Blog @ MoreWhat.com

What a ridiculous arrangement this is. And its widespread use is even more laughable. Those accepting this questionable practice would like you to ignore the obvious drawbacks. Like how useful is information provided by someone without the stones to disclose their identity? Or the ‘journalistic’ sin of avoiding the scrutiny of full disclosure? All this practice does is raise more questions for the skeptical and attempt to place value on gossip. Something all too common in media reports these days.

Media organizations lament the rise of citizen journalism and the fall of their business model. As more and more newspapers and other mainstream media outlets lose advertising dollars to support their enterprise criticism is misplaced. Many blame the internet and free resources rather than to perform an introspective analysis focusing on lack of integrity.

So how common is the practice of using anonymous sources? A Goole search of the phrase ‘condition of anonymity’ delivers a results count of twelve and a half million. In Google news, the phrase ‘they spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to release the information’ returns over five thousand hits.

Never mind the results available in these searches is tiny compared to the stated total (who could review milions of results?). The point is the practice as well as ‘media’ willingness to use it is more telling than any report including it. Citizen journalism may be suspect but that is a given. The role of the ‘fourth estate’ was to provide a source of objective information to the public. The failure to meet that standard is nothing new. There are many accounts demonstrating that fact throughout history.

So what’s the real reason mainstream media is failing? It’s obvious. They are no longer believable. At least citizen journalism, e.g., the blogosphere, provides passionate accounts on virtually any topic to promote discussion and foster further investigation.

Something lost on those allowing the demise of journalism in traditional sources.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

From unrest displayed by various factions in Pakistan to the strange relationship between the US and former top dog Musharraf to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto the some-time ally nation is a wild card in foreign affairs.

The story below is typical of those demonstrating that which may frustrate public officials and the public in countries around the world. However, terrorists who view this latest development as positive may change their minds later. US intelligence operatives may lament this decision publicly but keeping a top Taliban commander in Pakistan’s custody may actually expand options available for acquiring necessary information.

How much money will the US have to provide Pakistan for ‘extracting’ intelligence from this individual without all those messy rules some find comforting? Sure, Pakistan is denying extradition to any other country based on perceived rights of the detained. Not likely.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Pakistani Court Blocks Extradition of Top Afghan Taliban Commander

VOA News

A Pakistani court has blocked the extradition of at least five captured Afghan Taliban leaders, including top Taliban commander Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar.

Judge Khawaja Mohammad Sharif issued the order Friday after Islamist rights activist Khalid Khawaja filed a petition with the high court in Lahore. The judge said the militants should not be handed over to any other country.

One day earlier, the Afghan government said Pakistan had agreed to send Mullah Baradar and other militants to Afghanistan.

The Afghan president’s office said Thursday that Pakistan had agreed to give up the militants in exchange for the return of Pakistani prisoners.

Pakistani security forces captured Mullah Baradar in a joint operation with U.S. agents. Pakistan also detained several other top Taliban members in recent weeks.

The United States has urged Pakistan to crack down on Afghan Taliban militants who use northwestern Pakistan as a base for attacks on U.S.-led forces in neighboring Afghanistan.

Just a brief post on the summit to this point. (1PM EST).

Just when Eric Cantor and others were getting to the meat of the issue President Obama said rather than go on with a ‘back and forth’ others should be allowed to speak.

Interpretation: When about to lose ground on reform the President side-stepped the very debate he said he wanted to have.

The Dems have cited anecdotes for an emotional appeal while members of the GOP have tried to move the discussion to the real debate of why we cannot afford the legislation as it will only make healthcare more expensive through taxes and other excessive regulatory restrictions.

Now they broke for ‘a House vote that has to be taken now’. They knew this summit was on for today. With all the days Congress takes off, why did they have to have a vote now. Sounds like step two in the dodge and weave to regroup as the GOP had the stronger arguments.

