Just following your tax dollars

Bankrupt A123 changes name to B456 PDQ

Ok, so we made the "PDQ" part up, but battery maker A123 Systems, Inc. has changed its name to B456 Systems, Inc. – and no, this is not an early April Fool's Day joke. As part of A123's bankruptcy proceedings dating to last October, it was required to change its name in order to be purchased by Chinese company Wanxiang. According to the Detroit Free Press, as part of a March 22, 2013 filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission, A123 declared that its new name is B456 the name of the old assets to be liquidated is B456, akin to the way the post-bankruptcy General Motors was broken into GM and Motors Liquidation Company. The ongoing concern owned by Wanxiang is still called A123 Systems, Inc. We're not sure if anyone at A123 realized the irony – B456 is also the model number for a fire extinguisher made by Amerex that happens to be good for "energized electrical equipment."

Wanxiang completed its purchase of A123 B456 earlier this year. The company formerly known as A123 had received hundreds of millions of dollars in loans, tax credits and grants from the federal government and the states of Michigan and Massachusetts. Part of the funds from the Wanxiang purchase repaid the $2.8 million it received from Massachusetts, but it looks like the other monies will go unrepaid. The Chinese company has said it will keep the Michigan plants open, but Michigan is trying to keep Wanxiang from collecting the rest of its unused incentives.

She's not unusual in the progressive world...cutting edge is more important then morality

Video: Planned Parenthood Official Argues for Right to Post-Birth Abortion

John McCormack

Florida legislators considering a bill to require abortionists to provide medical care to an infant who survives an abortion were shocked during a committee hearing this week when a Planned Parenthood official endorsed a right to post-birth abortion.

Alisa LaPolt Snow, the lobbyist representing the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, testified that her organization believes the decision to kill an infant who survives a failed abortion should be left up to the woman seeking an abortion and her abortion doctor.

"So, um, it is just really hard for me to even ask you this question because I’m almost in disbelief," said Rep. Jim Boyd. "If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?”

"We believe that any decision that's made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician," said Planned Parenthood lobbyist Snow.

Rep. Daniel Davis then asked Snow, "What happens in a situation where a baby is alive, breathing on a table, moving. What do your physicians do at that point?”

"I do not have that information," Snow replied. "I am not a physician, I am not an abortion provider. So I do not have that information.”

Rep. Jose Oliva followed up, asking the Planned Parenthood official, "You stated that a baby born alive on a table as a result of a botched abortion that that decision should be left to the doctor and the family. Is that what you’re saying?”

Again, Snow replied, “That decision should be between the patient and the health care provider.”

“I think that at that point the patient would be the child struggling on the table, wouldn’t you agree?” asked Oliva.

"That’s a very good question. I really don’t know how to answer that," Snow said. "I would be glad to have some more conversations with you about this.”

Later another representative asked Snow, “What objection could you possibly have to obligate a doctor to transport a child born alive to a hospital where it seems to me they would be most likely to be able to survive?”

Snow said Planned Parenthood was concerned about "those situations where it is in a rural health care setting, the hospital is 45 minutes or an hour away, that’s the closest trauma center or emergency room. You know there’s just some logistical issues involved that we have some concerns about.”

Now who else was a big proponent of this kind of policy? It was immoral then and it just as immoral when the progressives suggest it.

Argentina: the recurring nightmare is government planning

Argentine defiance in appeal of $1.4 billion debt ruling aims at unlikely Supreme Court win

By Michael Warren, The Associated Press

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina - With just hours to go before Argentina has to show its last cards in a billion-dollar debt showdown in the U.S. courts, President Cristina Fernandez seems to be keeping up her "we're going for more" motto. Her government is reportedly preparing a response that analysts say could lead the country into another catastrophic default.

Argentina has until midnight Friday to propose how it would satisfy a $1.4 billion judgment won by plaintiffs who have insisted for a decade on getting full payment in cash, plus interest and penalties, on sovereign debt that the country hasn't paid since its world-record default in 2002.

Government officials weren't talking in public about the plan this week, but they have repeatedly said that the plaintiffs it considers "vulture funds" should get no better than what 92 per cent of other investors in Argentina accepted in 2005 and 2010 in exchange for their defaulted bonds: a package of new bonds that were initially worth less than 30 cents on the dollar.

The exact details likely won't be known until just before the deadline, but the broader aspects have been widely reported in Argentina's media: Rather than the quick cash payout ordered by the courts, it will offer new bonds that won't come fully due for up to 25 years. And rather than pay in full, the government will insist on paying no more than 30 per cent to start with.

If true, this would amount to open defiance of the U.S. federal courts, Wall Street analysts say.

