An affordable price is probably the major benefit persuading people to buy drugs at www.americanbestpills.com. The cost of medications in Canadian drugstores is considerably lower than anywhere else simply because the medications here are oriented on international customers. In many cases, you will be able to cut your costs to a great extent and probably even save up a big fortune on your prescription drugs. What's more, pharmacies of Canada offer free-of-charge shipping, which is a convenient addition to all other benefits on offer. Cheap price is especially appealing to those users who are tight on a budget
Service Quality and Reputation
Although some believe that buying online is buying a pig in the poke, it is not. Canadian online pharmacies are excellent sources of information and are open for discussions. There one can read tons of users' feedback, where they share their experience of using a particular pharmacy, say what they like or do not like about the drugs and/or service. Reputable online pharmacy canadianrxon.com take this feedback into consideration and rely on it as a kind of expert advice, which helps them constantly improve they service and ensure that their clients buy safe and effective drugs. Last, but not least is their striving to attract professional doctors. As a result, users can directly contact a qualified doctor and ask whatever questions they have about a particular drug. Most likely, a doctor will ask several questions about the condition, for which the drug is going to be used. Based on this information, he or she will advise to use or not to use this medication.
Category Archives: Human Rights Violations United Nations
Venezuela Doesn’t Have Enough Money to Pay for Its Money
Bloomberg: Venezuela’s epic shortages are nothing new at this point. No diapers or car parts or aspirin — it’s all been well documented. But now the country is at risk of running out of money itself.
In a tale that highlights the chaos of unbridled inflation, Venezuela is scrambling to print new bills fast enough to keep up with the torrid pace of price increases. Most of the cash, like nearly everything else in the oil-exporting country, is imported. And with hard currency reserves sinking to critically low levels, the central bank is doling out payments so slowly to foreign providers that they are foregoing further business.
Venezuela, in other words, is now so broke that it may not have enough money to pay for its money.
This article is based on interviews with a dozen industry executives, diplomats and former officials as well as internal company and central bank documents. All of the companies declined official comment; the central bank did not respond to numerous requests for interviews and comment.
Thronging Banks
The story began last year when the government of President Nicolas Maduro tried to tamp down a growing currency shortfall. Multi-million-dollar orders were placed with a slew of currency makers ahead of December elections and holidays, when Venezuelans throng banks to cash their bonuses.
At one point, instead of a public bidding process, the central bank called an emergency meeting and asked companies to produce as many bills as possible. The companies complied, only to find payments not fully forthcoming.
Last month, De La Rue, the world’s largest currency maker, sent a letter to the central bank complaining that it was owed $71 million and would inform its shareholders if the money were not forthcoming. The letter was leaked to a Venezuelan news website and confirmed by Bloomberg News.
“It’s an unprecedented case in history that a country with such high inflation cannot get new bills,” said Jose Guerra, an opposition law maker and former director of economic research at the central bank. Late last year, the central bank ordered more than 10 billion bank notes, surpassing the 7.6 billion the U.S. Federal Reserve requested this year for an economy many times the size of Venezuela’s.
The currency crisis sheds light on the magnitude of the country’s financial woes and its limited ability to remedy them as oil — the mainstay of its economy — continues to flatline. Venezuela’s inflation, the world’s highest, is expected to rise this year to close to 500 percent, according to the International Monetary Fund.
The first signs of the currency shortage date back to 2014 when the government began increasing shipments of bank notes as wallet-busting wads of cash were already needed for simple transactions. Venezuelans spend hours waiting in line for consumer staples, lining up first at banks and cash machines, often carrying the loot in backpacks and gym bags to pay for dinner out.
Ahead of the 2015 congressional elections, the central bank tapped the U.K.’s De La Rue, France’s Oberthur Fiduciaire and Germany’s Giesecke & Devrient to bring in some 2.6 billion notes, according to bank documents and people familiar with the deals. Before the delivery was completed, the bank approached the companies directly for more.
De La Rue took the lion’s share of the 3-billion-note order and enlisted the Ottawa-based Canadian Bank Note Company to ensure it could meet a tight end-of-year deadline.
Sniper Cover
The cash arrived in dozens of 747 jets and chartered planes. Under cover of security forces and snipers, it was transferred to armored caravans where it was spirited to the central bank in dead of night.
