| User Panel |
|
Welcome guest. You are currently not logged in. Please log in if you are already registered. If you are not yet a member we invite you to register below.
|
|
| Politics |
| The Politics Forum :: Ask us a Question! |
|
Politics :: This is the forum for political discussions, opinions, questions, and general commentary. Don't be bashful; don't be rude. Keep in mind that honest, intelligent, well-intentioned people do have differences of opinion, even experts within their own fields.
Is it Politics or is it News?. Maybe it’s Debate. Bring your topic anyway, and give us your opinion. Quote or link as you need to, to clarify your viewpoint, but give us your opinion - and expect to hear others. Who knows, not only may you change someone else’s perspective, you might see your own change as well. Try to remember that endless pages of pasted material are seldom read and often discourage discussion, not to mention the possibility of violating some else’s copyright. If in doubt,
link.
If you’re seeking information on an issue, this is the place to ask. Have a viewpoint to express, or a point to make? This is the place. Want to make a cute play on the name of a public figure or a member’s screen name? This is not the place. Make your point on its merits, not by insult. Politics, like sex and religion, often engenders strong feelings and opinions. We expect members stick to
issues, and not regress into personality politics. Even if a member does not agree with another member's view on a particular issue or personage, he needs to respect a person's
right to hold these opinions. Flaming and attacking will not be tolerated, nor will the use of belittling names, either to other members, or about political figures.
Ask questions, discuss, debate, argue - don’t quarrel. Ask us a Question!
|
| asbestos exposure cases |
Posted by tintin on May, 16. :: 3 Comments
Citing the legal precedent set by asbestos exposure cases, a state judge agreed to combine a series of workplace disability cases involving repetitive stress injuries to the hands and wrists. The judge's decision to consolidate hundreds of suits by data entry workers, word processors, newspaper employees, and other workers who use computers into one case is likely to prove detrimental for the computer manufacturing companies being sued, notwithstanding the defense's argument that the cases should not be combined because of the different individuals and workplaces involved
I don't understand those bold colored text.
what is "asbestos exposure cases" ?
what is "workplace disability cases" ?
that entire sentence looks complex .
i could not follow up.
can anybody simplify it?
thanks
|
| American refusnik |
Posted by blueflame1 on May, 16. :: 0 Comments
US soldier refuses to serve in 'illegal Iraq war'
Published: Friday May 16, 2008
Matthis Chiroux is the kind of young American US military recruiters love.
"I was from a poor, white family from the south, and I did badly in school," the now 24-year-old told AFP.
"I was 'filet mignon' for recruiters. They started phoning me when I was in 10th grade," or around 16 years old, he added.
Chiroux joined the US army straight out of high school nearly six years ago, and worked his way up from private to sergeant.
He served in Afghanistan, Germany, Japan, and the Philippines and was due to be deployed next month in Iraq.
On Thursday, he refused to go, saying he considers Iraq an illegal war.
"I stand before you today with the strength and clarity and resolve to declare to the military, my government and the world that this soldier will not be deploying to Iraq," Chiroux said in the sun-filled rotunda of a congressional building in Washington.
"My decision is based on my desire to no longer continue violating my core values to support an illegal and unconstitutional occupation... I refuse to participate in the Iraq occupation," he said, as a dozen veterans of the five-year-old Iraq war looked on.
Minutes earlier, Chiroux had cried openly as he listened to former comrades-in-arms testify before members of Congress about the failings of the Iraq war.
The testimonies were the first before Congress by Iraq veterans who have turned against the five-year-old war.
Former army sergeant Kristofer Goldsmith told a half-dozen US lawmakers and scores of people who packed into a small hearing room of "lawless murders, looting and the abuse of countless Iraqis."
He spoke of the psychologically fragile men and women who return from Iraq, to find little help or treatment offered from official circles.
Goldsmith said he had "self-medicated" for several months to treat the wounds of the war.
Another soldier told AFP he had to boost his dosage of medication to treat anxiety and social agoraphobia -- two of many lingering mental wounds he carries since his deployments in Iraq -- before testifying.
Some 300,000 of the 1.6 million US soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan suffer from the psychological traumas of post-traumatic stress disorder, depression or both, an independent study showed last month.
A group of veterans sitting in the hearing room gazed blankly as their comrades' testimonies shattered the official version that the US effort in Iraq is succeeding.
Almost to a man, the soldiers who testified denounced serious flaws in the chain of command in Iraq.
Luis Montalvan, a former army captain, accused high-ranking US officers of numerous failures in Iraq, including turning a blind eye to massive fraud on the part of US contractors.
Ex-Marine Jason Lemieux told how a senior officer had altered a report he had written because it slammed US troops of using excessive force, firing off thousands of rounds of machine gun fire and hundreds of grenades in the face of a feeble four rounds of enemy fire.
Goldsmith accused US officials of censorship.
"Everyone who manages a blog, Facebook or Myspace out of Iraq has to register every video, picture, document of any event they do on mission," Goldsmith told AFP after the hearing.
"You're almost always denied before you are allowed to send them home."