And if you listened to Washington Journal this a.m. prior to the summit you could have listened to Congressman Clyburn express the Dems goal is to provide unlimited coverage to Medicare as well as private insurance.

Then how do they expect anyone to believe we can afford healthcare reform? The answer is they don’t. They expect as most believed to takeover healthcare as a major step in bringing European socialism to the United States.

That is not a wild accusation. The evidence for the argument is all around you. All you have to do is open your eyes and observe. It is not that difficult.

Stay tuned to Cspan to ‘observe’ the liberal conspiracy first hand during this so-called healthcare summit. How many more times will Obama side-step the real debate when confronted by the GOP on the flaws of the Democratic majority’s healthcare component of their liberal agenda?

Currently we have witnessed side-step one and two (see above).

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

related:

“A Reading Guide to the Senate Bill’s Backroom Deals” (Michelle Malkin) 

Only pointing to the bad is as unhelpful as always pointing to the good. Certainly life as well as history is a mixture of both. But the report from Sonja Pace at VOA presented below may not even correctly point to the good when describing Muslim heritage and inventions.

There is evidence to suggest much of what Muslims may claim as their own was provided to them from others and certainly much of it before the beginnings of Islam. For example, Muhammad was born in 570 AD. Algebra likely has roots at least 1000 years earlier in Babylonia. The same culture may be responsible for a number of innovations but the religion known as Islam may have nothing to do with it.

Even in the report below one person interviewed mentions ‘Indian numerals’ which would be more accurate than some other representations. Let’s not try to cover over the terrorism aspect and hate for ‘infidels’ expressed by many Muslims.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

1001 Inventions and Muslim Heritage
Sonja Pace - London

Coffee, computers and piston engines - could we imagine a world without them? These are intricate parts of every day life for most of us and the knowledge that led to them was either invented by or passed down through the ancient Muslim world. That’s the theme of an exhibit in London’s Science Museum and it’s a far cry from the view held by some that the Muslim and Western World represent a “clash of civilizations”.

It has become an intricate part of so many cultures - that cup of coffee - latte, cappuccino, espresso. It’s “Kawha” - where it was first developed as a drink - in the Arabian Peninsula, in today’s Yemen.

Professor Salim al Hassani of the University of Manchester explains the coffee beans were actually brought to Yemen, from Ethiopia. “Well of course, coffee was invented in the very early years of Islam - a guy called Khaled in Ethiopia, a young man looking after his sheep,” he said.

The sheep seemed to like the beans. So the young man took the beans to Yemen - the story goes — and the drink was developed.

And there were many other inventions or innovations passed on by the early Muslim world from the 7th Century onward. “One of them is the invention of the university. This was done in the year 850 by a young lady called Fatima al-Firhi in the city of Fez in Morocco. The first university as we know it in the world, giving degrees and so on,” he said.

And that’s the theme of this exhibit at the London Science Museum. It’s called 1001 inventions: the Muslim Heritage - a bit like “1001 Arabian Nights” the well known fairy tale.

But, the exhibit here focuses on scientific or technological inventions and advances that changed our world — from some of the earliest universities, to innovations in medicine, hygiene, pumps, and water wheels.

“Forgotten history? Not really. Ask just about anyone on the streets of Cairo or Damascus today and they’ll readily tell you about Islam’s glory days - not just its conquests but its cultural, scientific and technological innovations.”

These advances came at the height of the Islamic empire’s glory when it spread from the Middle East, across North Africa to southern Spain and beyond. “During that time, which is about 1,000 years, there were enormous contributions in science and technology, that came to us from other civilizations over another very important civilization and that is the Muslim civilization,” he said.

Muslims absorbed knowledge - from India, China, the Greeks, the ancient Egyptians - and passed it on, a bit like this replica of the elephant clock designed by the Muslim inventor, mathematician and engineer al Jazari in the early 13th Century.

