Obama i SAD (2008-2016)

[honestly]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE [/youtube]
Glasacki uzorak .

[corolla02]

eh ovu melodiju danas otkrih

[ljubav_aha]

pa samo vidite paranoje od kontrole na aerodromima , postaje smijesno , hapse putnike u avionu ako prdne ili glasno zovne stjuardesu

hm,radi nedostatka iste "paranoje" ,80tih godina se srusio putnicki avion,jer je paket sa odredjenim kemikalijama pogresnoobiljezen

u avijaciji je "paranoja" neophodna

[ahuseino]

Eno ga preCje'nik ostvario prvu pobjedu.

Vidis kako ide kad se prestanes samo branit. Napad je najbolja oBrana...

Nego brine me miting sa Benom za par dana...

Ka'e odnosi su na 30 jer lou...

[corolla02]

jest jest bogu mi osta on u B. K. i u 2012, sad sta je u billu tek predstoji da se vidi

[jeza u ledja]

Izglasano je nesto sto se 30 godina pokusava odradit. Bill Clinton je pokusao, pa nije uspio.
Sad, kakav je zakon zakrpljen, bolji je nego nikakav. Na ovom se dalje moze nadogradjivati. Drugi dio billa (amandmani) mora nazad u Senat.

Bravo za Obamu, idemo dalje.

[jeza u ledja]

Ksenofobija, nacionalizam, sovinizam....

Ovo je transkript govora Netanyahua pred AIPACom danas, zanimljivo za procitati:

March 23, 2010
Address at AIPAC
Benjamin Netanyahu

As the world faces monumental challenges, I know that Israel and America will face them together.

We stand together because we are fired by the same ideals and inspired by the same dream - the dream of achieving security, prosperity and peace. This dream seemed impossible to many Jews a century ago.

This month, my father celebrated his one-hundredth birthday. When he was born, the Czars ruled Russia, the British Empire spanned the globe and the Ottomans ruled the Middle East.

During his lifetime, all of these empires collapsed, others rose and fell, and the Jewish klix swung from despair to a new hope - the rebirth of the Jewish state.

For the first time in two thousand years, a sovereign Jewish people could defend itself against attack.

Before that, we were subjected to unremitting savagery: the bloodletting of the Middle Ages, the expulsion of the Jews from England, Spain and Portugal, the wholesale slaughter of the Jews of the Ukraine, the pogroms in Russia, culminating in the greatest evil of all - the Holocaust.

The founding of Israel did not stop the attacks on the Jews. It merely gave the Jews the power to defend themselves against those attacks.

My friends,

I want to tell you about the day when I fully understood the depth of this transformation.

It was the day I met Shlomit Vilmosh over forty years ago. I served with her son, Haim, in the same elite unit in the army. During a battle in 1969, Haim was killed by a burst of gunfire. At his funeral, I discovered that Haim was born shortly after his mother and father had been freed from the death camps of Europe.

If Haim had been born two years before, this daring young officer would have been tossed into the ovens like a million other Jewish children. Haim's mother Shlomit told me that though she was in great anguish, she was proud. At least, she said, my son fell wearing the uniform of a Jewish soldier defending the Jewish state.

Time and again the Israeli army was forced to repel attacks of much larger enemies determined to destroy us. When Egypt and Jordan recognized that we could not be defeated in battle, they embraced the path of peace.

Yet there are those who continue the assault against the Jewish state and who openly call for our destruction. They seek to achieve this goal through terrorism, missile attacks and most recently by developing atomic weapons.

The ingathering of the Jewish people to Israel has not deterred these fanatics. In fact, it has only whetted their appetite. Iran's rulers say "Israel is a one bomb country." The head of Hezbollah says: "If all the Jews gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide."

My friends,

These are unpleasant facts, but they are the facts.

The greatest threat to any living organism or nation is not to recognize danger in time.

Seventy-five years ago, many leaders around the world put their heads in the sand. Untold millions died in the war that followed.

Ultimately, two of history's greatest leaders helped turn the tide. Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Winston Churchill helped save the world. But they were too late to save six million of my own people.

The future of the Jewish state can never depend on the goodwill of even the greatest of men. Israel must always reserve the right to defend itself.

Today, an unprecedented threat to humanity looms large.

A radical Iranian regime armed with nuclear weapons could bring an end to the era of nuclear peace the world has enjoyed for the last 65 years. Such a regime could provide nuclear weapons to terrorists and might even be tempted to use them. Our world would never be the same. Iran's brazen bid to develop nuclear weapons is first and foremost a threat to Israel, but it is also a grave threat to the region and to the world.

Israel expects the international community to act swiftly and decisively to thwart this danger. But we will always reserve the right to self-defense. We must also defend ourselves against lies and vilifications.

