News flamboyer

Can sanctions deter North Korea?

Labels: World

Kim Jong Un and his military

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

N. Korea said Thursday it plans to carry out new nuclear test and more long-range rocket launches

It said they are part of new phase of confrontation with United States

George A. Lopez says North Korea's aim is to be recognized as a 'new nuclear nation by fait accompli'

The Security Council sanctions aim to deteriorate and disrupt N. Korea's programs, says Lopez

Editor's note: George A. Lopez holds the Hesburgh Chair in Peace Studies at the Kroc Institute, University of Notre Dame. He is a former member, UN Panel of Experts on DPRK.

Indiana, U.S. (CNN) -- North Korea has responded to new Security Council sanctions condemning its December 12 rocket launch with a declaration that it plans a third nuclear test and more missile launches. Politically, it has made unambiguous that its "aim" is its enemy, the United States.

In this rapid reaction to U.N. sanctions, the young government of Kim Jong Un underscores what Security Council members have long known anticipated from the DPRK. Their end-game is to create a vibrant, integrated missile and nuclear weapons program that will result - as in the cases of Pakistan and India - in their being recognized as a new nuclear nation by fait accompli.

Read more: North Korea says new nuclear test will be part of fight against U.S.

In light of DPRK defiance - and a soon to occur nuclear test - the Security Council's first set of sanctions on North Korea since 2009 may seem absurd and irrelevant. These sanctions will certainly not prevent a new DPRK nuclear test. Rather, the new sanctions resolution mobilizes regional neighbors and global actors to enforce sanctions that can weaken future DPRK programs and actions.

Read more: U.N. Security Council slams North Korea, expands sanctions

The utility, if not the necessity, of these Security Council sanctions are to deteriorate and disrupt the networks that sustain North Korea's programs. Chances of this degradation of DPRK capabilities have increased as the new sanctions both embolden and empower the member states who regularly observe - but do nothing about - suspicious vessels in their adjacent waterways.

The resolution provides new guidance to states regarding ship interdiction, cargo inspections, and the seizure and disposal of prohibited materials. Regarding nuclear and missile development the sanctions expand the list of material banned for trade to DPRK, including high tech, dual-use goods which might aid missile industries.

Read more: South Korean officials: North Korean rocket could hit U.S. mainland

These new measures provide a better structure for more effective sanctions, by naming new entities, such as a bank and trading companies, as well as individuals involved in the illicit financing of prohibited materials, to the sanctions list. To the surprise of many in the diplomatic community - the Council authorizes states to expose and confiscate North Korea's rather mobile "bulk cash." Such currency stocks have been used in many regions to facilitate purchases of luxury goods and other banned items that sustain the DPRK elites.

Finally, the Security Council frees the Sanctions Committee to act more independently and in a timely manner to add entities to the list of sanctioned actors when evidence shows them to be sanctions violators. This is an extensive hunting license for states in the region that can multiply the costs of sanctions to the DPRK over time.

Read more: North Korea's rocket launches cost $1.3 billion

Whatever their initial limitations, the new round of U.N. sanctions serve as a springboard to more robust measures by various regional and global powers which may lead back to serious negotiations with DPRK.

Despite its bluster and short-term action plan, Pyongyang recognizes that the wide space of operation for its policies it assumed it had a week ago, is now closed considerably. To get this kind of slap-down via this Security Council resolution - when the launch was a month ago - predicts that any nuke test or missile launch from Pyongyang will bring a new round of stronger and more targeted sanctions.

Read more: North Korea silences doubters, raises fears with rocket launch

Although dangerous - a new game is on regarding DPRK. Tougher U.N. measures imposed on the North generated a predictable response and likely new, prohibited action. While DPRK may be enraged, these sanctions have the P5 nations, most notably China, newly engaged. A forthcoming test or launch will no doubt increase tensions on both sides.

But this may be precisely the shock needed to restart the Six Party Talks. Without this institutional framework there is little chance of influencing DPRK actions. And in the meantime, the chances of greater degrading of DPRK capabilities via sanctions, are a sensible next best action.

Read more: Huge crowds gather in North Korean capital to celebrate rocket launch

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of George A. Lopez.

Sailing: Olympic sailing champion visits Singapore

Labels: Technology

SINGAPORE: Xu Lijia, the 25 year old who became the first Chinese to win a gold medal in the dinghy class after finishing first in the laser radial class at the 2012 London Olympics, is in town.

The Chinese athlete shared her experiences with local sailors at a talk, which attracted 500 participants. The talk also saw the launch of the Character Development Through Sailing programme.

The Shanghai native, who won bronze in the same class at the 2008 Olympics in Beijing, said that it was not just about winning, but also enjoying the journey.

She had to beat many odds including injuries, physical limitations and the lack of a proper support structure for the sport in China.

"It is about promotion, promoting this sport not only in Singapore, China but... in whole of Asia. I hope that Asia can become stronger and stronger and (compete) with the European countries," she said.

- CNA/jc

Egypt: Deadly clashes follow soccer riot verdict

Labels: Health

Last Updated 4:48 p.m. ET

CAIRO Relatives and angry young men rampaged through the Egyptian city of Port Said on Saturday in assaults that killed at least 27 people following death sentences for local fans involved in the country's worst bout of soccer violence.

Unrest surrounding the second anniversary of Egypt's revolution also broke out in Cairo and other cities for a third day, with protesters clashing for hours with riot police who fired tear gas that encompassed swaths of the capital's downtown.

The divisive verdict and bloodshed highlight challenges being faced by President Mohammed Morsi, who took office seven months ago following an Egyptian revolution that ousted autocratic leader Hosni Mubarak. Critics say Morsi has failed to carry out promised reforms in the country's judiciary and police force, and claim little has improved in the two years after the uprising against Mubarak.

The Islamist leader, Egypt's first freely elected and civilian president, met for the first time with top generals as part of the newly formed National Defense Council to discuss the deployment of troops in two cities. The military was deployed to Port Said hours after the verdict was announced, and warned that a curfew could be declared in areas of unrest. The military was also deployed to the canal city of Suez, where protesters attacked the main security compound there after eight people were killed late Friday.

Smoke billows from a burning minibus belonging to a satellite channel after it was set on fire by Egyptian protesters outside the prison in Port said, Egypt, January 26, 2013. Twenty-one Egyptian football fans and club members were sentenced to death after a fatal post-match riot in Port Said last year, sparking new violence in the canal city that killed eight.

/

AFP/Getty Images

Saturday's riot in Port Said stemmed from animosity between police and die-hard soccer fans know as Ultras, who also were part of the mass uprising against Mubarak that began on Jan. 25, 2011, and at forefront of protests against the military rulers who assumed temporary power after his ouster.

It also reflected tensions after the uprising that reached into all sectors of Egyptian life, even sports.

Survivors and witnesses said Mubarak loyalists had a hand in instigating last year's attack, which began Feb. 1 after Port Said's home team Al-Masry won a match, 3-1, against Cairo's Al-Ahly. Some say "hired thugs" wearing green T-shirts posing as Al-Masry fans led the attacks.

Others say, at the very least, police were responsible for gross negligence in the Feb. 1 soccer brawl that killed 74 Al-Ahly fans.

Families of the victims who died in last year's soccer violence react in court after the issuance of the death penalty for 21 accused in the Port Said incident, in Cairo, Egypt, Saturday, Jan. 26, 2013.

