Raw Print | Westboro Baptist Tsunami Statement: "RAW STORY has discovered that the Westboro Baptist Church leaders known for picketing the funeral of Matthew Shepard, the young college student brutally murdered in Wyoming in 1998, have released the following statement regarding the tsunamis which hit Southeast Asia earlier in the week.

The statement, which was posted on their website Wednesday alongside dozens of other archived 'press releases,' thanks God for the tsunami and for the death of any gay Swedish vacationers who perished at the time."
- posted by Editor @ 6:18 AM

Israel's Fifth Column in Washington- by Justin Raimondo: "December 17, 2004 | The AIPAC spy scandal points to a massive undercover operation

... with another U.S. ally, Israel, in the role of friend-turned-adversary. The story of how and why Lawrence A. Franklin, who works as an Iran specialist under Pentagon policy director Douglas Feith, betrayed his country, and funneled American secrets to Israel, parallels the tragic saga of pro-Soviet American moles, who played a similar role in the administration of Franklin Roosevelt and into the Truman era ...
...
On December 1, however, the FBI struck again, raiding AIPAC headquarters in Washington, D.C., in an early morning sweep, and staying until 4 p.m., serving subpoenas on four top AIPAC officials and hauling away boxes full of evidence.
...
... While next to nothing about the second FBI raid was reported in the American media, except for a few perfunctory articles describing what happened in general terms, the Israeli media was in quite a lather. Maariv reported on "a growing suspicion" that an anti-Jewish conspiracy was operating at full throttle inside the Justice Department, and the Jerusalem Post weighed in with an "exclusive" report on how Franklin had been "set up" by the FBI. ...
...
Lured into "a ticking-bomb situation," avers the Post, AIPAC officials Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman, were entrapped by the FBI, which was recording their espionage in very the act of enabling it. FBI agents supposedly used the officials' concern for Jewish lives to trick them into committing treason.
...



- posted by Editor @ 2:34 PM

Palestinian textbooks: Where is all that 'incitement'?: "International Herald Tribune | Decemebr 18, 2004

Palestinian textbooks contain incitement to hatred of Israel, right? Both President George W. Bush and President Bill Clinton have said so. Zionist groups constantly lobby European foreign ministries to stop support for Palestinian textbooks on that basis, and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon affirmed it at a recent Likud party meeting.

Detailed analyses of the textbooks have been done by research institutes. The U.S. Consulate General in Jerusalem commissioned studies from the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information (IPCRI), and in Europe the Georg Eckert Institute facilitated research. Research papers have also been published in international fora such as the Hebrew University's Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace, the Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics, Economics and Culture, and presented at the Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief.

At the political level, a U.S. Senate subcommittee on Palestinian education and the Political Committee of the European Parliament have both held hearings on the matter. No country's textbooks have been subjected to as much close scrutiny as the Palestinian.

The findings? It turns out that the original allegations were based on Egyptian or Jordanian textbooks and incorrect translations. Time and again, independently of each other, researchers find no incitement to hatred in the Palestinian textbooks.

The European Union has issued a statement that the new textbooks are free of inciting content and the allegations were unfounded. The IPCRI 2003 report states that the overall orientation of the curriculum is peaceful and does not incite to hatred or violence against Israel and the Jews, and the 2004 report states that there are no signs of promoting hatred toward Israel, Judaism or Zionism, nor toward the Western Judeo-Christian tradition or values.

Yet Sharon now claims that the Palestinian textbooks are a greater threat than terrorism. If that is so, education for peace and conflict resolution has become the greatest threat to Israel. Maybe it is: What little independent research has been done on Israeli textbooks, together with the recent New Profile report on the militarization of the Israeli education system, gives grounds for serious concern about what is happening to future generations on that side of the wall. Peace might feel threatening to a war-ingrained identity.

- posted by Editor @ 2:14 PM

Cornell News: American attitudes toward Muslims: "Fear factor: 44 percent of Americans queried in Cornell national poll favor curtailing some liberties for Muslim Americans | EMBARGOED UNTIL FRIDAY, DEC. 17, 2004, AT 11:59 a.m. EST
...
About 27 percent of respondents said that all Muslim Americans should be required to register their location with the federal government, and 26 percent said they think that mosques should be closely monitored by U.S. law enforcement agencies. Twenty-nine percent agreed that undercover law enforcement agents should infiltrate Muslim civic and volunteer organizations, in order to keep tabs on their activities and fund raising. About 22 percent said the federal government should profile citizens as potential threats based on the fact that they are Muslim or have Middle Eastern heritage. In all, about 44 percent said they believe that some curtailment of civil liberties is necessary for Muslim Americans.

