The “seeds” of Alzheimer’s disease may be transmitted from one person to another during certain medical procedures, scientists have found.
A study into people who died of a separate kind of brain disease after receiving injections of human growth hormone suggests that Alzheimer’s may also be a transmissible disease.
The findings have raised questions about the safety of some medical procedures, possibly including blood transfusions and invasive dental treatment, which may involve the transfer of contaminated tissues or surgical equipment.
The investigation has shown for the first time in humans that Alzheimer’s disease may be a transmissible infection which could be inadvertently passed between people.
Scientists emphasised that the new evidence is still preliminary and should not stop anyone from having surgery. They have also stressed that it is not possible to “catch” Alzheimer’s by living with someone with the disease. (Read more from “Alzheimer’s Disease May Be Infectious, Study Suggests” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-09-09 22:09:372015-09-09 22:09:37Alzheimer’s Disease May Be Infectious, Study Suggests
This week, the House will hold votes related to the nuclear agreement with Iran. I have read the publicly available portions of the agreement in full. Consistent with my oath to support and defend the Constitution, I must oppose this nuclear deal.
There are at least two major constitutional defects with the nuclear deal.
First, President Barack Obama refuses to recognize the agreement as a treaty, subject to approval under the Constitution’s Treaty Clause (Art. II, Sec. 2, Cl. 2). Under the Treaty Clause, the president “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.” To avoid this higher threshold for approval, the Obama administration asserts that the nuclear deal is merely an “executive agreement” that binds only this president.
Even if we accept this dubious claim, there is a second constitutional defect that compels me to reject the nuclear deal. Under the Take Care Clause (Art. II, Sec. 3, Cl. 5), the president must “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” As I discuss below, the president clearly fails to fulfill this obligation.
In May, both houses of Congress passed, and the president signed into law, H.R. 1191, the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015 (Review Act). The Review Act provides a process for congressional oversight of any nuclear deal, so that Congress can determine whether the nuclear-related sanctions Congress has imposed on Iran should be lifted. I have supported sanctions on Iran directed at preventing the country from obtaining or using a nuclear weapon (in contrast to sanctions targeting non-nuclear-related civilian activities), and it’s likely that negotiations would not have taken place had those sanctions not been enacted.
The Review Act requires the president to submit to Congress the text of any nuclear deal reached with Iran. Submission of the nuclear deal triggers a period of review for Congress to analyze the agreement—a period during which the president is prohibited from taking any actions to lift statutory sanctions.
The precise language of the Review Act recognizes that a comprehensive nuclear deal includes many separate components, and that for members of Congress to accurately assess the merits of the agreement, Congress must have access to all portions of the agreement. Thus, the Review Act carefully defines “agreement” to include “annexes, appendices, codicils, side agreements, implementing materials, documents, and guidance, technical or other understandings, and any related agreements.”
We now know that there are at least two side agreements between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that are integral to the nuclear deal but nevertheless will not be shared with Congress. These side agreements cover how a primary Iranian military site will be inspected for nuclear activity and how Iran will resolve outstanding issues on possible military dimensions of its nuclear program. Remarkably, it was only through a chance meeting between two members of Congress and the IAEA that the existence of these secret agreements came to light. The Obama administration apparently preferred to keep Congress in the dark, and even now the administration refuses to provide the side agreements to Congress. Indeed, Secretary of State John Kerry claims that even the president’s negotiating team doesn’t have access to these side agreements.
The Obama administration’s secrecy surrounding these side agreements casts serious doubts on its other claims about the nuclear deal, and it makes clear that the president has not been working with Congress in good faith. The president signed the Review Act into law knowing full well that it requires him to provide all side agreements to Congress. The administration should not have negotiated a final nuclear deal that allows portions of the agreement to be withheld from Congress, because the president knows that his agreeing to such a nuclear deal violates U.S. law and his duty under the Constitution’s Take Care Clause.
This violation of law with respect to the submission of the agreement has further implications under the Review Act. The 30- to 60-day congressional review period for the nuclear deal isn’t triggered until the president submits the *entire* agreement to Congress. If the nuclear deal hasn’t been submitted in full—because side agreements remain hidden—then the review period hasn’t even begun.