/

AP/Ahmed Abd El-Latef, Shorouk Newspaper

Anger at police was evident in Port Said, home to most of the 73 men accused of involvement in the bloodshed, although the trial was held outside Cairo.

Judge Sobhi Abdel-Maguid did not give his reasoning when he handed down the sentences for 21 defendants. Executions in Egypt are usually carried out by hanging.

Verdicts for the remaining 52 defendants, including nine security officials, are scheduled to be delivered March 9. Some have been charged with murder and others with assisting the attackers. All the defendants — who were not present in the courtroom Saturday for security reasons — can appeal the verdict.

Supporters of those sentenced to death said they were being used as scapegoats. The rioters attacked the city's prison after the verdict was read live on state television to try and free the defendants. A police lieutenant and police officer were killed in the assault.

Residents also focused their anger against the government, attacking a power station, the governor's office and local courthouse. They staged a sit-in along the main road leading into the city and occupied a police station.

Security officials said a total of 27 people were killed and some 400 wounded, many by gunfire, throughout the city. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to release the information.

Victims were killed when police fired tear gas, bird shot and other live ammunition at the mob. Two soccer players who died- one from Port Said's Al-Marikh club and the other a former player of its Al-Masry club — apparently were killed on their way to do training near the prison. One of the players was shot three times, a local health official said.

Some 220 kilometers (135 miles) away in Cairo, the divisive nature of the trial was on display.

Relatives of those killed at the soccer game erupted in joy in the courtroom after the verdict was announced.

Families yelled "Allahu Akbar!" Arabic for "God is great" and pumped their fists in the air. Others held up pictures of the deceased, most of whom were young men from Cairo's poor neighborhoods. One man fainted while others hugged. The judge smacked the bench several times to try to restore calm.

Supporters of Cairo's Al-Ahly celebrated the verdict in the team's club before heading toward Interior Ministry headquarters, which manages the police, for more protests.

Lawmakers had formed a fact-finding committee that found some evidence toward collusion from authorities, but the evidence was not conclusive.

Nine of those on trial are security officials, charged with assisting the attackers for failing to search for weapons as is customary and allowing known criminals to attend the game. One was a senior officer who locked the exit designated for Al-Ahly fans. Many victims suffocated or were trampled to death in the corridor trying to escape the violence. Others were thrown off bleachers, undressed, beaten with iron bars and had the words "Port Said" carved into their skin.

1/2

Newtown Families March for Gun Control in DC

Labels: Business

Jan 26, 2013 4:59pm

gty gun control march washington jt 130126 wblog Newtown Victims Families Join Gun Control Activists on DC March

(YURI GRIPAS/AFP/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Near-freezing temperatures didn’t stop several thousand gun-control activists from bearing their pickets today, carrying signs emblazoned with “Ban Assault Weapons Now” and the names of gun violence victims in a demonstration organized as a response to the mass shooting in Newtown, Conn. last month.

Walking in silence, the demonstrators trudged between Capitol Hill and the Washington Monument over a thin layer of melting snow. They were joined by politicians and some families of the Newtown victims.

March organizer Shannon Watts said the event was for the “families who lost the lights of their lives in Newtown, daughters and sons, wives and mothers, grandchildren, sisters and brothers gone in an unfathomable instant.”

“Let’s stand together and use our voices, use our votes to let legislators know that we won’t stand down until they enact common sense gun control laws that will keep our children out of the line of fire,” she told demonstrators.

Watts founded One Million Moms for Gun Control after the killing of 20 first graders and six adults at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown in December. In a profile with the New York Times, Watts said her 12-year-old son had suffered panic attacks after learning of last summer’s Aurora, Colo., theater shooting, leaving her at an impasse over how to talk to him about the latest tragedy.

Also among the speakers was a survivor of the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre, Collin Goddard.

“We need to challenge any politician who thinks it’s easier to ask an elementary school teacher to stand up to a gunman with an AR-15 than it is to ask them to stand up to a gun lobbyist with a checkbook,” he said.

The demonstration comes amid a push by progressive lawmakers to enact stricter gun control measures as a response to the trend of recent mass killings, although any hypothetical bill would likely face strong opposition in Congress.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., was among the demonstrators today.

“The idea that people need high-capacity magazines that can fire 30, 50, 100 rounds has no place in a civilized society,” he said. “Between the time we’re gathered here right now and this time of day tomorrow, across America, 282 Americans will have been shot.”

The congressman was quoting statistics compiled by the Brady Campaign to Stop Gun Violence.

INFOGRAPHIC: Guns by the Numbers

Last week President Obama proposed a sweeping overhaul of federal measures regulating gun ownership, including a universal background check system for sales, banning assault weapons, and curbing the amount of ammunition available in weapon clips.

An ABC News/Washington Post poll released Thursday found 53 percent of Americans viewed Obama’s gun control plan favorably, 41 percent unfavorably. The division was visible today, as a handful of gun-rights advocates also turned out on the National Mall to protest what they believe would be infringements on their Second Amendment liberties.

ABC’s Joanne Fuchs contributed to this report.

SHOWS: Good Morning America World News

Where is aid for Syria going?

Labels: World

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

The U.S. ambassador to Syria says the U.S. has provided $210 million in humanitarian aid

The assistance has to be discrete, he said, to protect workers from being targeted

Washington has also provided $35 million worth of assistance to Syria's political opposition

Ambassador: We can help, but it's up to Syrians to find their way forward

(CNN) -- It has been more than a year since the United States government withdrew its ambassador to Syria and closed its embassy in Damascus.

On Thursday, that ambassador returned to the region along with a U.S. delegation, touring a Syrian refugee camp in Turkey to bring more attention to the growing humanitarian crisis. As the civil war has intensified in Syria, hundreds of thousands of people have sought refuge in Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and other neighboring countries.

Ambassador Robert Ford gave an exclusive interview to CNN's Ivan Watson and described what the U.S. is doing to help the refugees and the Syrian opposition.

Ivan Watson: The U.S. has given $210 million in aid (to Syria), but I think that there is a perception problem because no one can actually point at what that help is. So people conclude there is no help.

Robert Ford: The assistance is going in. It's things like tents, it's things like blankets, it's things like medical equipment, but it doesn't come in big boxes with an American flag on it because we don't want the people who are delivering it to be targeted by the Syrian regime.

The regime is going after and killing people who are delivering supplies. You see them bombing even bakeries and bread lines. So we're doing that, in part, to be discrete.

The assistance is going in ... but it doesn't come in big boxes with an American flag on it.
Robert Ford, U.S. ambassador to Syria

The needs are gigantic. So even though a great deal of American materials and other countries' materials are arriving, the needs are still greater. And that's why we're going to Kuwait to talk to the United Nations and to talk to other countries about how we can talk together to provide additional assistance.

Watson: The head of the Syrian National Coalition, which the U.S. government has backed, came out with a statement very critical of the international community, saying we need $3 billion if you want us to have any say on events on the ground inside Syria. Where is that money?

Ford: (Sheikh Ahmed) Moaz al-Khatib is a good leader, and we think highly of him and we have recognized his (coalition) as the legitimate representative of the Syrian people. And, of course, he wants to get as many resources as possible because of the humanitarian conditions that I was just talking about. Especially the ones inside Syria.

But we also, at the same time, have to build up those (aid) networks I was talking about. In some cases, they start out with just a few people. We don't need just a few people, we need hundreds of people, thousands of people on the inside of Syria organized to bring these things in.

