Showing posts with label Religion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Religion. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Monday, May 14, 2012
ICYMI: @MichaelEDyson ripping the skin off Anti-Gay Black Preachers (VIDEO)
Metaphorically speaking, of course. But if anyone's deserved a rhetorical thrashing, it's been black preachers.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Thursday, March 1, 2012
How Marcel Guanizo and @SenBobCasey embarrassed me to be a Catholic...this week (VIDEO)
Okay, so 1) The Bishops decide to dictate to Non-Catholics whether or not they get access to Birth Control, under the guise of "protecting Religious Freedom". That was sooo last week...
Oh, wait...maybe it's not.
2) Then, Rev. Marcel Guanizo decided to deny Barbara Johnson (no relation) communion at her Mother's Funeral Mass, because Ms. Johnson is a Lesbian.
Rev. Guanizo also got up and left as she gave her Eulogy...again, at her Mother's Funeral Mass. He also refused to attend or say prayer for the funeral for Ms. Johnson's Mother...who, it needs to be repeated, was not Gay.
Fortunately, the Funeral Home Director really stepped up, found a retired Priest to perform the last of the rites that needed to be performed,
Lawrence O'Donnell had her on last night:
And to repeat what Lawrence read in the video the D.C. archdiocese also stepped up and came correct:
Amen, Sister.
But let's be clear, that was full-on, full-throated apology from Rev. Knestout. No "I'm sorry if you were offended". No, this was a "we did wrong, and we will make amends."
Rev. Barry Knestout and the unnamed Funeral Director who came through for Ms. Johnson? You both made me proud to be a Catholic, but that's been tough sledding in 2012.
And now 3) Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania decided to vote for the Blunt Amendment, which thankfully failed.
But I want to remind the Senator that then-Senator Barack Obama took a LOT of grief from Pro-Choice Activists in the Party for giving him a prime speaking slot at the 2008 Convention in Denver.
And this is how he sees fit to repay the President.
More to the point, this is how he sees fit to "protect" religious freedom, which I'm sure is his argument. He wants to protect his religious freedom, by screwing you out of yours.
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, don't even bother calling me. Ben Nelson, Bob Manchin and now Ben Casey are today's reasons I don't give a dime to that organization. I will give money to Democratic Senators directly. I will give money to Senators who represent my interests, and not try to impose their Religious views on Non-Catholics.
Okay, Mother Church. It's only Thursday. What else have you got for me??
Oh, wait...maybe it's not.
2) Then, Rev. Marcel Guanizo decided to deny Barbara Johnson (no relation) communion at her Mother's Funeral Mass, because Ms. Johnson is a Lesbian.
Rev. Guanizo also got up and left as she gave her Eulogy...again, at her Mother's Funeral Mass. He also refused to attend or say prayer for the funeral for Ms. Johnson's Mother...who, it needs to be repeated, was not Gay.
Fortunately, the Funeral Home Director really stepped up, found a retired Priest to perform the last of the rites that needed to be performed,
Lawrence O'Donnell had her on last night:
And to repeat what Lawrence read in the video the D.C. archdiocese also stepped up and came correct:
Late Tuesday, Johnson received a letter of apology from the Rev. Barry Knestout, one of the archdiocese’s highest-ranking administrators, who said the lack of “kindness” she and her family received “is a cause of great concern and personal regret to me.”
“I am sorry that what should have been a celebration of your mother’s life, in light of her faith in Jesus Christ, was overshadowed by a lack of pastoral sensitivity,” Knestout wrote. “I hope that healing and reconciliation with the Church might be possible for you and any others who were affected by this experience. In the meantime, I will offer Mass for the happy repose of your mother’s soul. May God bring you and your family comfort in your grief and hope in the Resurrection.”
Johnson called the letter “comforting” and said she greatly appreciates the apology. But, she added, “I will not be satisfied” until Guarnizo is removed.
Amen, Sister.
But let's be clear, that was full-on, full-throated apology from Rev. Knestout. No "I'm sorry if you were offended". No, this was a "we did wrong, and we will make amends."
Rev. Barry Knestout and the unnamed Funeral Director who came through for Ms. Johnson? You both made me proud to be a Catholic, but that's been tough sledding in 2012.
And now 3) Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania decided to vote for the Blunt Amendment, which thankfully failed.
But I want to remind the Senator that then-Senator Barack Obama took a LOT of grief from Pro-Choice Activists in the Party for giving him a prime speaking slot at the 2008 Convention in Denver.
