• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Страны / Регионы902
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации20
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
Марианские острова
24 мая, 21:43

House Democrats See 'Medicare For All' As The Answer To Trumpcare

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); House Democrats on Wednesday touted unprecedented majority support for a bill that would expand Medicare to the entire U.S. population, reflecting a growing liberal consensus behind single-payer health insurance.  Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), who has been introducing single-payer legislation since 2003, said at a press conference that Democrats must counter the Republican bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act with support for “Medicare for all.”  “Obviously we’re all united in opposition to Trumpcare. That’s easy,” he said. “People know what we’re against, but we want to promote more what we are for.” The press conference was scheduled to take place hours before the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released its assessment of the updated version of the Obamacare repeal bill that the House of Representatives passed earlier this month. Conyers was joined by Democratic Reps. Bonnie Watson Coleman (N.J.), Steve Cohen (Tenn.), Ro Khanna (Calif.), Jamie Raskin (Md.), Keith Ellison (Minn.) and Mark Pocan (Wis.), the newly elected co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Like many progressives, Conyers has long said that the problems bedeviling the American health care system are rooted in its reliance on private insurance. “We will never get universal care built on a foundation of private, for-profit insurers,” he said. “The only way we will get there is the way every other advanced country on the planet has, through a universal system like expanded Medicare.” Critics like Conyers argue that Obamacare is flawed because of too little, not too much, government intervention.  We will never get universal care built on a foundation of private, for-profit insurers. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) The reform law enlarged private insurance rolls by requiring anyone in the individual market above a certain income level to seek coverage in government-regulated private insurance exchanges ― and providing them subsidies to do so. Now the number of insurance options in these markets has begun to dwindle because for-profit companies find it too costly to cover new enrollees, who tend to be sicker than the general population. There are a number of ways that the federal government could entice insurers to stay in the exchanges, such as reimbursing them for their highest-cost cases and improving how they enforce the individual insurance mandate. But if private insurers were not part of the equation, these triage measures would be unnecessary. Progressive single-payer advocates say that these challenges, along with the unprecedented political threat to Obamacare from President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans, have created the right political moment to push their ideal into the party’s mainstream.  Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who turned “Medicare for all” into a progressive rallying cry with his insurgent presidential campaign, plans to introduce companion legislation to Conyers’ bill in the Senate this summer. His single-payer bills have not attracted any co-sponsors in the past.  The growing level of support for Conyers’ bill suggests this time might be different. The legislation, known as the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act, has 111 co-sponsors ― including Dels. Eleanor Holmes Norton of D.C. and Gregorio Sablan of the Northern Mariana Islands, who can’t vote on legislation on the House floor. Still, it is a solid majority of the 193-member House Democratic Caucus and the most support such legislation has ever received. The bill has even attracted support from some fiscally conservative members like Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.). The previous high-water mark for Conyers’ bill was in 2008, when 93 of his colleagues got behind it. The Democratic caucus was much larger at the time, however, so the bill’s supporters constituted a smaller proportion. Last Congress, the bill attracted just 63 co-sponsors. House Assistant Minority Leader James Clyburn (D-S.C.) and Democratic Caucus Chair Joseph Crowley (D-N.Y.), both members of leadership, have co-sponsored the bill. Yet single-payer legislation would undoubtedly face a steep climb, even if Democrats took back the House in 2018. Currently, Medicare requires co-payments from seniors and people with disabilities above a certain income level. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said earlier this month that “the comfort level with a broader base of the American people is not there yet,” and encouraged activists to try to enact single-payer plans at the state level first. In addition to extending Medicare coverage to the whole population, Conyers’ bill would improve on Medicare’s coverage levels by having the government pick up the entire tab for everything from preventive care visits to dental care. To pay for this expansion, the law would increase personal income taxes by 5 percent for higher earners, institute a new tax on worker payroll, and levy new taxes on investment income and financial transactions.  But Conyers’ bill is also deliberately vague on some of the details. Aside from the income tax hike, the legislation does not specify the levels of all the new taxes, or the earnings thresholds where they would take effect. But a 2013 analysis of the bill by Gerald Friedman, an economist at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, assumed that the new high-income surtax would increase taxes on households earning $225,000 or more by 6 percent, and the payroll tax would levy new 3 percent or 6 percent taxes on employers of all workers. Ultimately, the taxes on workers and employers would be a net financial win for the country, saving Americans nearly $600 billion a year in lower health care costs, according to Friedman. But when the reality of those upfront tax increases sets in for members of Congress, it could be a tough sell. What’s more, several efforts to wring savings from private health care providers during the crafting of Obamacare collapsed as Democrats succumbed to industry pressure en masse. Since Conyers’ bill envisions that the government will use its bargaining power to bring costs into line with those of other countries, it could face similar resistance from providers. State-level experiments with single-payer health insurance face similar if not greater challenges due to the size of their risk pool. Vermont tried to adopt a single-payer health insurance plan in lieu of Obamacare, but gave up when the costs of transitioning to the the new system proved too great.  Some progressive groups, including the National Nurses United, are now throwing their weight behind a serious effort to create a single-payer health insurance system in California. The plan could cost as much as $400 billion a year, according to a legislative analysis released Monday and conducted at the request of state lawmakers promoting the policy. Half of that amount would have to be raised through new taxes. Challenges notwithstanding, progressive activists and Democratic lawmakers are tired of asking for less than what they really want and encountering unified Republican opposition anyway.  Even if it stands no chance of approval in the short-term, they say that a push to expand the popular Medicare program is a political winner that can help Democrats take back Congress.  At Wednesday’s press conference, Pocan observed that town hall discussions about implementing “Medicare for all” draw a more enthusiastic response than any other issue. He said the issue was widely praised at a town hall he recently held in in Kenosha, Wisconsin, which is in Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan’s district. Indeed, 60 percent of Americans favor extending Medicare to the entire population, according to an Economist/YouGov poll from April. Ellison, who is deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee, emphasized that no one in the DNC would tell lawmakers and candidates what position to take on a given issue ― but the power of suggestion is fair game. “I recommend that you win your election, and I think a good way to do it is to support the Conyers bill,” he said. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

23 мая, 15:45

Китайский батискаф спустился в Марианский желоб

Китайский батискаф "Цзяолун" совершил 23 мая погружение в Марианскую впадину. По сообщению Центрального телевидения Китая, глубина первого спуска составила 4 тыс. 811 метров. Батискаф отобрал со дна образцы воды, грунта и породы подводных скал. Целью экспедиции стало изучение геологической активности, а также подводной фауны и микроорганизмов. Исследовательское судно "Сянъянхун-09" с 96 учеными и батискафом на борту прибыло накануне в район

16 мая, 19:14

How U.S. Military Bases Back Dictators, Autocrats, And Military Regimes

Forty-Five Blows Against DemocracyCross-posted with TomDispatch.com Much outrage has been expressed in recent weeks over President Donald Trump’s invitation for a White House visit to Rodrigo Duterte, president of the Philippines, whose “war on drugs” has led to thousands of extrajudicial killings. Criticism of Trump was especially intense given his similarly warm public support for other authoritarian rulers like Egypt’s Abdel Fatah al-Sisi (who visited the Oval Office to much praise only weeks earlier), Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan (who got a congratulatory phone call from President Trump on his recent referendum victory, granting him increasingly unchecked powers), and Thailand’s Prayuth Chan-ocha (who also received a White House invitation). But here’s the strange thing: the critics generally ignored the far more substantial and long-standing bipartisan support U.S. presidents have offered these and dozens of other repressive regimes over the decades. After all, such autocratic countries share one striking thing in common. They are among at least 45 less-than-democratic nations and territories that today host scores of U.S. military bases, from ones the size of not-so-small American towns to tiny outposts. Together, these bases are homes to tens of thousands of U.S. troops. To ensure basing access from Central America to Africa, Asia to the Middle East, U.S. officials have repeatedly collaborated with fiercely anti-democratic regimes and militaries implicated in torture, murder, the suppression of democratic rights, the systematic oppression of women and minorities, and numerous other human rights abuses. Forget the recent White House invitations and Trump’s public compliments. For nearly three-quarters of a century, the United States has invested tens of billions of dollars in maintaining bases and troops in such repressive states. From Harry Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower to George W. Bush and Barack Obama, Republican and Democratic administrations alike have, since World War II, regularly shown a preference for maintaining bases in undemocratic and often despotic states, including Spain under Generalissimo Francisco Franco, South Korea under Park Chung-hee, Bahrain under King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa, and Djibouti under four-term President Ismail Omar Guelleh, to name just four. Many of the 45 present-day undemocratic U.S. base hosts qualify as fully “authoritarian regimes,” according to the Economist Democracy Index. In such cases, American installations and the troops stationed on them are effectively helping block the spread of democracy in countries like Cameroon, Chad, Ethiopia, Jordan, Kuwait, Niger, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. This pattern of daily support for dictatorship and repression around the world should be a national scandal in a country supposedly committed to democracy. It should trouble Americans ranging from religious conservatives and libertarians to leftists ― anyone, in fact, who believes in the democratic principles enshrined in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. After all, one of the long-articulated justifications for maintaining military bases abroad has been that the U.S. military’s presence protects and spreads democracy. Far from bringing democracy to these lands, however, such bases tend to provide legitimacy for and prop up undemocratic regimes of all sorts, while often interfering with genuine efforts to encourage political and democratic reform. The silencing of the critics of human rights abuses in base hosts like Bahrain, which has violently cracked down on pro-democracy demonstrators since 2011, has left the United States complicit in these states’ crimes. During the Cold War, bases in undemocratic countries were often justified as the unfortunate but necessary consequence of confronting the “communist menace” of the Soviet Union. But here’s the curious thing: in the quarter century, since the Cold War ended with that empire’s implosion, few of those bases have closed. Today, while a White House visit from an autocrat may generate indignation, the presence of such installations in countries run by repressive or military rulers receives little notice at all. Befriending Dictators The 45 nations and territories with little or no democratic rule represent more than half of the roughly 80 countries now hosting U.S. bases (who often lack the power to ask their “guests” to leave).  They are part of a historically unprecedented global network of military installations the United States has built or occupied since World War II. Today, while there are no foreign bases in the United States, there are around 800 U.S. bases in foreign countries. That number was recently even higher, but it still almost certainly represents a record for any nation or empire in history. More than 70 years after World War II and 64 years after the Korean War, there are, according to the Pentagon, 181 U.S. “base sites” in Germany, 122 in Japan, and 83 in South Korea. Hundreds more dot the planet from Aruba to Australia, Belgium to Bulgaria, Colombia to Qatar. Hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops, civilians, and family members occupy these installations. By my conservative estimate, to maintain such a level of bases and troops abroad, U.S. taxpayers spend at least $150 billion annually ― more than the budget of any government agency except the Pentagon itself. For decades, leaders in Washington have insisted that bases abroad spread our values and democracy ― and that may have been true to some extent in occupied Germany, Japan, and Italy after World War II. However, as base expert Catherine Lutz suggests, the subsequent historical record shows that “gaining and maintaining access for U.S. bases has often involved close collaboration with despotic governments.” The bases in the countries whose leaders President Trump has recently lauded illustrate the broader pattern. The United States has maintained military facilities in the Philippines almost continuously since seizing that archipelago from Spain in 1898. It only granted the colony independence in 1946, conditioned on the local government’s agreement that the U.S. would retain access to more than a dozen installations there. While there are no foreign bases in the United States, there are around 800 U.S. bases in foreign countries. That number was recently even higher... After independence, a succession of U.S. administrations supported two decades of Ferdinand Marcos’s autocratic rule, ensuring the continued use of Clark Air Base and Subic Bay Naval Base, two of the largest U.S. bases abroad. After the Filipino people finally ousted Marcos in 1986 and then made the U.S. military leave in 1991, the Pentagon quietly returned in 1996. With the help of a “visiting forces agreement” and a growing stream of military exercises and training programs, it began to set up surreptitious, small-scale bases once more. A desire to solidify this renewed base presence, while also checking Chinese influence, undoubtedly drove Trump’s recent White House invitation to Duterte. It came despite the Filipino president’s record of joking about rape, swearing he would be “happy to slaughter” millions of drug addicts just as “Hitler massacred [six] million Jews,” and bragging, “I don’t care about human rights.” In Turkey, President Erdogan’s increasingly autocratic rule is only the latest episode in a pattern of military coups and undemocratic regimes interrupting periods of democracy. U.S. bases have, however, been a constant presence in the country since 1943. They repeatedly caused controversy and sparked protest ― first throughout the 1960s and 1970s, before the Bush administration’s 2003 invasion of Iraq, and more recently after U.S. forces began using them to launch attacks in Syria. Although Egypt has a relatively small U.S. base presence, its military has enjoyed deep and lucrative ties with the U.S. military since the signing of the Camp David Accords with Israel in 1979. After a 2013 military coup ousted a democratically elected Muslim Brotherhood government, the Obama administration took months to withhold some forms of military and economic aid, despite more than 1,300 killings by security forces and the arrest of more than 3,500 members of the Brotherhood. According to Human Rights Watch, “Little was said about ongoing abuses,” which have continued to this day. In Thailand, the U.S. has maintained deep connections with the Thai military, which has carried out 12 coups since 1932. Both countries have been able to deny that they have a basing relationship of any sort, thanks to a rental agreement between a private contractor and U.S. forces at Thailand’s Utapao Naval Air Base. “Because of [contractor] Delta Golf Global,” writes journalist Robert Kaplan, “the U.S. military was here, but it was not here. After all, the Thais did no business with the U.S. Air Force. They dealt only with a private contractor.” Gaining and maintaining access for U.S. bases has often involved close collaboration with despotic governments. Elsewhere, the record is similar. In monarchical Bahrain, which has had a U.S. military presence since 1949 and now hosts the Navy’s 5th Fleet, the Obama administration offered only the most tepid criticism of the government despite an ongoing, often violent crackdown on pro-democracy protesters. According to Human Rights Watch and others (including an independent commission of inquiry appointed by the Bahraini king, Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa), the government has been responsible for widespread abuses including the arbitrary arrest of protesters, ill-treatment during detention, torture-related deaths, and growing restrictions on freedoms of speech, association, and assembly. The Trump administration has already signaled its desire to protect the military-to-military ties of the two countries by approving a sale of F-16 fighters to Bahrain without demanding improvements in its human rights record. And that’s typical of what base expert Chalmers Johnson once called the American “baseworld.” Research by political scientist Kent Calder confirms what’s come to be known as the “dictatorship hypothesis”: “The United States tends to support dictators [and other undemocratic regimes] in nations where it enjoys basing facilities.” Another large-scale study similarly shows that autocratic states have been “consistently attractive” as base sites. “Due to the unpredictability of elections,” it added bluntly, democratic states prove “less attractive in terms [of] sustainability and duration.” Even within what are technically U.S. borders, democratic rule has regularly proved “less attractive” than preserving colonialism into the twenty-first century. The presence of scores of bases in Puerto Rico and the Pacific island of Guam has been a major motivation for keeping these and other U.S. “territories” ― American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands ― in varying degrees of colonial subordination. Conveniently for military leaders, they have neither full independence nor the full democratic rights that would come with incorporation into the U.S. as states, including voting representation in Congress and the presidential vote.  Installations in at least five of Europe’s remaining colonies have proven equally attractive, as has the base that U.S. troops have forcibly occupied in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, since shortly after the Spanish-American War of 1898. Backing Dictators Authoritarian rulers tend to be well aware of the desire of U.S. officials to maintain the status quo when it comes to bases. As a result, they often capitalize on a base presence to extract benefits or help ensure their own political survival. The Philippines’ Marcos, former South Korean dictator Syngman Rhee, and more recently Djibouti’s Ismail Omar Guelleh have been typical in the way they used bases to extract economic assistance from Washington, which they then lavished on political allies to shore up their power. Others have relied on such bases to bolster their international prestige and legitimacy or to justify violence against domestic political opponents. After the 1980 Kwangju massacre in which the South Korean government killed hundreds, if not thousands, of pro-democracy demonstrators, strongman General Chun Doo-hwan explicitly cited the presence of U.S. bases and troops to suggest that his actions enjoyed Washington’s support. Whether or not that was true is still a matter of historical debate. What’s clear, however, is that American leaders have regularly muted their criticism of repressive regimes lest they imperil bases in these countries. In addition, such a presence tends to strengthen military, rather than civilian, institutions in countries because of the military-to-military ties, arms sales, and training missions that generally accompany basing agreements. Meanwhile, opponents of repressive regimes often use the bases as a tool to rally nationalist sentiment, anger, and protest against both ruling elites and the United States. That, in turn, tends to fuel fears in Washington that a transition to democracy might lead to base eviction, often leading to a doubling down on support for undemocratic rulers. The result can be an escalating cycle of opposition and U.S.-backed repression. Blowback While some defend the presence of bases in undemocratic countries as necessary to deter “bad actors” and support “U.S. interests” (primarily corporate ones), backing dictators and autocrats frequently leads to harm not just for the citizens of host nations but for U.S. citizens as well. The base build-up in the Middle East has proven the most prominent example of this. Since the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the Iranian Revolution, which both unfolded in 1979, the Pentagon has built up scores of bases across the Middle East at a cost of tens of billions of taxpayer dollars. According to former West Point professor Bradley Bowman, such bases and the troops that go with them have been a “major catalyst for anti-Americanism and radicalization.” Research has similarly revealed a correlation between the bases and al-Qaeda recruitment. Most catastrophically, outposts in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Afghanistan have helped generate and fuel the radical militancy that has spread throughout the Greater Middle East and led to terrorist attacks in Europe and the United States. The presence of such bases and troops in Muslim holy lands was, after all, a major recruiting tool for al-Qaeda and part of Osama bin Laden’s professed motivation for the 9/11 attacks. With the Trump administration seeking to entrench its renewed base presence in the Philippines and the president commending Duterte and similarly authoritarian leaders in Bahrain and Egypt, Turkey and Thailand, human rights violations are likely to escalate, fueling unknown brutality and baseworld blowback for years to come.  David Vine, a TomDispatch regular, is associate professor of anthropology at American University in Washington, D.C. His latest book is Base Nation: How U.S. Military Bases Abroad Harm America and the World (the American Empire Project, Metropolitan Books). He has written for the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Guardian, and Mother Jones, among other publications. For more information, visit www.basenation.us and www.davidvine.net. Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook. Check out the newest Dispatch Book, John Dower’s The Violent American Century: War and Terror Since World War II, as well as John Feffer’s dystopian novel Splinterlands, Nick Turse’s Next Time They’ll Come to Count the Dead, and Tom Engelhardt’s Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a Single-Superpower World. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

