The Front Page Cover
~ Featuring ~
Fans of Iran nuclear deal
start to acknowledge its flaws
by Eli Lake
.
FAA Privatization FAIL
by John J. Bastiat: We noted back in June the potential resurgence of support for privatizing the U.S. National Airspace System (NAS), to include privatizing all Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) air traffic control (ATC) services. The renewed interest followed President Donald Trump’s strong endorsement for NAS privatization, but as with all good-intentioned, road-to-hell ventures, the devil is in the details. That’s certainly the conclusion the American Conservative Union reached before heaping condemnation on the latest version of the idea, which has been backed from the beginning by its chief proponent, Rep. Bill Shuster (R-PA).
by John J. Bastiat: We noted back in June the potential resurgence of support for privatizing the U.S. National Airspace System (NAS), to include privatizing all Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) air traffic control (ATC) services. The renewed interest followed President Donald Trump’s strong endorsement for NAS privatization, but as with all good-intentioned, road-to-hell ventures, the devil is in the details. That’s certainly the conclusion the American Conservative Union reached before heaping condemnation on the latest version of the idea, which has been backed from the beginning by its chief proponent, Rep. Bill Shuster (R-PA). Addressing the congressman’s proposal, ACU Communication Director Ian Walter flatly stated Rep. Shuster should “withdraw the bill and start from scratch working with all stakeholders and Senate counterparts and agency officials to come up with a bill that achieves real privatization.” That sounds like a great idea — but isn’t this exactly what the current privatization bill does in the first place?
Well, no. First, the current plan lacks virtually any hint of private-sector involvement — let alone competition — and is instead a government-run effort. This is the exactly the bureaucracy against which the backlash toward privatization was formed. Second, the Department of Transportation (DOT) would be charged with populating the new enterprise with employees. Again, the point behind privatization is to cut through the decades of FAA and DOT red tape and entrenchment that have produced very little, relatively, for the money, and to provide efficient, cost-effective services to NAS stakeholders. Asking DOT to be engaged in such an effort is to invite a return to the unsatisfactory status quo. Third, the so-called “privatized” board would be comprised almost entirely of union representatives and airline industry lobbyists, rather than a cross-section of stakeholders reflecting the actual use of the nation’s airspace services.
In short, “privatization” as used in this privatization bill appears to be an Orwellian oxymoron. Further nailing down the coffin lid on this bill is an additional complication that has been standing hair up on the necks of conservative watchdogs: The rumor is Rep. Schuster has been trolling House catacombs for Dem votes, since support is substantially lacking among GOP House members. Fortunately, neither side favors the current construct and such votes are unlikely — hence, the initiative has yet to appear on the House agenda.
Despite the current bill’s fatal shortfalls, we still strongly support privatizing the U.S. National Airspace System. But that support extends only to the extent the NAS is truly privatized, meaning any privatization initiative must begin with a call for competitive private sector proposals and it must remain driven by free market forces throughout the vetting process. As for the current effort: Nice try. Try harder. ~The Patriot Post https://patriotpost.us/articles/51344
.
McMaster Stumped When Asked
If Admin Better Off After Bannon Purge
by rickwells.us
{rickwells.us} ~ Chris Wallace asked National Security Adviser HR McMaster a tough question to see what kind of answer he’d get back, if it might go beyond the customary scripted defenses... After referencing their past conflicts he asks, “Question, is the administration better off with Steve Bannon out of the White House?” The question also exposed is whether the globalist agenda can move forward with greater ease after his exit. McMaster replies with his typical mouthful of empty, globalist drivel, saying, “Well, the administration is better off when we can serve the President by integrating, coordinating across all of our departments and agencies with our key allies and partners and to present the President with multiple options.”... https://rickwells.us/mcmaster-stumped-bannon-purge/.
NASA plan to stop
supervolcano sparks doomsday fears
by wnd.com
{wnd.com} ~ Amid a summertime swarm of hundreds of earthquakes underneath Yellowstone National Park, NASA is developing a plan to tame a “supervolcano” that some experts believe is well overdue for a catastrophic eruption... The scientists’ plan: cool down the volcano. Volcanoes erupt when a certain heat threshold is built up within the magma, meaning that if enough heat can be let out of the volcano, it will never erupt. NASA’s idea is to pump water into the volcano after opening up a path via drilling. In theory, the plan would extract heat from the volcano and could even provide a new geothermal power plant. There’s only one problem: The process might trigger an eruption. Brian Wilcox of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory at the California Institute of Technology told the BBC an attempt to drill from the top of the magma chamber could accidentally cause the very thing the drilling was designed to prevent. To avoid that risk, he suggested drilling from outside the borders of Yellowstone and coming into the supervolcano from the lower side... http://www.wnd.com/2017/09/nasa-plan-to-stop-supervolcano-sparks-doomsday-fears/.