Argentina could keep appealing, but the U.S. Supreme Court has a long record of denying such cases. And that could be "suicide" for the South American nation's economy, says financial analyst Josh Rosner, managing director of Graham Fisher & Co. in New York.

"The court was looking for something simple, like: we're not going to pay them in a lump sum, but we're going to make a quarterly payment of the full $1.4 billion over three years. They weren't looking for creative financing where Argentina demands or forces a new bond," Rosner said. "What if somebody took that new bond, and the Argentine government defaulted the next day?"

Analysts voiced similar worries in Argentina, where defying the "vulture funds" is politically very popular, but economically dangerous.

If the government loses, "Argentina will be forced to decide whether to follow the decision or enter into technical default, a situation that would increase the country risk and deteriorate even more the price of publicly traded shares, as well as drive the parallel dollar even higher. This is not the most auspicious moment to run these risks," economist Ramiro Castineira concluded after analyzing how the government might follow through on its position.

The appellate court already ruled in October in favour of NML Capital Ltd., a hedge fund run by billionaire Paul Singer, basing its decision on the "pari passu" clause in the defaulted bond contracts, Latin for treating all bondholders equally.

Fine, Economy Minister Hernan Lorenzino has said repeatedly during this appeal: equal means Argentina will pay the plaintiffs no better than what the exchange bondholders got in 2005 or 2010.

Those bondholders have been steadily repaid, recovering much of their original investments over the years. But Argentina is apparently going to insist that the plaintiffs start with no more than what the other bondholders started with years ago, not what they've been paid to date, Castineira said.

"It brings us back to where Monday morning we're in a crisis because the Argentine government fails to meet its obligations and we're back to square one. Unless they sit down and make bilateral negotiations, they're probably headed to default," Rosner said.

"I think it will be important for people in Argentina to realize that offering a new bond is totally outside of what the court asked for, demanded or would accept," Rosner said. "They have to know that they can't win this."

President Fernandez and her economic team are proud of sharply reducing the country's foreign debt burden, and never failing to meet payments on the new bonds her government issued in exchange for the defaulted debt. But it still owes tens of billions to many other creditors, and until it settles those debts, its economy will be strangled by punishingly high borrowing costs, Rosner said.

Because of its deadbeat reputation, Argentina has had to look inward, essentially borrowing from its own people, fueling inflation, and trying to centrally manage the increasingly isolated economy by frequently changing the rules for exchanging currency, importing and exporting goods, setting prices and paying taxes.

Increasingly, Argentines are feeling trapped by the government controls, and foreign companies are being scared off.

Argentina's largest single foreign investment, a $6 billion Rio Colorado mine, railroad and port project to deliver potash fertilizer to Brazil, was suspended this month by Vale S.A., the world's second-largest mining company. Executives blamed Argentina's unpredictably high inflation and currency controls for laying off more than 4,000 people, despite having invested more than $1 billion and completed 40 per cent of the construction.

"The controls are being put in place because of these unnecessary ideological battles. My attitude as an analyst is, I really don't care whether Argentina is correct ethically, or intellectually. It doesn't matter. At this point, they need to take care of their population," Rosner said. "How do you provide for the people? You bring in foreign direct investment and have Vale staying in the country and building out."

"There's an easier way out," Rosner said. "The government could say 'you know what, we fought for what we thought was fair and equitable, but for the greater good of Argentina, we have to put this in our past so we can normalize our relations with international markets, so that we can start having negotiations with the companies that have judgments against us with World Bank arbitrators, with the Paris Club, with the IMF, because at the end of the day the only way we can protect the lives of the Argentines we have sworn to protect is by not going down this dangerous path.'"

Egypt and the Islamists

REPORT: MORSI PROMISED TO SMUGGLE AL QAEDA LEADER ZAWAHIRI BACK TO EGYPT

According to a new report published in the Arabic-language news outlet Misr al-Gidida and translatedby Islam expert Raymond Ibrahim, Egyptian president Muhammad Morsi’s secretly met with al Qaeda leader Ayman Zawahiri while in Islamabad, Pakistan. During the visit, Morsi reportedly promised to smuggle the Egyptian-born jihadist back to his native country.

According to the report, a Pakistani source said the clandestine meeting was “facilitated by elements of Pakistani intelligence [ISI] and influential members of the international organization, the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Zawahiri is, of course, an alumnus of the Brotherhood who allegedly tired of the group’s more patient-approach to world domination.