29 апреля, 17:04

Корабль ВМС Франции прибыл в Японию для участия в международных учениях

Москва. 29 апреля. INTERFAX.RU - Десантный корабль-вертолетоносец ВМС Франции типа "Мистраль" в субботу вошел в гавань японской военно-морской базы в Сасэбо на острове Кюсю, сообщают западные СМИ со ссылкой на заявление Сил самообороны Японии.Позднее этот корабль примет участие в совместных военно-морских учениях с участием Франции, Японии, США и Великобритании - первых в своем роде, отмечают СМИ.Согласно заявлению Сил самообороны Японии, готовящиеся учения "организованы для усиления и углубления доверия и сотрудничества между странами-участниками".Ожидается, что учения пройдут с 3 по 22 мая в водах вокруг Японии, а также в районе Северных Марианских островов и острова Гуам. В маневрах должны принять участие 700 военнослужащих, в частности, 220 японских военных и 60 британских моряков. К учениям также должен присоединиться еще один французский корабль - фрегат типа "Лафайет".СМИ напоминают, что подготовка маневров идет на фоне роста напряженности вокруг Корейского полуострова. В частности, в субботу КНДР провела очередное ракетное испытание, которое по данным американского телеканала CNN, закончилось взрывом ракеты.Ранее в субботу также стало известно, авианосная группа ВМС США, возглавляемая атомным авианосцем "Карл Винсон", и ВМС Южной Кореи приступили к совместным учебным маневрам в акватории Японского моря.(http://www.interfax.ru/wo...)

26 апреля, 19:58

Remarks by President Trump at Signing of Executive Order on the Antiquities Act

The Department of the Interior Washington, D.C.  11:34 A.M. EDT THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, Mike.  He’s been a great Vice President, a great help.  And everybody loves Mike Pence.  I just want to thank you for your service.  Been incredible.  (Applause.)  It’s a real pleasure to be at the Department of Interior, where you help preserve the splendor and the beauty of America’s natural resources.  And I can tell you the group that's in here right now, they really do the job.  Right, Lisa?  They’re doing a good job.  We're going to take care of Alaska, too.  Don't worry about it.  (Laughter.)  And they protect the ability of the people to access and utilize the land which truly belongs to them and belongs to all of us. Secretary Ryan Zinke is doing an incredible job -- and he never overlooks the details.  He’s a detail person.  Soon after he was confirmed, we had a snowstorm, big one, and he was out there on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial shoveling the snow all by himself.  And he’s a strong guy.  He did a good job.  (Laughter.)  He did a very, very good job.  But we're proud of him. In the first 100 days, we have taken historic action to eliminate wasteful regulations.  They're being eliminated like nobody has ever seen before.  There has never been anything like it.  Sometimes I look at some of the things I’m signing I say maybe people won’t like it, but I’m doing the right thing.  And no regular politician is going do it.  (Laughter.)  I don't know if you folks would do -- I will tell you literally some politicians have said, you're doing the right thing.  I don't know if I would have had the courage to do some of these things.  But we're doing them because it’s the right thing to do.  And it’s for the good of the nation. We're returning power back to the people.  We’ve eliminated job-destroying regulations on farmers, ranchers, and coal miners, on autoworkers, and so many other American workers and businesses. Today, I am signing a new executive order to end another egregious abuse of federal power, and to give that power back to the states and to the people, where it belongs. The previous administration used a 100-year-old law known as the Antiquities Act to unilaterally put millions of acres of land and water under strict federal control -- have you heard about that? -- eliminating the ability of the people who actually live in those states to decide how best to use that land.  Today, we are putting the states back in charge.  It’s a big thing. I am pleased to be joined by so many members of Congress and governors who have been waiting for this moment, including Governor Herbert of Utah.  Thank you, thank you, Governor.  Governor LePage of Maine, who, by the way, has lost a lot of weight.  (Laughter.)  I knew him when he was heavy, and now I know him when he’s thin, and I like him both ways, okay?  (Laughter.)  Done a great job.  Governor Calvo of Guam.  Thank you.  Governor Torres from the Northern Mariana Islands.  Thank you, thank you, Governor. I also want to recognize Senator Orrin Hatch, who -- believe me, he’s tough.  He would call me and call me and say, you got to do this.  Is that right, Orrin? SENATOR HATCH:  That's right.   THE PRESIDENT:  You didn't stop.  He doesn't give up.  And he’s shocked that I’m doing it, but I’m doing it because it’s the right thing to do.  But I really have to point you out, you didn't stop.   And, Mike, the same thing.  So many people feel -- Mike Lee -- so many people feel so strongly about this, and so I appreciate your support and your prodding, and your never-ending prodding, I should say, because we're now getting something done that many people thought would never ever get done, and I’m very proud to be doing it in honor of you guys, okay?  Thank you.  (Applause.)   Altogether, the previous administration bypassed the states to place over 265 million acres -- that's a lot of land, million acres.  Think of it -- 265 million acres of land and water under federal control through the abuse of the monuments designation.  That’s larger than the entire state of Texas. In December of last year alone, the federal government asserted this power over 1.35 million acres of land in Utah, known as Bears Ears -- I’ve heard a lot about Bears Ears, and I hear it’s beautiful -- over the profound objections of the citizens of Utah.  The Antiquities Act does not give the federal government unlimited power to lock up millions of acres of land and water, and it’s time we ended this abusive practice.  I’ve spoken with many state and local leaders -- a number of them here today -- who care very much about preserving our land, and who are gravely concerned about this massive federal land grab.  And it’s gotten worse and worse and worse, and now we're going to free it up, which is what should have happened in the first place.  This should never have happened.    That’s why today I am signing this order and directing Secretary Zinke to end these abuses and return control to the people -- the people of Utah, the people of all of the states, the people of the United States.  Every day, we are going to continue pushing ahead with our reform agenda to put the American people back in charge of their government and their lives.   And again, I want to congratulate the Secretary.  I want to congratulate Orrin and Mike and all of the people that worked so hard on bringing it to this point.  And tremendously positive things are going to happen on that incredible land, the likes of which there is nothing more beautiful anywhere in the world.  But now tremendously positive things will happen. So I want to thank you.  I want to thank everybody for being here.  God bless you all and God bless America.  Thank you.  Thank you very much.  So I’ll sign. (The executive order is signed.)  (Applause.)  Q    Are you surprised about this 9th Circuit ruling? THE PRESIDENT:  I’m never surprised by the 9th Circuit.  (Laughter.)  As I said, we’ll see them in the Supreme Court.  (Laughter and applause.)  END  11:42 A.M. EDT

07 апреля, 14:35

Ученые назвали самые курящие страны мира

Общее число курильщиков на планете достигло миллиарда человек, каждый четвертый мужчина и каждая двадцатая женщина сегодня никотинозависимы. Об этом говорится в статье, опубликованной в журнале Lancet, сообщает РИА Новости. «Текущие меры по борьбе с курением […]

06 апреля, 11:52

Какое место заняла Россия в рейтинге «курящих» стран?