And so step by step, the Syrians, Moaz al-Khatib and his organization, need to build that capacity. We can help build it, we can do training and things like that. But in the end, Syrians have to take a leadership role in this.

Watson: Is Washington giving money to the Syrian National Coalition?

Ford: We absolutely are assisting the (coalition), with everything from training to, in some cases, limited amount of cash assistance so that they can buy everything ranging from computers to telephones to radios.

Frankly, if not for the American assistance in many cases, the activists inside Syria wouldn't be in contact with the outside world. It's American help that keeps them in contact with the outside world.

Watson: But, how much assistance has this coalition gotten from the U.S.?

Ford: So far, we've allocated directly to the coalition in the neighborhood of $35 million worth of different kinds of equipment and assistance. And over the next few weeks, couple of months, we'll probably provide another $15 million worth of material assistance.

Watson: Washington recently blacklisted Jabhat al-Nusra, the Nusra Front, calling it a terrorist organization even though inside Syria, it has attracted a lot of respect for its victories and for comparative lack of corruption compared to many rebel groups. How has blacklisting the Nusra Front helped the Syrian opposition?

Ford: We blacklisted the Nusra Front because of its intimate links with al Qaeda in Iraq, an organization with whom we have direct experience, which is responsible for the killings of thousands of Iraqis, hundreds of Americans. We know what al Qaeda in Iraq did and is still doing, and we don't want it to start doing that in Syria -- which is why we highlighted its incredibly pernicious role.

I think one of the things that our classification of Nusra as a terrorist group did is it set off an alarm for the other elements of the Free Syrian Army. There was a meeting of the Free Syrian Army to set up a unified command, (and) Nusra Front was not in that meeting -- which we think is the right thing to do. As Syrians themselves understand that Nusra has a sectarian agenda, as they understand better that Nusra is anti-democratic and will seek to impose its very strict interpretation of Islam on Syria -- which historically is a relatively moderate country in terms of its religious practices -- as Syrians understand that better, I think they will more and more reject the Nusra Front itself.

Watson: But I've seen the opposite. As I go into Syria, I hear more and more support and respect for the Nusra Front, and more and more criticism for the U.S. government each time I go back.

Ford: I think that people, Ivan, are still understanding what Nusra is. I have heard criticism from the Nusra Front from people like Moaz al-Khatib who, in Marrakesh (Morocco) in his speech, said he rejected the kind of ideology which backs up Nusra. ... We have heard that from the senior commander of the Free Syrian Army as well. And so the more people understand inside Syria what Nusra is and represents, I think they will agree that is not the group on which to depend for freedom in Syria.

Watson: Do you think the U.S. government could have done more?

Ford: I think the Syrians, as I said, are the ones who will bring the answer to the problem -- just as in Iraq, Iraqis brought the solution to the Iraq crisis, to the Iraq war. The Americans can help, and we helped in Iraq, but ultimately it wasn't the Americans. Despite our help, it was Iraqis.

In Syria, again, it has to be Syrians who find their way forward. Twenty-three million Syrians need to find their way forward. We can help, and we are helping: $210 million in humanitarian assistance, $50 million to help the political opposition get organized for the day after (Bashar) al-Assad goes. These are important bits of help. But ultimately, it's not the American help. It's the Syrians themselves.

Apple loses world's most valuable company crown

Labels: Technology

NEW YORK: Apple shares extended their losses Friday, ending a miserable week for the California tech giant as it surrendered its position as the world's biggest company based on market value.

Apple ended down 2.36 per cent at US$439.88, giving it a market capitalisation of $413 billion -- while oil giant ExxonMobil rose 0.36 per cent to US$91.68 with a market cap of US$418 billion, to edge into first place.

The shares of both firms zig-zagged during the session, with Apple at various points regaining the top spot before falling back.

Apple first overtook ExxonMobil in August 2011 as the most valuable company in the world based on the value of its stock.

A year later, Apple dethroned longtime rival Microsoft as the most valuable company in history based on the value of its stock at US$622 billion.

But the company took a bruising this week after Wednesday's gloomy forecast accompanying its record quarterly profit announcement prompted pessimism over the tech giant's slowing growth trajectory.

Apple's profit was US$13.1 billion on revenue of US$54.5 billion in the fiscal quarter that ended on December 29, with sales of iPhones and iPads setting quarterly highs.

But despite those figures, investors soured on Apple after it forecast that revenue for the current quarter would range from US$41-43 billion and that it would have a gross margin of 37.5 to 39.5 per cent, lower than expectations.

Analysts remained cautious about Apple, which had seen a meteoric rise last September to over US$700 a share but it has slid 37 per cent since then. The company shed some US$60 billion on Thursday and around US$10 billion more Friday.

Some express concern that Apple has lost its edge in innovation since the death of Steve Jobs, and is losing ground to rivals such as Samsung, which leads the mobile phone market, and to others using Google's Android operating system.

Jinho Cho at Mirae Asset Securities said Apple will likely increase carrier subsidies in 2013 and launch "an entry-level iPhone" to compete better in emerging markets.

"These moves by Apple should lead to stiffer competition for greater carrier subsidies among smartphone makers, thus driving down handset industry-wide operating margins," the analyst said.

Colin Gillis at BGC Financial said Apple is facing new challenges.

"While we are incrementally more positive on the stock, we also mention that competition is increasing for the company," he said in a research note.

"We see competitors are using price as a lever to get traction in the market. Apple may also run into difficulty posting both the volumes and maintaining its prices over the next several quarters."

- AFP/jc

'Fighting' Casey Anthony gets two convictions tossed

Labels: Lifestyle

Casey Anthony on trial

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

An appeals court invalidates two of Casey Anthony's convictions, upholds two others

She was convicted of 4 counts of giving false information during a missing person investigation

Charges arose from statements Anthony made in 2008 after her daughter, Caylee, disappeared

Anthony's attorney said his client wanted to "keep fighting" after hearing about ruling

(CNN) -- One of the most infamous Americans in recent years took two big steps Friday toward clearing her name, and she's vowed to "keep fighting."

Florida's 5th District Court of Appeal threw out two of Casey Anthony's four convictions of "providing false information to a law enforcement officer during a missing person investigation," agreeing with her argument that the multiple convictions violated the ban on double jeopardy.

But the appeals judges upheld the other two convictions. According to the court filing, they rejected Anthony's claim that the trial court should have granted her motion to suppress statements made to law enforcement officers before they told her her Miranda rights. And they rejected her argument that the state statute she was convicted of violating is unconstitutionally vague.

Anthony's lawyer, Cheney Mason, said when he called his client to share the ruling, she said, "We keep fighting."

Anthony could appeal the remaining two convictions to the Florida Supreme Court next.

The four charges arose from statements Anthony made on July 16, 2008, to Orange County Detective Yuri Melich, who was investigating the disappearance of Anthony's 2-year-old daughter, Caylee.

Anthony gained notoriety after her mother, Cindy Anthony, called police to arrest her daughter the day before, when she thought Casey had stolen the family car and some money.

Read how Anthony's prosecutor has no regrets

During the call, Cindy Anthony told police she was concerned that her granddaughter might be missing, and said, "I found my daughter's car today, and it smelled like there's been a dead body in the damn car."