While the cash was still arriving — at times, multiple planeloads a day — authorities set their sights on the year ahead. In late 2015, the central bank more than tripled its original order, offering tenders for some 10.2 billion bank notes, according to industry sources.
But currency companies were worried. According to company documents, De La Rue began experiencing delays in payment as early as June. Similarly, the bank was slow to pay Giesecke & Devrient and Oberthur Fiduciaire. So when the tender was offered, the government only received about 3.3 billion in bids, bank documents show.
“Initially, your eyes grow as big as dish plates,” said one person familiar with matter. “An order big enough to fill your factory for a year, but do you want to completely expose yourself to a country as risky as Venezuela?”
Further complicating matters is the sheer amount of bills needed for basic transactions. Venezuela’s largest bill, the 100-bolivar note, today barely pays for a loose cigarette at a street kiosk.
As early as 2013, the central bank commissioned studies for 200 and 500 bolivar notes, former monetary officials say. Despite repeated assurances, no new denominations have been ordered, pushing Venezuela into uncharted territory by its refusal to produce larger bills while not fully paying providers.
Companies are backing away. With its traditional partners now unenthusiastic about taking on new business, the central bank is in negotiations with others, including Russia’s Goznack, and has a contract with Boston-based Crane Currency, according to documents and industry sources.
Steve Hanke, a professor of applied economics at Johns Hopkins University, who has studied hyperinflation for decades, says that to maintain faith in the currency when prices spiral, governments often add zeros to bank notes rather than flood the market.
“It’s a very bad sign to see people running around with wheelbarrows full of money to buy a hot dog,” he said. “Even the cash economy starts breaking down.”
***** Iran missile base in Venezuela, BusinessInsider
In part from Forbes: In Venezuela, Maduro´s government (based on the legacy of the late Hugo Chávez), has continued the policies of the previous administration by strengthening ties with Russia, China, and Iran, in opposition to US influence. An example of this has been Venezuela´s growing oil exports to the Asian giant, going from 50,000 barrels per day in 2006 to roughly 600,000 barrels per day sent to China in 2014. These growing exports have been part of a wider strategy aimed at reducing dependency on exports to the United States, as well as being used to back loans provided by China that now exceed $56 billion. China has also expanded its investments in Venezuela by acquiring and developing a plethora of companies, along with the signing of large military contracts to provide Venezuelan armed forces with aircraft, radars, armored vehicles, and helicopters.
China´s influence has also extended to more moderate governments in the region as in the cases of Ecuador and Argentina. In the case of the latter, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner´s administration signed a treaty that included the establishing of a “space exploration site” in the Argentine Patagonia with very few public details on the purpose and functioning of these installations, which will be under complete control of Chinese government. Many security experts agree on the fact that not only is the agreement absolutely opaque on the intention of the site, but also that the presence of dual-purpose technologies allow the station to operate as an intelligence gathering platform. Argentina has also become a recipient of Chinese loans, and an important provider of commodities.
Returning to the Panama Summit, it becomes clear it has been successful for Obama´s foreign policy intentions because it achieved not only the “must-have” picture with Castro and the joint press conference, but also because it unveiled a new beginning in US relations with Latin America and the Caribbean. Also because at this juncture of the process it managed to avoid confrontation with Venezuela´s Maduro, just as his Bolivarian government begins to lose regional support. More from Forbes.
AFP, Syria’s Alawites are closely associated with Bashar al-Assad (R) and his late father Hafez (L)
‘Muslim quality’
In part from BBC: The Alawites emerged in the 10th Century in neighbouring Iraq.
Little has been confirmed about their beliefs and practices since then because, according to the leaders, they had to be hidden to avoid persecution.
However, most sources say the name “Alawite” refers to their veneration of the first Shia imam, Ali, the son-in-law and cousin of the Prophet Muhammad.
AFP: Shia power Iran and Lebanon’s Shia Hezbollah movement are assisting the Assad regime
al-Arabiya: The most significant development coming from Syria in the last few days is not the killing of Al-Qaeda spokesperson in Idlib or the US-Russian chatter denying a plan to oust Bashar Al-Assad. It was a document leaked to the Western media and dubbed as the “declaration of identity reform” signaling signs of discontent from elders in the Alawite community towards the Syrian regime.