Медики из международной программы «Глобальное бремя болезней» опубликовали отчет об исследовании распространенности курения в мире.

06 апреля, 06:30

Ученые назвали самые курящие и некурящие страны мира

Общее число курильщиков на планете достигло миллиарда человек, и сегодня каждый четвертый мужчина и каждая двадцатая женщина являются никотинозависимыми, говорится в статье, опубликованной в журнале Lancet."Текущие меры по борьбе с курением помогли понизить вред от табака для здоровья человечества, но мы по-прежнему можем многое сделать. И сегодня число курильщиков растет быстрее, чем число людей, бросивших курить, что говорит о том, что мы должны предотвращать первичное употребление табака и помогать людям бросать курить", - заявила Эммануэла Гакиду (Emmanuela Gakidou) из университета штата Вашингтон в Сиэтле (США).По подсчетам ученых, число курильщиков на Земле в 2015 году составляло 933 миллиона человек, и на текущий момент времени их количество, если скорость их прироста не менялась, должна была превысить миллиард человек за счет быстрого прироста курильщиков в самых слаборазвитых странах мира. Если эти тренды продолжатся, то за текущее столетие курение убьет около миллиарда людей по всем странам мира.Большая часть курильщиков живет в азиатских странах - "большую тройку" этого антирейтинга занимают Китай, Индия и Индонезия, где почти 400 миллионов мужчин регулярно курят сигареты, трубки и другие табачные изделия. Больше всего женщин курят в США, Китае и Индии, где около 13-17 миллионов представительниц слабого пола регулярно или эпизодически употребляют табак.Если говорить о том, как много мужчин курят в отдельных странах, то здесь так же лидируют страны Азии - в Кирибати, Индонезии, Лаосе, на Марианских островах и в Армении почти половина представителей сильного пола является курильщиками. Среди женщин эту роль оккупировали Гренландия (44%) и страны Балканского полуострова - в Болгарии, Греции, Черногории, Хорватии и Македонии курят около 25-28% женщин.В пятерку стран, где табак унес максимальное число жизней, входит и Россия - она занимает в этом антирейтинге 4 место, уступая Китаю, Индии и США, и обходя Индонезию. В этих странах каждый год около 200-800 тысяч людей умирает от курения, а в Китае этот показатель достигает 1,8 миллиона погибших. В общей сложности на их долю приходится примерно половина смертей от табака по всей планете в целом.Как отмечает Гакиду, есть и положительные тренды - в 30 странах мира общее число курильщиков не выросло, а снизилось, а число людей, курящих ежедневно, в целом снизилось на 28% для мужчин и на 34% для женщин по сравнению с 1990 годом. Больше всего здесь прогрессирует Индия - на ее территории число постоянных курильщиков снижалось на 3% каждый год, начиная с 2005 года. Сопоставимых успехов добилась Бразилия, где число заядлых курильщиков упало на 56-57% за последние 27 лет.Текущие тренды, как отмечает Мэттью Майерс (Matthew Myers), руководитель Фонда по борьбе с курением среди детей, указывают на то, что меры по борьбе с курением в будущем нужно будет сосредоточить на странах с низким и средним уровнем доходов. В противном случае 80% смертей, связанных с табаком, будут происходить в этих государствах уже в 2030 году, заключает эксперт.(https://ria.ru/science/20...)

04 апреля, 23:02

Trump counts his wins after health care loss

Stepping out of the White House, the president tries to focus on his next goals while reminding crowds of his win.