Officials take "hard facts and slice them into small pieces to make them presentable to the secretary of state or the president -- and all with the intent of furthering the occupation of Iraq," Goldsmith added.
Chiroux is one of thousands of US soldiers who have deserted since the Iraq war began in 2003, according to figures issued last year by the US army.
But while many seek refuge in Canada, the young soldier vowed to stay in the United States to fight "whatever charges the army levels at me."
The US army defines a deserter as someone who has been absent without leave for 30 days.
Chiroux stood fast in his resolve to not report for duty on June 15.
"I cannot deploy to Iraq, carry a weapon and not be part of the problem," he told AFP.
link
|
| EXPOSED: McCain a Complete Hypocrite on Hamas! |
Posted by Zippo on May, 16. :: 4 Comments
EXPOSED: McCain a Complete Hypocrite on Hamas!
McCain was for talking to Hamas before he was against it.
Two years ago, in an interview with James Rubin for Sky News, Sen. John McCain expressed a willingness to negotiate with the terrorist group Hamas -- the very group that McCain has been relentlessly using to smear Sen. Barack Obama over the last several weeks.
Rubin has written an op-ed in Friday's Washington Post about his exchange with McCain, and The Huffington Post has obtained exclusive video. Here's the key excerpt:
RUBIN: "Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?"
McCAIN: "They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it's a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that."
As Rubin adds:
Given that exchange, the new John McCain might say that Hamas should be rooting for the old John McCain to win the presidential election. The old John McCain, it appears, was ready to do business with a Hamas-led government, while both Clinton and Obama have said that Hamas must change its policies toward Israel and terrorism before it can have diplomatic relations with the United States.
Even if McCain had not favored doing business with Hamas two years ago, he had no business smearing Barack Obama. But given his stated position then, it is either the height of hypocrisy or a case of political amnesia for McCain to inject Hamas into the American election.
UPDATE: The McCain camp has released the following response:
"There should be no confusion, John McCain has always believed that serious engagement would require mandatory conditions and Hamas must change itself fundamentally - renounce violence, abandon its goal of eradicating Israel and accept a two state solution. John McCain's position is clear and has always been clear, the President of the United States should not unconditionally meet with leaders of Iran, Hamas or Hezbollah. Barack Obama has made his position equally clear, and has pledged to meet unconditionally with Iran's leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the leaders of other rogue regimes, which shows incredibly dangerous and weak judgment."
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/85587
YOUTUBE VIDEO
====================
McCain the lying son of a b**** 
|
| VA official urged fewer PTSD diagnoses to cut costs |
Posted by blueflame1 on May, 16. :: 0 Comments
RAW STORY
Published: Friday May 16, 2008
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and VoteVets.org released an e-mail sent by a Veterans Affairs (VA) official directing VA staff to refrain from diagnosing soldiers and veterans with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) just a few months ago, as stories about the condition circulated through the media.
"A psychologist who helps lead the post-traumatic stress disorder program at a medical facility for veterans in Texas told staff members to refrain from diagnosing PTSD because so many veterans were seeking government disability payments for the condition," Christopher Lee reports for The Washington Post.
Excerpts from Post article:
#
"Given that we are having more and more compensation seeking veterans, I'd like to suggest that you refrain from giving a diagnosis of PTSD straight out," Norma Perez wrote in a March 20 e-mail to mental-health specialists and social workers at the Department of Veterans Affairs' Olin E. Teague Veterans' Center in Temple, Tex. Instead, she recommended that they "consider a diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder."
VA staff members "really don't . . . have time to do the extensive testing that should be done to determine PTSD," Perez wrote. Adjustment disorder is a less severe reaction to stress than PTSD and has a shorter duration, usually no longer than six months, said Anthony T. Ng, a psychiatrist and member of Mental Health America, a nonprofit professional association.
Veterans diagnosed with PTSD can be eligible for disability compensation of up to $2,527 a month, depending on the severity of the condition, said Alison Aikele, a VA spokeswoman. Those found to have adjustment disorder generally are not offered such payments, though veterans can receive medical treatment for either condition.
#
Melanie Sloan, executive director of CREW, said, “It is outrageous that the VA is calling on its employees to deliberately misdiagnose returning veterans in an effort to cut costs. Those who have risked their lives serving our country deserve far better. First and foremost, they have a right to expect that they receive diagnoses and treatment based on their symptoms and not on the VA’s budget. The VA should immediately reverse this and any other similar directives.”
Jon Soltz, an Iraq War Veteran and Chairman of VoteVets.org, added, “This is an issue I take personally. I know of many people who received a diagnosis of ‘Adjustment Disorder,’ who strongly felt they had PTSD, many of whom confirmed that suspicion with an independent diagnosis. Many veterans believe that the government just doesn’t want to pay out the disability that comes along with a PTSD diagnosis, and this revelation will not allay their concerns. It is crucial that we quickly get to the bottom of this, and ensure that misdiagnosing veterans is not part of some cost-cutting policy.”
FULL WASHINGTON POST ARTICLE AT THIS LINK
VA official's email can be viewed at CREW's website
link
|
|
|
|
