IMO the choice for DHS by Obama a poor choice. Predict his defeat. He gave a speech at Yale [the only Administration to do so?] defending the President's authority to kill by drone American citizens! A violation of the Constitution IMO!
I'm a nobody, but know a few people who may or may not have the pull to clear an interview with a few folks, including Hashemi...we will see. But if it happens and there is anything you would like asked for SST, I will of course gently bring it up...
She is not in any pain. I am bleeding money like a harpooned whale, but I can handle that for a while while the vets see if they can stabilize her calcium levels. pl
In case helpful, there is a very fine animal hospital in Nowalk, CT, which saved our five year old boxer from accidental poisoning this past summer. For reference, their 24/7 monitoring and life support ran about $1500 per day and she had an eight night stay. But she lived. Best wishes. Dave.
As far as I understand the Iranian side they don't fear threats. Fearing threats of an oppressor is against the core of the Shia resistance theology as it is understood in Iran: "Every day is Ashura, every land is Karbala."
The end of sanctions is what the Iranians want in exchange for allowing snap inspections:
Al Manar: Iran Says Will Accept Snap Visits of Its Nuclear Sites
So, as I see it, the question regarding snap inspections is for Iran: Will allowing snap inspections end all the sanctions or will Obama and the AIPAC-influenced US Congress come with other pretexts for sanctions if Iran allows snap inspections?
Because misery loves company, let me share that we carried health insurance on our dog for a few years. Times being what they are, we dropped it as a cost saving measure in this year's budget.
So, of course, this would be the year of the five figure doggie medical bill. And on it goes, seven weeks of aqua therapy already, and more to come. I wouldn't change a thing, and it's only money.
Bandolero: That is a political problem, not a legal one. If the US permits a UN resolution "resolving" the Iranian nuclear issue, then Congress can stamp their collective feet all they want, but so what? The Europeans agreed to the sanctions. They did not have to. Under the WTO, unilateral sanctions are illegal and any additional Congressional-mandated sanctions would fizzle without the Administration actively strong-arming foreign governments.
For purely domestic reasons, this would be a joyous fight. It would force the Israel-Firsters to publically attempt to sabotage a deal that is clearly in America's best interests.
I don't rightly know. My version of SWMBO, will know when she gets home. I know we had a deductible and paid premiums like a regular policy. All our services were also 'in network' so I think it would've made it more than cost effective.
We who choose to surround ourselves
with lives even more temporary than our
own, live within a fragile circle;
easily and often breached.
Unable to accept its awful gaps,
we would still live no other way.
We cherish memory as the only
certain immortality, never fully
understanding the necessary plan.
— Irving Townsend
Col., we had a 80/20 copay and a $200 deductible, up to $14,500 in total benefits. Our out of pocket, had we maintained the insurance, would have been about $2500 all in. The premium was just shy of $500 per annum.
In hindsight, it was foolish and costly to let it lapse. Live and learn.
I hope she makes it through. Of, if not, it does not go on too long.
Posted by: David Habakkuk | 20 October 2013 at 02:03 PM
IMO the choice for DHS by Obama a poor choice. Predict his defeat. He gave a speech at Yale [the only Administration to do so?] defending the President's authority to kill by drone American citizens! A violation of the Constitution IMO!
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 20 October 2013 at 03:55 PM
Generally not a fan of Huffington Post but thought this was an interesting read.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/20/israel-us-iran_n_4133300.html
Posted by: Lee | 20 October 2013 at 06:09 PM
Prayers for all: Lola, you & yours, and the vet/vet staff taking care of her.
Posted by: tpcelt | 20 October 2013 at 07:42 PM
Colonel,
I'm planning on visiting Tehran in early 2014.
I'm a nobody, but know a few people who may or may not have the pull to clear an interview with a few folks, including Hashemi...we will see. But if it happens and there is anything you would like asked for SST, I will of course gently bring it up...
Posted by: mac | 20 October 2013 at 08:09 PM
It is time for Halevy and Dagan to be contacted by folks in Qom. I expect that is the next phase.
Posted by: mac | 20 October 2013 at 08:11 PM
Lee
That's not a message from AOL Huffpo. It's a message from AP:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Just+days+after+the+first+round+of+global+nuclear+talks+with+Iran%2C+a+rift+appears%22
Yes, the US and Iran are trying to make a deal, and Israel and it's lobby (and the Saudis and the Turks) don't like it.
turcopolier
I wish your dog the very best.
Posted by: Bandolero | 20 October 2013 at 08:49 PM
Generally not a fan of NewsMax, but this was another interesting read:
http://www.newsmax.com/Peter-Morici/JPMorgan-Obama-settle-Goldman-Sachs/2013/10/20/id/532020
Posted by: Jose | 20 October 2013 at 10:05 PM
God bless you and puppy. At least you can be merciful with pup and stop the suffering,.
