it operates a host of brands, including Doubletree, Embassy Suites, Hilton Garden Inns, Hampton Inns and Homewood Suites.

In gaining a foothold in Chicago, founder Conrad Hilton bought two stunning Chicago convention hotels, the Stevens Hotel and the Palmer House, in 1945 -- huge deals in their own right.

The Stevens, now the Hilton Chicago, was the largest hotel in the world at that time. Both hotels were among the city's swankiest properties, with ornate lobbies and big ballrooms that played host to the city's movers and shakers.

Thor Equities LLC, a New York developer, bought the Palmer House from Hilton in 2005 for $230 million.

Hilton Hotels, which started in Texas in 1919, was headquartered here for a time, departing for Beverly Hills in the 1950s, according to spokeswoman Kathy Shepard.

"Hilton had a big play and presence in Chicago," said Ted Mandigo, an Elmhurst-based hotel consultant.

The Blackstone deal is reflective of a trend of private equity buying up hotel properties, he noted.

"Absolutely, it's huge," he said.

Hilton's expansion plans, especially in new territories such as India, and the steady stream of fees the company gets for managing franchised properties worldwide, proved attractive to Blackstone, said Jonathan Galaviz, a partner at Globalysis Ltd., a Las Vegas-based consultancy.

"I would expect to see continuing interest from private equity in travel and leisure sector assets as consumer disposable income increases in places like China and India and Baby Boomers here shift to the leisure part of their lives," he said.

Also, hotel properties are proving attractive right now because the high costs for building and land acquisition are putting a damper on new construction, minimizing new competition, Mandigo said.

"And we're still seeing increases in room rates above inflation ... and occupancy remains strong," said Mandigo. "Hotels will be very strong performers, at least in the short term, with good years going out to 2012, which justifies the purchase prices and aggressive acquisition going on."

And sellers are finding better prices in the private market, he said, because stock market investors tend to focus on operations' growth and to overlook real estate appreciation.

The trend raises questions about the ultimate disposition of the Chicago-based Global Hyatt Corp., owned by the billionaire Pritzker family. The family has agreed to break up its empire and split the proceeds among 11 heirs, leading to speculation that the company could be taken public.

"It could be a private deal," Mandigo said, "but I still think the value will be created by a stock deal. That establishes value in the shares."

The company so far has not committed to a course of action.

For Hilton, the Blackstone deal likely will lead to a more aggressive competitive stance, Mandigo said.

"There will be pressure to be more innovative and creative," he said.

Blackstone, whose holdings range from limited service properties such as La Quinta Inns and Suites to LXR Luxury Resorts and Hotels, said it intends to invest in the Hilton properties and brands.

The company said Tuesday it has invested approximately $1 billion in redevelopment capital in its LXR properties over the last three years.

Hilton investors will receive $47.50 a share, or 32 percent more than Hilton's closing price before the announcement Tuesday afternoon. Earlier Tuesday, shares of Hilton has risen $2.18, or 6.4 percent, to close at $36.05 on the New York Stock Exchange.

----------

kbergen@tribune.com

- - -

Building a hotel empire

Blackstone Group will acquire Hilton Hotels Corp., which owns the Hilton Chicago and manages the Drake Hotel and the Palmer House Hilton in Chicago, in a transaction valued at $26 billion.

1946: Hilton Hotels Corp. is formed and listed on the New York Stock Exchange, with Conrad Hilton as president.

1954: Hilton purchases The Statler Hotel Co.

1964: Hilton International spins off as a separate corporation, with Conrad Hilton as president.

1967: Hilton International is acquired by TWA; Conrad Hilton continues as chairman of the board.

1979: Conrad Hilton dies at age 91; Barron Hilton is named chairman.

1996: Stephen F. Bollenbach is named president and chief executive, becoming the first person in the company's history to hold the title of CEO whose last name is not Hilton. Also, Hilton acquires Bally Entertainment Corp.

1999: Hilton Hotels Corp. acquires Promus Hotel Corp., expanding its brands to include Doubletree, Embassy Suites Hotels, Hampton Inn, Hampton Inn & Suites and Homewood Suites by Hilton.

2006: Hilton Hotels Corp. acquires the lodging assets of Hilton Group PLC, reuniting the brand's international and North American operations.

Source: Hilton Hotels Corp.

BBC reporter freed by captors in Gaza - Hamas had pledged to secure his release

BBC reporter freed by captors in Gaza - Hamas had pledged to secure his release
By Joel Greenberg
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 4, 2007
JERUSALEM -- Alan Johnston, the British Broadcasting Corp. reporter held hostage in Gaza since March 12, was released by his captors early Wednesday, ending the longest kidnapping ordeal of a foreign journalist in the Gaza Strip.

Looking gaunt, Johnston, surrounded by members of Hamas's armed wing and security force, was brought to the office of the dismissed Palestinian prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas, and later driven to the Erez Crossing to Israel.

He appeared physically unharmed and at one point smiled to the crush of photographers around him.

"It's just the most fantastic thing to be free. ... I think I'm OK," Johnston said in a telephone interview with BBC television. "It was an extraordinary level of stress and psychological pressure for a long time, and obviously difficult to keep your mind in the right place, a constant battle. I do feel I probably got through it as well as I could have. I probably won't know for a while."

The release was a public relations and political success for Hamas, which took over the Gaza Strip last month, routing forces of the rival Fatah movement and establishing itself as the sole authority in the impoverished territory.

Hamas spokesmen had pledged to secure Johnston's release, a case followed around the world and a test of the Islamic movement's ability to re-establish security in lawless Gaza, which has been plagued with deadly clan and factional rivalries.

"The government is serious about imposing security, stability and order in this part of our homeland," Haniyeh said at a news conference with Johnston in his office.

Since taking over Gaza, Hamas has been anxious to demonstrate that it can restore law and order to the area, posting members of its armed wing and security force on the streets, collecting weapons from rivals who had served in the Fatah-dominated security forces, and carrying out drug raids.

Mahmoud Zahar, a top Hamas leader involved in the contacts leading to Johnston's release, said there were "no conditions at all" attached to freeing him.

Johnston, the only Western correspondent living in Gaza, had been held by the shadowy Army of Islam, a group affiliated with the powerful Doghmush clan and apparently inspired by Al Qaeda. The group had demanded the release of a radical Muslim cleric held in Britain, known as Abu Qutada, who had been convicted in Jordan of bomb plots against foreign tourists.

Since taking over Gaza, Hamas has steadily increased the pressure on Johnston's captors, and on Tuesday its forces surrounded the Doghmush clan's stronghold in Gaza City, posting gunmen on rooftops of surrounding buildings. On Monday, Hamas security men arrested the Army of Islam's spokesman, an apparent attempt to gain a bargaining chip for Johnston's release.

Last week the Army of Islam released a video showing Johnston wearing what he said was an explosives belt and warning against any attempt to release him by force.

"It was an appalling experience, as you can imagine: 16 weeks kidnapped, sometimes occasionally quite terrifiying," Johnston told the BBC. "I didn't know when it was going to end and it was hard to imagine normal life again, many times dreaming of being free and always waking up back in that room."

'Like being buried alive'

At the news conference in Haniyeh's office, Johnston said his captivity was "like being buried alive, really, removed from the world ... in the hands of people who were dangerous and unpredictable."

Johnston said his captors seemed "very comfortable and very secure in their operation" until the Hamas takeover of Gaza, when they became "much more nervous, and I began to feel that perhaps this was coming to an end." He said he was moved from one location to another in the days before his release.

"If it had not been for that serious Hamas pressure, that commitment to tidy up Gaza's many security problems, I might have been in that room for a lot longer," Johnston said.

He added that when negotiations for his release were going badly, he was shackled for 24 hours and his captors "talked about the possibility of killing me in the next few days." He said that on the first night of his captivity he was awakened at 3 a.m., hooded and taken outside.

"You wonder at that point how it's going to end, but as time went on it felt less and less likely that I was going to be killed," he said.

Johnston said he was able to listen to the BBC World Service on a radio while in captivity, and to follow expressions of support for him from Palestinian journalists in Gaza and from colleagues and people around the world.

The BBC, British diplomats and the Palestinian authorities in Gaza had for months conducted quiet negotiations with Johnston's captors for his release. But disputes between Hamas and Fatah over control of security in the territory, which erupted in repeated bouts of factional fighting, hampered efforts to free the reporter.

Haniyeh said the success in freeing Johnston showed that through common effort, Palestinians could "liberate the land of Palestine," and he appealed to Fatah leaders in the West Bank to renew dialogue with Hamas on political cooperation. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, the leader of Fatah, has rejected any talks with Hamas leaders, calling them murderers, and has appointed his own government in the West Bank.

The U.S., European Union and Israel have backed Abbas. They classify Hamas, which carried out dozens of suicide bombings in Israel, a terrorist organization and refuse to deal with it.

Israeli soldier still captive

Johnston was the longest-held foreign journalist kidnapped in the Gaza Strip. A reporter and cameraman from Fox News were kidnapped and held last year for nearly two weeks, before being released unharmed.

More than a dozen foreigners have been kidnapped in the Gaza Strip by armed groups in recent years, and have usually been released after a few hours or days in exchange for promises of jobs and the redress of other grievances.

Israeli Cpl. Gilad Shalit, kidnapped in June 2006 by militants from Hamas and allied groups in a cross-border raid, remains in captivity in Gaza. Haniyeh said he hoped the release of Johnston would lead to an "honorable" prisoner exchange with Israel that would free the soldier. ----------

jogreenberg@tribune.com

Boston Globe Editorial - The British way

Boston Globe Editorial - The British way
Copyright By The Boston Globe
Published: July 3, 2007


Sheer luck saved large numbers of people from being killed or wounded late last week in attempted car bombings in central London and Glasgow Airport. Because detonators failed to ignite propane canisters in two parked cars in London, Scotland Yard could trace numbers from mobile phones found in those cars. Yet even though British authorities had fortune on their side, their rapid and coordinated response still offers an example of how a liberal democracy can work to prevent and punish terrorism - without operating outside the law or sacrificing individual liberties.

In the two years since bombs exploded in London's transit system, Britain has kept close watch on extremists, extradited those who are wanted for crimes committed in other countries and explored the affiliations of individuals involved in terrorist plots.

The British approach is not without its questionable features. Under a controversial legal change instituted after the 2005 bombings, police may hold a terrorist suspect for 28 days without issuing an indictment.

Nonetheless, there are worthwhile lessons to be learned from the British effort. In their effort to deal with terrorism, authorities can work within the law. They do not require unconstrained power.

The threat from suicidal fanatics is dreadful enough without inflating it into an unbounded long war on terrorism. It is a threat to be countered by means of sound intelligence, conventional police work, legal adaptations that do not create a law-free zone, and leadership that distinguishes law-abiding communities from the crazed Islamist ideologues that prey upon them.

Britain is fighting terrorists without branding them unlawful enemy combatants, without torturing them and without frightening the populace with evocations of an apocalyptic war between good and evil.

International Herald Tribune Editorial - Soft on crime

International Herald Tribune Editorial - Soft on crime
Copyright by The International Herald Tribune
Published: July 3, 2007


When he was running for president, George W. Bush loved to contrast his law-abiding morality with that of President Bill Clinton, who was charged with perjury and acquitted. For Bush, the candidate, "politics, after a time of tarnished ideals, can be higher and better."

Not so for Bush, the president. Judging from his decision Monday to commute the 30-month sentence of I. Lewis Libby Jr. - who was charged with perjury and convicted - untarnished ideals are less of a priority than protecting the secrets of his inner circle and mollifying the tiny slice of right-wing Americans left in his political base.

