Weekend Open Thread
The Iranians are talking about a trial for the Bristish sailors. (link ) Bernie Kerik and others may face felony charges. (link
) What is Giuliani going to say about this? And swimmer Michael Phelps has won a sixth gold with some events still left. (link
)
What do you want to talk about?
Submitted by Mike Pridmore on Sat, 2007-03-31 09:25
Tags:
Comments :
Happy Saturday!
Sydney Australia goes dark to highlight action on Global Warming
Australians Believe in Science
A Toast to Pico!
:#)
A cure for the winter blues, 99 Proof Banana Scnapps
I'm only half stupid
Cheers to the Aussies!
Banana schnappes eh? Never tried that. Sounds yummy!
Appreciate that;
it's been an enormously bad week, though less for me and more for someone I know. I'll post more on it later this week, but it's someone else online, and there are already plans on how to address it with the community at dkos (thursday or so). Sorry to be so vague, but it will make sense why later.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
sorry to hear that
hope everything is alright.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
All politics and Gen. Eaton
General Eaton, a man wholly behind the mission in Iraq, is quoted in the Chicago Tribune as asking the President of the United States to STOP using the miitary as props.
Stop Pimping the Troops Please Mr. President
I'm only half stupid
Curiouser and curiouser
An interesting piece in Arab News today about "Left" and "Right" and what it all means to some in Afghanistan and Iraq. It's long but worth a read.
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=94405&d=31&m=3&y=2007
That is an interesting article,
although the alignments make sense: fundamental islam is so far to the right that it makes even our Right look positively communist by comparison (that is, where our Right is now, not where it wants to be).
Although they do need to do a little bit more research before writing things like this:
I mean, I would call this
many things, but hardly an "element of the left". :)
What I found most interesting in that article was this:
The first part of that statement, I agree with entirely, but the rest presupposes that the left is and can only be defined on politico-economic terms (macroeconomic, at that). I'd argue that the Western left has shifted its focus to socio-economic concerns, or how best to negoiate a mixed economy with a particular system of values. Instead of socialism (I'm talking real socialism, before Ender or GoRight jumps on that!), the Western Left has accepted the notion of a mixed economy in a democratic system and used that to angle for anything from health care to gay marriage. The author of the article recognizes what the Left has left behind but not what the Left has taken up instead.
Which is a huge failing on the part of the article, I think: it wants both to define the Left and then criticize it on the grounds of its own definition. There are some salient points in there I agree with, but otherwise it's a mess of misunderstanding.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
I agree
that from a US perspective, the author gets some things wrong and makes some odd assumptions, but I get no sense of intentional dishonesty. He isn't a US writer with a US background, held to US standards (yes, I typed that with a straight face, but only barely).
Instead he offers a glimpse into how someone not of this nation might interpret what they see and read about the US and the Western Left and the Right, and apply it to his own area of the globe. Are we Alice in his Wonderland, or he in ours?
The global village is an interesting place.
Looks like I got myself
embroiled in a little kerfuffle over in orangeland. My own fault
, of course. :)
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
Well put
added my name to the long list of recs.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
heh, I got some really nasty comments over there -
luckily Ender and GoRight have given me a thicker skin over here. Ha!
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
The depth
of negative reaction there to the Bible and/or Christian discussion is one of its more unpleasant characteristics for me.
But....
don't you think it is because the way religion has been "abused" to serve political purposes...! People are mixing how religon has been "used" with looking at the bible as the history of moral struggles of men.
I'm only half stupid
The reverse?
Maybe it's also because of the way some people have been abused by religion? It sounded like some of the commentors had had only negative exposure to religion and could see no good to any part of it, not even in its historical basis of much of our civilization.
Or more likely a bit of both.
I don't
the two categories as mutually exclusive. But I think a lot of them have had bad experiences with religion. But they fail to understand that their personal experience might be misleading. As i mentioned above, I think many of them believe there is an element of fakery/hypocrisy to all religion.
If one's exposure
to religion is mostly the Sunday morning broadcast TV shows, then the fakery/hypocrisy attitude is understandable.
A poignant post in Pico's diary:
Sounds like they were
assuming that everyone already was entrenched in the Christo-centric ethic, from the Church of England.
Many bad things have been done in the name of Christianity, and in fact all religons.
I'm only half stupid
Patterns
Undoubtedly. Religion used to be a huge part of Western life, and as such it was the most convenient philosophy to use as a cover for greed and ambition. It's followers could be easily persuaded to support whatever action was being considered, as long as the justification was cloaked in the right rhetoric.
Now, with religious philosophy on the wane, other philosophies take its place: "spreading freedom," "protecting our way of life," and "encouraging free markets" are a few that jump to my mind.
