Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 23, 2014, 03:57:33 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
82993 Posts in 2257 Topics by 1067 Members
Latest Member: Shinobi Dog
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Recent Posts
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10

 81 
 on: October 16, 2014, 08:20:56 AM 
Started by captainccs - Last post by Crafty_Dog

Syria-Iraq

U.S.-led airstrikes and Kurdish forces are continuing to push back Islamic State militants from the predominantly Kurdish Syrian town of Kobani (Ayn al-Arab), near the border with Turkey. As of Wednesday, coalition forces had conducted over 100 strikes around Kobani, which the Pentagon reported had killed several hundred Islamic State fighters. A Kurdish official reported militants are retreating from parts of the town, though U.S. military officials cautioned Kobani could still fall to the Islamic State group. Additionally, the retired general leading the coalition, General John Allen, noted Islamic State militants have made "substantial gains" in Iraq's western Anbar province, despite U.S.-led airstrikes. He mentioned, however, that coalition forces had pushed militants back in other areas of Iraq.



•   Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is expected to nominate a candidate from the Iranian-backed Shiite militia the Badr Corps as interior minister.  (Well, that will sure help persuade Sunnis to work with the Govt. of Baghdad)

 82 
 on: October 16, 2014, 08:16:58 AM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by Crafty_Dog
I remember hearing of this many years ago.  This is no surprise to me.

My understanding is this:

The chem weapons were all pre-Gulf War, and were all seriously degraded.  A danger to those handling them certainly, but not likely to function as weapons.  As pre-Gulf War, their degraded presence, in effect, underlined that the active program we asserted was devoid of proof after our invasion.

The embarrassment of the West's role, including a US role, in their manufacture, would have been VERY bad in the context of our used of WMD as a justification in front of the UN.



 83 
 on: October 15, 2014, 10:54:12 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by ccp


See also:
Top News,
 chemical weapons,
 Society,
 weapons of mass destruction
 
WMD found in Iraq after all, Bush was right: Pentagon 'hid' chemical weapons?
 

 

Use your key for the next article

Next: UFOs on Mars not far-fetched anymore: NASA chief reveals agency take on Mars

October 15, 2014  10:31 AM MST   Facebook
 Twitter
 Pinterest
 Linkedin
 Google Plus
 Comment
 
 
 
HuffPost senior media reporter Michael Calderone joins HuffPost Live's Jason Linkins to talk about the responsibility journalists have in covering the current turmoil in Iraq.
Play


HuffPost senior media reporter Michael Calderone joins HuffPost Live's Jason Linkins to talk about the responsibility journalists have in covering the current turmoil in Iraq.

on.aol.com




It's been 11 years since George W. Bush ordered an American invasion of Iraq after the 911 World Trade Center attacks. Then, President Bush was convinced Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein, had an active chemical weapons program. However, no weapons of mass destruction were found, as reported by the Administration at the time. Nonetheless, a shocking report out Tuesday by the New York Times says that WMD were found in Iraq after all, but the Pentagon did its best to hide the truth.
George W. Bush and Saddam Hussein
George W. Bush and Saddam Hussein

Bing

Watch video above of Huff Post Live talking about how weapons of mass destruction were not found in Iraq

Sources, namely former and retired U.S. and Iraq veterans, shared appalling stories of U.S. troops coming across dangerous abandoned chemical munitions during a span of time from 2004 to 2011. One such incident took place in 2008 with a team of military technicians charged with disposing of artillery left behind in the toils of war.

They told of handling shells that oozed of some pungent liquid that smelled acrid. "That doesn't look like pond water," said his team leader, Staff Sgt. Eric J. Duling. And after swabbing the discharge, the color indicated the presence of the agent mustard, a potent chemical weapon outlawed from past a war, that burns the skin, eyes, and airway of anyone exposed.

The sergeant gave the order: "Get the hell out." He knew the dangers of the WMD, and from that point on, an alleged government cover up ensued as officials tried desperately to keep the finding of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq from getting out to the public. The Times weighed in.

'The American government withheld word about its discoveries even from troops it sent into harm's way and from military doctors. The government’s secrecy, victims and participants said, prevented troops in some of the war's most dangerous jobs from receiving proper medical care and official recognition of their wounds."

Recently, through the Freedom of Information Act, the truth finally came out: There were chemical weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq, but not from an active Iraqi program at the time Bush ordered the famous, “Shock and Awe” invasion. All told, some 5,000 or more WMDs were located by military techs even when Pentagon officials say they were inert and posed no harm to humans.