But the existence of secret agreements with the IAEA has deeper implications still. The available text of the nuclear deal states that nuclear, missile, and arms restrictions on Iran are to be lifted after certain periods of time (between five and ten years depending on the source and type) “or when the IAEA has reached the Broader Conclusion that all nuclear material in Iran remains in peaceful activities, whichever is earlier.” In other words, at the discretion of the IAEA, these restrictions may be lifted significantly earlier than the milestone dates specified in the agreement, and the exact method by which the IAEA will reach this conclusion can’t be known to Congress or even the Obama administration, because the side agreements remain secret.
Finally, even if we set aside the constitutional defects and related consequences discussed above, it is unconscionable that the Obama administration would negotiate a final agreement that does not secure the release of the three American hostages held in Iran—Saeed Abedini, Amir Hekmati, and Jason Rezaian—or information on the whereabouts of a former FBI agent abducted in Iran, Robert Levinson. The nuclear deal provides Iran access to billions of dollars in unfrozen assets and the almost immediate removal of major U.S. and international economic sanctions on Iran’s financial and energy sectors, followed by the termination of most nuclear-related sanctions on Iran in just a few years. If Iran is unwilling to return American hostages to their families as part of this agreement, then we cannot trust that Iran will act in good faith as sanctions are lifted.
I support peaceful negotiations to prevent Iran from obtaining or using a nuclear weapon, and I kept an open mind about this agreement as it was being negotiated. It’s regrettable that the president has acted disingenuously in his interactions with Congress and continues to treat the Constitution with contempt. Despite the Obama administration’s false rhetoric, the choice here is not between this nuclear deal and war. A better agreement that complies with the Constitution and secures long-lasting peace is possible. (See “Constitutional Defects With the Iran Nuclear Deal” originally posted HERE)
Bringing a 30,000-year-old virus back to life sounds like the plot of a real-life horror movie. So if you were scared by the incurable virus in the movie “28 Days Later,” you might want to stop reading right now.
Scientists who discovered a prehistoric virus called Mollivirus sibericum in the Siberian permafrost plan to give the virus its first wakeup call since the last Ice Age (after first verifying that it can’t harm humans and animals, thankfully). It’s hoped the study could shed insight into ancient dormant viruses that could, it’s feared, get another chance at spreading as permafrost retreats due to ‘climate change’.
The team, from the French National Centre for Scientific Research, announced its plans in a study published Tuesday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) journal.
The virus is classified as a “giant” virus because it’s visible by light microscopy. Mollivirus sibericum carries a complex genetic structure that houses more than 500 genes, according to the study’s abstract. The influenza virus, in comparison, has only 8 genes.
The same team that discovered Mollivirus sibericum found another 30,000-year-old virus, Pithovirus sibericum, in the same Russian permafrost. As described in PNAS last year, those scientists revived a sample of Pithovirus sibericum in safe lab conditions and determined it was still infectious, though it only affects amoebas. (Read more from “Scientists Are Waking up 30,000-Year-Old Giant Virus” HERE)
Dennis Rodeman survived a tour of duty in Iraq with the U.S. Marines.
He was killed on Wednesday while collecting donations for a charity in Lansing, the victim of what police are calling a deliberate hit-and-run crash on the city’s south side.
Rodeman, 35, was a seven-year veteran of the Lansing Fire Department. He was married two months ago and expecting his first child. When the incident happened at about 3:40 p.m ET, he was collecting money for muscular dystrophy research near the intersection of Cedar Street and Jolly Road, police and city officials said.
The suspect — a 22-year-old Lansing man — drove away from the scene and was caught near the intersection of Holmes and Waverly roads after a car and foot chase, police said. Lansing police originally said the man was 32 . . .
“The suspect came by, was upset for whatever reason (and) circled back around” before running into the firefighter, Kraus said. “The preliminary investigation is that he deliberately hit the firefighter who was standing in the road, collecting for the charity.” (Read more from “Firefighter Killed in Hit and Run While Collecting for Charity” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00kathleenhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngkathleen2015-09-09 21:10:172015-09-09 21:10:17Firefighter Killed in Hit and Run While Collecting for Charity
By Randy DeSoto. Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who has been accused by fellow soldiers of abandoning his post in Afghanistan, has been charged with desertion and “misbehavior before the enemy,” which carries a potential life sentence.