Conversely, 48 percent of respondents nationally said they do not believe that civil liberties for Muslim Americans should be restricted
...
The survey also examined the relation of religiosity to perceptions of Islam and Islamic countries among Christian respondents. Sixty-five percent of self-described highly religious people queried said they view Islam as encouraging violence more than other religions do; in comparison, 42 percent of the respondents who said they were not highly religious saw Islam as encouraging violence. ...
...
Researchers found that opinions on restricting civil liberties for Muslim Americans vary by political self-identification. About 40 percent of Republican respondents agreed that Muslim Americans should be required to register their whereabouts, compared with 24 percent of Democratic respondents and 17 percent of independents. Forty-one percent of Republican respondents said that Muslim American civic groups should be infiltrated, compared with 21 percent of Democrats and 27 percent of independents.

On whether mosques should be monitored, about 34 percent of the Republicans polled agreed they should be, compared with 22 percent of Democrats. Thirty-four percent of Republicans said that profiling of Muslim Americans is necessary, compared with 17 percent of Democrats.

The survey also showed a correlation between television news-viewing habits, a respondent's fear level and attitudes toward restrictions on civil liberties for all Americans. ...
- posted by Editor @ 5:24 PM

Civil Rights Groups Sue Over 'Intelligent Design': "December 15, 2004E-mail story Print | IN BRIEF / PENNSYLVANIA | Civil Rights Groups Sue Over 'Intelligent Design'

Civil rights groups sued a school district to block teaching of "intelligent design," an argument against evolution that contends nature was created by an all-powerful being.

The American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed suit in federal court in Harrisburg on behalf of parents of students in the Dover Area School District who objected to the teaching.

The suit claims the policy, to become part of the curriculum in January, illegally promotes religious beliefs.
- posted by Editor @ 8:36 PM

Heather Gray: Will the Real Christians Please Stand?: "December 15, 2004 | A Personal Testimony | Will the Real Christians Please Stand? | By HEATHER GRAY
...
Most scholars concur that Jesus had no intention of starting a new religion. To do so would have been blasphemous against the Jewish faith. The historical task of creating Christianity was left to Paul whose credentials are mixed at best. Paul was named Saul before his conversion on the road to Damascus after the Romans had murdered Jesus. He was a Roman citizen, also Jewish and had never met Jesus. He had been persecuting his fellow Jews who opposed the occupation.

It is understandable, then, that the inner circle of Jesus' followers, such as James, did not trust Paul. Nevertheless, James, who is often referred to as the brother of Jesus, and others rather cautiously taught Paul Jesus' philosophy and then sent him to Turkey where he wrote letters back to Jerusalem about his work. Some contend that sending Paul to Turkey was an indication that he was not trusted, otherwise they would have kept him in Jerusalem to work in the heart of movement there. Paul was recalled, however, once it was understood what he was doing. There were also plans to assassinate him as described by Baigent and Leigh. (Read The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception for more details on Paul).

So what was Paul doing in Turkey? Well, he was creating a new religion, which was common practice at the time. The prerequisite conditions of a new religion required a virgin birth, resurrection and, importantly, there had to be a direct link to God before anyone would believe you had a religion worthy of merit. For some strange reason, we humans seem to want miracles then as now, and what's even stranger, we are inclined to believe these miracles as fact. Paul obviously knew what he was doing. Anyway, the rest is history as they say.

To summarize, if you look at the historical Jesus he seemed to be concerned about the poor, about corrupt power, about loving your neighbors and about maintaining Jewish traditions and faith void of Roman influence - my simplistic summary. This, to me, was his revolutionary posture. It appears he chose not to side with those who cozied up to Roman power. He was not a sellout. Obviously, the Roman occupiers and the Jewish elite didn't like this.
...
As a student at Emory University in Atlanta ... A church committee, I was taught, selected the books of the New Testament in 100 AD. Think about it - the committee was the scholarly elite in Europe at the time. They had a vested interest, likely in portraying Rome in a positive light, and selected books accordingly. Some books, like that of Thomas, were left out that disputed Paul's version of the resurrection, virgin birth, etc. (read Elaine Pagel's Beyond Belief: The Secret Book of Thomas and The Gnostic Gospels). And so the Bible is supposed to be the word of God? Well, it certainly appears to have its mortal and political twist.

