about that office of special plans. i have some concern liz cheney is heading up one for iran called (warning NRO) ISOG

“Although a spokesman for the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs (NEA) declines to comment on its existence, and the press has yet to carry a single mention of it, last month the administration formed something called the Iran-Syria Operations Group (ISOG)–a group headed by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Liz Cheney, the purpose of which is to encourage regime change in Iran. It’s no secret that Cheney has over $80 million at her disposal to promote democracy in Iran. But ISOG isn’t simply about promoting democracy. It’s about helping to craft official policy, doing so not with one but two countries in its sights, and creating a policymaking apparatus that parallels–and skirts–Foggy Bottom’s suspect Iran desk”

Awesome.

annie – I thought I had lost my capacity for shock when it comes to this administration. But the probability that Cheney’s family is spearheading the case (and developing its own intelligence) for war in Iran is totally beyond the pale.

i have doubts about anything trumped from memri tv. i saw this about a month ago and was stuck by the extremeness of the islamic fundie and the implications that he represented a large segment of those representing resistance to the occupation. i will watch it again w/a more open mind.

Sorry, my gerbil can’t run fast enough to play video’s.

Try putting Tang in the Constant Comment, an old hippie trick.

This is really sweet:

The following statement was issued by the Democratic National Committee to RAW STORY.

#

The Washington Post reported today that President Bush detailed the alleged existence of mobile biological weapons laboratories and claimed that “We have found the weapons of mass destruction,” two days after a “Pentagon-sponsored mission transmitted their unanimous findings to Washington” in a May 27, 2003 field report that directly contradicted the President’s statements. The final version of that report remains classified to this day. [Washington Post, 4/12/06]

This week, President Bush stated that he declassified and authorized the leak of cherry-picked portions of the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate because he “wanted people to see the truth,” and “to see what some of those statements were based on.” [President Bush, 4/10/06] In a breakfast discussion this morning with a couple dozen journalists hosted by the American Prospect, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean called on President Bush to release or declassify the final Defense Intelligence Agency report on the trailers so that the American people can learn whether they were misled about the claims of Iraqi biological weapons:

“Given that the President has been willing to declassify information for his own political purposes, he should declassify this report so that the American people can know if they were misled. The onus is clearly on the President to clarify the situation surrounding this report. Was this incompetence, meaning that he did not know something that he clearly should have known, or is this an instance of dishonesty where information was misused or withheld to support a political agenda?”

“Moderate” and “Conservative” sides of one religion is not what I would call a big difference. What needs to be realized is that ALL religion is absolutely worthless to building a better world. Organized religion has been responsible for an overwhelming majority of conflict in recorded history. We would do well to take both people on the video tape and push them off a cliff for clinging to medieval mythology as if it has some practical use in a modern world built by scientific achievement.

xyz , they are secretive of course, i tried googling this isog group, hardly anything in the news except this from the UK march 05. “Cheney daughter leads ‘cold war’ on mullahs” arrgh

they are determined to overthrow the regimes this term i fear. come hell or highwater.

Despite the obvious insainty of the whole mess, I keep reminding myself that in the current situation, everyone has a strong, rational, negotiating incentive to appear batshit crazy. Unfortunately, at least some of the participants have a track record to back it up.

Bravest woman in the world?

Could there be a greater insult to the Pakistani woman who was raped and tried for adultery and goes around the country speaking out on women’s rights and sexual assault and what-not?

Sheesh.

On religion:

“…Our situation is this: most of the people in this world believe that the Creator of the universe has written a book. We have the misfortune of having many such books on hand, each making an exclusive claim as to its infallibility. People tend to organize themselves into factions according to which of these incompatible claims they accept—rather than on the basis of language, skin color, location of birth, or any other criterion of tribalism. Each of these texts urges its readers to adopt a variety of beliefs and practices, some of which are benign, many of which are not. All are in perverse agreement on one point of fundamental importance, however: “respect†for other faiths, or for the views of unbelievers, is not an attitude that God endorses. While all faiths have been touched, here and there, by the spirit of ecumenicalism, the central tenet of every religious tradition is that all others are mere repositories of error or, at best, dangerously incomplete. Intolerance is thus intrinsic to every creed. Once a person believes—really believes—that certain ideas can lead to eternal happiness, or to its antithesis, he cannot tolerate the possibility that the people he loves might be led astray by the blandishments of unbelievers. Certainty about the next life is simply incompatible with tolerance in this one.

Observations of this sort pose an immediate problem for us, however, because criticizing a person’s faith is currently taboo in every corner of our culture. On this subject, liberals and conservatives have reached a rare consensus: religious beliefs are simply beyond the scope of rational discourse. Criticizing a person’s ideas about God and the afterlife is thought to be impolitic in a way that criticizing his ideas about physics or history is not. And so it is that when a Muslim suicide bomber obliterates himself along with a score of innocents on a Jerusalem street, the role that faith played in his actions is invariably discounted. His motives must have been political, economic, or entirely personal. Without faith, desperate people would still do terrible things. Faith itself is always, and everywhere, exonerated.

But technology has a way of creating fresh moral imperatives. Our technical advances in the art of war have finally rendered our religious differences—and hence our religious beliefs—antithetical to our survival.We can no longer ignore the fact that billions of our neighbors believe in the metaphysics of martyrdom, or in the literal truth of the book of Revelation, or any of the other fantastical notions that have lurked in the minds of the faithful for millennia— because our neighbors are now armed with chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. There is no doubt that these developments mark the terminal phase of our credulity. Words like “God†and “Allah†must go the way of “Apollo†and “Baal,†or they will unmake our world…”

Sam Harris, “The End of Faith“

ck
Previous thread #21
April 12th, 2006 at 9:18 am
…Bush is our own little Mao, in Bolshevik drag
There is a concept in Jungian psychology that deals with the negative Double. Simply, the thing you hate the most is the thing that you are most like. Perhaps this helps explain W’s irrational hatred for North Korea’s Kim Jong-il.

~

We need more brave people, the Administration is doing its best to make us into cowards.

From the washpost:

Admin: 9/11! Boo! Iraq! Boo! Iran! Boo! Brown people! Boo!

Citizens who are paying attention: BOOOOOOOO

Posted by: E. “Greg” Ious | April 12, 2006 02:15 PM

i’m downloading it now, so i’ve only read the transcript so far (perhaps i have it wrong?)… but i am uncomfortable with what seems to be the anti-muslim message – that only muslim fundamentalist are violent:

We have not seen a single Jew protest by killing people. The Muslims have turned three Buddha statues into rubble. We have not seen a single Buddhist burn down a Mosque, kill a Muslim, or burn down an embassy. Only the Muslims defend their beliefs by burning down churches, killing people, and destroying embassies.

where i live there is already too much of this… equating muslims with violence.

” the thing you hate the most is the thing that you are most like. “
you become that which you resist

This woman is a secular Arab, not a moderate Muslim. Her anti-Muslim rhetoric is, actually, a bit ham handed at points (ex: “only muslims defend their faith by burning churches”… “muslims began the clash of civilizations” [paraphrase] etc.).
Though, I can see why she’s worked up, and she is very courageous. She also seems perfectly corret in her entry point into the debate: the defense of modernity and science is the place to be, rather than knee-deep in a clash of civilizations.

selise, a simple google on the origin of memri will give one an idea of the people behind this video.

to cdj:

I imagine the Pakistani woman herself could think of greater insults.

