Blog @ MoreWhat.com

BEIJING (Reuters) - China urged other powers on Tuesday to show more flexibility in dealing with Iran’s disputed nuclear programme, playing down prospects of sanctions after six countries met to discuss the standoff.

While Western powers have looked to further sanctions against Iran over its rejection of a U.N. plan to rein in Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, Russia and now especially China have resisted such steps and called for more negotiations.

How about this for a conspiracy theory? China and Russia have ties with Iran. They could care less if the US or its allies view Iranian nukes as a problem. China is hell bent on being a dominate force on the planet and has achieved much in that regard. Russia has lamented the fall of the Soviet Union since it happened and Putin is determined to regain that status as a world power.

Imagine Russia wants to relive the Missiles of October scenario from 1962 and allow Iran to be their proxy and provoke a nuclear standoff or worse, launch a strike against Israel? Israel may well be able to react in advance and preempt a first strike. Add to that any reaction that would come from China and others with nuke capability and Armageddon is poised to occur as the end of the Mayan calendar approaches in 2012. Coincidentally, the year President Obama is up for re-election and the VPOTUS warning of a test shows up late.

Even without the conspiracy theory, the so-called international community continues its impotent policy toward the current nuclear threat.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Although this post does not offer an exhaustive list of funding provided for earthquake relief purposes to Haiti the reports featured raise questions. But that does not address a broader question on why each ‘natural disaster’ or other catastrophic event is treated the way they are. If ET were to visit the planet Earth the impression for the extra=terrestrial might be that this is the first time humans have encountered such an event.

The shock and awe reaction in the main stream media suggests we have never witnessed such an event. The wailing and gnashing of teeth expressed by those affected and interviewed by the same MSM demonstrate a universal theme. There is the expectation that someone else is responsible to return ‘victims’ to their pre-disaster condition.

No, this is not a heartless rant targeting millions affected by the earthquake in Haiti. It is an observation presented during a crisis to offer suggestions for future events. It seems little if anything is done to effectively prepare for such contingencies by those most likely to be affected. Certainly those who are least prepared to face life in general are not in a position to prepare themselves properly for extreme conditions like a quake. But that is the whole point.

Just as issues like education avoid the responsibility of the family component e.g., good parenting, and the so-called global economic crisis sidesteps greed on every level, preparation for natural disasters receives little attention between events or focus on simple preventative measures addressing those most likely to be harmed.

Most ongoing ‘humanitarian’ efforts elicit funds based on emotional appeals for money to address problems after the fact. Outside of legitimate organizations raising funds to accomplish goals like teaching the have=nots to fish in order to feed themselves rather than give them food to solve an immediate need, most ‘humanitarian’ appeals are a scam.

Here are some reports regarding the current difficulties in Haiti that illuminate the world’s curious reponse to such events.

UN Appeals for $550 Million for Haitian Quake Victims

If millions are affected it is not surprising the UN would request $550 million. If there are 3 million ‘victims’ that is less than $200 per person. But while the request receives much attention during the disaster little valid disclosure will follow documenting where the money went.

Obama Pledges Sustained Commitment To Haiti

Okay, so the UN asks for $550 million and the US offers $100 million. That’s nearly 20% of what the UN asked for and a decent percentage for the US to offer. It seems large compared to what reports show for other countries thus far.

China Sends Aid to Quake-Stricken Haiti

Purely based on the report, China claims they will do what’s necessary to help but the only specific monetary amount is $1 million from the Chinese Red Cross.

Sarkozy Calls For International Donors Conference to Help Haiti

Go figure, France calls for a conference to solve the problem.

France Calls for Cancellation of Haiti’s Debt

Okay, correction, France calls for a conference and cancelling Haiti’s debt. So what does that cost France?

Haiti Aid Pouring in Through Text Message Campaign

Some reporting has warned the public about fraudulent websites accepting donations for earthquake ‘victims’ in Haiti. The bottom ilne warns there are genuine relief sites and frauds. Let the donor beware. The point is the public may represent the only honest source of aid for this event. Are the other sources bogus and do they feed on these events to perpetrate fraud?

