Overnight Music Video - Diana Ross and Marvin Gaye ~ You Are Everything ♥ ♥

Video - Dearborn'istan' Police stand down as Christians assaulted by Muslims at 2012 Arab Festival.

Video - Dearborn'istan' Police stand down as Christians assaulted by Muslims at 2012 Arab Festival.(Shoebat).The surrender of Dearborn, MI to Islam is all but complete. This may be one of the most important videos in a long, long time. Background: A group of Christians showed up at the annual 2012 Arab Festival, holding signs and wearing t-shirts to communicate their message. There are many things to take note of as you watch. First, the mob assaults the Christians with debris (rocks, bottles, crates, etc.). Second, the police do nothing to stop it. Read the full story here.Via The United West.

More from AnsweringMuslims, David Wood: The Dearborn Saga continues.

There's no questioning the fact that Ruben Israel's group came to the Dearborn Arab Festival to provoke a response from Muslims. But their actions were protected by the U.S. Constitution. The violent response they received from Muslims, however, was illegal. Every bottle, rock, or milk crate thrown was an assault.

I'm no fan of Ruben Israel. Indeed, I'm appalled at some of his group's antics. Yet I can't help but think that the city has brought this on themselves. Why did Ruben Israel come to the festival? Because Dearborn Police started arresting Christians (myself included) for peacefully sharing the Gospel in 2010. Thus, Ruben's message is: "If you're going to start messing with Christians, you're going to have to deal with us."

Obama Phone: Gov to Spend $2,4 Billion taxpayer money On Millions of Free Phones In 2012.

FlashBack - March 2012 -Obama Phone: Gov to Spend $2,4 Billion taxpayer money On Millions of Free Phones In 2012.(SHTP).By Mac Salvo.One of the complaints about the U.S. Constitution recently, being as outdated as it is, is that it fails to guarantee certain unalienable rights such as free medical care, housing , food, and of course, the right to bear cell phones.
And, although the founders failed to specifically cite social programs as a necessary element for promoting the general welfare, the living nature of our founding document has been interpreted by political and legal scholars alike to allow for the seizure of assets by force from one group of people in order to redistribute those assets in a fair and responsible manner to those less fortunate.
As such, if you’re one of the 100 million Americans living below or at the edge of the poverty line, you’ll be happy to know that you more than likely qualify for a free cellular phone, also known as the Obama Phone, from the US government:

The Lifeline and Link Up programs are available to qualifying consumers in every state, territory, commonwealth, and on Tribal lands. Eligibility criteria vary by state. For states that rely solely on the federal Lifeline and Link Up program eligibility criteria, subscribers must either have an income that is at or below 135% of the federal Poverty Guidelines or participate in one of the following assistance programs:
•Medicaid,
•Food Stamps,
•Supplemental Security Income (SSI),
•Federal Public Housing Assistance (Section 8),
•Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP),
•Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), or
•The National School Lunch Program’s Free Lunch Program.

The qualification requirements apply to roughly half of all American households, because according to recent statistics some 48.5% of Americans receive benefits from the government programs above.
According to a recent ruling by the FCC, the Lifeline and Link Up programs will now be expanded to provide wireless (and wireline broadband) coverage to more Americans than ever before:
The Lifeline-eligible population has increased significantly over the past decade. Since 1999, real median household income in the U.S. has declined by 7.1 percent, while households at the bottom of the income scale have seen their income decline by 12.1 percent.
In 2010, 46.2 million Americans were living in poverty, defined as living at or below the benchmark established in the FPG, compared to 31.6 million in 2000.
As household income has declined and more carriers have offered Lifeline-supported service, the program hasexperienced significant growth. In the absence of today’s Order, which manages the size of the Fund in part by establishing a savings target, the program would provide an estimated $2.4 billion in support in 2012; that compares to an inflation-adjusted $582 million it provided in 1998 when five million subscribers participated in the program.
Source: Federal Communication Commission [pdf]
Over $2.4 billion in freshly printed dollars will be directed towards the program, which aims to connect tens of millions of poverty stricken Americans to the digital grid.
While we realize that some of those individuals, like those who cannot work for medical reasons for example, need access to phones in the event of an emergency, we can’t help but wonder how many millions of people like Duane Brooks, Jr. will be able to make calls, send text messages, and update their Facebook profiles instantly at the expense of others.Hmmmm......Buying votes with taxpayer funded free phones.Does it come with free textmessages from Barack Hussein Obama?Read the full story here

Gov. Jan Brewer: " President Obama is not above judgment – and the American people will have theirs very soon."