Throughout history, the slanders against the Jewish people always preceded the physical assaults against us and were used to justify these assaults.

The Jews were called the well-poisoners of mankind, the fomenters of instability, the source of all evil under the sun. Unfortunately, these libelous attacks against the Jewish people also did not end with the creation of Israel. For a time, overt anti-Semitism was held in check by the shame and shock of the Holocaust. But only for a time.

In recent decades the hatred of the Jews has reemerged with increasing force, but with an insidious twist. It is not merely directed at the Jewish people but increasingly at the Jewish state. In its most pernicious form, it argues that if only Israel did not exist, many of the world's problems would go away.

My friends,

Does this mean that Israel is above criticism? Of course not. Israel, like any democracy, has its imperfections but we strive to correct them through open debate and klix. Israel has independent courts, the rule of law, a free press and a vigorous parliamentary debate - believe me, it's vigorous. I know that members of Congress refer to one another as my distinguished colleague from Wisconsin or the distinguished Senator from California.

In Israel, members of Knesset don't speak of their distinguished colleagues from Kiryat Shmona and Be'er Sheva. We say - well, you don't want to know what we say....

In Israel, self-criticism is a way of life, and we accept that criticism is part of the conduct of international affairs. But Israel should be judged by the same standards applied to all nations, and allegations against Israel must be grounded in fact.

One allegation that is not is the attempt to describe the Jews as foreign colonialists in their own homeland, one of the great lies of modern times.

In my office, I have a signet ring that was loaned to me by Israel's Department of Antiquities. The ring was found next to the Western wall, but it dates back some 2,800 years ago, two hundred years after King David turned Jerusalem into our capital city. The ring is a seal of a Jewish official, and inscribed on it in Hebrew is his name: Netanyahu. Netanyahu Ben-Yoash. That's my last name. My first name, Benjamin, dates back 1,000 years earlier to Benjamin, the son of Jacob.

One of Benjamin's brothers was named Shimon, which also happens to be the first name of my good friend, Shimon Peres, the President of Israel.

Nearly 4,000 years ago, Benjamin, Shimon and their ten brothers roamed the hills of Judea.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel cannot be denied. The connection between the Jewish people and Jerusalem cannot be denied. The Jewish people were building Jerusalem 3,000 year ago and the Jewish people are building Jerusalem today. Jerusalem is not a settlement. It is our capital.

In Jerusalem, my government has maintained the policies of all Israeli governments since 1967, including those led by Golda Meir, Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Rabin. Today, nearly a quarter of a million Jews, almost half the city's Jewish population, live in neighborhoods that are just beyond the 1949 armistice lines. All these neighborhoods are within a five-minute drive from the Knesset. They are an integral and inextricable part of modern Jerusalem.

Everyone knows that these neighborhoods will be part of Israel in any peace settlement.

Therefore, building in them in no way precludes the possibility of a two-state solution.

Nothing is rarer in the Middle East than tolerance for the beliefs of others. It's only under Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem that religious freedom for all faiths has been guaranteed. While we cherish our homeland, we also recognize that Palestinians live there as well. We don't want to govern them. We don't want to rule them. We want them as neighbors, living in security, dignity and peace.

Yet Israel is unjustly accused of not wanting peace with the Palestinians. Nothing could be further from the truth. My government has consistently shown its commitment to peace in both word and deed. From day one, we called on the Palestinian Authority to begin peace negotiations without delay. I make that same call today. President Abbas, come and negotiate peace.

Leaders who truly want peace should sit down face-to-face. Of course, the United States can help the parties solve their problems but it cannot solve the problems for the parties. Peace cannot be imposed from the outside. It can only come through direct negotiations in which we develop mutual trust.

Last year, I spoke of a vision of peace in which a demilitarized Palestinian state recognizes the Jewish state. Just as the Palestinians expect Israel to recognize a Palestinian state, we expect the Palestinians to recognize the Jewish state.

My government has removed hundreds of roadblocks, barriers and checkpoints facilitating Palestinian movement. As a result, we have helped spur a fantastic boom in the Palestinian economy (Coffee Shops, restaurants, businesses, even multiplex theaters). And we announced an unprecedented moratorium on new Israeli construction in Judea and Samaria.

This is what my government has done for peace. What has the Palestinian Authority done for peace? Well, they have placed preconditions on peace talks, waged a relentless international campaign to undermine Israel's legitimacy, and promoted the notorious Goldstone report that falsely accuses Israel of war crimes. In fact, they're doing right now in the UN in the grotesquely misnamed UN Human Rights Council.

I want to thank President Obama and the United States Congress for their efforts to thwart this libel, and I ask for your continued support. Regrettably, the Palestinian Authority has also continued incitement against Israel.

