Blog @ 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

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.

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

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

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

Exactly the kind of talk that supports the notion Arab countries and Muslims worldwide have an agenda for the destruction of Israel.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who is in the United States for talks, says Arab nations would recognize Israel only after a just and comprehensive Mideast peace deal is reached.

Nothing like putting the cart in front of the horse. Does Mubarak say anything with this other than they want a deal that places Israel in more jeopardy from the foes that surround them? A tiny country, Israel, surrounded by a massive geography populated by Muslims has been a target of these neighbors since 1948 when the current chapter in the saga began.

As early as 2010 or 11 things may change in Egypt removing them from the occasional moderate position they express. That is not how all of this sounds.

The talks in Washington are centered on the Middle East peace process and the Arab world’s relationship with Iran under President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, all issues Mr. Mubarak has taken an active interest in.

But underneath lies the question of what comes next for Egypt, or more specifically, who. In power since 1981, Mr. Mubarak has given little indication of what the transition might look like. He has no vice president. He has not said if he will run for re-election in 2011, and many wonder if that would even be advisable, as he would be nearly 90 at the end of that term.

It is an issue that concerns not just Egyptians. Professor Said Sadek is a political scientist at the American University in Cairo, who worries any instability or political vacuum could be exploited by hardline groups and politicians across the region that oppose U.S. influence in the region.

“How do you guarantee the transition of power in Egypt, so that we don’t have an unpredictable situation in Egypt that would get you the Muslim Brotherhood here in alliance with Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Beirut and [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad in Tehran - voila, the American strategic policy in the area would collapse,” said Sadek.

As with any conflict all sides have made mistakes. But that certainly does not justify calling for the destruction of Israel. While calling for the death of infidels, the destruction of Israel and at the same time claiming they are mistreated, Muslims need a reality check.

Stop the terrorism and calls for more of it and someone might begin to take you seriously. Constant violence, calling for it and promoting it does not suggest a religion of peace.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Read a book. It’s possible this blog has never recommended reading a particular book other than Mark Levin’s Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto. But a recent visit to tsowell.com served up a reminder of a wise choice from many of Thomas Sowell’s suggested reading list. It is not new or the latest bestseller but that is certainly not a reason to discount it. In these times of social and political unrest not to mention terrorism and Jihad the book by Bernard Lewis entitled ‘ What Went Wrong’ is not only relevant but extremely well written and compelling. If you do not care to take this blog’s word for it, being on Sowell’s reading list should suffice.

Like any treatment of the topic discussed by Lewis it is not without its detractors. In the interest of fairness one search engine result that provides the dissenting viewpoint is linked here so you can have one recommendation accompanied by one random review by someone not impressed with the work or the author. It would not be surprising if this dissenting viewpoint is held by someone not fond of criticism toward someone or something they personally value, right or wrong.

A description of the book from Sowell’s site is presented here and hopefully Mr Sowell will not object.

A small book presenting a top scholar’s very readable account of the history that led the Islamic world from its pinnacles of achievement in the past to its present pathology and poisonous and dangerous hatreds.

How about a guess? Terrorists, Jihadis, Muslims and Islam will be offended. The rest of us will not. Give it a read and make up your own mind. Hopefully you have already accepted the earlier recommendation on Levin’s book and read that by now. It would not hurt to follow the link to Sowell’s lists, etc., to find other good reading material.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

How does the following report reconcile one statement indicating Netanyahu ‘concedes little’ and making the speech was due to ‘American pressure’? They claim he was under duress and felt compelled to make a speech. Based on the second report below it would appear nothing has changed. Egypt still balks at the idea of recognizing the Jewish state. Is that supposed to be a big surprise?

Israeli PM concedes little in speech

The fact that Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu felt it necessary to make a speech at all about a Palestinian state shows that American pressure works.

2nd report…..
CAIRO, June 15 (Reuters) - Egypt said on Monday Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s vision for achieving peace with the Palestinians was flawed and fell short of Arab and international demands for an independent Palestinian state.

Netanyahu endorsed — with tough conditions — the establishment of a demilitarised Palestinian state in a policy speech on Sunday. He said Palestinians must recognise Israel as a Jewish state and forego the right of return for refugees.

Other reports express the Palestinians were disappointed, there is ‘fallout’ after the speech and that opposition party leader Tzipi Livni is on the same page with Netanyahu. Considering what is available to read about this topic it appears Israel is conceding nothing, maintaining their previous positions and any new items are so vague as to be a no risk offer. And the question of a Palestinian state is rendered useless since they will not likely be disarmed.

The world has moved no closer to peace in the Middle East. So what’s new? Is it possible that President Obama’s two state solution is DOA?