There’s no need for you to take a compliment to one woman as an implied slur on another.

Truth to power indeed.Very eloquent,very intelligent viewpoint.Basically: Get the fuck out of the stone age.I see parallels with her argument and ours in reguard to outdated thinking by fundamentalists.(theirs and ours) I did notice the same default tactics in the response also. Name calling and dismissal as irrelevant any thing that does not fit with the outdated intellect. Nice to know how to spot the B.S..

guardian

“The second thing that makes me uneasy is that the stories selected by Memri for translation follow a familiar pattern: either they reflect badly on the character of Arabs or they in some way further the political agenda of Israel. I am not alone in this unease.

Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American-Islamic Relations told the Washington Times: “Memri’s intent is to find the worst possible quotes from the Muslim world and disseminate them as widely as possible.”

Bobby G # 10: More on religion:

Ghandi once said “All religions are equally true.”

I accept this statement as far as it goes, however one of two alternative clauses should be added to the sentence:
a) ” . . except for those religions that assert for themselves preeminence of access to the truth. (You know who you are.)”

or b) ” . . in which case all religions are also equally false.”

;-)

vicki M -

To call someone a winner is to by implication call all the rest losers.

To call someone THE bravest is to call all others not as brave.

Please don’t ask me to ignore the meanings of words of the English language. Well, you can ask I suppose, but at the cost of your own intellectual honesty.

havent seen it mentioned but I’m so far behind it could have been: does any of this remind you of “The Omen?”

All faiths have had their reformation come from within. Imagine the reaction of the Pope if a learned Rabbi was the messenger of Luther’s reforms.

Islam needs a reformation. I don’t think anyone can doubt as much. But to have this reformation forced at the tip of a gun cannot work. Would that our country realize some fundamental truths about the nature of faith and its ahderents.

sorry, try again, guardian

eli — yes, the beginning portion was the part that caught my attention as well. I think she goes off her message toward the end — in the face of a lot of grief from the other participant, lets her temper get the better of her — but the amount of courage and clarity at the start was very gripping. I meant to make that point, and forgot in my rush to get this posted — thanks so much for bringing it up so I could clarify. :)

OT Mary – Does that come with the NSL, or do they issue it later? ??????

I am normally good with acromyms (if that’s what it is), but NSL escapes me so I can’t get the joke.

If all religions are equal, or valid, by all means let’s bring back the Aztec religion. Talk about “Old Timey”. I want to see Bush wearing Saddam’s skin at the base of the Washington Monument.

Or, the Mayan’s little bit of cosmology, Bush pushing the barb of a Sting Ray through his foreskin, and bleeding on a piece of the Constitution. Burning the whole thing in the Lincoln Memorial, so we can have a swell corn crop and get off mideast oil.

cdj: vicki M -

To call someone a winner is to by implication call all the rest losers.

To call someone THE bravest is to call all others not as brave.

Please don’t ask me to ignore the meanings of words of the English language. Well, you can ask I suppose, but at the cost of your own intellectual honesty.

No, it’s just at the cost of your mindless literalism. Calling someone “the bravest person in the world” or “the most wonderful” or other superlatives is a common rhetorical device, and is not generally interpreted as denigrating every other person you can think of. If it were, no one would use it.

Old one–been around the blogoshpere long enough to grow a beard. What she doesn’t mention is that Israel kills 3 innocent Palestinians for every one of theirs. She’d have to be REALLY brave to say that.

Redshift #28 – Here, here.

I find her, umm, somewhat (understatement) biased. She proclaims herself to be neither Jew, Christian, nor Muslim yet singles out the Muslim faith and its followers for her wrath. She is an arab american and psychologist who lives here, therefore not so brave for speaking out in this way, imho.

wrt MEMRI– Juan Cole has had something to say about them:

http://www.antiwar.com/cole/?articleid=4047

mkultramaroon — Nietsche, yes? Stare long enough into the abyss and the abyss will stare back at you…

mkultramaroon: There is a concept in Jungian psychology that deals with the negative Double. Simply, the thing you hate the most is the thing that you are most like. Perhaps this helps explain W’s irrational hatred for North Korea’s Kim Jong-il.

Hmm, I’ve always thought it’s that Bush thinks he’s Superman, and is always on the lookout for a supervillain who, if he is defeated, will cause the entire enemy effort to collapse. Unfortunately, his failure to notice the fact that this never happens is just one of many disasters caused by relentlessly faith-based foreign policy.

I’m sorry, but you won’t win any arguments about Muslim moderation by putting up a debate between a woman who says she no longer practices Islam and a Muslim cleric. You might as well have me, non-theist to the core, debate Pat Robertson about the true message of Jesus.

As Dr. Sultan told the The New York Times:

DR. SULTAN is “working on a book that — if it is published — it’s going to turn the Islamic world upside down.”

“I have reached the point that doesn’t allow any U-turn. I have no choice. I am questioning every single teaching of our holy book.”

The working title is, “The Escaped Prisoner: When God Is a Monster.”

Al Jazeera regularly includes discussions among “moderates,” “conservatives” and the occasional “extremist.” This particular clip may be remarkable for the strength of the woman’s criticism, but it is less of an example of the struggle within Islam itself, that one between apostates and still-practicing Muslims.

Redshift –

And there’s the call to ignore the English language. Thanks!

All faith traditions have their fundamentalists and they tend to get the most attention, in the news, in history, in infamy.
Not all who practice any given religion are fundamentalists. Most of us are tolerant and just trying to get by and do the right thing in the name of justice and peace. We don’t tend to assert ourselves because we don’t claim a lock on the truth and we are open to the ideas and beliefs of others being valid—for them.

I do lots of social action and justice work not in spite of but because of my faith. We need more liberals and free thinkers to join the ranks of liberal religion and speak out because our message is being drowned out by the right wing noise machine.

Unfortunately, we all know that Pat Robertson and Ralph Reed and their ilk do what they do for power and money, not for any true faith. The good news is that they are being found out, slowly but surely.

Rather than diss religion as a concept, we need to not paint all who have some kind of faith or guiding principle in their lives with the same brush as the fundamentalists. Being intolerant of all who do have some kind of faith is just another kind of fundamentalism.

And I’ll add “hear, hear!” to that. :)

I also forgot to mention that this being on the air is some progress in and of itself… I don’t know where it aired. It didn’t look like al Jazeera to me, but I don’t know… In any case that fundamentalist fella had his hands full with this woman. An articulate and passionate defense of modern values of free thought and tolerance is just what is needed against all these fundie cats (Christian, Muslim, Scientologist, or whatever)… this guy’s response was literally: “I don’t have to argue my case because you’re a heretic.” Lovely. That’s when you know they’ve got nothin’. One generation and they’ll be hiding this crap behind subtle euphamism a la National Review.

It may not be the same as winning, but it’s a start.

eli, selise and angie- i think you all have it covered!

Christian Zealots: “Respect Our Bigotry!”
[..]The first few paragraphs in the LA Times story Christians Sue for Right Not to Tolerate Policies sums it up pretty well:

Ruth Malhotra went to court last month for the right to be intolerant.