And this is how he sees fit to repay the President.
More to the point, this is how he sees fit to "protect" religious freedom, which I'm sure is his argument. He wants to protect his religious freedom, by screwing you out of yours.
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, don't even bother calling me. Ben Nelson, Bob Manchin and now Ben Casey are today's reasons I don't give a dime to that organization. I will give money to Democratic Senators directly. I will give money to Senators who represent my interests, and not try to impose their Religious views on Non-Catholics.
Okay, Mother Church. It's only Thursday. What else have you got for me??
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Umm, is there a way @MSNBC can force Chris Matthews to watch his own Network and learn somethin'? (VIDEO)
First Chris Matthews had on E.J. Dionne and Susan Milligan, and barely let Susan get in a word in edgewise:
And then Lawrence O'Donnell had Mark Shields on to pontificate just a little bit more:
And yes, despite Lawrence's admonition, Mark Shields went on and on.
Unanswered was the question, in both segments was this: Why should the Catholic Church be able to enforce Catholic Dogma on it's employees who work for Catholic Organization who are not Catholic.
Instead all we heard was the alleged oppression being put upon the Church, which...if you remember history, is just a damn joke.
Another way to ask the question is: Why should the Catholic Church control the sex lives of Non-Catholic, or anyone else for that matter?
Or how about this one: Mad as I am about the Catholic Sex Scandal, I don't want to pay for Father Donovan's Heart Medication. Can I have a exemption, too? Or is it more important that we have a Civilization here, and pay for each other's stuff...even if we don't use it?
But finally buried in the din...was Rachel Maddow...and Rachel sounding uber-reasonable, and quiet, underhandedly scolding her journalistic colleages (namely Shields and Matthews).
And she did it again, the next night:
And Lawrence had an actual lawyer on (the legendary David Boies) to explain why the contretemps over the Birth Control issue was total bullshit:
Basically, I want two things from Chris Matthews...but expect only one.
It'd be really nice if stop hawking his book on Jack Kennedy every ten seconds, but hey a fella can dream, can't he?
But what I really expect is for Chris Matthews to stop using MSNBC as a personal platform to provide cover for the Church, of which he and I are members. He has not provided an impartial platform and instead used the network to flog and issue that is 110% bullshit.
Ethics, Chris. I thought they were important to Catholics. Maybe that's just lip service.
(Actually, as a Catholic, and knowing our history...yeah, it's lip service.)
And then Lawrence O'Donnell had Mark Shields on to pontificate just a little bit more:
And yes, despite Lawrence's admonition, Mark Shields went on and on.
Unanswered was the question, in both segments was this: Why should the Catholic Church be able to enforce Catholic Dogma on it's employees who work for Catholic Organization who are not Catholic.
Instead all we heard was the alleged oppression being put upon the Church, which...if you remember history, is just a damn joke.
Another way to ask the question is: Why should the Catholic Church control the sex lives of Non-Catholic, or anyone else for that matter?
Or how about this one: Mad as I am about the Catholic Sex Scandal, I don't want to pay for Father Donovan's Heart Medication. Can I have a exemption, too? Or is it more important that we have a Civilization here, and pay for each other's stuff...even if we don't use it?
But finally buried in the din...was Rachel Maddow...and Rachel sounding uber-reasonable, and quiet, underhandedly scolding her journalistic colleages (namely Shields and Matthews).
And she did it again, the next night:
And Lawrence had an actual lawyer on (the legendary David Boies) to explain why the contretemps over the Birth Control issue was total bullshit:
Basically, I want two things from Chris Matthews...but expect only one.
It'd be really nice if stop hawking his book on Jack Kennedy every ten seconds, but hey a fella can dream, can't he?
But what I really expect is for Chris Matthews to stop using MSNBC as a personal platform to provide cover for the Church, of which he and I are members. He has not provided an impartial platform and instead used the network to flog and issue that is 110% bullshit.
Ethics, Chris. I thought they were important to Catholics. Maybe that's just lip service.
(Actually, as a Catholic, and knowing our history...yeah, it's lip service.)
Monday, February 6, 2012
As the Catholic Church continues to embarrass itself on Birth Control...
Sarah Kliff, working for Ezra Klein's Wonkbook, published this handy-dandy fact check on the President's new regulations regarding Health Insurance Companies...note: Health Insurance Companies...having to cover contraception under the Affordable Care act.