And of course to repeat the broader point of this post, why does there seem to be no effort to prepare humans on this planet to be prepared to handle disaster in an effective manner?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The Day of Infamy

The attack on Pearl Harbor was the culmination of a decade of deteriorating relations between Japan and the United States over the status of China and the security of Southeast Asia. The breakdown began in 1931 when Japanese army extremists, in defiance of government policy, invaded and overran the northern-most Chinese province of Manchuria. Japan ignored American protests, and in the summer of 1937 launched a full-scale attack on the rest of China. Although alarmed by this action, neither the United States nor any other nation with interests in the Far East was willing to use military force to halt Japanese expansion.

Over the next three years, war broke out in Europe and Japan joined Nazi Germany in the Axis Alliance. The United States applied both diplomatic and economic pressures to try to resolve the Sino-Japanese conflict. The Japanese government viewed these measures, especially an embargo on oil, as threats to their nation’s security. By the summer of 1941, both countries had taken positions from which they could not retreat without a serious loss of national prestige. Although both governments continued to negotiate their differences, Japan had already decided on war.

The attack on Pearl Harbor was part of a grand strategy of conquest in the Western Pacific. The objective was to immobilize the Pacific Fleet so that the United States could not interfere with these invasion plans. The principal architect of the attack was Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief of the Japanese Combined Fleet. Though personally opposed to war with America, Admiral Yamamoto knew that Japan’s only hope of success in such a war was to achieve quick and decisive victory. America’s superior economic and industrial might would tip the scales in her favor during a prolonged conflict.

Pearl Harbor: 68 years (Michelle Malkin) 

While the recent decision by the Nobel committee to award the 2009 peace prize to President Obama focused more attention on the US leader no more will be said about it in this post. US diplomatic strategy, success or failure, foreign policy and the role of the US State Dept and White House will be. All the talk about rebuilding America’s image, hope and change, a nuclear free world and ends to conflict needs a reality check. How are things going so far?

Not necessarily in order of importance what is on most peoples’ minds these days in terms of international relations or foreign affairs? From the US perspective the countries of note would include Russia, China, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, North Korea and Iran. Of course the perennial favorites not yet mentioned would be any country in the Middle East. Israel and its neighbors are still without solutions. Russia and China are still vying for top dog honors with the US on the world stage. Upstarts Iran and North Korea at the very least want a seat at the cool kids table. So nothing much has changed.

Here’s a brief recap of events in US diplomatic strategy with a ‘new’ President and Secretary of State.

Still no progress in Palestinian/Israeli peace talks

NECN/ABC) - President Barack Obama’s Mideast envoy, George Mitchell, left the region Sunday after failing again to get Israelis and Palestinians back to the bargaining table. The breakdown of peace talks is taking a toll on Obama’s prestige among Palestinians.

President Obama’s Middle East peace envoy on another trip to the region - more meetings - more handshakes with Israelis and Palestinians - but still no progress, no movement in the peace process.

Not a surprise to see a headline expressing failure in Middle East diplomacy no matter who is involved.

What about Iran?

Putin Says Iran Sanctions Talk Premature

By VOA News
14 October 2009

Russia’s Prime Minister Vladimir Putin says it is premature to discuss sanctions against Iran for its controversial nuclear program.

And the view from the US Secretary of State…..

“I believe if sanctions become necessary, we will have support from Russia,” Clinton told ABC television in an interview on Wednesday.

This is merely a continuation of the impotent international community’s response to Iran’s nuclear weapons program that was essentially confirmed again with yet another lie exposed with admission of the previously hidden enrichment facility already known to the Obama Administration. And no one will visit the plant until later this month. Like that will solve anything.

Which makes this next sham almost laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic.

Obama to Preside at UN Security Council

By Margaret Besheer
The United Nations

The United States has taken over the rotating presidency of the 15-member United Nations Security Council for the month of September. U.S. President Barack Obama and other top U.S. political figures will be at the world body this month to highlight issues of importance to the United States.

Another rhetorical masterpiece expressing the desire for a nuclear free world without the substance to support such a notion. The exclamation point is provided by the appeasement strategy reminiscent of a similar process that helped usher in WWII.

And what was the defining achievement by press accounts for the SoS Hillary Rodham Clinton?

Hillary Clinton Helps Turkey, Armenia Open Border - ABC News

Clinton uses diplomatic muscle in Turkey-Armenia row | Politics …

Turkey, Armenia Agree to Ties; Clinton’s Skill Tested (Update1 …

The Daily Star - Politics - Clinton hails Turkey, Armenia steps …

Clinton Helps Save Historic Turkey, Armenia Accord - International …

A more accurate appraisal of Clinton’s participation may be the following…..

