Year: 2007

Why I Won’t Be in Church on Easter

Trish

As Christians and people of Eastern Orthodox faiths observe their holiest day this Sunday, one of their number has a few questions about what they think it means to follow Christ.

Christian commentator Roland Martin speaks for many.

When did it come to the point that being a Christian meant only caring about two issues,­ abortion and homosexuality?

Roland Martin: “I’ve grown tired of people who pimp God”

Ask the nonreligious what being a Christian today means, and based on what we see and read, it’s a good bet they will say that followers of Jesus Christ are preoccupied with those two points.

Poverty? Whatever. Homelessness? An afterthought. A widening gap between the have and have-nots? Immaterial. Divorce? The divorce rate of Christians mirrors the national average, so that’s no big deal.

The point is that being a Christian should be about more than abortion and homosexuality, and it’s high time that those not considered a part of the religious right expose the hypocrisy of our brothers and sisters in Christianity and take back the faith.

Martin puts his finger on one of the reasons I and so many others have all but turned our backs on faith, and can’t be pushed into an organized religious service with a Mack truck.

…it’s troubling to listen to “Christian radio” and hear the kind of hate spewing out of the mouths of my brothers and sisters in the faith.

In fact, I’ve grown tired of people who pimp God. That’s right; we have a litany of individuals today who are holy, holy, holy, sing hallelujah, talk about how they love the Lord, but when it’s time to walk the walk, somehow the spirit evaporates.

I mean no disrespect to the people closing their businesses to celebrate Good Friday, or those joining the throngs at church on Easter Sunday. But the joy of religion is long since past for me. And until it becomes more about quietly setting the highest example for others to follow and less about judgement and scorn, it will probably remain that way.

Downing Street Memo Redux: DoD Provides New Evidence of Bush ‘Fixing’ Pre-War Intel

Jon Ponder

There is a new report out from the inspector general at the Dept. of Defense that provides clear evidence that senior Bush officials at DoD “fixed” the pre-war intelligence on Iraq to suit their policy of fictitiously connecting Saddam Hussein to al Qaeda’s attacks on the United States on Sept. 11, 2001, in order to motivate the public to go to war against Iraq.

A normal president would be held accountable if proof were offered from within his own government that his team deliberately falsified intelligence in order to trick the country into going to war. And yet this revelation yesterday is barely even news.

In particular, the IG’s report includes a January 2002 memo from Paul Wolfowitz, the neocon architect of the war who was then deputy defense secretary, written to Douglas Feith, DoD’s number three official:

“We don’t seem to be making much progress pulling together intelligence on links between Iraq and Al Qaeda,” Wolfowitz wrote…

Using Pentagon jargon for the secretary of Defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld, he added: “We owe SecDef some analysis of this subject. Please give me a recommendation on how best to proceed. Appreciate the short turn-around.”

…The memo marked the beginnings of what would become a controversial yearlong Pentagon project supervised by Feith to convince the most senior members of the Bush administration that Hussein and Al Qaeda were linked — a conclusion that was hotly disputed by U.S. intelligence agencies at the time and has been discredited in the years since.

What this brings to mind, of course, is a key section of the Downing Street Memo:

[Unnamed British official “C”] reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime’s record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

You recall that the “memo” was actually the minutes of a meeting of top officials in Tony Blair’s government in July 2002 — seven months into the “yearlong project” to link Saddam and 9/11.

When the memo was leaked in May 2005, the mainstream media ignored it for weeks. As I recall it, its release dd not make the front page of the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, the Washington Post or any major U.S. daily paper. When the memo finally made it into the news, the Gang of 500 dismissed it, as did rightwingers like comedian Rush Limbaugh:

I purposely haven’t talked about this Downing Street memo much because, frankly, A, it didn’t interest me. And, you know, if it doesn’t interest me I’m not going to talk about it. And the reason it didn’t interest me is because it was just another one of these ginned up things by the libs…

Wrong again, Rush. And yet, while it’s nice to (once again) get proof of Bush’s skulllduggery, this revelation (once again) amounts to little more than cold comfort.

A normal president would be held accountable if proof were offered from within his own government that his team deliberately falsified intelligence in order to trick the country into going to war. And yet this revelation yesterday is barely even news.

Bush, Cheney Dig Deep for Friendly Graduates to Address

Trish

Both the president and his impeachment insurance — er, I mean, his vice president — will speak to graduating young people this month. Cheney will go to Mormon-run Brigham Young University while the holder of the nation’s highest office will go to…wait for it…a satellite campus of a community college.