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

For the liberals who love to label anyone expressing a strong disfavor toward ‘foreigners’ as xenophobic try on this report. Obviously this blog did not produce this report but of course extends its profound gratitude to Voice of America for presenting it. There are some who believe that Jews and others who support them are overreacting to threats from their Arab ‘neighbors’ who surround them as well as to the actions that go beyond threat level. This should be yet one more wake up call to those same liberals and another example of the mounting evidence demonstrating Muslim hate.

And the current US President is going to cozy up to the world’s Muslims yet again. Do you suppose he will start by bowing this time too? How embarrassing. And it is ironic the POLS mentioned in this story are Democrats, liberals, whatever.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

(from left) Reps. Shelley Berkley (D-NV), Anthony Weiner (D-NY), Joe Crowley (D-NY) with poster showing excerpt from Saudi school book

Lawmakers in the U.S. Congress say Saudi Arabia has failed to remove offensive material from textbooks used in the kingdom’s schools, including language promoting hatred of and violence against Jews. Three House Democrats used a news conference coinciding with U.S. President Barack Obama’s stop in Saudi Arabia to draw attention to the problem and urge the president to press Saudi leaders on the issue.

Congress has complained for years about hate-promoting language in textbooks used in Saudi Arabia’s schools, and about books used in other countries in the Arab world, notably Egypt, as well as in schools in the Palestinian territories.

Where Saudi Arabia is concerned, the issue has been raised repeatedly by the U.S State Department in its annual religious freedom report, and by the independent U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.

In a news conference, lawmakers said that despite assurances from various Saudi officials over the years that offensive and inaccurate material would be removed from textbooks, it appears little has been done.

Representative Anthony Weiner, a Democrat from New York, displayed a 10th grade textbook, smuggled out of Saudi Arabia and translated by the Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Gulf Affairs, and he read one extract. “This is to be taught to children age 15: “The Prophet said, “the hour [of judgment] will not come until Muslims fight the Jews and kill them. . . “O Muslim! O Servant of God! There is a Jew Behind Me. Come and kill him.” This is the language that is being taught to students as young as age 15,” he said.

A report prepared by Congressman Weiner’s office, with assistance from the Institute for Gulf Affairs, examined seven textbooks in circulation in Saudi Arabian public schools and used in the 6th through 12th grades in 2008 and 2009.

Among portions translated for the report are those inciting hatred of Jews and Zionism, encouraging jihad against Jews and Christians, endorsing punishment for homosexuality, demeaning women, and affirming the right of parents to force children into marriages against their will.

Representative Shelley Berkeley, a Democrat from Nevada, says Saudi Arabia, which wants to be seen as a leader in the Arab world, must take the lead in eliminating intolerant, hateful material from its textbooks.

“Until they change their textbooks and help educate the younger generation of Saudis that are in their elementary schools and in their secondary schools, and take these hateful teachings out of the textbooks and substitute what we would consider appropriate, tolerant language in teaching for these kids, I am afraid we are just going to see a perpetuation of what we see now, cycle after cycle of hatred and intolerance,” she said.

Congressman Weiner says the Saudi government must decide which side of the debate over tolerance it wants to be on. “Do they want to be on the side where President Obama and the American people are, where we want to reduce the tensions and stop passing hate from generation to generation, or do they want to continue their age-old ways of exporting the worst type of hate, which unfortunately leads to terrorism, misunderstanding and distrust all over the world,” he said.

In its report this past April, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom named Saudi Arabia a Country of Particular Concern, saying promises and Saudi commitments to the U.S., including pledges to reform textbooks, remain unfulfilled.

The report issued by Congressman Weiner’s office quoted a pledge in 2006 by Saudi Arabia’s Ambassador to the U.S., Prince Turki Al-Faisal, that the government had removed intolerance from old textbooks, and implemented a comprehensive internal revision and modernization plan.

Saying patience in Congress with Saudi Arabia has worn out, Weiner said President Obama has an opportunity to prod Saudi Arabia to take action once and for all on the issue.

It is probably too early to draw a conclusion on President Obama’s reported ‘go ahead’ order on the Navy Seals mission to end the hostage situation involving Somali ‘pirates’ (thugs, terrorists, extortionists) and a now famous Captain Phillips of the ship Maersk Alabama. With one 16 year old perp in custody and Phillips still being held hostage, under imminent threat of death, the Navy team took out the remaining three thugs effectively freeing the captain from his captors.