"I felt more like a guinea pig than a wounded soldier," said a former Army sergeant who suffered mustard burns in 2007. This same veteran was denied medical treatment for "exposure to WMDs" and despite requests from his commander to be evacuated from theater, higher-ups denied requests.

Years later, soldiers in mass began reporting harmful effects from nerve and mustard gas agents. However, bureaucratic red tape is complicating their care. Some facilities are saying the ill effects reported by veterans are not related to the discovery of outlawed chemical weapons, based on the Geneva Convention Protocol, as ICRC explains.


"The use of chemical weapons is prohibited in international armed conflicts in a series of treaties, including the Hague Declaration concerning Asphyxiating Gases, the Geneva Gas Protocol, the Chemical Weapons Convention and the Statute of the International Criminal Court.[1] At present, only 13 States are not party to either the Geneva Gas Protocol or the Chemical Weapons Convention.[2] Of these, at least three have made statements to the effect that the use of chemical weapons is unlawful, or have indicated that they do not possess or use them or that they are committed to their elimination.[3] The prohibition is also contained in a number of other instruments."

So, why did the government allegedly conceal the fact weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq? After all, it was President George W. Bush's premise for invading the country in 2003 and targeting Saddam Hussein and Al-Quaeda for the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001?

The NY Times suggests that the Bush Administration would have a hard time explaining why officials sent soldiers into harms-way after leading them to believe the WMDs were harmless. A second reason is that the outing of the information could possibly fuel attempts by ISIS to locate the remaining unearthed chemical weapons – and use them. Finally, and, arguably, the most damaging reason why the U.S. government didn't disclose the finding of chemical weapons was that most, if not all of them were allegedly manufactured in European and American companies before 1991.

Just last year, reporters visited a pair of abandoned bunkers that were contaminated by dangerous munitions left behind during the long occupation in Iraq. What they found was nothing short of alarming.

"Two contaminated bunkers — one containing cyanide precursors and old sarin rockets — loomed behind. The area where Marines had found mustard shells in 2008 was out of sight, shielded by scrub and shimmering heat. The Iraqi troops who stood at that entrance are no longer there. The compound, never entombed, is now controlled by the Islamic State," according to Times.

 84 
 on: October 15, 2014, 10:48:07 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by G M
Yes, I'm looking for the post.

 85 
 on: October 15, 2014, 10:46:24 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by ccp
From Wikipedia:

****Political views[edit]

Cooper was a staunch supporter of the Republican Party. He voted for Calvin Coolidge in 1924, and for Herbert Hoover in 1928 and 1932. He campaigned for Wendell Willkie in 1940.[46] In 1944 he attended a 93,000-large Republican rally in the Los Angeles Coliseum in support of the Dewey-Bricker ticket.[47][48] While filming Good Sam in October 1947, he testified before the House Committee on Un-American Activities where he was asked if he had observed "communistic influence in Hollywood".[49] Cooper named no one in particular but said he had "turned down quite a few scripts because I thought they were tinged with communistic ideas".[49] He also testified that he had heard statements such as, "Don't you think the Constitution of the United States is about 150 years out of date" and, "Perhaps this would be a more efficient government without a Congress"—statements he characterized as "very un-American".[49]****

 86 
 on: October 15, 2014, 09:11:27 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by ccp
I wonder if this is what he was rushing back was for.  To make the hospital CEO apologize.  Make him the scapeghoat. 

 The only one who should apologize is the Self Chosen One who will not secure the borders:


Top Texas hospital official to tell lawmakers 'we made mistakes' on Ebola


Published October 15, 2014·
FoxNews.com
top official for the parent company of the Texas hospital where two nurses contracted Ebola from a dying patient plans to tell lawmakers he is “deeply sorry” that “mistakes” were made at the facility, and will vow to determine how the errors occurred.

Dr. Daniel Varga, the chief clinical officer and senior vice president for Texas Health Resources, which runs Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital, will testify before a House subcommittee Thursday along with CDC Director Dr. Thomas Frieden, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Dr. Anthony Fauci and others.

According to prepared testimony, Varga will apologize to the subcommittee for how the hospital handled the treatment of Thomas Eric Duncan, a Liberian national who became the first person diagnosed with Ebola in the U.S. He died Oct. 8.