Gov. Jan Brewer: " President Obama is not above judgment – and the American people will have theirs very soon."(CNSNews).Hours after the Supreme Court upheld a key provision of Arizona's immigration law, President Obama "demonstrated anew his utter disregard for the safety and security of the Arizona people," Gov. Jan Brewer announced on Monday.

"Within the last two hours, I have been notified the Obama administration has revoked the 287(g) agreement," which allows Arizona police to partner with the federal government in enforcing immigration law.

It's no coincidence, Brewer said, noting that while 68 law enforcement bodies in 24 states have 287(g) agreements with the federal government, the only agreement eliminated on Monday was the one with Arizona -- "the state that happens to be on the front lines of America's fight against illegal immigration," she said.

"We are on our own, apparently," Brewer said in the statement posted on her website.“I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised," she continued. "The Obama administration has fought the people of Arizona at every turn --“The President’s action should be of concern to all Americans," Brewer said. "This fight is not over. President Obama may disregard Congress. He may target individual states like Arizona. He may generally act with impunity. But he is not above judgment – and the American people will have theirs very soon.”Read the full story here.More here.

Obama White House defends support of new Egyptian president amid GOP criticism.

Obama White House defends support of new Egyptian president amid GOP criticism.(TheHill).The White House defended its support of the newly elected Egyptian president amid Republican criticism Monday, saying he will be judged by his actions, not religion.
The Obama administration on Sunday praised the outcome of Egypt’s election on Sunday, which was won by Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist party.
That prompted Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) to declare on his Facebook page that the Obama administration should cut off foreign aid to Egypt and denounce the election results and the Muslim Brotherhood.
West concluded that the Egyptian elections had shown that“the Arab Spring is nothing more than a radical Islamic nightmare.”
White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters on Air Force One that the Obama administration was committed to the Arab Spring revolution in Egypt that led to their democratic elections held this past week.
He said the administration looks forward to working with Morsi and hopes he will respect the rights of all Egyptian citizens, including women and religious minorities.
“We judge individuals and parties that are elected in a democratic process by their actions, not by their religious affiliations,”Carney said. One of the biggest concerns for U.S. officials with the transition in Egypt is its neighbor, Israel. When asked about the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood affecting Egyptian-Israeli relations, Carney pointed to Morsi’s statement that Egypt would continue to uphold its treaty obligations.
“A treaty that is, of course, of great importance is the one that it has with Israel,” he said.
Carney was less direct on how Morsi would interact with Iran, as he declined to address Iran specifically when asked if Egypt would restore its ties with Tehran.
“It's appropriate for a nation like Egypt to have relations with other nations in the region,” Carney said.Hmmmm.........."he will be judged by his actions, not religion."Obama: "“We will hold sacred the beliefs held sacred by others.”Doesn't sound like 'Christian' or 'Copt' to me.Read the full story here.

The Evils of the Muslim Brotherhood: Evidence Keeps Mounting.

The Evils of the Muslim Brotherhood: Evidence Keeps Mounting.(IPT).By Raymond Ibrahim Special to IPT News.Egypt's longtime banned Muslim Brotherhood—the parent organization of nearly every subsequent Islamist movement, including al-Qaeda—has just won the nation's presidency, in the name of its candidate, Muhammad Morsi. That apathy reigns in the international community, when once such news would have been deemed devastating, is due to the successful efforts of subversive Muslim apologists in the West who portray the Brotherhood as "moderate Islamists"—forgetting that such a formulation is oxymoronic, since to be "Islamist," to be a supporter of draconian Sharia, is by definition to be immoderate. Obama administration officials naturally took it a step further, portraying the Brotherhood as "largely secular" and "pluralistic."

