"The president says he feels compassion for me, but the best way to show that compassion is by meeting with me and the other mothers and families who are here. Our sons made the ultimate sacrifice and we want answers. All we're asking is that he sacrifice an hour out of his five-week vacation to talk to us, before the next mother loses her son in Iraq." -- Cindy Sheehan, Camp Casey, Crawford, Texas
Whether you agree with her or not, Cindy Sheehan is a testament to how much of an impact one concerned citizen can make. She has light a fire under the anti-war movement that has shaken the P.R. machine in the White House to its core.
What do I think of Cindy? More to come....
A website sympathetic to her has a live blog from Camp Casey where she and her supporters are gathered. It is interesting to read at truthout's website.
Monday, August 29, 2005
Will Iraqis Ratify Their New Constitution?
Iraq has finally completed writing its constitution! They missed their Aug. 15th deadline, but everybody gets to turn in late work every now and then, right? So, all of this is good news, right? Well, maybe not. While two of Iraq’s major groups are pleased with the constitution, one of them is not, and it must be ratified by a vote of the people. Why do many Kurds and Shiites (a/k/a Shia) agree to the draft constitution and most Sunnis do not? It turns out that the Sunnis are opposed to adopting a system of federalism instead of a unitary nation. (Gee, I've seen these terms in my "We the People" book!) The BBC has done a good job of summarizing all of this in a relatively short article.)
Also there is a possibility that some in the Sunni minority (along with others opposed to the new government) will respond with increased violence. All of this is bad for the U.S. mission in Iraq, that a majority of the public think is being mismanaged by the Bush administration.
Okay, so why oppose federalism? Would you be surprised to learn that at the root of it is who gets to control the nation's oil wealth? From an article in the NY Times comes the following:
Of course, not all of the Shiites agree. Followers of Muqutada al-Sadr are opposing the constitution as well. (Read more here.) On the streets of Iraq, many of the people are less interested in the constitution than they are in getting basic services back that still have not been restored fully since the U.S. began it's attack on Iraq. From the NYTimes:
Also there is a possibility that some in the Sunni minority (along with others opposed to the new government) will respond with increased violence. All of this is bad for the U.S. mission in Iraq, that a majority of the public think is being mismanaged by the Bush administration.
Okay, so why oppose federalism? Would you be surprised to learn that at the root of it is who gets to control the nation's oil wealth? From an article in the NY Times comes the following:
The issue of federalism is critical: Sunnis fear not only a giant Shiite state in the south but also future bids by the Kurds to expand their region into northern oil-producing areas, as they have demanded. That would leave the Sunnis cut off from Iraq's oil wealth.
Of course, not all of the Shiites agree. Followers of Muqutada al-Sadr are opposing the constitution as well. (Read more here.) On the streets of Iraq, many of the people are less interested in the constitution than they are in getting basic services back that still have not been restored fully since the U.S. began it's attack on Iraq. From the NYTimes:
"What constitution are you talking about?" Mr. Sami, a Shiite, said sardonically. "We are fed up with this thing! We would prefer to solve our problems first, such as electricity, water and security. How come they gathered to approve the constitution while Iraqis are slaughtered?"
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
Pat Robertson is an Idiot
Pat Robertson is an Idiot
Jon Stewart lampooned televangelist Pat Robertson the other night because Robertson offered an on-air, heartfelt prayer to God asking for another chance to appoint a Supreme Court justice this summer.
It seems that Robertson doesn’t only have federal judges on his hit list. Today comes news that he is calling for the assassination of Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez. (Chavez, if you aren’t aware, is a socialist who has been intensely critical of U.S. foreign policy.) Here are the good Reverend’s words:
“You know, I don’t know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we’re trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it,” Robertson said. “It’s a whole lot cheaper than starting a war ... and I don’t think any oil shipments will stop.”
Well.
This is why so many people I know love to watch the 700 Club for the sheer entertainment value. Personally, I’d like to see him run for the Republican nomination for president again. We could all enjoy the laughs.