04 апреля, 20:15

Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Sean Spicer, 4/4/2017

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room 11:45 A.M. EDT MR. SPICER:  I know the President is leaving shortly, so I'm going to keep this relatively short.  A couple things from yesterday.  The President signed four bills:  S.J. Res. 34 which disapproves of the FCC regulations that would have imposed new privacy standards on Internet service providers, allowing bureaucrats in Washington to pick winners and losers in the industry -- we've discussed that before; H.J Resolution 83, which disapproves of a Department of Labor regulation extending the statute of limitation for claims against employers failing to maintain records of employee injuries; H.J. Res. 69, the disapproval of the Bureau of Land Management regulations that would limit Alaska’s ability to manage hunting of predators on national wildlife refuges in Alaska; and H.R. 1228 which makes technical amendments to the appointment procedures of members to the Board of Congressional Compliance. One quick note, I mentioned this before, but the number gets higher -- we’ve now -- the President has signed 12 congressional review acts.  In the past, all Presidents combined had signed one.  So I think we have a vastly different attempt to roll back regulatory reforms that are standing in the way of freedom as well as business development. Also yesterday, the President spoke with the President of Peru and the President of Colombia to express his condolences for the devastation and loss of life by recent mudslides in the country.  He offered the assistance of the United States government during this tragedy.  And the President also spoke with President Putin of the Russian Federation to condemn yesterday’s attack in St. Petersburg.  He offered the full support of the United States government in responding to the attack and bringing those to justice.  We had readouts of both of those yesterday. With respect to today, this morning the President hosted a CEO town hall.  I think some of you had the opportunity to go over there.  The town hall was broken into four separate discussions -- infrastructure, modernizing government services, workforce development, and the pro-business climate.  A report released by the Pew Research Center yesterday showed an historic rise in public opinion about the economy.  Fifty-eight percent of Americans say that the current economic situation in the United States is good, which is a 14 percent jump from last year, the largest one-year improvement in the survey’s history.  It’s also the most positive Americans have been about the economy since before the recession.   The American economy is already showing improvements under the President’s pro-job, pro-business policies.  The President was glad for the opportunity to speak to the CEOs from many industries about what his administration is doing moving forward to make it even easier to create jobs in America and making it even easier to do business in the country. This afternoon -- in fact, literally momentarily -- the President will be taking off from the White House to go speak at the 2017 North America Building Trades Unions national legislative conference.  I’m not going to get ahead of the speech, but I think it’s fairly safe to say that he looks forward to speaking to the men and women who are building so much around our nation, and the issues that matter most to them -- bringing back well-paying jobs, jumpstarting American energy, rebuilding our infrastructure and trade. Later this afternoon, the President will have several meetings, including EPA Administrator Pruitt, Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, Governor Torres of the Northern Mariana Islands.  And this afternoon, we will have a background briefing here in this room at 4:30 p.m. on the upcoming visit with President Xi.   And then tomorrow, I know we had mentioned earlier in the week that there will be a Wounded Warriors soldier ride.  We’re obviously tracking the weather on that, but this is really a great opportunity, and I know that this team is working with several media outlets who want to cover this to really pay tribute to the men and women who have fought and served for this country and some of the efforts that are being made now to really go out and show how they’ve recovered so well and compete.  So while it may look like we’re going to have some rain, I’ll make sure that we share any updates with you.   Last, before I get on to your questions, I just want to -- we have a quick update on Syria.  So I'm going to read the statement for you, and obviously, as I conclude, we will put it out:   Today’s chemical attack in Syria against innocent people, including women and children, is reprehensible and cannot be ignored by the civilized world.  These heinous actions by the Bashar al-Assad regime are a consequence of the past administration’s weakness and irresolution.  President Obama said in 2012 that he would establish a “red line” against the use of chemical weapons, and then did nothing.  The United States stands with our allies across the globe to condemn this intolerable act.   John. Q    Thank you, Sean.  I wanted to pick up on that statement.  As you know, with this chemical attack on this rebel-held Syrian town, at least 100 deaths have been reported, at least 400 injuries.  And I hope you could give some clarity in terms of the administration's position on Syria.  Secretary of State Tillerson just days ago said that the Syrian people themselves should decide the future of the country.  And at the same time, the U.N. Ambassador -- the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., Nikki Haley, has said that Assad is a war criminal.  So you just criticized President Obama's policy on Syria and the red line.  What will the administration do in response to what we saw take place there over the past 24 hours? MR. SPICER:  Thanks.  I think the statement speaks for itself.  I think a couple of things.  One is, statements by both Secretary Tillerson and Ambassador Haley speak to the political realities of the situation in Syria in terms of -- I think we had opportunities in the past, several years, to look at regime change.  I think those are fundamentally -- the landscape is fundamentally different than it is today.   That being said, I think the President has made it clear in the past, and will reiterate that today, that he is not here to telegraph what we're going to do.  But rest assured that I think he has been speaking with his national security team this morning, and we will continue to have that discussion both internally with our national security team, as well as with our allies around the globe.  But I think the statement pretty much speaks for itself -- what we believe, that is -- and then we'll go from there. Q    Do you think there is any confusion with those two statements that I read earlier -- one from Secretary of State Tillerson and the other from the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley? MR. SPICER:  No.  As I said, one of them is just a statement of -- or both of their statements with respect to Assad speak to the political reality of -- it's great to say that -- there is almost an acknowledgement of the reality of the situation, politically speaking, in terms of his standing within -- where we stand.  There is not a fundamental option of regime change as there has been in the past.  I think we would look like, to some degree, rather silly not acknowledging the political realities that exist in Syria, and that what we need to do is fundamentally do what we can to empower the people of Syria to find a different way. Right now, both statements stand very squarely with what we will do today.  I think that the comments and the statement are unequivocal when it comes to how we believe we view this attack on innocent people, the heinous nature of it.  But I don’t want to get ahead of where we're going from here. Hunter. Q    Just real quick, Sean.  Are you -- MR. SPICER:  Hold on.  Hans, I know -- Q    I didn’t know if the point was to me or -- MR. SPICER:  No, no, it wasn’t.  Hunter is Hunter; Hans is Hans. Q    Thank you, Sean. MR. SPICER:  I'll come back to you. Q    Thank you.  I'm wondering if you're at all concerned to see these reports of the chemical attacks coming right on the heels of the administration suggesting it's open to Assad staying in power.  Are you worried there's any correlation between the attacks and the change in posture? MR. SPICER:  Again -- and I don’t think -- I would hardly characterize it as -- I forgot the way that you phrased it -- but there's not a comfort level with Assad.  I think it's a political reality.  That being said, I think the idea that someone would use chemical weapons on their own people, including women and children, is not something that any civilized nation should sit back and accept or tolerate.  And I think that is what we are making very clear today. Q    Right.  But in addition to you describing Assad as the  "political reality," Ambassador Haley said the priority "is no longer to sit there and focus on getting Assad out."  That's a direct quote.  So this is clearly a change in posture.  Do you think there's any correlation between sort of an almost increased brazenness on his part and those statements?  MR. SPICER:  I don't.  And I think that -- like I said, I'm not going to get into it, but I think the President is extremely alarmed at these revelations.  He continues to meet with his national security team, and I think there will be further discussions around the globe with our allies as far as the appropriate action. Hans. Q    Thanks, Sean.  Are you certain it was the Assad regime?  Is it possible that Russia was involved?  Do you know the air platform?  And then one final -- do you know if any Russian forces were with Assad regime forces that launched the chemical attack? MR. SPICER:  I'm not going to get into -- I know that the President was briefed on this extensively this morning by his national security team, and I'm going to let the statement speak for itself, because we feel very confident in the statement that we're making. Q    So that means no Russian involvement? MR. SPICER:  That means that the statement is very clear as far as who we believe is to blame and how we believe we're reacting to it. Zeke. Q    Thanks, Sean.  In the statement, you were sharply critical of the past administration with regards to Syria.  I was hoping you could clarify, when does the President believe that he takes ownership of foreign policy when obviously -- every President always blames the predecessor -- the need to put that criticism in this statement, now condemning the use of chemical weapons, a war crime overseas, why take the potshot at his predecessor?  And when does the President truly own his own foreign policy?   MR. SPICER:  I think it is very clear.  I mean, we drew -- what's the point of red lines?  America's credibility was at stake, and I think the President wants to point out that there was a red line and they did cross it.  We did talk about -- we did have alternatives to regime change, and they weren’t taken.  And I think that's a very, very different -- it's important to acknowledge the difference in the change in our posture and how we will go out from here.  So I think it is a big difference. Q    And what is that change in posture? MR. SPICER:  I understand.  The statement speaks for itself.  I think I'm not going to get into what actions we're taking.  Obviously, I get you want to do that.  Those are decisions that the national security team continues to make recommendations to the President.  But until we do anything, I'd rather not get ahead of it. Q    So the next crisis -- maybe it's not Syria -- is the President going to criticize President Obama for trade policies when he meets with President Xi later this week?  Is it every foreign policy statement -- MR. SPICER:  It's going to depend -- I mean, I don’t want to say yes or no.  I mean, I think that's going to depend on what our posture was towards that country or regime or policy. Q    (Inaudible.) MR. SPICER:  I don’t -- I mean, I don’t know.  Did you ask that same question of President Obama when they literally spent a year or two years blaming the Bush administration for everything that was wrong? Q    Yes.  Yes, we did.  (Laughter.)     MR. SPICER:  But I mean, I think that -- look, right now we’re 70-something days into it.  I think there’s no question what their position was with respect to Syria in terms of red lines and regime change and the lack of action that they did take.  I think we want to make sure that we’re very clear that there is a different posture. Q    Sean, is President Trump willing to draw a second red line to discourage the Assad regime from using chemical weapons on his own people? MR. SPICER:  I think the statement is pretty clear on this, Trey.  The United States stands with our allies to condemn this intolerable attack.  And I think going forward we will have more on this, but I’m not -- I think we want to be very clear where we stand.  I know countries throughout Europe are reaching out, making it clear what their position is.  There’s been some calls for action, the U.N. Security Council.  I think, at this point, as things develop, I’m not ready to talk about our next step, but we’ll get there soon. Kaitlan. Q    Does the White House agree with Rand Paul that Susan Rice should testify? MR. SPICER:  I think that’s -- again, I’m not going to start getting into who should testify.  But I do think that it is -- I know that she’s about to make comments to a host of -- to minimize this.  But it is interesting, she was the one who went out and said she “had nothing to do” with this on a program a few weeks ago, and now I continue to see more and more reports. So I think it’s not for me to decide who should testify or how they should do it, but I do think that there is a sharp contrast between a few weeks ago when she was very public in saying she "didn’t have any clue what Chairman Nunes was talking about," and yet now we’re finding out that she’s trying to figure out how she can go to some kind of friendly way of discussing this. But all yesterday there was an opportunity -- my understanding -- of several people to reach out.  I didn’t hear anything except for a quote; one network described it as a “person close to her,” which I think is rather interesting that -- you would assume that if you stood by the comments that you made several weeks ago, that you wouldn’t need someone who just was close to you to defend it. Q    What do you think about networks like CNN saying that it’s a diversion, that the Susan Rice story is a diversion? MR. SPICER:  I think I’ll let CNN speak for themselves.  I find it interesting that you -- I don’t know how many reports that -- I get that at some point they have an invested angle and narrative in this, but the reality is -- and again, I’m not going to keep going into every turn and twist about this, but I think that, as I noted yesterday, the more we find out about this the more we learn that there was clearly something there and that there was a lot of activity.  We’ve seen people both on the record and in comments talk about their activities. I think it’s interesting, as I noted yesterday, and I read some of the comments afterwards, but the default from at least some media outlets seems to be to rush to the defense of the Obama administration and the activities there instead of so-called want to get to the bottom of this.  But there is an immediate attempt to defend certain actions like that on one side of the aisle and an immediate rush to judgment on the other side, which I get that people don’t like to hear that, but that is the reality. If you look at the two situations that occurred, there is no question the way that some networks are handling one set of circumstances versus another.  It is clearly an attempt to preserve a narrative and to defend one side of the aisle versus another. Steve. Q    Sean, generally speaking, would you like to see Assad step down or out of power somehow in Syria? MR. SPICER:  I think it’s in the best interest of the Syrian people to not have anybody who would do the kind of heinous acts -- any leader that treats their people with this kind of activity and death and destruction -- I mean, it’s just -- yeah, I don’t think that anybody would wish this upon anybody. Q    And are you confident that the United States will respond to this attack in some way? MR. SPICER:  I would not want to get ahead of the President at this point.  I do think that the statement is fairly strongly worded for a certain reason. Q    And lastly, has he specifically talked to any allies about this this morning? MR. SPICER:  I’m not sure that he’s spoken to any leaders specifically.  I know the team has been in contact.  He’s spent an extensive amount of [time with] team this morning getting briefed by the intelligence community as well as his national security team. Hallie. Q    Sean, I want to follow on that and then I have two other topics for you.  You said -- I know you don’t want to get ahead of the President and you’re letting the statement speak for itself.  You also said that you want to empower the people of Syria to find a different way.  How will the United States help them out with that? MR. SPICER:  I don’t think -- again, we need to look at options at this point, and I’m not going to get ahead of the President and the team.  I think right now our concern is for the people of Syria and the victims of this attack.  We have plenty of time to chart a way forward. Q    Okay, so let me just ask you this.  On the Susan Rice story, you said yesterday you believed that it was moving in a “troubling direction.”  What do you find troubling about that story? MR. SPICER:  Well, I find it troubling that someone would go out and talk about the fact that they had -- and again, I’m paraphrasing because I don’t have the exact quote in front of me -- but I believe she made something to the comments, I have no idea what Chairman Nunes is talking about, and then threw a person apparently that’s close to her -- continuing a narrative, but yet more and more news outlets are reporting that there was something there. And there’s a question -- I’ve seen enough -- you saw Secretary -- I mean, former director Brennan talk about that if people were leaking this information, it's treasonous.  You have questions about what was the motive behind if it didn’t have intelligence value, it wasn’t part of an ongoing investigation, what was the reason that somebody would have -- the extent to which it goes. I think those are all very -- I mean, there is a civil liberties component to this that should be very troubling in terms of the revelations that keep coming up. Q    But so to pick up on that, do you believe it is improper for a national security advisor to request the unmasking of names? MR. SPICER:  It would depend on the purpose of that.  Again, it depends on the purpose of why they were asking and what they were trying to accomplish. Q    But it sounds like you believe this purpose was politically motivated.  (Inaudible.)   MR. SPICER:  No, no, I’m not -- please don’t -- Q    I’m not putting words in your mouth, I’m just trying to understand -- MR. SPICER:  Well, you are.  You said “you believe.” Q    I’m asking you. MR. SPICER:  Okay, and I think the answer is that I think why I’m saying that we’re going in a troubling path is I think that what we continue to see is that there is a lot coming out that says there was no value in this intelligence.  And so the question is, why was somebody unmasked if that was the case, what was the purpose of requesting it, and the extent of which it occurred. If there is no intelligence or criminal value in it, why was somebody requesting it?  How far did they do it?  Who did they share it with?  But I believe that there are more questions than answers at this point. Q    My last question about healthcare.  There’s been a lot of discussion in the last 18 hours or so on the revival, potentially, of this healthcare bill.  Speaker Paul Ryan said today it’s in the concept stages, if you will.  Can you talk about the White House’s role in this and specifics?  Are community ratings now on the table?  Preexisting conditions, will those be protected?  Has the President made that -- MR. SPICER:  I think, yesterday, Chief of Staff Priebus and some others hosted a group -- Tuesday Group folks here in the morning.  I know the Vice President and Mr. Priebus went up to Capitol Hill later in the afternoon.  I know they’ve got some additional meetings today I believe back on Capitol Hill.  They’re having some folks here.  The President had a discussion with a couple members in the House and the Senate over the weekend.   I think that our goal is -- and I know Chairman Walden of the House Energy and Commerce Committee has been talking to his members in particular and members of the different caucuses and groups up there, and I think has some ideas that he thinks could be very helpful.  He’s talked to leadership.  I think if we can -- the same narrative that we’ve been talking about for a while -- if we can get that group to get to 216, then I think that we’ll move forward. I think the talks have been very productive.   Q    So it’s back live, would you say? MR. SPICER:  I think the President -- look, the President would like to see this done.  If we can get a deal and it gets to those votes -- which, again, I'm not going to raise expectations.  But I think that there are more and more people coming to the table with more and more ideas about to grow that vote.  And I think on both -- not just in the House, but we've had some discussions as well in the Senate.  But I think both the Chief of Staff and the Vice President feel very optimistic with the tone of the conversation and the ideas that are coming out and the willingness of folks to find common ground. John. Q    Can you talk about this Erik Prince business -- this idea that he was trying to create a back channel between the President and Russia?  I mean, his closeness to this administration -- his sister being the Education Secretary -- certainly creates an appearance, but it could also be problematic for the White House from the standpoint of, well, this is what the Obama administration might have been looking into (inaudible) intelligence reports. MR. SPICER:  The thing that's interesting about the story is, when you look at it, it's -- respectfully, I would call it flimsy.  I mean, they use -- the meeting took place around January 11th.  He had no “formal role with the campaign or transition team,” although he apparently presented himself.  He “has ties to people” -- that's plural.  When you go through the story, the tie that they have is that he appeared on Steve Bannon’s radio show.  When you look at the radio show, it says that he appeared on Steve Bannon’s radio show in November.  Steve Bannon gave up the radio show in August.   I think that this idea that somebody who admittedly, on both sides -- we say that he had no role in the transition, he says he has no role in the transition.  But apparently, he knows somebody who knew somebody, who knew a guy in the UAE, who also knew a guy in Russia and they had to fly to the Seychelles on or around January 11th, of which the government of the Seychelles says, "They have no record of them being there."  Government officials in the Seychelles, “they were not aware of any meetings.” But it is a bunch of flimsy pieces of information all tied together to create a sensational feel.  But just so we're clear, there is no -- they can't identify the other individuals.  They claim that Erik Prince, who went, admittedly by himself, by us, by others, has no role in the transition, and that his connection is “ties to people” -- is, one, he’s related to what would become the Secretary of Education’s sister, and two, is he appeared on someone’s radio show.  That doesn’t seem to pass muster with a great deal of strength to me. Q    But would you acknowledge that this could be potentially problematic from the standpoint of -- MR. SPICER:  No. Q    -- this could give Susan Rice an out to say, well, this was the sort of thing that we were looking at, and this is why we were conducting to unmask --  MR. SPICER:  Well, I think if you are looking at -- I mean, you would hope that if that's what you were looking at, you would get a lot more information than that.  That, to me -- I don't -- they don't know the date, who they met with, how they actually came into contact, what the exact ties were, or what supposedly happened as a consequence to this, because they can't meet.  There was no, apparently -- nothing came of it.   So, again, I guess someone may have visited an island, but there is no proof they actually ever met with an individual, nor that they had any ties, nor that they actually know the exact date, nor any consequence of the so-called meeting.  I think that it is flimsy at best.   Q    The President said earlier at that CEO town hall, as it relates to infrastructure, that the package would be a trillion dollars and “maybe even more.” Given a trillion dollars is a massive number to begin with, what might “and maybe even more” mean? MR. SPICER:  Again, I think that's part of what the team is working on.  It's a number that's very consistent with what he has said since the beginning.  So I don't know why this should be any different than -- I mean, it's consistent with the numbers that he’s used. Q    And then let me ask you about Dodd-Frank.  He also said that he wants to take a haircut to it.  Dodd-Frank is a law that the President can't unilaterally change.  He can't sign executive orders.  So is he hoping to work with Capitol Hill for this major haircut?  Is it solely through executive orders?  How does that relationship --  MR. SPICER:  I think we'll have an update further on that.  Obviously, there’s clearly, as you know, a legislative component to this, and we'll have more on that.   Q    Thanks, Sean.  I want to follow up on Hallie's question about healthcare.  The proposed changes to the essential health benefits and the community ratings -- is there a concern that that would roll back protections for preexisting conditions?  That's obviously something that President Trump said he wanted to keep in place during the campaign.  So wouldn’t these changes that health policy experts were saying would get rid of those protections, wouldn't that violate what President Trump --  MR. SPICER:  Again, I would note, to Hallie’s question, that we're not there yet.  We're having discussions.  As I said, the Chief of Staff hosted the Tuesday Group yesterday morning, and then he and the Vice President went up yesterday to talk to the Freedom Caucus.  I think part of this is -- I get that there are disparate interests that are trying to pull this to one side or another, but I think that we understand the core principles of this and we've got to make sure that we do -- whatever we do continues to get an outcome that grows the vote, not decreases the vote.  And so I don't want to start prejudging where this thing is going to head at this point.   So, with that, I know the President is on his way, he’s going to start speaking.  So I'll catch you later.  Enjoy.  Thank you. END     12:11 P.M. EDT

04 апреля, 13:47

TRUMP outside group puts up another six-figure ad buy -- PAUL RYAN’s MILLION-DOLLAR day – House Republicans and W.H. discuss way to break health-care logjam -- STEVE THOMMA's new job -- B’DAY: Jo Becker