Anne Marie Brennan teaches forensic biology at London’s South Bank University and is fascinated by these innovations. The clock with its giant Indian elephant and Chinese dragons is her favorite. “The elephant clock is wonderful because it is like a United Nations clock. It has all the elements of different civilizations and I like it as a scientist because it shows that science doesn’t have to be boring and sterile and plain, but it can be decorative and it can also pay homage to the cultures that bring it forward,” she said.

And then there is mathematics and algebra. In general, our numbers are known as Arabic numerals today, but it wasn’t always so. “The numbers that we have today - 1,2,3,4 - they’re called Arabic numerals, but actually the Arabs at the time called them Indian numerals,” he said.

And, the number “0″ for example - “zephir” in Arabic - was used first by early Arab scholars as an integral part of mathematical equations. And that’s part of the all-important formula of zeros and ones that was crucial to the development of computers and other new technology.

And, much like coffee, what would we do today without it?

Reid Appoints Durbin, Baucus, Conrad To Presidential Commission That Will Help Rein In Spending And Reduce The Deficit

Washington, DC— Nevada Senator Harry Reid released the following statement to announce Senate appointees to the deficit commission President Obama established last week: “One of the top issues for many of the Nevadans I met with last week was the need to get federal spending under control. That is why Senate Democrats supported establishment of a deficit reduction commission by statute earlier this year. Unfortunately, strong Republican opposition - including by several Republicans who co-sponsored a statutory commission - prevented this important legislation from passing. “I am pleased that President has decided to take bold action to move forward and create a commission by executive order. The establishment of this commission is an important signal that we understand the need to address our fiscal challenges and are committed to finding bipartisan solutions. Senators Durbin, Baucus and Conrad all have vast experience in dealing with the federal budget and have a proven record of looking out for working families like those in Nevada. “I have committed to President Obama that I will work to ensure that the commission’s recommendations receive a vote in the Senate. Senate Democrats understand that we have to be responsible stewards of the federal budget.”

Nothin’ like having the usual suspects who have accelerated the mess we’re in beyond the GOP fall from grace being given more access to YOUR wallet.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

News reports out today regarding the Dems jobs bill and the vote of newly minted Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) raise questions. Brown is being described by some as a sellout. Others suggest he had no choice given circumstances in the state he represents.

You can view the roll call vote by clicking here. The questions about this vote should ask more than why did Senator Scott Brown vote for it. Why did seven other GOP members not vote?

Among those not voting was Senator Jeff Sessions. To this point Senator Sessions has been viewed as a positive force in the US Senate and that will probably continue. But the question remains. Why did he and six others not vote on this bill?

Voinovich and Bond voted ‘yes’ and are retiring. Collins and Snowe voted ‘yes’ and that is no surprise given they are RINOs. That suggests Scott Brown does not plan on being in the Senate long or is a RINO or both. If nothing else the last three statements are humorous. But only because the vote’s outcome is so pathetic.

The previous post on Romney, McCain and Palin is troubling. This post adds to that concern. Again, what the hell are Republicans thinking (or are they)?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

With some troubling news coming out of CPAC 2010 along with similar revelations about various ‘conservative’ philosophies and their proponents more reports suggest 2010 is still wide open.

The recent endorsement of John McCain by former running mate Sarah Palin was analyzed by some as the former Alaska governor being polite. But that argument fails given her unnecessary decision to ’stump’ and raise money for the veteran Senator from Arizona whose conservative values have always been in question. His maverick status being built more by a departure from conservative values than adherence to it.

Now this:

Romney backs McCain in Arizona Senate primary race

It’s like 2008 all over again: Mitt Romney is endorsing John McCain. This time, though, it’s not after a bitter presidential primary between the two GOP rivals.

With too many Republicans appearing more like their liberal counterparts in the Democratic party the wonder is how anyone can suggest a GOP majority after the 2010 elections. This blog features sidebar links for Palin and Romney. And past posts have called for support of both in past elections. For now those links and the supportive posts will remain. But the troubling trends being reported render all that subject to change.