Malhotra says her Christian faith compels her to speak out against homosexuality. But the Georgia Institute of Technology, where she’s a senior, bans speech that puts down others because of their sexual orientation.

Malhotra sees that as an unacceptable infringement on her right to religious expression. So she’s demanding that Georgia Tech revoke its tolerance policy.

With her lawsuit, the 22-year-old student joins a growing campaign to force public schools, state colleges and private workplaces to eliminate policies protecting gays and lesbians from harassment. The religious right aims to overturn a broad range of common tolerance programs: diversity training that promotes acceptance of gays and lesbians, speech codes that ban harsh words against homosexuality, anti-discrimination policies that require college clubs to open their membership to all.

The Rev. Rick Scarborough, a leading evangelical, frames the movement as the civil rights struggle of the 21st century. “Christians,†he said, “are going to have to take a stand for the right to be Christian.”

[..] “THIS is the most pressing issue to these people, these Christians … they are CALLED by their Lord to spread hatred. The fact that other people in the society around them ask them to be civil, to show some respect when interacting with others is “discrimination†against them for their faith. In fact, they claim that policies that constrain them from spewing their bile result in a war on Christians.”

more… http://66.232.56.61/ee/index.p…..r_bigotry/

TPM has an appalling quote from one of the Iraq War intelligence bamboozlers, which is in a Bloomberg article under the headline “Iran Could Produce Nuclear Bomb in 16 Days, U.S. Says”:

“Natanz was constructed to house 50,000 centrifuges,” Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, told reporters today in Moscow. “Using those 50,000 centrifuges they could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 16 days.”

This seems roughly equivalent to saying “they’ve built a missile silo, and if they get a missile to put in it, they could bomb us any minute” and headlining it “Iran could bomb us any minute!”

Disgusting.

J. Madison:

“Ecclesiastical establishments tend to great ignorance and corruption, all of which facilitate the execution of mischievous projects.”

The Mobile Lab story is going to very significant:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/12/143710/613

It raises questions about leaking that will bring inconsistencies and hypocrasy bubbling to the surface for all to view.

Religion, in and of itself, is not the problem. Millions of us believe (or not), attend church (or not), follow closely the tenets of our religions (or not), and we do it (or don’t do it) in ways that do not impose ourselves and our beliefs on others. That I, as an Episcopalian, do not see eye-to-eye with those whose faiths are different, does not cause me to commit violent acts, or condemn, stigmatize or vilify those who do not share my brand of faith.

Where religion becomes a problem is in the same place that politics becomes a problem: in the acquisition and implementation of power that forces groups of people to be subjected in their daily lives to beliefs they do not hold, solely because they are in the minority. Wielding that power while wearing the mantle of one religion or the other does not imbue the power-holder with extra-special religious attributes, but rather, just proves that power is a heady and exciting thing to have, and causes those who wield it to confuse themselves with the deity they purport to represent.

How anyone expects tolerance to come easily to cultures and civilizations that have existed for millennia, when we have not yet attained that goal in this very young country of ours, is beyond me. You and I and many others may be teaching our children to see people as people, and not as the color of their skin or their ethnicity, but we all know that there are still far too many people out there who are teaching their children to hate, or fear, anyone who is different from what they see in the mirror.

A little O/T snark

Taking a break from the workout in today’s threads – plutonium, uranium and let’s throw in Sraffa and Nietsche-gawd I love this place

found this -

Crashing the Gate
Amazon Sales Rank # 369

Ramesh Ponnuru – Party of Death
Amazon Sales Rank # 80,432

someone please tell Regnery is not a money laundering op

Having lived in the middle east, and knowing something first hand of the hurdles she has had to overcome to get to where she is, I think she is very courageous. There is absolutely NO way she could both live in the most Arab countries (and many islamic countries) say the things she is saying and stay alive.

I proclaim myself to be neither a muslim, jew or christian, but that does not stop me from having a right to critisize fundamentalists who are trying to hijack my culture and land.

As for her point about whether or not Jews blow themselves up, believe me, I am no defender of Israel and have great sympathy for the Palestinian plight, but there is a big difference between the state violence perpetrated by Israel on Palestinian civilians and a cultural mindset (which is not shared by the majority of Arab muslims, btw) which condones individual acts (by civilians) of terrorism against other muslims. (If we were to agree with the idea that they are analogous, then each one of us, as American citizens, are complicit in the murder of 100,000s of thousands of Iraqis just as if we had gone in with bombs on our persons and blown them up ourselves, personally.) I think THAT is the valid point she was trying to make. She is speaking to an Arabic speaking audience, after all.

revdev36, thank you for an excellent rundown.
people not familiar w/muslins may infer thru viewing this person represents the majority who are followers of islam.

Anne #44

Ding, ding ding… We have a winner!

Oops. I wrote “of terrorism against other muslims. ” That should be, “of terrorism against other civilians.”

Christy–

Outstanding series of posts, especially “No Room For Errors.” I have not been able to get focused on the situation in Iran the past few days. This really helps.

Christy,

Thank you for this post. As a Muslim, I struggle with this stereotype everyday. I can shout as loud as I want about how we are not all radical, in fact most Muslims like everyone else are just trying to get by taking care of their families. Most Muslims also are secular. But, when I say it, I get the usual “oh you are brainwashed and we need to cure you”. Its refreshing to hear a balanced position from a non-muslim and its easier for the rest of the non-muslims to accept. For that I thank you.

I had written a post a week or so ago in response to questions from a reader of my blog. I presented my view of my religion here. The post elicited a lot of constructive feedback, and some expected backlash. Please read it and I hope it adds positively to the debate. Thanks.

timewarp #46
‘(If we were to agree with the idea that they are analogous, then each one of us, as American citizens, are complicit in the murder of 100,000s of thousands of Iraqis just as if we had gone in with bombs on our persons and blown them up ourselves, personally.) I think THAT is the valid point she was trying to make. She is speaking to an Arabic speaking audience, after all.’

We ARE complicit in those murders…

Second the wisdom and words of Annie #44.

Abuse of power is a horrific thing and we keep experiencing it over and over and over again whenever any group gets too much power be they religious or not. Power corrupts and absolute power . . .you know the rest. Add to that doing everything in the name of a God and that’s about as absolute as you can get.

Christy, I’m going to have to disagree with you, substantially, on this one.

1. MEMRI is an Israeli psy-ops site, founded by a member of their military inteligence, Yigal Carmon, and Meyraw Wurmser, wife of David who also holds dual-citizenship and serves with Richard Perle on the Hudson Institute, etc.and is probably also Mossad. Are we saying Neocon, much? The general purpose of this organization is to slant media coverage of Arabs and Muslims as far to the negative as possible. I believe Juan Cole has quite a bit to say about them also, though I’ve not checked his site.

2. I’m Episcopalian, not Muslim, but I’ve got several e-friends who are and have done a bit of reading on that faith and its history. So while I claim no expertise, I’m still going to debunk a whole lot of what this woman has said — and it also should be known that she has been pretty roundly castigated in non-neocon circles as, at best, a secularist unfamiliar with Islam and, at worse, a shill for Israeli interests (remember, this is MEMRI, and they are not very reliable).