Religious Institutions who employ people in their religion have an exemption.
Naturally, Religious Institutions who employ people outside their religion are in a snit over the fact that they won't be able to impose their religious values over their employees. (Catholic Hospitals of America...Chris Matthews of Hardall...I'm talkin' to you!)
From today's Washington Post:
Religious Institutions who employ people in their religion have an exemption.
Naturally, Religious Institutions who employ people outside their religion are in a snit over the fact that they won't be able to impose their religious values over their employees. (Catholic Hospitals of America...Chris Matthews of Hardall...I'm talkin' to you!)
From today's Washington Post:
How did this all start?
The health reform law requires that insurance companies cover preventive services for women without any co-pay beginning this summer. It did not, however, specify what services to cover — that was left to the Obama administration. With guidance from the Institute of Medicine on the issue, Health and Human Services published a regulation on Aug. 1, 2011 that included birth control as part of the preventive package. That regulation also had a conscience clause, which allows religious employers who object to birth control — and also primarily employ those of their own religion — to be exempt from the requirement. That would allow churches to opt out of the new requirement.
What’s the fight about now?
Some religious leaders say that the exemption wasn’t wide enough: That the Obama administration should allow all faith-based employers regardless of who they employ, to opt out of the new requirement if they object to contraceptives. This wider definition would exempt, among others, Catholic hospitals. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has lobbied aggressively for this wider conscience clause, as have a number of prominent Catholics who supported the health reform law. But in final regulations last month, the Obama administration did not expand the exemption.
Let’s say the Obama administration had expanded the conscience clause. Would that allow Catholic hospitals not to provide birth control to their patients?
No, it would not. This regulation only applies to the health insurance that a hospital, charity or other employer provides for its employees. It does not regulate the care that a Catholic charity provides to its patients. As Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius wrote recently in a USA Today op-ed, “our rule has no effect on the long-standing conscience clause protections for providers, which allow a Catholic doctor, for example, to refuse to write a prescription for contraception.”
What happens next?
Two Catholic universities have already filed lawsuits challenging the mandated coverage of contraceptives as a violation of religious freedoms protected under the First Amendment. The Catholic bishops are also looking to file a similar challenge, and some observers expect these challenges could wind their way up to the Supreme Court.
The new rule is starting to play a political role, too, in the 2012 election. Republican candidates have come out against the contraceptive requirement. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich blasted it as “a direct assault of freedom of religion.” The Obama campaign and its allies have repeatedly defended the new requirement, attacking the Republican field as anti-contraceptives.
How have contraceptive mandates been handled previously?
Twenty-eight states currently require insurance plans to cover contraceptives, although two exclude emergency contraceptives from that mandate.
Nine states do not have conscience clause. Four states have what the Guttmacher Institute describes as “narrow” exemptions, similar to the federal one, which allows churches and other institutions that primarily employ those of their own religion to opt out. Seven states have “broader” exemptions that cover other religious institutions, but not hospitals. Then eight states have “expansive” conscience clauses that allow at least some hospitals not to provide contraceptive coverage.
What about if you get health care through your employer?
Approximately 90 percent of employer-based insurance plans cover contraceptives, according to the Guttmacher Institute, although many may charge co-pays for birth control, which the health reform law will eliminate.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Monday, January 9, 2012
After his Daily Show fiasco, Joe Kaufman explains himself... (VIDEO)
Remember Nezar Hamze, the Muslim Republican, who wanted to gain the admission into the Broward County (FL) GOP?
Well, Mr. Kaufman released this statement to...ahem...explain himself.
Yeah.
McClatchy News had this to say in the same article:
As Randi always says, there's a reason Florida is shaped like it is.
Well, Mr. Kaufman released this statement to...ahem...explain himself.
Friends,
With the intention of exposing and helping to bring national attention to the infiltration of Islamist groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Brotherhood, I agreed to do an interview with Comedy Central’s Daily Show, which was to take place on October 25th. The piece aired January 5th.
For over two hours, I was asked questions about my run for Congress against Debbie Wasserman Schultz and my thoughts regarding the Broward Republican Party’s refusal to grant membership to local CAIR leader Nezar Hamze.
I had been outspoken against Hamze gaining a position in the party, due to the extremist nature of the organization he represents and due to his own radical past. I had distributed information to party members detailing these facts (See attachment of flyer).