Libby was convicted of lying to federal agents investigating the leak of the name of a covert CIA operative, Valerie Wilson. Her husband, Joseph Wilson, was asked to investigate a central claim in Bush's drive to war with Iraq - whether Iraq tried to purchase uranium from Africa. Wilson concluded that Iraq had not done that and had the temerity to share those conclusions with the American public. It seems clear from the record that Vice President Dick Cheney organized a campaign to discredit Wilson. And Libby, who was Cheney's chief of staff, was willing to lie to protect his boss.

All of this put immense pressure on the president to do something before Libby went to jail. But none of it was justification for the baldly political act of commuting his sentence.

Bush's assertion that he respected the verdict but considered the sentence excessive only underscored the way this president is tough on crime when it's committed by common folk. As governor of Texas, he was infamous for joking about the impending execution of Karla Faye Tucker, a killer who became a born-again Christian on death row. As president, he has repeatedly put himself and his team, especially Cheney, above the law.

Presidents have the power to grant clemency and pardons. But in this case, Bush did not sound like a leader making tough decisions about justice. He sounded like a man worried about what a former loyalist might say when actually staring into a prison cell.

International Herald Tribune Editorial - Through others' eyes

International Herald Tribune Editorial - Through others' eyes
Cop[yright by International Herald Tribune
Published: July 3, 2007


The central finding of the latest Pew global opinion poll is, alas, drearily familiar: President George W. Bush and his misguided war in Iraq have dragged the United States far, far down in the world's eyes.

The only good news - and it's not much comfort - is that most countries give higher ratings to the American people than to the country. That means a change of government could bring a change of attitude toward America. But there is a long way to go, especially to correct the perception that the United States promotes its values globally not because they are universally good, but because they are good for American interests.

The survey found that majorities or pluralities in 33 of the 47 countries polled expressed a dislike of American ideas about democracy, with the hostility highest in three allies: Turkey, France and Pakistan. The poll also showed a widespread perception that Washington acts without considering the interests of other countries. And strong majorities everywhere saw the United States as the worst culprit in "hurting the world's environment."

What the Pew poll reflects is a profound disappointment in America's failure to live up to its own ideals and standards. Ponder this: Two-thirds of American respondents said it was good that "American ideas and customs were spreading around the world." Yet two-thirds or more of the respondents in 26 other countries, and majorities in another 10, disagreed, including former pro-American bastions like Britain, Poland, Turkey, Kuwait and Indonesia.

Bush and his team are famous for not listening to anyone but themselves. But they need to listen to what the rest of the world is saying when they refuse to plan for a rational exit from Iraq or block serious efforts to control global warming or insist that the time is still not right for an Israeli-Palestinian settlement. It's not just their reputation that is suffering. It's America's.

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

A political program to exit Iraq

A political program to exit Iraq
By Henry A. Kissinger Tribune Media Services
Copyright by The Interenational Herald Tribune
Published: July 2, 2007


The war in Iraq is approaching a kind of self-imposed climax. Public disenchantment is palpable. Congress will surely press for an accelerated, if not total, withdrawal of American forces. Demands for a political solution are likely to mount.

But precipitate withdrawal would produce a disaster. It would not end the war but shift it to other areas, like Lebanon or Jordan or Saudi Arabia. The war between the Iraqi factions would intensify. The demonstration of American impotence would embolden radical Islamism and further radicalize its disciples from Indonesia and India to the suburbs of European capitals.

We face a number of paradoxes. Military victory, in the sense of establishing a government capable of enforcing its writ throughout Iraq, is not possible in a time frame tolerated by the American political process. Yet no political solution is conceivable in isolation from the situation on the ground.

What America and the world need is not unilateral withdrawal but a vision by the administration of a sustainable political end to the conflict. Withdrawals must grow out of a political solution, not the other way around.

None of Iraq's neighbors, not even Iran, is in a position to dominate the situation against the opposition of all the other interested parties. Is it possible to build a sustainable outcome on such considerations?

The answer must be sought on three levels: the internal, the regional and the international.

The internal parties - the Shiites, the Sunnis and the Kurds - have been subjected to insistent American appeals to achieve national reconciliation. But groups that have been conducting blood feuds with one another for centuries are, not surprisingly, struggling in their efforts to compose their differences by constitutional means. They need the buttress of a diplomatic process that could provide international support for carrying out any internal agreements reached or to contain their conflict if the internal parties cannot agree and Iraq breaks up.

The American goal should be an international agreement regarding the international status of Iraq. It would test whether the neighbors of Iraq as well as some more distant countries are prepared to translate general concepts into converging policies. It would provide a legal and political framework to resist violations. These are the meaningful benchmarks against which to test American withdrawals.

The reason why such a diplomacy may prove feasible is that the continuation of Iraq's current crisis presents all of Iraq's neighbors with mounting problems. The longer the war in Iraq rages, the more likely will be the breakup of the country into sectarian units.

Turkey has repeatedly emphasized that it would resist such a breakup by force because of the radicalizing impact that a Kurdish state could have on Turkey's large Kurdish population. But this would bring Turkey into unwanted conflict with the United States and open a Pandora's box of other interventions.

Saudi Arabia and Jordan dread Shiite domination of Iraq, especially if the Baghdad regime threatens to become a satellite of Iran. The various Gulf sheikhdoms, the largest of which is Kuwait, find themselves in an even more threatened position. Syria's attitudes are likely to be more ambivalent. Its ties to Iran represent both a claim to status and a looming vulnerability.

Given a wise and determined American diplomacy, even Iran may be brought to conclude that the risks of continued turmoil outweigh the temptations before it.

To be sure, Iranian leaders may believe that the wind is at their backs, that the moment is uniquely favorable to realize millennial visions of a reincarnated Persian empire or a reversal of the Shiite-Sunni split under Shiite domination. On the other hand, if prudent leaders exist - which remains to be determined - they might come to the conclusion that they had better treat these advantages as a bargaining chip in a negotiation rather than risk them in a contest over domination of the region.

No American president will, in the end, acquiesce once the full consequences of Iranian domination of the region become apparent. Russia will have its own reasons, principally the fear of the radicalization of its own Islamic minority, to begin resisting Iranian and radical Islamist domination of the Gulf. Combined with the international controversy over its nuclear weapons program, Iran's challenge could come to be perceived by its leaders to pose excessive risks.

Whether or whenever Iran reaches these conclusions, two conditions will have to be met: First, no serious diplomacy can be based on the premise that the United States is the supplicant. America and its allies must demonstrate a determination to vindicate their vital interests that Iran will find credible. Second, the United States will need to put forward a diplomatic position that acknowledges the legitimate security interests of Iran.

Such a negotiation must be initiated within a genuinely multilateral forum. A dramatic bilateral Iranian-U.S. negotiation would magnify all the region's insecurities. For if Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait - which have entrusted their security primarily to the United States - become convinced that an Iranian-U.S. condominium is looming, a race for Tehran's favor may bring about the disintegration of all resolve.

Within a multilateral framework, the United States will be able to conduct individual conversations with the key participants, as has happened in the six-party forum on North Korea.

A forum for such an effort already exists in the foreign ministers' conference that met recently at Sharm el-Sheikh. It is in the United States' interest to turn the conference into a working enterprise under strong, if discreet, American leadership.

The purpose of such a forum should be to define the international status of the emerging Iraqi political structure into a series of reciprocal obligations. Iraq would continue to evolve as a sovereign state but agree to place itself under some international restraint in return for specific guarantees.

In such a scheme, the United States-led multinational force would be gradually transformed into an agent of that arrangement, along the lines of the Bosnian settlement in the Balkans.

All this suggests a three-tiered international effort: an intensified negotiation among the Iraqi parties; a regional forum like the Sharm el-Sheikh conference to elaborate an international transition status for Iraq; and a broader conference to establish the peacekeeping and verification dimensions. The rest of the world cannot indefinitely pretend to be bystanders to a process that could engulf them through their default.

Neither the international system nor American public opinion will accept as a permanent arrangement an American enclave maintained exclusively by American military power in so volatile a region. The concept outlined here seeks to establish a new international framework for Iraq. It is an outcome emerging from a political and military situation on the ground and not from artificial deadlines.

Henry A. Kissinger heads the consulting firm Kissinger & Associates. This article was distributed by Tribune Media Services.

Chicago Tribune Editorial - Do the crime, do the time

Chicago Tribune Editorial - Do the crime, do the time
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 3, 2007

The crimes were serious, the jurors unanimous, the sentencing judge plainly perturbed at the defendant's felonious behavior. And so, four weeks ago, Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, got what he had coming: 30 months in a federal slammer.

On Monday, though, President Bush commuted Libby's prison sentence. That leaves Libby, 56, with a $250,000 fine, a lengthy probation and a public humiliation that, no matter how long he lives or what else he accomplishes, will define the first paragraph of his obituary.

But in nixing the prison term, Bush sent a terrible message to citizens and to government officials who are expected to serve the public with integrity. The way for a president to discourage the breaking of federal laws is by letting fairly rendered consequences play out, however uncomfortably for everyone involved. The message to a Scooter Libby ought to be the same as it is for other convicts: You do the crime, you do the time.

The bizarre and politically tinged case that produced Libby's wrongdoing shouldn't obscure the seriousness of his offenses. Most of us are blessedly in the process of forgetting the saga that erupted around one-time CIA operative Valerie Plame, whose name surfaced in the public prints in 2003. Who in official Washington had leaked her identity?

That case meandered far from its origins; no one was ever charged with the leak. But somewhere along that twisting path, Libby decided to break tenets of the legal system he had sworn to uphold. Jurors convicted him of two counts of perjury, one count of obstructing justice, and one count of making false statements about when and how he learned Plume's identity, as well as what he told Washington journalists about her.

U.S. Atty. Patrick Fitzgerald of Chicago, the special prosecutor who directed the Plame inquiry, has done a succinct job of explaining why those crimes so profoundly undermine our justice system: "When someone doesn't tell the truth to the system, everyone suffers. The legal system suffers because we don't know what the actual facts are. And, frankly, lots of other people suffer since, when you don't know what the truth is, people draw all sorts of conclusions."

True enough -- just as people will draw conclusions about a president who commutes the sentence of his vice president's right-hand man. As someone intricately involved in helping Cheney on national security issues, Libby served the interests of the same president who on Monday declared incarceration "excessive" punishment for "a first-time offender with years of exceptional public service."

That's the sort of unconvincing piety Illinois defense attorneys murmur after their clients are sentenced in public corruption cases here. It's a lame excuse in Chicago and, on Monday it was a lame excuse in Washington too.

The dark, secret world of Cheney

The dark, secret world of Cheney
By Leonard Pitts is a syndicated columnist based in Washington.
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 3, 2007

I want to spend a few moments talking about someone you may have heard of, a fella by the name of "Dick" Cheney—assuming that's his real name. When it comes to our cloak-and-dagger veep, one can never be too sure.

We are indebted to The Washington Post for vigorous reporting that reminds us what a piece of work the vice president is. Meaning last week's rigorously researched series illustrating how the hand of Cheney has moved in ways unseen to seize power, undermine authority and circumvent the rule of law.

Still, appalling as that is, I think the vice president's character—and that of the administration he serves—is illustrated just as clearly if not more so in a story that broke a few days before the Post piece. It seems there's an office in the federal bureaucracy, the National Archives and Records Administration, whose job includes verifying that the various entities in the executive branch with access to classified information have safeguards to protect that information. We learn from these latest news stories that the vice president's office has refused, since 2003, to file required annual reports on its possession and stewardship of the nation's secrets. When the NARA pressed Cheney's office on the issue, he reportedly tried to have it abolished.

It would be, in any ordinary context, a rather minor dust-up involving an obscure federal office. But we're not dealing with an ordinary context. Rather, the context here is of a vice president and an administration whose obsession with secrecy borders on mania and whose respect for the public's right to know is simply non-existent.

They have withheld information on matters of personal embarrassment (Cheney shoots a man in the face), public interest (they still won't tell us who advised Cheney's energy policy task force) and even distant history (last year, the government reclassified as secret Cold War-era military information that had been in the public domain for years). They have withdrawn documents from the public sphere, sealed visitors logs from public scrutiny, fought transparency every step of the way.