Ibrahim translates that the Pakistani source said that the meeting lasted 45 minutes during which Morsi pledged to make preparations for Zawahiri’s return. The source also said that Morsi indicated that “some Muslim Brotherhood members would handle the operation, by first smuggling the al-Qaeda leader to a Gulf nation, likely Qatar, and then easily transferring him to Egypt—on condition that Zawahiri disappear lest he embarrass Egypt’s ruling Muslim Brotherhood with its American ally, whose security and intelligence agencies consider Zawahiri most wanted.”

While Ibrahim cedes that the Arabic-language report cannot yet be independently verified, he said that a number of indicators support the report’s veracity. For one, he notes that Egypt’s Salafi faction has been clamoring for the return of their “hero,” Zawahiri and Aboud al-Zomor, a leading member of the new Egyptian parliament, has also called for the return of Zawahiri, “with his head held high and in safety.”

Morsi, who was once a prisoner himself, has already released other jihadis and has been consistently calling on the U.S. to return of the “Blind Sheikh” to Egypt. Of course, the Blind Sheikh is serving a life sentence for masterminding the original World Trade Center bombing in 1993.

In terms of where, specifically, the al Qaeda leader might go should he make safe passage to Egypt, the Arabic-language report also indicates that Zawahiri will likely disappear in the Sinai, where al-Qaeda influence has grown under the leadership of his brother, Muhammad Zawahiri. Ibrahim points out that the Muhammad Zawahiri was also imprisoned by Mubarak only to be released by Morsi.

Given Morsi’s history of releasing other jihadis — including Zawahiri’s brother — and his consistent appeals for the U.S. to release the Blind Sheikh, it does not strain belief that Morsi would be planning to bring home the al Qaeda leader many of his counterparts laud a national “hero.”

Obama empowering our enemies

Jordan’s King Warns Obama; America Backs Muslim Brotherhood Agent as Syria’s Next Ruler

Posted By Barry Rubin 

”Don’t scare anyone. But once you gain ground then move ahead. You must utilize as many people as possible who may be of use to us.” — Joseph Stalin to future Communist dictator of Hungary Matyas Rakosi, December 5, 1944.

It really isn’t hard to understand what is happening in the Middle East if you gather the facts:

1. Jordan’s King Abdullah — whom President Barack Obama just visited — is clearly telling us what’s going wrong: the Muslim Brotherhood is dangerous, and the United States is supporting it. Presumably, this is what Abdullah told Obama.
2. U.S. policy is now escalating support for a Muslim Brotherhood regime in Syria, and the Syrian rebels increasingly have open Brotherhood leadership.
3. Repression is gradually escalating in Egypt, with arrests of moderates, Islamists being sent to the military academy, and many other measures.

Regarding Jordan, Jeffrey Goldberg has written an extremely valuable profile of Abdullah. The Jordanian monarch is telling Western visitors that their countries are making a huge mistake by supporting the Islamists. He complains that the U.S. State Department is ignoring him, and further, that U.S. officials are telling him: “The only way you can have democracy is through the Muslim Brotherhood.”
Abdullah responds: the Brotherhood wants to impose anti-American reactionary governments, and his “major fight” is to stop them. No margin may be left for relative moderate and pro-American states between a Sunni Islamist alliance led by Egypt and including Turkey versus a Shia Islamist alliance led by Iran, says Abdullah. And he’s right. The only differences, Abdullah explains, between the Turkish and Egyptian regimes are their timetables for installing dictatorships.
And Egypt’s new president, says the king, is obsessed with a hostile view of Israel.
(Here’s the delicious irony: Last August, Jordanian Prime Minister Fayez Tarawneh launched a ferocious personal attack on me. Why? Because I said that the Sunni-Shia battle was going to replace the Arab-Israeli conflict. Well, his king just concurred with me. LOL.)
Meanwhile, while President Barack Obama was love-bombing Israel during his visit, U.S. policy was helping to install a Muslim Brotherhood supporter as the putative next leader of Syria. Obama’s strategy — with appropriate adjustments to the national scene — is the same as his disastrous policy in Egypt.
The new leader of the Syrian opposition coalition is Ghassan Hitto, an obscure figure who has long been a resident of the United States. His actual election contained two hints:

– He only received 35 votes from 63 members of the Syrian National Coalition. That show of support matches the number of Muslim Brotherhood supporters there.
– Only 48 out of the 63 even cast a ballot at all, showing lack of enthusiasm and possible U.S. pressure on groups to abstain rather than oppose Hitto.