The Obama Administration traded the so-called “Taliban-Five” Guantanamo detainees for Bergdahl, age 29, securing his release in May 2014. The soldier left his post in Afghanistan in June 2009, having written to his parents beforehand saying he no longer supported the war effort and that he was “ashamed to be an American.” He was reportedly held captive by the Taliban for five years.
According to CNN by accounts of those engaged in the searches, at least six soldiers died in operations seeking to find Bergdahl after he went missing.
The president lauded Bergdahl’s release last year with a Rose Garden ceremony. Obama said to the soldier’s parents, who were in attendance: “[T]oday families across America share in the joy that I know you feel…As President, I know that I speak for all Americans when I say we cannot wait for the moment when you are reunited and your son, Bowe, is back in your arms.”
Among the five Taliban detainees traded to obtain Sgt. Bergdahl’s release were: Abdul Haq Wasiq, who served as deputy minister of intelligence for the Taliban; Mullah Mohammad Fazi, deputy defense minister for the Taliban; Mullah Norullah Noori, a senior military commander; Mullah Khairullah Khairkhwa, a former provincial governor who reportedly met with Iran to plot attacks against American forces; and Mohammad Nabi Omari, who has held multiple leadership roles in various terrorist groups.
The “misbehavior before the enemy” charge has seldom been used since World War II. “I’ve never seen it charged,” said Walter Huffman, a retired major general who served as the Army’s top lawyer, according to the Military Times. “It’s not something you find in common everyday practice in the military.” (Read more from “The Army Has Charged Bowe Bergdahl With Something Even Worse Than Desertion” HERE)
______________________________________
Military Selects Rarely Used Charge for Bergdahl Case
By Jonathan Drew. Military prosecutors have reached into a section of military law seldom used since World War II in the politically fraught case against Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the soldier held prisoner for years by the Taliban after leaving his post in Afghanistan.
Observers wondered for months if Bergdahl would be charged with desertion after the deal brokered by the U.S. to bring him home. He was — but he was also charged with misbehavior before the enemy, a much rarer offense that carries a stiffer potential penalty in this case.
“I’ve never seen it charged,” Walter Huffman, a retired major general who served as the Army’s top lawyer, said of the misbehavior charge. “It’s not something you find in common everyday practice in the military.”
Bergdahl could face a life sentence if convicted of the charge, which accuses him of endangering fellow soldiers when he “left without authority; and wrongfully caused search and recovery operations.”
Huffman and others say the misbehavior charge allows authorities to allege that Bergdahl not only left his unit with one less soldier, but that his deliberate action put soldiers who searched for him in harm’s way. The Pentagon has said there is no evidence anyone died searching for Bergdahl. (Read more from this story HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-09-08 22:03:162015-09-08 22:03:16The Army Has Charged Bowe Bergdahl With Something Even Worse Than Desertion
The fog created by the ostensibly impending resignation of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas appeared to clear Monday, as details emerged indicating that the resignation threats were a diversion ahead of a dramatic move planned by the Palestinians: declaring Palestine a state under occupation and reneging on their obligations as detailed in the Oslo Accords.
The move was apparently decided on several months ago by Saeb Erekat, the acting head of the Palestinian negotiating team and the secretary general of the PLO’s executive committee, who was the man behind a document setting out the Palestinians’ diplomatic moves against Israel during the month of September . . .
The Oslo Accords, as well as the agreement signed in Sharm el Sheikh in 1994, are expected to be canceled. Also set to be annulled are an economic agreement signed in Paris and several pacts on security cooperation between the Palestinian Authority and Israel.
At this stage, it is still not yet clear what the actual implications of such a decision will be. It will reportedly be accompanied by an announcement by Abbas at the United Nations General Assembly session at the end of the month, where he is expected to say that in light of the annulment of the agreements, Palestine will be considered a state under occupation. (Read more from “Palestinians Preparing to Renege on Oslo Accords, Declare an Independent “Occupied State” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-09-08 22:01:512015-09-08 22:01:51Palestinians Preparing to Renege on Oslo Accords, Declare an Independent “Occupied State”
Here’s a question all liberal, open border politicians must answer as it relates to the refugee crisis: if wealthy Arab and Muslim countries are concerned about the security, fiscal, and cultural problems associated with admitting mass numbers of Syrian refugees, why should America be the guinea pig?