According to Hamze, he had been "encouraged" to join the Republican Party by Javier Manjarres, a campaign staffer for one of my opponents in the upcoming Republican Primary, Karen Harrington. It is the opinion of many that Manjarres, who has a criminal background, attempted to destroy the local GOP by bringing Hamze in. It backfired, as Hamze was voted down 158 to 11.
Upset, Manjarres - defending Hamze - complained to the Miami Heraldthat the vote was a “set up.” He said the Republican Party was practicing “bigotry.”
Prior to the vote, I had the chance to formally ask Hamze, in front of the party, if he would support either Allen West or myself for Congress and if he was a supporter of terrorism. He declined to answer the questions.* Indeed, Hamze has in the recent past been fervently outspoken against Congressman West and other prominent Republicans, including Adam Hasner. *[reporter's note: It's a suspect claim to say Hamze refused to say he was against terrorism]
Following the vote, I praised local party leaders and members for how they conducted themselves during the voting process. I stated that groups connected to terrorism should have no role in the Republican Party and should not exist within the United States.
Although the Daily Show segment skewed the serious nature of the subject of CAIR and radical Islamic outfits and edited out so much of what I had to say, we can now hope this small shred of national exposure can begin the serious dialogue on the truth regarding these groups.
Make note, the only reason why I did this show was to have another opportunity to speak out against the hate and terror of CAIR and the like. For the past ten years, I have devoted my life to exposing these groups, and I am extremely proud of the work I have done to help protect the nation I grew up in and love.
I have never been afraid of the terror-related groups I write and speak about, even after receiving numerous threats. I most certainly will never be afraid of doing a comedy show.
Joe Kaufman
Yeah.
McClatchy News had this to say in the same article:
But, for now, this is a win for Kaufman. Getting mocked on liberal-leaning Daily Show isn't bad for a Republican (more here). And being an Islam basher isn't a killer in heavily Jewish South Florida. But it's a pretty disastrous prospect to be defined as an object of mockery, even if Kaufman was caught off guard. If Kaufman makes it out of the primary, he'll likely go up against Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who's not just beloved in her heavily liberal district. She can define words like "against."
As Randi always says, there's a reason Florida is shaped like it is.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
If you really want to see the President get heckled by a Religious Zealot (VIDEO)
His reaction to these always makes me smile. Most politicians have a "how dare you interrupt me" look on their face as this is going on. The President meanwhile has you "Are you done yet? Can I get on with my speech as the Secret Service knocks you into next week?"
Friday, September 16, 2011
Bob Shrum explains what happened in the New York 9th Special Election...
Is THIS what it comes down to? Me agreeing with Bob Shrum??!? (BOB SHRUM for pity's sake!!!)
Randi Rhodes said all of this on her show like on...Wednesday.
The GOP reaction was predictable: This was a referendum on Obama and a portent of doom in 2012. After all, here was the first Republican elected from this district since 1923. (Actually, that's a sloppy factoid, echoed in the media, to make it easy to blame Obama first; it's a fact in the Brooklyn rump of the district, but not in Queens, the district's predominant swath, where Forest Hills and other neighborhoods sent Republican Seymour Halpern to Congress in the 1960s and 1970s.)
Al Smith, the master of the sidewalks of New York, in a characteristic phrase, might have called the Democrat in this special election "a bum." At the least, David Weprin was a bumbler. He confidently offered up a figure on the national debt; he was off by 10 trillion (with a 'T') dollars. He skipped out of a debate, citing the threat of Hurricane Irene; the storm had already passed. He didn't go on the attack until it was too late; he never brought Gov. Andrew Cuomo into a district where he is overwhelmingly popular.
James Carville would have the president play a hasty game of musical chairs that would turn Obama's ship of state into the Titanic.
Weprin fled any identification with the president after former New York Mayor Ed Koch urged voters to retaliate against Obama's Mideast policy by rallying to the Right. Koch, whom I was proud to help defeat for re-election in 1989, has a record of exploiting ethnic tensions and turning on his own party. He race-baited Jesse Jackson in the 1988 presidential primary — and in the past, he's endorsed Rudolph Giuliani, the state's last Republican senator (Alfonse D'Amato), and George W. Bush.