For some reason, I can’t get the video, so I’m only commenting now on the transcript on Taylor’s site, but that’s ok for starters. Her attribution of a medieval, backward, barbaric, primitive mentality to Islam sounds far more like an Israeli script than anything having anything whatever to do with the actual faith. I’m not making any kind of apologia for Islam here — because I don’t think one is necessary, frankly, but also because there is quite a difference between the local cultures and political situations in the Middle East, which have a lot more to do with Western neo-colonialism (think oil) than anything religious, and the faith itself, which is in many ways an offshoot of Christianity (think Unitarianism: Allah is nothing more than the Arabic word for God, they revere Jesus, Moses and Abraham, hold the Bible (both Testaments) as their Holy Books and believe in the Immaculate Conception as well as Jesus being at the right hand of God on Judgment Day). Furthermore, I doubt that Indonesian women, for example, have the same problems as Pakistani, or the residents of Amman or Beirut.

Likewise, Muslims are NOT the ones who began the “clash of civilizations” — *we* are. Think Crusades. And the term was popularized by Samuel Huntingdon, a neocon. When Mohamed fought, it was to defend his faith against Pagan attackers, and the division into Muslim and non-Muslim for purposes of governance was actually a very tolerant one: care of the poor, and other things for which we now pay taxes was all, under the system he set up, to be accomplished by charitable donation (one of the five pillars of Islam). Mohammed not only did NOT force people to convert to Islam, but welcomed People of the Book (Christians and Jews), merely asking of them to pay taxes at basically the same rate as Muslims were asked to donate.

Fighting infidels meant fighting the Pagans of the 7th century Arabian Peninsula and actually, Mohamed “made” most of them convert by choosing to lay down his arms and refusing to fight them.

I’ve probably written too much already and I’ve only responded to the first paragraph. Nor have I gotten into Mohammed’s incredibly progressive attitudes towards women (for real: he granted them better rights than I had in N. Carolina vintage 1974). But if there are any people here who are interested, either I or someone more knowledgeable could perhaps take some time another time to rebut the many, many factual errors in this woman’s talk.

Rayne # 32

April 12th, 2006 at 11:50 am

“Nietzsche is dead.” -God

Marine coming home from Iraq detained at airport…
He was on the “no-fly” list as a suspected terrorist. WTF!
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12284855/

CJR and Americablog finger Donald Graham as the uber wing nut at the WaPoo:

http://americablog.blogspot.co…..em-at.html

The collective wisdom of this blog is awesome, and the last couple of threads have been spectacular. Thanks to all.

Some good points, dannyboy, but, post-Mohammed, there’s this little matter of the Arab conquest whose beginning predates the Crusades by 300 years. To suggest that nobody was forced to convert is to deny history, although the same can, of course, be said about Christianity.

Moreover, while Muslim rule may have been tolerant of Jews and Christians, they were, in most places, second-class citizens, with restrictions placed upon the practice of their religion and other aspects of their lives.

from the transcript:

“. I am not a Christian, a Muslim, or a Jew. I am a secular human being. I do not believe in the supernatural, but I respect others’ right to believe in it. …

You are free to worship whoever you want, but other people’s beliefs are not your concern, whether they believe that the Messiah is God, son of Mary, or that Satan is God, son of Mary. Let people have their beliefs. … The Jews have come from the tragedy (of the Holocaust), and forced the world to respect them, with their knowledge, not with their terror, with their work, not their crying and yelling. Humanity owes most of the discoveries and science of the 19th and 20th centuries to Jewish scientists. 15 million people, scattered throughout the world, united and won their rights through work and knowledge. We have not seen a single Jew blows himself up in a German restaurant. We have not seen a single Jew destroy a church. We have not seen a single Jew protest by killing people. The Muslims have turned three Buddha statues into rubble. We have not seen a single Buddhist burn down a Mosque, kill a Muslim, or burn down an embassy. Only the Muslims defend their beliefs by burning down churches, killing people, and destroying embassies. This path will not yield any results. The Muslims must ask themselves what they can do for humankind, before they demand that humankind respect them.”

Where is her reference to Christians here? Does this seem lopsided to anyone else? After all, our country is predominately Christian and we are fighting 2 wars in the area… surely we have caused some destruction… think of the cradle of civilization– the antiquities we have bombed.

wrt to the statues of Buddha– they were respected and protected for thousands of years before some radicals destroyed them. Predominately Islamic Afghanistan protected them…

thanks, dannyboy for your detailed post.

The following made the circles a few years ago and I’ve always liked it, being a spiritual person. Excuse some of the caps as I don’t have time to fix this file:

Spirituality vs. Religion

SPIRITUALITY SAYS THAT GOD IS WITHIN US AND THAT WE DON’T NEED ANYONE ELSE TO MAKE THAT DIVINE CONNECTION FOR US
Religion says that we are separated from god and that we need “them” to make that divine connection

SPIRITUALITY SAYS THAT WE ARE FREE TO MAKE CHOICES ON OUR OWN AND THAT WE MUST TAKE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR OUR ACTIONS
Religion says we must make their choices and act their way

THE THEME OF SPIRITUALITY IS UNCONDITIONAL LOVE
The theme of religion is fear and guilt

SPIRITUALITY DOES NOT REQUIRE US TO MAKE DONATIONS
Religion has become big business

SPIRITUALITY SAYS THERE IS NO HELL, NO JUDGEMENT, NO ANGRY GOD….THAT WE ARE LOVED UNCONDITIONALLY
Religion says there is a hell, god gets angry and judges us… Therefore, we are not loved unconditionally

SPIRITUALITY SAYS WE ARE FREE TO CHOOSE OUR OWN PATH TO GOD
Religion commands us to follow “their” path

SPIRITUALITY SAYS WE GO TO GOD TO LIGHTEN OUR BURDEN
Religion has taught us to fear their god

SPIRITUALITY SAYS WE SHOULD NOT BE ASHAMED OF OUR SEXUALITY… THAT IT SHOULD BE A SACRED CELEBRATION OF LOVE
Religion has taught us to feel ashamed, guilty and dirty about our sexuality

SPIRITUALITY TEACHES US TO HONOR AND RESPECT MOTHER EARTH
Religion has told us to “be thou fruitful, multiply and subdue the Earth” I repeat… “subdue the earth”

SPIRITUALITY REMINDS US THAT WE ARE ONE WITH GOD AND ONE WITH EACH OTHER
Religion teaches disunity and separation which is the opposite of god

SPIRITUALITY SAYS GODD/ESS IS WITHIN
Religion says he is in heaven and that “they” are the only intermediaries for us

SPIRITUALITY SAYS WE ARE BORN IN INNOCENCE AND PURITY
Religion says we are born with sin

SPIRITUALITY TEACHES THAT WE ARE ON A LONG SPIRITUAL ADVENTURE AND JOURNEY WHICH WILL ULTIMATELY END BY REUNITING WITH OUR SOURCE
Religion says we’ve got one life to get it all right and there is nothing but heaven or hell after that

SPIRITUALITY SAYS WE ARE FREE TO EXPRESS
Religion gave us the dreaded inquisition

SPIRITUALITY TEACHES UNCONDITIONAL LOVE FOR ALL
Religion gave us the crusades in which many were killed and slaughtered in the name of god

