Blog @ MoreWhat.com

One report attributed to Reuters at the NYT fish wrap and a similar one at Reuters report the IPCC will be investigated by an independent board of review. Each report is slightly different yet share some text and the titles are not the same. Given the scam proportions of AGW and the IPCC this raises suspicion this blog will deal with right now as no time is available for further investigation. But it can make you wonder. Was the NYT taking a little creative license with the report?

Moving to the real problem, how do you convince the public everything is above board when you make a claim that irregularities related to scientists will be investigated by other scientists? Who cares if you claim they are independent? The ones under investigation were described that way too!

This blogger, for one, would like to report on at least one example where confidence is high that so-called scientific evidence on AGW is correct. As much as this issue smells of scam any skeptic worth their criticism would expect at least one example of scientific truth regarding global warming. Everything being false or fabricated is no more believable than everything being correct.

Okay, let’s go back to the report…..

“It will be [made up of] senior scientific figures. I can’t name who they are right now. It should do a review of the IPCC, produce a report by, say, August and there is a plenary of the IPCC in South Korea in October.

“The report will go there for adoption,” he told reporters on the sidelines of a UNEP conference in Nusa Dua, on the Indonesian island of Bali, where environment ministers have been meeting this week.

It would appear that the powers-that-be within the United Nations are simply seeking vindication by any means in advance of the next scam meeting. It is not difficult to believe those in lesser industrialized nations and the third world view the AGW issue as a great strategy for sabotaging their more successful counterparts. Launch initiatives like those suggested by Al Gore and his crew to destroy the economies of ‘rich’ nations to even the playing field.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

When the words war and crimes are used together it speaks to an underlying problem. As a species we have failed to render armed conflict obselete. And given that two or more sides of an issue engage in the practice from time to time additional problems arise in the aftermath. Someone always wants to justify war by finding someone to accuse of war crimes. As if having rules for war somehow makes it more palletable or civilized.

It is no surprise that the United Nations is central to this story. Neither is it a surprise that it surrounds the Israeli/Palestinian problem or that others can cloak their real intentions as participants in the international organization. So after more than a year since the conflict in question took place there’s a new wrinkle in the situation.

The U.N. General Assembly has adopted a resolution renewing pressure on the Israelis and Palestinians to conduct independent and credible investigations into crimes committed by both sides during the 22-day Gaza conflict that erupted in December 2008.

The General Assembly voted to give Israel and the Palestinians five more months in which to conduct investigations of alleged war crimes that are “independent, credible and in conformity with international standards.”

The US continues to support Israel and says the Goldstone report is flawed. Other countries line up on familiar sides of the issue as with any other item involving Israel. It’s a logjam that demonstrates absolutely no probability for resolution. Not just about the 22-day conflict in 2008 but everything else involving the Middle East.

There is nothing ‘united’ about these nations. It should be possible for a large group of nations to impose their will on the occasional problem areas from time to time. But not when the large group supports their own interest rather than the world at large and politics trumps all else.

Just another example that the United Nations is one useless organization.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

For more information on the topic click here

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.

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.

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

The critical issue these days when discussing political parties should be national security as without effective defense every other debate is moot. The GOP fall from grace preceding two election cycles of defeat merely allowed the continuation of flawed governance. The only difference is party blue rather than party red.

Michael Leiter is a Bush appointee. Obama did not replace him. Leiter is in the news due to the Flight 253 terror plot. There are conflicting reports between at least three sources, the NY Post, the NY Daily News and US News & World Report. The conflict is whether Leiter was on vacation before the event and declined to return or that he left the day after the botched national security that allowed the botched terror plot.

from the NY Post….

The White House acknowledged Thursday that Michael Leiter, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, had taken six days annual leave after the Dec. 25 attempted plane bombing but said he remained intimately involved in the U.S.’s response to the thwarted terror attack.