Now Cheney fights to keep secret from the agency charged with protecting secrets his process for protecting secrets. Unbelievable.

And somewhere, I am sure, former CIA operative Valerie Plame is wishing they had protected her confidential information with equal vigor.

Don't bother, you Bush dead-enders, to send me e-mail pointing out that every administration has secrets. No administration in history has withheld information as prodigiously, determinedly or indiscriminately as this one.

Indeed, so secrecy-fixated is this White House that John Dean, Richard Nixon's White House counsel, was once quoted in the Daily Telegraph of London as saying, "Bush and Cheney are a throwback to the Nixon time. All government business is filtered through a political process at this White House, which is the most secretive ever to run the United States."

What's most important here is not that the vice president feels himself above the law, though he obviously does. But the larger issue is embodied in that line from the Declaration of Independence about government "by the consent of the governed." Like the public's right to know, that consent is in danger.

You see, people who are not informed cannot ask pertinent questions. They cannot demand accountability. They cannot give informed consent.

They can only be led. Or, perhaps more accurately, herded. Sheep are herded. We all know what happens to them.

U. of C. hospital hit with insulin scare - Authorities call in police to probe 3 suspicious cases — 2 of them fatal

U. of C. hospital hit with insulin scare - Authorities call in police to probe 3 suspicious cases — 2 of them fatal
By David Heinzmann and Angela Rozas
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 3, 2007



University of Chicago Hospitals have asked police to investigate whether "an intentional act" caused the unexplained and overwhelming increases in insulin that apparently killed one patient and put another in a coma.

Investigators are also looking into the death of another woman who suffered from symptoms consistent with a sharp increase in insulin, although blood tests have not been completed to verify the presence of the hormone, according to hospital officials and a police source familiar with the investigation.

All three patients were elderly women being treated in the same wing of the Hyde Park hospital, all were stricken between May 7 and June 5, and none had been prescribed insulin or was suffering from diabetes, sources said.

University of Chicago Hospital officials said Monday that they are conducting a full investigation and exploring a range of explanations that include "medication error, laboratory error related to serum insulin levels, and product integrity" of medications.

But hospital officials notified the Chicago Police Department on June 22 because the insulin levels may have been caused by an "intentional act," hospital spokesman John Easton said. Police spokeswoman Monique Bond confirmed that Wentworth Area homicide detectives are investigating, but she said the investigation is in the preliminary stage.

Hospital officials say they have tightened control of insulin supplies since the incidents.

Two of the victims had insulin levels "thousands of times higher than normal levels," sources said. The third was not tested for insulin levels but was hypoglycemic at the time of her death, officials said.

Insulin is a naturally occurring hormone the body needs to convert glucose into energy. When insulin levels rise, glucose levels decrease, and extreme imbalances can cause severe damage to the brain, seizures, coma or even death.

A normal insulin level may range from fewer than 10 to 50 micro international units per microliter, depending on a person's medical condition, experts say. Two of the patients at U. of C. had readings over 2,600.

"The only way I know to get insulin that high is to inject it from a bottle," said Dr. Irl Hisch, medical director of the Diabetes Care Center at the University of Washington in Seattle.

Doctors were alerted to the problem on June 6 when they first saw a high-insulin test result, Easton said. Test results for a second victim were seen on June 14. The hospital notified police after a June 22 staff "root cause" meeting at which internal investigators could not explain the deaths, Easton said.

Ruthie Holloway, an 82-year-old North Kenwood resident, died about three weeks after being admitted to the 5 North/East wing of the hospital on May 21 for a urinary tract infection, sources said.

The day after Holloway was admitted, she showed signs of an insulin overdose and doctors ordered blood tests that placed her insulin level at 2,680, according to sources. Holloway was transferred to a nursing home on June 7, but sent back to the hospital on June 10. She died the same day.

Jessie Sherrod, 89, was admitted April 28, suffering from complications of Alzheimer's disease. She also showed signs of insulin overdose by May 7 when she displayed symptoms of hypoglycemia, but she was not tested for insulin.

She died June 6, records show. Her son Ted, a state administrative law judge, said Monday that he was unaware of the investigation, and that he believed his mother had died of Alzheimer's disease. Her son said her condition actually improved at the nursing home before she died.

A 68-year-old East Side woman who remains in a coma was admitted to the hospital on May 30, also for a urinary tract infection. Less than a week later, she had fallen into a coma and doctors noticed that she was exhibiting signs of extremely high levels of insulin. Her tests showed a level of 2,670.

Her son said Monday that he had no idea of the insulin-level investigation, although hospital officials said they have been keeping family members apprised of the situation.

Hospital official have sent blood samples from all three women to an outside laboratory for testing. But neither of the bodies of the women who died was examined by the Cook County medical examiner's office, Easton said.

U. of C. officials also notified the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the Oakbrook Terrace-based Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, the Illinois Department of Public Health and the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation.

dheinzmann@tribune.com

arozas@tribune.com

A less American face for mediation in Iraq

A less American face for mediation in Iraq
By Chuck Hagel
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 3 2007 03:00 | Last updated: July 3 2007 03:00


Iraq is caught in a vicious and unrelenting cycle of violence, despair and retribution that risks tearing it apart and spilling over into the rest ofthe Middle East.

America has vital geopolitical, energy and economic interests in this troubled region. However, America's support for involvement in Iraq continues to erode. We are dangerously close to the moment when the American people will demand that we leave Iraq and pull back from the Middle East, risking a wider regional conflagration. This is not in the US's interest or the world's.

In September, our military and diplomatic leaders in Iraq will provide Congress with a report on the situation. We cannot afford simply to wait until September to consider what must be done. The president and Congress must focus on developing a viable new strategy that the American people can support, and that advances our interests in the Middle East. We cannot afford to remain bogged down in the mistakes and disagreements of the last four years, or in a partisan divide over Iraq.

American military power will not be the solution. The time for more troops is past. We must begin planning for a phased withdrawal and redeployment of US troops from Iraq. The only sustainable way forward is to achieve Iraqi political accommodation that will begin to move the country towards political reconciliation. However, Iraqis by themselves appear incapable of achieving political progress. They have had more than four years to find a political consensus. It continues to evade them, increasing the violence and danger in the Middle East.

We need strategic direction for Iraq that moves to "internationalise" our efforts to help the Iraqis achieve a core of political stability. As the Baker-Hamilton report concluded, Iraqi political accommodation can be achieved only within a constructive regional framework supported by the international community. The US must refocus its policy, leadership and resources on directly helping the Iraqis to establish an inclusive political framework to begin to defuse the violence.

An international mediator, under the auspices of the UN Security Council and with the full support of the Iraqi government, should be established. The mediator should have the authority of the international community to engage Iraq's political, religious, ethnic and tribal leaders in an inclus-ive political process. In letters last month to President George W. Bush and the UN secretary-general I urged them urgently to consider this initiative.

Special envoys have been instrumental in helping bring political reconciliation to other recent conflicts - Afghanistan, Kosovo, East Timor, Northern Ireland - adapted to the conditions in each country. Iraq needs the inter-national community's help and support if it is to turn away fromsectarian violence. If there is Iraqi resistance, we should be clear with all Iraq's leaders that this initiative is a condition of continued US support.

This approach would help begin to take the American face off Iraq's political process. The US is seen as the occupier. Our ability to influence the outcome in Iraq has been seriously eroded.

This approach would further invest the region and the rest of the world in helping to stabilise Iraq. Reversing Iraq's slide into chaos is a goal shared by nations around the world. Creating an international mediator would build on this common interest.

To succeed, this initiative must be complemented by other elements of a new regional US strategy. Stability in Iraq requires a sustainable and constructive comprehensive regional security framework, one that includes engaging Syria and Iran. We cannot allow last month's regional ministerial conference on Iraq in Sharm el-Sheikh to be a "one-off" event. The US must also announce a renewed commitment to address the Arab-Israeli conflict, with a Middle East special envoy who has the authority effectively to work the day-to-day political reconciliation effort. The appointment of Tony Blair is welcome. He has the stature, standing and experience that will be required. To succeed, he must also have the mandate and authority to address all issues, including the political issues that must be resolved to achieve the two-state solution.

Ultimately, the future of Iraq will depend onchoices made by the Iraqi people. America's role will also remain critically important. But finding a responsible way forward in Iraq will require broader support. Creating an international mediator could help. For stability in Iraq, the world community must be engaged in support of a new political and diplomatic strategy.

The writer is a US senator for Nebraska

Britons take it easy in the new age of terrorism

Britons take it easy in the new age of terrorism
By Gideon Rachman
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 2 2007 19:43 | Last updated: July 2 2007 19:43


The threat level in Britain is “critical”. This means that a new terrorist attack could be imminent. Would-be car-bombers are said to be still at large. Iraq-style terror tactics have arrived.

But the British public seems to be more worried about the threat from the domestic tabby than the menace of suicide bombers. Checking the BBC website on Monday for news of the latest arrests, I noticed that the “most read” story in the UK was headlined: “Experts warn on cat allergies.” Terrorism did not make it into the top five.

Certainly the Londoners I travelled to work with did not seem terrified – or even particularly anxious. The crowds on the Tube were, as usual, immersed in their free newspapers and insulated by their iPods. People seem to have decided that the “British” thing to do (to use our new prime minister’s favourite word) is to stay calm. But the commuters around me were not putting on a brave face. They seemed genuinely relaxed.

There is an obvious explanation for this. None of the three attempted bombings so far has killed anyone. Ever since the Tube bombings of July 7 2005, we have been warned that further attacks are inevitable. Given the grisly array of possibilities – dirty bombs, truck bombs, even nuclear terrorism – the startling incompetence of the recent attacks has come as something of a relief. Setting yourself on fire and then punching a policeman, while shouting “Allah”, is about as low-tech as it gets.

Of course, by tomorrow, the mood could have changed utterly. All it would take is for a car bomber to get through and succeed in killing scores of people.

The political debate about how to counter terrorism has already taken on a new urgency. Gordon Brown, freshly installed in 10 Downing Street, has to think about new policies. The five main topics under review will be civil liberties, foreign policy, British Muslims, security and intelligence.

The temptation is to act frenetically on all fronts. But we have known for years that there is a grave threat from terrorism. As before, the real key to tackling it remains good intelligence.

Even before this week, Mr Brown had made clear that he wants to give police and prosecutors more powers to combat terrorism. Allowing wire-tap evidence in court would be sensible. The government will also certainly need to look again at the farce of “control orders” – a form of house arrest for suspected terrorists. Six of the 17 suspects subject to control orders have already absconded. Immigration controls and visa regimes also seem certain to be tightened, as the pattern of arrests becomes clearer.

But Mr Brown also favours a controversial proposal to extend the amount of time that police can hold terrorist suspects – without charging them – to 90 days. This is a fundamental encroachment on civil liberties that was rejected by parliament in 2005. Its reintroduction should be treated sceptically.

The government will insist that British foreign policy will remain unaltered – anything else would sound like a capitulation to terror. Behind the scenes, however, there is sure to be pressure to accelerate troop withdrawals from Iraq. But a panicky decision to withdraw is highly unlikely to appease fanatics. They can always find a new grievance – Afghanistan, Israel or Britain’s infuriating reluctance to accept sharia law.

There is open relief in Britain that the suspects arrested so far seem to be from the Middle East, rather than British Muslims. But it would be foolish to be too self-congratulatory about this. Not all the arrests have been made yet. And just a couple of months ago five British Muslims were convicted for their part in the “operation Crevice” plot – to blow up shopping centres and night-clubs.