During the Cold War, American policy toward Third World countries frequently looked for a “third way” democratic alternative — leaders who were neither Communists nor right-wing authoritarians. Today, however, the Obama administration doesn’t do the equivalent at all, despite pretenses to the contrary. Rather, it seeks leadership from the most seemingly moderate people … who represent Islamist groups. Of course, this moderation is largely deceptive.
That was the pattern in Egypt; now it is the same failed strategy in Syria.
Hitto is a typical example of such a person. He has lived in the United States and went to university there, so presumably he knows the West and has become more moderate by living there. He is involved in high-tech enterprises, so supposedly he is a modern type of guy.
Remember how now-dictator of Syria Bashar al-Assad was lavishly praised because he studied and lived in London and was supposedly interested in … the internet?
In addition, nobody has (yet) uncovered an outrageous Hitto statement. His ties to the Brotherhood are not so blatant — even though they are obvious.
Yet the connections between Hitto and the Muslim Brotherhood — and those are only the ones documented quickly following his election — are extensive:

– He is founder of the Muslim Legal Fund of America, largely directed by Muslim Brotherhood members.
– He was a secretary-treasurer of the American Middle Eastern League for Palestine (AMELP), which is closely linked to the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP), which supports Hamas and terrorism against Israel.
– Hitto was vice president of the CAIR Dallas/Fort Worth chapter, and director of the Muslim American Society (MAS) Youth Center of Dallas, which was a Muslim Brotherhood front group.

The list goes on and on.
To sum up the situation, Hassan Hassan of the United Arab Emirates newspaper The National published an article titled “How the Muslim Brotherhood Hijacked Syria’s Revolution.”

Government waste

Insane Government Waste and Use of Taxpayer Money

The NRCC is out with its new "waste list" which totals more than $18 billion. So what exactly is the government spending your money on? How about:

-$1 million on a fruit fly sexual attractiveness study

-$1.3 million for old fashioned x-rays of prisoners. x-rays of prisoners

-$1.5 million on designing a video game controller

-$100,000 on taxpayer funded comedy group tour in India

-$547,430 on a dancing robot that connects to an iPhone

-$25,000 funding a course about "How to be happy"

-$145,000 on a sculpture garden

-$25,000 on an Alabama Watermelon Queen tour

-$697,177 on a climate change musical

-$10,000 on talking urinal cakes (just in case the boys need some company or to prevent drunk driving)

-$35 million on an old fashioned trolly car

-$150,000 for a toy exhibit

-$320,000 for robot squirrels

-$1.4 billion in improper food stamps purchases which included alcohol, condoms, junk food and diapers

You can read the entire list here.

We can pay to study the sexual attractiveness of fruit flies and robot squirrels but by all means please, lets cut the working hours for Border Patrol to save some money.

Socialists are more interested in retribution then economic growth

France to tax companies 75 pct on $1.3M salaries By SARAH DiLORENZO  AP Business Writer

PARIS (AP) -- French President Francois Hollande may have finally found a way to tax the really rich: by making their companies pay. In a televised interview Thursday night, he said he wants companies that pay their employees more than 1 million euros ($1.3 million) to pay 75 percent payroll taxes on those salaries. The proposed tax, which still needs to be approved by parliament, replaces one of Hollande's signature campaign proposals: to tax individuals who earns more than 1 million euros at 75 percent. France's highest court has thrown out that plan and the government has been looking for a replacement. Hollande said he hoped the new proposal would push companies to lower executive pay at a time when France's economy is suffering, unemployment is soaring and employees are being asked to take pay cuts. While the president reiterated his goal of stopping the rise of unemployment this year and restarting growth, he offered no specific new economic policies. "The tools are there. We need to use them fully," he said on France-2 television. The new payroll tax would last only two years. On the highest salaries, companies already pay payroll taxes that add up to at least 50 percent of the paycheck. "What's my idea? It's not to punish," Hollande said. "When so much is asked of employees, can those who are the highest-paid not make this effort for two years?" Hollande's original plan for a 75 percent tax on individuals was also conceived as a largely symbolic measure. It was likely to have brought in only about 100 million to 300 million euros - an insignificant amount in the context of France's roughly 85 billion-euro deficit. As Hollande's popularity slides, he has struggled to convince the French that he is doing enough to boost growth - or to redistribute wealth, as his leftist base wants. Going after high-earners may be an easy win for him with voters. French growth has been stagnant for nearly two years, and unemployment has been rising for 19 straight months and is now at 10.6 percent - a level not seen since 1999. Consumer confidence slipped again in March after briefly starting to rise earlier this year. The national statistics agency, Insee, found this month that the French are more pessimistic about the economy's prospects for the coming year than they have ever been. (The survey was first taken in 1972.) But some may wonder if adding another tax on companies as he is trying to encourage growth is the right message to be sending. Despite the poor economy, Hollande has avoided imposing the deep spending cuts that other European countries like Greece and Spain have imposed. And he said again Thursday that he would not go down that path - even though France will miss its deficit target of 3 percent of gross domestic product this year. "Prolonging austerity will risk not reducing the deficits and bring the certainty of having unpopular governments that populists will eat alive," he said. France has largely avoided the unrest seen in European countries that are experiencing deep recessions, but the layoffs are piling up and have spawned some protests. On Thursday, around 100 workers from a factory that carmaker PSA Peugeot Citroen wants to close stormed the offices of France's leading business lobby, Medef. Police said dozens were arrested.