Or if you were French in the 19th century: "liberte, egalite, and fraternite." Lots of bad things were cloaked in that innocent-sounding trifecta.
I am not so sure religon is waning
At their core people long for a universal creater. I hope that religon with tolerance takes hold.
The other philosophies you speak of such as spreading freedom, and free markets, if you look closely at the conservative ideology, they have mixed the two. The theory that civil societies lead to free markets.
Listen carefully and you will hear that civil society means judeo-christian values, and free markets can only flourish with these values in places. Thus they have evanglized freedom and democracy in Iraq to mean a Christian society with free market principles. It is a cynical exploitation.
It is no secret is it that Halliburton has used Christian missionaries to settle an area before the set up shop. Or that only Bush voting Jeusus Republicans don't , were given special favors and contracts in Iraq.
The common thread is appealing to people's ideals and then engineering political advantage behind it.
I'm only half stupid
I like to talk
about religion, but dKos usually isn't the place for a pleasant discussion. Some normally reasonable folks there are just rabid where this is concerned. I feel that it is more than just the Sunday TV shows, though exposure to those could explain a lot.
One shouldn't be put off by other's religions.
People have a right to believe. People don't have a right to make others believe.
Believing, whatever it is your beliefs is really good. It brings some a sense of belonging and calms them. But when you have to make others who don't believe what you believe, live as you live, and not give them their own choice...well, then we got problems.
Unfortunately, most of the worlds religions, in their orthodox setting fiercely believe that others don't have a right to choose and they are theo ONLY group that is right. That is so common it would be hillarious if the consequences weren't the unyielding and hate filled world we live in today.
Now for MOST folks...it's all OK. It's the hard cores that make religion difficult. That hard core also includes those who completely reject religion, thus it's their religion to strip all vestiges of it from public words. Same thing as the others though.
I feel the same.
Rejecting religion and/or religious discussion is itself a form of religion.
I think they see
all religion as fakery. As noted below, many of them seem to have never had a positive experience with religion.
Sadly!
Yet the Sunday socials, and church picnics, etc were a way of meeting people and a community gathering place, in rural communities especially.
And the irony of Africans adopting Christianity so rigorously and gathering at the church to sing and praise the lord, helped them endur suffering in a shared way. If you were poor and black the church was a social safety net. Church was not an option. Momma made you go seven days a week.
I'm only half stupid
Nicely written
It's not your fault (or TIME's for that matter) that reading comprehension skills and the desire to find fault are at the levels they are.
I had added my two cents in the originating diary but this is an emotional issue for some folks.
Kudos!
An excellent dairy and an excellent subject. Very thought provoking. I am glad to see people in orangeland, and other places talk about this "stuff". It is exactly what the doctor ordered...... an assessment of our values, and our culture...... from a progressive perspective.
We have seen how conservative idealogy has driven the right, with an imposing moral selfishness and lots of barking about the evils of liberalism. IMHO as the conservative model is proving unsuccessful, I think it is time for progressives to talk seriously and long about the liberal idealogy, and how it can work to serve all aspects of living, teaching, and measuring progress on a different scale, other than pure profit motive. Of course that includeds better government.
What a treasure you are pico.
I'm only half stupid
The other dairy
the story of Joseph Darby. Wow!
The heights and depths of human capacitiy. One man. Just ONE man, with a sledgehammer. Or a conscience and a CD full of photos.
I'm only half stupid
and wasn't this what
Kerry adviser's focused polled, and said not don't talk about it. Was the "winter soldier" story too much to tell twice!
The whole torture thing is hard to fathom. And the right says, look away nothing to see here?
I'm only half stupid
Nice one pico
I like this comment: "These dueling diaries make me feel sick."
I mean, come the f*** on. These guys are offended by even a respectful, well-argued response to a diary totally based on an important real-world issue? I don't think some people draw any distinction between diaries like yours and blogroll dustups and throwaway "I don't care" diaries.
I have to admit that I'm pretty ignorant of the Bible. I grew up in a liberal United Methodist church, which is pretty much Christianity Lite as far as I'm concerned. If you come out with a Bible course on DVD, I'll buy a copy ;-)
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
I got there late
But I got in a few shots. LOL
I swear that one day I'm going to do a diary with the title "You heathens will all burn in Hell" just to see the reaction.
I did drop this gem
into the mix.
qui tacet consentire
Pico, your diary on teaching and
exposing American public school children to the bible was quite good. Couldn't agree more that the bible is part of our western history and cultural traditional, regardless of weather one "believes" or not.