If reports are accurate and President Obama twice gave the order to proceed then he should receive credit for doing the right thing. But that is what he is supposed to do, the right thing. While doing the right thing is subject to debate even in this case the outcome could have been a problem. What if the plan went forward and disaster was the result? That is the difficulty in doing the right thing under these circumstances. There would have been no shortage of criticism. So it was not an easy call contrary to what popular opinion might be but it was the right thing to do. And on that note this blog offers its first positive response to the new President.

Be it known that it is for this event and this event only that the positive response is offered. For between the Presidential agenda and the main stream media, what of it still remains viable, the phony treatment of current events distort reality. A report from AP this weekend emphasizes this assertion.

Obama Hopes to Use Dealmaking Skills Honed Abroad
Sunday, April 12, 2009 8:33 AM
WASHINGTON –

Let’s make a deal.

President Barack Obama honed his dealmaking skills on his maiden international trip, to Europe and the Middle East.

The trip helped burnish his image abroad. But can he translate that into getting his legislative priorities through Congress, where partisan lines continue to harden?

Analysts say the generally positive reception to his first venture on the international stage can’t hurt. But foreign-policy successes don’t necessarily mean achievements at home.

What analysts say any of that? Where are they? Why does the AP report not refer to them by name and offer supporting resources or evidence? Could it be the author is making it up? Like Obama suggested of those who presented less than flattering information on him during the 2008 campaign. ‘They’re just making it up.’

Analysts say. Sources say. Unnamed sources say. High level sources close to the President say. Under the promise of anonymity so and so said. This is not convincing. Right out of the gate on this one the AP is helping support the notion that the MSM is a fraud.

In the very next paragraph after such a pathetic beginning with the AP report the following was concluded. Obama helped negotiate a compromise among world powers to battle the global recession, helped break a deadlock over NATO’s next secretary-general and helped coordinate NATO’s strategy for Afghanistan. Where do they get this stuff? The G20 was a flop. Go read the statements of Merkel, Sarkozy, Brown and others at the G20. You will, if you haven’t already, see a different outcome from this particular international political show. Economic pledges of a trillion dollars do not a success make. No ‘fighting’ troops to Afghanistan from the EU is not an accomplishment. There is nothing about the G20, the UN, NATO or Obama that suggest the glowing report offered by the AP.

He agreed to restart languishing nuclear arms control talks with Russia, laid down a marker on terms for a Palestinian state, delivered a strong pitch for allowing Turkey to join the European Union and sought to heal a rift between the U.S. and the Muslim world.

Appeasement, surrender, appeasement, appeasement in that order on the last misguided excerpt from the report by AP. For a more realistic view on the nonsense that is President Obama’s agenda and his crews’ efforts thus far is another promotion from this blog to read yet another piece from George Will.

Rice really thinks there is a community out there. To believe that is to believe, as liberals do, that harmony is humanity’s natural condition, so discord is a remediable defect in arrangements.

Regarding North Korea’s missile launch, Rice was very stern. She said the U.N. Security Council would “meet,” and there would be “consultation with our partners,” who “all need to come together” and “add to” the 2006 U.N. resolution that North Korea had just disregarded, the one that demanded a halt to future missile-related activity, including launches. The Security Council met. It could not even bring itself to say North Korea’s launch had violated the resolution against launches.

The column by Will must be read in its entirety as the lone excerpt provided here doe not do it justice. Plus it is good to refer to other sources from this blog that have, shall we say, ’street cred’ in making the case or point suggested here. With more talent like George Will in the MSM they might have a better chance for survival as well as being taken seriously.

It would be wonderful if this blog could expand this one time positive response to the President’s action on the Phillips’ rescue to his entire agenda. But there is currently no evidence the remainder of his plans will be an exercise in doing the right thing.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

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

In early March 2009 Iran’s Khamenei expressed several points that would suggest the US and Iran will not likely find agreement with any proposed dialogue that could occur. There seems to be much posturing by both Iran and the White House. Obama and other Democrats have pushed for talks with Iran for a long time claiming the two countries can work out problems. Those in the US opposing such talks argue concessions or appeasement would be the only items in which Iran would be interested. And Iran continues to maintain their opposition to Israel and deny involvement in terrorism or pursuit of nuclear weapons.

Iran Denounces US During Gaza Meeting
By Edward Yeranian
Cairo
04 March 2009

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in the opening speech at the conference that President Obama spoke of change during his campaign but supported Israel’s devastating three-week offensive against the Gaza Strip earlier this year.

He says that even the new American president, who came to office with the slogan of bringing change to the policies of the Bush administration, avows unconditional support for Israel’s security, which means defending state terrorism, injustice and oppression, as well as a 22-day long massacre of hundreds of Palestinian men, women and children. This, the Ayatollah said, is the same path of the Bush administration.