SPIRITUALITY TEACHES THAT WE SHOULD LOVE ONE ANOTHER UNCONDITIONALLY AND ALWAYS HONOR THE RIGHTS AND CHOICES OF OTHERS
Religion treated Native Americans, the Mayans and other indigenous Cultures as savage primitives who “must be saved”

SPIRITUALITY TEACHES PEACE AND HARMONY
Religion has caused more wars and more killing than any other reason

SPIRITUALITY SAYS RESPECT ALL LIVING THINGS
I never once heard any religion say stop slaughtering millions of trees every year for christ’s birthday

SPIRITUALITY TEACHES US TO HAVE FAITH IN OURSELVES
Religion teaches us to have faith in them

SPIRITUALITY SAYS WE HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS… THAT WE CAN FIND THEM BY “GOING WITHIN”
Religion teaches us that it has all the answers and only its answers are the right ones

SPIRITUALITY TEACHES US TO SEARCH FOR THE UNIVERSAL TRUTHS AND OUR HEARTS WILL TELL US WHEN WE HAVE FOUND THEM
Religion teaches we have no choice but to accept their version of the truth

Which One Feels Better to You? Spirituality or Religion?
Go to Your Heart for the Answer it Will Never Lie to You
……………………………………………….
There are many paths to enlightenment.
Be sure to take the one with a heart.
- Lao Tzu

Meteor Blades — to say that Arabs (previously known for their love of poetry, knife blades and horses) were not galvanized by Islam into a force to be reckoned with would be to mis-state history. But most of the incredible expansion of Islam was, in fact, voluntary. Yes, Arabs now were your rulers, but you still could remain Christian if you wished — and most Middle Eastern Christians did convert to Islam partly out of convenience and partly because for many it actually felt more spiritually close to their early roots than what Christianity, at that point in time, had become. The restrictions placed on Christians or Jews were not tenets of Islam, or due to the practice of Islam, but merely the whim of various rulers — some were just nicer/more tolerant/easy-going, and some nastier and/or greedier. We know how that works!

beautiful and thank you, Shez.

On the subject of religion, I highly recommend the book “The End of Faith” by Sam Harris. The simple fact is that all religious belief, with its emphasis on the virtue of faith (belief that lacks a basis in evidence), and for numerous other reasons, is a powerful force for irrationality in our world – a force which has done vastly more harm than good over the course of human history and now threatens to destroy our very existence.

http://www.samharris.org/

Ooooffff!
Scotty meltdown alert (Iraq mobile labs/H generators/sand toilets edition)

“I hope they [major US news organizations] will go and publicly apologize on the air about the statements that were made”

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/…..apologize/

ck # 57:
Is he any relation to Katherine Graham?

You’ll have to cut, paste and google the following as they won’t link for some reason…

http://www.onlinejournal.com/a….._175.shtml

http://www.onlinejournal.org/M…..hasty.html
~

Angie 52

We ARE complicit in those murders…

Yes, I agree, we are complicit. Which is why I speak out against this war every chance I can get. But all complicities are not equal, in my view. If we were to equate all forms of complicity, should we be calling US soldiers (all of whom volunteered btw) murderers? I am not being cavelier here, but it does us no good to make broad generalizitions here. As far as I know, neither you or I are sneaking into Iraq with bombs on our persons to blow up Iraqi civilians. Or sneaking onto US army bases to blow up soldiers because we want to save Iraqi civilians. That was the point I was trying to make.

Excellent Q&A with Sam Harris regarding religion:

http://www.samharris.org/index…..am_harris/

Donald Graham as Wingnut

I have read that CJR profile through 3 different links @ 3 differnt times. Graham is a low profile guy and there aint much out there on him-

Before I even start, let me say I have no real idea if Donald Graham is an uber-wingnut or not
But you can’t prove it reading that particular piece. The profile states in three different places (e.g. the last paragraph!) that Graham is all about keeping the paper as centrist as he can .

The piece itself is 4 years old and personalities evolve (look at Len’s quote from 1976’s The New Muckrackers as a stark example)
Graham may indeed be a wingnut, it would certainly explain a lot of their recent ‘hijinks’, and no, I don’t think WaPo is centrist but you can’t prove it by that article and I’m a little disappointed in Americailog’s ‘case’.

Only Muslims kill blow up churches and kill people? Who invaded Iraq? Who was driving the bulldozer that ran over Rachel Corrie?

timewarp–
Dead is dead and there are lots of forms of terror. Whether by a bomb falling from the sky or from an ied or a suicide bombing. I don’t see anyway around it, I am sorry. We started counting Iraqi deaths only when the civil war started, not before. When we could find someone else to blame for the loss of life and chaos. Illegal occupation and wars of aggression are to blame.

Mash #51- i visited your site- i compliment you on your thoughtful post and patient responses to the comments esp. the “backlash” ones.

Shez – Thanks for that wonderful post, as well as for the link to the LAT story. I see that the lawsuit was filed by the Alliance Defense Fund. Here’s what PFAW has on them:

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/gener…..x?oid=4457

Also, somewhat on-topic, from Mike Davis:
“The Poor Man’s Air Force: A History of the Car Bomb (Part 1)”

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0412-20.htm

Angie — This woman also betrays an incredible ignorance of her own culture as an Arab — Humanity’s “discoveries and science of the 19th and 20th centuries” are not owed primarily to *Jewish* scientists, although many were/are Jewish. Those discoveries could not have happened had not *Arab* mathematicians and scientists, from the Dark Ages to the Renaissance, preserved and built upon what the Greeks had begun, including algebra, the concept of zero, and all sorts of medical stuff.

Furthermore, her defense of Jews vs. attacks on Muslims is ingenuous at best: many churches, mosques and Muslim and Christian shrines have in fact been destroyed by Israel, in Israel and the Occupied Territories — and, while I don’t believe in any violence, I still find a big difference between Palestinian freedom fighters conducting legitimate resistance in the Occupied Territories and Al Quaeda.

quisp #70:
And who blew up the people in Oklahoma? -a self-identified Christian (of some fundamentalist type). And US Citizen.

timewarp:

Iraqi civilians = Collateral Damage

*We* don’t hesitate to “liberate” a few extra “innocents” if we can bag one “terrrrist”

Shez at #61 – beautiful and worth passing on. Thank you.

Timothy McVeigh was a real fundamentalist type: a Catholic!

And I wonder of Christians do not hold the record for destroying and defacing their own churches? Iconoclast vandalism (or cleansing, depending on your viewpoint) occured all the way from Finland and Scandinavia, through British Isles and down through norhern Europe.

OT,
like usual. Most of us here understand to some degree the problem with racism in this country. I applaud the wonderful series by the various writers.

Now, I make my plea…while I think it is important to point out the gOP’s adoption of white supremicist agenda, as Digby pointed out, this is not new.

The only thing that is going to remove the current administration from office is the election. Primary goal #1. After a major shift in Congress, then we can focus on pressuring a president and congress to officially end the war on drugs and the war on terror. In fact, I’m all for an amendment that makes it illegal for a U.S. President to have a war against a non-physical entity. Just think about how much time and money this would have saved.

Anyways, can we get back to framing the issues in a manner that will persuade voters in the midwest, southeast, and west to realize the errors of this administration ie., energy/gas prices, national security, medicare, healthcare. Let the GOP hang themselves on the immigration issue.