Of course, Venezuela’s government is not laughing. Their Vice-President issued an interesting statement saying, “The ball is in the U.S. court, after this criminal statement by a citizen of that country,” Rangel told reporters. “It’s huge hypocrisy to maintain this discourse against terrorism and at the same time, in the heart of that country, there are entirely terrorist statements like those.”
MSNBC also reported a Venezuelan legislator putting it more simply and directly: “This man cannot be a true Christian. He’s a fascist.”
Comments?
Jon Stewart lampooned televangelist Pat Robertson the other night because Robertson offered an on-air, heartfelt prayer to God asking for another chance to appoint a Supreme Court justice this summer.
It seems that Robertson doesn’t only have federal judges on his hit list. Today comes news that he is calling for the assassination of Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez. (Chavez, if you aren’t aware, is a socialist who has been intensely critical of U.S. foreign policy.) Here are the good Reverend’s words:
“You know, I don’t know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we’re trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it,” Robertson said. “It’s a whole lot cheaper than starting a war ... and I don’t think any oil shipments will stop.”
Well.
This is why so many people I know love to watch the 700 Club for the sheer entertainment value. Personally, I’d like to see him run for the Republican nomination for president again. We could all enjoy the laughs.
Of course, Venezuela’s government is not laughing. Their Vice-President issued an interesting statement saying, “The ball is in the U.S. court, after this criminal statement by a citizen of that country,” Rangel told reporters. “It’s huge hypocrisy to maintain this discourse against terrorism and at the same time, in the heart of that country, there are entirely terrorist statements like those.”
MSNBC also reported a Venezuelan legislator putting it more simply and directly: “This man cannot be a true Christian. He’s a fascist.”
Comments?
Irony in the War on
Irony in the War on Terror
This statement from our government strikes me as utterly bizarre:
"In light of the recent bombings in London, it is crucial that police, fire and emergency medical personnel take notice of their surroundings, and be aware of 'vagrants' who seem out of place or unfamiliar," said the message, distributed via e-mail to some federal employees in Washington by the U.S. Attorney's office.
Can someone explain this to me? Are there homeless people on the streets that seem like they are NOT out of place? I mean, isn’t that the definition of what it is to be homeless – out of place – one who has been displaced by landlords, places of work, and society in general? Have we become so callous as a society that there are ‘vagrants’ that are simply commonplace and familiar?
Of course, this warning does make some sense if you go beyond the absurd bureaucratic wording of the statement, but I think it does speak volumes to us about our society’s priorities.
What do you think?
This statement from our government strikes me as utterly bizarre:
"In light of the recent bombings in London, it is crucial that police, fire and emergency medical personnel take notice of their surroundings, and be aware of 'vagrants' who seem out of place or unfamiliar," said the message, distributed via e-mail to some federal employees in Washington by the U.S. Attorney's office.
Can someone explain this to me? Are there homeless people on the streets that seem like they are NOT out of place? I mean, isn’t that the definition of what it is to be homeless – out of place – one who has been displaced by landlords, places of work, and society in general? Have we become so callous as a society that there are ‘vagrants’ that are simply commonplace and familiar?
Of course, this warning does make some sense if you go beyond the absurd bureaucratic wording of the statement, but I think it does speak volumes to us about our society’s priorities.
What do you think?
Sunday, August 21, 2005
Negotiations over Iraqi Constitution Continue
There are three major areas of disagreement among the Iraqis trying to write a constitution for their nation: the role Islam will play in the nation's legal system, the extent to which they will follow a federal system of government, and how to divide the nation's oil wealth which is not evenly distributed across the nation.
The NY Times has a nice overview of all of this and where things stand as of now.
If you would like to weigh in on these matters, Slate magazine has a humorous survey going.
More seriously, these talks will have a tremendous impact on the rights of women in Iraq.
Depending on how sharia, or Islamic law, is interpreted and implemented, women may be getting a new birth of freedom in the region or be relegated to second-class status. Read one woman's commentary on all of this.
How does the situation in Iraq compare to the conflicts our Framers faced in that hot summer in Philadelphia in 1787? While the similarities have been often pointed out, there are some very big differences. An interesting analysis appeared in Slate.