Meanwhile Condoleezza Rice will address the graduates of Little Tots Preschool in St. Joseph, Missouri. Rice is preparing for tough questions afterward, like “Can I go pee-pee now?” Oh wait, Bush won’t be there to ask that last question.

President Bush will deliver a rare commencement address at a community college: the Miami Dade College Kendall Campus, on April 28.

The White House said Monday that it’s only the second time in history that a sitting president has spoken at a community college commencement. The first time came last year, when Bush traveled to Mississippi Gulf Coast Community College following Hurricane Katrina.

O.K., it’s billed as the country’s largest community college but still. This is just embarrassing. Why MDC?

“Though his popularity is at a historic low, [Bush] remains more popular among Cuban Americans, said Fernand Amandi, executive vice president at public opinion research firm Bendixen and Associates…

”I think the student body at Kendall Campus are an educated body and will understand that he’s the commander-in-chief and will show him the respect he deserves,” [17-year-old Student Government President Christopher] Miles said.

Well, Chris, I are educated enough to know that you’re probably right. There’s no chance Bush would go anyplace that isn’t a slam dunk to love him. And obviously, those places are getting harder and harder to find. No offense.

Cheney, meanwhile, is venturing into hostile waters. I know, he’s supposedly from the West and Mormons are very Republican but BYU students are protesting his visit. A writer for the University of Utah’s independent student paper really let it go, saying Cheney came looking for the work.

BYU has invited the devil to Happy Valley.

OK. That last sentence isn’t entirely true. Vice President Dick Cheney will be giving the commencement address at BYU-and yes, he is the devil. What isn’t true is that BYU sought out his services. It was the Bush administration that laid the groundwork for this controversial decision. It asked politely if BYU leaders could see it in their hearts to listen for an hour or two to the half-smiling codger. It seems Cheney won’t be busy this month giving no-bid contracts to Halliburton, outing CIA agents over a grudge or shooting his friends in the face.

Whew. Want to come to work for Pensito Review when you graduate? The pay’s not so good but…well, anyway.

The first of the actual protests got off to a very Mormonesque start.

The College Democrats passed out fliers listing their grievances with having the VP speak at the ceremony. Among them are complaints that: “Cheney’s controversial actions do not represent a model our students should follow,” various issues with the war in Iraq from, the war being “preemptive” to “misleading use of weak intelligence to elicit fear” to ties with Halliburton…

The protest was a peaceful sit-in style with discussions between students but very little shouting and no chanting.

At the BYU College Republicans’ counterprotest, students handed out blue armbands, circulated a letter thanking Cheney for agreeing to speak and offered cookies, brownies and lemonade.

The speeches are still a couple of weeks away, so maybe the action will pick up. Meanwhile Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will address graduates of Little Tots Preschool in St. Joseph, Missouri.* Rice is said to be preparing for tough questions afterward, like “What’s your favorite color?” and “Can I go pee-pee now?” Oh wait, Bush won’t be there to ask that last question.

* Not.

Human Rights Network Perpetuates Bad “Reportage” of Ryan Skipper’s Murder

Buck Banks

You’d think something called Human Rights Headlines would be more concerned with the truth. I mean the thing quotes Montesquieu at the top of the page: “An injustice committed against anyone is a threat to everyone.” Well, on behalf of everyone, let me just say, Thanks, Human Rights Headlines, for the latest injustice perpetrated on the late Ryan Skipper and, by extension, everyone.

Thanks, Human Rights Headlines, for the latest injustice perpetrated on the late Ryan Skipper and, by extension, everyone.

Posted on the site is a “story” “bylined” Janvieve Williams that “reports” the facts of Skipper’s murder and the subsequent arrest of his alleged killers. But Ms. Williams didn’t write the piece. She didn’t interview anyone for it. She merely cobbled together newspaper reports — complete with the lies, smears and distortions Pensito Review has been pointing out in coverage of the murder for weeks — without attributing her sources.

And you wonder why weblobgs don’t get no respect.

Human Rights Headlines just regurgitated the bad reporting that’s been done by the Lakeland Ledger and other outlets in covering this case, compounding the inaccuracies and distortions by lumping them all together on one long rambling document. This headline thing is the work of something called Human Rights Network, which describes itself this way:

Underlying all human rights work in the United States is a commitment to challenge the pernicious belief that the United States is inherently superior to other countries of the world, and that neither the US government nor the US rights movements have anything to gain from the domestic application of human rights. Rather, in the view of a growing number of US activists, the US government should no longer be allowed to shield itself from accountability to human rights norms and the US civil, women’s, worker, immigrant, lgbt, prisoner and other rights movements stand to benefit, perhaps now more than ever, from an end to US impunity in this regard.