A few days ago, a public square near Ramallah was named after a terrorist who murdered 37 Israeli civilians, including 13 children. The Palestinian Authority did nothing to prevent it.

Peace requires reciprocity. It cannot be a one-way street in which only Israel makes concessions. Israel stands ready to make the compromises necessary for peace. But we expect the Palestinians to compromise as well.

But one thing I will never compromise on is our security.

It is hard to explain Israel's security predicament to someone living in a country 500 times the size of Israel. But imagine the entire United States compressed to the size of New Jersey. Next, put on New Jersey's northern border an Iranian terror proxy called Hezbollah which fires 6,000 rockets into that small state. Then imagine that this terror proxy has amassed 60,000 more missiles to fire at you.

Wait. I'm not finished. Now imagine on New Jersey's southern border another Iranian terror proxy called Hamas. It too fires 6,000 rockets into your territory while smuggling even more lethal weapons into its territory. Do you think you would feel a little bit vulnerable? Do you think you would expect some understanding from the international community when you defend yourselves?

A peace agreement with the Palestinians must include effective security arrangements on the ground.

Israel must make sure that what happened in Lebanon and Gaza doesn't happen again in the West Bank.

Israel's main security problem with Lebanon is not its border with Lebanon. It is Lebanon's border with Syria, through which Iran and Syria smuggle tens of thousands of weapons to Hezbollah. Israel's main security problem with Gaza is not its border with Gaza. It's Gaza's border with Egypt, under which nearly 1,000 tunnels have been dug to smuggle weapons.

Experience has shown that only an Israeli presence on the ground can prevent weapons smuggling. This is why a peace agreement with the Palestinians must include an Israeli presence on the eastern border of a future Palestinian state. If peace with the Palestinians proves its durability over time, we can review security arrangements.

We are prepared to take risks for peace, but we will not be reckless with the lives of our people and the life of the one and only Jewish state.

The people of Israel want a future in which our children no longer experience the horrors of war. We want a future in which Israel realizes its full potential as a global center of technology, anchored in its values and living in peace with all its neighbors. I envision an Israel that can dedicate even more of its creative and scientific talents to help solve some of the great challenges of the day, foremost of which is finding a clean and affordable substitute for gasoline.

And when we find that alternative, we will stop transferring hundreds of billions of dollars to radical regimes that support terror.

I am confident that in pursuing these goals, we have the enduring friendship of the United States of America, the greatest nation on earth.

The American people have always shown their courage, their generosity and their decency. From one President to the next, from one Congress to the next, America's commitment to Israel's security has been unwavering. In the last year, President Obama and the U.S. Congress have given meaning to that commitment by providing Israel with military assistance, by enabling joint military exercises and by working on joint missile defense.

So too, Israel has been a staunch and steadfast ally of the United States.

As Vice President Biden said, America has no better friend in the community of nations than Israel. For decades, Israel served as a bulwark against Soviet expansionism. Today it is helping America stem the tide of militant Islam. Israel shares with America everything we know about fighting a new kind of enemy. We share intelligence. We cooperate in countless other ways that I am not at liberty to divulge. This cooperation is important for Israel and is helping save American lives.

Our soldiers and your soldiers fight against fanatic enemies that loathe our common values. In the eyes of these fanatics, we are you and you are us.

To them, the only difference is that you are big and we are small. You are the Great Satan and we are the Little Satan.

This fanaticism's hatred of Western civilization predates Israel's establishment by over one thousand years. Militant Islam does not hate the West because of Israel. It hates Israel because of the West - because it sees Israel as an outpost of freedom and democracy that prevents them from overrunning the Middle East. That is why when Israel stands against its enemies, it stands against America's enemies.

President Harry Truman, the first leader to recognize Israel, said this:

"I have faith in Israel and I believe that it has a glorious future - not just as another sovereign nation, but as an embodiment of the great ideals of our civilization."

We are gathered here today because we believe in those common ideals.

And because of those ideals, I am certain that Israel and America will always stand together.

Benjamin Netanyahu is Prime Minister of Israel.

[UnscarD]

Izglasano je nesto sto se 30 godina pokusava odradit. Bill Clinton je pokusao, pa nije uspio.
Sad, kakav je zakon zakrpljen, bolji je nego nikakav. Na ovom se dalje moze nadogradjivati. Drugi dio billa (amandmani) mora nazad u Senat.

Bravo za Obamu, idemo dalje.

Sa ovim se moram sloziti...istorijski preokret...nije mi bitno koji sistem, sta i kako, sve dok pokazuje brigu za ljudsko bice. Za Ameriku, krupan korak....