Back in the real world, evidence that the Brotherhood is just another hostile Islamist group bent on achieving world domination through any means possible is overwhelming. Here are just three examples that recently surfaced, all missed by the Western media, and all exposing the Brotherhood as hostile to "infidels" (non-Muslims) in general, hostile to the Christians in their midst (the Copts) in particular, and on record calling on Muslims to lie and cheat during elections to empower Sharia.In short, the Muslim Brotherhood has not changed; only Western opinion of it has. As it was since its founding in 1928, the group is committed to empowering and spreading Sharia law—a law that preaches hate for non-Muslim "infidels," especially Islam's historic nemesis, Christianity, and allows anything, from lying to cheating, to make Islam supreme. Now that the Brotherhood has finally achieved power, the world can prepare to see such aspects on a grand scale.Read the full story here.

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum

Video - Hamas Interior Minister Fathi Hammad Vows to Liberate Cities in Israel, Including Jerusalem, Haifa, Jaffa, Akko, Lod, and Ramle.

Video - Hamas Interior Minister Fathi Hammad Vows to Liberate Cities in Israel, Including Jerusalem, Haifa, Jaffa, Akko, Lod, and Ramle.


Following are excerpts from footage of a Gaza police academy graduation ceremony, in which Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security Fathi Hammad delivered an address. The footage aired on Al-Aqsa TV on June 13, 2012.

Announcer: Now that we have heard the song of the men, here is a little Palestinian girl, a flower of Jerusalem, who insisted on participating in this ceremony. Rawan is the daughter of one of the officers at the Palestinian police academy. Please welcome Rawan Khilla, who will recite what she has to say, the words on which she was raised.

Rawan Khilla: Glory explodes in your bodies, and eternal life is guaranteed for martyrdom-seekers.

Fathi Hammad, Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security: Allah says: “Prepare for them what force and steeds of war you can.” The Prophet Muhammad says: “Prepare for them what force you can. Force means shooting.” The Prophet Muhammad also says: “Lands shall be thrown open to you, and Allah will protect you, but none of you should give up playing with his arrows.”
None of you should give up playing with all the tools of force and equipment, which will bring us closer to our aspirations: Jerusalem, the Al-Aqsa Mosque, Haifa, Akko and Jaffa.

From this place, I bring you glad tidings: The officers of the class graduating today will become the Police Chief of Jaffa, the Police Chief of Haifa, the Police Chief of Akko, the Police Chief of Lod, the Police Chief of Ramle, and of all other places.

Therefore, from this place, we declare to all those who usurped our lands that they must prepare to leave, because we have prepared for Jihad. You are going to leave, while we are summoned to battle. We are the owners of this land.

We say: There shall be no reconciliation with secularism. There shall be no reconciliation with any path other than that of Islam.

This is an opportunity for you to study at our academy how to defend our battlefront and how to be soldiers of Allah. We will not be the soldiers of the US, of the Zionists, or of the hypocrites. We are determined to proceed along the path of Allah.

Therefore, dear brothers, we speak with conviction. Some might say: You are talking as if victory is imminent. Yes, victory is imminent. Victory is ours, and disgrace will be the lot of all the hypocrites, who agreed to be the shoes on the feet of the Zionists and the Americans.Indeed, victory is coming. Victory is imminent. Hmmmm.......Obama's 'peacepartners'. Source: Memri.

Video - Michael Coren and Daniel Pipes: "Making Sense of the Egyptian Presidential Election."

After an Israeli Strike on Iran.

After an Israeli Strike on Iran.(DanielPipes).By Daniel Pipes. June 26, 2012.

[N.B.: This version differs slight from the Washington Times text]

 How will Iranians respond to an Israeli strike against their nuclear infrastructure? The answers to this prediction matters greatly, affecting not just Jerusalem's decision but also how much other states work to impede an Israeli strike.
Analysts generally offer up best-case predictions for policies of deterrence and containment (some commentators even go so far as to welcome an Iranian nuclear capability) while forecasting worst-case results from a strike. They foresee Tehran doing everything possible to retaliate, such as kidnapping, terrorism, missile attacks, naval combat, and closing the Strait of Hormuz. These predictions ignore two facts: neither of Israel's prior strikes against enemy states building nuclear weapons, Iraq in 1981 and Syria in 2007, prompted retaliation; and a review the Islamic Republic of Iran's history since 1979 points to "a more measured and less apocalyptic—if still sobering—assessment of the likely aftermath of a preventive strike."

The authors, Michael Eisenstadt and Michael Knights of the Washington Institute for Near Eastern Policy.