Such an avowedly internationalist and multi-lateralist stance has not been common to domestic rights advocacy in the United States since the Cold War. Its current resurgence in US rights work, from the death penalty to economic justice, signals a fundamental shift in the politics of US rights activism.

The resonance of human rights with progressive trends in US rights work ensures its increasing relevance to domestic activists. The movement for human rights in the United States is here and plans to stay.

After reading that, I’m kind of glad they didn’t write a real story about the Skipper murder because they probably would have really screwed it up. I can’t even tell what they supposedly do or stand for.

In the hope that they will remove their inaccurate and distorted piece of copyright infringement from the Web, I’m going to post a comment on the site with a link back to this post and Pensito Review’s other coverage of the Ryan Skipper murder. Maybe then they’ll do the human right thing.

Cheney Overseeing “Private War” Against Iran

Trish

The United States has been orchestrating raids on Iran by a covert Pakistani group since 2005, according to ABC. The Bush administration makes sure its private war flies below the public radar by keeping funding a secret from Congress.

And Dick Cheney’s recent trip to Afghanistan to meet with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf — when he was finally on the business end of a weapon — was part of it.

Pakistani government sources say the secret campaign against Iran was on the agenda when Vice President Dick Cheney met with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf in February.

The group, called Jundullah, is made up of members of the Baluchi tribe and operates out of the Baluchistan province in Pakistan, just across the border from Iran.

It has taken responsibility for the deaths and kidnappings of more than a dozen Iranian soldiers and officials.

U.S. officials say the U.S. relationship with Jundullah is arranged so that the U.S. provides no funding to the group, which would require an official presidential order or “finding” as well as congressional oversight.

Tribal sources tell ABC News that money for Jundullah is funneled to its youthful leader, Abd el Malik Regi, through Iranian exiles who have connections with European and Gulf states.

Official disavowals focus on whether we bankroll, not control, the group. But laundering money is nothing new for rightwing American paramilitary and intelligence operations. Can you say, “Iran-Contra?”

Some former CIA officers say the arrangement is reminiscent of how the U.S. government used proxy armies, funded by other countries including Saudi Arabia, to destabilize the government of Nicaragua in the 1980s…

Most recently, Jundullah took credit for an attack in February that killed at least 11 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard riding on a bus in the Iranian city of Zahedan.

Last month, Iranian state television broadcast what it said were confessions by those responsible for the bus attack…

The Iranian TV broadcast is interspersed with the logo of the CIA, which the broadcast blamed for the plot.

A CIA spokesperson said “the account of alleged CIA action is false” and reiterated that the U.S. provides no funding of the Jundullah group.

The book, Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army, can tell you how little correlation there is between the United States not leaving a money trail and not being behind something.

Pakistani government sources say the secret campaign against Iran by Jundullah was on the agenda when Vice President Dick Cheney met with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf in February.

Pelosi Opens Way for Talks between Israel and Syria

Jon Ponder

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi met with Syrian strongman, Bashar Assad, today, and appears to have opened the door to talks between Syrial and Israel:

Israel is ready to hold peace talks with Syria, the speaker of the US House of Representatives said today after meeting the Syrian president, Bashar Assad, in Damascus.

Nancy Pelosi’s trip has angered the Bush administration, which accused the Democrats of sending mixed signals to Syria, listed by the US state department as a sponsor of terrorism.

Ms Pelosi told reporters that she had passed Israel’s message on during her discussions with the Syrian leader.

“[Our] meeting with the president enabled us to communicate a message from prime minister [Ehud] Olmert that Israel was ready to engage in peace talks,” she said.

This sends a message to Pres. Bush from the Democrats: Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

Conservapedia Just a Wingnut Wiki, Not an Objective Answer to Wikipedia’s Alleged Liberal Bias

Buck Banks

Wicked wiki: What rock was I under when Conservapedia hit the news? How did I miss it on NPR, in the newspapers and on numerous weblogs? Oh yeah, I was completely out of pocket during the two weeks in March when it rose up out of nowhere and reared its butt-ugly head.

Like all conservative media products, Conservapedia infuses language with politics, pushing an agenda by distorting meanings and manipulating context.