What the hell are these people thinking? Enough noise was made by the public this year that even POLS with hearing impairments should have received the message. A return to basic common sense American values is long overdue and more necessary for survival than previously thought. If those connected to the GOP are as unresponsive as their political opposition from the other major party then one thing remains clear.

They are no better than those they criticize and have apparently improved upon the liberal trend of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

An interesting slice of this video report reveals other freedoms that are abridged in the workplace. Specifically, freedom of speech disappears at the employer’s door.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

related:
CBO: The Obama Administration’s Health Care Proposal

Pence Calls President’s New Health Care Bill ‘More of the Same’

Obama vs. Obama: Cost of President’s Health Care Plan Goes Up as Taxpayer Savings Go Down

CBO to White House: We can’t score your health care crap sandwich

Here’s a suggestion for evaluating the soon to be televised (on Cspan) health summit hosted by the White House. You may recall President Barack ‘Mr Transparency during the 2008 campaign’ Obama was complicit in efforts by the Democratic party to exclude the Republican party from the business of crafting so-called healthcare reform legislation. Correction, that is now ‘health insurance reform.’

Just in case you forgot the following excerpt is provided as a reminder that much of the latest push in Congress and the White House for ‘reform’ has been behind opaque rather than transparent doors.

C-SPAN questions follow Obama

President Barack Obama might just wish he had opened even one health care meeting to the C-SPAN cameras.

The issue is starting to follow him around.

Once again Tuesday, he faced a question about it, from a high school student in Nashua, N.H., who asked him to grade the White House’s transparency efforts, given the fact that all the health care discussions have been behind closed doors.

Now that Obama has realized the mistake in hiding negotiations he expresses a ‘warning.’

President Obama warned lawmakers on both sides of the aisle Saturday not to turn the upcoming White House health-care summit into “political theater,” but rather “to seek common ground in an effort to solve a problem that’s been with us for generations.”

The ‘problem’ for the Dems is they have been trying to takeover healthcare for ‘generations.’

The standard rhetoric from the left now that they have initiated damage control for their lack of transparency is that the GOP is the party of ‘no’ and has no plans. The GOP counters with examples of their plans and a website to publish them. The right fears a setup or ambush by the left in this overdue suggestion of transparency. The left has the majority in DC as well as most of the cards yet have been unable to move their liberal agenda forward. It is reasonable to suspect all of this from both sides is politics as usual.

Everyone has an agenda including you and I. An agenda can be a good thing. But finding one in Washington DC that is good is next to impossible. Can politicians escape politics in this upcoming ’summit.’? Not likely.

The public is not happy with the Obama agenda or Congress. It is quite possible the GOP prefers the Dems own this one, meaning Obamacare. If health related legislation is passed in Congress without GOP support and turns out to be the disaster expected they can say we told you so. The Dems want the GOP to have ’skin in the game’ by signing on to this legislation without benefit of participation in its crafting. Obama’s health summit is likely a maneuver with that in mind.

Once again you are on your own to evaluate what is really going on. The upside is November 2010 holds the key. Tell the White House and Congress what you think with your vote.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

related: Reconciliation, the public option, and Demcare revival (Michelle Malkin)

If a tax is involved you can rest assured the entire strategy is flawed. The most altruistic intention is betrayed when the word ‘tax’ is included. Taxes are a curse on citizens and job one of corrupt political agendas.

In the United States, for all practical purposes as well as political folly, taxes are collected to pay for the expenses of running a government. When the taxes are collected for the purpose of funding the government’s ‘limited’ role as defined by the founding documents there is little objection. It is political agenda using these funds for their own purposes that inflames public outrage. The report featured here is a classic example of what ‘tax’ should not support. The agenda is not part of government’s role.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

From the report the following excerpt exposes two flaws.

Grover Norquist of anti-tax advocacy group Americans for Tax Reform shares that sentiment, calling the bag fee just another tax on consumers.