“Unfortunately, in our initial treatment of Mr. Duncan, despite our best intentions and a highly skilled medical team, we made mistakes,” the prepared testimony reads. “We did not correctly diagnose his symptoms as those of Ebola. We are deeply sorry.”

Varga will say the team of medical professionals was “devastated” when Duncan succumbed to the disease, adding it is “hard to put into words” the sorrow the team felt.

Varga also plans to mention the two nurses, both of whom contracted the deadly virus after caring for Duncan. He will say the team is “hopeful” about the progress of Nina Pham, the first nurse diagnosed and also will mention the second patient.

“A lot is being said about what may or may not have occurred to cause Ms. Pham to contract Ebola,” he will say. “She is known as an extremely skilled nurse, and she was using full protective measures under the CDC protocols, so we don’t yet know precisely how or when she was infected. But it’s clear there was an exposure somewhere, sometime. We are poring over records and observations, and doing all we can to find the answers.”

Varga will tell lawmakers the hospital group has made changes since its first encounter with Ebola, saying that the hospital was prepared to treat Ebola but fell short on diagnosing it.

“As a result, following Mr. Duncan’s initial admission, we have changed our screening process in the (emergency department) to capture the patient’s travel history at the first point of contact with (emergency department) staff,” he will say.

Varga will also say the hospital system is also conducting further training sessions with its staff and communicating and collaborating with federal, state and local agencies

Fauci will also testify before lawmakers on the federal government’s response to the crisis. According to prepared testimony, Fauci will say that although his agency is an “active participant” in attempting to stop the outbreak, it is still in the “early stages” of determining how best to treat and prevent Ebola.

“As we continue to expedite research while enforcing high safety and efficacy standards, the implementation of the public health measures already known to contain prior Ebola virus outbreaks and the implementation of treatment strategies such as fluid and electrolyte replacement are essential to preventing additional infections, treating those already infected, protecting health care providers, and ultimately bringing this epidemic to an end,” he will say.
 

 87 
 on: October 15, 2014, 09:05:20 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by Crafty_Dog


Risk of Deflation Feeds Global Fears
Falling Commodities Prices Pressures Central Banks
By Jon Hilsenrath and Brian Blackstone
Oct. 15, 2014 8:26 p.m. ET

Behind the spate of market turmoil lurks a worry that top policy makers thought they had beaten back a few years ago: the specter of deflation.

A general fall in consumer prices emerged as a big concern after the 2008 financial crisis because it summoned memories of deep and lingering downturns like the Great Depression and two decades of lost growth in Japan. The world’s central banks in recent years have used a variety of easy-money policies to fight its debilitating effects.

Now, fresh signs of slow global economic growth, falling commodities prices, sagging stock markets and declining bond yields suggest the deflation risk hasn’t gone away, particularly in the often-frenetic eyes of investors. These emerging threats come as the Federal Reserve is on track this month to end a bond-buying program that has been one of the main tools in its fight against falling prices.

The deflation concern is particularly pronounced in Europe and Japan, two economies where policy makers are struggling to come up with solutions to counter especially slow economic growth.

However, recent declines in commodities prices suggest that downward pressure on inflation—if not all-out deflation—could become a wider-ranging phenomenon, and one with some mixed implications for economies like the U.S. and emerging markets.

Investor worries about the global economy appeared to gather force Wednesday. European stock markets sagged; the Stoxx Europe 600 index fell 3.2% to its lowest level since last December. U.S. stocks pared steep losses, but still finished down for the fifth straight day; after falling more than 450 points at one point, the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 173.45, or 1.1%, to 16141.74.

Meantime, yields on 10-year U.S. Treasury notes fell to 2.091%, their lowest level since June 2013, and are down nearly a percentage point from the beginning of the year. Bond yields fell to new lows in Germany, too. Crude-oil prices dropped further; crude futures on the New York Mercantile Exchange fell to $81.78 a barrel, the lowest level since June 2012.

The deflation concerns are particularly acute in Europe, where annual inflation in the 18 nations that use the euro was 0.3% last month, a five-year low that is far below the European Central Bank’s target of just under 2%.

With inflation so low, it wouldn’t take much of a shock—such as weakness in Germany’s economy or geopolitical tensions in nearby Ukraine—to tip the whole region into a deflationary downturn. Some eurozone countries, such as Italy, have already tipped into deflation. Even countries outside the currency bloc are feeling the pain. Sweden’s statistics agency said Tuesday that consumer prices fell 0.4% in annual terms last month after a 0.2% fall in August, well below its central bank’s 2% target.