Ever since 2005, the government has pushed the idea that all immigrants and minority communities should adhere to certain core “British values”. Reports of the death of multiculturalism are, however, exaggerated. (I was startled to discover recently that my primary school children have been instructed that they must always say, “peace be upon him”, if they mention Mohammed in religious education classes.) Mr Brown should press ahead with his pet project of promoting British values.

But the most direct and effective way of combating terrorism is through intelligence. Since July 2005 the security services have issued a series of blood-curdling warnings – including the revelation that they were watching 30 active terrorist plots. But they have also done a good job of foiling many of these plots – as the Crevice convictions and the disruption of the effort to blow up airliners last year illustrated.

The government says that by 2008 the intelligence services will have doubled in size since 2005. Britain already spends £2bn ($4bn) a year on counter-terrorism. That is money well spent. Unfortunately, for politicians who are under pressure to be seen to be taking action, intelligence is inevitably low-key. If the government wants to send a signal of increased vigilance, it does things such as increasing armed security at airports.

But a permanent increase in heavy-handed security measures will be hard to reconcile with Mr Brown’s appeal for the “ordinary business of our country to continue”. For an international city such as London, being able to fly in and out easily is fundamental to “ordinary business”. Heathrow is already nightmarish enough. If excessive security increases crowds and delays, businesspeople and tourists will start to avoid London.

After the attack on Glasgow airport it inevitably will become harder to drive right up to terminal buildings. But the authorities must not overreact on all fronts. Measures such as last year’s ludicrous ban on taking paperback books through Customs need to be resisted.

The fact is that not every large crowd in Britain can be protected without gumming up ordinary life intolerably. Seal up the airports and you will make the lives of many travellers a misery. You might even deter an attack. But there are other targets – stations, buses and shopping centres.

It is a nasty thought. But it is also a reality that Britain has had to live with for years. (Remember the IRA?) It is a little more comforting to reflect that – two years after the attacks on the Tube – the terrorists have been unable to strike again.

The terror threat will be with us for years. In dealing with it, the Brown government should take its cue from London’s commuters. Keep calm.

gideon.rachman@ft.com

Police probe foreign doctor terror theory

Police probe foreign doctor terror theory
By Stephen Fidler and Ben Hall
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 3 2007 03:00 | Last updated: July 3 2007 03:00



Police are investigating whether a network of foreign doctors was responsible for three failed bomb attacks in London and Glasgow.

Two doctors - one who qualified in Jordan and one in Iraq - were identified as being among eight people arrested in the investigation that followed two failed car bomb attacks early on Friday and an attempt to drive a car bomb into Glasgow airport on Saturday. Police said at least five of those arrested worked in the medical profession.

The police confirmed the arrest of two more people yesterday in the Glasgow area. Scotland Yard said last night that an eighth person had been arrested at an undisclosed location, although Reuters reported Australian officials said the suspect had been detained at Brisbane airport.

The developments are likely to trigger reviews of immigration procedures that allow foreign-qualified doctors into the UK to help fill shortages in the National Health Service.

The British Medical Association said it had already become harder since last year for doctors from outside Europe to take up training posts in the UK, following an increase in UK medical school graduates.

The manhunt continued for others connected to the plot.A person briefed on the investigation said that the number eventually arrested could double, and include more medicalpractitioners.

One of the occupants of the flaming car at Glasgow airport was named as Bilal Abdulla, who qualified in Baghdad as a doctor in 2004. He suffered severe burns in the attack and remained in a critical condition at the Royal Alexandra Hospital in Paisley - where he had been working.

Police said they carried out the controlled detonation of a vehicle in the grounds of the hospital, but said it was a precautionary move and there was no indication it contained explosives.

Mohammed Asha, who qualified as a doctor in Jordan in the same year, was arrested on Saturday night with his wifetravelling north on the M6.

The investigation has moved rapidly since two cars were found on Friday with the un-exploded devices inside. The cars have yielded many clues, including DNA evidence. Police have not released any pictures of the suspects in spite of plentiful closed circuit television coverage of the would-be bombers in London - suggesting they are confident they have found those who planted the devices or know who they are.

Britain's threat level yesterday remained at critical, indicating that another attack could be imminent.

Jacqui Smith, Britain's new home secretary, said searches had been carried out in at least 19 locations. She outlined extra security measures in force across the country, including high-visibility patrols, armed response vehicles, increased use of stop-and-search powers, and tighter controls on roads to airports.

In an emergency statement to parliament, Ms Smith thanked the public for "their patience and measured response to these events". In a change of tone from her predecessors in Tony Blair's government, Ms Smith steered clear of blaming the attacks on radical Islam or of evoking a "war on terror".

A Downing Street spokesman said the government wanted to pursue a more "consensual" approach to counter-terrorism.

The extra measures were on top of longer-term improvements to security. The police and intelligence services had already advised 450 sporting venues and 400 shopping centres on how to tighten security, she said.

McCain campaign hit by fundraising woes

McCain campaign hit by fundraising woes
By Andrew Ward in Boston
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 3 2007 14:51 | Last updated: July 3 2007 14:51


John McCain, the one-time favourite for the Republican presidential nomination, has sharply scaled down his campaign operation after disappointing fundraising results raised fresh doubts about his bid for the White House.

Mr McCain has cut his staff by at least a third and refocused resources on a handful of states with crucial early primary elections or caucuses but insisted he would not withdraw from the race.

The restructuring followed the release of second quarter fundraising figures that showed the Arizona Senator had brought in just $11.2m between April and June – less than the disappointing $13.6m he raised in the first quarter.

Mr McCain’s campaign has been badly damaged by his steadfast support for President George W. Bush on arguably the two most controversial issues in US politics: Iraq and immigration.

He was the only main Republican candidate to back Mr Bush’s push for an overhaul of immigration laws, which failed in Congress last week, and he has been the most vocal advocate of the “surge” strategy of increasing US troop numbers in Iraq.

The senator’s refusal to back away from two such unpopular positions has reinforced his reputation as a principled and brave politician. But the defiant stance has increasingly looked like political suicide as his poll ratings and fundraising have slumped.

Terry Nelson, Mr McCain’s campaign manager, acknowledged that “incorrect assumptions” had been made about fundraising. “At one point, we believed that we would raise over $100 million during this calendar year, and we constructed a campaign that was based on that assumption,” he said. “We believe today that that assumption is not correct.”

Mr McCain’s prospects could be dented further if, as expected, Fred Thompson, the senator-turned-actor, officially enters the race. Mr Thompson, star of the legal drama Law & Order, has overtaken Mr McCain to seize second place in most polls of likely Republican voters, behind former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, even before he has declared his candidacy.

The rise of Mr Thompson reflects widespread discontent among grassroots Republicans about the current choice of candidates. Mr Giuliani is viewed as a strong leader but his liberal views on abortion and other social issues cause angst among many conservatives. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, another frontline candidate, has shown signs of gaining momentum but he is struggling to convince voters that his newfound commitment to social conservatism is genuine.

The sense of dissatisfaction surrounding the Republican field contrasts sharply with the excitement within the Democratic party about its fiercely competitive presidential race. The two leading Democratic candidates – Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama – raised nearly $60m between them in the second quarter.

Doctor held in Australia over UK terror

Doctor held in Australia over UK terror
By Stephen Fidler, Ben Hall, Virginia Marsh, James Wilson and agencies
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 2 2007 22:11 | Last updated: July 3 2007 15:59



An Indian doctor was detained in Australia for questioning in connection with a suspected al Qaeda plot to detonate car bombs in London and Scotland as he tried to leave the country, the Australian prime minister, John Howard, said on Tuesday.

The hospital registrar, named in Australian media reports as Dr Mohammed Haneef, aged 27, was seized at Brisbane airport where he was trying to leave on a one-way ticket.

His detention, after a tip-off from UK police, widens the international dimension of the investigation and takes to eight the number held, at least six of whom are doctors.

All eight are linked to a plan to detonate two car bombs left in central London early on Friday and an attack on Glasgow city airport in Scotland on Saturday using a fuel-laden Jeep Cherokee.

Police in Lancashire on Tuesday afternoon arrested a further two men on suspicion of terrorist offences but the force said it was too early to know whether the arrrests would prove to be connected to the wider inquiry related to bomb attempts in London and Scotland.

The men were held at about noon at an industrial estate on Birley Street, Blackburn – the town represented in parliament by Jack Straw, the former foreign secretary and now justice minister. No more details about the men were available.

Lancashire police said they had not been asked to carry out the arrests on behalf of the Metropolitan Police, which is leading the investigation into the attempted bombings at the weekend.

In another development, news organisations said that police had carried out two controlled explosions on a car related to the investigation at a mosque in Glasgow early on Tuesday. Police called the action precautionary and said the car did not contain explosives, according to reports.

Police also carried out a controlled explosion on a suspect package outside Hammersmith London Underground station. It was later said that the suspect package was harmless.

The arrest of the Indian doctor in Brisbane led counterterror authorities to a second doctor who is now also being interviewed, Mr Howard said. ‘‘The first person taken into custody is an Indian national who came to Australia sponsored by the Queensland (state) health department,” he told reporters. “The identity of that second person arose from the discussions that occurred with the first person taken into custody.”

Mr Haneef worked at the Gold Coast Hospital in southeast Queensland and was recruited from Liverpool, officials said.

The authorities stressed there was no evidence of a related plot in Australia and maintained the country’s terror alert at medium.

US law enforcement officials had intelligence reports a fortnight ago of a possible terror attack in Glasgow against “airport infrastructure or aircraft”, according to ABC News.

An unnamed senior official told the US news network that the intelligence led to Federal Air Marshals being placed on flights in and out of both Glasgow and Prague in the Czech Republic.

US Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff declined to comment, but told ABC News that “everything that we get is shared virtually instantaneously with our counterparts in Britain and vice versa.”

UK police were investigating on Monday whether a network of foreign doctors was responsible for three failed bomb attacks in London and Glasgow.

The police arrested two more people on Monday in the Glasgow area, after the arrests of four men and one woman over the weekend.

The developments are likely to trigger reviews of UK immigration procedures that allow foreign-qualified doctors into the country to help fill shortages in the National Health Service.

The British Medical Association said it had already become harder since last year for doctors from outside Europe to take up training posts in the UK, following an increase in UK medical school graduates.

The manhunt continued for others connected to the plot. A person briefed on the investigation said that the number eventually arrested could double, and include more medical practitioners.

The new arrest in Brisbane and evidence of the strong medical links of the suspects came as some details emerged about the background of those under arrest.

The passenger of the flaming car at Glasgow airport was named as Bilal Abdulla, who qualified in Baghdad as a doctor in 2004. The driver suffered severe burns in the attack and remained in a critical condition at the Royal Alexandra Hospital in Paisley.

Police said they carried out the controlled detonation of a vehicle in the grounds of the hospital on Monday, but said it was a precautionary move and there was no indication it contained explosives.

Mohammed Asha, who also qualified as a doctor in Jordan in 2004, was arrested on Saturday night with his wife travelling north on the M6.

The investigation has moved rapidly since two cars were found on Friday with the unexploded devices inside. The cars have yielded many clues, including DNA evidence. Police have not released any pictures of the suspects in spite of plentiful closed circuit television coverage of the would-be bombers in London – suggesting they are confident they have found those who planted the devices or know who they are.

Britain’s threat level remained at critical, indicating that another attack could be imminent.

Jacqui Smith, Britain’s new home secretary, said searches had been carried out in at least 19 locations. She outlined extra security measures in force across the country, including high-visibility patrols, armed response vehicles, increased use of stop-and-search powers, and tighter controls on roads to airports.

In an emergency statement to parliament, Ms Smith thanked the public for “their patience and measured response to these events”. In a change of tone from her predecessors in Tony Blair’s government, Ms Smith steered clear of blaming the attacks on radical Islam or of evoking a “war on terror”.

A Downing Street spokesman said the government wanted to pursue a more “consensual” approach to counter-terrorism.