Clinton to Attend Turkey-Armenia Normalization Deal Signing

By David Gollust
State Department

The State Department said Thursday Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will fly to Zurich to attend Saturday’s signing of accords to normalize relations between Turkey and Armenia.

A simple visit to the US State Dept website would bear this out. At least in terms of demonstrating that this State Dept is essentially no different from any other feeble attempt by heads of state to display their conviction to foreign relations or determination to improve conditions in the world. A visit to the website while producing this post featured the following items:

Positive Future for U.S.-Russian Relations

Finding Common Ground With Russia

Secretary Clinton Travels to Europe

U.S. Supports Peace in Northern Ireland

U.S. Supports Emergence of Afghan Government

U.S.-U.K. Advancing Shared Values

U.S.-Ireland Working Together

and travel puff pieces?

So much for the hope and change of a new administration in the US and statements expressed to suggest foreign policy would be successful.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

A few days ago German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated new sanctions against Iran would be considered if no agreement on negotiations was reached by September. Iran continues to claim their nuclear program is for energy purposes while many other countries suggest they are pursuing nuclear weapons. This is not a new story. After previous sanctions, UN resolutions and other lame attempts to persuade Iran to abandon the pursuit of nukes this ineffective strategy has been no more successful than similar tactics against North Korea on the same issue.

Are the world’s most powerful nations as ignorant and inept as their actions in this matter demonstrate? Or is it a simple matter of no one wanting to be the first to take effective action against Iran and North Korea? Will this situation escalate among ‘rogue’ nations of the world until one of them launches a strike against a perceived or stated foe? Or will Israel lose its patience with the so-called international community and its lack of suitable action and take matters into their own hands?

If the US, Russia, China and other nations continue to postpone what is necessary regarding Iran, North Korea and others pursuing nukes the question will not be who has them but when will they be used. If that is allowed to happen the scenario returns to that of the sixties. Before, during and after the Cuban Missile crisis in 1962 the idea of MAD, mutually assured destruction, was considered the concept which avoided WWIII and a nuclear winter or the planet ceasing to exist. It is reasonable to assume those seeking nukes these days are not dissuaded by this concept.

So why are the other nations of the world doing nothing about this?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

crossposted at:
Maggie’s Notebook
Conservative Thoughts

IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei has circulated his latest reports on nuclear safeguards in Iran and Syria to Member States. The report outlines developments since the Director General´s report of 5 June 2009.

Circulation of the reports is restricted; they cannot be released to the public unless the IAEA Board decides otherwise.

General Mohamed ElBaradei has circulated his latest report on nuclear safeguards in Iran to the Agency´s Board of Governors, the 35-member policymaking body. The Board next convenes in Vienna on 7 September.

So here’s a recent Arab response on Iran’s nuclear program.

Israeli nuclear weapons and Western hypocrisy
By Yusuf Fernandez (Source: thepeoplevoice.org)

Once again, Arab states have announced that this year they will submit a resolution at September’s general assembly of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in order to force Israel to sign the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and open up its secretive military nuclear program to international inspections.

The article also suggests ‘Israel’s rejection to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as the main obstacle to global nuclear disarmament.’ After stating that Israel has nukes with a 2000 km range and able to reach any Arab capital the article changes direction with ‘Israel is one of the few states in the world that have refused to sign the NPT and is reportedly the only state in the Middle East having nuclear weapons.’

Reportedly the only state in the Middle East having nukes, indeed. ‘Iran has repeatedly assured that its nuclear program is peaceful…’ Repeatedly ‘assured’ is the key here.

You may recall that Saddam Hussein commented after being apprehended from a hole in the ground that he did nothing to convince the world Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction for fear of looking weak to ‘his’ neighbors in the region. Had he not chosen that strategy he may have avoided another confrontation with the US military accompanied by the inevitable outcome. As if Desert Storm in 1991 was not proof enough he could not win a war against the US after invading Kuwait.

Like Iraq’s former ‘leader’ Saddam Hussein, Iran’s leadership behaves in a similar manner allowing statements calling for the destruction of Israel to stand refusing to recognize Israel’s right to exist and yet claim their nuclear ambitions are purely peaceful. They now promote the notion of ‘Western hypocrisy’ while they express the desire to destroy Israel and at the same time define their nuclear program as ‘peaceful’.