I want impeachment, then criminal prosecution for the President and Vice President to show the world we are not above the agreements we hold all other countries accountable to.

Delicious to see the White House in full bore CODE BROWN Definition-of-’IS’ mode now.

He didn’t “leak,” he “de-classified” (how/when details left unclear) to “get the WMD truth out” (even though we now know the contravening “truth”).

He didn’t lie about the mobile “WMD labs,” he was only giving the truth AS HE KNEW IT AT THE TIME. Not subsequently going back and correcting himself in light of contravening truth, well, picky, picky, picky…

Asshole. Stew in your own web of lies. Choke on the hairball of your own absurd hairsplitting.

About the WH pushback on the trailers. Unfrikkin’ believable. It was a “field report”. Excuse me? So we would rather believe an influenced CIA/DIA analysis populated with fiction by a unreliable informant named ‘Curveball’, then our own technical experts in the field? Hello?

ANd they had the report for A YEAR. And still Bush was claiming the trailers were for WMDs.

*ilson46201 #78:
But what kind of Catholic? There are fundmentalist versions of Catholics. He was not a typical Christian, that’s for sure.

Angie – I don’t think we really are really in any fundamental disagreement about the crimes which our government has committed in our name, for which I do feel a deep sense of responsibility.

But I am trying to say that Dr. Sultan was speaking to a very specific audience adheres to specific cultural values (constraints?). AI believe she was trying to make a very specific point. Which is that Arab culture should not be condoning acts of violence perpetrated by Arabs, in the name of Islam. As you say, Dead is dead, and I applaud her efforts to speak out strongly against actions taken by extremists within her culture, just as you and I speak out strongly against extremist elements of American society in the name of Christianity.

Was her rhetoric a little over the top? Perhaps, but then, having lived in the Arab world, I can tell you that in comparison to much of what goes for regular discourse, it was pretty mild. Arabic is a pretty flamoyant language – it is just the way people express themselves in Arabic, and doesn’t always translate well into English. And it does take a lot of guts to go on Arabic TV and say “I am not a Muslim” (apostasy) – in spite of the fact that she was assuredly raised as one, and to call the fundamentalist clerics out on their hate-mongering speech. Within that cultural context, what she was saying was truly radical. As a feminist, I applaud her for it.

Following this blog is like continuing education for me; I am blown away by how much information I get here, and how much better informed I feel after reading everyone’s posts.

What I’ve read today has reinforced for me how important context is to the argument, although it also makes me wonder if the opinions I venture can ever be as fully informed as they should be, given how much information is out there.

Looking at all sides, and taking in contrary information is something I like to think liberals are better able to do. Maybe it’s because we are not afraid of information, and we’re willing to adjust our thinking on the basis of new information – I don’t know.

What I do know is that as other perspectives have been posted on this thread, no one has lost his or her mind as a result.

This is, without a doubt, a place where the collective experience, education, expertise and opinion of the posters form a community that is in no way diminished by our differences, and is a joy to participate in.

dannyboy,
Thanks again for pointing that out– her commentary is rife with mischaracterizations. It has provided me with a headache!

**OT**
I finally received a reply from DiFi regarding my asking her to support Feingold’s censure resolution in light of the illegal spying on American’s on American soil. I’m so pissed! Another non-answer answer that does not even mention the word “censure”. I’ve cut and pasted her official email response:

April 12, 2006

Ms. Suzanne XXXX
XXXX

Dear Ms. XXXX:

Thank you for writing to me about recent revelations that the United States Government has
engaged in domestic electronic eavesdropping without appropriate legal authority. I welcome the opportunity to respond.

On February 6th, the Senate Judiciary Committee held the first of a series of hearings into this matter, at which Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testified about
the legality of the program. He provided none of the documents the Committee required for proper oversight, and his assurances alone did not allay my concerns.
Instead, he propounded a radical legal theory of presidential power largely unrestrained by either
Congress or the courts.

I have carefully reviewed the Constitution and the laws relating to this domestic intelligence activity, along with the President’s statements and those of the Attorney General and other Administration officials. I believe that the electronic surveillance program was not conducted in accordance with U.S. law. The program, as described,
violates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which requires a court order for surveillance of Americans. Congress has updated FISA many times since 9/11 in
order to provide our nation with all the necessary tools to
fight terrorism. The Administration has never asked for
the authority to conduct this program.

I believe the Administration also violated the National Security Act, which requires all members of the Intelligence Committee to be fully and currently informed of all significant intelligence activities other than covert actions. I am a member of the Intelligence Committee, and yet I was not told about this program
until it was made public.

There will be further hearings in the Senate Judiciary and Intelligence Committees. Once the facts are clear, we can decide on appropriate corrective action.

Again, thank you for writing. I hope that you will continue to write to me on issues of importance to you.

Best regards.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator
http://feinstein.senate.gov

If I remember correctly, she didn’t even bother to show up for the censure hearing. (taking deep breaths and thinking calming thoughts)

Egad, DiFi has turned out to be such a big disappointment.

Sorry for the rant and funky text. Tried to fix the line breaks in DiFi’s email but I’m still kinda new at this.

dannyboy, large numbers of Middle Eastern Christians (and Jews) more or less welcomed Arab Muslims – to get out from under the yoke of their Byzantine rulers. However, across the greatest expanse of the Arab Conquest, North Africa to Spain, resistance was fierce and slaughter was immense. The Berbers held out for two centuries.

The restrictions on Christians and Jews were the result of the practice of Shariah, which most certainly has its foundation in Islam. Just how contentious this subject is can be found in this entry in the Wikipedia.

But these are small points of disagreement when, in fact, we agree on the point generated by this thread regarding Wafa Sultan’s comments.

new thread

I just saw the movie “Control Room,” about al Jazeera and the beginning of the Iraq War, and was blown away by it.

The main thing is, this woman is real and there are a whole lot more just like her. We never see or hear about them, but they are there.

I was afraid the movie would be a downer, but it was redeemed because there are heroes in it. One of the main characters is a guy called Hassan, and he is just like Fat Albert. A big friendly, open-hearted guy who is also intelligent.

But it was also striking how different the al Jazeera people were from the western media. They came in all skin tones and wore every variety of dress, from two or three different kinds of traditional garb to very stylish western dress. Al Jazeera also had women, not just in from of the camera but working as technicians and analysts. The western media, in contrast were completely homogenous, like a bunch of blow-dried fraternity boys, with a few women in front of the camera but none behind the scenes. And they were so uncurious. They simply took whatever information the military fed them and reported it, no questions asked.

Another difference was, the Arab journalists of al Jazeera, when they saw Arabs suffering on TV their eyes welled up. When they saw Americans suffering their eyes also welled up. The American media seemed completely unfazed by images of Arab suffering and only got upset when Americans suffered.

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1511

I wanted a little bit more background on Memri, and found this info. I’ll watch their videos, but continue to listen carefully – their agenda might get in the way at times.

xyz, you wrote:
“The simple fact is that all religious belief, with its emphasis on the virtue of faith (belief that lacks a basis in evidence), and for numerous other reasons, is a powerful force for irrationality in our world – a force which has done vastly more harm than good over the course of human history and now threatens to destroy our very existence.”
“Tillich defines and explores faith as ultimate concern. Faith is a centered act of being ultimately concerned.”
http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/tillich.html
The classical interpretation is that faith, (concern) drives us towards understanding, not away from it in to irrationality.
Religions and theists who do not define faith as Tillich did, face the inadequacy that Harris mentions, a drive towards irrationality and inhumanity. Harris’ statement, however, is imo far too broad, and ahistorical, when he says this applies to “all religions.”