The news of the document is the most concrete evidence we have from Assad’s religious community since the beginning of the uprising in 2011, indicating that their patience is running out with the status-quo and they are openly seeking a third alternative. For such alternative to materialize, however, and for the Alawites to publicly start abandoning Assad, a political and security umbrella has to be extended from Russia and regional countries, guaranteeing their protection and role in a pluralistic future in a post-Assad Syria.
Alawite discontent
Syria’s Alawites have been both, the cornerstone for the regime’s survival and its Achilles’ heel. A 15% of Syria’s population (estimate of 3 million), the minority enjoys the lion’s share in the regime political and security hierarchy. Assad, the Chief of Staff of the Syrian Army, heads of the intelligence services are all from the powerful sect. When the state security proved not enough, a new militia was formed and allied with the regime and Iran to protect the Alawites along the coastline and in the mountain region over Latakia.
“The declaration from the Alawite leaders is a watershed moment in how the minority is publicly untying itself from Assad family, and attempting to pursue a pact of coexistence in Syria”, Joyce Karam.
The new declaration as leaked by European media, exposes fissures between the Alawites and the regime, and efforts to pursue a third option, instead of prolonging Assad’s military campaign, or getting overridden by extremist groups. According to the The Telegraph, the document authors “had been forced to act because of the extreme danger the sect was now facing” amid reports of enormous losses for the Alawites (a third of their young) in the 5-year-long war. In a political departure from the regime narrative, the declaration speaks of “a new relationship with Syria’s Sunni majority” while calling the regime as “totalitarian”, and the uprising “an initiative of noble anger”. The document also promotes a vision for secular, pluralist and democratic state of Syria.
By distancing themselves from the regime, the Alawite signatories are seeking a path that is not hostage to Assad’s strategy of war and outright military victories that could take years or lead to disintegration of Syria. From the beginning of the conflict, there were shy attempts from the Alawite community showing discontent with the Assad family and the war realities. In the last year the community has demonstrated in Latakia calling to execute Assad’s cousin, Suleiman, now serving a 20-year sentence in prison. In 2014, protests from members of the community broke out in Tartous and in Homs over the bombing of elementary schools and the failure of the security to protect their children.
Assurances from Region and Russia
The declaration from the Alawite leaders is a watershed moment in how the minority is publicly untying itself from Assad family, and attempting to pursue a pact of coexistence in Syria. However, and unless it’s met by political and security assurances from the West, the region and Russia, this momentum will not hold against a status quo of fear from extremism that forces Alawites to be more dependent on Assad and local militias.
For a minority whose roots are entrenched in the Levant and has survived the Mamluks, the Crusaders, and the Ottomans, it is only natural that its fate won’t be parallel and decided by the Assad family. It is the regime and not the family that holds higher priority for the Alawites, and even then, negotiating a new pact of governance is the most pragmatic and secure approach for the community’s future in Syria. The heavy toll of the war and the strong presence of Al-Qaeda’s Jabhat Nusra in Northern of the country are ominous signs of what could yet come if no political solution is achieved.
In that context, Russia’s intervention and establishing a presence in Khmeimim airbase in Latakia could make Moscow a key guarantor for the Alawites in a post-Assad Syria. Regional countries such as Saudi Arabia who helped assure the Lebanese Christians at the end of the civil war by brokering the Taif agreement, or Turkey who holds influence in Northern Syria could help in mediating between the Alawites and the opposition.
There is already plenty of buzz regionally of backchannel diplomacy to resolve the Syrian conflict, supervised by John Kerry and Sergei Lavrov, before U.S. President Barack Obama leaves office. There are also questions on recent reports of relieving Maher al-Assad of his duties in the Republican Guard, and what that could mean for the negotiations, for the Alawites and Moscow’s role.
The Alawite declaration this week from Syria, is a critical opportunity to start a conversation about the status of the minority in a post-Assad structure. Absent of guarantees in form of protection and political assurances, this paper will be shelved along a thick bundle of documents and goodwill gestures to resolve the conflict.
USAToday
*****
WSJ: GENEVA—Talks aimed at ending the five-year war in Syria ground to a halt with the government and opposition divided over fundamental issues, including whether President Bashar al-Assad’s political fate even belongs on the agenda.