In 325 the Roman Emperor Constantine even called for a gathering of church leaders to meet in Turkey - known as the first Synod of Niceae - where the decision was to be made by these "mere mortals" whether Jesus was the son of God or not. So a committee made this decision? Well, yes, and they decided, in their rather dubious infinite wisdom three hundred years after Jesus died, that Jesus was, in fact, the Son of God. Then, at this meeting, they developed the Nicene Creed that goes like this "We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things, both visible and invisible; and in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of Godetc. etc." and is recited by Christians today all over the world. This provided some clarity and unity, as the Emperor obviously wanted, for Christian leaders to conveniently sweep in and control the masses.

Then there's Michelangelo. It's a sad twist of history that he used his uncle and nephew as models for God and Jesus for his painting on the Sistine Chapel. By doing so, he created an unfortunate legacy of people throughout the world who think of God as a white male. This is the ultimate of white supremacy and insult. Jesus was, after all, described as dark skinned and woolly haired. Let's have some honesty here. And God as human? I don't think so. ...
- posted by Editor @ 7:50 PM

The New York Times > National > Mystery Cloaks Couple's Firing as Risks to U.S.By JAMES DAO | Published: December 12, 2004
...
But that afternoon, their managers pulled the Afsharis aside and delivered a stunning message: they had failed secret background checks and were being fired. No explanations were offered and no appeals allowed. They were escorted to the door and told not to return.
...
Seven months later, the Afsharis, Shiite Muslims who came from Iran 18 years ago to study, then stayed to build careers and raise three children, still have no answers.

They have been told they were fired for national security reasons that remain secret. When their lawyer requested the documents used to justify the action, he was told none existed. When he asked for copies of the agency's policies relating to the background checks, he received a generic personnel handbook.

The Afsharis' case comes at time when immigrants from many nations, but particularly Islamic ones, are facing tougher scrutiny from government agencies.

Unable to clear their names or find new employment in their field, the Afsharis on Thursday resorted to that most American of recourses: they sued the institute and its parent agencies, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Department of Health and Human Services, demanding back pay and reinstatement or the chance to appeal.

The Afsharis, who passed background checks when they were hired - he in 1996, she in 1997 - were not even aware of the new reviews until they were told that they had failed.
...
But what is most confounding to the Afsharis is how the government could consider them threats in the first place. Neither had access to classified documents or worked with banned biological or chemical toxins.

Moreover, none of their research was secret, much of it having been published in scholarly journals or presented at academic conferences. ...
...
"This looks suspiciously like the witch hunts of the 50's, this time targeted against Muslim Americans," Ms. Martin of the Center for National Security Studies said.
...
"I've told Ali's story to a lot of people," said Travis Goldsmith, a computer engineer who worked with Mr. Afshari. "They don't believe that this could happen in this country."
- posted by Editor @ 7:24 PM

War is inherently evil, unless God is on your side.: "Issa Khalaf |
12/10/04
...
The invasion of Iraq is about geo-strategic dominance of the Middle East oil fields, the expansion of bases throughout the area, and about Israel. Always Israel. Iraq, Iran, Syria. Invade them or denude them to leave Israeli expansionism and nuclear supremacy unchallenged.

In my estimation, the threat of a nuclear, biological, or nuclear attack by domestic or foreign terrorist groups is a grim reality. President Bush is pursuing a foreign policy that promises to reap yet more terrorism, economic collapse, and violence. Much of the American public is unaware of the profound dangers and insecurity he is causing this country.

But these dangers apparently matter little to Mr. Bush, who evidently is blind to the consequences of his actions, and to the Israel-first crowd that inhabits key positions in the departments of Defense and State.