Welcome to California fuel prices.

EPA taking aim at auto emissions, sulfur in gas

WASHINGTON (AP) — Reducing sulfur in gasoline and tighteningemissions standards on cars beginning in 2017, as the Obama administration is proposing, would come with costs as well as rewards. The cost at the pump for cleaner air across the country could be less than a penny or as high as 9 cents a gallon, depending on who is providing the estimate.

An oil industry study says the proposed rule being unveiled Friday by the administration could increase gasoline prices by 6 cents to 9 cents a gallon. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates an increase of less than a penny and an additional $130 to the cost of a vehicle in 2025.

The EPA is quick to add that the change aimed at cleaning up gasoline and automobile emissions would yield billions of dollars in health benefits by 2030 by slashing smog- and soot-forming pollution. Still, the oil industry, Republicans and some Democrats have pressed the EPA to delay the rule, citing higher costs.

Environmentalists hailed the proposal as potentially the most significant in President Barack Obama's second term.

The so-called Tier 3 standards would reduce sulfur in gasoline by more than 60 percent and reduce nitrogen oxides by 80 percent, by expanding across the country a standard already in place in California. For states, the regulation would make it easier to comply with health-based standards for the main ingredient in smog and soot. For automakers, the regulation allows them to sell the same autos in all 50 states.

The Obama administration already has moved to clean up motor vehicles by adopting rules that will double fuel efficiency and putting in place the first standards to reduce the pollution from cars and trucks blamed for global warming.

"We know of no other air pollution control strategy that can achieve such substantial, cost-effective and immediate emission reductions," said Bill Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies. Becker said the rule would reduce pollution equal to taking 33 million cars off the road.

But the head of American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers, Charles Drevna, said in an interview Thursday that the refiners' group was still unclear on the motives behind the agency's regulation, since refining companies already have spent $10 billion to reduce sulfur by 90 percent. The additional cuts, while smaller, will cost just as much, Drevna said, and the energy needed for the additional refining actually could increase carbon pollution by 1 percent to 2 percent.

"I haven't seen an EPA rule on fuels that has come out since 1995 that hasn't said it would cost only a penny or two more," Drevna said.

A study commissioned by the American Petroleum Institute estimated that lowering the sulfur in gasoline would add 6 cents to 9 cents a gallon to refiners' manufacturing costs, an increase that likely would be passed on to consumers at the pump. The EPA estimate of less than 1 cent is also an additional manufacturing cost and likely to be passed on.

A senior administration official said Thursday that only 16 of 111 refineries would need to invest in major equipment to meet the new standards, which could be final by the end of this year. Of the remaining refineries, 29 already are meeting the standards because they are selling cleaner fuel in California or other countries, and 66 would have to make modifications.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the rule was still undergoing White House budget office review.

Isn't it humorous that the people who only make regulations know what it costs to produce something they have never done. The lie is that California fuel prices are way above one cent more then the rest of the country. But, never let really interfere with a bureaucrats vision of the world.

Just the people you want to have F-16's and Abrams tanks.

Hostile Takeover

Islamists enter military in Egypt as part of Muslim Brotherhood effort to take control, US says