The regime insists that Mr. Assad remain in power, and the opposition demands that he step down. With an August United Nations deadline looming to form a new government and the peace process floundering, participants in the talks have floated alternatives aimed at breaking the deadlock that appease some parties but anger others.
Among the ideas are to transfer Mr. Assad’s powers to a handful of deputies; to form a new ruling council comprised of Syrian military officials and moderate rebel leaders; and to coalesce around a new Syrian leader who feuding camps could support.
None of the alternatives has gained traction, and each would face serious, possibly insurmountable, obstacles even if they garnered support in the Geneva talks. The discussions around them are a sign of the lengths to which negotiators are going in an effort to maintain some form of dialogue.
“Geneva is a process without content,” a senior Western diplomat said. Much more here.
CIS.org: With the Syrian crisis entering its sixth year, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is thinking of “innovative approaches” to organize Syrian admissions, alongside the refugee resettlement program, to countries willing to welcome them. UNHCR’s target for resettlement is 480,000 places over the next three years; it is not sure how many additional admissions into the U.S. and elsewhere these new “alternative safe pathways” will ensure. Refugees who are not resettled could be “legally admitted” using various routes described below.
The legitimacy and transparency of these new “alternative pathways,” aimed at admitting increasing numbers of Syrian refugees into the United States without calling them “refugees,” remain to be seen. They might even amount to convenient admissions detours at a time when the U.S. refugee resettlement program is under tight scrutiny.
In a panel discussion on The Global Refugee Crisis: Moral Dimensions and Practical Solutions organized by the Brookings Institution earlier this year, Beth Ferris, Research Professor at Georgetown University and adviser to the United Nations Secretary General on humanitarian refugee policy, talked about the need to find different solutions to the ongoing humanitarian Syrian crisis. The refugee resettlement program was no longer sufficient to admit Syrian refugees she said; “alternative safe pathways” are needed:
Refugees and government officials are expecting this crisis to last 10 or 15 years. It’s time that we no longer work as business as usual … UNHCR next month [March 2016] is convening a meeting to look at what are being called “alternative safe pathways” for Syrian refugees. Maybe it’s hard for the U.S. to go from 2,000 to 200,000 refugees resettled in a year, but maybe there are ways we can ask our universities to offer scholarships to Syrian students. Maybe we can tweak some of our immigration policies to enable Syrian-Americans who have lived here to bring not only their kids and spouses but their uncles and their grandmothers. There may be ways that we could encourage Syrians to come to the U.S. without going through this laborious, time-consuming process of refugee resettlement.” (Emphasis added.)
The UNHCR conference Ferris was referring to took place in Geneva this March 30. It is one of a series of initiatives aimed at comprehensively addressing the Syrian crisis in 2016. The Geneva “High-level meeting on global responsibility sharing through pathways for admission of Syrian refugees” focused on the need for a substantial increase in resettlement numbers and for “innovative approaches” to admit Syrian refugees. It followed February’s London Conference on Syria, which stressed the financial aspect of this humanitarian crisis ($12 billion pledged in humanitarian aid) and precedes a September 2016 high-level plenary meeting of the United Nations General Assembly in New York. Worthy of note here, President Obama will host a global refugee summit this September 20 on the margins of this upcoming General Assembly meeting.
The focus of the Geneva meeting was to introduce “other forms of humanitarian admissions” since “[r]esettlement is not the only aim”, explained UNHCR’s spokesperson. UN High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi appealed to the international community in his opening statement, calling for “alternative avenues” for the admission of Syrian refugees:
These pathways can take many forms: not only resettlement, but also more flexible mechanisms for family reunification, including extended family members, labour mobility schemes, student visa and scholarships, as well as visa for medical reasons. Resettlement needs vastly outstrip the places that have been made available so far… But humanitarian and student visa, job permits and family reunification would represent safe avenues of admission for many other refugees as well.
At the end of the meeting, Grandi highlighted several commitments made by a number of participants in his closing remarks. Promises were made to:
Increase the number of resettlement and humanitarian admission places.
Ease family reunification and increase possibilities for family reunion.
Give scholarships and student visas for Syrian refugees.
Remove administrative barriers and simplify processes to facilitate and expedite the admission of Syrian refugees.
Use resources provided by the private sector in order to create labor mobility schemes for Syrian refugees.