When questioned, Casey Anthony admitted to police that she hadn't seen Caylee for more than 30 days, and on July 16, she was arrested on suspicion of child neglect, filing false official statements and obstructing a criminal investigation. At that time, she made the statements to Melich, which led to her convictions.

In December 2008, a utility worker found remains in a wooded area near the Anthony home, and about a week later, authorities announced they were Caylee's.

After nearly three years of legal maneuvers, Anthony's capital murder trial began on May 24, 2011.

Prosecutors alleged that she killed Caylee by using chloroform and covering her nose and mouth with duct tape, and that she put her body in the trunk of her car before dumping it in the woods.

Defense attorney Jose Baez argued that Caylee drowned in the Anthony family pool on June 16, 2008, and that Casey Anthony and her father, George, covered up the death.

Watch: A year after trial, where's Anthony?

On July 5, 2011, a jury found Anthony not guilty of first-degree murder, aggravated child abuse and aggravated manslaughter of a child, while convicting her on the four "false information" counts.

Anthony was sentenced to four years in jail, to be served consecutively, including time served. She was released 10 days after her sentencing, on July 17. Even though she exited shortly after midnight, about 1,000 people jeered her as police guards and Baez escorted her to a waiting SUV and drove away quickly.

Anthony still faces a defamation lawsuit from Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez, of nearby Kissimmee, Florida.

During Anthony's disputed July 16, 2008, statements to Melich, she said the last time she had seen her daughter was when she dropped Caylee off at Gonzalez's apartment.

Gonzalez filed suit in September 2008, claiming that Anthony ruined her reputation.

Last April, a judge ruled that the suit needed to go to trial by jury and denied Gonzalez's request for a summary judgment.

In Session correspondent Jean Casarez reported for this story, and Mark Morgenstein wrote it in Atlanta.

Court: Obama appointments are unconstitutional

Labels: Health

Updated at 3:30 p.m. ET

President Barack Obama violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate to fill vacancies on a labor relations panel, a federal appeals court panel ruled Friday.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said that Obama did not have the power to make three recess appointments last year to the National Labor Relations Board.

The unanimous decision is an embarrassing setback for the president, who made the appointments after Senate Republicans spent months blocking his choices for an agency they contended was biased in favor of unions.

The ruling also throws into question Obama's recess appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Cordray's appointment, also made under the recess circumstance, has been challenged in a separate case.

Obama claims he acted properly in the case of the NLRB appointments because the Senate was away for the holidays on a 20-day recess. But the three-judge panel ruled that the Senate technically stayed in session when it was gaveled in and out every few days for so-called "pro forma" sessions.

GOP lawmakers used the tactic - as Democrats have in the past as well - to specifically to prevent the president from using his recess power. GOP lawmakers contend the labor board has been too pro-union in its decisions. They had also vigorously opposed the nomination of Cordray.

Play Video

Carney: Court's NLRB ruling "novel and unprecedented"

White House spokesman Jay Carney today said the administration "respectfully but strongly" disagrees with the court decision. He said there have been more than 280 intra-session recess appointments dating back to 1867.

"The decision is novel and unprecedented," he said. "It contradicts 150 years of practice by Democratic and Republican administration."

Carney also said the decision does not apply to Cordray's appointment, since it was written about a specific case the court considered.

The Obama administration is expected to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, though Carney referred questions with respect to the administration's next steps to the Justice Department. A Justice Department spokesperson, said, "We disagree with the court's ruling and believe that the president's recess appointments are constitutionally sound."

If the decision stands, it means hundreds of decisions issued by the board over more than a year are invalid. It also would leave the five-member labor board with just one validly appointed member, effectively shutting it down. The board is allowed to issue decisions only when it has at least three sitting members.

On Jan. 4, 2012, Obama appointed Deputy Labor Secretary Sharon Block, union lawyer Richard Griffin and NLRB counsel Terence Flynn to fill vacancies on the NLRB, giving it a full contingent for the first time in more than a year. Block and Griffin are Democrats, while Flynn is a Republican. Flynn stepped down from the board last year.

Obama also appointed Cordray on the same day.

The court's decision is a victory for Republicans and business groups that have been attacking the labor board for issuing a series of decisions and rules that make it easier for the nation's labor unions to organize new members. House Speaker John Boehner said in a statement the ruling was "a victory for accountability in government."

"The Obama administration has consistently used the NLRB to impose regulations that hurt our economy by fostering uncertainty in the workplace and telling businesses where they can and cannot create jobs," he said. "Instead of operating under a shroud of controversy, the NLRB should meet the highest standards of transparency, starting with having its members approved by the people's representatives."

Apple Drops Manufacturer Using Underage Workers

Labels: Business

Apple has stopped doing business with a Chinese manufacturer after a report said it had employed 74 underage workers. According to Apple's Supplier Responsibility Report, which was released by the company Thursday, Guangdong Real Faith Pingzhou Electronics was employing workers under the age of 16.

"Our auditors were dismayed to discover 74 cases of workers under age 16 — a core violation of our Code of Conduct. As a result, we terminated our business relationship with PZ," the company says in the report.

Apple has now lost its spot as the most valuable publicly traded company, one year after it first firmly overtook ExxonMobil. Even though it announced a record number of iPhone and iPad sales in its last quarter earnings, its stock price has fallen over 12 percent.

Apple says it is working hard to improve labor conditions at the factories of its Chinese contractors. It said it also discovered that one of the region's labor agencies had conspired with the manufacturer, providing children to them and helping forge age-verification documents. Apple said in its report that it alerted the provincial government, which fined the agency and suspended its business license.

Apple To Start Making Some Mac Computers in America in 2013

"The children were returned to their families, and PZ was required to pay expenses to facilitate their successful return," Apple says in the report.

In an interview with Bloomberg, Apple's Senior Vice President of Operations, Jeff Williams, said child labor was being used more than companies care to admit. "Most companies, they either don't report on it at all, or they say they look for it and found none, or they obscure the data in some way," Williams told Bloomberg. "If they're not finding it, they're not looking hard enough."

ABC News' Bill Weir visited the factory of Apple's Foxconn supplier last year and did not see any underage workers. "But while we looked hard for the kind of underage and maimed workers we've read so much about, we mostly found people who face their days through soul-crushing boredom and deep fatigue," Weir wrote about his visit.

PHOTOS: Inside Apple's Factories in China

In the 37-page Supplier Responsibility Progress Report, which can be viewed here, Apple said there had been a 72 percent increase in facility audits. According to the report, Apple achieved an average of 92 percent compliance with the goal, for now, of a maximum 60-hour work week.

Apple vowed last year to improve working conditions at its manufacturing facilities in China, vowing to work specifically on reducing working hours for Chinese workers. In March 2012, the Fair Labor Association released a report on the poor conditions at Apple's Foxconn supplier. The organization gave a long list of recommendations to Apple and Foxconn, and both Apple and Foxconn agreed to follow them.

In August, the FLA said that that Foxconn had completed 280 action items on time or ahead of schedule. By July 1, 2013, Foxconn has promised to reduce workers' hours to 49 hours per week and stabilize pay -- though the limit is rarely enforced because workers often want to work overtime and make ends meet.

Apple announced in December that it would begin to make some of its Mac computers in America in 2013.