Never mind that Weprin is an Orthodox Jew, an undeviating rubber stamp for Israeli policies, with relatives living in that country. And never mind that Obama's position is the same as Bush's, Bill Clinton's, and the peace deal Israel offered in 2000 and 2001 — a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders with agreed land swaps. And never mind that as Israel's self-ordained champion, Koch in reality endangers the increasingly isolated Jewish state with his knee-jerk support of a Netanyahu regime that subordinates the strategic imperatives of national survival to the political survival of his own extremist-infested coalition. To cite Abba Eban's famous phrase, it's now Netanyahu who "never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity" — say, to avert a dangerous break with Turkey — and there are "friends" of Israel like Koch who are there with him every lurch of the way.
Koch undoubtedly hurt Weprin; but there's little doubt that other, stronger Democrats — including former District Attorney and Rep. Elizabeth Holtzman — would have won anyway. But Democratic bosses outsmarted, or more accurately, out-dumbed themselves by ruling out a primary in favor of picking a patsy who would compliantly disappear after redistricting eliminated one of New York City's congressional seats. They got the patsy they wanted, only he inconveniently disappeared 14 months early.
Randi Rhodes said all of this on her show like on...Wednesday.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Yes, Fox News is racist...and Christianist. All Jon Stewart last night did was document it. (VIDEO)
You want a definition of Christianist, and example can be found here, via Andrew Sullivan.
I'm still...mesmerized at the outrage over every single Terrorist incident where the perpetrator is Muslim, yet in instances of violence (Terrorist and non-Terrorist alike)...like for example: the Norway Shooter, Timothy McVeigh, the Atlanta Olympic Park Bomber, Jared Loughner, Tim Proffit, the guy who tried to ask Eric Cantor a question at a local event, the Tea Party's constant use of racial imagery and threats, the guy who posted former Rep. Perriello's address on the interwebs, all the HCR Town Hall nonsense (which Fox frequently justified), Pastor Steven Anderson...an actual Pastor!!, the Idaho GOP, Teabaggers showing up with Guns at Obama appearances, the guy who shot the head of the Local Democratic Party in Arkansas, the man who shot up a Unitarian Church in Tennessee, the who shot Dr. Tiller?
(Things ain't perfect on this side of the aisle. I will point out that things like the Sparkman case turned out to be B.S. and the thing with Rep. Bobby Rush's niece which also turned out to be wrong.)
You see there's a healthy list of quote-unquote white-slash-supposedly-Christian Domestic Terrorists out there, that Fox does not make their audience hyperventilate over.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Thursday, March 24, 2011
The rise of Liberal Catholics? (Or really, how they never went away in the first place)
Via Lawrence on the Last Word:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Friday, December 17, 2010
ThinkProgress: The only shocking thing about this...is that this guy's shocked!
Apparently, the founder of Muslims for Bush is shocked, SHOCKED I TELL YOU, that there's anti-Muslim Bigotry in the GOP:
Honestly, I think Republicans are convinced that a) They're still the Party of Lincoln, and b) It's still 1864.
Last week, Muhammad Ali Hasan, a lifelong Republican and the founder of Muslims for Bush, announced he was switching parties because he is disgusted with the GOP’s tolerance of bigotry and adoption of thinly-veiled Islamophobia. Hasan and his family have raised money for Republican candidates in their home state of Colorado, helped GOP campaigns, and Hasan has run for public office on the GOP ticket. But after months of watching conservatives fan the flames of intolerance for political gain, Hasan had had enough, and wrote an open letter to the GOP published last Friday in the Huffington Post:
In watching this summer, with the promotion of Arizona’s SB 1070, calls to revoke the 14th Amendment, anger at the overturn of California’s Proposition 8, and lastly, aggressive protest against a mosque in New York City, I came to question how much the GOP values the vision of our American Saints, the Founding Fathers. Quite frankly, we are no longer the party of Constitutionalists.
Honestly, I think Republicans are convinced that a) They're still the Party of Lincoln, and b) It's still 1864.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Lewis Black, Nate Silver and the shameless utter hypocrisy of the American People (VIDEO)
I was going to do a whole piece on the American's shameless hypocrisy over the full body scanners. Save me! Save me from those nasty Muslims! Do whatever you have to do...to them. Take away my neighbor's civil liberties, I have nothing to hide.
Wait, you want to do something to me? Whooooaaa, you crossed a line there, fella.
Of course, Lewis Black said it (and performed it) way better.
It reminds me of the old adage: Black people. Why I love black people! Blacks are some of my best friends...
...but no, I wouldn't let my daughter marry one.