“The politicians want to have a tax on bags. The fact that they want to try to call it a fee tells you they’re liars as well as tax increasers.”

The Anacostia Watershed Society says the goal is not to raise money, but to change behavior. Washington city officials expect to raise three or four million dollars this year to help clean up the Anacostia River, and they predict that eventually there will be fewer bags and less trash in the waterways of the U.S. capital.

Changing behavior is not governments’ role. And Norquist is exposed again in the following report from Michelle Malkin.

An inconvenient question about the Mount Vernon Statement (Michelle Malkin)

Watch the video and use these notes to understand the self-interest and folly of the religion of peace.

-There’s a limit
-I cannot do this job
-if you live in the United States you are already an infidel
-it’s not our job to do that
-we are here… because we have better opportunities here….
-….not fair to this community….

This vid and the phrases listed above betray what Muslims claim is unfair and that they pose no threat to others. The tired old excuse of being in the US for ‘opportunities’ is the great liberal myth. To express sentiments designed to exploit the guilt of weak minds residing within their target area Muslims work the ‘po lil ol me’ fallacy.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Given the current political climate you would be hard pressed to find anyone to suggest the government is competent. At least in matters of public policy and foreign affairs few agree with public officials in the US. Boots on the ground and others who serve in the armed forces and are getting it done when allowed are the exception rather than the rule these days.

Is it possible that over the last several years a bipartisan scheme between the executive and legislative branches of the US government is coming to fruition? The political left and right had a minor media frenzy over Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s meddling in Middle East affairs in 2007 with a trip to Syria and elsewhere. Most reports then suggested President Bush opposed the trip as well those raising legal questions about official roles and capacity.

A post on this blog suggested it was political theatre of a bipartisan nature. Again, bipartisan meaning anything but its standard definition. Typically it is used for covering the political backside of both parties by mutual consent. And the Pelosi trip may have been a classic example. And you can expect both sides had hopes of a political upside for themselves and their opposition taking a hit. Here’s a link to the older post featured on this blog.

President Barack Hussein Obama’s World Apology Tour and other appeasement strategies suggest US State Dept outreach to Syria is coincidence and has no connection to the earlier Pelosi trip reported as annoying President Bush in 2007. But you have to wonder if it was one of those seeds planted with hopes of a later harvest. Pelosi’s trip may have thwarted some development that was brewing and hurtful to both parties and a scheme may have avoided that plus provided options for the future both parties wanted. Yet no public announcement of such an agreement was an acceptable political strategy for either party.

It’s still appeasement.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Here’s the brief report on the US kissin’ up to Syria.

US Official, Syrian President Meet in Bid for Improved Ties
VOA News
17 February 2010

One of the highest-ranking U.S. officials to visit Syria in years held talks with Syria’s president Wednesday, one day after Washington nominated its first ambassador to the country since 2005.

The U.S. Under Secretary of State, William Burns, said he and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad spoke candidly while meeting in Damascus. Burns said they discussed both areas of disagreement and common ground.

On Tuesday, the White House named long-time U.S. diplomat Robert Ford to serve as ambassador to Syria. Ford, who is fluent in Arabic, now serves as the U.S. deputy ambassador in Iraq.

Burns called the appointment a “clear sign” of America’s readiness to improve relations and to pursue a comprehensive peace between Arabs and Israelis.

The United States said in June that it planned to reinstate its ambassador to Syria, as part of the Obama administration’s efforts to improve relations with Syria and advance the Middle East peace process.

Ford’s nomination will have to be approved by the U.S. Senate.

The United States withdrew its last ambassador to Syria after the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005. Many countries have blamed Syria for the assassination, but Damascus has denied involvement.

The U.S. has long accused Syria of supporting Islamic militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which the U.S. considers terrorist organizations. Washington also has voiced concern about Syria’s human rights record and its role in neighboring Lebanon.