It was reported Thursday that government sources were upset that Leiter had gone on a ski trip following Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s attempt to destroy a Detroit-bound plane.

“People have been grumbling that he didn’t let a little terrorism interrupt his vacation,” one of the sources is reported to have told the newspaper.

from USN&WR…

Terror Chief Michael Leiter Wasn’t Vacationing Through Attack

Only later did he head out of town. “Only after explicit consultations with both the White House and the Director of National Intelligence and considering the current threat environment did Director Leiter take six days of annual leave after the event, which again did not affect in any way his ability to remain engaged with all elements of the United States Government,” he said.

The piece above critcizes the NY Daily News for reporting Leiter was on vacation and declined to return to work after the Flight 253 incident on Dec 25th. But Alex Kingbury at USN&WR misses the point.

The stumbling US national security ‘team’ seriously botched this one. Liberals in Congress criticize conservatives for holding up a critical confirmation of Obama’s nominee to head TSA. Napolitano’s no help. So having the head of another national security ‘resource’ take to the slopes AFTER a security breach is equally disturbing. Not like they fixed what’s wrong before he left.

At the very least this supports Senator Jim DeMint’s ‘holding up’ the confirmation of Erroll Southers as the head of the Transportation Security Administration. These national security vacancies require very special people to lead the effort. One could say there are vacancies in leadership roles that are filled not to mention other positions throughout government.

Nearly a decade after 9/11 everyone should be able to expect better than this from US national security. Among other things Bush bashers love to draw comparisons. Any criticism expressed toward the current administration is met with rebuttals concerning the Bush years. The point those arguments fail to recognize is 9/11 publicly exposed national security vulnerabilities and placed the topic front and center. Much was corrected by the Bush adminisstration and not without excessive opposition from the left. Now that the left is once again in the majority in Washington they are not allowed a pass to make earlier mistakes over again.

US national security failures started with Clinton and ended with Bush. Let’s not have a do over.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

First homeland security princess Janet Napolitano said the systems worked in the Flight 253 incidents. Second, President Obama was uncharacteristically silent as an opportunity to pontificate presented itself. Third, Napolitano initiated damage control for her earlier pathetic appraisal of national security. Fourth, President Obama, for reasons we can imagine, broke his silence on the matter and part of a report from the Obama hijacked VOA News is below.

The president’s demeanor was serious as he faced reporters in Hawaii, where he is vacationing with his family. He talked about the steps that have been taken to improve airline safety since the attempted attack. And he sought to reassure the American people, saying that the government is doing all it can to keep the public safe and secure.

He said extra law enforcement officers will be put on many flights, and that the passenger screening process is being reviewed - including revising the computerized lists used to detect high risk individuals.

The president added that he is conferring with his national security team. He spoke of their determination to deal with the terrorist threat. “We will continue to use every element of our national power to disrupt, to dismantle and defeat the violent extremists who threaten us - whether they are from Afghanistan or Pakistan, Yemen or Somalia or anywhere where they are plotting attacks against the U.S. homeland,” he said.

President Obama urged Americans to be vigilant but confident as they travel during the current holiday season and throughout the coming year

Sorry Mr President but it appears the only ones concerned about national security are those you and your cronies have labeled violent fringe right wingers who attend tea parties. As far as extra law enforcement goes Barry, there is no extra. There’s what you have and what you use. There’s no extra. Review this if there is something you want to review. See below.

Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate CIA interrogations of high-value detainees came under attack Sunday from key figures in both parties.

The intelligence community has every reason to doubt your sincerity.

The White House will not weigh in on the case of the three Navy SEALs facing court martial for allegedly mistreating an Iraqi terror suspect believed to have been behind the slaying of four Americans in 2004

And it is fortunate those who serve in the military have their own leadership who inspire them as their Commander-in-Chief has abandoned that role.