The Geneva meeting was attended by representatives of 92 countries, including the United States. Heather Higginbottom, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources, reiterated in her remarks the U.S. commitment to refugees: “President Obama has made assisting displaced people a top priority for the U.S. government.” Last year alone the U.S. contributed more than $6 billion to humanitarian causes. So far this year, the United States has provided nearly $2.3 billion in humanitarian assistance worldwide. She also announced additional measures: “We are further increasing our support of Syrian refugees, and we will make additional contributions to the global displacement effort through September, and beyond”, while reminding the participants of President Obama’s role in hosting a high-level refugee summit this September.
The U.S. State Department released a Media Note following the Geneva meeting. It confirmed the goal of resettling at least 10,000 Syrians in FY 2016 and of 100,000 refugees from around the world by the end of FY 2017 – an increase of more that 40 percent since FY 2015. It also announced the following:
“The United States pledged an additional $10 million to UNHCR to strengthen its efforts to identify and refer vulnerable refugees, including Syrians, for resettlement.”
“The United States joins UNHCR in calling for new ways nations, civil society, the private sector, and individuals can together address the global refugee challenge.”
“Additionally, the United States has created a program to allow U.S. citizens and permanent residents to file refugee applications for their Syrian family member.” [Emphasis added.]
On this last note, why create a family reunification program for Syrian refugees when refugees in the U.S. are already entitled to ask for their spouse and unmarried children under 21 to join them? Unless of course, the aim is to widen family circles to include aunts and uncles, brothers and sisters, grandmothers and grandfathers.
Let’s see if we got this right: More Syrian refugees are to be resettled in the United States; administrative barriers (including security checks?) are to be removed to expedite admissions. Come to think of it, this is exactly what we witnessed with the “Surge Operation” in Jordan, where refugee resettlement processes were reduced from 18-24 months to three months in order to meet the target of 10,000 Syrian refugees this year.
Moreover, the United States government, by its own admission, “joins UNHCR in calling for new ways” to move more Syrians to other countries. With the U.S. Refugee Resettlement program under close scrutiny, other routes for “legal admissions” (not “resettlement”) of Syrian refugees into the United States seem more appropriate. Those routes may vary from private sponsorships, labor schemes, expanded family reunification programs, humanitarian visas, medical evacuation, to academic scholarships and apprenticeships, etc.
What remains to be determined is how transparent these “alternative pathways” will be. Will we be given details about numbers, profiles, locations, screening, or costs? Also, what additional measures are we to expect from this administration as it prepares to host a Global Refugee Summit this September 20?
Meanwhile, we are left to wonder: aren’t these “pathways” for refugees nothing more than disguised resettlement routes? Akin to “pathways to citizenship” in lieu of amnesty…
It all started with the Iranian hostages, then the Beirut bombings. President Jimmy Carter gave the order to freeze all accessible Iranian assets including military equipment. And so it was done, but Madeline Albright began to pull the threat on behalf of Iran, and Barack Obama continued to do the same in 2009.
There are countless moving parts here, so it is for sure convoluted so perhaps the bullet points here will help. A calculator may be good too.
The Supreme Court decided today in a 6-2 ruling on behalf of the victims to free up close to $2 billion in frozen Iranian assets—held in a New York bank for Iran’s central bank, Bank Markazi—to compensate more than 1,000 victims and family members harmed in terrorism incidents traceable to Iran, including the 1983 bombing of a U.S. Marines barracks in Lebanon.
In 2000, in her speech on Friday, March 17, the U.S. Secretary of State, Mrs. Albright, made reference to the Iranian assets that the United States froze in the aftermath of the hostage crisis in 1979. It always had been that any normalization of relations between these two countries had to consider the unfreezing of the Iranian assets. What was never clear was the size and nature of the assets. In her speech, Mrs. Albright indicated that much of the frozen assets were turned over to Iran after 1981. Yet, she also intimated that there is more that was not turned over. The size of the remaining frozen assets has been one mystery. Their nature and location, too, are not clear. At the time of the freeze, reports indicated that the assets consisted of goods purchased by Iran and not delivered by the suppliers, including military supplies, cash and securities on deposit or in trust with various U.S. banks and financial institutions here and their branches and subsidiaries abroad, stock and bonds of United States issuers, real estate, right to interest, dividend, and distribution, contract rights, and other proprietary interests. Read the rest of the shocking summary here.