My Diesel ( golden retriever) and Roxanne ( Labrador) are waiting for us the other side of the bridge.
Posted by: Walrus | 21 October 2013 at 12:11 AM
Best wishes to you and your dog, Col. Lang.
Posted by: Medicine Man | 21 October 2013 at 01:04 PM
Didn't the Saudis threaten Russia? Seems like Russia should teach the Saudis a lesson. See http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-10-21/russian-terrorist-attack-numerous-casualties-caught-dashcam
Posted by: Matthew | 21 October 2013 at 03:24 PM
walrus
She is not in any pain. I am bleeding money like a harpooned whale, but I can handle that for a while while the vets see if they can stabilize her calcium levels. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 21 October 2013 at 05:08 PM
mac
Ask them if they understand that they will be free of threat if they allow complete unannounced IAEA inspection. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 21 October 2013 at 05:10 PM
In case helpful, there is a very fine animal hospital in Nowalk, CT, which saved our five year old boxer from accidental poisoning this past summer. For reference, their 24/7 monitoring and life support ran about $1500 per day and she had an eight night stay. But she lived. Best wishes. Dave.
Posted by: David Michael | 21 October 2013 at 05:25 PM
@turcopolier
As far as I understand the Iranian side they don't fear threats. Fearing threats of an oppressor is against the core of the Shia resistance theology as it is understood in Iran: "Every day is Ashura, every land is Karbala."
The end of sanctions is what the Iranians want in exchange for allowing snap inspections:
Al Manar: Iran Says Will Accept Snap Visits of Its Nuclear Sites
http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=116148&frid=19&seccatid=32&cid=19&fromval=1
Fars News: MP: Annulment of All Sanctions Paves Ground for Iran's Approval of Additional Protocol
http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13920728000266
So, as I see it, the question regarding snap inspections is for Iran: Will allowing snap inspections end all the sanctions or will Obama and the AIPAC-influenced US Congress come with other pretexts for sanctions if Iran allows snap inspections?
Posted by: Bandolero | 21 October 2013 at 05:33 PM
bandolero
IMO you are right that they do not fear threats but at the same time they would prefer not to have the US bomb the s--t out of them. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 21 October 2013 at 05:46 PM
Because misery loves company, let me share that we carried health insurance on our dog for a few years. Times being what they are, we dropped it as a cost saving measure in this year's budget.
So, of course, this would be the year of the five figure doggie medical bill. And on it goes, seven weeks of aqua therapy already, and more to come. I wouldn't change a thing, and it's only money.
Posted by: nick b | 21 October 2013 at 06:37 PM
Bandolero: That is a political problem, not a legal one. If the US permits a UN resolution "resolving" the Iranian nuclear issue, then Congress can stamp their collective feet all they want, but so what? The Europeans agreed to the sanctions. They did not have to. Under the WTO, unilateral sanctions are illegal and any additional Congressional-mandated sanctions would fizzle without the Administration actively strong-arming foreign governments.
For purely domestic reasons, this would be a joyous fight. It would force the Israel-Firsters to publically attempt to sabotage a deal that is clearly in America's best interests.
Posted by: Matthew | 21 October 2013 at 06:39 PM
nickb
how much would the doggie insurance have saved you? pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 21 October 2013 at 06:41 PM
I don't rightly know. My version of SWMBO, will know when she gets home. I know we had a deductible and paid premiums like a regular policy. All our services were also 'in network' so I think it would've made it more than cost effective.
Penny wise, pound foolish, as usual.
Posted by: nick b | 21 October 2013 at 06:52 PM
You may wish to visit Mashad and ask Agha to resolve any issues you might be facing.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 21 October 2013 at 08:05 PM
Do you mean this in all seriousness; that snap inspections will be sufficient to accomplish this goal?
Will that be enough for Obama & Kerry to declare victory and go home?
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 21 October 2013 at 08:07 PM
We who choose to surround ourselves
with lives even more temporary than our
own, live within a fragile circle;
easily and often breached.
Unable to accept its awful gaps,
we would still live no other way.
We cherish memory as the only
certain immortality, never fully
understanding the necessary plan.
— Irving Townsend
Posted by: mj | 21 October 2013 at 09:10 PM
Col., we had a 80/20 copay and a $200 deductible, up to $14,500 in total benefits. Our out of pocket, had we maintained the insurance, would have been about $2500 all in. The premium was just shy of $500 per annum.
In hindsight, it was foolish and costly to let it lapse. Live and learn.
Posted by: nick b | 21 October 2013 at 09:20 PM
nickb
I am going to have you beat before I am through with this. pat
Posted by: turcopolier | 21 October 2013 at 11:34 PM