Why do 2010 and 2012 keep coming to mind? Sorry, it’s just another rhetorical question. But feel free to answer if the notion strikes.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Barry from DC’s homeland security princess, Janet Napolitano, first stated the US national security system worked in referring to an attempt to detonate explosives on board a US airliner landing in Detroit on Christmas. Today she is stumbling over herself to produce damage control for her previous appraisal. No doubt this is taking place at the ‘urging’ of others in the Obamanation.

But let’s not focus only on the Obama Administration’s reaction to a failed terrorist attack. Failed only because the terrorist fortunately botched the assignment. Members of the US Congress are equally disappointing in their response to the event.

from the House Committee on Homeland Security…..

The reported act of terrorism – whether directly related to al Qaeda or not – and the response to it will be the focus of an oversight hearing next month. The Committee will get to the bottom of what did and did not happen with Mr. Abdulmutallab and what security precautions need to take place in the future.”

from the Senate Committee on Homeland Security….

WASHINGTON - Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Joe Lieberman, ID-Conn., and Ranking Member Susan Collins, R-Me., announced Monday that they would convene a hearing in January to examine the layers of security meant to protect airline passengers from terrorist attacks but which accused terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab successfully evaded.

Hearings scheduled for January!!! So this is how are fine leaders respond to dropping the ball on national security. Not to worry folks, your elected and appointed leaders are on the job. They’re not concerned enough to interrupt their Christmas and New Year’s plans to deal with security breaches so you should not worry either. Just continue as before….. clueless.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Open thread: Obama’s statement on the Christmas Day jihadi attack; Perfunctory, hasty, and bloodless (Michelle Malkin)

Another event to once again raise the discussion on national security. Not like the status of US national security is ever erased from the American consciousness but one has to wonder if that includes the Obama Administration? The President has been criticized for not being more visible on this and other issues since heading to Hawaii on vacation. His security princess, Napolitano, stated after the Flight 253 incident, the first of two, that ‘the system’ was working properly. That someone was able to board a commercial aircraft and attempt to detonate explosives on final approach contradicts Napolitano’s conclusion. Unless only doing something after the fact is her idea of national security. And even then, simply notifying other commercial aircraft of the conditions on Flight 253 is of little value.

For those who missed it a Delta or Northwest (owned by Delta) flight, number 253, had a Nigerian passenger who attempted to detonate explosives on board as summarized above. A strange coincidence, or not, involved the same flight number on a subsequent flight in which another passenger was either detained and/or arrested for causing a disturbance. One troubling set of circumstances finds reports about the first incident suggesting the description of the ‘perp’ as a terrorist was premature and early reports about the second incident being characterized as a second terrorist attack. How’s that for a spot on press response?

Here’s a more recent account of the second incident.

A U.S. law enforcement official says an unruly passenger was detained Sunday when a Northwest Airlines flight landed in Detroit, Michigan, but he was later declared as not a security threat.

The plane was on the same route and carried the same flight number as one on Friday, when a Nigerian man allegedly tried to blow up Northwest Flight 253 just before landing.

In the latest incident, security personnel arrested a passenger upon landing Sunday because he was verbally abusive to the flight crew and had locked himself in the airplane bathroom for a long time.

The pilot radioed for emergency help. Passengers were evacuated and dogs sniffed the luggage which was spread out on the tarmac.

A law enforcement official tells news agencies that the passenger turned out to be a businessman who got sick during the flight .

And another recent update provides an excerpt on the initial incident.

Passengers have told investigators the man went into the bathroom for 20 minutes before landing, and then when he went to sit down, said he had stomach problems, and pulled a blanket on himself.

Just as the plane was getting ready to land, they heard a pop, smelled smoke and then saw the man on fire.

A Dutch passenger jumped on the Nigerian to subdue him, and blankets were used to put out the fire.

Does this brief review adequately establish Napolitano’s press statements are absurd? Certainly everyone is entitle to their opinion but you can guess that most Americans expect a different outcome in order to state the ’system worked’ when discussing US national security.