Those are the words of Michael Eisenstadt and Michael Knights of the Washington Institute for Near Eastern Policy, who provide an excellent guide to possible scenarios in "Beyond Worst-Case Analysis: Iran's Likely Responses to an Israeli Preventive Strike." Their survey of Iranian behavior over the past three decades leads them to anticipate that three main principles would likely shape and limit Tehran's response to an Israeli strike: an insistence on reciprocity, a caution not to gratuitously make enemies, and a wish to deter further Israeli (or American) strikes.

The mullahs, in other words, face serious limits on their ability to retaliate, including military weakness and a pressing need not to make yet more external enemies. With these guidelines in place, Eisenstadt and Knights consider eight possible Iranian actions, each of which must be assessed while keeping in mind the alternative – namely, apocalyptic Islamists controlling nuclear weapons:

• Terrorist attacks on Israeli, Jewish, and U.S. targets. Likely but causing limited destruction.
• Kidnapping U.S. citizens, especially in Iraq. Likely, but limited in impact, as in the 1980s in Lebanon.
• Attacks on Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan. Very likely, especially via proxies, but causing limited destruction.
• Missile strikes on Israel. Likely: a few missiles from Iran get through Israeli defenses, leading to casualties likely in the low hundreds; missiles from Hezbollah limited in number due to domestic Lebanese considerations. Unlikely: Hamas getting involved, having distanced itself from Tehran; the Syrian government, which is battling for its life against an ever-stronger opposition army and possibly also the Turkish armed forces. Overall, missile attacks are unlikely to do devastating damage.
• Attacks on neighboring states. Likely: terrorism, because deniable. Unlikely: missile strikes, for Tehran does not want to make more enemies.
• Clashes with the U.S. Navy. Likely: but, given the balance of power, does limited damage.
• Covertly mining the Strait of Hormuz. Likely, causing a run-up in energy prices.
• Attempted closing the Strait of Hormuz. Unlikely: difficult to achieve and potentially too damaging to Iranian interests, for the country needs that same strait for commerce.

The authors also consider three potential side effects of an Israeli strike. Yes, Iranians might rally to their government in the immediate aftermath of a strike, but in the longer term Tehran "could be criticized for handling the nuclear dossier in a way that led to military confrontation." The so-called Arab street is perpetually predicted to rise up in response to outside military attack, but it never does; likely unrest among the Shi'a of the Persian Gulf would be counterbalanced by the many Arabs quietly cheering the Israelis. As for leaving the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and starting an overt crash nuclear weapons program, while "a very real possibility," the more the Iranians retaliate, the harder they will find it to obtain the parts for such a program.

The USS Enterprise – how serious is the Iranian threat against it?

In all, these dangers are unpleasant but not cataclysmic, manageable not devastating. Eisenstadt and Knights expect a short phase of high-intensity Iranian response, to be followed by a "protracted low intensity conflict that could last for months or even years" – much as already exists between Iran and Israel. An Israeli preventive strike, they conclude, while a "high-risk endeavor carrying a potential for escalation in the Levant or the Gulf, … would not be the apocalyptic event some foresee."
This analysis makes a convincing case that the danger of nuclear weapons falling into Iranian hands far exceeds the danger of a military strike to prevent that from happening.

Illustration by Linas Garsys for The Washington Times.

Mr. Pipes (www.DanielPipes.org) is president of the Middle East Forum and Taube distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University. © 2012 by Daniel Pipes. All rights reserved.

receive the latest by email: subscribe to daniel pipes' free mailing listThis text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

"Échec et mat" - This could be Russia's Masterstroke: Bailing Out Cyprus.

"Échec et mat" - This could be Russia's Masterstroke: Bailing Out Cyprus.(GI).By Peter Martino.

"Cyprus is a prey Russia has long been eyeing, both as a substitute for Syria, and as a permanent naval base for the Russian fleet in the Mediterranean."