[Ljevicar]

Promjena velika kako da ne. Samo ce napuniti dzepove zdravstvenim osiguranjima i dodati 16,000 poreznih inspektora sa cim povecavaju kontrolu nad narodom. To je i razlog sto se zdravstvene kompanije i nisu borile protiv ovoe reforme jer ce dobiti dodatnig 20 miliona osiguranika/kupaca. Fakat nidje veze.

[ahuseino]

Promjena velika kako da ne. Samo ce napuniti dzepove zdravstvenim osiguranjima i dodati 16,000 poreznih inspektora sa cim povecavaju kontrolu nad narodom. To je i razlog sto se zdravstvene kompanije i nisu borile protiv ovoe reforme jer ce dobiti dodatnig 20 miliona osiguranika/kupaca. Fakat nidje veze.

Dobar si...

Bolje je bilo 'nako... kako people of America wanted...

Zaboravio sam...
People - according to the republican dictionary means - insurance companies?!... ili bjese any company?!

16,000 novih radnih mjesta
Lova iz dzepa people of America u dzepove (dzast) people...

Ali treba obratit' paznju i na smoke and mirrors... like these fringe items:
Abortion
Government control
Death squads
...


On a sajd nout... custe li Bajdna kako ka'e (ne skontajuci da je preblizu mikrofonu): "This was a big fuckin' deal..." ?

Taj covjek mi je tako smjesan, uvijek zabavan... never fails to deliver...

[jefferson]

Joe Biden je TITO! On je uspio skrenuti paznju na sebe i pored toga sto se potpisivao najveci zakon od vremena kada je legendarni LBJ potpisao Civil Righs/Voting Right Acts 1964/1965.
ili kad izjavi saucesce Irskom premijeru, a ono mama ziva u publici
Kralj!

[ahuseino]

Joe Biden je TITO! On je uspio skrenuti paznju na sebe i pored toga sto se potpisivao najveci zakon od vremena kada je legendarni LBJ potpisao Civil Righs/Voting Right Acts 1964/1965.
ili kad izjavi saucesce Irskom premijeru, a ono mama ziva u publici
Kralj!

Ovdje sam tako zavuk'o glavu u kragnu kad sam gledao... ja sam se stidio za njega...

[jeza u ledja]

Promjena velika kako da ne. Samo ce napuniti dzepove zdravstvenim osiguranjima i dodati 16,000 poreznih inspektora sa cim povecavaju kontrolu nad narodom. To je i razlog sto se zdravstvene kompanije i nisu borile protiv ovoe reforme jer ce dobiti dodatnig 20 miliona osiguranika/kupaca. Fakat nidje veze.

A sta mislis ko placa Republikance da ne glasaju za?
Sta mislis ko je organizovao one silne proteste protiv reforme zdravstva?

Poenta zakona je da se osigura sto veci broj ljudi, da im se ponudi mogucnost izabiranja drzavnog zdravstvenog paketa, te sto je najbitnije da se smanje troskovi, da se ukine 'odbrambeno lijecenje' (bespotrebno trosenje sredstava na razne testove i opremu), da se smanje izdvajanja za administraciju (sinoc slusam ima tamo negdje provizija da 80-85% sredstava mora iskljucivo ici u medicinske svrhe), potom da se zabrani osiguranjima da ti odbiju pokrice zato sto imas predispoziciju da se razbolis ili da odapnes, pa onda da ti ne smiju limirati pokrice nakon odredjenog iznosa (ako dobijes rak, pa se moras lijeciti mjesecima, a oni ti nakon 2 mjeseca kazu - ne moze vise, pa onda uletis u ogromne dugove i na kraju odapnes, a zena ili djeca ti ostaju u dugu od $500,000), pa onda da mozes dijete zadrzati na svom pokricu do mescini 26-e godine, pa onda tax-credits za mala poduzeca kao podstrek i pomoc kojom ce morati placati osiguranje svojim uposlenicima (sto do sad nisu morali), a i kazne ako ne budu placali, itd...Republikanci kazu kao eto to ce podici takse (kao da ih oni nisu vec dizali X puta) zemlja ce uletiti u dugove (kao da na s Bush nije zavalio u dugove) i onda kao slag eto kao pa sto te pare koje ce izdvojiti za zdravstveno osiguranje nisu ulozili na drugi nacin da rijese to pitanje??? Pa sto ih oni nisu ulozili kad su imali vlast do sad??

Najsmjesnije, koriste se neke cifre od 50-60% ljudi koji se protive ovom paketu reformi, i to Reps stalno isticu, a niko od njih ne spominje da maltene pola tih ljudi se ne protivi zato sto se vlada petlja previse, vec sto ne radi dovoljno! Mnogi ljudi hoce jos. Dvije trecine ljudi u Americi, najmanje, zeli promjenu ovog sistema.