On the topic of President Obama’s silence on the matter in recent reports this blog’s reaction. It is reminiscent of an old expression about incompetence that begins with ‘better to be viewed as an idiot than….’. You probably know the rest.

Some related items are provided below on the explosive (PETN) reportedly used in the first incident.

a highly explosive organic compound belonging to the same chemical family as nitroglycerin—i.e., the nitric acid esters of polyalcohols.

PETN was introduced as an explosive after World War I. It is used by itself in detonators and detonating fuses (Primacord) and in a mixture, called pentolite, with an equal amount of trinitrotoluene (TNT) in grenades and projectiles.

PETN is a colourless, crystalline material that is generally stored and shipped as a mixture with water. It is less sensitive than nitroglycerin but is easily detonated. Valued for its shattering force and efficiency, PETN is the least stable of the common military explosives but retains its properties in storage for longer periods than nitroglycerin or cellulose nitrate (nitrocellulose) does. PETN is also used in medicine as a heart stimulant.

Yup, good old-fashioned human technology about a century old.

OSHA does not have a PEL for pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN), which is used both as a drug for preventing angina pectoris and as an explosive.

If you really need to know what a PEL is the following link explains along with many other items typcially covered on a MSDS or Material Safety Data Sheet. And one last related OSHA link.

OSHA has data on PETN. Now if only DHS had detection methods for this well-known explosive and implemented them to avoid a Flight 253 problem.

As a final note for this post a political point is in order. Bush bashers frequently express 9/11 happened on the Bush 43 watch so it was his fault. This blog has stated in the past that there is plenty of blame to go around regarding US national security. A couple of things to keep in mind. 9/11 was not conceived, planned or otherwise arranged by terrorists in less than eight months which is the time George W Bush was in office prior to the attack. Before that President Clinton completed two terms in office and posts here as well as information freely available elsewhere indicate some dropping of the ball as regards terrorism and Osama bin Laden, etc.

When Bush 43 took office and after 9/11 occurred it became his war on terror and he owned the problem. An unfortunate downside to pursuing public office. Post 9/11 the Bush Administration was successful on matters of national security for two terms. The same ownership transfer now applies to President Obama. Given the Flight 253 episode(s), Napolitano’s statement, Obama’s silence, the previous and now infamous warning by VPOTUS Joe Biden the national security situation is once more front and center.

Nothing about current US national security policy inspires confidence.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

How long can they keep this up? No, not Iran’s so-called ’supreme leader’, the revolutionary guard or that little Hitler named Ahmadinejad but the opposition. At a time when the UN and more importantly, member nations, have done essentially nothing about Iran’s nuclear program(s) people who actually have the stones are taking their case to the streets at great risk. Many have suggest the US and other countries should rise in support of the protests. It it is true that Ahmadinejad and the ruling thugs of Iran stole the election earlier this year there are plenty of legitimate actions other nations could take on behalf of those seeking justice in Iran.

In the VOA piece below another account in this year’s Islamic saga describes the latest threat of Iran’s ruling crew toward protesters. After that an excerpt from an LAT’s report that is not included in the one from VOA. It is another example of concerns that the present community organizer-in-chief in the US may be placing his influence within this well-known news gathering organization.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Issues Stern Warning to Protesters

Iran’s supreme leader has accused the pro-reform opposition of trying to undermine the Islamic system and insulting the Islamic Republic’s founder.Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Sunday the opposition’s relentless protests were disrespectful. State television had broadcast footage of what it said were opposition supporters destroying photos of both Ayatollah Khamenei and the Islamic Republic’s founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, during massive anti-government protests on December 7.

Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guard called Sunday for punishment of the demonstrators who tore up or burned photos of the late Ayatollah Khomeini. The guard is the country’s most powerful military force.

On Saturday, hard-line Iranian clerics rallied in cities across the country to denounce pro-reform students who staged the violent anti-government rallies.