What a fine mess the Europeans have made with their deluded dream of a common European currency for 17 countries with different languages, cultures, traditions and economic systems. As a result of the experiment with the euro, almost all countries along Europe's southern rim are on the brink of bankruptcy. One of them is Cyprus. It, too, urgently needs a bailout. This week, the Cypriotic government needs €4bn to recapitalize the country's second largest bank.Cyprus, however, is in a comfortable position. The other beggars are forced to accept bailout from the European Union in exchange for diminished national sovereignty, EU imposed austerity measures and direct supervision from Brussels over their budgets and economies. Cyprus, however, has an alternative. "We have other options," the Cypriotic Finance Minister Vassos Shiarly recently told journalists in Nicosia. Economists expect that to keep Cyprus afloat, it will need between €25 and 50bn in the coming years. Nicosia, however, is resisting pressure from the other EU countries to take a first bailout package worth as much as €10bn.
Cyprus does not want to accept the strings attached to the European offer. The Cypriotic alternative is called Russia. Last December, Moscow already gave Nicosia a bilateral loan of €3bn. Eager, since the era of Peter the Great, to acquire a strategic foothold in the Eastern Mediterranean, Russia is now offering even more. And with President Demetris Christofias of Cyprus happy to accommodate his friend Vladimir Putin, there is no doubt that Nicosia will turn to Moscow rather than to Brussels.Christofias is a Communist – he is, in fact, the only Communist leader in the European Union – and, under the EU's rotating chairmanship, he will be chairing the EU meetings from July 1^st until the end of the year.
As pointed out earlier in this Gatestone column, if Russia steps in, the strategic situation in the entire Eastern Mediterranean could change. Russia stands to gain most out of the eurozone crisis. Cyprus is a prey which it has long been eying. If Moscow loses Syria as its ally, it needs Cyprus as a substitute. Bailing out Nicosia is a bargain price to acquire a permanent naval base for the Russian fleet in the Eastern Mediterranean.
Cyprus is said to be so high on Russia's priority list that President Putin himself is currently dealing with the €4bn loan request from Nicosia. The interest charged by the Russians is 4.5%, which is far better than Cyprus can get anywhere else. The financial risk for the Russians is limited. There is every chance that Cyprus will be able to repay their bilateral loans fairly soon. Nicosia hopes to start exploiting the huge gas reserves off the Cypriotic coast in the coming decade. With Russian help, it might even be able to exploit these gas fields within the next five years.The gas fields are an additional reason why Cyprus is a good long-term investment for the Russians. But there are many other reasons. The Russian presence in Cyprus is already very strong. Cyprus is a favourite holiday resort for the Russian middle and upper classes. It could easily become a Russian Florida. Some 50,000 Russians – mostly retirees – are already living permanently on the island. They are attracted by its climate and by the cultural affinities with the Cypriots, who, like the Russians, are Orthodox Christians. Cyprus is also used by Russians as an offshore banking center. This, too, is why the Russians will do their best to support the Cypriotic banking system.A Russian deal is a win-win situation for both Russia and Cyprus. As soon as Russia has acquired a solid foothold on Cyprus, the third largest island of the Mediterranean Sea, it will be able to drop Assad, thereby reducing the current diplomatic tensions between Washington and Moscow over Syria. Cyprus, on the other hand, welcomes Russian backing: its intention to exploit the gas fields has merely led to tensions with Turkey. With the Russian bear behind its back, it will be easier to deter the Turks. The pro-Turkish attitude of the EU authorities in Brussels has long angered the Cypriots.
If Russia, as a result of its interference in Cyprus, becomes involved in a quarrel with Turkey, this, too, might lead to superficially better, if unreliable, relations with Israel. The animosity between Israel and its NATO ally Turkey has been rising lately. There is little doubt that Putin, during this week's visit to Israel, will discuss not just Syria, Iran and Turkey with the Israeli leadership, but also Russia's growing involvement in Cyprus.
If Cyprus proves to be better off with Russia's financial, political and strategic backing than Greece with the assistance of the European Union, the close relations between the Greeks and the Cypriots might convince Greece that it, too, should turn to Moscow rather than to Brussels for financial and economic help. A strategic realignment in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East might then be in the offing. If the EU and NATO keep regarding the pro-Islamic government in Turkey as their preferred ally, before they know it they might be confronted with an alliance of Russia, Cyprus and Greece – a strong Christian-Orthodox axis against the Turks. And whom would this alliance target after that?
Comment: The relationship between one's debt and its ability to conduct rationale and effective foreign policy is clear. America, with its massive debt puts herself in a most weak position. America's energy policies also place her in a position to not move to support stability in regions far away from her shores. For example, the gas field find in the Mediterranean is an energy game changer in this part of the world. It also established a new flash point for violence-Israel's gas filed find is being challenged by this same group-Cyprus is "next door" to Israel and if you don't think military action is going to be avoided than you are naive as the summer days are long. Russia wanted back in as a "player", everyone is cooperating-even we in Israel are playing the "game"-Putin arrived two blocks from my home in Netanya yesterday for a "ceremony"-really now why do you think he agreed to do this?Read the full story here.