I onda Reps pricaju eto narod zeli ovo ono. Ma mars.
Na kraju se zapitas zasto su svi glasali protiv? Pa oni su glasnogovornici osiguravajucih drustava. Upravo svi ti glasovi protiv, upravo ljudi koji protestuju - to su ti ta osiguravajuca drustva i farmaceutske kompanije.

I tacno ko sto Biden kaze - This is a big fucking deal!!

[jeza u ledja]

Malo o trenutnoj zategnutosti odnosa izmedju SAD i Izraela:

Iz Washington Post

Dispute with Israel underscores limits of U.S. power, a shifting alliance
By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 24, 2010

The two-week-old dispute between Israel and the United States over housing construction in East Jerusalem has exposed the limits of American power to pressure Israeli leaders to make decisions they consider politically untenable. But the blowup also shows that the relationship between the two allies is changing, in ways that are unsettling for Israel's supporters.

President Obama and his aides have cast the settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, not just the relationship with Israel, as a core U.S. national security interest. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the head of the military's Central Command, put it starkly in recent testimony on Capitol Hill: "The conflict foments anti-American sentiment due to a perception of U.S. favoritism toward Israel." His comments raised eyebrows in official Washington -- and overseas -- because they suggested that U.S. military officials were embracing the idea that failure to resolve the conflict had begun to imperil American lives.

Visiting Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu received warm applause at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference on Monday night when he bluntly dismissed U.S. demands to end housing construction in the disputed part of Jerusalem. He was greeted as a hero when he visited Capitol Hill on Tuesday.

But the administration has been strikingly muted in its reception. No reporters, or even photographers, were invited when Netanyahu met with Secretary of State Clinton Hillary Rodham Clinton and Vice President Biden on Monday or when he met with Obama on Tuesday night. There was no grand Rose Garden ceremony. Official spokesmen issued only the blandest of statements.

The cooling in the U.S.-Israel relationship coincides with an apparent deepening of Israel's diplomatic isolation. Anger has grown in Europe in the wake of Israel's suspected misuse of European passports to kill a Palestinian militant in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates. On Tuesday, British Foreign Secretary David Miliband announced the expulsion of a senior diplomat over the incident, an unusually drastic step for an ally. Relations with Turkey, a rare Muslim friend of Israel for decades, have hit a new low.

Obama and his aides have strongly pledged support for Israel's security -- including a reiteration by Clinton when she addressed AIPAC on Monday -- but they have continued to criticize its settlement policies in tough terms. Clinton notably did not pull her punches on the issue when she addressed the pro-Israel group, warning that whether Israelis like it or not, "the status quo" is not sustainable. The drawing of such lines by the administration has been noticed in the Middle East.

"Israeli policies have transcended personal affront or embarrassment to American officials and are causing the United States real pain beyond the Arab-Israeli arena. This is something new, and therefore the U.S. is reacting with unusually strong, public and repeated criticisms of Israel's settlement policies and its general peace-negotiating posture," Rami Khouri, editor at large of Beirut's Daily Star, wrote this week. "At the same time Washington repeats it ironclad commitment to Israel's basic security in its 1967 borders, suggesting that the U.S. is finally clarifying that its support for Israel does not include unconditional support for Israel's colonization policies."

Problems from the start

The Obama administration has struggled from the start to find its footing with Israel and the Palestinians. Obama took office soon after Israel's three-week offensive in the Gaza Strip, which had ruptured peace talks nurtured by the George W. Bush administration. Obama appointed a special envoy, former senator George J. Mitchell, on his second day in office. But then the administration tried to pressure Israel to freeze all settlement expansion -- and failed. The United States further lost credibility when Clinton embraced Netanyahu's compromise proposal, which fell short of Palestinian expectations, as "unprecedented."

U.S. pressure at the time also backfired because it appeared to let the Palestinians off the hook. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas refused to enter into direct talks before a settlement freeze, even though he had done so before. The administration had to settle for indirect talks, with Mitchell shuttling back and forth. The recent disagreement has set back that effort.

Administration officials have been careful to turn down the heat in their latest exchanges with Netanyahu over Jerusalem, even as they continue to express their displeasure. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley spoke in clipped sentences Tuesday when asked to describe the hours of private conversations with Netanyahu this week: "We have outlined some concerns to the Israeli government. They have responded to our concerns. That conversation continues. This is a dynamic process. There's a lot of give-and-take involved in these conversations."

Crowley argued that "the only way to ultimately resolve competing claims, on the future of Jerusalem, is to get to direct negotiations." He said the administration faces a series of "pass-fail" tests: Can it get the two parties to join direct talks? Can it persuade them to address the vexing issues surrounding the final status of Jerusalem? And ultimately, "do we get to an agreement that is in the Israeli interest, in the Palestinian interest, in the interest of the rest of the region and clearly in the interest of the United States?"