In Vino–AMEN

Code Brown.Bwahahahahaha

Mash…Abaraka……thanks

And finally, I think Wafa Sultan, may have been interviewed by Amy Goodman at Democracy Now. I cannot find this connection at DemNow website.

The NY Times published an article about Wafa Sultan in March. Here is an excerpt:

Dr. Sultan grew up in a large traditional Muslim family in Banias, Syria, a small city on the Mediterranean about a two-hour drive north of Beirut. Her father was a grain trader and a devout Muslim, and she followed the faith’s strictures into adulthood.

But, she said, her life changed in 1979 when she was a medical student at the University of Aleppo, in northern Syria. At that time, the radical Muslim Brotherhood was using terrorism to try to undermine the government of President Hafez al-Assad. Gunmen of the Muslim Brotherhood burst into a classroom at the university and killed her professor as she watched, she said.

“They shot hundreds of bullets into him, shouting, ‘God is great!’ ” she said. “At that point, I lost my trust in their god and began to question all our teachings. It was the turning point of my life, and it has led me to this present point. I had to leave. I had to look for another god.”

She and her husband, who now goes by the Americanized name of David, laid plans to leave for the United States. Their visas finally came in 1989, and the Sultans and their two children (they have since had a third) settled in with friends in Cerritos, Calif., a prosperous bedroom community on the edge of Los Angeles County.

After a succession of jobs and struggles with language, Dr. Sultan has completed her American medical licensing, with the exception of a hospital residency program, which she hopes to do within a year. David operates an automotive-smog-check station. They bought a home in the Los Angeles area and put their children through local public schools. All are now American citizens.

Read More Here

Another excerpt:

he other guest on the program, identified as an Egyptian professor of religious studies, Dr. Ibrahim al-Khouli, asked, “Are you a heretic?” He then said there was no point in rebuking or debating her, because she had blasphemed against Islam, the Prophet Muhammad and the Koran.

Dr. Sultan said she took those words as a formal fatwa, a religious condemnation. Since then, she said, she has received numerous death threats on her answering machine and by e-mail.

One message said: “Oh, you are still alive? Wait and see.” She received an e-mail message the other day, in Arabic, that said, “If someone were to kill you, it would be me.”

Dr. Sultan said her mother, who still lives in Syria, is afraid to contact her directly, speaking only through a sister who lives in Qatar. She said she worried more about the safety of family members here and in Syria than she did for her own.

“I have no fear,” she said. “I believe in my message. It is like a million-mile journey, and I believe I have walked the first and hardest 10 miles.”

I wish I had a fraction of her courage.

Three other extremely controversial women in this same vein as Wafa Sultan:

Irshad Manji, the internationally best-selling author of The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim’s Call for Reform in Her Faith, was born a Shia Muslim in Uganda, but her family moved to Canada when she was 4. A self-identified lesbian and practitioner of the Islamic tradition of critical thinking known as ijtihad, she has served as a legislative aide in the Canadian parliament, editorialist at the Ottawa Citizen, and host of several Canadian television shows. She writes for publications worldwide and appears regularly on various television programs from the BBC and CNN to Real Time with Bill Maher, where she was a guest February 24. She has received so many death threats that her apartment windows are reputed to be fitted with bullet-proof glass.

Taslima Nasrin, a Bangladeshi doctor-turned-feminist-writer, three of whose four novels (My Girlhood, Wild Wind, Shame) have been banned in her home country for blasphemy or allegedly anti-Muslim sentiments. She fled Bangladesh in 1994 after extremists put a price on her head.

Ali Ayaan Hirsi, born in Mogadishu, is a member of Dutch parliamen from the right-wing People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy. While attending a Muslim girls’ school in Kenya, she says she sought to become a martyr for Iran in its war with Iraq, and was for a time a sympathizer with the Muslim Brotherhood. After being forced into an arranged marriage, she made her way to The Netherlands, where she obtained asylum, attended university and became an acerbic critic of the life of women under Islam. In her book De zoontjesfabriek (The Son Factory), she critiqued social customs such as genital mutilation and later sought to have the Dutch government ban the practice, which it refused to do. She co-wrote the film Submission, which explores women’s oppression under Islam. Since co-author and film-maker Theo Van Gogh was assassinated by Mohammed Bouyeri in 2004, Hirsi lives under police protection.

The fundamental problem with (most) religion is that it demands blind, unquestioning adherence to authority. This turns religious followers into sheep that are easily led to whatever ends the leaders wish.

The authority may be benign in most cases, but in some (such as fundamentalist leaders) it is clearly not, and when it’s not then you have a Big Problem — perfect soldiers: unquestioning, fanatical, and unthinking.

Even if the authority is benign, it still trains people from birth that the proper way to behave is to shut up and do what the authority figures say. This is hard training to break.

You can analogize relgious belief with nuclear reactions. It can be used for good or ill, but either way it’s a powerful and dangerous thing.

In my view, the danger and harm of blind belief greatly outweighs the benefits of it. Particularly when those benefits can be obtained equally well in other, less risky, ways.

I am not an athiest, by the way. I am “ignostic” — that is, if you ask me if I believe in God, I will respond with “it depends on how you define God”.

As someone said during GWB’s visit to India, you guys should learn from that country. In a predominantly Hindu nation, the President is a Muslim, the Prime Minister a Sikh, and the leader of the majority party is a woman, and an Italian born Catholic to boot.

timewarp @ 1:43 pm (#95) Agreed. Speaking out against the fanatics of any of the major religions takes courage. Muslim fanatics seem to have more support these days from their societies than most. If I were Dr. Sultan, I’d be very afraid.

angie (numerous) Asking that Sultan denounce crimes of Christians while debating with a Muslim about Muslim religious fanaticism is a red herring. She was talking to, scolding actually, Muslims. In her position, assuming I had the courage, I’d have said much the same. If I were debating a Christian about Christian fanatacism, then the talking points would be on Christian misdeeds and foolishness. Ditto with Jews or any other religion that thinks its members are the chosen people and violence in that religion’s name is somehow OK.

In the same vein as the lady in this vid, I’d like to introduce/recommend to the FDL crowd another Muslim who dares to speak about what Islam is like for most of its adherents:

Mansour El-Kikhia

Mr. El-Kikhia is a professor at the University of Texas San Antonio, and has a regular column in—believe it or not—the San Antonio Express-News. He writes often of Islam as a religion and of its history, and the viewpoint of regular Muslims on issues of the day.

He’s definitely an independent thinker. Most of the time, he’s well in line with progressive views of current events, he’s definitely no BushCo fan, but he can take a detour that can open one’s eyes to issues in a way we don’t usually consider—particularly the Arab POV, as in this column about racism against Arabs and how that played out in the Dubai Ports Deal:

Indeed, the brainwashing has been so complete that when an Arab company bought a British company running six ports in the United States, 72 percent of Americans opposed letting the Arabs run the ports. It made little difference that Dubai Ports World is one of the largest and most successful port management companies in the world.