More:  Axis Moscow-Tel Aviv by Turkish & Islamic - V.Poutin the event of unforeseen circumstances in Israel!   here from a Greek Source,(GoogleTranslate).

Deep Water Horizon Legacy - Researchers:"Gulf Shrimp Widely Contaminated With Carcinogens".

Deep Water Horizon Legacy - Researchers:"Gulf Shrimp Widely Contaminated With Carcinogens".(BLN).Source: Sayer Li, Green Med Info.

Conservative estimates indicate that the 2010 BP oil disaster released over 200 million gallons of oil into the Gulf, followed by at least 1.8 million gallons of dispersants.
While the use of dispersants helped mitigate the public relations disaster by preventing the persistent formation of surface oil, as well as keeping many beaches visibly untouched, they also drove the oil deeper into the water column (and food chain) rendering a 2-dimensional problem (surface oil) into a 3-dimensional one. Additionally, research indicates that dispersants prevent the biodegradation of toxic oil components, as well as increasing dispersant absorption into fish from between 6 to 1100 fold higher levels.
Since the event, both the mainstream media and the government have acted as if the oil disappeared, and that no significant health risks remain for the millions still consuming contaminated seafood from the Gulf.*
Now, a new study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives has revealed that the 2010 BP Gulf oil disaster resulted in widespread contamination of Gulf Coast seafood with toxic components from crude oil.¹ In fact, levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in shrimp were found to exceed the FDA’s established thresholds for allowable levels [levels of concern (LOCs)] for pregnant women in up to 53% of Gulf shrimp sampled.
PAHs are well-known carcinogens and developmental toxicants, which is why the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is obligated to set risk criteria and thresholds for allowable levels of exposure to them.**The authors discovered a glaring discrepancy between the FDA Gulf seafood risk assessment (FDA 2010a) and the FDA’s own prior practice with risk assessment guidelines produced by other authoritative entities.
The FDA’s risk assessment was found to be seriously flawed because of the following six questionable assumptions:

The questionable assumptions include six main issues: a) high consumer body weight, b) low estimates of seafood consumption, c) failure to include a cancer risk assessment for naphthalene, d) failure to adjust for early-life susceptibility to PAHs, e) short exposure duration, and f) high cancer risk benchmarks. Taken together, these flaws illustrate a failure to incorporate the substantial body of evidence on the increased vulnerability of subpopulations to contaminants, such as PAHs, in seafood.

Their final conclusion was as follows

Environmental risk assessment requires the use of scientifically founded assumptions and appropriate default estimates about the exposed population, the intensity and duration of exposure, and the dose–response relationship. The risk assessment methods used by the FDA to set safe exposure levels for Gulf Coast seafood after the oil spill do not incorporate current best practices and do not protect vulnerable populations. The FDA’s conclusions about risks from Gulf seafood should be interpreted with caution in coastal populations with higher rates of seafood consumption and in vulnerable populations such as children, small adults, and pregnant women. Our analysis demonstrates that a revised approach, using standard risk assessment methods, results in significantly lower acceptable levels of PAHs in seafood and identifies populations that could be at risk from contaminants in Gulf Coast seafood. Health advisories targeted at high-end consumers would better protect vulnerable populations such as pregnant women, women who may become pregnant, and children. Our approach did not address infant exposure to PAHs via maternal seafood consumption and lactational transfer. The NRC (2008) found up to 50-fold interindividual variability in cancer risk and recommends incorporation of estimates of uncertainty, as well as population risk distributions, into future risk assessments. Improved public health protection from contaminants in food will require reforming FDA risk assessment practices.

Taken together, these findings demonstrate that the FDA’s conclusion that there are no significant risks to Gulf populations from oil spill–related contaminants in seafood are incorrect, and reckless when it comes to the health of the most vulnerable populations.
With reports now surfacing in mainstream media outlets on the appearance of eyeless shrimp and mutant fish, this latest finding probably only scratches the surface of a health problem in the Gulf titanic in proportions.Read the full story and more on this 'cover up' here.