Following the widely viewed picture of the dead toddler washed up on the shore of Turkey, liberal NGOs dealing with refugee resettlement feel they have their bloody shirt moment in their relentless quest to flood the country with tens of thousands of additional refugees from the Middle East. But anyone who follows the Middle East can appreciate that prudent policy is a lot more complex than heartrending images of individual babies dying while fleeing an Islamic Civil War. For one thing, most of the migrants appear to be adult males. And the story of the drowned boy also appears to be more complex than initially thought.
Certainly the images of gruesome torture of Christian minorities in Syria should conjure up just as much righteous indignation and calls to admit refugees, yet we have only admitted 28 Christians from Syria this year – just 2% of all refugees from that country – according to State Department data. Likewise, of the 11,164 refugees admitted from Iraq this year, just 193 were Yazidi. Why have we admitted 70,000 refugees from around the world this year but have taken in just 28 individual Christians from Syria and 193 Yazidis from Iraq – the most persecuted people of our time?
Why has the refugee program ostensibly become a Muslim resettlement program and why is it the western, predominantly Christian countries that are tasked with taking in so many Muslim refugees when the Gulf States, which share the same language and religion, turn a blind eye?
I know what you’re thinking – with all the persecution of Christians transpiring in this country, maybe this is not the last remaining asylum for persecuted Christians. And evidently, liberals believe that those who peacefully decline a service while asserting Christian beliefs should be thrown in jail but are clamoring to bring in tens of thousands of fervent Sharia adherents who, let’s just say, don’t always express their religious convictions peacefully. But I digress.
A number of NGOs and sitting Democrat senators are calling for the admission of as many as 200,000 refugees next year, including 100,000 Syrians. You won’t get this perspective from the mainstream media, but take a look at this chart of the top host countries to refugees worldwide and you will see that we are, by far, the most generous. Americans don’t need sanctimony from the open borders crowd.
As you can see, the U.S. admitted 73% of the world’s refugees in 2014. Now, obviously, that will change in the final tally for 2015, as European countries such as Germany are being flooded with record numbers of refugees. But America has been the leading host country for years, accepting 448,463 refugees since FY 2009. With all the security risks and the public charge we are forced to incur, it’s more than high time for other countries to do their fair share.
Also, in addition to refugees, no other western country has admitted so many immigrants from indigent countries over the past decade. As the Center for Immigration Studies shows, this has resulted in a massive strain on our welfare system, representing a huge break with 100 years of past immigration policy that avoided those who were likely to become a public charge. In total, as of 2010 the U.S. was the destination of 20% of the world’s migrants even though we account for just 4% of the global population. America also has its own migrant crisis from Central America. Americans don’t need lectures on compassion.
Notice how few refugees are taken in by Latin American countries or East Asian countries. And as we mentioned before, what happened to countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Emirates? The five richest Gulf nations have yet to admit a single refugee from Syria this year!
What do they know about security policy that some western liberals do not?
America has taken in over 100,000 Somali refugees since 1993. We are paying for it to this day with growing radicalism in the areas they settled – to the extent that the U.S. Attorney from Minnesota said they have lost control over many individuals in the local Somali community who’ve connected with foreign fighters. And although the public charge is certainly not as grave as the security issues, it is still important nonetheless. Among refugees from the Middle East, 91.3% received Food Stamps and 73.1% received Medicaid.
On Wednesday, the Obama administration will “consult” with Congress on the number of refugees they plan to admit for the next fiscal year and from which parts of the world. Conservatives should gird for battle.
As we approach another anniversary of 9/11, let’s not forget that immigration is the front line in the defense against terror. (For more from the author of “What the Media Isn’t Saying About the Refugee Crisis in the Middle East” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-09-08 21:59:092015-09-08 21:59:09What the Media Isn’t Saying About the Refugee Crisis in the Middle East
Angered by videos in which Planned Parenthood officials discussed compensation for providing fetal tissue from abortions, Republicans in Congress are again demanding an end to government funding for the nearly 100-year-old provider of women’s health services.