If you are curious to know who is Yusef Fernandez the following is from Frontpage magazine. ‘Yusuf Fernandez, the spokesman for the Spanish Federation of Islamic Religious Entities…‘

Some additional information may be found useful as well.

In 1967 the first law allowing the Muslims to organize themselves, after a parenthesis of centuries, was promulgated in Spain, leading to the establishment in 1968 of the first local Muslim Association in Spain in Melilla, and in 1971, the first national association, the Association of Muslims in Spain (AME), which has its headquarters in Madrid. Under the Spanish Constitution the Statutory Law of Religious Freedom is promulgated, now in force, and the Union of Islamic Communities in Spain was constituted (UCIDE), as well as the Spanish Federation of Islamic Religious Entities (FEERI), which together constitute the Islamic Commission of Spain (CIE), which is a member of the Muslim Council of Cooperation in Europe (MCCE)[1]in Brussels, which is a consultative body to the European Union.

So the IAEA reports to this point have solved nothing as indicated in numerous reports in the ‘media’.

Yossi Melman / The IAEA report on Iran lacks the bottom line

‘IAEA hiding incriminating evidence’

UN nuclear watchdog denies hiding Iran information

UN reports increase in Iranian uranium programme

IAEA to report Iran atom slowdown ahead of talks

Iran, Syria have not carried out sufficient cooperation in …

Iran is continuing nuclear activity, says United Nations watchdog

Iran Claims Report ‘Vindicated’ Nuclear Program

Iran dismisses nuclear assessment

Iran is stonewalling the UN nuclear watchdog agency about “possible military dimensions” to its suspect nuclear programme, officials have said.

The UN is urging the regime to clarify the mysterious role of a foreign explosives expert and shed light on other issues.

A senior Iranian envoy angrily denounced the assessment as “fabrication,” insisting his country has gone out of its way to be transparent and co-operative.

In its latest report, the International Atomic Energy Agency said it has pressed the Islamic Republic to clarify its uranium enrichment activities and reassure the world that it is not trying to build an atomic weapon.

Iran insists its nuclear programme is peaceful and geared solely toward generating electricity. The United States and key allies contend the country is covertly trying to build an atomic weapon.

These stories support comments suggesting the ‘international community’ response to the nuclear ambitions of Iran, North Korea and others is impotent. They do nothing about the problem outside of promoting resolutions at the equally impotent United Nations. This criticism includes the IAEA.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

During the 2008 US Presidential election campaign many noticed the personal history of candidate Barack Obama appeared cloaked in secrecy as little was uncovered about his earlier days growing up or attending college and the candidate was not offering any clarity on the topic. Surprisingly, the NY Times is offering an account of at least one aspect of student Obama’s thinking on nuclear arms. And Jennifer Rubin offers a report expanding on the concerns that President Obama may still hold these youthful idealistic notions. Unfortunately, Mr Obama may be operating without benefit of the practical realities that typically guide world leaders through the dangerous territory of foreign affairs.

The student was Barack Obama, and he was clearly trying to sort out his thoughts. In the conclusion, he denounced “the twisted logic of which we are a part today” and praised student efforts to realize “the possibility of a decent world.” But his article, “Breaking the War Mentality,” which only recently has been rediscovered, said little about how to achieve the utopian dream.

Twenty-six years later, the author, in his new job as president of the United States, has begun pushing for new global rules, treaties and alliances that he insists can establish a nuclear-free world.

With Iran, North Korea and surely others pursuing nuclear weapons arsenals and Russian leaders expressing concern over US missile defense proposals leading up to current arms negotiations the Obama mindset may be of concern to you. Especially if the new President has an obsession with youthful idealism.

Obama Has Gotten It Wrong for Twenty-Five Years

Jennifer Rubin - 07.05.2009 - 8:31 AM

Those who suspect the president is engaged in a bit of dangerous self-delusion and denial about certain unpleasant realities regarding the threats from rogue states won’t be heartened to read that his current non-proliferation fetish stems, at least according to the New York Times, from his college infatuation with the nuclear freeze movement.

The line below from the Rubin piece should feature prominently with any US position on arms negotiations.

And really, what excuse is there for Obama’s ludicrous worldview? Unlike student Obama, President Obama knows how the Cold War ended. And it wasn’t by disarming America.