The extra measures were on top of longer-term improvements to security. The police and intelligence services had already advised 450 sporting venues and 400 shopping centres on how to tighten security, she said.

Uproar as Bush saves Libby from Jail Term

Uproar as Bush saves Libby from Jail Term
By Andrew Ward in Kennebunkport
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 2 2007 23:00 | Last updated: July 3 2007 00:49


President George W. Bush on Monday commuted the 30-month prison sentence handed to Lewis “Scooter” Libby, former chief of staff to vice president Dick Cheney, for lying and obstructing justice.

The decision represented a political thunderbolt from Mr Bush and sparked immediate uproar among Democrats, who accused the president of overturning the rule of law.

Mr Bush had been under intense pressure from some influential Republicans to spare Mr Libby, a longtime pillar of the party establishment, from jail.

The move came hours after a federal appeals panel refused a final plea for Mr Libby’s prison term to be delayed, making his incarceration imminent.

“I respect the jury’s verdict,” said Mr Bush, in a two-page statement explaining his decision. “But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr Libby is excessive.”

Mr Bush declined to pardon Mr Libby, leaving intact a $250,000 fine and two years probation – a move that legal experts described as highly unusual.

“My decision to commute his prison sentence leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr Libby,” he said. “The reputation he gained through his years of public service and professional work in the legal community is forever damaged.”

Mr Libby was convicted in March of lying to authorities and obstructing the investigation into the 2003 leak of a CIA operative’s identity by a Bush administration official in the run up to the war in Iraq.

Valerie Plame, the CIA agent involved, is the wife of Joseph Wilson, a former US ambassador, who accused the administration of manipulating intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to build its case for war.

Mr Libby was the highest-ranking White House official ordered to prison since the Iran-Contra affair in the 1980s.

Mr Bush noted that the sentencing judge had rejected the advice of the probation office for a lesser sentence, including the possibility of home confinement.

“The Constitution gives the President the power of clemency to be used when he deems it to be warranted,” said Mr Bush. “It is my judgment that a commutation of the prison term in Mr Libby’s case is an appropriate exercise of this power.”

Some political analysts viewed the move as an attempt to restore morale among Mr Bush’s conservative base - much of which viewed the case against Mr Libby as a liberal conspiracy - after a torrid few months of political setbacks for the Republican party.

But the decision threatened to further poison the political atmosphere in Washington and galvanise Democrats to step up a series of investigations into alleged wrongdoing by the Bush administration.

With his approval rating already close to record lows and forced to step down in 2009, Mr Bush has little to lose politically from Monday’s decision.

But, while the move will please some Republicans, it also creates danger for the party by giving Democrats fresh ammunition ahead of next year’s elections and risks alienating moderate voters.

A recent poll showed that more than 70 per cent of Americans were opposed to Mr Bush’s pardoning Mr Libby.

Harry Reid, Senate majority leader, described the president’s decision was “disgraceful”

“Libby’s conviction was the one faint glimmer of accountability for White House efforts to manipulate intelligence and silence critics of the Iraq War. Now, even that small bit of justice has been undone,” he said.

Mr Reid added: “The constitution gives President Bush the power to commute sentences, but history will judge him harshly for using that power to benefit his own Vice President’s chief of staff who was convicted of such a serious violation of law.”

John Conyers, chairman of House Judiciary Committee, said: “This decision is inconsistent with the rule of law and sends a horrible signal to the American people.”

Monday, July 02, 2007

International Herald Tribune Editorial - Executive privilege abused

International Herald Tribune Editorial - Executive privilege abused
Copyright by The International Herald Tribune
Published: July 1, 2007


After six years of kowtowing to the White House, Congress is finally challenging President George W. Bush's campaign to trample all legal and constitutional restraints on his power. Congressional committees have issued subpoenas for documents and witnesses in two major cases and have asked for the first - and likely not the last - criminal investigation of an executive branch official who might have lied to Congress.

Predictably, the White House is claiming executive privilege and refusing to cooperate with the legitimate congressional investigations, one springing from Bush's decision to spy on Americans without a warrant and the other from the purge of U.S. attorneys.

The courts have recognized a president's limited right to keep the White House's internal deliberations private. But it is far from an absolute right, and Bush's claim of executive privilege in the attorneys scandal is especially ludicrous. The White House has said repeatedly that Bush was not involved in the firings of nine U.S. attorneys. If that's true, he can hardly argue that he has the right to conceal conversations and e-mail exchanges that his aides had with one another and the Justice Department.

When the White House refused last week to even account for the documents it was withholding and why, Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, pointed out that every president since World War II has at some point complied with congressional requests or subpoenas for testimony by members of the White House staff or other advisers.

Bush's claim of executive privilege may be somewhat stronger on the spying program, since he personally issued the order to start the wiretapping. But executive privilege cannot be used to cover up actions and policies that involve an outright violation of the law, as the spying program did.e

Nor can it be used to shield an official who might have lied to Congress. The Senate Judiciary Committee has asked the Justice Department to investigate Brett Kavanaugh, a former White House official who told a Senate hearing on his appointment to a federal judgeship that he was not involved in forming rules on the treatment of detainees. Recent press accounts suggest that he was.

The White House has predictably accused the Democrats of being soft on terrorism for opposing illegal wiretapping and of partisan politicking in their attempt to get to the bottom of the attorneys scandal. This is the point when we used to wearily watch as Congress bowed and backed out of the room. But lawmakers finally seem determined to do their duty. Partly that's because tough-minded Democrats are now in charge, like Leahy. But even some of Bush's Republican enablers on Capitol Hill seem to be losing patience. Last week, three Republican senators voted to issue subpoenas for records relating to Bush's decision to authorize the tapping of Americans' phone calls and e-mails abroad without warrants.

If the White House continues to defy Congress, the Senate and the House could file criminal contempt charges. It's a strong measure, but lawmakers should not be afraid to take it, as they have done 10 times since 1975 under both parties.

Last week, in a bit of especially mendacious spin, Tony Fratto, the White House deputy press secretary, responded to the subpoenas on the illegal wiretapping by saying, "It's unfortunate that congressional Democrats continue to choose the route of confrontation."

Actually, Bush chose that route long ago by defining consultation as a chance for lawmakers to hear about decisions he had already made, bipartisanship as a chance for Democrats to join Republicans in rubber-stamping those choices and congressional oversight as self-serving and possibly seditious. At this point, confrontation is far preferable to the path the Republican majority in Congress chose for so many years - capitulation.

Gutierrez retirement sets up wide-open race -- if he goes

Gutierrez retirement sets up wide-open race -- if he goes
BY LAURA WASHINGTON LauraSWashington@aol.com
Copyright by The Chicago Sun-Times
July 2, 2007

Open congressional seats are like invitations to A-list dinner parties. Everyone angles to sup at the table.

Luis "El Gallito (The Little Fighting Rooster)" Gutierrez says he is battle-worn. He has declared he won't run for re-election to his 4th Congressional District seat in 2008. While his plans are viewed skeptically by many, potential successors have been popping up out of the woodwork. Here's just a few: Cook County Commissioner Roberto Maldonado, Aldermen Danny Solis (25th) and Manny Flores (1st), and state Representatives Susana Mendoza and George Cardenas, and my personal favorite, 22nd Ward Ald. Ricardo Munoz.

If that's not enough, how about the real possibility that a non-Latino candidate, sensing the vote will be split seven ways to Sunday, may swoop in and steal the congressional seat? Even "El Gallito" says he "wouldn't be surprised" if a ringer popped up in the campaign.

Sixty percent of the district's registered voters are Latino, Gutierrez told me. It was designed to create a "Latino" voting bloc. The Hispanic population skews Mexican, but Puerto Ricans are more likely voters. The district spans Chicago's Near Northwest and Southwest sides to west suburban Cicero.

Economically, the district ranges from upscale Wicker Park and Bucktown to the blue-collar Little Village and west suburban Cicero.

Munoz, 42, was born in Monterrey, Mexico, moved to the South Side with his family at the age of 5, and became an American citizen at 23. Munoz is a City Council independent and labor stalwart best known for spearheading a hunger strike that forced the Chicago Public Schools to build the first new high school in Little Village in more than 90 years.

Munoz has been in campaign mode for months. Still, he has plenty of strong competition. Their biggest obstacle, however, may be the person who is not running: Gutierrez.

More than a few dollars and endorsements have not been forthcoming. Why? Because many are skeptical about Gutierrez's retirement plans, and for many good reasons: Gutierrez occupies a very safe seat in a very blue state. Democrats have wrested control of Congress and have a superb shot at the White House in 2008.

Not to mention that Gutierrez's signature issue has been immigration reform. He has staked his national reputation on pushing for the legalization of up to 12 million immigrants. Last Thursday, a hard-fought compromise plan was crushed in the U.S. Senate, leaving immigration reform dead in the water until after the 2008 elections.

It's hard to believe that Gutierrez, 53, won't want to stay around Congress to try again.

"I love Chicago, Laura. I want to go back home," Gutierrez said. "What I've told people is that I am retiring from Congress. As we speak today, there is nothing I can think of that has changed my mind."

Still, The Little Rooster adds, would-be candidates and congressional colleagues alike are assiduously trying to talk him out of it. "There are many people who have encouraged me to stay. It's hard to tell your friends, 'It's over.' "

El Gallito didn't earn his nickname by walking away from a fight.

Financial Times Editorial Comment: Grandiose failure

Financial Times Editorial Comment: Grandiose failure
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 1 2007 21:12 | Last updated: July 1 2007 21:12


The US Senate’s second rejection of the “grand bargain” on immigration finally put a gravely wounded plan out of its misery. Few expect a comparably ambitious proposal to surface again before 2009. It might be better if it never did. The chief flaw in a proposal with many to boast of was that it tried to do too much.

The architects of the grand bargain correctly saw the issue as falling into three main parts. First, tighten security at and behind the border to discourage future illegal immigration. Second, resolve the status of 12m or more illegal immigrants. Third, make entry easier for new foreign workers to live and work in the US. One could quarrel with the bill’s proposals under each heading, but what killed it was the promise to secure the border: nobody believed it. As a result, the second part, which critics call “amnesty” (despite fines and other sanctions), could not be presented as a once-and-for-all expedient.

The failure of the measure was not a case of partisan deadlock. The vote to kill the plan was bipartisan, and fairly reflected American opinion. The political arithmetic, and the underlying sentiment it ex­presses, are unlikely to change when the administration does. In any case, President George W. Bush did all he could to get the measure passed. Waiting for a new Congress may therefore be pointless. Meanwhile, the issue refuses to wait: the short age of skilled workers is pressing down on the economy.

The bill needs to be brought forward in smaller pieces. Tighter border security, and steps to make employers authenticate workers’ status, should be pulled from the grand bargain and reintroduced.

These would likely command bipartisan support in Congress; they would certainly be popular in the country. Easier access for new legal immigrants is also needed, especially for skilled workers.

Though certainly not as popular as stronger enforcement, some loose ning would not meet implacable resistance in its own right. Yet here the grand bargain does need improving. Its points-based system for skilled immigrants was rigid, and bizarrely calibrated. Employers know which skills they seek. This part of the system must be better designed to serve their needs.

Effective policing, together with easier entry for legal immigrants, would gradually press down on illegal immigration. That would make it easier for the public – and hence for Congress – to accept the liberal dispensation for existing illegal immigrants that compassion and good sense dictate.

Comprehensive reform has failed. Try incremental reform instead.

Europeans see US as threat to peace

Europeans see US as threat to peace
By Daniel Dombey and Stanley Pignal in London
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 1 2007 18:09 | Last updated: July 1 2007 18:09


Europeans consistently regard the US as the biggest threat to world stability, a new poll reveals on Monday.

A survey carried out in June by Harris Research for the Financial Times shows that 32 per cent of respondents in five European countries regard the US as a bigger threat than any other state.