In the holy city of Qom, cleric Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami accused the opposition of trying to destroy Iran’s Islamic system of government.

Government supporters at the rallies chanted “death to opponents of the supreme leader.”

Defeated presidential candidate and opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi was quoted on Saturday as saying his supporters would not allow any insult against the supreme leader.

Supporters of Mousavi and other reformist leaders held mass protests earlier this year after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad secured a second term in a disputed June election. The post-election demonstrations were the largest in Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

The opposition accuses Mr. Ahmadinejad of stealing the vote.
from the LAT….

Opposition supporters, however, said the incident was staged by hardliners loyal to Ahmadinejad and aired on TV to discredit their cause.

Now that’s an interesting claim. But beyond this latest episode international action is sorely needed against Iran’s delaying tactics on the nuke problem. Another benefit Ahmadinejad acquires from being allowed to procrastinate on the issue. One could argue that makes the UN and member countries complicit in Iran’s threat to the planet.

BTW, peace on Earth good will toward all.

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) 

GENEVA — The United Nations called Switzerland’s ban on new minarets “clearly discriminatory” and deeply divisive, and the Swiss foreign minister acknowledged Tuesday the government was very concerned about how the vote would affect the country’s image.

Maybe the United Nations or those specific members expressing displeasure over the minaret ban should review a larger list of ‘clearly discriminatory’ actions and deeply divisive agendas present in the world today.

The Swiss government opposed the initiative but has sought to defend it as an action not against Islam or Muslims, but one aimed at improving integration and fighting extremism.

For those who are content to define opposition to special interest agendas as xenophobic or some other phobia consider this. Special interests pursuing political influence in order to provide special status to their agenda is a dangerous trend. The PR camouflage of an issue of equality is a sham. It echoes a familiar reaction to similar exercises in the past. All men are created equal, some more equal than others.

In the United States, for example, one can observe a plethora of organized efforts to promote agendas based on social, cultural, ethnic, racial or other special interests. The one interest that seems grossly underserved is that of being an American. As if that was somehow an unworthy goal. Perhaps if people would spend more time understanding what it is to be a citizen of their respective country of origin there would be less trouble in the world.

The statement above regarding improving integration and fighting extremism is on point. Imagine that. The Swiss referendum is at odds with the UN.

“A blanket prohibition of minarets is not consistent with OSCE commitments on freedom of religion or belief and the principle of non-discrimination based on religion,” Lenarcic said in Athens, where he will participate in the OSCE Ministerial Council, to be held tomorrow and Wednesday.

The referendum, launched by the Swiss People’s Party and the Federal Democratic Union, was backed by 57.5 per cent of voters and a majority of cantons.

The UN OSCE claims the Swiss are ‘not consistent with OSCE commitments’. But 57.5% of the Swiss voted to ban minaret construction. When will the UN learn? Contrary to the UN, the Swiss ban is supported on this blog.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Another example of how political motivation blurs the lines in the GOP on being a politician or standing for conservative values.

Republicans are unanimously opposed to the sweeping legislation.

Signaling the unease of some freshman Democrats in swing districts, Rep. John Adler of New Jersey said Friday he will vote against the bill. Mr. Adler, who won his first term in 2008 with 52% of the vote, said the House bill “does not do enough to contain costs.”

He added, “Congress should not pass a bill that costs more than $1 trillion” over 10 years.

Are Republicans unanimously opposed to HR3962 and the other healthcare reform plans proposed by the Democrats for purely political reasons or because this reform violates conservative principles? There is the distinct possibility current reforms violate sections of the US Constitution as well but that’s another story for another time. As is the question of why this unanimous GOP opposition is not demonstrated on other issues like illegal immigration?

The Democratic majority has been unable to produce party unity on healthcare reform as reports indicate the Saturday vote on HR3962 may be delayed. Vulnerable Democrats are worried about the 2010 elections. The GOP has similar concerns about their possible comeback in those same elections. And yet both parties seem unwilling to accept widespread rejection by the public and respond responsibly. The fight is purely political.