Arab leaders have long said that a peace deal would be possible if the United States pressured Israel. But many experts say such hope is often misplaced. In the case of East Jerusalem, Netanyahu believes that a halt to construction represents political suicide for his coalition, so no amount of U.S. pressure will lead him to impose a freeze -- at least until he is in the final throes of peace talks.

"U.S. pressure can work, but it needs to be at the right time, on the right issue and in the right political context," said Robert Malley, a peace negotiator in the Clinton White House. "The latest episode was an apt illustration. The administration is ready for a fight, but it realized the issue, timing and context were wrong. The crisis has been deferred, not resolved."

[jeza u ledja]

Sa BBC:

Ties between Israel and US 'worst in 35 years'

Israel's ambassador to the US has said relations between the two are at their lowest for 35 years, Israeli media say.

Last week, Israeli officials angered visiting US Vice-President Joe Biden by announcing the building of 1,600 new homes in occupied East Jerusalem.

The US said it was waiting for a formal Israeli response to its concerns.

Palestinian leaders say indirect talks with Israel are now "doubtful". Israel's PM said Jewish settlements did "not hurt" Arabs in East Jerusalem.

Addressing Israel's parliament, the Knesset, Benjamin Netanyahu said he wanted peace negotiations, and hoped the Palestinians would not present "new preconditions" for talks.

"No government in the past 40 years has limited construction in neighbourhoods of Jerusalem," he said.

"Building these Jewish neighbourhoods in Jerusalem does not hurt the Arabs of East Jerusalem or come at their expense."

US state department spokesman Philip Crowley said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had asked Mr Netanyahu for a "formal" response to concerns she had raised with him.

But he stressed continuing US support for the country, saying: "Israel is a strategic ally of the US and will continue to be so."

Meanwhile, EU foreign policy head Baroness Ashton, who is on a Middle East tour, said Israel's decision had put the prospect of indirect talks with the Palestinians in jeopardy.

'Difficult period'

Previously the Israeli government had played down the strain in relations with the US.

But Israel's ambassador to the US, Michael Oren, told a conference call with Israeli consuls general in the US that "the crisis was very serious and we are facing a very difficult period in relations", the Israeli media reported on Monday.

On Friday, Mr Oren was summoned to the state department and was reprimanded about the affair, the Israeli Ynet News website reported.

Ynet quoted the ambassador as saying "Israel's ties with the US are in the most serious crisis since 1975".

In 1975, US-Israeli relations were strained by a demand from then US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger that Israel's Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin partially withdraw its troops from the Sinai Peninsula, where they had been since the 1967 Six-Day War.

The Haaretz newspaper said the ambassador's quote had been reported to it by four of the Israeli consuls general following the conference call on Saturday.

Mr Oren had appeared "tense and pessimistic", the consuls general told the newspaper.

They were instructed to lobby members of congress and Jewish community leaders and tell them Israel had not intended to cause offence.

"These instructions come from the highest level in Jerusalem," Haaretz quoted Mr Oren as saying.

The Israeli embassy in Washington has not yet commented publicly on the story.

The EU, as part of the Middle East Quartet, has already condemned Israel's decision to build new homes in East Jerusalem.

Speaking to members of the Arab League in Cairo on Monday, Lady Ashton said the move had "endangered and undermined the tentative agreement to begin proximity talks".

She added: "The EU position on settlements is clear. Settlements are illegal, constitute an obstacle to peace and threaten to make a two state-solution impossible."

'Insult'

On Sunday, a top aide to US President Barack Obama said Israel's announcement of plans to build 1,600 homes for Jews in East Jerusalem was "destructive" to peace efforts.

David Axelrod said the move, which overshadowed Mr Biden's visit to Israel, was also an "insult" to the United States.

Just hours before the announcement Mr Biden had emphasised how close relations were, saying there was "no space" between Israel and the US.

Under the Israeli plans, the new homes will be built in Ramat Shlomo in East Jerusalem.

The Palestinians are threatening to boycott newly agreed, indirect talks unless the Ramat Shlomo project is cancelled.

Close to 500,000 Jews live in more than 100 settlements built since Israel's 1967 occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

The settlements are considered illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this.

[ahuseino]

Promjena velika kako da ne. Samo ce napuniti dzepove zdravstvenim osiguranjima i dodati 16,000 poreznih inspektora sa cim povecavaju kontrolu nad narodom. To je i razlog sto se zdravstvene kompanije i nisu borile protiv ovoe reforme jer ce dobiti dodatnig 20 miliona osiguranika/kupaca. Fakat nidje veze.

Valjda nisi ozbiljan...

Kakav je ovo broj od 16,000 inspektora? Zasto? Odakle ti?