In the US itself, North Korea and Iran are seen as the biggest risks. However, the youngest US respondents share the Europeans’ view that theirs is the biggest threat, with 35 per cent of American 16- to 24-year-olds identifying it as the chief danger to stability.

The level of European concern about the US has remained broadly consistent over the past year. In 11 previous polls dating back to July 2006 the proportion of respondents considering the US a threat to stability has ranged between 28 per cent and 38 per cent.

The latest poll comes in the wake of the “surge” that has increased US forces in Iraq to about 160,000 troops, but which has not been accompanied by political breakthroughs or a dramatic reduction of violence. During President George W. Bush’s second term the administration has also embarked on a more consensual international approach to issues such as Iran’s nuclear programme and North Korea’s nuclear bomb.

But the poll shows that the European public still considers Mr Bush a risk.

“It is evidence of the continued estrangement between the European public and the Bush administration, in spite of a real improvement in official ties,” said Ron Asmus, head of the Brussels office of the German Marshall Fund, which works to bolster transatlantic ties.

“It is proof that the next president will be confronted with the major challenge of improving America’s image abroad, starting with Europe and our main allies.”

Inhabitants of Spain are most concerned about the US, with 46 per cent of respondents naming America as the biggest threat.

European poll respondents – who also come from France, Germany, Italy and the UK – are increasingly concerned about China, which 19 per cent perceive as the biggest threat, up from 12 per cent last July.

Meanwhile, 17 per cent identify Iran as the biggest threat, 11 per cent Iraq and 9 per cent North Korea. Only 5 per cent single out Russia, despite increased tensions between Moscow and the west.

The poll’s data on the US indicate that 25 per cent of Americans see North Korea as the biggest threat, followed by Iran with 23 per cent, China with 20 per cent, and the US itself with 11 per cent.

The poll is consistent with findings last week by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, which found that favourable ratings of the US had declined in 26 of 33 countries over the past five years.

But the Pew poll also contrasted unfavourable ratings of the US with much more positive responses in Israel, Poland, Japan, India and parts of Africa and Latin America.

The survey for the Financial Times was carried out online by Harris Interactive between July 2006 and June 2007. More than 1,000 people were polled in each country each month.

US groups borrow to pay out to investors

US groups borrow to pay out to investors
By Richard Beales and Francesco Guerrera in New York
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 1 2007 18:34 | Last updated: July 1 2007 18:34


Some US companies are starting to take on more debt in order to pay it out to shareholders – a response to rampant leveraged buy-outs and activist investors.

The moves, while still unusual, could herald a gradual shift among publicly listed companies towards more aggressive capital structures.

Recent announcements include home improvement retailer Home Depot’s intention to borrow $12bn to help finance a $22.5bn share buy-back and plans at Expedia, the online travel agent, to spend $3.5bn buying back 42 per cent of its shares – funding part of the buy-back with debt.

Tobias Levkovich, chief US equity strategist at Citigroup, said such announcements could be early indications of a change in attitude. “The bottom line is that managements are starting to look at this more aggressively,” he said. “Shareholders, particularly in the large-cap world, are getting more frustrated.”

He said even if the jittery credit conditions of recent weeks continued, making debt more expensive, companies could still afford to borrow more. “They’re hurting their returns by being so under-levered.”

The latest round of borrowing is aimed at funding returns to shareholders rather than more traditional capital or research investment.

Edward Marrinan, head of credit strategy at JPMorgan, said that some recent moves to return cash to shareholders were aimed at staving off activist investors.

“Management understandably wants to retain as much control over their own company’s destiny as possible,” he said.

Home Depot’s proposed buy-back is one of the largest in US corporate history. Carol Tome, chief financial officer, told Wall Street analysts that increased indebtedness was justified to keep rewarding shareholders in the face of slower growth in profits and sales.

She said. “As a maturing company our financing strategy is evolving to one that facilitates capital distribution.”

Ms Tome said Home Depot, whose previous chief executive Robert Nardelli stepped down in January amid a controversy over his compensation and treatment of shareholders, would accept a downgrade by credit agencies as a result of its heavier debt load provided that it retained an investment grade rating.

In spite of such evidence, some analysts say the limited shift to gear up and reward shareholders with the proceeds will be restricted to specific cases where the threat of noisy activism or private equity attention has forced action.

Small donors give Obama fundraising lead

Small donors give Obama fundraising lead
By Andrew Ward in Kennebunkport
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 1 2007 21:02 | Last updated: July 1 2007 21:02


A barrage of small donations from grassroots supporters helped Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential hopeful, raise $32.5m in campaign funds over the past three months, outstripping Hillary Clinton, his biggest rival.

More than 154,000 people contributed to Mr Obama’s campaign, the largest number of donors recruited by a US presidential candidate at this stage in the election cycle. Mrs Clinton’s campaign had already conceded defeat to Mr Obama in the second-quarter fundraising race, announcing last week that it had raised about $27m (€20m, £13.5m) during the period.

The figures showed that Mr Obama’s campaign still has strong momentum at the grassroots level in spite of his failure to narrow the commanding lead held by Mrs Clinton in most polls.

Mrs Clinton’s campaign said it was relaxed about the fundraising gap. But the early financial strength of Mr Obama puts him on course to remain competitive against Mrs Clinton throughout next year’s primary election season.

Mr Obama’s success in building a fundraising operation within months of announcing his intention to run for president has stunned the Clinton campaign. While Mrs Clinton has focused on securing larger contributions from a smaller number of donors, Mr Obama has tapped a broader base of supporters attracted by his promise to bring political change to Washington.

“We now have hundreds of thousands of Americans who are ready to demand healthcare for all, energy independence, and an end to this war in Iraq,” said Mr Obama in a statement.

“That’s the kind of movement that can change the special interest-driven politics in Washington and transform our country.”

Additional reporting by Associated Press

Advertising outlook weakens in US

Advertising outlook weakens in US
By Carlos Grande
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 2 2007 12:13 | Last updated: July 2 2007 12:13


Advertising forecasters have downgraded prospects for the US, challenging expectations of a boost to the marketing industry from the presidential election race and the 2008 Beijing summer Olympics.

Zenith Optimedia, the international media buyer, on Monday shaved its 2007 expectations of US advertising expenditure growth to 3.3 per cent at constant currencies.

Zenith, part of Publicis, the Paris-headquartered marketing services group, says weak expenditure on US network television and trade magazines to reduce further its previous estimate of 3.4 per cent, which had already come down from 4.1 per cent in December.

Zenith follows recently reduced US forecasts by Carat, part of Aegis, the UK-listed media and research group, and a gloomy analysis by Universal McCann, part of Interpublic, the US-listed marketing services group.

Universal McCann said US businesses were cutting back to focus on improving productivity and profits and building up cash resources. It puts US advertising growth at 3.1 per cent this year.

The US is the world’s biggest advertising market and the key profit territory for the world’s two largest marketing services groups - Omnicom of the US and UK-listed WPP.

Worldwide, the industry would normally expect a jump in expenditure during a period which includes the run up to the US presidential elections, the Euro 2008 football championships and the summer Olympics in China.

The current downgrades for the US contrast with upbeat assessments from Zenith and others of prospects for global advertising, especially internet marketing.

Interest in online video advertising and localised marketing on search engines has encouraged Zenith to publish upgraded figures for expenditure on internet advertising.

It now believes internet advertising will grow by 82 per cent between 2006 and 2009, while the rest of the advertising sector grows by 13 per cent during the same period.

Zenith estimates worldwide advertising expenditure will grow by 5.5 per cent this year and by 6.4 per cent in 2008. It calculates that the Beijing Olympics will generate about $3bn of extra advertising expenditure globally in 2008.

Sentiment towards western european markets has also improved: Zenith estimates that German advertising last year experienced its fastest growth rate since 2000.

Carat estimates that global advertising expenditure will increase by 5.8 per cent this year and 6.4 per cent in 2008.

Univeral McCann predicts worldwide advertising will grow by 4.2 per cent in 2007.

Two more arrests in UK terror investigation

Two more arrests in UK terror investigation
By Stephen Fidler and Ben Hall in London, James Wilson in Manchester and Krishna Guha in Washington
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Published: July 1 2007 18:44 | Last updated: July 2 2007 12:05


Two more men were arrested as British police pursued a manhunt for suspected terrorists following failed car bomb attacks in Glasgow and London.

The arrests of the men, aged 28 and 25, were made by Strathclyde police late on Sunday, and bring to seven the total number of people being held over the three attempted bombings.

Police and security officials were still trying to establish the identity and nationality of five people arrested at the weekend, including the critically injured driver of a car that drove into Glasgow airport terminal on Saturday and his passenger.

Early boost for terror probe

Stephen Fidler suggests air travellers and air travel will bear the burden of the security response to the attempted terrorist attacks
Police said the latest arrests were a result of “intensive police operations in the Paisley area last night”.

Assistant Chief Constable John Malcolm, of Strathclyde Police said: “This continues to be a fast-moving investigation and I am grateful to the public for their perseverance and support during these difficult times. I would continue to urge people to be vigilant.”

Government officials said they were hopeful of finding links between the cell, at least some of whom appeared to be recent arrivals in the country, and other individuals that they had under surveillance.

The government threat level remained at critical, the highest on a five-step indicating another attack could be imminent. Security at airports and at public events, such as Wimbledon, has been sharply stepped up.

Cars were stopped from dropping off passengers at terminals at all UK airports from Sunday. Gordon Brown, prime minister, said he wanted “the ordinary business of the country to continue”. But he asked members of the public to be ready for extra roadside checks on cars “in the course of the next few days”.

Airport officials said all passengers should expect to be searched, instead of one in three, as had been usual. BAA advised travellers to take public transport to terminals.

The government’s Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre raised the threat level after an attempted car-bomb attack at Glasgow airport on Saturday. Officials said the decision was taken based on the likelihood that another attack could happen, rather than on specific information that another attack was planned.

The US has stepped up security at its airports and posted additional armed marshals on flights to and from the UK. Michael Chertoff, US homeland security secretary, said: “We will be doing some elevated air marshal work and some other activities with respect to UK travel.”

Two men were arrested after the attempt to ram a flaming Jeep Cherokee into the Glasgow airport terminal. The driver, who set himself alight after the attack faltered, is in critical condition with severe burns and under police guard at the Royal Alexandra Hospital in Paisley. A controlled explosion was carried out by police on a vehicle in the hospital’s car park on Sunday.

A passenger in the Jeep was arrested at the airport after the attack. The Jeep contained gas canisters and containers of petrol, as had two Mercedes cars found less than 48 hours earlier in London’s West End.

Police expressed confidence they would gain a thorough understanding of the planning of the attacks and the network involved. Peter Clarke, Scotland Yard’s chief anti-terrorism officer, said information was being obtained hour-by-hour. “The links between the three incidents are becoming ever clearer,” he said. “We are pursuing many lines of inquiry.”

Police arrested a 26-year-old man in Liverpool. Two houses in the city were also raided. A man aged 26 and a woman of 27 were arrested on the M6 heading north in Cheshire. Addresses were searched in the Glasgow suburbs and in Newcastle-under-Lyme.

Various British media organisations reported that the two arrested on the M6 were doctors, and that one of them worked at North Staffordshire Hospital, but there was no official confirmation of this.

Jacqui Smith, the new home secretary, said she would make a statement to parliament on Monday.

Sunday, July 01, 2007

Sexual orientation only natural

Sexual orientation only natural
BY MONROE ANDERSON
Copyright by The Chicago Sun-Times
July 1, 2007

Except for my bare-knuckled politics, I am not a lefty. I was born and bred right-handed and have never strayed. On the other hand, I harbor no ill will for those whom nature was not so accommodating.

Some of my best friends are southpaws. So was my first wife. Through the ages, all over the planet, being left-handed has not been naturally good. It's sometimes called Cain's hand and has been associated with Satan and evil in the Christian world, while offering a left for a handshake greeting is a serious personal insult in Arab society. It even has its own think tank to strategize about keeping the left-handed from being left out: Indiana University's Handedness Research Institute.