You may notice in the excerpt above that Khamenei conveniently omits attacks by Hamas, Hezbollah and others or describing them as terrorism. Yet clearly in the example he uses, the December 2009 retaliation by Israel from repeated rocket attacks by Hamas, was initiated by terrorists he refuses to acknowledge.

Khamenei called for a referendum of all those residents of historic Palestine, whom he termed “legitimate,” to determine the fate of the Holy Land.

He says that he is proposing a solution which is democratic in principle and which serves as a logical basis for everyone. All those who have a legitimate stake in the territory of Palestine, he says, including Muslims, Christians and Jews should choose the structure of their ruling system in a general referendum. He says that Palestinian exiles must also participate in the referendum.

Mr. Obama has said his administration is looking for opportunities to engage Iran to help reduce tensions between the two countries - particularly related to Iran’s nuclear program.

Khamenei’s comments Wednesday highlighted how difficult it will be for the Obama administration to improve relations given the deep disagreements on both sides on issues like Israel and Iran’s nuclear efforts.

And the Iranian leader insults the intelligence of anyone reading his words regarding a referendum. Even without doing a head count on those living in the areas mentioned, to add so-called Palestinian exiles would at the very least stack the deck with unverifiable votes reminiscent of ACORN and make this ‘referendum’ a self-fulfilling prophecy with a nearly unlimited quantity of phantom voters that are anti-Israel.

Syria Offers to Mediate With Iran
By Edward Yeranian
Cairo
18 March 2009

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is proposing to mediate between the West and Iran, telling an Italian newspaper that he’s prepared to act as a go-between to improve relations that have been further strained over Iran’s nuclear program.

How convenient that after Congressional Dems sponsored an appeasement tour of the Middle East in August 2007 and Obama has been calling for appeasement worldwide Syria decides to offer to be a mediator on the Iran nukes issue as well as improving foreign relations with the United States.

French President Nicholas Sarkozy urged Mr. Assad, during a conference in France last July, to use his influence to help resolve Iran’s nuclear standoff with the West.

President Assad noted that dialogue was the best means to end long-standing disputes with Tehran, arguing that any attempt to contain a country ends by strengthening it.

And it seems French President Sarkozy is hedging his bets. It may be fair to say his rise to power not unlike Obama’s was premised on change. Now that the honeymoon is long over two things stand out. Mention of him in the previous reference as inviting Syria to get involved and lately warming up to re-entering NATO. What’s that about? Go for appeasement and if that puts you at risk fall back on newly formed ties with NATO to do your fighting for you?

Iran Warms to Obama Appeal for Better Relations
By Edward Yeranian
Cairo
20 March 2009

Iranian government TV carried a traditional New Year’s greeting from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad calling it the day of the “rebirth of love, friendship, and aspiration,” but it was President Obama’s message that captured many people’s attention.

First of all, ‘love, friendship and aspiration’ coming from Ahmedinejad is in direct opposition to his statements that Israel must be eliminated. And the Iranian President also had this to say.

“Mr. Obama has talked of change, but has taken no practical measures to redress America’s past mistakes in Iran,” he said. “If Mr. Obama takes a concrete action and makes fundamental changes to U.S. foreign policy towards other nations, including Iran, the Iranian government and people will not turn their back on him. Mr. Obama has referred to differences between Iran and the US. We believe that those differences stem from Washington’s hostile policy towards Iran. Minor changes will not end the differences.”

It is obvious anything short of appeasement and caving to Iranian intentions will not produce effective solutions or dissuade Iran from their current agenda. Where the author came up with the title suggesting Iran is ‘warming’ to the US is a puzzle.

US Looking for Reciprocal Iranian Gesture After Obama Message
By David Gollust
State Department
20 March 2009

The State Department said Friday U.S. officials are looking for a reciprocal gesture from Iran after President Barack Obama’s conciliatory holiday message to the Iranian people and government Thursday. Mr. Obama said in a broadcast for the Iranian new year holiday Nowruz that the United States wants “honest engagement” with Tehran based on mutual respect.

If the report above is true there is confirmation that Hillary Rodham Clinton does not have a clue or thinks you do not.

At a news briefing, State Department acting spokesman Robert Wood said that the crux of the President’s message was that despite the serious differences that have marred the relationship over time, the Obama administration is committed to diplomacy that addresses the full range of issues with Tehran.

Senior Iranian leaders have not given any direct response but Wood signaled patience, saying the process is at an early stage.

“We’re at the beginning of this process,” he said. “The President has made it clear we’re going to engage diplomatically with Iran. We intend to do that. It will be up to the Iranians how they want to reciprocate.”