To dovetail the second bullet point above, today, Daily Beast published an item that explains why the legislation introduced to punish Saudi Arabia for any involvement in the 9/11 attacks on the United States should be avoided as noted by some key officials at the Pentagon. Why you ask, the historical house of the United States is not clean either, which too is further explained in the link of the second bullet item. This is for sure still up for debate, however, there are major indications that during Barack Obama’s trip to Saudi Arabia, he is likely reassuring the KSA he will veto any punishing legislation.
We can fully know at all exactly where or how much Iranian money resides in banks around the world and how is brokering business on behalf of Iran, investing for the rogue country, much less skirting sanctions for them as well. You see even China had/has ownership of $22 billion of Iranian funds mostly due to sanctions and to pay for oil.
In 2009, enter Barack Obama and $2 billion for Iran just to come to the table. WSJ: ” More than $2 billion allegedly held on behalf of Iran in Citigroup Inc.C2.43% accounts were secretly ordered frozen last year by a federal court in Manhattan, in what appears to be the biggest seizure of Iranian assets abroad since the 1979 Islamic revolution. The legal order, executed 18 months ago by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, is under seal and hasn’t been made public. The court acted in part because of information provided by the U.S. Treasury Department.President Barack Obama has pledged to enact new economic sanctions on Iran at year-end if Tehran doesn’t respond to international calls for negotiations over its nuclear-fuel program. The frozen $2 billion stands at the center of an intensifying legal struggle between Luxembourg’s Clearstream Banking S.A., the holder of the Citibank account, and the families of hundreds of U.S. Marines killed or injured in a 1983 terrorist attack on a Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon. Clearstream is primarily a clearing house for financial trades and is a wholly owned subsidiary of Germany’s Deutsche Börse AG. Luxembourg’s bank secrecy laws have helped it grow into a major European financial center.” More here from the WSJ.
So what about this Clearstream Banking operation you say? Well they were a nefarious operation as well. In 2014, The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) today announced a $152 million agreement with Clearstream Banking, S.A. (Clearstream), of Luxembourg, to settle its potential civil liability for apparent violations surrounding Clearstream’s use of its omnibus account with a U.S. financial institution as a conduit to hold securities on behalf of the Central Bank of Iran (CBI). More here from Treasury.
In January 2016, The U.S. State Department announced the government had agreed to pay Iran $1.7 billion to settle a case related to the sale of military equipment prior to the Iranian revolution, according to a statement issued on Sunday.
Iran had set up a $400 million trust fund for such purchases, which was frozen along with diplomatic relations in 1979. In settling the claim, which had been tied up at the Hague Tribunal since 1981, the U.S. is returning the money in the fund along with “a roughly $1.3 billion compromise on the interest,” the statement said.
Wait, there is the other $100 billion: That’s roughly how much the U.S. Treasury Department says Iran stands to recover once sanctions are lifted under the new nuclear deal.
We cant know if there is more, yet no wonder Iran is dancing in the streets and maintains threatening behavior where Obama continues to tell the region, get along with Iran….they are legitimate. Oh….Obama is working on a personal meeting with Rouhani too.
Intense U.S.-Iran negotiations appear to be underway at this time, on various levels. They have included meetings this week in New York between Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif and U.S. Secretary of State Kerry, and an April 14 Washington meeting between Central Bank of Iran governor Valiollah Seif and U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Jack Lew.[1] According to an April 19 report on the Iranian website Sahamnews.org, which is affiliated with Iran’s Green Movement, President Obama asked to meet with Iranian President Hassan Rohani in two secret letters sent in late March to both Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and President Rohani. According to the report, Obama wrote in the letters that Iran has a limited-time opportunity to cooperate with the U.S. in order to resolve the problems in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen, and promised that if Iran agreed to a meeting between him and Rohani, he would be willing to participate in any conference to this end. The Sahamnews report further stressed that Supreme Leader Khamenei discussed the request with President Rohani, that Rohani said that Iran should accept the request and meet with Obama, and that such a meeting could lead to an end to the crises in the region while increasingIran’s influence in their resolution. Rohani promised Khamenei that any move would be coordinated with him and reported to him. According to the report, Khamenei agreed with Rohani. The Sahamnews report also emphasized that Khamenei’s recent aggressivelyanti-U.S. speeches were aimed at maintaining an anti-U.S. atmosphere among the Iranian public, whereas in private meetings he expresses a different position. Courtesy and more from MEMRI here.