Listen to the Playbook Audio Briefing http://bit.ly/2o4WFTU ... Subscribe on iTunes http://apple.co/2eX6Eay ... Visit the online home of Playbook http://politi.co/2f51JnfBULLETIN -- AP at 4:46 a.m.: “TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Boeing Co. says it has signed a $3 billion deal with Iran’s Aseman Airlines for 30 737 MAX airplanes.”Good Tuesday morning. THE NEW REALITY: BIG MONEY AT EVERY TURN -- MAKING AMERICA GREAT, a non-profit group aligned with big GOP donor Rebekah Mercer, is dropping six figures on a digital advertising campaign to both tout the Trump administration’s accomplishments and pressure senators to confirm Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. The ad is running nationally, but will have boosted spending in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, Missouri, Montana, Wisconsin, Maine and D.C. -- all markets where Democratic senators face re-election in 2018. This campaign comes a week after a $1 million buy boosting Trump’s agenda. “Judge Gorsuch is impeccably qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. Some of our Senators’ petulant opposition is not in the best interest of our nation, and is contrary to the wishes of their constituency,” said Emily Cornell, the COO of Making America Great. “We welcome the opportunity to give Gorsuch supporters the megaphone they deserve.”-- THIS IS LOOKING LIKE IT WILL BE A TREND, AND TRUMP WORLD IS GOING TO BE HAPPY. Six- and seven-figure ad buys have gone up in back-to-back weeks to boost the president’s agenda. If this continues, it will be helpful as Trump tries to prevent a government shutdown, lift the debt ceiling, pass tax reform and an infrastructure bill. The ad http://bit.ly/2nSkOuV FIRST IN PLAYBOOK: RYAN’S MILLION-DOLLAR DAY -- SPEAKER PAUL RYAN is distributing $1.2 million from his personal political accounts to roughly half the House Republican Conference today. Ryan has already transferred millions of dollars to the party’s re-election arm, but now the speaker is cutting checks directly to lawmakers’ campaign committees -- a move that underscores his newfound brand as a top Republican money man. The donations are going to virtually every House Republican being targeted by Democrats, and conservatives and moderates alike. Members of the House found out about the Ryan largesse when Kevin Seifert, Ryan’s political director, emailed chiefs of staff, telling them a check was waiting at the RNC for pickup this morning. THIS IS IMPORTANT: Members of leadership usually either cut checks to the party committee, or directly to members. Ryan is doing both as he tries to keep the House in GOP hands in 2018.**SUBSCRIBE to Playbook: http://politi.co/2lQswbhFOR YOUR RADAR -- “Authorities name suspect from Kyrgyzstan in St. Petersburg metro bombing,” by WaPo’s Andrew Roth and David Filipov in St. Petersburg: “A likely suspect in the blast that killed 14 people as it ripped through a subway car in St. Petersburg is a Russian citizen born in a volatile region of Kyrgyzstan, the Central Asian country’s security service said Tuesday. The state security service of Kyrgyzstan told the Interfax news agency that the suspect is 22-year-old Akbarzhon Dzhalilov, who was born in Osh, a city that has seen bloody ethnic conflicts and the growth of jihadist movements since the Soviet Union began disintegrating three decades ago. The service said it was working with Russian law enforcement authorities, who are investigating the incident as an act of terrorism. Russian officials have not said how many people were involved in Monday’s attack.” http://wapo.st/2nzl9kxIT’S BACK … WE THINK? -- “White House, conservatives mull deal to revive Obamacare repeal,” by Rachael Bade and Jen Haberkorn: “House conservatives and the White House are mulling a potential agreement to revive the GOP Obamacare replacement bill that was pulled from the House floor just over a week ago, POLITICO has learned. The House Freedom Caucus, the group of three-dozen conservatives that helped bring down the bill, has been in talks with Trump administration officials about changes to the legislation that might get them to ‘yes.’ One option seriously being considered, multiple GOP sources said, includes allowing governors to opt out of some Obamacare regulations. “The developments could mean that Speaker Paul Ryan’s bill might not be dead after all -- or at least indicate that continued discussions are going on behind the scenes. Sources stressed that the details are still being finalized, and it’s far from certain that such a change would act as a silver bullet to salvage the much-maligned bill. It is unclear whether such an idea would win over enough conservatives while also keeping moderate Republicans on board. Two sources told POLITICO centrist House Republicans were summoned to the White House to discuss the idea Monday afternoon.” http://politi.co/2nDvgFy-- ONE THING TO REMEMBER: It’s possible, but very unlikely this bill will pass before May. A two-week recess starts Thursday afternoon. Even if a deal came together today, the GOP whip team would have to canvass for support to see if it could pass. And, if Republicans are true to what they promised voters a few years back, the bill would have to sit for three days so the public could review it. That would take us to Thursday -- the day Republicans are slated to get out of town. Could they keep the House in an extra day? Sure. Will they? Who knows, but probably not. And if it doesn’t pass this week, it won’t even be in the mix until May -- when Congress returns the last week of this month, they’ll have to fight to keep the government open.MCCONNELL’S BIG MOMENT -- “McConnell bets the Senate on Gorsuch,” by Burgess Everett: “When Neil Gorsuch is confirmed to the Supreme Court this week, Mitch McConnell will clinch a place in history after pulling off one of the most audacious gambles in modern political history. Whether he’ll be regarded as a hero or a villain depends almost entirely on which side of the aisle one is on. The immediate payoff to the Republican Party is enormous and indisputable, starting, of course, with another staunch conservative on the court who could remain there for decades. But Republicans also credit McConnell with saving the Senate majority and electing President Donald Trump, by giving traditional conservative voters a powerful motivator to turn out for a nominee they were less than enthused about.” http://politi.co/2oxdFTFSCOOP – “Name of Trump admin hire surfaced in Ashley Madison hack,” by Daniel Lippman: “The Trump administration has hired the former executive director of the Louisiana Republican Party whose name turned up on a list of accounts released in the 2015 hack of the cheating website Ashley Madison. Jason Doré started on Monday as assistant chief counsel for external affairs for the Small Business Administration’s Office of Advocacy, he confirmed to POLITICO on Monday. ... In 2015, Doré told the New Orleans Times-Picayune he used the Ashley Madison site for opposition research. He said on Monday he stood by that explanation. He told POLITICO the incident ‘really never came up’ in his recent job interviews. ‘I addressed it at the time. It’s not a secret,’ he said of the episode. ... The White House said Doré was not a political hire from the Presidential Personnel Office and did not comment further.” http://politi.co/2oUbLcj JUSTICE WATCH -- “Sweeping Federal Review Could Affect Consent Decrees Nationwide,” by NYT’s Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Eric Lichtblau: “Attorney General Jeff Sessions has ordered a sweeping review of federal agreements with dozens of law enforcement agencies, an examination that reflects President Trump’s emphasis on law and order and could lead to a retreat on consent decrees with troubled police departments nationwide. In a memorandum dated March 31 and made public Monday, the attorney general directed his staff to look at whether law enforcement programs adhere to principles put forth by the Trump administration, including one declaring that ‘the individual misdeeds of bad actors should not impugn’ the work police officers perform ‘in keeping American communities safe.’” http://nyti.ms/2oTRaEI BLAST FROM THE PAST -- “Blackwater founder held secret Seychelles meeting to establish Trump-Putin back channel,” by WaPo’s Adam Entous, Greg Miller, Kevin Sieff and Karen DeYoung: “The United Arab Emirates arranged a secret meeting in January between Blackwater founder Erik Prince and a Russian close to President Vladi­mir Putin as part of an apparent effort to establish a back-channel line of communication between Moscow and President-elect Donald Trump, according to U.S., European and Arab officials. The meeting took place around Jan. 11 — nine days before Trump’s inauguration — in the Seychelles islands in the Indian Ocean, officials said. Though the full agenda remains unclear, the UAE agreed to broker the meeting in part to explore whether Russia could be persuaded to curtail its relationship with Iran, including in Syria, a Trump administration objective that would be likely to require major concessions to Moscow on U.S. sanctions.” http://wapo.st/2oE1dhWHOT ON THE RIGHT -- WSJ EDITORIAL BOARD: “Susan Rice Unmasked: Obama’s security adviser sought the name of at least one Trump official in intelligence reports”: “Well, what do you know. On the matter of who ‘unmasked’ the names of Trump transition officials in U.S. intelligence reports, we now have one answer: Susan Rice, Barack Obama’s national security adviser.“A U.S. intelligence official confirms to us the bombshell news, first reported Monday by Bloomberg, that Ms. Rice requested the name of at least one Trump transition official listed in an intelligence report in the months between Election Day and Donald Trump’s inauguration. Ms. Rice received summaries of U.S. eavesdropping either when foreign officials were discussing the Trump team, or when foreign officials were conversing with a Trump transition member. The surveillance was legally authorized, but the identities of U.S. citizens are typically masked so they cannot be known outside intelligence circles. Ms. Rice asked for and learned the identity of the Trump official, whose name hasn’t been publicly disclosed and our source declined to share. ...“[T]he media have been running like wildebeest after that story while ignoring how the Obama Administration might have abused domestic surveillance for its political purposes. Americans deserve to know the truth about both.” http://on.wsj.com/2oUb42w KNOWING NUNES -- “Washington may be shaking its head, but Devin Nunes is still a hometown hero,” by L.A. Times’ Cathleen Decker in Tulare, California: “In an interview with The Times, he bridled at insinuations that, under pressure from the White House, he’d canceled a committee hearing that was to feature former Acting Atty. Gen. Sally Yates, who was fired by Trump early in his administration. ‘There’s a story ... that the Trump administration asked me not to invite Sally Yates and not have a hearing, which is 100% accurate, I mean inaccurate,’ he said. Later, describing the evidence that he said had ‘alarmed’ him enough to alert the president, he said that ‘it was involving Russia -- I mean it was not involving Russia.’” http://lat.ms/2o3TgVICOMING ATTRACTIONS -- “The return of Mitt Romney,” by McClatchy’s Katie Glueck: “Romney will make his first major foray into Donald Trump’s Washington next month, headlining a fundraiser to benefit the official foundation of Yellowstone National Park. The gathering will take place at Hawthorne, a bar and restaurant in D.C.’s hip U Street corridor, on May 4 at 7 p.m. ... The news comes as the White House announced Monday that Trump would donate his first quarter salary to the National Park Service. … Jackie Rooney, the founder and chair of Yellowstone Forever Young Patrons and an alum of Romney’s 2012 campaign, waved off the idea that he would make any political announcements at the May gathering. … [T]he host committee is stacked with former Romney staffers, including 2012 campaign manager Matt Rhoades, ex-campaign spokespeople Ryan Williams, Amanda Henneberg and Chris Maloney, and major pro-Romney fundraisers Charlie and Lisa Spies.” http://bit.ly/2oT1q01 … Tickets http://bit.ly/2oUmfbq HAPPENING TODAY -- TRUMP is meeting with CEOs at the White House before speaking at the North America’s Building Trades Unions National Legislative Conference at the Washington Hilton. He’s meeting separately with EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, HUD Secretary Ben Carson and Northern Mariana Islands Gov. Ralph Torres. WHAT CAUGHT OUR EYE: Trump is meeting with Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.). Rohrabacher has worked with disgraced former lobbyist Jack Abramoff to try to connect Denis Sassou Nguesso, the strongman leader of the Republic of Congo, to Trump. http://politi.co/2nSwXAd -- AT TRUMP’S CEO MEETING: Gary Cohn, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, White House director of strategic initiatives Christopher Liddell, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Ivanka Trump, Dina Powell. List of CEOs expected to attend http://politi.co/2owQVDy ... AP story http://apne.ws/2nxZWaB THE JUICE … -- SPOTTED AT THE NATS SEASON OPENER: Luke Russert and Michael Kornheiser, former Sen. Norm Coleman, Brian Zuzenak (celebrating his birthday), Missy Kurek, CR Wooters, Ian Mandel, Kevin McKeon, Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, Mayor Bowser, former D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty, Al Hunt, Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer, Alex and Caitlin Conant, Lindsay Czarniak, James JB Brown, Chris Gindlesperger, Matt Haller, Andrew Kovalcin, Judd Deere and Todd Sadowski.--KELLY AYOTTE, the former Republican senator from New Hampshire, is now on the board of News Corp. Members of the board get paid $100,000 in cash annually, and $145,000 in deferred stock and compensation based on their board committee assignments, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Elaine Chao, who left the board to serve as President Trump’s transportation secretary, made $295,250 from the News Corp board in the 2016 fiscal year. Ayotte has helped shepherd Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch through the Senate confirmation process.