Neanderthal cloning? Pure fantasy

Labels: World

A display of a reconstruction of a Neanderthal man and boy at the Museum for Prehistory in Eyzies-de-Tayac, France.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Arthur Caplan: It would be unethical to try and clone a Neanderthal baby

Caplan: Downsides include a good chance of producing a baby that is seriously deformed

He says the future belongs to what we can do to genetically engineer and control microbes

Caplan: Microbes can make clean fuel, suck up carbon dioxide, clean fat out of arteries

Editor's note: Arthur Caplan is the Drs. William F and Virginia Connolly Mitty professor and director of the Division of Bioethics at New York University Langone Medical Center.

(CNN) -- So now we know -- there won't be a Neanderthal moving into your neighborhood.

Despite a lot of frenzied attention to the intentionally provocative suggestion by a renowned Harvard scientist that new genetic technology makes it possible to splice together a complete set of Neanderthal genes, find an adventurous surrogate mother and use cloning to gin up a Neanderthal baby -- it ain't gonna happen anytime soon.

Nor should it. But there are plenty of other things in the works involving genetic engineering that do merit serious ethical discussion at the national and international levels.

Arthur Caplan

Some thought that the Harvard scientist, George Church, was getting ready to put out an ad seeking volunteer surrogate moms to bear a 35,000-year-old, long-extinct Neanderthal baby. Church had to walk his comments back and note that he was just speculating, not incubating.

Still cloning carries so much mystery and Hollywood glamour thanks to movies such as "Jurassic Park," "The Boys From Brazil" and "Never Let Me Go" that a two-day eruption of the pros and cons of making Neanderthals ensued. That was not necessary. It would be unethical to try and clone a Neanderthal baby.

Why? Because there is no obvious reason to do so. There is no pressing need or remarkable benefit to undertaking such a project. At best it might shed some light on the biology and behavior of a distant ancestor. At worst it would be nothing more than the ultimate reality television show exploitation: An "Octomom"-like surrogate raises a caveman child -- tune in next week to see what her new boyfriend thinks when she tells him that there is a tiny addition in her life and he carries a small club and a tiny piece of flint to sleep with him.

The downsides of trying to clone a Neanderthal include a good chance of killing it, producing a baby that is seriously deformed, producing a baby that lacks immunity to infectious diseases and foods that we have gotten used to, an inability to know what environment to create to permit the child to flourish and a complete lack of understanding of what sort of behavior is "normal" or "appropriate" for such a long-extinct cousin hominid of ours.

When weighed against the risks and the harm that most likely would be done, it would take a mighty big guarantee of benefit to justify this cloning experiment. I am willing to venture that the possible benefit will never, ever reach the point where this list of horrible likely downsides could be overcome.

Even justifying trying to resurrect a woolly mammoth, or a mastodon, or the dodo bird or any other extinct animal gets ethically thorny. How many failures would be acceptable to get one viable mastodon? Where would the animal live? What would we feed it? Who would protect it from poachers, gawkers and treasure hunters? It is not so simple to take a long dead species, make enough of them so they don't die of isolation and lack of social stimulation and then find an environment that is close enough and safe enough compared with that which they once roamed.

In any event the most interesting aspects of genetic engineering do not involve making humans or Neanderthals or mammoths. They involve ginning up microbes to do things that we really need doing such as making clean fuel, sucking up carbon dioxide, cleaning fat out of our arteries, giving us a lot more immunity to nasty bacteria and viruses and helping us make plastics and chemicals more efficiently and cheaply.

In trying to make these kinds of microbes, you can kill all you want without fear of ethical condemnation. And if the new bug does not like the environment in which it has to exist to live well, that will be just too darn bad.

The ethical challenge of this kind of synthetic biology is that it can be used by bad guys for bad purposes. Biological weapons can be ginned up and microbes created that only infect people with certain genes that commonly associate with racial or ethnic groups.

Rather than worry about what will happen to real estate values should a new crop of "Flintstones" move in down the street, our public officials, religious groups and ethicists need to get serious about how much regulation the genetic engineering of microbes needs, how can we detect what terrorists might try to use, what sort of controls do we need to prevent accidents and who is going to pay if a bug turns out to cause more harm than good.

We love to think that the key to tomorrow lies in what humanity can be designed or empowered to do. Thus, the fascination with human cloning. In reality, at least for a long time to come, the future belongs to what we can do to design and control microbes. That is admittedly duller, but it is far better to follow a story that is true than one such as Neanderthal cloning that is pure, speculative fantasy.

Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter.

Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Arthur Caplan.

Cooling-off Day for Punggol East by-election

Labels: Technology

SINGPORE: Friday is Cooling-off Day for the Punggol East by-election, which has seen nine days of vigorous campaigning by the four candidates contending in the polls.

The Elections Department has reminded political parties and candidates that Friday has been set aside for voters to reflect rationally on various issues raised during the campaigning before they go to the polls on Saturday.

The four candidates Channel NewsAsia spoke to say they intend to spend their time with their family, friends, and supporters after a gruelling election campaign that took form in walkabouts, morning visits to train stations to catch office-goers, as well as public and online rallies.

Campaigning is not allowed on Cooling-off Day. Election advertising cannot be published or displayed on Cooling-off Day as well.

Exceptions include reports in newspapers as well as on radio and television which relate to election matters.

Also allowed are approved posters and banners lawfully displayed before the start of Cooling-off Day. Other election advertising, such as internet election advertising lawfully displayed or published before the start of Cooling-off Day, is also allowed. Candidates can also continue to wear a replica of the symbol allotted to them.

Candidates and supporters have been advised to refrain from attending public events on Cooling-off Day and Polling Day. However they can attend religious ceremonies or worship services, or functions in the course of work or employment, but must be mindful of the rule prohibiting campaigning and election advertising.

On Saturday, some 31,600 voters from Punggol East SMC will go to the polls to elect their Parliamentary representative.

The by-election is being contested by four political parties.

Dr Koh Poh Koon from the People's Action Party, Mr Kenneth Jeyaretnam from the Reform Party, Mr Desmond Lim Bak Chuan from the Singapore Democratic Alliance and Ms Lee Li Lian from the Workers' Party.

This is Singapore's second by-election in eight months after the May 2012 Hougang by-election.

The Cooling-off Day provision in the Parliamentary Elections Act is now in force for the fourth time, after the 2011 General and Presidential Elections and the 2012 Hougang by-election.

- CNA/jc

After threats, North Korea's secrecy a challenge for U.S.

Labels: Lifestyle

Kim Jong Un and his military

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

NEW: U.S. places sanctions on Korean financial entities

The U.S. secretary of defense says predicting a North Korean test is difficult

Pyongyang says it plans a new nuclear test and further long-range rocket launches

North Korea is upset by a recent U.N. Security Council resolution, an analyst says

Seoul, South Korea (CNN) -- North Korea said Thursday that it plans to carry out a new nuclear test and more long-range rocket launches, all of which it said are a part of a new phase of confrontation with the United States.

The North's National Defense Commission said the moves would feed into an "upcoming all-out action" that would target the United States, "the sworn enemy of the Korean people."

Carried by the state media, the comments are the latest defiant flourish from the reclusive North Korean regime, whose young leader, Kim Jong Un, has upheld his father's policy of pursuing a military deterrent and shrugging off international pressure.

U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said Thursday there are no "outward indications" that North Korea is about to conduct a nuclear test, but he admitted it would be hard to determine that in advance.

"They have the capability, frankly, to conduct these tests in a way that makes it very difficult to determine whether or not they are doing it," he said in a Pentagon press conference.