Report: Planned Parenthood Organ Sales Are ‘Pure Profit’
Congressional panel says abortionists incur no costs for organ harvesting
FreeBeacon: Planned Parenthood abortion clinics profit from the sale of aborted baby organs, according to new documents released by a congressional committee investigating the organization’s practices.
The U.S. House Select Panel on Infant Lives released a preview of its findings after a months-long review of internal documents obtained from the nation’s top abortionist, as well as organ procurement companies and buyers. The panel concluded that abortion clinics incur no additional costs in harvesting organs obtained from an already-aborted baby and that the sale or transfer of those organs represented “pure profit” for the clinic.
“The [abortion clinic] has no costs so the payments from the [procurement business] to the [abortion clinic] are pure profit,” the report concludes. “All costs are born by the [procurement business] or the customer. The payments from the customer to the PB exceed its cost by a factor of 300 to 400 percent.”
Pro-life activists said those practices run counter to federal law, which bars clinics from profiting off of the sale of baby body parts.
“The abortion industry sells baby hearts, livers, brains, hands and other organs procured by a middleman company inside their facilities at no cost or effort to the facilities themselves. The facility receives upfront fees that can amount to five-figure sums every month and then the procurement companies resell organs for tens of thousands more—depending on the child’s characteristics,” Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, said in a release. “The documents make clear there is absolutely no cost to the abortion clinic so that all monies received go to their bottom line.”
The scandal began after investigators with the pro-life Center for Medical Progress released a series of videos capturing top Planned Parenthood officials discussing the group’s fetal organ sales in the summer of 2015. One top official was caught on camera saying that clinics generate a “fair amount of income” from the sales.
The committee’s conclusions stand in contrast to Planned Parenthood’s repeated denials that it made any money from the sale of organs. The group claimed that all payments were to recoup costs. The abortionist announced last year it would no longer accept any payments from researchers or procurement companies for baby body parts.
Planned Parenthood did not return a request for comment.
The congressional panel will hold a hearing Wednesday morning to discuss the report.
It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise transfer any human fetal tissue for valuable consideration if the transfer affects interstate commerce.
(b) Solicitation or acceptance of tissue as directed donation for use in transplantation
It shall be unlawful for any person to solicit or knowingly acquire, receive, or accept a donation of human fetal tissue for the purpose of transplantation of such tissue into another person if the donation affects interstate commerce, the tissue will be or is obtained pursuant to an induced abortion, and—
(1)the donation will be or is made pursuant to a promise to the donating individual that the donated tissue will be transplanted into a recipient specified by such individual;
(2)the donated tissue will be transplanted into a relative of the donating individual; or
(3)the person who solicits or knowingly acquires, receives, or accepts the donation has provided valuable consideration for the costs associated with such abortion.
(c) Solicitation or acceptance of tissue from fetuses gestated for research purposes
It shall be unlawful for any person or entity involved or engaged in interstate commerce to—
(1)solicit or knowingly acquire, receive, or accept a donation of human fetal tissue knowing that a human pregnancy was deliberately initiated to provide such tissue; or
(2)knowingly acquire, receive, or accept tissue or cells obtained from a human embryo or fetus that was gestated in the uterus of a nonhuman animal.
(d) Criminal penalties for violations
(1) In general
Any person who violates subsection (a), (b), or (c) shall be fined in accordance with title 18, subject to paragraph (2), or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.
(2) Penalties applicable to persons receiving consideration
With respect to the imposition of a fine under paragraph (1), if the person involved violates subsection (a) or (b)(3), a fine shall be imposed in an amount not less than twice the amount of the valuable consideration received.
(e) Definitions
For purposes of this section:
(1)The term “human fetal tissue” has the meaning given such term in section 289g–1(g) of this title.
(2)The term “interstate commerce” has the meaning given such term in section 321(b) of title 21.
(3)The term “valuable consideration” does not include reasonable payments associated with the transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, or storage of human fetal tissue.
AFP, Syria’s Alawites are closely associated with Bashar al-Assad (R) and his late father Hafez (L) 
AFP: Shia power Iran and Lebanon’s Shia Hezbollah movement are assisting the Assad regime