Liberals’ newest attack on Trump for letting
11-year-old kid mow WH grass is mind-boggling
by Chris Enloe
{theblaze.com} B~ President Donald Trump was accused of breaking child labor laws on Friday after the White House let an 11-year-old Virginia boy assist in cutting the White House lawn... Young Frank Giaccio sent Trump a letter earlier this year offering his lawn care services. Giaccio told Trump he started his own lawn care business and would even work on the White House’s lawn for free. Frank’s story went viral Friday, mostly because it was a super cool, feel good story. With all of the negative news in the press these days, who doesn’t love a story about a young boy wanting to cut the White House lawn — and then actually getting to do so?... http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/09/16/liberals-newest-attack-on-trump-for-letting-11-year-old-kid-mow-wh-grass-is-mind-boggling/
.
'Don't ever compare settlements
to terror - terrorism is murder'
by David Rosenberg
{israelnationalnews.com} ~ US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman blasted President liar-nObama this week, attacking the 44th president over his administration’s comparison of Israeli housing projects to murderous terror attacks... and the decision to withhold America’s veto at the United Nations Security Council on a key vote against Israel following Donald Trump’s election. “During the eight years of liar-nObama’s presidency, there was a very one-sided view of the conflict,” Friedman told Israel Hayom in an interview published Sunday night. “The liar-nObama administration drew a parallel between the settlements and terrorism. I want to make it clear again: the settlements are definitely a very important subject and merit debate, but terrorism is murder.”... http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/235666?utm_source=activetrail&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl
.
Trump Urges State Department
to Release liar-Hillary’s Emails
.
.
Fans of Iran nuclear deal
start to acknowledge its flaws
{jewishworldreview.co} ~ The public line from the supporters of the Iran nuclear deal in the last two years has been clear. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, as the core agreement is known, is wonderful. As Barack liar-nObama said after its negotiations were completed in 2015: "There's a reason why 99 percent of the world thinks that this is a good deal: It's because it's a good deal."
And you will encounter this kind of thing on social media today.
All of this is reminiscent of what journalist David Samuels described in 2015 as an echo chamber of prominent arms-control experts, sympathetic journalists and liar-nObama administration staffers deployed to sell the nuclear bargain to the public and Congress. Their party line is that the deal is the best possible way to limit Iran's nuclear rise.
Nonetheless, many of these experts and former officials are also beginning to acknowledge that the nuclear deal they sold in 2015 is flawed. Next month, the Brookings Institution will host an off-the-record meeting of policy experts -- some who favored the deal, some who oppose it -- to discuss how to address the nuclear agreement's flaws.
The State Department's former special adviser for nonproliferation and arms control, Bob Einhorn, invited these nonproliferation experts to "one or more workshops to address the nuclear deal's 'sunset' problem," which he said was the risk that, "when key nuclear restrictions of the JCPOA expire, Iran will be free to build up its nuclear capabilities, especially its enrichment capacity, and drastically reduce the time it would need to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon."
This was a key objection voiced by Israel in 2015 when it publicly opposed liar-nObama's deal with Iran. Between 2025 and 2030, the agreement to limit Iran's stocks of low-enriched uranium and the number of centrifuge cascades it can operate will expire, allowing Iran to erect an industrial-scale nuclear program if it chooses.
At the time, Israel's objections were dismissed and derided by the White House. liar-nObama called the deal's critics warmongers.
Today, former liar-nObama officials are singing a different song. Einhorn, who served from 2009 to 2013 in the liar-nObama administration, told me: "Everyone recognizes that the deal is not ideal. I think President liar-nObama would say the deal is not ideal." He added: "There have been all kinds of ideas for how it can be strengthened. Strong supporters of the deal would acknowledge that. Let's think of a strategy for how some of its shortcomings can be remedied."
Iran has continued to test ballistic missiles and has warned it won't allow inspections of military sites -- highlighting ambiguities in the agreement. Einhorn's quiet effort coincides with a new Trump administration strategy that looks to use the president's decertification of Iranian compliance with the deal as leverage to negotiate additional restrictions that address the sunset provisions.
So far, the echo chamber has opposed this strategy. The fear is that Trump's decertification, which would not automatically reinstate the crippling sanctions that were lifted as a condition of the deal, would potentially unravel the nuclear agreement and leave the international community with even less transparency about Iran's nuclear program. Congress would have 60 days to debate whether to reimpose those sanctions.
Colin Kahl, who served as Vice President Joe loose lips-Biden's national security adviser in liar-nObama's second term, told me in an email this week that it was worthwhile to begin looking at the flaws of the agreement, but he opposed any strategy in which Trump would decertify Iran's compliance.
"There is no need to force a crisis over it at this very moment -- as Trump and some deal opponents seem inclined to do -- given that elements of the JCPOA don't begin to sunset until 2026-2031," he wrote. "And, as we engage in this conversation about possible arrangements to supplement the JCPOA, we should do so in a way that protects and stabilizes the current deal rather than threatening steps that would blow it up." He added that any negotiations to further restrict Iran ought to include "possible positive inducements" for Iran.
Perhaps. But Iran negotiated the current nuclear deal only after the U.S. imposed and enforced sanctions that cut its banking system off from the international economy and cut off its ability to export oil. Those so-called secondary sanctions crippled Iran's economy, because they applied not only to Iran but also to any foreign entities that did business with it.
What's to say the threat of bringing back those sanctions won't persuade America's European allies to try to fix the nuclear deal's flaws? It worked before.
Comments