-- RNC NAMES FINANCE TEAM -- Elliott Broidy, national vice chairman of Trump’s campaign and vice chairman of the presidential inaugural committee; Michael Cohen, Trump’s lawyer; and Louis DeJoy, president of LDJ Global Strategies, have been named national deputy chairmen for the RNC. Brian Ballard, a long-time Florida fundraiser; Bob Grand, who is close to Vice President Mike Pence; Gordon Sondland, founder and chairman of Aspen Lodging Group; Geoff Verhoff, of Akin Gump; and Ron Weiser, chairman of the Michigan Republican Party, have been named regional vice-chairmen. http://bit.ly/2nEmZkPYOU’RE INVITED -- THE HOUSE FREEDOM CAUCUS privately met last night with VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE as Republicans try to pass a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare. We’ll be interviewing the group’s central figures: Chairman Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), founding chairman of the caucus, and Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) Thursday morning for a Playbook Interview. The Peter G. Peterson Foundation is sponsoring the event. Doors open at 8 a.m. and outside cameras are welcome. RSVP http://bit.ly/2oHFLIcSPORTS BLINK -- “North Carolina beats Gonzaga for sixth national championship,” by Sports Illustrated Wire: http://on.si.com/2oDZUzy-- THANK YOU to those who came out last night to our watch party at BlackFinn.DEEP DIVE -- JONATHAN MAHLER in Sunday’s upcoming NYT magazine, “CNN Had a Problem. Donald Trump Solved It: Inside the strange symbiosis between Jeff Zucker and the president he helped create”: Until Trump “an existential threat was looming. In a world where cable cutters were consuming their news in bite-size portions on their phones and streaming free video over the internet, how much longer would anyone be willing to pay for expensive cable packages? Real breaking-news events happened only every so often, and people lost interest in them quickly; more quickly than ever, in fact, now that there was so much else to distract them. But then along came a presidential candidate who was a human breaking-news event. Trump provided drama and conflict every time he opened his mouth. So too did his growing band of surrogates, who were paid by either the campaign or the network, and in one case both, to defend his statements. Indeed, it often seemed disconcertingly as though Trump had built his entire campaign around nothing so much as his singular ability to fill cable news’s endless demand for engaging content.“Had Trump lost the election, CNN would probably have returned to its previously scheduled struggle for survival. Instead, it has become more central to the national conversation than at any point in the network’s history since the first gulf war. And the man who is presiding over this historic moment at CNN happens to be the same one who was in some part responsible for Donald Trump’s political career. It was Zucker who, as president of NBC Entertainment, broadcast ‘The Apprentice’ at a time when Trump was little more than an overextended real estate promoter with a failing casino business. That show, more than anything, reversed Trump’s fortunes, recasting a local tabloid villain as the people’s prime-time billionaire. And it was Zucker who, as president of CNN, broadcast the procession of made-for-TV events — the always news-making interviews; the rallies; debates; the ‘major policy addresses’ that never really were — that helped turn Trump into the Republican front-runner at a time when few others took his candidacy seriously.” http://nyti.ms/2nRmPrgMICHAEL GRUNWALD in POLITICO Magazine, “For Trump, NAFTA Could Be the Next Obamacare”: “If Trump fails to bully the Mexicans into massive NAFTA concessions, or even a face-saving NAFTA update reinstating the TPP concessions, he will face a similar choice: Muddle through with the status quo, or else walk away and blame others for the chaos. Getting a divided Congress to approve a revised NAFTA would be a daunting legislative challenge, but abandoning NAFTA would be quite simple; Trump would just need to give six months’ notice. He would be risking the demolition of North American supply chains, fury from farmers and consumers, a potential trade war, and a potential recession.” http://politi.co/2oDOPyx BOSTON GLOBE -- “Cambridge council votes to urge US House to consider Trump impeachment,” by Felicia Glans: “In a vote Monday, seven city councilors voted in favor of a proposal that asks the House to authorize its Committee on the Judiciary to investigate possible violations Trump may have made in the foreign emoluments clause, domestic emoluments clause, or other constitutional clauses. … The template for the proposal was written by a national movement called Impeach Trump Now and has been used by such other communities as Berkeley, Calif., and Charlotte, Vt.” http://bit.ly/2ox9Z4b 2020 WATCH -- “Biden to headline New Hampshire party event,” by Gabriel Debenedetti: “Former Vice President Joe Biden is returning to New Hampshire for the first time since leaving the White House later this month for the state Democratic Party’s fundraising dinner. Headlining such events is often associated with presidential ambitions, and when Biden passed on the state committee’s big fundraising dinner in 2015, it was widely read as a sign that he wouldn’t pursue the presidency in 2016.” http://politi.co/2nWwmPsDRIP DRIP -- “Controversial Trump Aide Sebastian Gorka Backed Violent Anti-Semitic Militia,” by Lili Bayer in The Forward in Budapest: “As a Hungarian political leader in 2007, Sebastian Gorka, President Trump’s chief counter-terrorism adviser, publicly supported a violent racist and anti-Semitic paramilitary militia that was later banned as a threat to minorities by multiple court rulings. ... Asked directly on the TV interview program if he supports the move by Jobbik, a far-right anti-Semitic party, to establish the militia, Gorka, appearing as a leader of his own newly formed party, replies immediately, ‘That is so.’ The Guard, Gorka explains, is a response to ‘a big societal need.’” http://bit.ly/2nDwtNfFOGGY BOTTOM WATCH -- “Former Virginia governor Jim Gilmore on shortlist for ambassador to Germany,” by WaPo’s Anne Gearan and Abby Phillip: http://wapo.st/2nyiebASNEAK PEAK -- KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND PROFILE -- Rebecca Traister in NYMag: “There’s plenty of speculation that Gillibrand will take her own advice and run for president in 2020. ... Though she supported Clinton over Sanders in 2016, she has much in common with the populist senator from Vermont. Like Sanders, she has often stood apart from Democrats. She ‘got an earful’ for her vote against tarp, she says, and recalls her failed efforts to save $4 billion cut from snap benefits in the farm bill, which only 28 of her fellow Democrats supported, as ‘so heartbreaking.’ And like Sanders, she sees in left-wing populism—in affordable day care and paid leave and the expansion of Medicare as a means of addressing economic inequality—a path for red and blue America to come together. Sanders spoke alongside Gillibrand in March at a press conference in support of the Family Act, and Gillibrand is very enthusiastic about becoming a co-sponsor of Sanders’s forthcoming Medicare for All bill.” Link live at 7 a.m. http://nym.ag/2our139HOLLYWOODLAND -- “Mitch Glazier Tapped to Succeed Cary Sherman as CEO of RIAA,” by Variety’s Ted Johnson: “Glazier in the meantime has been promoted to president of the association, after managing the public policy and industry relations teams as senior executive vice president. Sherman plans to retire from the RIAA at the end of 2018, after serving as chairman and CEO for seven years.” http://bit.ly/2ovCWOqMEDIAWATCH -- “Media Consumption Of 2016 Political News: Strong Gains, Cable TV Soars,” by MediaPost’s Wayne Friedman: “There is more evidence that TV news consumption rose sharply in 2016, due to a surprising presidential election. Nielsen says there was an 18% gain in news media consumption in 2016 over the year before -- to 72.5 billion minutes. The bulk of this came from large turnout in watching TV cable news networks. Adults 18 + watched 44% more national cable TV networks, in term of gross minutes a week, versus 2015. For the individual viewer, this averaged six and half hours a week watching national cable news networks -- an hour and a half more than in 2015, and a hour and forty-five minutes from the last presidential election in 2012.” http://bit.ly/2oT4Gso-- “More Trouble at Fox News: Ailes Faces New Sexual Claims and O’Reilly Loses Two Advertisers,” by NYT’s Emily Steel and Michael S. Schmidt: “The sexual harassment scandal that engulfed Fox News last year and led to the ouster of its chairman, Roger Ailes, continued to batter the network on Monday, as a new lawsuit described unwanted sexual advances by Mr. Ailes and two major advertisers pulled their spots from the show of its top-rated host, Bill O’Reilly. Mercedes-Benz and Hyundai said they were withdrawing their ads from Mr. O’Reilly’s prime-time show, ‘The O’Reilly Factor,’ after The New York Times published an investigation this weekend that found five women who made allegations of sexual harassment or inappropriate behavior against him. Those five women received settlements totaling about $13 million, The Times reported.” http://nyti.ms/2oDXT6n ... NYT’s original Sunday blockbuster http://nyti.ms/2owRFZv -- STEVE THOMMA has been hired as the new director of the White House Correspondents Association – Jeff Mason emails members: “After conducting a nationwide search, fielding over 100 applications and conducting interviews with more than 10 candidates, we are happy to announce that Steve Thomma, former White House Correspondent and former Politics and Government Editor at McClatchy, will be taking over as executive director of the WHCA next month. ... He will start in the WHCA office this week, shadowing and assisting Julie as she helps to plan her final White House Correspondents’ Dinner as executive director.”SPOTTED in first class from Memphis to Atlanta: Andrew Young, the former congressman, UN Ambassador and mayor of Atlanta. ... Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) at DCA tuning into CNN’S “The Lead” on one of the airport’s TVs.-- SPOTTED in Palm Beach yesterday at the “Managing the Disruption” conference hosted by Jeff Greene and the Greene Institute, which focused on the impact of automation and artificial intelligence on jobs and the economy: Gov. Chris Christie, Arne Duncan, Kimberly Bryant, Eythor Bender, Larry Summers, Vivek Wadhwa, Larry Kudlow, Stefanie Symon, Tom Friedman, Kate Darling and Scott Santens.TRANSITIONS -- Robert Flock is joining the Credit Union National Association on April 10 as associate director of advocacy, where he’ll be responsible for outreach to members of the House Republican Conference. He was previously policy advisor at Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck … Samantha Medlock has started as North America lead for capital, science and policy with Willis Towers Watson, the global advisory, broking and risk management solutions company. She previously was previously senior advisor at the Obama White House’s OMB. … Daniel Huey is joining the firm Something Else as a partner. He comes onboard from the NRCC where he served as a senior advisor and managed the independent expenditure unit. ...… Riley Kilburg, who was deputy political director of Hillary for America in Iowa, recently joined the team at Center Forward, which brings together members of Congress, non profits, academic experts, trade associations, corporations and unions to find common ground and end gridlock in Washington. … Dina Ellis Rochkind, formerly Washington director for Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.), is joining the fintech and payments practice at Paul Hastings, helping to lead their government relations offering. http://politi.co/2owRInT … Digital strategist David Payne is leaving VOX Global after running the agency’s online advocacy practice for eight years. He is launching CODAVATE, a digital public affairs firm. http://bit.ly/2oTUhNc ENGAGED -- Kevin Daley, The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Supreme Court reporter, got engaged to Rachel Landsman, a paralegal in the appeals practice of Kirkland and Ellis, working for Paul Clement. He proposed at the Tidal Basin, before they got brunch in the Kennedy booth at Martin’s. Beforehand, he filed a story -- and his editors love that. “The wonderful pair are proof something beautiful can come of interns meeting at Union Pub,” Chris Bedford writes us. Pic http://bit.ly/2nVsyOkBIRTHWEEK (was yesterday): Ed Rowny, Reagan’s strategic nuclear arms negotiator, Ambassador and Army Lieutenant General, turned 100 years old -- he lives in DC and is still active in international matters (hat tip: Joe Duggan, who was his public affairs advisor at State from 1986 to 1990)BIRTHDAY OF THE DAY: Jo Becker, Pulitzer Prize-winning NYT investigative reporter and author of “Forcing the Spring: Inside the Fight for Marriage Equality” – she’s celebrating with her “best girlfriends for a night on the town, hopefully taking a horse jumping lesson on the sweetest thoroughbred named Chance ... [and] then later this month heading to Costa Rica for a birthday surfing roadtrip with my brother and some friends from there” – read her Playbook Plus Q&A: http://politi.co/2nz6DcA BIRTHDAYS: Rob Stutzman ... author Kitty Kelley is 75 ... former Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) is 85 ... Molly Edwards, deputy press secretary in the Office of the Speaker (hat tip: Speaker Ryan press shop) ... Senegal turns 57 on its Independence Day ... Bruce Wolpe, a Henry Waxman alum and chief of staff to former Prime Minister Julia Gillard of Australia, is 66 ... KJ Heal ... cybersecurity reporter and Politico alum Joe Marks ... Warren Ryan, policy advisor at Treasury ... Kristin Bannerman ... Hillary (Maxwell) Beightel, a Bush 43 Ed. dept alum now in public affairs and corporate comms. at Dell ... Judith Czelusniak, a Bloomberg alum now doing marketing/PR in Florida (h/t David Bass) … Dena Levitz, a 1776 alum now at Web Summit ... Michael Halle, alum of Hillary for America, Gov. McAuliffe and Obama 2012 ... Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, former NSA Director and LBJ School prof, is 86 … Ryan Davis, managing director of digital at Families For Excellent Schools (and former social media director at Blue State Digital) is 35 (h/t Lee Morrow) ... Caroline Campbell ... Charles Halloran, celebrating with Chris (h/ts Jon Haber) ... longtime Senate Republican floor aide Robert Duncan is 4-0 (h/t Stew) ... Rep. Norma Torres (D-Calif.) is 52 ...... Meghan Thurlow, senior manager for global public affairs at GE and a DOT and Burson-Marsteller alum … former Sen. Mo Cowan (D-Mass.) is 48 ... National Media’s Melissa Sharp, an NRSC and Carly for Senate alum ... Politico’s Alexandra Farrand ... Lindsay Gruskay of Broadway Video, Lorne Michaels’ entertainment and media company ... Teddy Himler, principal at Comcast Ventures ... Bridget Spurlock, director of scheduling for Sen. Rubio (h/t Megan McKinley) ... Daisy Melamed Sanders, senior editor for Hearst Digital Media’s content studio ... Neil Giacobbi, associate VP of public affairs at AT&T ... Joy Wang, editor at NBC News and a WNYC alum ... Darienne Page, gov’t relations at Lyft and Obama alum and formerly ROTUS, the White House Receptionist ... Dan Hauser ... Tyler Beckley of Knoxville ... Ryan Davis, co-founder and strategy director of Bushwick Digital … Alex Paulitz … Jerry Irvine ... David Fawcett … Francis Kidd ... Joe Riccca ... Alfred Stanley ... Katreice Banks ... Laura Dresser ... Nile Ritchie (h/ts Teresa Vilmain) ... Robert Downey Jr. is 52 ... magician David Blaine is 44 (h/ts AP)