After all these centuries, lefties are still facing discrimination. It's a right-handed world.

In an effort to correct their handedness, small children are still abused for using their hand of choice instead of their right. Some lefty police and soldiers still find themselves at risk because their gun holsters hang right, making it a challenge for them to be quick on the draw. Spiral notebooks, three-ring binders, even pencil sharpeners are still user-unfriendly for the left-handed. So are most classroom desks, with an arm rest designed to support the right elbow. The few left-handed desks available are typically placed in the back of the classroom, reports the institute, which also quotes on its Web site lefties who claim not being hired because of wrong-handedness, or report that a left hand was tied behind the back to force a fit to the norm.

Nobody knows how many of the estimated 13 percent of the world's lefties have been turned out through such dedicated efforts to make them right. Nor does anyone know why they were born using that other hand to begin with.

Nor does anyone know why some people are born gay. We do know, however, that statistically speaking, there are about the same number of gays in this world as there are lefties.

And we should know that the biggest difference between the left-handed and the gay -- if we follow the American Family Association and its founder and chairman, the Rev. Donald E. Wildmon -- is a matter of agenda. Left-handers have none. Gays have an insidious one. They're ''intent on molding American culture in their own image,'' according to Wildmon and his organization, which he claims numbers more than 3 million.

A couple of weeks ago, the Association and its leaders launched an action alert on a bill in Congress that they assert would make pastors and other Christians subject to huge fines and prison terms if they say hateful things about homosexuality.

''The proposed law could make it a crime to preach on Romans Chapter 1 or I Corinthians Chapter 6. Or even to discuss them in a Sunday School class. If churches and individuals want to keep the government from telling them what they can and cannot preach and teach about homosexuality, they better get involved now!'' the association advised.

Never mind that Snopes, the urban legends Web site, has determined the association's claim about the bill is false. The radical right religious organization remains steadfast in insisting that if this bill passes, ''liberal judges will rush to make it a federal crime to publicly criticize the homosexual lifestyle.''

And never mind that more than half of America is not so quick to curse or condemn. A CNN opinion poll last week reported that 56 percent of Americans believe that gays and lesbians could not change their sexual orientation even if they wanted to. In the poll, 42 percent of respondents also said they believe homosexuality results from upbringing and environment, while 39 percent said they believe it is something a person is born with -- a close call that echoes the national debate over nurture vs. nature.

Our sexual orientations, in reality, are no different from the rest of the animal world. Zoologists are discovering that, within and throughout the animal kingdom, homosexual and bisexual activity is a familiar occurrence.

So, if it's hands-down quantitatively natural, what makes some believe it's not?

Chicago Sun-Times Editorial - Legislators good at doing nothing

Chicago Sun-Times Editorial - Legislators good at doing nothing
Copyright byh The Chicago Sun-Times
July 1, 2007

State government won't shut down this month. Workers will get their checks, and vendors will be paid. Road projects won't be disrupted, and payments to the state's Medicaid providers won't fall any further behind than they already are. All of this is made possible not by a miraculous deal in Springfield but by the passage of a one-month, status quo budget -- or, as Sen. Matt Murphy (R-Palatine) appropriately called it, the "Political Cover for Obstinate Leaders Act."

This year's session went into overtime at the end of May, when state government's Democratic majority failed to agree on a budget. Looking back at June -- when the minority Republicans finally got a seat at the table -- it's hard to see what our leaders accomplished other than making themselves look bad. At the top of the list is Gov. Blagojevich, who demanded lawmakers work in Springfield five days a week, something he's never managed to do, and then added to his image problems by spending thousands of taxpayers dollars to fly back and forth to Springfield nearly every work day. Speaker Michael Madigan (D-Chicago) also deserves criticism for repeatedly insisting that "the House has passed a budget," when he knows full well the budget it passed is full of holes.

Now they've bought themselves a month. They won't return to work, however, until after they march in hometown Fourth of July parades. Here's hoping citizens will remind them why they were sent to Springfield, so they'll come back, put their egos aside and get something done.

Chicago Sun-Times Editorial - High court denies equal education

Chicago Sun-Times Editorial - High court denies equal education
Copyright by The Chicago Sun-Times
July 1, 2007


Whatever side of the school integration issue you are on, you can sympathize with Crystal Meredith, the Louisville woman who sued the local school system over its racially determined admission policy because it forced her to drive 90 minutes to pick up her son and drop him off at his father's for visitation. Based on the fact that he is white, he was denied admission to two schools closer to home because it would upset their racial balance. Many other families across the country, white and black, have found themselves similarly inconvenienced in a big way by integration programs. As understandable as their unhappiness over these conditions is, there is a larger cause than theirs under consideration here: the crucial cause of equal education for minorities, which the landmark Brown vs. Board of Education ruling zeroed in on 53 years ago and which remains a prime concern of school reformers. In striking down school integration programs in Louisville and Seattle, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt a potentially crippling blow to that cause. Adding insult to injury, Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, actually said the court was acting in the spirit of Brown in disallowing the schools to "discriminate on the basis of race."

It remains to be seen how profoundly the bitterly divided 5-4 decision will overhaul the status quo. As with other recent close decisions by the high court, this one saw strong disagreement within the five-member conservative bloc that carried the day. While agreeing that the programs in Louisville and Seattle were unconstitutional, Justice Anthony Kennedy scored Roberts for his "all-too-unyielding insistence that race cannot be a factor in instances when, in my view, it may be taken into account." Racial diversity in schools, he said, was a worthy goal that could be pursued by school districts through "narrowly tailored" programs. We can anticipate widespread efforts to meet that criterion.

For the moment, Chicago schools likely won't be affected by the decision. A 1980 desegregation consent decree placed public schools under federal oversight. Efforts to get the decree lifted have failed and, according to Chicago Public Schools attorney Patrick Rocks, it takes precedence over the Supreme Court decision. But at some point, Rocks said, the CPS will ask to terminate the decree. Where that will leave the city's magnet schools, which to varying degrees use race as a factor in their evaluation of applications, is open to conjecture. Elsewhere in Illinois, there appears to be no immediate threat to standing policies.

The court's decision might seem a bit more reasonable if schools were closing in on the goal of equality. But statistics tell us that more than one in six black children attend schools that are overwhelmingly minority in composition. As Justice Stephen Breyer said in his dissenting opinion, "The last half-century has witnessed great strides toward racial equality, but we have not yet realized the promise of Brown. To invalidate the plans under review is to threaten the promise of Brown. The plurality's position, I fear, would break that promise. This is a decision that the court and the nation will come to regret."

Got your passport? You sure it's OK?

Got your passport? You sure it's OK?
By James Gilden
Copyright by The Chicago Tribune
Published July 1, 2007

If you are one of the record millions of Americans who has recently applied for a passport, you will want to double check it very carefully when you -- eventually -- receive it. If it contains errors -- a growing likelihood, some say -- expect at minimum delays at the airport. At worst? You could miss your trip altogether.

Travel documents, especially passports and airline tickets, have received increased scrutiny at the airport post-9/11. Accurately matching a traveler's identity to his or her ticket is an important step in the increased security we see today in our nation's airports.

This is part of the reason Congress passed the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI). Beginning last January, air travelers entering the U.S. from Mexico, Canada and most of the Caribbean have been required to carry a valid passport. U.S. citizens accustomed to traveling to these regions without a passport have since inundated the U.S. Passport Agency with a record number of applications, causing delays in processing as staff and government contractors struggle to meet the demand.

In addition to delays in processing (now 12 weeks for normal processing), the number of errors being introduced into passports has also risen, says Colin Walle, a senior passport specialist and local president of the passport worker's union at the Seattle Passport Agency.

Though the government has added employees to help with the increased workload, it is fewer than they had planned. The State Department planned on adding 468 passport workers, most of whom were to be adjudicators, according to Walle. Only about 185 new adjudicators have been added. The result has been mandatory overtime for employees who are expected to determine an applicant's eligibility for a U.S. passport at the rate of 24 per hour.

So is this scenario leading to more errors in processing?

"I don't think I can quantify that, but the answer is yes," Walle said. "You just make more mistakes when you're tired."

Adjudicators were held to a 1 percent error rate prior to the implementation of WHTI, a rate that Walle says is no longer a standard. Even if just 1 percent of passports had an error, that would be 170,000 out of the estimated 17 million being applied for this year. Of course not all errors are to an applicant's name, but the potential is there.

Travelers can go online and fill out their own applications (travel.state.gov, click on "passports" then "applications and forms"), thus eliminating one potential source of input error, assuming you don't make any mistakes on your own information. Or so you'd think.

If printed out and taken directly to a passport agency, the bar code on the application can be scanned and the information is downloaded directly into the agency's database. But if it is mailed in, the contractor hired to input the data, Citigroup, cannot scan the bar code and must rekey all the data, opening the door for input errors.

"The quality of the data entry is so poor from the current provider," Walle said.

The government says it's on the case, but a State Department spokesman wouldn't comment on why the contractor was not required to be able to process the bar code data to begin with.

"We are working with our government partner and our private partner to process a record number of passports and to streamline the process," said Steve Royster, a spokesman for consular affairs at the State Department. "We've hired over 250 regular government and contract employees, and we're still extending offers of employment."

Showing up at the airport with a passport that doesn't exactly match your name is not necessarily the end of your trip, but it will likely lead to delays.

"If you have a passport that has a discrepancy, you can still travel," said Transportation Security Administration spokesman Nico Melendez. "There has to be a level of common sense applied to security, and we try to do that."

Even people who have lost or had their identification stolen can travel, Melendez said. But expect a higher level of scrutiny at security.

Airline polices vary but not widely.

"When there are slight, obvious differences between the name on a ticket and a passport, we are happy to accommodate," said United spokeswoman Robin Urbanski. "If there is a significant difference, we will change the ticket complimentary if we made the error. If the passport is incorrect, we suggest bringing other documentation like a marriage certificate or birth certificate."

British Airways has a similar policy.

"The passport name must agree with the name on the international airline ticket," said British Airways spokesman John Lampl. "If you book through the Internet and give your own wrong name -- not what's on the passport -- you have to pay for [a] change fee. Believe me, people do it."

If BA makes the error, there is no change fee. Lufthansa has a similar policy.

"We're very careful to compare the passport name to the name on the ticket, both for security and for fraud reasons," said Lufthansa spokeswoman Jennifer Urbaniak.

"However, we will accept a name spelling discrepancy on a ticket if it is off by several characters -- or as long as the name and order in general matches."

"If a passenger's name has been misspelled or transposed, we can make the necessary change and waive the applicable change fee," Tim Wagner, a spokesman for American Airlines, said with regard to customers who book through American Airlines Reservations or AA.com. "It is permissible to change a first name that would correct a nickname to a given name, e.g. Bob to Robert, and any prefixes, e.g. Ms. to Dr.

"Customers who booked through a travel agent, or online travel agency (Expedia, Orbitz, et al.), should work through their travel agent to have changes made. The customer may be subject to pay any applicable change fee as a result of a ticket reissue," he said.

If in checking your new passport you find an error, get it fixed as quickly as possible.

"Bring it to our attention," said the State Department's Royster. "Call the national info line 877-487-2778 and let us know about the error."

If you have an emergency situation, they will work with you, he said.

At the local passport agency office in Chicago (Kluczynski Federal Building, 230 S. Dearborn St., 18th floor) you can try to make an appointment (at the number above), or just show up and take your chances.

"Calling and asking for an appointment can accomplish an expedited turnaround," Walle said.

If all else fails, call your member of Congress. They can pull strings and have access to phone lines unavailable to the general public.