*Sixty percent of domestic shrimp and 70% of domestic oysters are sourced from the Gulf.
**The inherent absurdity of determining "an acceptable level of harm" is often overlooked.

Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal says Iran talks waste of time.

Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal says Iran talks waste of time.(AA).Negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program is a “waste of time” and it should be pushed forward towards time-limited talks, Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said on Monday, as Europe confirmed that a ban on oil imports from Iran will go ahead as planned on July 1. The comments came during the joint ministerial meeting between the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and the European Union (EU) in Luxemburg. “We have agreed on the importance of negotiating with Tehran for the sake of reaching a political solution. Based on our previous experience, negotiations for Iran might be a means to gain more time instead of reaching a result. I believe, planning a time-limit for the negotiations will push Iran to show its real policy. It is not important to talk about the nuclear potentials, but what is happening on the ground is more important,” Faisal said, according to Al Arabiya. The West suspects Iran of seeking to make nuclear weapons under the guise of an energy program and wants it to stop enriching uranium to 20 percent, which brings it dangerously close to levels needed to make a nuclear bomb. Prince Faisal expressed his displeasure that Iran was not responding to all such efforts and its attempts to manipulate.
The Saudi top diplomat underlined the importance of making the Middle East region free of mass-destruction weapons, SPA reported. The EU confirmed earlier Monday that a ban on oil imports from Iran will go ahead as planned on July 1 due to the lack of progress in talks on Tehran’s contested nuclear drive.This meant on the one hand that contracts for importing Iranian oil that were concluded before Jan. 23 “will have to be terminated by July 1.” “From the same date, EU insurers may no more provide third-party liability and environmental liability insurance for the transport of Iranian oil,” the statement said, according to AFP.Confirmation that the embargo will be enforced comes days after talks in Moscow between Iran and world powers on its nuclear program failed to reach a breakthrough.Hmmmm......."The Saudi top diplomat underlined the importance of making the Middle East region free of mass-destruction weapons"....As i said before if Obama protects Israel there will be a very heavy price to pay.Read the full story here.

Syria - U.S. is adamantly opposed to Iran taking part in talks, while Russia supports its inclusion.

Syria - U.S. is adamantly opposed to Iran taking part in talks, while Russia supports its inclusion.(AA).United Nations envoy Kofi Annan has proposed inviting Iran to a high-level meeting this week to discuss a political transition in Syria but is leaving it up to the U.S. and Russia to decide whether Iran can participate, The Associated Press reported on Tuesday, as the U.S. described the U.N. Security Council as a “colossal failure” in protecting Syrian civilians, amid a continual rise in death toll nationwide. U.S. officials said Monday that Annan wants an “understanding” between Washington and Moscow on Iran, other potential guests and the agenda, before he issues formal invitations to the meeting he intends to host in Geneva on Saturday. The U.S. is adamantly opposed to Iran taking part, while Russia supports its inclusion. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the diplomacy. They said Annan is seeking a U.S.-Russian agreement by later Tuesday. Washington said late Monday that the U.N. Security Council has been a “colossal failure” in protecting Syrian civilians and made a new demand for sanctions against President Bashar al-Assad. The council, which is divided on how to end the conflict, “continues to stand by, rather than to stand up,” Susan Rice, U.S. envoy to the United Nations, told the 15-nation body. The Security Council is to get an update on the U.N. Supervision Mission in Syria (UNSMIS) on Tuesday from Nasser al-Kudwa, deputy to Annan. “The situation in Syria represents a colossal failure by the Security Council to protect civilians,” Rice told a council debate on civilians in conflict, according to AFP.Kamal al-Labwani, one of the founders of the Syrian National Front, expressed to Al Arabiya his fear of a possible regional conflict as the fighting escalates in Syria. “What the [Syrian] regime is doing now is an attempt to direct the attention away from what is happening interiorly,” he said. “The Assad regime now fears that Russia might change its stand,” Labwani told Al Arabiya. While the United States, Britain, France and Germany have called for sanctions against Assad, Russia and China have twice used their powers as permanent members of the council to veto resolutions which hinted at sanctions.Read the full story here.