03 апреля, 16:14

Острова смерти. ( 15 фото )

Оригинал взят у oper_1974 в Острова смерти. ( 15 фото )       "18 августа на острове высадился японский пехотный полк под командованием полковника Итики Киуоно, того самого, который в 1937 году руководил войсками во время так называемого инцидента на мосту Марко Поло. Теперь, через шесть лет, Итики должен был возглавить высадку двух тысяч японских солдат на атолл Мидуэй. Полковник считался видным тактиком, сторонником эффективных массированных ночных атак.       На этот раз его подвела самоуверенность. Итики считал, что американская морская пехота плохо подготовлена и не способна выдержать вражеское наступление на узком участке фронта.       Через три дня после высадки он повел своих солдат в ночную атаку. Морская пехота оказалась застигнутой врасплох. Японцы сумели бесшумно приблизиться к американским позициям, однако встретили неожиданное препятствие - колючую проволоку.       Это и помогло американцам в критический момент боя. Пока морские пехотинцы дрались врукопашную с отдельными японскими солдатами, сумевшими преодолеть проволочное заграждение, их артиллерия открыла убийственный огонь по основной массе войск противника.       К рассвету японцы были разгромлены. По одним данным, Итики сжег знамя и совершил сеппуку. По другим, он погиб еще в начале боя. Какой бы ни была его судьба, эта одна из первых "банзай-атак" закончилась сокрушительным провалом: в течение нескольких часов погибло восемь сотен японских солдат.        Под утро американцы могли наблюдать во всей своей трагичности картину массового самоубийства солдат противника. Многие раненые японцы шли к американским позициям, держа на голове гранаты. Взять их в плен не было никакой возможности: они взрывали себя при любой попытке пленения.        11 мая 1943 года американские амфибийные силы высадились в заливе Чичагова маленького скалистого островка Атту (Алеутские острова). В течение двух недель И тысяч морских пехотинцев США пытались выбить японцев с их позиций.       Но они держались, несмотря ни на что. 28 мая полковник, командующий гарнизоном, пришел к выводу, что поражение неизбежно. Продовольствие уже давно закончилось, боеприпасы были на исходе. Первоначальные силы в количестве 2600 человек сократились до 1000.      Поздно вечером он собрал подчиненных, описал тяжелую ситуацию, в которую они попали, и предложил предпринять самоубийственную атаку с тем, чтобы убить как можно больше вражеских солдат. Полковник напомнил о рукопашном сражении, которое пользовалось особым почетом у "древних самураев", и приказал "погибнуть славной смертью".       Солдаты все, как один, ответили, что готовы умереть за вечную Японию. После совещания больных и раненых, не способных принять участие в последней атаке, убили. Некоторым ввели смертельную инъекцию, других застрелили в затылок.        Ночью японцы тихо спустились вниз. Оружия не хватало. Многие были вооружены лишь ножами и штыками. Они смогли бесшумно снять посты охранения, а затем сгруппировались и перед рассветом с громким криком напали на спящих американцев. Многие морские пехотинцы были застигнуты врасплох и убиты в спальных мешках.       Началось страшное побоище. Японцы наносили удары сразу по нескольким направлениям, оставляя после себя красные от крови, смятые и порезанные палатки. Выскакивающие в панике американские солдаты тут же падали под ударами японских штыков и мечей. Ворвавшись в находившийся неподалеку полевой госпиталь, японцы прикончили всех, кто в нем находился, - врачей, санитаров, раненых.       С восходом солнца американские солдаты сумели прийти в себя и организовали успешную контратаку. Уцелевшие от огня японцы, оказавшись в кольце американских войск, стали совершать самоубийства. Кто-то вскрыл себе вены, кто-то взорвал себя гранатой. В плен попала лишь горстка раненых. Японский гарнизон перестал существовать. Внезапная атака стоила американцам около 600 убитых и 1200 раненых.        Три дня продолжались напряженные бои на Бетио. В плен было взято 17 японцев. На острове Макин 6500 морских пехотинцев двое суток сражались с японским гарнизоном, стоявшим насмерть. Три дня не стихало сражение на острове Тарава. 5 тысяч морских пехотинцев США встретили здесь особенно яростный отпор японских войск во главе с Сибасаки Кейдзи.      Десантные суда застревали на коралловых рифах и становились удобными неподвижными целями для японской артиллерии. По крайней мере двадцать кораблей оказались в западне, безжалостно расстреливаемые артиллерийским огнем. Особенно ужасными были выстрелы одного тяжелого орудия. Несколько раз его снаряды точно ложились в десантные суда, которые тут же уходили на дно, оставляя на поверхности моря огромные кровавые пятна.       Из первой волны десантных кораблей лишь 30 процентов достигли берега, из второй - еще меньше, из третьей - практически ни одного. Американцы получили хороший урок и задали себе простой вопрос: следовало ли сражаться за Тараву? Не лучше ли было обойти его?          Если на Тараву было выпущено 3 тысячи тонн снарядов, то на Кваджелейн - в четыре раза больше. По словам одного очевидца, после артобстрела острова впечатление было такое, словно его подняли на шесть километров вверх и сбросили вниз.        1 февраля 1944 года армейские части США приступили к высадке десанта. Более половины японского гарнизона погибло уже при артобстреле. Однако уцелевшие японские солдаты, дрались со свойственной им яростью и упорством. Они поднимались из снарядных воронок и бросались в атаки, в которых почти все погибали. В плен попало 437 оглушенных и тяжелораненых солдат. Американские потери составили 368 человек убитыми и 1148 ранеными.        Расположенный рядом атолл Эниветок подвергся атаке морской пехоты 19 февраля 1944 года Он оказался плохо укреплен и был захвачен за два с половиной дня. Японцы потеряли 2700, американцы - 339 человек.         В руках Императорских войск оставалось еще более пятидесяти островов этого архипелага, не представлявших для США никакого интереса. Их не тронули, и японские силы оставались там до конца войны. Американскому флоту лишь зачем-то понадобился атолл Бикини, и взвод морской пехоты занял его. Пять японцев сопротивления не оказали и покончили с собой.          Первоочередным объектом для штурма адмирал Ч. Нимиц наметил самый крупный остров Сайпан - главную морскую базу Марианских островов. Утром 15 июня 1944 года после трехдневного обстрела на остров стала высаживаться морская пехота США.         На рассвете следующего дня на окопавшихся американцев двинулись японские танки. Сопровождавшую их пехоту удалось сразу же отсечь плотным пулеметным огнем. Время от времени танки останавливались, выскочившие экипажи горланили песни и размахивали мечами.         По сигналу горна танкисты снова занимали места в машинах и возобновляли движение. Подобные атаки, безрассудные и плохо организованные, вели к бессмысленным потерям техники, в которой так нуждались защитники острова.        В ночь на 26 июня крупная группа японских солдат прорвалась к аэродрому, захваченному американцами. Японский отряд тщательно подготовился к этой операции. Был даже выдвинут лозунг "Семь жизней, чтобы отомстить за родину", по-видимому, означавший, что каждый японец должен уничтожить семь вражеских солдат до того, как погибнет сам.        Не известно, сколько человек участвовало в атаке. Японцы не смогли достичь заветной цели - убить семь за одного. Они едва ли убили более семи американцев, уничтожили один и повредили два самолета. Сами же потеряли почти 500 солдат и офицеров.        Поскольку противотанкового оружия на южных островах не хватало и доставить его туда не представлялось возможным, то Усироку решил проблему просто, в чисто самурайском духе - приказал снабдить солдат ранцами с подрывными зарядами.       Обычный солдатский ранец из прорезиненной ткани одевался на спину с помощью матерчатых лямок. Легкий и практичный, он имел размеры 20x20x7 сантиметров и вмещал 10 килограмм взрывчатки. Солдаты должны были уничтожать вражеские танки, бросаясь под них и подрывая себя.       Императорский генеральный штаб издал приказ о формировании самоубийственных подразделений по борьбе с танками и о широком применении тактики самоубийственных "человеческих зарядов" (другое ее название - "никудан" - "человеческие пули"). Солдат, добровольно жертвовавших своими жизнями, так и называли - "никудан", то есть "телесные пули".            На Сайпане генералы Игета, Сайто и адмирал Нагумо приняли решение собрать все оставшиеся силы для последней атаки. Однако вместе с солдатами в пещерах укрывались тысячи японских поселенцев. Что с ними делать? "Нет больше каких-либо различий между гражданскими лицами и войсками, - заявил Сайто. - Для них будет лучше присоединиться к атаке, вооружившись бамбуковыми пиками, чем быть плененными".         По мысли Сайто, неслыханная психическая атака должна была продемонстрировать врагу несокрушимый дух японских солдат, их полное пренебрежение к смерти. Он приказал разослать триста копий приказа о последней атаке, но до того, как это было сделано, поступил приказ из Токио продолжать сражение, чтобы "выиграть время".         Однако Сайто уже не имел сил выполнить этот приказ. Он послал в Императорский генеральный штаб последнее радиосообщение, в котором извинился перед императором за то, что не сумел удержать Сайпан, и сообщил, что на следующее утро собирается организовать последнюю банзай-атаку жалкими остатками своих сил. Затем, посоветовавшись с Нагумо и Игета, он объявил о том, что они умрут в 10 часов, и зачитал вслух последнее обращение к защитникам острова.        Закончив чтение, Сайто объяснил присутствующим в пещере, что совершить сеппуку займет слишком много времени, и попросил офицеров встать у генералов за спиной и выстрелить в затылок. Нагумо, Сайто и Игета перешли в небольшую пещеру неподалеку. Они уселись, скрестив ноги, у ее входа. Двое молодых офицеров с пистолетами стали у них за спинами. Три выстрела - и тела распростерлись на земле.        Ночью, перед атакой, тела командующих сожгли на костре вместе со знаменами частей. Ровно в полночь разбитые на группы японские солдаты начали выдвигаться к американским позициям.         Сайто разработал план атаки заблаговременно, но американцы получили информацию о готовящемся наступлении, хотя и не знали, когда и на каком участке оно произойдет. Наступление возглавил командир 135-го пехотного полка полковник Судзуки. Неясно, сколько точно японцев участвовало в самой массовой атаке самоубийц на Тихом океане. По количеству трупов предполагают, что их было свыше трех тысяч.        Готовясь к последнему бою, японские солдаты опустошили все запасы саке и пива, усеяв склон, ведущий к американским позициям, тысячами пустых бутылочек. В 4 часа 7 июля сначала с пением военного гимна "Уми юкаба", а затем с боевыми криками "Вах!" толпы японцев бросились на позиции двух батальонов 105-го полка.       Удержать огромное количество людей, единственная цель которых состояла в том, чтобы умереть, было невозможно. Американские силы оказались разбиты. Японцы хлынули дальше, к артиллерийским позициям.       За их боевыми порядками двигалась жуткая процессия: хромые, слепые, калеки, больные и раненые - все встали с коек с единственной целью умереть в бою. Безногие с трудом передвигались на костылях. Легкораненые помогали ослабевшим и беспомощным.        Кое у кого были гранаты или штыки, прикрепленные к длинным бамбуковым шестам. Некоторые шли с дубинками, другие вообще безоружные. Для них важно было одно - погибнуть в бою. Тех, кто был настолько слаб, что не смог встать с койки, японцы прикончили еще в госпитале. Таких оказалось около трех сотен.         Две американские батареи 105-мм орудий вели ураганный огонь прямо по толпе атакующих. Японцы гибли массово, но оставшиеся в живых продолжали идти вперед и смяли артиллеристов. Затем они волнами атаковали наспех оборудованные позиции морской пехоты, продолжая нести огромные потери.        В некоторых местах тела убитых лежали друг на друге так высоко, что американским пулеметчикам приходилось менять позицию для того, чтобы иметь открытую зону обстрела.        Подоспевшие американские части пленных не брали, да и сами японцы предпочитали умереть с оружием в руках. Многие из них (по оценкам, четвертая часть) покончили с собой. Так закончилась эта массовая психическая атака. К ночи остались лишь две группы японских солдат. Прижатые к морю, они упорно сопротивлялись.        Леденящие кровь события развернулись у высокого мыса Марпи, крайней северной точки острова. Здесь собралось около тысячи мирных жителей. Внизу, у воды, выстроилась сотня японских солдат.       Раскланявшись перед появившимися американскими морскими пехотинцами, они разделись, окунулись в море, переоделись в чистую одежду и снова выстроились в шеренгу под огромным флагом. У каждого в руке - граната.     Раздалась команда, и каждый японец, строго соблюдая порядок, выдергивал кольцо и взрывал себя.        Несколько десятков женщин с детьми замешкались... Шестеро солдат подбежали к ним и продемонстрировали, как надо взрывать себя. Мирные жители последовали их примеру.            В других местах японцы не церемонились: они штыками подталкивали толпы мирного населения к обрыву, заставляя стариков, женщин и детей бросаться в море. Тех, кто отказывался покончить жизнь самоубийством, пристреливали. После чего с громкими криками "банзай" японские солдаты бросались в смертельную атаку под град американских пуль, взрывали себя гранатами, рубили друг другу головы самурайскими мечами.         Переводчики и пленные японцы через громкоговорители обращались к японским солдатам и к гражданскому населению с призывами сдаваться. Лишь немногие последовали этим призывам. В то же время почти две трети из 12 тысяч лиц гражданского населения выбрали самоубийство. Капитан патрульного катера жаловался, что "продвижение его судна было медленным и сильно затруднено из-за сотен трупов, плавающих в воде".         Японский снайпер увидел на скале супружескую пару с четырьмя детьми, которая никак не могла решиться совершить самоубийство. Первым выстрелом он убил мужчину, который свалился в море. Вторая пуля поразила женщину. Она упала в воду, но, вся в крови, попыталась спасти детей. Снайпер высунулся из пещеры, чтобы лучше прицелиться и сразить и женщину, и детей, но попал под сосредоточенный огонь сотен американских стволов...         9 июля, на 25-й день операции, было объявлено о занятии Сайпана. При этом было убито почти 24 тысячи японских солдат, 1800 взято в плен. Точное число жертв среди гражданского населения так и не было установлено. Однако совершенно ясно, что находившиеся на Сайпане 50 тысяч японцев, гражданских и военных, погибли почти все.        Американцы потеряли 3143 человека убитыми, 13208 ранеными и 335 числились пропавшими без вести. Взамен они получили базу для В-29, и теперь Япония стала досягаемой для воздушных ударов.        Скрыть правду или умолчать о поражении на Сайпане не представлялось возможным: за сражением, затаив дыхание, следила вся Япония. Впервые Императорскому генеральному штабу пришлось сказать правду. Страна была шокирована. Подобного удара нация еще не получала. Миллионы жителей стали понимать, что Япония начинает проигрывать войну. Впервые японцы услышали о "человеческих зарядах".        Ирония судьбы заключалась в том, что как раз 15 июня, в день высадки десанта на Сайпане, Тодзио хвастливо заявил: "Время созрело для общего наступления вооруженных сил держав оси против их врагов".       18 июля последовала отставка его кабинета. Усироку за внедрение пехотной самоубийственной тактики наказали и с позором перевели командовать 3-й армией в Маньчжурии. Через год его войска разбила Советская армия, а сам он сдался (!) в плен.         Однако концепция пехотных самоубийственных атак, которую развивал Усироку, осталась жить. Несмотря на то, что высшее военное руководство Японии во всеуслышание заявило после падения Сайпана: "Никогда больше "человеческие заряды" использоваться не будут", - уже через несколько месяцев защитники острова Лейте применяли ее как лучшее средство борьбы с танками.          С падением Сайпана участь последнего острова Марианского архипелага Тиниан была решена. К 1 июля на Тиниане остались лишь мелкие группы японских солдат, скрывавшихся в пещерах, среди камней, в лесах обрывистого хребта на юго-восточном побережье острова.        Сюда же отступило вместе с солдатами много японского гражданского населения. И здесь повторилась такая же картина, как в северной части Сайпана: солдаты использовали своих соотечественников в качестве живого щита, продолжая вести огонь по морской пехоте.        Гражданскому населению не разрешали сдаваться. Матери бросали со скал своих детей и прыгали вслед. Группу беженцев всех возрастов человек в пятьдесят японские солдаты погнали на минное поле, заставив всех умереть ужасной смертью. Затем солдаты подорвали себя гранатами. Обычно в таких случаях они клали гранату себе на голову и выдергивали предохранительную чеку.        На рассвете 15 сентября американская морская пехота сумела высадиться на острова Палау и закрепиться на берегу. Во второй половине дня японцы провели контратаку. За огневым валом в наступление устремились японские танки, сопровождаемые пехотой. Американцы к этому времени сумели доставить на остров 30 своих танков "Шерман".        Японские танкисты, вместо того, чтобы сосредоточить внимание на уничтожении пехоты противника, ударить по артиллерийским позициям и, таким образом, нанести американским войскам существенный урон, предпочли пойти на таран "Шерманов".         В этой атаке сказалась приверженность танкистов духу самурайства. Они потеряли свои 17 танков, которые так и не успели осуществить задуманное и причинить хотя бы какой-то вред противнику. Однако одну свою задачу - умереть на поле боя - их экипажи выполнили.          Тем временем сражение за Манилу продолжалось. Оно было жестоким и осложнялось присутствием 700 тысяч человек гражданского населения. В этих условиях американцы не могли достаточно эффективно использовать авиацию и артиллерию.         Упорные бои развернулись за здания почты, Филиппинского университета, отеля "Манила" и других объектов. Отступая, японцы проявляли звериную жесткость, убивая толпы филиппинцев. Их кололи штыками, обливали бензином и сжигали заживо.         Отправляясь на тот свет, японцы устроили террор. Резня в Маниле стала одной из самых кровавых драм войны на Тихом океане. Она обошлась филиппинскому народу в 100 тысяч человек. Количество погибших в столице мирных жителей в шесть раз превысило общие потери воюющих сторон.          Лишь к концу войны американцы сумели понять, что психические банзай-атаки - это проявление шока у японских солдат, чьи нервы не выдерживали напряжения боев, чьи физические и моральные силы полностью истощились. Это не были на самом деле свидетельства героизма. Скорее всего это были своеобразные примеры упадка духа и воли, решимости свести счеты с жизнью по-самурайски.         Японцы смотрели на смерть в бою совсем не так, как противник. Если для американцев смерть представлялась ужасным уходом в небытие, то для японцев главным была не сама смерть, а Обстоятельства, при которых она произошла.        Не случайно они использовали для обозначения вида смерти несколько слов. Помимо слова "сенботсу", обозначавшего смерть в бою, в японском языке имелись и другие (в зависимости от степени проявления героизма).        Под понятием "гиокусай" подразумевался "поиск смерти вместо бесчестья". Для японцев это означало, что солдату лучше погибнуть в безвыходной ситуации, чем сдаться врагу.        Но поскольку было нежелательно, чтобы солдат отдавал свою жизнь без пользы, то существовало понятие "тай-атари". Оно означало смерть посредством взрыва или тарана. При этом тело самоубийцы уничтожалось взрывом и разрывалось на части.        Если раненый солдат подрывал себя и подошедших к нему близко врагов гранатой, то такая смерть называлась "джибаку". Если же не было никаких надежд на спасение и не было рядом врагов, то такое самоубийство обозначалось "джикетсу".http://wunderwaffe.narod.ru/HistoryBook/Kamikaze/05.htm