Layoff fears part of 'new normal' - Affluence, college education no protection from job market that cycles quickly through workers

Layoff fears part of 'new normal' - Affluence, college education no protection from job market that cycles quickly through workers
By Barbara Rose, Tribune staff reporter. Tribune staff reporter Darnell Little contributed to this report
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 1, 2007

Good skills and a good attitude no longer ensure steady employment, even when the economy is humming. This is the first in an occasional series about job loss and the changing nature of employment.

The center of greater Barrington, population 40,000, is a compact village reminiscent of a Norman Rockwell painting. Radiating in all directions are six affiliated communities offering winding roads with 5-acre lots and gated enclaves. Nearby corporate headquarters include Motorola Inc. in Schaumburg, Sears Holdings Corp. in Hoffman Estates, Allstate Corp. in Northbrook, and Baxter International Inc. and Walgreen Co., both in Deerfield. Eighty-six percent of greater Barrington's employed adults work as managers and professionals, or in sales and office jobs. The median household income tops $110,000.

But below the surface of a strong economy is an unsettling trend that may be contributing to worrying changes in the school lunch program and elsewhere. Residents seem to be losing jobs at a faster clip. They land back on their feet but not necessarily at the kind of salaries to which they had become accustomed.

"There's more recycling going on, faster cycling," said retired consultant Philip Roussel, who sits on the board of the Barrington Career Center, which helps job seekers in the northwest suburbs. Despite low unemployment, attendance at a weekly networking meeting is up 37 percent.

People find jobs faster in a good economy "but more people are losing jobs than you might think," Roussel says.

Barrington's awakening to a national trend of rising rates of job loss for better-educated workers is a mirror for profound changes in white-collar employment. More than a decade after economists declared the old system of steady lifetime jobs dead, white-collar workers are struggling with the fact they can be laid off even in good times, more than once during a career.

It wasn't always the case.

When Barrington residents were asked in 1996 to check which of 10 difficulties their household faced, "difficulty finding child care" got the biggest score. It was the first survey by a coalition of 20 non-profit and government groups.

By 2005, "involuntary job loss due to downsizing or other reason" topped the list, followed closely by "difficulty paying bills" and "put off health care" because of cost or lack of insurance. By comparison, child care had become a minor issue.

The 2005 survey, the latest one, came as a shock because 16 percent of residents who responded said someone in their household had lost a job within the previous 12 months -- more than eight times the 1996 rate.

"We were surprised by it," said Sylvia Boeder, community relations director at Barrington's Advocate Good Shepherd Hospital, who heads a committee studying the issue.

The responses were puzzling because the economy generated more jobs than were lost in 2005. Yet the recycling created losers. Employers in the north and northwest suburbs shed more than 3,600 jobs that year because of shutdowns or restructuring, according to state data.

Barrington officials don't have answers, but they wonder whether job churn contributes to changes they see surfacing.

Deborah Villers sensed something was different several years ago when it came time to get ready for annual "Giving Day" in mid-December. Organizers invite needy families to a school gymnasium filled with donated toys, clothes and food.

Villers' job at Barrington Community Unit School District 220 was to prepare a mailing list of households that received free or subsidized school lunches. But unlike years past, the schools' allotment of 300 invitations wasn't enough to cover all the families. Unnerved, she pared the list to free lunch recipients, but there were still 50 too many. Familiar addresses leaped out at her. They were from affluent neighborhoods, not just lower-income communities on Barrington's fringes.

"They were all over the place, they were names you knew and recognized on this list," she recalls. "It was disturbing."

Activity is brisk at the non-profit Barrington Career Center, which served 600 people from 100 communities last year.

"The information that comes out from the Department of Labor makes it look like it's a really rosy picture, but that's not what we see at all," says Monica Keane, the center's director.

Linda Spinelli, out of work since her position as vice president of purchasing for a local home builder was eliminated in February, visited the center for the first time this spring.

She scanned the sign-in sheet, her eyes jumping down the titles -- general manager, director, senior analyst -- and former employers -- Motorola, Bank of America, R.R. Donnelley, Allstate. "Whoa, these are heavy hitters, people in the same position I'm in," the Barrington resident recalls thinking.

Unemployment is lower for better-educated workers than for other workers, in good times as well as bad, federal data show. But college-educated workers lose jobs more often now than they did 20 years ago.

"It appears that there has been an upsurge in job-loss rates for more-educated workers in the early and mid-1990s and again in the new century," writes a leading job-loss researcher, Princeton University's Henry S. Farber. "Job-loss rates for other educational groups show a cyclical pattern but no upward trend."

Income loss is greater too. The average earnings decline including lost raises was 21 percent for workers forced to find new full-time jobs between 2001 and 2003, four times the mid-1990s rate, Farber found.

Ray Ercoli heads a career ministry at Barrington's Willow Creek Community Church. He added volunteers and services in 2001 to help unemployed high-tech workers, but people kept coming after the economy recovered.

"The need we see now are older workers losing their jobs after being employed 15 to 20 years, usually at one company," he says. Some have that "deer-in-the-headlights look. They're not sure they're going to be able to land another job."

Richard H. Price, a leading researcher on the psychological impact of job loss, says the blow to self-esteem is heavy, especially for professionals. But the increased rates of illness, depression, anxiety and marital conflict that he and others documented among displaced U.S. workers stem mainly from the economic fallout -- the "cascade of stressors" flowing from reduced income and loss of benefits like health care, he says.

"People focus so much on the job loss itself, what they forget is you're plunging people into quasi-poverty," says Price, research professor at the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research. "Even if a spouse is working they are going to be going through a lot of the issues others do. If they're a 50-year-old person who was moderately successful, their chance of landing another comparable job can be very low."

Fatigue from the pain of a herniated disc showed plainly on Carl Clouse's face, but he didn't let it color his voice. He stood at his desk, dialing prospective customers. If he didn't feel pressure to prove himself in his new job, he would be home taking care of his back.

Clouse got laid off for the first time in 2001 when Motorola eliminated his job as a senior manager in strategic marketing for an Internet software group. He had been with the company 16 years.

He operated his own marketing firm until his major client got sold last year. Then, six months after a trade show services company hired him as sales director in March, a new chief executive eliminated his position. "I just sucked it in. I couldn't believe it," he says.

He carried his belongings to his car and drove directly to the unemployment office, where the person who processed his application tried to reassure him by saying workers can expect to lose eight jobs in a career.

"You've only had two so you've done pretty good," the unemployment person said.

Clouse thought, "Six more times, I sure hope not."

For weeks he avoided leaving his Barrington home during the day because he didn't want his neighbors to know he was out of work. "It's tremendously embarrassing," he says. "Your self-esteem is shot."

Finally he started walking his 10-year-old son down the driveway to the school bus stop.

His new sales job pays one-third less than his last. His wife, a student at a local college, will hunt for work when she finishes her associate's degree.

Worry punctured the burst of pride he felt when his son recently made the cut for a soccer team. How would he afford the team's $1,575 in travel fees?

Vesna Arsic avoids Barrington, where she lived when she got laid off from a director-level position at Motorola in 2002.

She picked up the pieces and moved on, reinventing herself as an independent marketing consultant and selling her family's home to relocate with her son downtown. But the experience left a mark.

"It took a heavy emotional toll," she says. "I don't even like going back there. If somebody invites me to a party in Barrington, I don't like to go."

At a recent Tuesday morning networking meeting at the Barrington Career Center, the mood is determinedly upbeat. Unlike the dark years from 2001 through 2003, when it seemed nobody was hiring, people are getting interviews.

A former national account manager for an industrial supply company tells the group he was unnerved by the question, "I want you to describe yourself using nothing on your resume."

"It took me for a loop," he says. "I kind of fumbled around and finally said, 'I biked through the forest preserve for 12 miles this morning.' "

"Have you written a value statement?" one participant offers. "You could describe yourself that way."

Another job seeker declines an offer of help getting in the door at one of the area's blue-chip industrial companies. "They have an incredible turnover rate," he says.

"I think the turnover rate is pretty high everywhere," another job seeker says.

For some, such company is comforting. For others, it can be a depressing reminder that successful performance is no guarantee of steady work.

"The person I sat next to, I knew him from when his company was on the top of the game," Clouse says. "For me to see this gentleman on the curb, it blows me away."

Arsic, the marketing consultant, is philosophical: "To me, this is the new normal."

----------

berose@tribune.com

A high court favor to the Democrats

A high court favor to the Democrats
By Clarence Page
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune
Published July 1, 2007

WASHINGTON -- It may have been purely coincidental that the Supreme Court banned the use of race to achieve racial diversity in public schools only hours before the year's first presidential debate to focus on minority issues.

Coincidence or not, the Supremes could hardly have handed Democratic candidates a better issue with which to energize their liberal base.

The 5-4 decision by Chief Justice John Roberts declared Thursday that public school systems cannot use a student's race to achieve or maintain integration. The decision invalidated programs in Seattle and metropolitan Louisville that tried to maintain schoolby- school diversity by using race to limit transfers or as a "tiebreaker" for admission to particular schools. Hundreds of school districts across the country have similar plans in place.

It is a sign of how complicated race has become as a legal and political issue that justices on both sides of the decision claimed to be acting in the best spirit of the landmark 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education school desegregation decision.

In his new role as the court's swing vote, Justice Anthony Kennedy voted with the majority, but dissented in a separate opinion that criticized Roberts' view as "too dismissive" of such "compelling interests" as "avoiding racial isolation" and resegregation.

Kennedy's moderating influence leaves a door open for school districts to try for racial diversity through the use of non-racial proxies like home addresses or family income.

Yet, it is easy to imagine Democrats making an issue of the difference judicial appointments make in the wake of a decision that dissenting Justice Stephen Breyer denounced as a "radical" step away from settled law. I can already see attack ads showing President Bush's face morphing into Roberts' and morphing into, say, the late Alabama Gov. George Wallace blocking black students in schoolhouse doors in the early 1960s.

Such themes were eagerly picked up at the Democratic debate before a mostly black audience at historically black Howard University. Emceed by talk show host Tavis Smiley and sponsored by PBS, the "All-American Presidential Forum" will be repeated in September with a debate among the Republican candidates.

The event seemed to be ideally suited to showcase Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, the only black candidate among the eight on the stage, and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, the only Latino.

It should surprise no one that Obama ran away with that issue. He cast himself as a product of the Brown decision and knowledgeably praised Thurgood Marshall, then the chief counsel for the NAACP and later the first black Supreme Court justice, who developed his winning Brown arguments at Howard's law school. "If it hadn't been for them, I would not be standing here today," Obama said.

Richardson noted that "issues of diversity for me -- the first Latino to run for president-- aren't talking points. They are facts of life."

Yet, unlike the earlier debates that featured Iraq as an incendiary issue, this one was remarkably free of clashes between the candidates. There were few surprises of the sort that move poll numbers.

That means Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York wins. Despite the media excitement generated by Obama, Clinton has been a consistent frontrunner in polls of Democratic primary voters. That made her the candidate to beat, and her seven opponents never laid a glove on her.

She scored further points by exhibiting the poise, confidence and passion that comes from years of dealing with the issues and with black audiences, despite the ridicule heaped upon her by conservatives. The more she is criticized from the right, the more sympathy she appears to generate on the left and the middle, particularly among women voters.

The bigger news was happening off-camera as unofficial reports show Clinton and Obama each raked in more donations during the second quarter of this year than all top five Democratic contenders at this point in 2003-- combined. That would put more distance between themselves and former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, who has been running a strong third in the polls.

The post-debate spin of Obama's campaign team is that he is very comfortable with his position and doesn't want to peak too soon. That's wise. But while Obama appears to be winning favor with the party's black voters, Clinton is winning among women, which is a much larger bloc of voters.

With other big issues like abortion rights hanging in the balance, the Supreme Court may have given the Clinton campaign a major boost. Republicans used abortion rights to rally voters on the right. Clinton could use the same issue to energize the left -- and the middle.

----------

Clarence Page is a member of the Tribune's editorial board.