One of the themes I have been reading about over the past years is with the waning of religious belief in the bible, especially in post-Christian Europe, and, to a lesser degree in the US, there is a lack of faith-based resistance to the current cultural threat. That is the radical islamists are highly motivated and have (to say the least) much intense belief in their faith. They believe in their religion and the secular west increasingly doesn't believe (or even honor) its own religious traditions. It's a big subject...........
name the enemy, win the war
Where do you get your info
that radical islamists are more motived than radical Christians? I see both as having equally intense beliefs and motivations.
What exactly do you mean by current cultural threat. Are you implying that we are being invaded by muslem culture.
I'm only half stupid
I got this impressions from reading books like
"The Cube and the Cathedral" by George Wiegel where he discusses the decrease of Christian faith and practice in Europe. Lack of church attendance, low birth rates in traditionally Catholic countries--like Spain and Italy, striking from the EU Constitution any mention of the Christian background of Europe. The Pope has been speaking about this too. The whole "No Faith, No Future" theme. Giving in too easily to sharia law initiatives in the EU countires because of fear of radical islamist inspired violence. It's all over the EU press and internet--I'm not making this up, it's a major concern of Christian clergy in Europe.
name the enemy, win the war
While there is
some truth to what you say, espeically the Christian clergy.
I think western values are a little stronger than that. My feeling is a lot of the problem can be seen in economic disadvantage, and disaffected and cynical youth, that are naturally rebellious. If the western ways are more appealing than the christian clergy should make its case.... and start appealing to folks, instead of rejecting and judging.
Isn't the refugee situation partly responsible also....... and that too is economic. He who provides the most jobs wins?
I'm only half stupid
For example, see this
article. It's depressing.
Teachers drop the Holocaust to avoid offending Muslims
The situation in Europe is actually worse than portrayed in the MSM.
name the enemy, win the war
Christians and
Jews and Muslems have lived side by side peacefully in many cities in the world.
The refugee crises makes things worse. We see the same thing here on our Southern borders. It is just difficult to absorb a godzillion immigrants without tensions.
Hyperventilating about all the differences only makes things worse.
The right has made this same case against liberals for a long time. How we are destroying the schools, and ruining America.
I'm only half stupid
Proof by anecdote
Whatever happened to statistics. 'some teachers' means so little. You could find teachers who deny the holocaust or don't teach it throughout the US as well.
And of course, the same thing happens to evolution (to a very higher degree) in the US.
yeah
Islamists are instigating trouble in all areas of the world. It's sad. They need a major reformation of their religion or there will eventually be a very bloody confrontation.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Hundreds of protesters gathering at British Embassy in Tehran
Ugh... this sounds ominously familiar...
So let me get this straight, Iran... your country captures 15 British soldiers under disputed conditions, then the British, showing not a small measure of restraint, do not retaliate for several days-- and this deserves protest? For what? What would the chant be at this protest:
One! Two! Three! Four!
How come you haven't
de-clared war?
This has the polymer aroma of an Iranian astroturf protest-- check these protesters' paystubs and I'll bet that you'd find that a lot of them are on the regime's payroll. Let em lay a finger on anyone inside that embassy and I'll be sounding a lot more like Ender in a heartbeat :-(
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
Too much oil
comes thru that waterway.
Iranian pres has the world by the short hairs. It is all for show of power. We are slaves to oil. Attacking Iran would cause a global economic depression. I doubt if even Haliburton wants that.
I'm only half stupid
Ender just wants "special forces" style rescues
see here for his comment.
Of course, if anything untoward happened at the British Embassy, I would then call for special forces rescues of the British Navy 15 and the Embassy staff, and Ender would probably be calling for a crater the size of Krakatoa at the area soon to be formerly known as Tehran :-p
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
heh
I am not that big on using nuclear weapons in such situations. That kind of response is reserved for extreme circumstances and heavy loss of life on our side.
I'd still go with Special Forces and maybe bombing of the government buildings as a little preview of what's to come if BS continues.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
here is a good dkos diary that I can agree with
and recommend:
Islamic Countries Can Suck Jesus's Chocolate Covered C***
It's well recommended :)
Nice stuff like:
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
anyone brave enough to say "your religion sucks"
to a bunch of anti-freedom lunatics is a brave man. Anyone trying to ban freedom of speech globally through fear and intimidation deserves to be repelled. That goes for all Islamic countries who collectively blow and win the award for being something out of the Stone Ages.
[Edit] I generally respect religion, as you all know and support Religious Right being part of the GOP coalition, and would not make fun of prophets/saviors but a big Screw You goes out to anyone trying to ban freedom of speech. Anyone should be allowed to make fun of Mohammed and Jesus (and unfortunately Jesus gets a lot more of it because it's not politically correct to touch those poor discriminated against Muslims - whose faith is in the 21st century version of the dark ages).