"We are very concerned with North Korea's continuing provocative behavior," he said, but he added that the United States is "fully prepared" to deal with any provocations.

Read more: U.N. Security Council slams North Korea, expands sanctions

North Korea's statement prompted France and Great Britain to express exasperation with the secretive regime.

Britain's mission to the United Nations called on North Korean leaders to "refrain from further provocation." France said it "deplores" North Korea's statement, telling its leaders that they need not to threaten, but instead to work toward dismantling their nuclear and missile programs.

In addition to Panetta's statement, the United States responded by adding sanctions against more bank officials and a business linked to the regime's nuclear weapons program.

The Treasury Department announcement targets two Beijing-based representatives of Tanchon Commercial Bank and a company -- Leader (Hong Kong) International Trading Limited -- that the U.S. government says shipped machinery and equipment in support of North Korea's nuclear program.

The organizations are "part of the web of banks, front companies and government agencies that support North Korea's continued proliferation activities," said Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence David S. Cohen.

"By continuing to expose these entities, and the individuals who assist them, we degrade North Korea's ability to use the international financial system for its illicit purposes," he said.

North Korea's statement followed a U.N. Security Council resolution approved Tuesday that the United States pushed for, condemning a recent rocket launch by North Korea and expanding existing sanctions.

Read more: North Korea silences doubters, raises fears with rocket launch

The statement "should have been the expected outcome" from the U.N. decision, said Daniel Pinkston, senior analyst for the International Crisis Group covering Northeast Asia.

"I think they are completely outraged and insulted by it," he said.

Read more: N. Korea's launch causes worries about nukes, Iran and the Pacific

North Korea, which often issues bellicose statements in its state media, said Thursday that it rejects all Security Council resolutions concerning it, describing the most recent resolution as "the most dangerous phase of the hostile policy" toward it.

Read more: U.S. official: North Korea likely deceived U.S., allies before launching rocket

Analyst: Threat meant as a deterrence

The threats toward the United States, a constant theme in the North's propaganda, have more to do with deterrence than a desire for full conflict, Pinkston said.

"I don't believe they have the capability, the intention or the will to invade or destroy the United States," he said. "They wish to deter interference from the U.S. or any outside powers."

Read more: North Korea's rocket launches cost $1.3 billion

North Korea's successful rocket launch last month nonetheless changed the strategic calculations for the United States, showing that the North's missile program is advancing despite an array of heavy sanctions imposed on it.

Analysts say it still has a lot of work to do to master the technology necessary to mount a nuclear warhead on a missile or accurately target it.

At the same time, Pyongyang has been hinting for a while that a new nuclear test could be in the cards.

Read more: South Korean officials: North Korean rocket could hit U.S. mainland

Just before the North sent out its latest hostile statement Thursday, a U.S. State Department official was telling reporters in Seoul that Washington hoped Pyongyang wouldn't go ahead.

"We think that that would be a mistake, obviously," said Glyn Davies, the U.S. special envoy on North Korea. "We call on North Korea, as does the entire international community, not to engage in any further provocations."

North Korea has carried out two previous nuclear tests, in 2006 and 2009, both of which were condemned by the United Nations.

Read more: Huge crowds gather in North Korean capital to celebrate rocket launch

Pyongyang didn't say Thursday when exactly it would carry out a third test, but it could happen "at any time," according to Pinkston.

He said it is hard for anybody outside the North Korean nuclear sector to know if the country is technically ready to carry out the test, but that politically, "it seems an appropriate time."

Demands unlikely to sway North

South Korean defense officials said last year that they believed the North was in a position to carry out a new test whenever leaders in Pyongyang gave the green light.

North Korea's nuclear program is "an element of threat to peace not only for Northeast Asia but also for the world," Park Soo-jin, deputy spokeswoman for the South Korean Unification Ministry, said Thursday.

"North Korea should immediately stop its nuclear test and other provocation and should choose a different path by cooperating with the international community," Park said.

That appears unlikely at this stage, though.

After a failed long-range rocket launch in April, North Korea ignored international condemnation and carried out a second attempt last month. That one succeeded in putting a satellite in orbit, Pyongyang's stated objective.

But the launch was widely considered to be a test of ballistic missile technology. And it remains unclear if the satellite, which the North insists is for peaceful purposes, is functional.

Both North Korea's previous nuclear tests took place weeks or months after long-range rocket launches.

Those tests were carried out under the rule Kim Jong Il, the deceased father of the current leader, and the man who channeled huge amounts of money into North Korea's nuclear and missile development programs.

Kim Jong Il died in December 2011 after 17 years in power, during which the North Korean people became increasingly impoverished and malnourished.

Economically, the country relies heavily on trade with its major ally, China.

On Tuesday, China's Foreign Ministry appealed for calm.

Spokesman Hong Lei urged North Korea and the West to "keep calm, remain cautious and refrain from any action that might escalate the situation in the region."

The U.S. Treasury Department on Thursday prohibited future transactions between Americans and two North Korean bankers and one financial service company the agency said support North Korea's nuclear program.

Read more: For the U.N. and North Korea: Game on

CNN's K.J. Kwon reported from Seoul, and Jethro Mullen from Hong Kong. CNN's David Hawley in Seoul contributed to this report.

A question of access? Mental health and gun violence

Labels: Health

As President Obama faces opposition from gun rights advocates over his recent proposals to combat gun violence, the challenge he faces of fixing flaws in the mental health care system may prove just as difficult a battle.

Mr. Obama outlined plans aimed at preventing mass shootings and reducing broader gun violence in the United States last week, while signing 23 executive actions that did not require Congressional approval. Alongside proposed changes to gun laws including universal background checks, a stronger ban on assault weapons and new restrictions on ammunition and magazines, mental health emerged as a core feature of the president's plan to prevent further tragedies like the Dec. 14 shooting in Newtown, Conn.

The executive actions related to mental health included:

A letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities
Incentives for schools to hire school resource officers
A letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover
Finalization of regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within health insurance exchanges
A commitment to finalizing mental health parity regulations
The launch of a national dialogue led by the departments of Health and Human Services and Education on mental health
A Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence
Clarification that the new health care law does not prohibit doctors from asking their patients about guns in their homes

Noting that it was the first of its kind to focus on mental health since 2007 -- and long overdue -- Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin chaired a hearing of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Thursday.

Harkin laid out that while Newtown has brought the issue to the forefront of discussion, mental illness only accounts for a small proportion of violent crimes.

Experts estimate only a small percentage of violent crimes -- less than 5 percent -- are caused by mentally ill people.

"People with mental illness are much more likely to be the victims of violent crimes than perpetrators of violence," said Harkin, who called mental health care's shortcomings a public health problem.

A common theme throughout the hearing was to avoid stigmatizing people with mental illness while discussing gun violence and problems facing mental health care.

Play Video

Mental health expert: "We can and must intervene early"

Pamela S. Hyde, administrator for the government's Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) laid out the scope of the mental health care problem during the hearing (video at left). Of the 45 million U.S. adults suffering from mental illness, only 38.5 percent receive the treatment they need, she said. For children, only one in five receive necessary treatment for diagnosable mental disorders. Despite showing symptoms, many children and adults experience significant delays getting into treatment. Hyde argues that if the system shifts to a focus on early intervention, more people can be helped.