The impotent ‘international community’ has done nothing to stop rogue states from pursuing an arms race in a time ideally suited for such a collective effort. That alone should raise suspicion about the intentions of those courting the US on disarmament. Other recent reports are offered below.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Russia Still Opposes US Plan for Missile Shield in Eastern Europe

Russia Wants Deeper Cuts in Numbers of Nuclear Warheads

Next Round of US-Russian Arms Talks Set for June 23

Russia Ready to Reduce Nuclear Arms

Russia, US Begin Talks Over New Arms Control Pact

Russia, US Work on New Missile Pact

Are U.S.-Russian Relations Warming?

Clinton, Russian FM Agree to Improve US-Russian Relations

Resurgent Russia Poses Challenge for Obama Administration

As is always the case, assuming the information below is accurate, comments from four Uighur detainees who have been relocated to, go figure, Bermuda, certainly give an impression far different from opponents of the military facility at Gitmo.

The four of the Chinese Muslims, or Uighurs, released to Bermuda from the Guantanamo Bay prison told FOX News that they are innocent, glad to be free and hold no grudges against the United States for their captivity.

The men, who range from 31 to 38 years old, also said they think life in China, where they face persecution, is worse than life at Guantanamo.

Given that Bermuda is a ‘British protectorate’ another interesting part of the story is the US did not discuss the move with British authorities prior to sending the detainees to the island. It appears the only security involving the detainees at their new digs is a requirement to check in with local police from time to time. The entire scenario seems a bit absurd given the raging debate on the matter over the last few years.

Maybe this is the kind of story that causes China to include themselves in a group calling for diverse currency in global finance obviously chagrined at the allegations that they manipulate their own currency and are taking a shot at the world’s most accepted version, the greenback. While the two best known world powers, the United States and Russia, seem to be in regroup mode, China appears to be having welcome to the NFL growing pains. All that power and all that talent struggling to be a player on the world stage. Hampered by longstanding criticism of government abuse, human rights violations and new economic woes from tainted or counterfeit goods as well as allegations of espionage and stolen intellectual property the Chinese are desperately trying to distract attention from their own problems.

Maybe the Uighur detainees living large in Bermuda can enlighten us further on life in China. Could that be one of the reasons they may be persecuted in China, telling it like it is? Of course this could all be a sham and the Uighurs are as the Chinese say….. terrorists or some such.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

From the White House website and the out of place blog three items are featured. Health care reform is touted as ‘the key to our fiscal future.’ The 2000th transportation construction job located in Michigan is described so cutely as the road to recovery. And ‘a broad array of ways’ the public can participate in government extends the fantasy of transparency and accountability, etc.

And a list along side these items outlines legislation passed this year. The measure on credit card rules demonstrates the not so creative use of words to give the impression new laws are significant. Accountability (there’s that word again), responsibility and disclosure are combined with credit or card to give the cute acronym CARD for this law. Another weapons procurement law, another title suggesting a way to save homes of those at risk of foreclosure, something on fraud and recovery, serving America, managing public lands, extending some small business programs, PORKULUS, DTV and SCHIPS finish out the list with a bill characterized as securing fair pay.

You can conclude that all these things guarantee the spending of more taxpayer dollars. What you cannot conclude is whether or not they will do any good. Every time Congress passes a law and the President signs it money will be spent. But exactly what good it does or the fact that no one in Washington (or really at any other level of government) will do anything to present facts and figures with supporting data to prove the end results or lack of same stands as evidence nothing changes in the executive and legislative branches at the federal level and all talk of transparency and accountability is ludicrous.

Put this in comparison with the biggest issues this past week. North Korea has expanded on its course to collide with the rest of the world on nuclear threats and its reckless actions while the best the White House can do is say it supports the UN resolution that is simply one more impotent act in a series of them from the international community including current leadership of the United States.

Iran is reported to have held elections in which the little Hitler has been kept in power while the opposition is making claims of election fraud. Has anyone offered a helping hand to those making the allegations in an effort to place pressure on Iran to show proof of a valid election? If the world’s rogue state’s can refuse to recognize Israel why can’t the same be said of Iran based on this week’s elections?

A Treasury Dept task force ‘defends’ taking over the automobile industry There is some quiet noise being made about Gitmo and Uighur detainees and China’s opposition to relocating them from members of Congress. Obama plans to push another government takeover in the form of health care reform. The House of Representatives passes a State Dept funding plan to clean up other people’s messes and waste more taxpayer money. But let’s keep accepting the White House PR that progress is being made and things are going to get better. Cuz there from the government and here to help. Right.