“But I also want to emphasize we still have some very difficult issues that divide us. And what the President has said is that we want to work with Iran on trying to deal with these differences. We’re willing to diplomatically engage. It’s really going to be up to Iran,” he added.

Wood said the problem issues in the relationship include Iranian threats toward Israel and other countries in the region and its nuclear program, which U.S. officials believe is weapons-related despite statements from Tehran that it is for peaceful purposes only.

If you cite all the problems with Iran and what they are trying to accomplish and yet claim to hold out hope for a few publicly expressed kind words to initiate some sort of reconciliation two things become apparent. Either you’re an idiot or much more is going on behind the scenes and as usual public rhetoric is for political purposes. Of course it is always possible both are right.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Dismisses Obama’s Appeal
By Edward Yeranian
Cairo
21 March 2009
Speaking in the holy city of Mashhad Saturday, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the United States is using “the slogan of change,” but that he sees no real change in U.S. policy toward Iran.

Change in rhetoric alone is not enough, he said, and even then we haven’t seen much change in vocabulary. Change, he insists, must be authentic.

This part could be called ‘ gimme something.’ Obviously Obama blinked and now the Iranians are feeling superior. Could it be that during the Bush Administration Iran only talked tough as they had no other options to save face? Now that an American President is ‘asking’ to talk they have the upper hand in a discussion. So now what? Does Obama expect them to roll over and play nice or is the opposition correct, Obama’a agenda is full of appeasement?

PRESS RELEASE - Washington, D.C., March 23, 2009 - President Obama’s message to the Iranian people on the Nowruz holiday drew millions of viewers and listeners to the Voice of America (www.VOANews.com ), the largest international Persian-language broadcaster.

By Monday, VOA sites had more than 134,000 views of the three-minute speech, which Obama delivered late last Thursday as Iranians prepared to celebrate Nowruz, the Persian new year. The video was posted on www.VOANews.com, www.VOANews.com/persian/, and VOA’s partner YouTube channels. VOA’s Persian News Network (PNN) also broadcast the message to Iran, a country with a restricted media, on satellite television and on shortwave radio.

Over the weekend, PNN received and broadcast e-mails from inside Iran, many of them praising Obama’s speech. In one, Arash said he was pleased with Obamas “message because he (Obama) actually recognizes the Islamic Republic of Iran.” The writer also said he hoped Iran’s leaders “will study Obama’s speech and make a good decision.”

In his remarks, Obama talked of a “new beginning,” saying he hoped Iran, the United States and other nations would form constructive ties. He also praised Iran’s “great and celebrated culture.”

VOA’s dissemination of the video was also cited by Fox News Network, the Times of London and the Guardian in the United Kingdom, among many other places.

Whatever happened to strength through power?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Obama is pushing for a two state solution to conflict in the Middle East between Israelis and Palestinians. Syria may have expressed there is a possibility of peace with Israel but the condition still hinges on the Palestinian question so what has really changed? A report indicates the US will not talk to Hezbollah as Britain will. Iran backs Hezbollah (among others) and the report below indicates Hezbollah will never recognize Israel.

Israel, a tiny country surrounded by a vast geographic expanse of Arab countries. Some of the problems have been centered on access or ownership of areas of religious significance but that seems to be more of an excuse to continue fighting than an honest grievance. The ‘bad blood’ between the two sides has a long history and to the casual observer it would seem much of the problem stems from violence through recent history more than any long standing disagreements.

Arab countries have held ’summits’ to address their own problems with each other. Could it be some would like to take advantage of a new leader from Israel’s most staunch ally, the US, and come to some sort of equitable solution? Even if that were true how do you keep all the parties in line that feel they have some sort of stake in this?

It really is not a simple problem to solve. But it seems the strategies offered or attempted over many years are merely repeats of failed attempts from the past. What is needed? Those directly involved, Israelis and Arabs, must find a way to put aside the anger and hate to do the right thing. Anything short of that will not work since a solution requires all involved to stop the madness. That is why this blog’s author is not optimistic this problem will be solved in our lifetime.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The leader of Lebanon’s Hezbollah militant group said Friday his movement will never recognize Israel.

In a speech marking the birthday of the Prophet Mohammed, Hassan Nasrallah said he rejected American conditions for dialogue, including recognition of the state of Israel.

The United States considers Hezbollah a terrorist organization and has called on the Shi’ite group to renounce violence.

During his speech, Nasrallah also welcomed Arab reconciliation efforts and called on Arab nations to show support for Iran, which backs Hezbollah.

Saudi Arabia and Egypt held talks with Syria in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, this week, in a bid to mend rifts.