Also one of the very few times I agree with MSOC.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Cenk must have been drunk when he wrote that
At least I hope he was.
This is hardly the sort of call for freedom of speech that anyone should rally around:
It's obvious he has zero respect for anyone of faith and is just looking to ram a stick into someone's eye by teling them their faith is "voodoo" and that they are hell-bent on murder.
If that excites you, Ender, I feel sorry for you.
qui tacet consentire
His bio says Cenk is a morning host
on Air America. Is that true? If so he I don't think he will be there much longer.
name the enemy, win the war
He has a show with two co-hosts
It used to be on Sirius, but it moved to Air America, called The Young Turks. Cenk is Turkish.
qui tacet consentire
hmm no
I disagree with insulting religious people and have a lot of respect for many people of faith. I am only excited about speaking up for freedom of speech on the matter. I don't have to agree with said speech to support it. Mainly it's not the anti-Christian stuff that is the problem (no one is truly asking to forbid it and it's all around us - the Left bashes Christians and Christianity non-stop) but the anti-Muslim speech.
Look, I obviously disagree with some of what he says and how he says it, but I only think it is important to highlight in the face of calls for repression (including from the Left in this country re: anti-Islamic speech) with various excuses and labeling as "hate speech".
So no offense man, you know I have a lot of respect for people of faith.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
A disingenuous piece
An honest piece would have taken on the UN Resolution head-on. Instead, he panders to his audience by giving equal time to a fake non-issue regarding Christianity, made up by Bill Donohue, who hardly represents anyone as far as I can tell, much less all Catholics.
Is Bill Donohue equal to the UN in importance? Uh, that would be no. Yet Cenk uses this minor incident to throw all Catholics and all Christians under the bus, craftily switching his target from Bill Donohue's supporters (few) to the entire religion (many), hoping we won't notice the sleight of hand.
Not a very brave piece IMO.
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
you make a very good point
and I agree with you completely. To be honest I barely skimmed the "Christian" part and only was impressed with taking on the UN resolution.
The Christianity part is truly a fake non-issue.
I'm not really enthusiastic about it anymore, though I still agree with the sentiment of keeping free speech free regardless.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Do you remember Terry Jones of Monty Python fame?
He wrote a piece for the Guardian about Iranian treatment of the Brittish soldiers
held by Iran. (h/t crooks&liars). I have to say I found it compelling and poingant.
Two thumbs up.
I'm on his side on the US prisoner treatment issues, but
Two wrongs don't make a right... I'm not going to excuse Iran for parading prisoners in front of the cameras just because my own government has engaged in mistreatment of prisoners... I understand the argument he's making, but when I was young, when I had done something wrong, the "but look Daddy! Johnny did something worse!" kind of argument always failed, and rightfully so.
And we won't know exactly how prisoners have been treated until they have been released. To me, the expressions of remorse expressed by two? of the prisoners seems unlikely to be entirely voluntary and may indicate mistreatment in some form-- we can't know for sure yet. The filming of the captives is in and of itself mistreatment, even if not the worst possible kind of mistreatment.
Those of us in the US who have condemned the US mistreatment of prisoners ever step of the way are hardly hypocrites when we also condemn Iran for mistreatment of prisoners.
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
Please understand, I think the Iranians wrongly took
them. I'm really more inclined to think they were in Iraqi waters when it happened. I pointed this out becuase it's brittish humor gives an air of civility and reduces stress levels. So many folk wanted to use their capture as a reason to attack Iran. I'm glad the Brittish aren't giving them that chance. And even though I think Iran is wrong, I can still make fun of the notions on my side I don't agree with.
Well it was a good read anyway...
...and if it serves to help ease tensions, I approve. I still am hopeful that diplomacy can solve this particular situation without loss of life.
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
Your modern-day Republican Party
Two of the three leading Republican candidates for President either embrace or are open to embracing the idea that the President can imprison Americans without any review, based solely on the unchecked decree of the President. And, of course, that is nothing new, since the current Republican President not only believes he has that power but has exercised it against U.S. citizens and legal residents in the U.S. -- including those arrested not on the battlefield, but on American soil.
by Glenn Greenwald.
It goes into significant detail. Scary. I guess that's how the German people willingly voted to give up their rights before WWII.
Bush is afraid of getting booed
So he is skipping Opening Day for the second straight year.
Link
qui tacet consentire
Last year's highlights
when Cheney threw out the first pitch
in D.C.
qui tacet consentire
They weren't booing
They were chanting 'Choooooooo-ney' or something like that. They are world-renowned for their mispronunciations in Washington DC. (At least that is what my right-wing friend told me.)
We are all mediators, translators. - Derrida