It might be fair to say that Russia an China, being two other significant players on the world scene, are doing just as poorly as the US leadership in turning things around and getting serious about what really matters. But this blog is not that concerned about how well other countries are living up to their responsibilities. The US needs its leadership to return to principles that have kept us going all these years. Tearing down what has been and ‘rebuilding the fundamental ways’ this country functions as Obama has suggested is not a recipe for success.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

After hearing on Hannity that Geithner was laughed at in China a little net surfing turned up some of the items below. Hannity suggested there would be little coverage on this from the MSM. Aside from blogs and a few non-MSM business sites it seems the suggestion was right on in terms of the American press. The report below is from the UK.

Geithner insists Chinese dollar assets are safe

US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner was laughed at by an audience of Chinese students after insisting that China’s US assets are safe.

Here’s a challenge. Find the part of Geithner’s speech transcript that caused the laughter at Peking University. Okay, so maybe his insistence that China’s US assets are safe came from another exchange. (no pun intended)

Full Text of Geithner’s Speech at Peking University

Some reporting and commentary from a Chinese source on US-China relations including some discussion about Geithner, Pelosi and Clinton’s recent overtures toward the Chinese and downplaying of all their previous complaints. Funny how being broke will do that to ya.

China won’t pick up the tab for US financial woes

As Geithner goes begging to China for Barack Obama he has softened talk of China manipulating their currency. Recently he was criticized by China for saying they do manipulate their currency. And in the report below from April 2009 Geithner was again retreating on the Chinese currency manipulation claim. Which is it Tim? Oh that’s right, this is the guy who couldn’t properly submit a tax return with the help of Turbo Tax. And he’s the current Treasury Secretary of the United States arriving in China this week with his tail between his legs. Talk about not saving face.

US Treasury Says China Not Manipulating Currency

All in a day’s work at the Obamanation and we are merely observers as our elected representation is out of control.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

One argument suggests the conditions at Gitmo are better than what detainees would have access to in their home countries (assuming they have one). The same can be said for conditions of another group there… the Uighers. There is no conclusion being drawn here on the guilt or innocence of any detainee. And even though the conditions at Gitmo can be considered superior to what may otherwise be available to a detainee or the fact that detainees are being held, President Obama holds some very different views of the detainee pop as the following link explains.

Barack Obama has decided to fight the release of the 17 Chinese Uighers at Guantanamo Bay into the US, Jake Tapper reports — and he’s choosing an interesting argument to use. While Obama has wasted no opportunity to paint Gitmo as a stain on the nation’s reputation and all but the gulag Dick Durbin called it a few years ago, the administration paints quite a different picture of it in court:

The point is that Obama supporters including the MSM largely express opinions that the Messiah is right on just about everything. Let’s try to remember that the one characteristic all elected officials have is that they are politicians. Much of what gets played in the press puts a spin on the political positions of those we have selected, as a group, to represent our interests in Washington and elsewhere.

For instance, while this blog maintains a conservative slant on public affairs there is no hesitation to call out elected officials for their failure to maintain a similar approach if they are or ever have expressed their preference or belief in conservative principles. BTW, that would naturally explain why liberals rarely receive positive or complimentary reports in these posts.

And since some noise has been made that a significant number of liberals are displeased with Mr Obama’s performance thus far the story above about the Uighers and other elements related to Gitmo and other highly charged issues underscores the campaigning Obama versus the President Obama. This is not an attribute unique to Barack Obama but needs to be understood when analyzing or appraising his record on the issues. If most people voted for Barack Obama based on his campaign promises they might want to carefully review the chronology to determine whether or not they may suffer from buyer’s (or voter’s) remorse.

Then again they may have gotten exactly what they wanted. The person they chose for President in which none of what was just described matters.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Why this story did not get much play is a bit of a mystery. China wants to be king. But so do many countries. Amid criticism over the last few years China has exported tainted goods, conspired with major IT companies to limit their citizens access to the internet, been accused of cyber-espionage and other bad behavior. While Olympic athletes choked on their smog dominated air the US continued to play nice as China joined in the greed that put the world finances in the tank as well as sponsoring out of control US debt. But even then the US was chastising them for manipulating their currency. Gee Timothy, what changed?