The risk of deflation in Europe is “a real worry,” Harvard University professor and former Federal Reserve governor Jeremy Stein said in an interview. “The right prescription [for policy makers] is to be aggressive.”

ECB President Mario Draghi acted against deflation risks in June and September, pushing the central bank to slash interest rates to record lows each time—including a negative rate on bank deposits at the ECB—and unveiling new bank-lending and asset-purchase plans for asset-backed securities and covered bonds.

But there is little consensus for more-dramatic measures—the kind of monetary stimulus the Fed, the Bank of England and the Bank of Japan have deployed—namely large-scale purchases of government bonds to raise the money supply.

The head of Germany’s central bank, Jens Weidmann, has signaled his opposition to such bond buying, and other members of the ECB’s governing council appear sympathetic to his argument that with government and corporate borrowing costs already superlow, the policy wouldn’t even do much good.

“I am very much for a steady-hand approach, and I think this is what we are doing,” Austria’s central bank governor, Ewald Nowotny, said in an interview last week.

Hard fiscal problems are part of Europe’s problem. Last week, Standard & Poor’s stripped Finland of its triple-A credit rating and downgraded France’s outlook. On Tuesday, Fitch put France on review for a possible downgrade.

Struggling economies such as France and Italy face a tough choice: Take additional austerity measures to shrink budget deficits, inflicting more pain on their economies, or attempt to flaunt the EU’s budget rules calling for low deficits, which could damage their credibility in Europe.

ECB chief Mario Draghi, shown in Washington this past weekend, faces opposition to further measures to combat deflation in the eurozone.R Reuters

The resistance Mr. Draghi faces has shaken the faith of some investors that policy makers in Europe will address the threat.

“Market valuations, especially for rich countries, have been well above what was warranted by fundamentals. What kept them up there was a belief that central banks were markets’ best friends,” said Mohamed El-Erian, chief economic adviser at Allianz Group. “Most people now recognize that the ability of central banks to address what ails the global economy is weaker than they believed.”

Meanwhile, Japan had recently begun to stir sustained growth, which helped to push its inflation rate above 1%, after years of on-again, off-again deflation. But inflation decelerated again in recent months as the economy softened after an April sales-tax increase meant to restrain mounting government debt. Many private economists forecast a slip back below 1% this year.

Japanese officials must now decide whether to follow through on another planned sales-tax increase that could dent growth even more. And the Bank of Japan is weighing whether it needs to provide even more stimulus. BOJ Governor Haruhiko Kuroda launched new asset purchase programs last year to reverse two decades of deflation and has pledged to persist until he reaches the 2% target.

Japan’s struggles to exit deflation, even with massive central-bank stimulus, illustrate just how difficult it is for an economy to pull out of the trap, once it has settled in.

A weak global outlook “has to be a worry for every economy,” Reserve Bank of India Governor Raghuram Rajan told The Wall Street Journal in an interview last week.

The U.S. confronts much different circumstances than Europe and Japan. U.S. inflation had been rising toward the Fed’s 2% objective earlier this year but now faces a downward tug amid the weakening global growth and a strengthening U.S. dollar. The Labor Department reported Wednesday that producer prices in the U.S. fell in September. Sharp drops in commodities prices this month could add to downward pressure.

Yet falling commodities prices have silver linings. For one, the decline is being driven in part by a U.S. energy production boom—not just sagging global demand for goods. Moreover, falling gasoline prices are a boon to U.S. consumers: One rule of thumb is that every one-cent drop in the price of gasoline amounts to a $1 billion boost to U.S. household incomes, and gasoline prices have dropped by 13 to 17 cents from a year ago, according to the automobile group AAA.

“All else equal, when energy gets cheaper, we benefit,” Mr. Stein said.

Meanwhile, the Fed is on track this month to end its bond-buying stimulus program launched in September 2012. And Fed officials have largely stuck to their line that they expected to start raising short-term interest rates by the middle of 2015. Still, traders in futures markets have been pushing up the prices of contracts tied to the Fed’s benchmark interest rate—a sign they see diminishing odds that the Fed will follow through on that plan.

Harvard’s Mr. Stein said he didn’t think the U.S. central bank needed to alter its thinking much in light of recent developments. “I wouldn’t dramatically revise my expectations,” he said. “The balance of the job-market news in the U.S. has been very positive.”