Citing security and leading the charge, Democratic New York Sen. Charles Schumer went out of his way to convince Americans of the grave danger to security should Arabs manage the New York port.

Of course, he said nothing about the American ports managed by the Chinese, Koreans or Venezuelans. He said even less about the Israeli communications software firm that oversees communication in the White House and the Pentagon.

DP World is lucky to lose the deal. Why would any Arab company want to run U.S. ports? Only about 6 percent of all goods coming in the United States are inspected, and all it takes is one nutcase to do something stupid before all Arabs are blamed again for something beyond their control.

I’d never thought of the issue from that point of view…

El-Kikhia gets more hate mail and nasty LTTE’s than any columnist at the paper, but the E-N refuses to get rid of him.

Suzanne #87: I got the very same form email from Diane Feinstein regarding my letter to her pleading with her to support the Censure motion.

Yes she has been in the politics business too long, cynical, jaded… we have to get our democratic congresspeople to represent us-now! but how????!!!!!

LJ/Aquaria @ 2:17 pm (#99) – Agree with the professor that DP’s (and the UAE) are probably better off without the U.S. ports. Unfortunately, if AQ hits some other port that’s run by them, there will be a similar stink.

My problem with the UAE debacle was that this was a far less important issue than the question of how inspections are done, and other security concerns. If those things had been addressed, I would have had much less concern about DP running our port facilities. As it was, politicians from both parties took the oppurtunity to grandstand and play to racist fears, and neglected to talk about the real issues.

I say again if you want a devout Muslim who risks her life daily in Iran standing up for moderation and human rights then you’re talking about Shirin Ebadi. I’m not denigrating anybody here. Just sayin’

mfi– you are right. There are countless others, but she easily comes to mind. Your distinction is also on target– she lives within the struggle and still continues her important work. Many dissidents languish in prisons and continue their fight and still keep their voices heard by their very confinement. Thank you.

While we are compiling list, don’t forget Mukhtaran Bibi, also known as Mukhtar Mai of Pakistan.

This is a link to devout Iraqi woman who is critical of much of what “passes” for Islam, who has also been forced into exile. And one to another Iraqi woman who is not so devout, who is still living “within it.”

Though I don’t see why a woman from an Islamic culture has to be a “devout” muslim in order to be a credible critic.

I am just saying that I don’t think it makes much sense for any of us to be judging the personal choices (if they can make them at all) of any of these women, that is, from the safety of our own homes.

Sharia? Nay shookoran.Me Dhimmi.

Bombing the pentagon off the map?

Allah al ackbar. YES shookoran.YES!

Arabic-English translation:

Shukran (shookoran), “thank you.”

djimmi, “non-muslim citizen of a muslim state.”

It’s nice that the woman in the video takes on the numbskulls, but she needs some help with her facts. There are better advocates for the secular.

Whoa. From a new Wapo article on the trailer lies:

The White House sought to further rebut the Post article with a series of “Setting the Record Straight” statements e-mailed to reporters. In the statements, the White House does not deny the existence of the technical team’s report but portrays it as a preliminary finding, contrasting that report with a public white paper put out by the CIA on May 28, 2003. The CIA paper described the trailers as the “strongest evidence to date that Iraq was hiding a biological warfare program.”

The White House provided a “link” to a CIA Web site where the white paper is still posted, nearly 18 months after its conclusions were refuted by the Iraq Survey Group.

The White House statement also cites the 2005 Robb-Silberman commission report on intelligence failures related to Iraqi weapons. That report criticizes the intelligence agencies for “bureaucratic resistance to admitting error” as evidence showed Iraqi weapons claims to be unfounded. (My bold)

dannyboy #74
Precisely– there is so much wrong with what she says– I was working on that part of her commentary; thanks for that!

Additionally, does she even know the history of the wars fought in

whoops– sorry hostesses, please delete. Too many windows open as I was trying to shut down the puter and hit submit on an open one. ;)

Recently, I heard on a local “60s-70s Rock” radio station a political ad for a male Republican running for a judgeship. A woman’s voice at the beginning of the ad stated: “People have the right to freedom of religion, but they don’t have the right to be free from religion.”

Whaaaaat?!?!?!? I was driving at the time and almost ran off the road.

Only a fundie could come up with a campaign slogan so anti-Democracy and anti-First Amendment.

I would love to ask this judicial candidate and his spokeswoman why they hate America so much.

You see, freedom is freedom.

But some people have the insane idea that their freedom is derived from and maintained by taking freedom away from others. Unfortunately, this only represents a recipe for tyranny. Repressive, cruel, deadly, batshit-insane tyranny.

But then all fundies are the same.

Many of the ancestors of the founders of our Democracy fled from the Old World to escape religious tyranny. They travelled across the Atlantic looking for religious freedom…for themselves and their families. Many of these Old World immigrants, though, once they got to America, ended up just being religious tyrants themselves. Other religions were banned. Anyone not properly practicing “their” religion was punished. In other words, they just imported from the Old World their own brand of religious intolerance, hatred and tyranny.

And then something wonderful happened…Democracy. But not just any majority-rules pseudo-democracy (like the hardcore, religious fundie one Bush is allowing to be established in the “liberated” Iraq). One with a Bill of Rights with a First Amendment guaranteeing all American citizens certain inalienable, and supposedly unassailable, rights.

And the fundies have been assailing the inalienable rights of U.S. citizens ever since.

And what is one of the primary freedoms of all U.S. citizens? Freedom of Religion. And what is required for a U.S. citizen to have freedom of religion? The just as essential right to be free from religious tyranny. Or any type of tyranny for that matter.

These two inalienable, essential and supposedly unassailable rights of U.S. citizens go hand in hand. Otherwise, the door to religious tyranny opens, unleashing all manner of horror on a nation’s citizens and it’s children, including, of course, the one’s responsible for pulling this evil stunt.

So, I was shocked at what this woman on the radio said. Because this is exactly the anti-Democracy agenda being pushed on America by the likes of Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, James Dobson and, apparently, this Republican trying to get elected as a judge.

Their “religious freedom” is all that matters to them. And the freedom of everyone else who’s not a member of their religion? Fuck their freedom.

I get their message. Do you?

So, yes, there is a war going on in America. But the war I am waging isn’t against Christianity, or Islam, or Judaism, or Hinduism, or whatever. The war I am waging is against any individual or group of individuals actively out to subvert our democracy so they can setup their nefarious, anti-Democracy tyranny.

If a Communist dictator showed up and tried to pull this stunt, I would resist with all my strength. If an al Qaeda or Taliban dictator showed up, I would resist with all my might. But as it is, the only dictators who have shown up, so far, are the religious fundamentalist dictators promoting their monopolistic right-wing religious tyranny. Nope. Never. Nyet. Forget it, assholes.

I will defend our Constitution, our Bill of Rights, our First Amendment, to my last breath, to keep our freedom-loving democracy from falling into your evil, vile, religious tyrannical hands.

Just as I swore to defend these beautiful things and defend all my fellow citizens from tyranny when I entered the US Air Force many years ago. Back then the main threat to our beloved Democracy was the Communists. Today the main threat is from all the batshit-insane religious fundamentalists in the world, including our own. I swore a solemn oath then, and I will always honor this oath.