According to one website that offers exchange rate data, nothing. Even the US gov’t data on China’s currency valuation does not appear to reflect Geithner’s rosy report of 16% appreciation. Why do you suppose Turbo Tax & cheat wonder boy Geithner gave such a positive spin on China’s currency?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has declined to name China as a currency manipulator - a position that is in contrast to the government’s stance in January.
In the Treasury Department’s semi-annual report on the currency practices of key trade partners, Mr. Geithner says there is no evidence that any major U.S. trading partner had manipulated its exchange rate. The findings are in a report submitted to Congress Wednesday.

During his January confirmation hearing, Mr. Geithner said that President Barack Obama believed China was “manipulating” the value of its currency to gain unfair trade advantages.

However, in the new report, he says China has taken steps to “enhance exchange rate flexibility.” He also says the Chinese currency “appreciated” by more than 16 percent between June 2008 and February 2009.

U.S. politicians, labor leaders and manufacturers have long complained that China intervenes in foreign exchange markets to keep the value of its currency artificially low. The move would give Chinese products a price advantage on world markets.

In the new report, Mr. Geithner also says “virtually every advancing economy and many emerging markets are in recession.”

He also says many currencies depreciated against the dollar in the second half of 2008 and into 2009.

crossposted to:
Maggie’s Notebook
Conservative Thoughts

This month President Barack Obama caused the eyes of many to glaze over with his wandering message expressing an interest in a world free of nuclear weapons. Those who applauded the announcement were from one of three groups. Those who share membership in the not so exclusive nuclear club of planet Earth or wannabees who are delighted the new American President will try to disarm the US. Or uber liberals with reality issues who still believe surrender and appeasement will bring peace to the world. Or really nice folks who thought it impolite not to applaud the person on stage accepting blame for everything on behalf of the country he represents.

Yo Barry. Here’s a heads up for you. Most people accept the events in history that led to the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, China and France being the original, and for a time only, members of the group known as the Nuclear Club. Well, except maybe for France, but that’s another story. They’re the same ones who support the US strategy in Afghanistan but won’t send troops or ones that can fight. Oh ya, and they’re the ones like some others in the EU who support the G20 idea of providing a trillion in stimulus but are fine with the US contributing more than their share. And apparently, Mr Obama, you agree.

In addition to the original members of the Nuclear Club are India and Pakistan. Just like Iran and North Korea now, no one had a clue how to prevent these two countries from joining. And there are about a dozen other countries included in discussions of who has the ability to go nuclear. (Israel’s ability is assumed but not declared ) So the number is at or approaching a couple of dozen. Are you following this so far, Mr President?

If you understand the previous few paragraphs then why the hell are you making these public statements about a nuclear free world? This is one time most Americans would hope you are offering another promise you will break. Otherwise one can only assume the pressure is getting to you and you’re losing it. If the problem was so simple to solve and all the people of the planet could get along as you and your followers believe, don’t you expect it would have been achieved by now? Has it ever occurred to you that the reason the problem has not been corrected is that no one has the answer yet? It is fair to assume that what was once feared as the ultimate fate of a nuclear armed Earth still remains.

But a likely alternative expectation, given the UN’s typical failure to respond to the DPRK’s missile launch, is that with proper handling avoiding catastrophe can be achieved in much the same way as it was in the past. All parties will be attracted to their nuclear power of choice while the nuke powers will maintain a balance still based on mutual assured destruction if the worst would happen. At some point thereafter this game will be exhausted and other circumstances yet to arrive will cause nations of the world to abandon this stupidity. Not because we will then be wiser but some other equally scary threat will require extraordinary cooperation between all the people on this planet in order to survive. And no, Mr Gore, it’s not Global Scamming Warming. It’s those peaceful Muslims carrying suitcases. (hint, hint)

We may then have a taste of peace long enough to become addicted to its benefits. But it won’t happen due to some idealistic fantasy that we can all get along because that is the way ti is supposed to be. That may come within time but for now you are trying to put the cart before the horse at best or transforming the human race to an endangered species at worst. Starting with the United States for whom you took an oath. It may be time for you to read it again for the first time.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

If the reports below are any indication of what can be expected from the G20 summit in London this week anyone skeptical of good news resulting will not be disappointed. It is likely the optimistic expectations suggested by President Obama of the US and Prime Minister Gordon Brown of Britain will not come to fruition.