Terrorism is most effectively fought by multilateral cooperation and pursuing a multifaceted policy that attacks the terrorists’ financial, military and political base while actively pursuing realistic but just solutions to the broader sources and contexts that give rise to extremists. There is no other way.
...
The profound folly of those ruling Washington is troubling for the future well-being and security of this wonderful country. It’s as if nothing is learned from history and the idiocy of previous states that walked our path. We are in the ceaseless clutch of a prolonged great power syndrome: the globe is our backyard, the world must be fashioned in our image, we are and must remain number one, and disagreements with and challenges to our primacy must be overcome at all costs. For nefarious reasons, we send our young people to kill and be killed in faraway lands. We will exit Iraq, after we turn it into a sea of rubble and manage to snuff out the lives of hundreds of thousands. This will happen. Domestically, we are ineluctably moving toward bankruptcy and declining standard of living as Mr. Bush spends like there is no tomorrow. The only good news is that, as a democracy, we might yet correct our course. This will come, but only after the red half gets it.
- posted by Editor @ 6:32 PM

Mainline Protestants Challenge Israel Lobby - by Chris Moore: "December 7, 2004 | by Chris Moore

The Presbyterian Church recently came under fire for its decision to employ a human rights tactic on behalf of Palestinians that it once used to encourage racial reform in apartheid South Africa: the process of divestment – in this case, from companies that profit from Israel's brutal occupation of Palestinian territories.
...
"It is a modest attempt by one small denomination to say a word of peace and justice and hope in the middle of continuing mind-numbing violence and human suffering," the Rev. John Buchanan, senior pastor of Fourth Presbyterian Church in Chicago, recently told the Chicago Tribune.

The response was immediate – and extreme.

An anonymous letter postmarked in Queens, N.Y., was sent to the Louisville, Ky., headquarters of the Presbyterian Church USA threatening arson against Presbyterian churches in retaliation for "your anti-Israel and anti-Jewish attitudes."
...
The threat came on the heels of another letter objecting to the Presbyterians' divestment decision, this one written by Congressman Howard L. Berman (D, Calif.) and signed by 13 of his colleagues in the House of Representatives.

Using rhetoric that alternated between propaganda and hysteria, Berman and his co-signers (seven Republicans and six Democrats), claimed that, by initiating divestment from certain companies doing business in Israel, "the Presbyterian Church has knowingly gone on record calling for jeopardizing the existence of the State of Israel.

Also writing a letter, not to the church, but to the U.S. Department of Commerce, were 13 more members of Congress, urging the shutdown of any divestment campaigns affecting Israel.

According to an account of that letter issued in a Sept. 28 press release by the Zionist Organization of America (which bragged of initiating the action), the Congressmembers accused divestment organizers of violating the "anti-boycott provisions of the Export Administration Act," and demanded that the Department of Commerce "investigate the national boycott campaign against Israel, shut down the illegal divestment campaigns, and impose the appropriate penalties."

What on earth is going on here?

When members of Congress, who ostensibly work for American taxpayers, write the Department of Commerce, which also ostensibly works for American taxpayers, demanding it investigate and sanction those same taxpaying Americans for their measured opposition to the policies of a foreign power – policies often employed using U.S. taxpayer money and military hardware – the question has to be asked: who do those members of Congress think they represent, Americans or the Israeli government?
...
... Given the close relationship between Israel and its various lobbies in the U.S., it is highly likely that some of that money is recycled back to America to defeat those who oppose blank-check U.S. aid to Israeli.

On top of all that influence, add the heft of millions of Evangelical Rapturists, who believe their support of Israeli expansionism is hastening the conditions necessary to trigger the return of Jesus.
...
In a spunky response to Berman's claim that the Presbyterians' actions had caused "terrible distress," the Church issued a reply through the Rev. Clifton Kirkpatrick citing "terrible distress" of its own.

No, Kirkpatrick didn't whine about the threats to burn down Presbyterians churches. His concern was far more selfless in nature, over "the failure of the U.S. Congress to be a balanced arbiter for peace in the region or [condemn] the illegal expansion of settlements in the West Bank."

"It has been very disappointing to us that the U.S. Congress has not proven to be an ally or a balanced arbiter in the negotiations for peace in the region," said Kirkpatrick. "While Congress has passed repeated statements against the Palestinian Authority, it has never passed a resolution condemning the continuous illegal construction of settlements in the West Bank. There has been nothing done by Congress to pressure Israel to adhere to international law. Rather, Israel has been encouraged by Congress to violate international law.
...
Also considering divestment is the Episcopal Church, whose governing board recently resolved to "investigate what corporate actions might be appropriate with companies that contribute to the infrastructure of Israel's ongoing occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip."


- posted by Editor @ 6:28 PM