Instead here its: Muslims? I ain't afraid of no Muslims...but don't let one sit next to me, okay? And don't let them build a Mosque in my neighborhood...and God help you if you touch my junk!
Still, Nate Silver has a couple interesting points about his own experiences with the Scanners in San Diego (an experience mirrored by Sports Talk Show Host, Jim Rome on his own show this morning, but I don't have audio for that):
And Nate has some interesting stuff about the polls finding Americans in favor of the scanners:
Wait, you want to do something to me? Whooooaaa, you crossed a line there, fella.
Of course, Lewis Black said it (and performed it) way better.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Back in Black - Nanny State | ||||
| ||||
It reminds me of the old adage: Black people. Why I love black people! Blacks are some of my best friends...
...but no, I wouldn't let my daughter marry one.
Instead here its: Muslims? I ain't afraid of no Muslims...but don't let one sit next to me, okay? And don't let them build a Mosque in my neighborhood...and God help you if you touch my junk!
Still, Nate Silver has a couple interesting points about his own experiences with the Scanners in San Diego (an experience mirrored by Sports Talk Show Host, Jim Rome on his own show this morning, but I don't have audio for that):
My first experience with the full-body scanners, on a flight back to Kennedy Airport from San Diego last month, was also a negative one. I had assumed that, whatever their other faults, the full-body scanners would at least speed up the process of going through the security line; I supposed I imagined something like this scene from the movie Total Recall, in which passengers literally don’t even have to pause to go through security as their bodies are scanned while they walk toward the departure gate.
Instead, the lines were quite slow — possibly because the machines were coming up with a lot of false positives, myself included. As is my usual practice when passing through airport security, I emptied my pants pockets completely — there wasn’t so much as a stick of gum, a penny, or a taxi receipt in there. But the machine nevertheless insisted that that there was something in the back right-hand pocket of my jeans. When the official from the Transportation Security Administration asked me what I had in my pocket, and I told him that there was absolutely nothing, he then performed a pat-down. I was in a chipper enough mood that I wasn’t inclined to make a scene, but I did ask the T.S.A. official whether it was routine for the machines to see things that weren’t there, to which he declined to respond.
This is not necessarily to suggest that my experience was typical — although perhaps there are some particular issues in San Diego, the same airport at which Mr. Tyner experienced his problems, and perhaps there is something of a learning curve as T.S.A. crews learn how to use the new technologies effectively.
And Nate has some interesting stuff about the polls finding Americans in favor of the scanners:
The T.S.A. is fond of citing polls which suggest that about 75 or 80 percent of air travelers approve of the new machines. There are a couple of issues having to do with the timing of these surveys, however. Most of them were conducted in January, immediately after the failed attempt last Christmas day by a Nigerian man, who had concealed explosives in his underwear, to blow up a plane travelling from Amsterdam to Detroit — during which time concern about air travel security would naturally have been quite elevated.
In addition, the surveys were conducted at a time when virtually no Americans would have had experiences with the full-body scanners, which had not yet been installed in any American airports at that time. Again, I have no way of knowing whether my experience at San Diego was at all typical. But if so, I would imagine that other people might have their opinions shifted after actually having encountered the machines.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Adam Serwer lists the many, many times Muslim-Americans have helped foil Terrorist Attacks.
Good call, sir:
Of course, there's more at the American Prospect.
October 2001: The conviction of “Portland 7” case was substantially helped after a local police officer encountered the suspects engaged in target practice. The police officer had been sent to the area after a local citizen notified police that he heard gunfire.
September 2002: Members of the “Lackawanna 6” are arrested. FBI first becomes aware of their activities in June 2001 when a local Muslim community member tips off the FBI.
March 2002: FBI become aware of a possible terror plot by Imran Mandhai (and later Shueyb Jokhan) after they are notified by an American Muslim named “Saif Allah” who attended Mandhai and Jokhan’s same mosque provides a tip.
June 2003: FBI receive two tips from community members notifying them “military-style training” was being conducted suspect by Ali Al-Tamimi. The tip set in motion an investigation later leading to the arrest of the so-called “Paintball 11” in Northern Virginia.
August 2004: James Elshafay and Shahwar Matin Siraj are arrested largely based on the controversial use of an informant in the investigation. However, NYPD were first notified of Siraj after a Muslim community member anonymously notifies New York police about consistently troubling rhetoric coming from the suspect.