Conservapedia positions itself as an alternative to Wikipedia with its librul bias:

Tired of the LIBERAL BIAS every time you search on Google and a Wikipedia page appears? Our study suggests that Wikipedia is 6 times more liberal than the American public. Now it’s time for the Conservatives to get our voice out on the internet!

Conservapedia began in November 2006, as the class project for a World History class of 58 advanced homeschooled and college-bound students meeting in New Jersey.

Conservapedia has since grown enormously, including contributors worldwide. Conservapedia already exceeds the number of entries in the Oxford Dictionary of World History. Conservapedia is rapidly becoming one of the largest and most reliable online educational resources of its kind.

The “study” referred to above is a laundry list of examples of Wikipedia’s mistakes, inaccuracies and instances where entries would not pass the “Bill O’Reilly Test.” Here are a couple, starting with the number-one instance:

  • Wikipedia allows the use of B.C.E. instead of B.C. and C.E. instead of A.D. The dates are based on the birth of Jesus, so why pretend otherwise? Conservapedia gives the credit due to Christianity and exposes the CE deception.
  • About 60% of Americans accept the account of the Great Flood in the Bible. But enter “Great Flood” into Wikipedia and it automatically converts that to an entry entitled “Deluge (mythology).” That entry then uses “myth” or “mythology” nearly 70 times in its description. Its entry on “Noah’s Ark” is just as biased.
  • Wikipedia’s entry on abortion reads like a brochure for the abortion industry. Wikipedia denies and omits the results of 16 out of 17 statistically significant studies showing increased risk of breast cancer from abortion. Wikipedia’s entry also omits the evidence of abortion causing increased premature birth of subsequent children. Instead of providing these facts, Wikipedia blames women by declaring that “breast cancer elicits disproportionate fear in women.”

OK, it’s easy to see where this is going. So how did they come up with that “statistic” that Wikipedia is six times more liberal? Creationistic math, that’s how:

Polls show that about twice as many Americans identify themselves as “conservative” compared with “liberal”, and that ratio has been increasing for two decades. But on Wikipedia, about three times as many editors identify themselves as “liberal” compared with “conservative”. That suggests Wikipedia is six times more liberal than the American public.

[…]

33 Percent of Pensito Review Editors Back Tancredo for Prez

Buck Banks

Monday Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo announced he was joining the legions seeking the Republican presidential nomination. Now, if he can only win it. I for one fervently hope he can.

‘We have something they don’t have — a group of people out there who are there because of an issue.’

That might sound odd coming from one who has been somewhat critical of Tom Tancredo in the past, who was dismissive of his presumed run for the presidency and offended by his characterization of Miami as a “Third World country.” But I’m serious, I really do want him to win the Republican presidential nomination. Honest, I do.

I know it will be difficult for Tom to compete with the likes of Mitt the Money Magnet in fundraising, but he’s got that covered:

[Tancredo] said he wasn’t intimidated by other campaigns with more money and resources. Tancredo said he had raised a little more than a million dollars for his presidential bid. In comparison, aides to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney announced on Monday that he had raised more than $20 million.

“We have something they don’t have — a group of people out there who are there because of an issue,” Tancredo said. “And they’re never going to have that. They can use their 100 million to try and buy constituency. I have it. It’s natural. It’s there.”

And we all know what Tom’s issue is — immigration. It’s the number-one issue for Tom and his constituents, just not for a majority of Americans. But that’s okay, too, because you don’t need a majority of Americans to win the presidency anymore. Tom’s counting on that, which is why he said to heck with tradition and announced his candidacy, not in his home state of Colorado, but in Iowa. On the radio.

Tancredo said he chose radio because talk radio had for years given him a platform for his stand against illegal immigration. And he made the announcement in Des Moines rather than his home state of Colorado because of the importance of Iowa in the nominating process.

“That’s how you get there,” he said. “You do well in Iowa, you do well in New Hampshire.”

Now that sounds like a solid plan for winning the nomination — do well in Iowa and New Hampshire. I tell you, this guy has the juice!

That’s why I am breaking with my co-editors and endorsing Tom Tancredo for the Republican nomination for president of these United States. Because if the GOP nominates a single-issue loose-cannon headcase like Tancredo, the Dems are sure to win.

We Third Worlders are behind you Tom, and I speak on behalf of my fellow Miamians when I say that were most of them in the country legally and registered, I’m sure they’d vote for you. Honest.