Republikanci koriste sve moguce izgovore da izvitopere raspravu.

Freedom:
Freedom to die not covered vs. freedom from government mandated health protection/coverage.
Death squads... really?

Cost:
Wahtever it is/will be, cannot match the cost of the two wars and the bailout (all said and done, probably in the vicinity of $2Tn).

Which is more beneficial to the society/world: neocolonial imperialism lobbied by corporations on corporate welfare (socialized risk, capitalized profits) or having healthy population motivated to work without burden of fear for health/life????

What about today's full-retail, no-discount cost burden of the state for the uninsured who are by law required to be treated by health institutions?

Business:
The only business that'll hurt is the insurance business... small/mid/big size business will get appropriate tax breaks; all the more business benefit.


Bune se republikanci za Kost... za buduce generacije... nisu se bunili kad su se nosaci aviona pokretali, kad je Paulsen potpisivao prvi bailout. Kad je zdravlje u pitanju brine se za Kost, a kad se trosi oruzje, bori protiv terorizma i razdjeljuje demokratija po svijetu, onda, jebaji ga, sve je u humane svrhe, jel' to?

Meni nije jasno kako ima i 3 cojeka sa IQ-om ispod 48 da more ovaj drek 'kupovat'.

[jeza u ledja]

A najbljutavije kad pocnu pricati o 'Freedom'..

Kao ono, narode bunite se, u pitanju je vasa 'sloboda' (ono valjda kao sloboda izbora zdravstvenog osiguranja). Ma ja ba, slobodan narod slobodno umire jer jedan dan u bolnici kosta $1500.

Mamu im j.... lopovsku, unistise sve zivo, unistise svijet, unistavaju Ameriku, a glupi narod se lijepi za propagandu u stilu Goebelsa. Pu, samo cheraj Obama dalje, uradi koliko se moze dok nam se ovo zlo ponovo ne popne na grbacu.

[Ljevicar]

16,000 poreznih inspektora je potrebno da bi provjeravali ako zdravstvena osiguranja ispunjavaju "minimalne" standarde koje drzava postavi. IRS (Internal Revenue Service) su dobili mandat da nadgledaju osiguranja, sto je fakat nidje veze. Povrh toga sto ce osoba biti primorana da kupi osiguranje ili plati kaznu, nece imati izbora da kupi policu po svojoj zelji vec po "minimalnin" standardima drzave, sto je takodje nidje veze. Nama koji smo dosli "odozdo" je tesko objasniti ili skontati da amerikanci ne zele federalnu vlast u svojim svakodnevnim zivotima, jer smo mi navikli da sta nam god drzava kaze-mi to moramo uraditi I nema price. Neko spomenu kako 16,000 inspektora je uredu jer daje toliko radnih mijesta!?!? Pa pobogu nije komunizam da drzava mora da ti osigura radno mijesto. Treba olaksati put do posla ali ne I napraviti ga.

Da ne bude da branim konzervativce, Obama je trebao forsirati univerzalno zdravstveno osiguranje od strane drzave za sve gradjane jer ova trenutna reforma ima veoma dobre sanse da bude proglasena neustavna zbog ovog mandata da svi moraju kupiti osiguranje. Cetiri od devet sudija ce vjerovatno biti na strani neustavnosti sto znaci da ce samo jedan sudija (Kennedy-umjereni konzervativac) odluciti o sudbini citave zemlje. Ovo je naravno ako zakon dodje to Ustavnog Suda, a sve su sanse da hoce...

[jefferson]

16,000 poreznih inspektora je potrebno da bi provjeravali ako zdravstvena osiguranja ispunjavaju "minimalne" standarde koje drzava postavi. IRS (Internal Revenue Service) su dobili mandat da nadgledaju osiguranja, sto je fakat nidje veze. Povrh toga sto ce osoba biti primorana da kupi osiguranje ili plati kaznu, nece imati izbora da kupi policu po svojoj zelji vec po "minimalnin" standardima drzave, sto je takodje nidje veze. Nama koji smo dosli "odozdo" je tesko objasniti ili skontati da amerikanci ne zele federalnu vlast u svojim svakodnevnim zivotima, jer smo mi navikli da sta nam god drzava kaze-mi to moramo uraditi I nema price. Neko spomenu kako 16,000 inspektora je uredu jer daje toliko radnih mijesta!?!? Pa pobogu nije komunizam da drzava mora da ti osigura radno mijesto. Treba olaksati put do posla ali ne I napraviti ga.