A Commerce Department report Wednesday showed U.S. retail sales dropped in September, but many economists are sticking to estimates that the U.S. economy expanded at a rate in excess of 3% in the third quarter, potentially the fourth time in the past five quarters it exceeded 3%. Moreover job growth has been stronger than Fed officials expected.

Write to Jon Hilsenrath at jon.hilsenrath@wsj.com and Brian Blackstone at brian.blackstone@wsj.com

 88 
 on: October 15, 2014, 09:04:27 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by ccp
Hat tip to Mark Levin who spoke on his radio show tonight about Michele Malkin's article about the CDC.  This is a real eye opener.  Let me get this straight.  Private companies are funding government agencies like the CDC?Huh

What the heck is that all about?

This cannot be kosher:

****AdTech Ad
Lead StoryThe Centers for Everything But Disease Control
Share   
By Michelle Malkin  •  October 14, 2014 09:33 PMScreen Shot 2014-10-14 at 9.16.35 PM

The Centers for Everything But Disease Control
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2014

So now the federal health bureaucrats in charge of controlling diseases and pandemics want more money to do their jobs. Hmph. Maybe if they hadn’t been so busy squandering their massive government subsidies on everything but their core mission, we taxpayers might actually feel a twinge of sympathy.

At $7 billion, the Centers for Disease Control 2014 budget is nearly 200 percent bigger now than it was in 2000. Those evil, stingy Republicans actually approved CDC funding increases in January larger than what President Obama requested.

What are we getting for this ever-increasing amount of money? Answer: A power-hungry busybody brigade of politicized blame-mongers.

Money, money, it’s always the money. Yet, while Ebola and enterovirus D68 wreak havoc on our health system, the CDC has been busying itself with an ever-widening array of non-disease control campaigns, like these recent crusades:

Mandatory motorcycle helmet laws. CDC Director Dr. Thomas Frieden appoints a 15-member “Community Preventive Services Task Force” to promote pet Nanny State projects. An obscure Obamacare rule–Section 4003(b)(1)–stealthily increased the task force’s authority to study “any policies, programs, processes or activities designed to affect or otherwise affecting health at the population level.” Last year, the meddling panel extended the agency’s reach into transportation safety with a call to impose a federal universal motorcycle helmet law on the country. Is riding a Harley a disease? Why is this the CDC’s business?

Video games and TV violence. At Obama’s behest, in the wake of high-profile school shootings, the CDC scored $10 million last year to study violent video games and media images, as well as to assess “existing strategies for preventing gun violence and identifying the most pressing research questions, with the greatest potential public health impact.” Whatever that means. Why is this the CDC’s business?

Playground equipment. The CDC’s “Injury Centers” (Did you know there are 13 of them?) have crafted a “national action plan” and funded countless studies to prevent boo-boos and accidents on the nation’s playgrounds. Apparently, there aren’t enough teachers, parents, local school districts, and county and state regulators to police the slides and seesaws. Why is this the CDC’s business?

“Social norming” in the schools. The CDC has funded studies and campaigns “promoting positive community norms” and “safe, stable, nurturing relationships (SSNRs)” in homes and schools. It’s the mother of all government values clarifications programs. So bad attitudes are now a disease. Again, I ask: Why is this the CDC’s business?

After every public health disaster, CDC bureaucrats play the money card while expanding their regulatory and research reach into anti-gun screeds, anti-smoking propaganda, anti-bullying lessons, gender inequity studies and unlimited behavior modification programs that treat individual vices–personal lifestyle choices–as germs to be eradicated.

Here’s a reminder of what the CDC does with money that’s supposed to go to real disease control. In 2000, the agency essentially lied to Congress about how it spent up to $7.5 million earmarked each year since 1993 for research on the deadly hantavirus. “Instead, apparently without asking Congress, the CDC spent much of the money on other programs that the agency thought needed the funds more,” The Washington Post found. The diversions were impossible to trace because of shoddy CDC bookkeeping practices. The CDC also misspent $22.7 million appropriated for chronic fatigue syndrome and was investigated in 2001 for squandering $13 million on hepatitis C research.

As I pointed out years ago, the CDC has its own private funding pipeline in the form of “Friends of CDC,” an Atlanta-based group of deep-pocketed corporations, now including ATT, Costco, General Motors, Google, IBM and Microsoft. To date, the entity has raised some $400 million to support the CDC’s work.