February 2006: Muslim community members in Ohio provide information helping to arrest and eventually convict 3 suspects planning attacks in Iraq.
July 2009: Mosque leaders in Raleigh, North Carolina, contact law enforcement to notify them of “violent, threatening action … considered to be dangerous” leading to the arrest of Daniel Boyd and 6 other individuals.
November 2009: Five Virginia Muslim youth are arrested in Pakistan, allegedly seeking to join a terror group, after family members told American federal authorities they went missing.
April 2010: Senegalese Muslim Alioune Niass first spots the suspicious vehicle used as a bomb to attack Times Square in New York City. Clues from the vehicle and defused explosive immediately led to the suspect, Faisal Shahzad’s, arrest.
June 2010: Suspects Mohammed Mahmoud Alessa and Carlos Eduardo Almonte are arrested, after the FBI first receives an anonymous report in 2006 from one of the suspects’ family members. News reports indicate one of Alessa’s family members provided the tip.
Of course, there's more at the American Prospect.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
"The precepts of Jesus Christ spoke to me in terms of the kind of life that I would want to lead..."
Shifting away from the Rolling Stone piece, and to a backyard discussion (like we've seen before) in New Mexico (video will be posted as soon as its made available), the President addressed his faith:
In response to a woman who asked him why he is a Christian, Obama also offered some rare personal comments about his faith.
"I'm a Christian by choice," he said, noting that his mother "didn't raise me in the church" and that his family did not attend church every week.
"So I came to my Christian faith later in life," Obama said. "And it was because the precepts of Jesus Christ spoke to me in terms of the kind of life that I would want to lead - being my brothers' and sisters' keeper, treating others as they would treat me."
He said he also reached an "understanding that . . . Jesus Christ dying for my sins spoke to the humility we all have to have as human beings, that we're sinful and we're flawed and we make mistakes, and that, you know, we achieve salvation through the grace of God."
He continued: "But what we can do, as flawed as we are, is still see God in other people and do our best to help them find . . . their own grace. And so that's what I strive to do. That's what I pray to do every day. I think my public service is part of that effort to express my Christian faith."
Obama emphasized, however, that "as president of the United States, I'm also somebody who deeply believes that part of the bedrock strength of this country is that it embraces people of many faiths and of no faith." While the United States "is still predominantly Christian," he said, "we have Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, and . . . their own path to grace is one that we have to revere and respect as much as our own."
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Sarah Racist Palin.
She can call this what she wants (and I can care less about her pathetic justifications). All she's trying to do is gin up racial hatred for the President. Thus, she's a racist. Period. End of discussion.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Simon Schama: "People want to sound off..." (VIDEO)
I like Simon Schama. The American Future remains one of my favorite Historical Documentaries, and this was damn good analysis of America and the American body politic, and it follows up a little on what I said before. Americans fall a bit too much in love with their belief that "I just know what I know" and it always leads to trouble in the American Experiment:
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Did someone in Texas just save a bunch of lives with his skateboard??!?
Well, never mind the fact that Washington beat Dallas 13-7 last night. (I don't care how ugly it was, a win is a win; and a win against the Cowboys is extra sweet!)
But, a Texas Skateboarder in Amarillo just stood up for America in a way that...frankly brings a tear to my eye.
I know, a Texan!
A TEXAN!!!!
Good for him. He's one of my nominees for American of the Year.
But, a Texas Skateboarder in Amarillo just stood up for America in a way that...frankly brings a tear to my eye.
I know, a Texan!
In Amarillo, Texas, David Grisham, director of Repent Amarillo, “which aims to deter promiscuity, homosexuality and non-Christian worship practices through confrontation and prayer,” planned to burn the Islamic holy text at a public gathering. But before he could set the book ablaze, a 23 year-old skateboarder named Jacob Isom swooped in and grabbed it:
A planned Quran burning Saturday in Amarillo was thwarted by a 23-year-old carrying a skateboard and wearing a T-shirt with “I’m in Repent Amarillo No Joke” scrawled by hand on the back.
Jacob Isom, 23, grabbed David Grisham’s Quran when he became distracted while arguing with several residents at Sam Houston Park about the merits of burning the Islamic holy book. “You’re just trying to start Holy Wars,” Isom said of Grisham after he gave the book to a religious leader from the Islamic Center of Amarillo.
A TEXAN!!!!
Good for him. He's one of my nominees for American of the Year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)