"Cost, access and recognition of the problems are the primary reason this treatment is not received. However it doesn't have to be this way," said Hyde. "For most of these conditions, prevention works, treatment is effective and people do in fact recover."

Mental health care spending has been dramatically cut in recent years. A 2011 report from the National Alliance on Mental Health that looked at state-by-state mental health budgets reported $1.6 billion in state funding cuts from 2009 through 2012. Medicaid cuts at this time also negatively affected mental health care, the report showed. States are mulling increases in funding in light of the Newtown shooting.

And the health care system may only become more burdened in the near future: A July 2012 study by the Institute of Medicine, an advisory medical organization to the government, found an aging baby boomer population could cause a mental health care crisis by 2030, when the number of U.S. seniors is expected to double and necessary resources will be woefully lacking.

Play Video

The dangerous stigma of mental illness

Dr. Jeffrey Lieberman, chairman of psychiatry at Columbia University Medical Center in New York City, told CBS News senior correspondent John Miller in December that mental health care is a societal problem because the U.S. has not taken on the treatment of mental illness as effectively as it could.

"I think mental health is a big issue," Lieberman said at the time. "It's definitely related to the frequency of these seemingly senseless and wanton killings that occur. And the way it relates is that unfortunately, individuals who have specific forms of mental illness, if untreated, can be more prone to act in a way which is socially destructive and results in harm or killing like we saw happen."

Lieberman said a person who needs treatment for mental illness often faces barriers such as insurance coverage and accessibility to care, in addition to stigma -- while people getting treated for a disease like cancer face fewer "disincentives" to getting the best care.

Following the president's announcement, Lieberman told CBSNews.com that the new proposals are "on the right track" in terms of addressing issues in the mental health system, but much work remains to clarify how these actions will be implemented.

By getting more people with mental illness, impulse disorders and substance abuse issues into constant treatment, he said, they may be prevented from ever getting to a point where they are showing symptoms of mental illness -- and acting on violent impulses.

"Trying to say we should only do something when they get dangerous is very late in the process," said Lieberman.

Details on the president's proposals still need to be worked out, said Lieberman, who is also president-elect of the American Psychiatric Association. For example, the Mental Health Parity Act, which the president wanted to finalize in his executive actions, requires that mental health benefits are covered by insurance, similar to non-psychiatric health care benefits. However, the rules to determine what services are covered, how people become reimbursed and other stipulations have not been established, he said. The president also asked for clarification on Medicaid mental health services, which now typically covers people who have severe forms of mental illness. Lieberman argues policymakers may find that these services are not adequate, and broader services are needed.

Right now, doctors cannot provide mental health care services in what Lieberman refers to as a "financially viable way." He explains that patients seeking help for mental health may require a lot of support, not only from a doctor who may provide medication, but from therapists, case managers and social and vocational rehabilitation counselors who need to be more actively involved in the patient's lives. These team-based "multi-element treatment approaches" have been shown in studies to be effective, however these types of paid services just aren't available for people suffering from mental health problems. Meanwhile, a person with heart disease may see a cardiologist, a surgeon, a different doctor about stent management, a nutritionist for lifestyle tips, and other providers all covered by insurance.

"In mental health care it's the same thing -- you can't just see a psychiatrist and get a prescription," he said. "This is not just throwing different services at the problem, there's good evidence that these things work."

Dr. Jeffrey Swanson, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Duke University School of Medicine, who has published several research papers on gun violence and mental health for more than a decade, agrees the current mental health system represents a complex public health problem facing the United States.

"The mental health system in the country, if you can call it that, is fragmented and grossly under-resourced," Swanson told CBSNews.com in an email. "It needs a lot of things, and more research into how to fix it -- at a time when there are more mentally ill people incarcerated than in hospitals -- is one of the needed things," he said.

A 2011 paper by Swanson published in Psychiatric Services examines the lack of data available on firearm use against strangers, and how it is impossible to reliably predict which specific individuals would engage in the most serious acts of violence.

But even if more CDC research stemming from the president's proposals strengthens the available data pool, Swanson argues these egregious acts of violence may still be impossible to predict.

Play Video

Can a mental disorder make someone violent?

"I think more access to evidence-based treatment and less access to guns, taken together, would have an impact on gun violence, at least on the margins. But prevent mass shootings? That's hard to say," Swanson said. "Those are almost inherently unpredictable, and often perpetrated by people with no gun-disqualifying mental health or criminal record -- until it's too late. Most of the measures in the President's proposal, even if enacted and implemented perfectly, would not necessarily have prevented the shootings in Tucson, Aurora, or Newtown."

While concerns persist on how the president's proposals will be implemented, the announcement was supported by various health organizations that had previously submitted recommendations to Vice President Joe Biden's White House Task Force on Gun Violence Prevention.

"NAMI applauds the President's plan for its significant provisions to strengthen and expand mental health services," Michael Fitzpatrick, executive director of the National Alliance on Mental Illness said in a statement following the proposals. "The mental health care system has long been broken. The challenge is not to fix it, but to build it anew, focusing on early screening, diagnosis, treatment and prevention. The President's plan takes important steps toward meeting that challenge."

Dr. Dilip V. Jeste, president of the American Psychiatric Association, added in statement, "We are heartened that the Administration plans to finalize rules governing mental health parity under the 2008 Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act, the Affordable Care Act, and Medicaid. "We are glad that the President has clarified that doctors are not prohibited from asking their patients about guns in their homes. The APA has consistently advocated for such a position."

The American Academy of Pediatrics also offered its support.

"In addition to addressing firearm regulations, we must improve access to quality mental health care both to help prevent violent acts and to assist victims of trauma," AAP President Dr. Thomas K. McInerny, said in a statement following the proposals. "The AAP agrees with the President that we must improve the identification of mental illnesses through increased screening, address inadequate insurance coverage and high out-of-pocket costs that create barriers to access, strengthen the overall quality of mental health access, and improve and expand the Medicaid reimbursement policy to include mental health and developmental services.

Feinstein Proposes Assault Weapons Ban

Labels: Business

Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP Photo

With an AR-15 and nine other guns on her left, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., introduced a bill today that would ban assault weapons and high capacity ammunition clips.

The bill comes nearly 20 years after the first assault weapons ban was signed into law.

“I remain horrified by the massacre committed at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., and I’m also incensed that our weak gun laws allow these mass killings to be carried out again and again and again,” said Feinstein, who was joined by senators, representatives, mayors, police officials and victims of gun violence. “Military-style assault weapons have but one purpose, and in my view that’s a military purpose, to hold at the hip, possibly, to spray fire to be able to kill large numbers.”

“Assault weapons were designed for and should be used on our battlefields, not on our streets,” Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said. “We know that there is no inalienable right to own and operate 100-round clips on AR-15 assault rifles.”

Feinstein’s proposed plan, which she will formally introduce on the Senate floor this afternoon, will ban the sale, transfer, manufacturing and importation of 158 semi-automatic weapons with at least one military feature. It would also ban fixed magazines that are capable of holding more than 10 rounds.

The newly bill differs from the 1994 assault weapons ban in that it does not have a sunset provision. Feinstein said the bill will protect over 2,200 makes of hunting and sporting rifles and shotguns, and the bill will subject existing or grandfathered weapons to background checks if they are sold or transferred.