March 22 Muslim Brotherhood protest in Egypt / AP

BY: Bill Gertz Follow @BillGertz
March 29, 2013 5:00 am

Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated government recently allowed members of the Brotherhood and hardline jihadists to join Egypt’s military academy for the first time as part of what U.S. officials say is a covert effort to impose Islamist rule in the key Middle East state.
According to U.S. officials with access to intelligence reports, the government of President Mohamed Morsi is covertly taking steps to take control over the pro-Western military and the police forces as part of a campaign to solidify Islamist control.
Egypt for decades had banned the Muslim Brotherhood and radical Islamist groups from both the military and police academies after Islamic terrorists in the military assassinated Egyptian leader Anwar Sadat in 1981.
The Egyptian military also for decades has maintained close ties to the U.S. military. Analysts in the U.S. intelligence community and the military are viewing the introduction of Islamists into the national military academy, disclosed last week, with concern.
Muslim Brotherhood members and hardline Salafi groups are regarded as dedicated first to jihad, or holy war, and other Islamist principles rather than to the country.
“Any opening of the Egyptian military to Islamist elements would be a big and complicated change,” said one U.S. official. “It’s not clear how it would be managed or how well the rank and file would absorb it.”
Disclosure that the Muslim Brotherhood and other radical Islamists are now being admitted to the military academy was made public March 19 in Egyptian news reports.
The head of the military academy, Ismat Murad, told reporters the new batch of Islamist students included the nephew of Morsi, a Muslim Brotherhood leader.
Meanwhile, U.S. officials said intelligence agencies are investigating reports that Morsi recently concluded a secret agreement with the Palestinian terror group Hamas, another disturbing sign the Egyptian government is shifting away from its former pro-Western stance and toward radical Islam.
There are concerns the agreement involves collusion between the Muslim Brotherhood and a plan to settle Palestinians in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula.
Hamas militants in recent days have attacked Egyptian troops engaged in demolishing tunnels from the Sinai into Israel. Hamas has asked the Egyptian government to halt the tunnel demolition. The tunnels are a major source of covert support into Gaza.
Morsi was elected president last year. His Freedom and Justice Party was founded by the Muslim Brotherhood, an anti-democratic Islamic political movement whose motto states, “Jihad is our way.” The group claims to be nonviolent but has spawned numerous Islamic terror organizations including al Qaeda.
Under Morsi, the Egyptian government has appointed hardline Islamists as presidential advisers and assistants, including members of the Salafist Al-Nour Party.
In addition to the military academy, Cairo also is taking steps to Islamicize the police forces.
According to recent reports, the Muslim Brotherhood is planning to restructure the Egyptian Interior Ministry. The restructuring is said to include plans to place Brotherhood members in key ministry positions.
On the secret agreement with Hamas, Egyptian daily Al-Watan published documents in early February purportedly exposing a secret agreement between the government and Hamas. One document stated that Hamas’ military wing was sending militants to Egypt to defend the current regime from supporters of the ousted Mubarak government.
A second document was written by a Qatari foreign affairs official granting Hamas $250 million to support Morsi.
The Morsi administration has agreed to several construction deals in Gaza, along with security and intelligence-sharing agreements with Hamas.
Morsi also has sought closer ties to Iran, whose President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visited Cairo in February. Intelligence officials said the two intelligence services also are collaborating.
Many Persian Gulf states are worried about the threat to their regimes posed by the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, with the exception of Qatar emerging as a connection point for Brotherhood’s expansion efforts.
In Saudi Arabia, several Islamist Saudi clerics are supporting the Muslim Brotherhood transformation in Egypt, putting them at odds with Riyadh’s opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood government there.
There are concerns that Egypt will create religious police along the lines of Saudi Arabia’s Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, as the Sharia-law enforcement police are called.
Thousands of police in Egypt went on strike to protest the Muslim Brotherhood Islamist efforts earlier this month. Riots broke out March 22 between pro- and anti-Muslim Brotherhood protesters. The police went back to work after the government said it would bring in contractors, raising fears of further Islamicization.
The Brotherhood announced it planned to form vigilante groups to prevent attacks on Islamists.
An Egyptian military adviser went public with concerns about Muslim Brotherhood activities in Egypt on March 11. Maj. Gen. Abd-al-Munim Katu, an adviser to the Egyptian Armed Forces Morale Affairs Department, told the Dubai news outlet Al Bayan Online that the military is resisting Morsi’s Islamicization efforts.
Specifically, Katu said the Muslim Brotherhood was pressuring Egypt’s Defense Minister Abdul-Fattah Al-Sisi to ignore the Sinai tunneling into Gaza.
“I think that the current situation in Egypt is alarming and confused, in general,” Katu said.
Asked if Morsi will complete his term as president, Tatu said: “The vision is blurry. Indicators suggest that he may not be able to complete his term. The people have legitimate demands, but the Muslim Brothers are busy seizing control of the joints of the state. The gap between the two parties is widening.”
The Obama administration, whose religious outreach advisers include several Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers, is not directly challenging the far-reaching campaign of Islamicization being carried out by the Morsi government in Egypt.
Instead the administration adopted conciliatory policies toward the current government in Egypt. The administration hopes to continue working with Egypt’s government but has not pressured Cairo into making needed democratic reforms, U.S. officials said.
Secretary of State John Kerry visited Cairo March 4 and mentioned U.S. hopes for democratic reform. He also announced the release of $250 million in U.S. aid out of $1 billion promised by President Barack Obama after Egypt’s revolution overthrew long-time ally Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak last year.
Kerry said he urged Morsi to initiate “homegrown reforms.”
Pro-democracy protesters in Cairo’s Tahrir Square carried banners during the visit that read “Kerry, member of the Brotherhood,” and “Kerry, you are not welcome here.”
Analysts have compared Obama’s policy toward Egypt to those of President Jimmy Carter who in the late 1970s tacitly supported Iran’s exiled radical cleric Ayatollah Khomeini. Carter eventually abandoned the Shah of Iran, a longtime U.S. ally, and paved the way for 1978 revolution that brought the current hardline Islamist state in Tehran into power, a regime that is now on the verge of developing nuclear weapons for its large ballistic missile force.
Frank Gaffney, head of the Center for Security Policy, said Obama’s foreign policy has been accurately described as “Jimmy Carter’s policies on steroids.”
“What’s happening in Egypt today with the Muslim Brotherhood takeover and the ascendancy of Islamist throughout the Middle East and North Africa, makes Jimmy Carter’s debacle in Iran pale by comparison,” Gaffney said.

