There seems to be lots of talk lately about a middle path...one that actually does not go to the lifting of sanctions at all for a while.
The plan is to use "giving the Iranians their own money" as an incentive...by releasing accounts that have been impounded around the world by pressure exerted by the United States.
This way...sanctions will not actually be lifted...but there is benefit to Iran (they need the money desperately) to continue down the path to give up centrifuges and stop enrichment and so forth.
Let's all hope this works...that the nuclear threat ends and that we soon move on to lifting sanctions.
I refer you to Ed's reply. I read it a day after responding to your post, and had to do a double take. I always thought of you as one of the smarter Conservatives, but resorting to stuff that's over fifty years old doesn't help with that perception.
Btw, there's absolutely nothing clear cut about the Kennedy assassination. Whichever way you look at it, it's as murky as ****.
So true; some today even believe that the government assassinated Kennedy. Who knows?
I guess JFK's murder is destined to go down in history as unresolved.
As national security adviser, Brennan made news last May by becoming the first U.S. official to acknowledge the U.S. government's drone war against suspected terrorists in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere. Brennan won kudos for his candor from supporters of the drone war, while critics found his claims of "moral rectitude" to be dubious in the absence of any checks on his power to target suspected terrorists (and inevitably innocent bystanders.)
Brennan's confirmation hearings are a rare opportunity for the Congress to hold the Executive Branch accountable for its secret actions. Brennan is reported to favor a more restrained drone war while liberal critics will seek disclosure of the legal justification for the extra-judicial assassination of U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism.
The overarching issue at stake in Brennan's confirmation is official secrecy in the name of national security. Do the White House and national security agencies acknowledge any limits on their powers of official secrecy? How can a self-governing democracy prevent the abuse of power without disclosure and accountability?
The JFK assassination story provides a useful benchmark in this debate because it is one area where a broad consensus holds that secrecy is not appropriate. If the Congress wants to demonstrate that it has the power to insure accountability at Obama's CIA, the JFK assassination records are a good place to start.
You still haven't read her post
I claimed that Oswald killed him, that he served in the Marines and that he was a professed communist.
What is incorrect in that statement, let alone murky?
John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
President John F. Kennedy, Jackie Kennedy, Nellie Connally, and Governor John Connally, moments before the assassination.
The circumstances surrounding the assassination of John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963 spawned suspicions of a conspiracy. These suspicions were mitigated somewhat when an official investigation by the Warren Commission concluded the following year that there was no conspiracy. Since then, doubts have arisen regarding the Commission's finding that Lee Harvey Oswald was responsible for the assassination of Kennedy, and most Americans today believe that others besides Oswald were also involved in the assassination. Critics have argued that the Commission and the government have covered up crucial information pointing to a conspiracy.
Subsequent official investigations confirmed most of the conclusions of the Warren Commission. However, the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) concluded that Kennedy was probably assassinated as the result of a conspiracy, with "...a high probability that two gunmen fired at [the] President." No person or organization was identified by the HSCA as being a co-conspirator of Oswald. Most current theories put forth a criminal conspiracy involving parties as varied as the CIA, the mafia, anti-Castro Cuban exile groups, the military industrial complex, sitting Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson, Cuban President Fidel Castro, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, the KGB, or some combination of those entities.
While lawmakers reached an agreement last week to avert the country’s first default in its 237-year history, overseas investors who own almost half the Treasuries outstanding have reduced holdings for four straight months, the longest stretch since 2001. Their growing reluctance to finance the world’s biggest debtor nation may lift borrowing costs further and harm an economy that has yet to fully recover from the deepest recession since the 1930s. Each percentage point increase in Treasuries would boost annual U.S. funding costs by $20 billion, based on the amount of debt issued in the year ended Sept. 30.
“Default or no default, the damage is already done,” Steve Major, the London-based global head of rates strategy at HSBC Holdings Plc, Europe’s largest bank, said in a telephone interview. “Politicians are kicking the can down the road when the world needs a longer-term solution. This sort of political brinkmanship undermines confidence.”
“Every time we play this game it’s just a small chip away, it slightly erodes the benchmark status that Treasuries enjoy,” Evans said
demonstrating government incompetence by not even being able to set up a website correctly after several years and $300 million in work.