Finally, an analysis in the CS Monitor states that while all are hoping a successful constitution and election will help bring down the level of violence in Iraq (and make it easier for the U.S. to withdraw quickly) a state of civil war essentially already exists, making this constitutional convention more like peace talks than anything our Framers engaged in.
The NY Times has a nice overview of all of this and where things stand as of now.
If you would like to weigh in on these matters, Slate magazine has a humorous survey going.
More seriously, these talks will have a tremendous impact on the rights of women in Iraq.
Depending on how sharia, or Islamic law, is interpreted and implemented, women may be getting a new birth of freedom in the region or be relegated to second-class status. Read one woman's commentary on all of this.
How does the situation in Iraq compare to the conflicts our Framers faced in that hot summer in Philadelphia in 1787? While the similarities have been often pointed out, there are some very big differences. An interesting analysis appeared in Slate.
Finally, an analysis in the CS Monitor states that while all are hoping a successful constitution and election will help bring down the level of violence in Iraq (and make it easier for the U.S. to withdraw quickly) a state of civil war essentially already exists, making this constitutional convention more like peace talks than anything our Framers engaged in.
Tuesday, August 09, 2005
More on Iraq and One Mother's Opposition
The U.S. is really pinning its hopes on a Constitution being drafted, and accepted in the next several months. Even though there are deep divisions between the rival factions on important issues in the draft Iraqi Constitution (one example being women's rights, and others discussed here), the U.S. wants the process to stick to the deadline of being finished by August 15. Elections will follow in the fall. The Bush administration seems to reason that this is the only way out for U.S. troops.
In the meantime, this will mean more troops in the short run. See the article in the Seattle Times.
While Bush is taking the longest vacation in presidential history (okay, it is a working vacation, but excuse my Michael Moore-ish description) one woman who lost her 24 year-old son in Iraq has camped outside his Crawford Ranch and demanded a meeting with the President. She says she won't leave until he meets with her. She is proving quite the embarassment for the President as she is intelligent, articulate, and full of righteous anger. Read her writings here about her protest:
Read the rest of her statement at BuzzFlash.com.
More trouble between the west and the remaining members of the "axis of evil"
Iran's new President has renewed his determination to enrich uranium that could be used for nuclear weapons, and is forging an anti-American alliance with Syria. URL: Iran resumes uranium work, ignores warnings
The New York Times has some very complete coverage.
In the meantime, this will mean more troops in the short run. See the article in the Seattle Times.
While Bush is taking the longest vacation in presidential history (okay, it is a working vacation, but excuse my Michael Moore-ish description) one woman who lost her 24 year-old son in Iraq has camped outside his Crawford Ranch and demanded a meeting with the President. She says she won't leave until he meets with her. She is proving quite the embarassment for the President as she is intelligent, articulate, and full of righteous anger. Read her writings here about her protest:
George Bush said speaking about the dreadful loss of life in Iraq in August:
(08/03/05): "We have to honor the sacrifices of the fallen by completing the
mission." "The families of the fallen can be assured that they died for a noble
cause."
In reaction to these two assinine and hurtful statements, members of
Gold Star Families for Peace (GSFP) are going to George's vacation home in
Crawford, Tx this Saturday, August 6th at 11:00 am to confront him on these two
statements.
1) We want our loved ones sacrifices to be honored by bringing
our nation's sons and daughters home from the travesty that is Iraq IMMEDIATELY, since this war is based on horrendous lies and deceptions. Just because our children are dead, why would we want any more families to suffer the same pain and devastation.
2) We would like for him to explain this "noble cause" to us and, if the cause is so noble, ask him why Jenna and Barbara are not in harm's way.
3) If George is not ready to send the twins, then he should bring our troops home immediately. We will demand a speedy withdrawal.
Read the rest of her statement at BuzzFlash.com.
More trouble between the west and the remaining members of the "axis of evil"
Iran's new President has renewed his determination to enrich uranium that could be used for nuclear weapons, and is forging an anti-American alliance with Syria. URL: Iran resumes uranium work, ignores warnings
The New York Times has some very complete coverage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)