Too bad some of those big bucks can’t be earmarked to find a cure for bureaucratic obesity and a vaccine for mission creep.

 89 
 on: October 15, 2014, 09:02:23 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by Crafty_Dog
Here ya go: 

(For the record, I'm not sure I agree 100%, but I offer it here for conversation)

How the U.S. Made the Ebola Crisis Worse
The total number of Liberian doctors in America is about two-thirds the total now working in their homeland.
By
E. Fuller Torrey
Oct. 14, 2014 7:19 p.m. ET
39 COMMENTS

Amid discussions of quarantines, lockdowns and doomsday death scenarios about Ebola, little has been said about the exodus of Africa’s health-care professionals and how it has contributed to the outbreak. For 50 years, the U.S. and other Western nations have admitted health professionals—especially doctors and nurses—from poor countries, including Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea, three nations at the heart of the Ebola epidemic.

The loss of these men and women is now reflected in reports about severe medical-manpower shortages in these countries, an absence of local medical leadership so critical for responding to the crisis, and a collapse or near-collapse of their health-care systems.

Although Africa bears 24% of the global disease burden, it is home to just 3% of the world’s health workforce. A 2010 World Health Organization assessment of doctors, nurses and midwives per population listed Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea in the bottom nine nations in the world in medical manpower.
ENLARGE
Corbis

In Liberia, a nation of four million people, the number of Ebola cases is said to be doubling every 15-20 days. Based on news reports, I’ve estimated that there were about 120 Liberian physicians in the country prior to the outbreak.

According to an American Medical Association database, in 2010 there were 56 Liberian-trained physicians practicing in the U.S. This number does not include other Liberian physicians who emigrated to this country, were unable to pass state licensing exams, and are employed as technicians, administrators, or in other jobs. Older studies suggest that the number failing such exams is about half of those licensed.

Thus the total number of Liberian physicians in the U.S. is probably about two-thirds the number in Liberia. In addition, Liberian-trained physicians live in Canada, Great Britain and Australia.

The Liberian situation is not exceptional. Altogether in 2010 the U.S. had 265,851 licensed physicians trained in other countries, constituting 32% of our physician workforce, according to the AMA. Among these, 128,729 came from countries categorized by the World Bank as being from low- or lower-middle income countries. These physicians tend to work disproportionately in rural and inner-city jobs less favored by American medical graduates. West Virginia, for example, has the highest proportion of foreign-trained physicians from poorer countries to U.S.-trained physicians.

The U.S. has always welcomed health professionals from other countries. However in 1965, responding to a perceived shortage of physicians for the growing U.S. population, Congress passed landmark immigration legislation giving preference to health professionals. Subsequent legislation in 1968, 1970 and 1994 further opened the door, especially for physicians from poorer countries. The percentage of foreign-trained physicians has steadily increased from 10% of the workforce in 1965 to its current 32%.

Many objections to this policy have been raised over the years. In 1967 Walter Mondale, then a senator from Minnesota, called it a disgrace. It was “inexcusable,” he wrote in the Saturday Review, that the U.S. should “need doctors from countries where thousands die daily of disease to relieve our shortage of medical manpower.”

A 1974 report on the “Brain Drain” for the House Foreign Affairs Committee noted that the current policy was widening the gap between rich and poor nations, and warned that the policy “has a great potential for mischief in the Nation’s future relations with the LDC [less developed countries].”

Despite such complaints, U.S. policy has continued to encourage the immigration of physicians and other health workers from poorer countries. “There’s nothing wrong with a foreign-trained doctor,” Casper Weinberger, then secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, said on TV in 1973. “Of course we’re using a lot of them, and will use a lot more.”

The consequences of this policy may be more than “mischief.” Ebola may be merely the first of many prices to be paid for our long-standing but shortsighted health manpower policy. Surely the wealthiest country in the world should be able to produce sufficient health workers for its own needs and not take them from the poorest countries.

Dr. Torrey is associate director of the Stanley Medical Research Institute and author of “American Psychosis: How the Federal Government Destroyed the Mental Illness Treatment System” (Oxford, 2013).

 90 
 on: October 15, 2014, 08:31:52 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by ccp
I cannot get the whole article.

Have to login.

Freidan is a perfect example of a liberal fool.  Of course we should try to close our borders.  At least we should try.
Trickle up poverty and trickle around the world disease.

In any case the politics of the AIDs epidemic seems to be when we started treating infectious disease differently. 

Make us all suffer why don't chya.

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!