“We have tried to learn from the bill. We have tried to recognize legal hunting rights. We have tried to recognize legal defense rights. We have tried to recognize the right of a citizen to legally possess a weapon. No weapon is taken from anyone. The purpose is to dry up the supply of these weapons over time. Therefore, there is no sunset on this bill,” Feinstein said.

Feinstein acknowledged the difficulty lawmakers face in passing this bill through Congress.

“Getting this bill signed into law will be an uphill battle, and I recognize that, but it’s a battle worth having,” Feinstein said. “We must balance the desire of a few to own military-style assault weapons with the growing threat to lives across America.”

The National Rifle Association said Feinstein’s plan infringes on second amendment rights and neglects to address other issues spurring gun violence.

“Senator Feinstein has been trying to ban guns from law-abiding citizens for decades. It’s disappointing but not surprising that she is once again focused on curtailing the Constitution instead of prosecuting criminals or fixing our broken mental health system. The American people know gun bans do not work and we are confident Congress will reject Senator Feinstein’s wrong-headed approach,” Andrew Arulanandam, spokesman for the NRA, told ABC News.

Feinstein’s office told ABC News that the senator worked with U.S. Capitol Police and Washington Metro Police to ensure the display of weapons at the press conference complied with the rules.

An ABC News-Washington Post poll released last week found that 65 percent of those polled supported banning high capacity ammunition magazines while 58 percent favored banning the sale of so-called assault weapons.

Last week, President Obama introduced his gun policy agenda, which called for the banning of some assault-style weapons and high capacity magazines holding over ten rounds. The president’s plan included 23 executive actions on gun violence that would not require congressional approval, which included a directive for national agencies to strengthen the criminal background check system.

A new ABC News-Washington Post poll out today showed 53 percent find the president’s gun control plan to be favorable while 41 percent view it unfavorably.

Benghazi blame-game is useless

Labels: World

Hillary Clinton through the years

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Anthony Cordesman: Questions for Hillary Clinton on Benghazi attack inevitable, important

But political blame game useless, a discouraging message to diplomats, military advisers, he says

He says in hindsight, warnings, pleas for support mistakenly make crisis seem obvious

Writer: U.S. must focus forward: encourage, support risk-takers doing crucial work in field

Editor's note: Anthony H. Cordesman holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Follow CSIS on Twitter.

(CNN) -- Politics are politics, and partisan congressional challenges over the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens and other Americans in Benghazi, Libya, last September were inevitable.

But while some of the questions Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was asked in her appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee bordered on politics at their worst, some represented democracy at its best: A legitimate challenge of how the government works. The fact is, we do need to ask serious questions about the way our diplomats function, how they are deployed and protected.

In her responses, Clinton took responsibility, as the top official in every department always must. The question now, however, is what, if anything, will we really learn from the events that led to the deaths of Stevens and his colleagues?

Anthony H. Cordesman

Do we actually learn something from their courage and sacrifice, and the similar experience of other American diplomats and officers that have faced similar attacks in the past? Or do we go on playing a pointless blame game, creating a climate that discourages our diplomats, U.S. military advisory teams and intelligence officers from taking necessary risks -- and relies even more on fortifying our embassies.

Three lessons here. The first: Virtually every post mortem that relies on the blame game has the same result. There is always someone who asked for more resources and warned of the risk before the event. There are always enough intelligence indicators so that once you go back -- knowing the pattern of actual events -- it becomes possible to predict the past with 20-20 hindsight.

The problem is that the post mortems and hearings tend to be useless. Every prudent security officer has always asked for more; the indicators that could provide warning with 20-20 hindsight will still be buried in a flood of other reporting that warns of crises that don't take place; U.S. officials will still have to deal with what intelligence experts call "noise" -- the vast amount of reporting and other data that make it impossible to sort out the right information until the event actually occurs and the patterns are known. All of this makes it hard to know what request or warning ever matters.

Opinion: Algeria hostage crisis shows jihadists on rise

Yes, intelligence and warning can always be improved if the post mortem is realistic and objective. But the resulting improvements will never be enough. No one will ever assess all the risks correctly, U.S. diplomats and other Americans will be vulnerable when they operate in a hostile environment, and risk-taking will remain inevitable.

The second lesson is that we cannot deal with crises like the political upheavals in the Arab world, or the more direct threats that countries like Iran and North Korea can pose, unless our diplomats and military advisers take risks -- and more casualties -- in the process.

Stevens and those around him did what had to be done. These are the teams that can help lead unstable countries towards democracy and stability. They are the crucial to our counterterrorism efforts in the field and to building up the military security capabilities of developing states. They are key to uniting given factions, creating effective governance, and persuading states to move toward development and greater concern for human rights.

They can only be effective if they are on the scene, work with the leaders and factions involved, and often go into harms way where there are terrorist and military threats. Like Stevens, they cannot wait for perfect security, stay in a safe area, or minimize risks and deal with the realities of Libya, filled with local power struggles, extremist elements and potential threats.

We need risk-takers. We need them in any country that is going through the kind of upheavals taking place in Libya, as well as in countries where our enemies operate, and semi-war zones like Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen. We need diplomats, U.S. military advisory teams, and intelligence officers that reach far beyond our embassies and go into high risk zones. We need to reward and honor those risk-takers, not those who shelter in safety and avoid the risks they should take or fear their career will be damaged if anyone is killed or hurt.

Opinion: Algeria crisis is a wakeup call for America

The third lesson is that we do need to steadily strengthen our ability to provide secure mobility, better intelligence, better communications, and better protection for those diplomats, U.S. military advisory teams and intelligence officers. We need to be able to better provide emergency help to those American NGO personnel and businessmen who take similar risks.

We need both an administration and a Congress that look beyond the blame game and understand that some things are worth spending money on. We need them to understand that what we once called the Arab Spring is clearly going to be the Arab Decade, and we face different but equally real risks in the field in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

It is far better -- and cheaper even, in the medium term -- to fund strong U.S. country teams, military advisers, counterterrorism teams and development efforts than to let nations collapse, to let extremists take over, to lose allies, and see American NGOs and businesses unable to operate.

We need to see what new methods and investments can protect our people in the field and reduce the risks they should be taking. The answer may be special communications, intelligence system, helicopters and armored vehicles, emergency response teams and new career security personnel to replace contractors and foreign nationals.

What the answer is not is partisan blame, risk avoidance, punishing those who do take risks for the result, and failing to make the improvements in security for risk takers -- while building larger fortress embassies. If you want to honor the Americans lost in the line of duty, focus on the future and not the past.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Anthony Cordesman

News flamboyer

Category

Archive

Can sanctions deter North Korea?

Sailing: Olympic sailing champion visits Singapore

Egypt: Deadly clashes follow soccer riot verdict

Newtown Families March for Gun Control in DC

SHOWS: Good Morning America World News

Where is aid for Syria going?

Apple loses world's most valuable company crown

'Fighting' Casey Anthony gets two convictions tossed

Court: Obama appointments are unconstitutional

Carney: Court's NLRB ruling "novel and unprecedented"

Apple Drops Manufacturer Using Underage Workers

Neanderthal cloning? Pure fantasy

Cooling-off Day for Punggol East by-election

After threats, North Korea's secrecy a challenge for U.S.

A question of access? Mental health and gun violence

Mental health expert: "We can and must intervene early"

The dangerous stigma of mental illness

Can a mental disorder make someone violent?

Feinstein Proposes Assault Weapons Ban

Benghazi blame-game is useless

Subscribe Me