Global warming, eh. Not so much.

Twenty-year hiatus in rising temperatures has climate scientists puzzled

DEBATE about the reality of a two-decade pause in global warming and what it means has made its way from the sceptical fringe to the mainstream.

In a lengthy article this week, The Economist magazine said if climate scientists were credit-rating agencies, then climate sensitivity - the way climate reacts to changes in carbon-dioxide levels - would be on negative watch but not yet downgraded.

Another paper published by leading climate scientist James Hansen, the head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, says the lower than expected temperature rise between 2000 and the present could be explained by increased emissions from burning coal.

For Hansen the pause is a fact, but it's good news that probably won't last.

International Panel on Climate Change chairman Rajendra Pachauri recently told The Weekend Australian the hiatus would have to last 30 to 40 years "at least" to break the long-term warming trend.

But the fact that global surface temperatures have not followed the expected global warming pattern is now widely accepted.

Research by Ed Hawkins of University of Reading shows surface temperatures since 2005 are already at the low end of the range projections derived from 20 climate models and if they remain flat, they will fall outside the models' range within a few years.

"The global temperature standstill shows that climate models are diverging from observations," says David Whitehouse of the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

"If we have not passed it already, we are on the threshold of global observations becoming incompatible with the consensus theory of climate change," he says.

Whitehouse argues that whatever has happened to make temperatures remain constant requires an explanation because the pause in temperature rise has occurred despite a sharp increase in global carbon emissions.

The Economist says the world has added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010, about one-quarter of all the carbon dioxide put there by humans since 1750. This mismatch between rising greenhouse gas emissions and not-rising temperatures is among the biggest puzzles in climate science just now, The Economist article says.

"But it does not mean global warming is a delusion."

The fact is temperatures between 2000 and 2010 are still almost 1C above their level in the first decade of the 20th century.

"The mismatch might mean that for some unexplained reason there has been a temporary lag between more carbon dioxide and higher temperatures in 2000-2010.

"Or it might mean that the 1990s, when temperatures were rising fast, was the anomalous period."

The magazine explores a range of possible explanations including higher emissions of sulphur dioxide, the little understood impact of clouds and the circulation of heat into the deep ocean.

But it also points to an increasing body of research that suggests it may be that climate is responding to higher concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide in ways that had not been properly understood before.

"This possibility, if true, could have profound significance both for climate science and for environmental and social policy," the article says.

There are now a number of studies that predict future temperature rises as a result of man-made carbon dioxide emissions at well below the IPCC best estimate of about 3C over the century.

The upcoming IPCC report is expected to lift the maximum possible temperature increase to 6C.

The Research Council of Norway says in a non-peer-reviewed paper that the best estimate concludes there is a 90 per cent probability that doubling CO2 emissions will increase temperatures by only 1.2C to 2.9C, the most likely figure being 1.9C.

Another study based on the way the climate behaved about 20,000 years ago has given a best guess of 2.3C.

Other forecasts, accepted for publication, have reanalysed work cited by the IPCC but taken account of more recent temperature data and given a figure of between 1C and 3C.

The Economist says understanding which estimate is true is vital to getting the best response.

"If as conventional wisdom has it, global temperatures could rise by 3C or more in response to a doubling of emissions, then the correct response would be the one to which most of the world pays lip service; rein in the warming and the greenhouse gases causing it," the article says.

"If, however, temperatures are likely to rise by only 2 degrees Celsius in response to a doubling of carbon emissions (and if the likelihood of a 6 degrees Celsius is trivial) the calculation might change," it says.

"Perhaps the world should seek to adjust to (rather than stop) the greenhouse-gas splurge.