Away from the headlines, however, the group is facing other major challenges, including one from a far different source: the Affordable Care Act, which it avidly supports.
Many formerly uninsured women who once depended on Planned Parenthood for low-cost access to birth control, abortions and other reproductive healthcare have gotten coverage under President Barack Obama’s healthcare law, making them less reliant on the organization’s 700 clinics.
In many states, Planned Parenthood is losing clients as newly insured patients turn to medical providers included in their health plan’s networks, according to data provided to Reuters and interviews with more than two dozen of its affiliates.
“Some people relied on us because they were uninsured prior to the Affordable Care Act. Now they can go anywhere for care, and some of them have been,” said Lori Carpentier, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Mid and South Michigan, which expects to treat 58,000 patients in 2015, down about 15 percent from the 68,000 it treated in fiscal 2012, before major parts of the law went into effect. (Read more from “Planned Parenthood Faces Unexpected Challenge From Obamacare” HERE)
U.S. naval forces operating in and around the Strait of Hormuz, a critical shipping lane, are “routinely approached by Iranian warships and aircraft” on a “nearly daily basis,” according to a Pentagon official familiar with operations in the region.
During these interactions between U.S. and Iranian forces, American aircraft and ships are routinely photographed by the Iranians for intelligence purposes, according to the official, who said that most confrontations between the sides are “conducted in a safe and professional manner.”
The disclosure of these daily run-ins comes following the release of footage by the Iranian military purporting to show a reconnaissance mission over a U.S. aircraft carrier station in the Strait of Hormuz.
The clip, which was filmed at the end of August and is punctuated by dramatic music, shows U.S. personnel aboard the ship and shots of U.S. warplanes stationed on it.
Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps “drones have carried out such missions many times; although the drone remains for a long time above the [American crew’s] heads, they didn’t notice it,” Iran’s state-control media reported in Persian at the time, according to a translation by the Middle East Media Research Institute. “In some cases, [the American crew] did notice the IRGC drone awhile after the filming and tried to drive it off by sending a helicopter or fighter jet after it.” (Read more from “Iranian Warships Confront US Navy on ‘Daily Basis'” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-09-08 21:56:332015-09-08 21:56:33Iranian Warships Confront US Navy on ‘Daily Basis’
We have been reporting from time to time the number of Syrian refugees admitted to the US. You know that the resettlement contractors and the Senate Jihad Caucus are looking for the US to resettle 65,000 before Obama leaves office.
Using US State Department figures going back to January 1, 2012 we see that 1,487 Syrians have been admitted as of September 1 (a few days ago) and the vast majority (95%) are Muslims—Sunni Muslims. However, if one only looks at the calendar year 2015, the percentage of Muslims jumps to 97%! That is because the UN is telling us which refugees to take!
By the way there are 40-some Christians in that number and 1 Yazidi (and a few other religions, or no religion).
The 1,487 have been distributed to 36 states.
The top ten states receiving mostly Sunni Muslim Syrians since 1/1/2012 are as follows:
Texas (173)
California (162)
Michigan (146)
Illinois (120)
Arizona (107)
Florida (92)
Pennsylvania (76)
New Jersey (63)
Massachusetts (58)
Kentucky (55)
I’ll bet that one criteria used to determine where they have been sent is the number of mosques in the state.
Don’t forget that back in February the FBI testified before the House Homeland Security Committee that they could not adequately screen the Syrians for security.
For those readers just joining us today—PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION!
Watch for it! This month Obama will be announcing how many Syrians he wants admitted to the US in 2016! I’ll be watching what those Senators running for the Republican nomination for President will say as their states will be getting the bulk of the Syrians. Ted Cruz (TX), Rand Paul (KY), Chris Christie (NJ) and Marco Rubio (FL)—where are you? (For more from the author of “Here’s the Number of Syrian Refugees Admitted to the US in 2015 Who Are Muslims” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-09-08 21:51:132015-09-08 21:51:13Here’s the Number of Syrian Refugees Admitted to the US in 2015 Who Are Muslims
The “seeds” of Alzheimer’s disease may be transmitted from one person to another during certain medical procedures, scientists have found.