16 марта, 22:45

This Map Shows the Most Extreme Comparison of Population Density We’ve Seen

More people live in the tiny red region than all of the blue areas combined. This map really shows the disparity in population density throughout the globe. The post This Map Shows the Most Extreme Comparison of Population Density We’ve Seen appeared first on Visual Capitalist.

14 марта, 13:36

У берегов Северных Марианских островов произошло землетрясение магнитудой 5,5

Землетрясение магнитудой 5,5 произошло в понедельник, 13 марта, у берегов Северных Марианских островов, сообщает Геологическая служба США

13 марта, 12:52

В Тихом океане произошло сильное землетрясение

Землетрясение магнитудой 5,5 произошло в акватории Тихого океана в районе Марианских островов, сообщает Алтае-Саянский филиал Единой Геофизической службы РАН.

12 марта, 12:46

Вашингтон и Оттава стали на час ближе к Москве

Соединенные Штаты перешли на летнее время для того, чтобы сэкономить потребление электроэнергии на освещение.

09 марта, 19:03

FUSAG - резиновая армия. ( 50 фото )

Оригинал взят у oper_1974 в FUSAG - резиновая армия. ( 50 фото )         Во время 2-й Мировой войны военная разведка Соединенных Штатов провела ряд операций по передаче дезинформации командованию противника, для этого были созданы фиктивные соединения войск.          Командирами таких соединений назначали порой известных военачальников (например, генерал Паттон), данным подразделениям были приданы штабы управления и части обеспечения.          В начале осени 1942 года на Ближний Восток "отправилась" группировка американских войск. В 1943 г. проводилась крупная операция с целью создания у немецкого командования ощущения, что на территории Британии войск больше, чем это было фактически.         Большую известность получили операции "Fortitude South" и "Fortitude South II ". Основной целью данных операций было создание впечатления об угрозе высадки десанта США и их союзников в районе пролива Па-де-Кале, тогда как направление главного удара было направлено на Нормандию. Для дезинформации противника была сформирована 1-я американская группа армий (FUSAG - First US Army Group).          В фиктивной высадке десанта должны были принять участие 55-я британская, 17-я и 59-я американские пехотные дивизии, 2-я британская, 9-я и 21-я американские воздушно-десантные дивизии. Причем реально существовала только 55-я пехотная дивизия.         После успешного окончания этой операции 21-я вдд еще участвовала в "десантировании" в районе Киля-Бремена в сентябре 1944 г. Для задержки немецких частей на юго-западе Франции весной 1944-го была предпринята операция "Vendetta".         В "высадке" принимала участие 7-я армия в составе шести французских, трех британских и двух американских (91-я пд и 6-я вдд) дивизий. Только 91-я пд и три французских дивизии были настоящими.         Американцы проводили такие ложные демонстрации и на тихоокеанском ТВД. Летом 1944 г. с целью отвлечь внимание японцев от десанта на Марианские острова готовилась операция по "высадке" на Курилы, для чего была сформирована 9-я амфибийная группа в составе 5 дивизий, из которых все существовали только на бумаге. В 1945 годубыли проведены еще две подобные "высадки" на остров Окинава и на восточное побережье Китая.14-я армия. Составляла часть FUSAG в операции "Fortitude South II".6-я вдд. "Высаживалась" на юге Франции в 1944 г Операции "Vendetta".18-я вдд. Предназначалась для операций в Европе, отправлена на тихоокеанский ТВД21-я вдд. "Высаживалась" в Па-де-Кале, затем в районе Киля-Бремена в 1944 г135-я вдд. Создана на Средиземном море. В операциях участия не принимала.22-я пд. "Отправлена" на Ближний Восток в 1942 г46-я пд. "Прибыла" в Британию в 1943 г59-я пд. "Высаживалась" в Па-де-Кале в 1944 г.108-я пд. "Высаживалась" на Курильских островах в 1944 г.119-я пд. "Высаживалась" на Курильских островах в 1944 г, затем в Китае в 1945 г. Принимала участие в "десанте" на Окинаве в 1945 г.130-я пд. "Высаживалась" на Курильских островах в 1944 г.141-я пд. "Высаживалась" на Курильских островах в 1944 г., затем в Китае в 1945 г.

27 февраля, 13:40

A New Tool in a Century-Old Fight for Voting Rights

Residents of the U.S. territories can’t vote in federal elections, so they’re tapping into crowdfunding to try to change that.

19 февраля, 08:05

В Чили и в районе Северных Марианских островов произошли землетрясения

По данным Геологической службы США (USGS), в районе Северных Марианских островов произошло землетрясение магнитудой 5,1. Его эпицентр находился примерно в 111 км к юго-востоку от острова Рота. Очаг землетрясения залегал на глубине 14,5 км. Сведений о жертвах и разрушениях не поступало.Вчера произошло более сильное землетрясение — магнитудой 6,4 — на севере Чили. Его очаг находился на глубине почти 266 км, а эпицентр — в 74 км от города Сокайре. Данных о последствиях разгула стихии также нет.

19 февраля, 02:36

Землетрясение магнитудой 5,1 произошло в районе Марианских островов

В районе Марианских островов в Тихом океане произошло землетрясение магнитудой 5,1. Читать далее