The Senate may not be able to arrange a vote until next year. That would take a toll on Obama’s first term. The liberal agenda now seems destined to ride completely on the outcome of healthcare reform legislation. If incomplete into next year their 2010 aspirations are vulnerable. But the GOP may suffer along with them as voters express their anger at the ballot box.

As this fiasco continues other issues suffer from neglect, incompetence or both. The President’s support is fading. Congressional approval ratings are still in the tank. There is no economic recovery. Unemployment has reached a new high above 10% and some say it is actually higher. And all politicians can do is play politics with an issue most regard as secondary at best.

Shelve the damn healthcare issue for now. Attend to national security, national defense, border control, immigration enforcement and domestic policy related to economic matters. In other words, limited government that reduces taxes, national debt, deficits and spending. If those items are ever effectively solved then revisit healthcare reform if anyone other than liberal politicians is interested.

Until then, get conservative or get out.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

As President Obama campaigns on behalf of liberal candidates in current elections and has school children singing his praises thanks to questionable encouragement from their teachers one has to wonder how voters view his performance thus far. Indeed, Obama’s honeymoon with the American people lasted less than six months. So Mr Obama, how are all those government interventions working for you? You know, government motors, government healthcare, government pay czars and your nanny state agenda?

VPOTUS Joe Biden was tapped to shore up Barack Obama’s lack of foreign affairs experience during the 2008 Presidential campaign. Apparently most people dismissed any concerns about Obama’s lack of experience in other areas. A community organizer-in-chief was what the majority of American voters selected. The new President tapped his former rival for President as his Secretary of State. So how is Hillary Clinton doing in the minds of voters?

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 27 percent of voters think Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would be doing a better job as president, while 49 percent say she would be performing about the same. That’s about 70 percent that say a hypothetical ‘President Hillary’ would be doing as well or better than President Barack Obama.

Obama’s honeymoon is over and according to the poll above about half the voters think Hillary or Barack would be doing about the same as president. Barack Obama has done nothing to inspire confidence resulting in the honeymoon being over and half the voters think Hillary would be doing about the same. So how’s Hillary doing as Secretary of State? Forget that most of the year she was promoting human rights as her central focus. What about the Middle East?

Secretary Clinton came to Marrakech for the sixth Forum for the Future, which joins civil society groups and the private sector with foreign ministers from the Group of Eight leading industrialized nations and the Middle East to talk about democracy and resolving conflict in the region.

What was the result of these discussions?

Palestinian leaders are voicing frustration after U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton praised Israel for making what she said are unprecedented concessions in efforts to restart peace negotiations. Israeli leaders are keeping up their calls for the Palestinians to drop all preconditions.

Palestinian leaders on Sunday stuck to their demands that Israel stop all settlement activity before any resumption of peace talks that have been stalled since December.

Clinton praises Israel for doing their part and the Palestinians register a complaint.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Arab foreign ministers in Morocco to discuss Israel’s offer to limit the expansion of Jewish settlements. Clinton says Israel should reciprocate positive Palestinian moves to improve security.

Clinton reverses her earlier praise of Israel in response to Palestinian objections.

Well then, how’s it going on the issue of Iran and their pursuit of nuclear weapons?

Iranian officials say they want technical experts to review the U.N.-backed plan for sending Iran’s uranium abroad for enrichment.

All the rhetoric from various nations including the US over Iran’s nuclear program has produced zero results except that Iran is still stalling and being allowed to get away with it. And the answer from the US……

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says there will be no changes to an international offer to end the dispute over Iran’s nuclear program by having its low-grade uranium processed and enriched abroad.

That’s reassuring.(NOT) Given the impotent international response to date and Clinton’s caving on statements made about the Middle East peace process more of the same is anticipated.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com