Da ne bude da branim konzervativce, Obama je trebao forsirati univerzalno zdravstveno osiguranje od strane drzave za sve gradjane jer ova trenutna reforma ima veoma dobre sanse da bude proglasena neustavna zbog ovog mandata da svi moraju kupiti osiguranje. Cetiri od devet sudija ce vjerovatno biti na strani neustavnosti sto znaci da ce samo jedan sudija (Kennedy-umjereni konzervativac) odluciti o sudbini citave zemlje. Ovo je naravno ako zakon dodje to Ustavnog Suda, a sve su sanse da hoce...

IRS ce imati mandat jer ce se kazne raditi putem IRS-a. 16,000 ljudi nece samo to raditi, imat ce oni jos ovlastenja, a to je kontrolu samih osiguravajucih kuca.
Ono sto se meni svidja jeste da se krenulo s mrtve tacke. Mislim da je bilo nerealno preko noci zahtjevati univerzalno zdravstveno osiguranje iz nekoliko razloga:
1. Amerika je individualisticka drzava sa takvom istorijom, i tesko bi bilo povecati poreze bez velikih politickih ali i ekonomskih potresa.
2. Zdravstvo cini 16% americke ekonomije, ili oko 2,8 triliona (li po BH biliona) dolara. To je ekonomiaj ravna njemackoj ekonomiji, i nesmiju se dozvoliti preveliki potresi.
3. Preuzimanje zdravstva od strane drzave bi moglo ugusiti inovacije. SAD su najplodnije tlo za zdravstvene inovacije jer je zdravstvo zasnovano na profitu. Tu treba biti vrlo pazljiv.

Sto se tice neustavnosti to ce biti vrlo interesantno gledati. 14 drzava ima pravo. Po ustavu federalna vlada ne moze zahtjevati od gradjana da nesto kupe, dok je to takodje mjesanje u ovlasti drzava. Article 1 ustava govori o enumerated powers i jasno se kaze da vlada nikog ne moze natjerati na odredjenu akciju, dok su mnoge ovlasti ostavljene drzavama.
Ako ovo prodje bit ce samo jos jedan udarac na ovlasti drzave i bit ce interesantno kako ce to braniti administracija jer su sigurno ovo predvidjeli. Da bi sve bilo po zakonu, trebao bi se predloziti amandman, sto mora ratifikovati tri cetvrtine americkih drzava.
Ovo sto je proslo u nedjelju trajat ce jos par godina.

[statix]

Moze li neko laicki pojasniti, sta ce se prosjecnom ameru, koji radi i prima platu 2000 dolara promjeniti, tj. sta i koliko ce mu se na platnoj listi promjeniti. Hoce li to biti kao kod nas, da placas porez na dohodak i doprinose za PIO i MIO.
Hvala unaprijed

@ahuseino ako se imalo za rata i spasavanja velikih, moze se imati i za zdravstvo.

[Šeha]

Nece biti neustavno jer nece morati imati osiguranje!
Morat ce platiti kaznu u vidu vece takse ako ne budu imali osiguranje! A to se desava i sada na drugim primjerima tako da od neustavnosti nema nista. Bice vrlo jednostavno za odbraniti.

Ustav kaze (Article 1 Section 8 ):

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

[UnscarD]

Bit ce od vas dvojice kad tad komunisti ...vidima ja

[statix]

Bit ce od vas dvojice kad tad komunisti ...vidima ja

Nema formule za ekonomiju, bez drzavnog intervencionizma. Laissez-faire i slobodno trziste nikad nisu u pravom smilu ni postojali, to je zadnja kriza potvrdila.

[Ljevicar]

Reforma ima dobre sanse da bude proglasena neustavna jer 4 sudije Ustavnog Suda jedva cekaju sudski slucaj gdje ce oni postaviti nove Ustavne standarde u skladu sa origanilistickom interpretacijom Ustava. Dakle, sudije koje gaje tu originalisticku interpretaciju Ustava su Scalia, Thomas, Roberts I Alito. Po nijihovoj teoriji, federalna vlast ima jedino one ovlasti koje su joj date Ustavom, a sve ostalo je na drzavama da odluce. Po ovoj interpretaciji, federalna vlast ne moze mandatom zahtijevati od gradjana da kupe zdravstveno osiguranje.

U svemu ovome, sumnjam da je slucajno da su drzave pokrenule tuzbu bas u Floridi. Vjerovatno vecina federalnih sudija su nominovani od strane Busha prvog ili drugog, a mozda I Reagana, pa samim tim I gaje konzarvativnu, originalisticku interpretaciju Ustava...

[jeza u ledja]

Neki dan je pravnik na NPR palamudio i rece da su male sanse da se te tuzbe uspjesno odrade. Ne znam sad objasnjavao je detalje, ali mi ne izgleda kao moguce. Da nije, ne bi se o tome vec godinama pricalo.

Uostalom, Massachusetts vec ima maltene identican zakon gdje su gradjani obavezni imati osiguranje ili platiti kaznu.