"There is no point buying earthquake insurance if you don't live in an earthquake zone."

According to The Economist, "given the hiatus in warming and all the new evidence, a small reduction in estimates of climate sensitivity would seem to be justified." On face value, Hansen agrees the slowdown in global temperature rises can be seen as "good news".

But he is not ready to recalculate the Faustian bargain that weighs the future cost to humanity of continued carbon dioxide emissions.

Hansen argues that the impact of human carbon dioxide emissions has been masked by the sharp increase in coal use, primarily in China and India.

Increased particulate and nitrogen pollution has worked in the opposite direction of rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.

Another paper published in Geophysical Research Letters on research from the University of Colorado Boulder found small volcanoes, not more coal power stations in China, were responsible for the slowdown in global warming.

But this did not mean that climate change was not a problem.

"Emissions from volcanic gases go up and down, helping to cool or heat the planet, while greenhouse gases from human activity just continue to go up," author Ryan Neely says.

Hansen's bottom line is that increased short-term masking of greenhouse gas warming by fossil fuel particulate and nitrogen pollution represents a "doubling down" of the Faustian bargain, an increase in the stakes.

"The more we allow the Faustian debt to build, the more unmanageable the eventual consequences will be," he says.

In every corner of the world...guess who?

Kenya deaths as 'MRC' attacks Malindi casino

At least seven people have been killed in a Kenyan coastal town during a raid on a casino by a machete-wielding gang, police say.

Police intervened, shooting dead six of the attackers, officials said. At least one officer also died.

The 50-strong gang struck in Malindi, some 120km (75 miles) north of Mombasa, early on Thursday, police said.

A spokesman linked the attackers to the Mombasa Republic Council (MRC), an outlawed separatist group.

"A gang of 50 MRC suspects armed with machetes and other crude weapons raided a casino in Malindi and started attacking patrons before police were called," Ambrose Munyasia told Reuters news agency.

The attack was thought to have happened at about 02:00 local time (2300 GMT, Wednesday).

There was no immediate confirmation about whether any casino guests were hurt.

The MRC says it is campaigning on behalf of the "oppressed" people of Kenya's coastal region, many of whom are Muslims who say they face discrimination.

"The objective of our movement is to lift the coastal people from the neo-colonialism of the government of Kenya," Randu Ruwa, the MRC's secretary general, told the BBC before the elections earlier this month.

The group was blamed for a series of attacks before the election, in which some 12 people were killed.

Last week a spokesman for the group was arrested on suspicion of links to the attacks.

There was no statement from the MRC after Thursday's attack.

Mombasa is a popular hub for tourism in Kenya, with its Indian Ocean coastline drawing visitors from around the world to a string of luxury resorts.

Burma's President Thein Sein warns 'extremists'

The Burmese government will use force if necessary to stop "political opportunists and religious extremists" from fomenting hatred between faiths, President Thein Sein has warned.

It was his first public comment on the violence, which began last week.

At least 40 people have been killed as a result of discord between Buddhists and Muslims since 20 March.

Curfews have been imposed in a number of areas, as crowds of Buddhists attacked Muslim buildings.

The police were reported on Wednesday to have opened fire in one town on a crowd of about 500 people.

Last Friday a state of emergency was enforced in the central town of Meiktila in Mandalay region - where the communal violence began after a reported argument at a gold shop.

'Last resort'

"I would like to warn all political opportunists and religious extremists who try to exploit the noble teachings of these religions and have tried to plant hatred among people of different faiths for their own self-interest. Their efforts will not be tolerated," the president said in a national televised address.

"In general, I do not endorse the use of force to solve problems. However, I will not hesitate to use force as a last resort to protect the lives and safeguard the property of the general public," he said.

"All perpetrators of violence will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law."

The president said that "conflicts and difficulties" would inevitably arise during Burma's transition to a democracy.

He called on police to "perform their duties decisively, bravely and within the constraints of the constitution and by-laws".

Correspondents say that police in Meiktila have been criticised for failing to act quickly enough to stop the rioting, in which houses, shops and mosques were burned down.

At least 12,000 Muslims are thought to have fled their homes because of the unrest.

In similar violence in Rakhine state last year, nearly 200 people were killed and tens of thousands forced from their homes.

The conflict that erupted in Rakhine involved Buddhists and Rohingya Muslims, who are not recognised as Burmese citizens and have complained of frequent persecution.

Those affected by the latest violence insist that in contrast to the allegations made against the Rohingyas they are legitimate Burmese citizens.

Correspondents say that isolated violence involving Burma's majority Buddhist population and its minority Muslim community has occurred for decades, even under military governments that ruled the country from 1962 to 2011.