Apparently those in charge of releasing a collective statement for leaders in attendance are having difficulty deciding what to say. After embarrassing leaks and reports of numerous revisions this may demonstrate the feeble performance yet to appear from the world’s, ah hem, leaders.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The Times understands that the money will come in three separate packages.

The first are new lines of credt worth more than $100 billion to encourage countries to trade more.

The second is a possible tripling to $750 billion in the resources held by the International Monetary Fund to rescue struggling economies. The extra money will come from Japan, the EU, China and others.

The third is a one-off allocation of “special drawing rights” that enable countries to swap their own currencies for IMF backed resources.The effect is to give those countries more confidence to deplete their reserves and expand.

The report above is from the Times and the one below from the Telegraph (UK)

A version that surfaced in Germany last week appeared to show that leaders are still not agreeing on what to say about “fiscal stimulus” measures to boost economic activity by borrowing.

British officials have insisted that that the German leak was out of date and failed to reflect the intense negotiations carried out by “sherpas” and other officials ahead of the actual summit.

In fact, the text being circulated in London today commits leaders only to make “the scale of sustained effort necessary to restore growth” and contains no detail about the size and type of stimulus countries should undertake.

For a little entertainment you may wish to follow the link from the excerpt below.

The G20 protests

Wagging the dog

Apr 2nd 2009
From Economist.com
On the barricades and behind the cameras in London

OUR day of covering the protests starts with a failure: the Whitechapel Anarchist Group, whom we had emailed about interviewing, fail to answer their phone (too busy preparing to spread mayhem if other press reports are to be believed, though their blog huffily decries these accounts). At 7am, the City is quiet. Work traffic is light for a weekday, and my camera-wielding colleague and I are keen to get shots of the City prepared for protests, so set off looking for banks and offices that have shut for the day. HBOS and Halifax both sport locked doors, but security guards prevent us from filming. Frustrated, we head toward London Bridge where one of the marches is due to start.

Seriously: “Send in the Clowns” on Queenzbop playlist (Michelle Malkin)

crossposted at:
Maggie’s Notebook
Conservative Thoughts
Screw the UN

More on the Obama Adminisration and troubling trends are in the news. It is not a surprise nor necessarily atypical for a President of one political party to undo that of a former President of another party. The Obama Administration rescinded the Mexico City Policy ban on funding foreign abortions which has a history of reversals with each change in President of the opposing party. He appeared to be reversing policy on Gitmo but the jury is still out on that one. And the liberal fringe is not happy about the new President’s action or inaction on Iraq and Afghanistan or some other matters.

Does it seem odd to you that the President Obama’s first foreign trip was to Canada while his new Secretary of State headed for Indonesia and China and the rest of Asia? It is not unlike an opinion voiced by Rush Limbaugh on news the President does not favor the Fairness Doctrine. El Rushbo suggests we should not be optimistic about the news in that Obama did not say something like he would not sign or would veto such legislation. Alternatively, Limbaugh suggested it as a trait of the new liberal President to not spend political capital when he can get others to do it. That may also explain his trip to Canada. And Hillary is simply trying to add to her lacking resume’ for 2012. But Canada is boycotting Durban II. Hmmm.

That brings us to this issue, Durban II. The US and Israel were the only countries to vote against it in 2001 or beyond. Now that Obama is in office funny how the UN’s agenda on race again takes center stage. In the past there was the suggestion that opponents of Israel would use the opportunity to gain advantage by using international events to portray Israel and/or the US as racist. Given Obama and Holder’s notable quotes on the topic this may be of some concern to the public at large. Another reversal of Bush 43 policy which may also prove to be dangerous.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Op-Ed: Boycott Durban II

Jewish Telegraphic Agency, NY - Feb 18, 2009
The April 2009 Durban II conference promises to top that fiasco, despite the Obama administration’s decision to attempt to influence the process. …

Can the United States fix Durban II?

Reuters - Feb 18, 2009
Israel and Canada have already announced they would boycott “Durban II,” as the conference is being called, and the Bush administration was opposed to the …

Obama officials meet US Jews to explain their Durban II policy

Human Rights Tribune, Switzerland - Feb 18, 2009
Jerusalem fears that the “Durban II” summit, set to be held in Geneva this April, will be used by Arab nations and others as a forum to criticize Israel as …