Brown woman divorces Democrats

SUBHEAD: I’m a brown woman who’s breaking up with the Democratic Party.

By Saira Rao on 16 December 2017 for Huffington Post -
(https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/brown-women-democratic-party_us_5a31a32de4b07ff75b001456)


Image above: What appears to be a selfie of Saira Rao during her college days with Hillary Clinton. From original article.

Dear Democratic Party:

You were the love of my life. I fell in love early and hard. I have been the kind of party loyalist ― the kind of sappy, soapbox-y, clichéd devotee ― that makes Fox News moonwalk with glee.

The first vote I ever cast, at 18, was for Bill Clinton. The last vote I cast was for his wife, Hillary. My adoration for Hillary bordered on mania.

In college, I named my ficus plant after her. Twenty years later, I canvassed, held fundraisers, dragged my 8-year-old daughter door to door, proudly wore HRC’s face on T-shirts and housed campaign volunteers in my home.

I loved you so much that I cried each time I voted. Thinking about the women who died fighting for my right to vote did it every time. I cried when I voted for Bill. For Barack Obama. I wept when I voted for Hillary. You’ve been that kind of mad love to me.

And now I want to break up.

I realize now that the love has been one-sided, unrequited. You’ve never recognized me, as a brown woman. You’ve taken my love, my money, my tokenism, with nary anything in return. You married the white woman and hooked up with me on the side.

Black Lives Matter is a second ― or third ― thought. Where is your outrage over the national epidemic of police brutality against black people?

You continue to call angry white men who commit mass murder “lone wolves.” But if someone who looks like me screams “Allah” and fires a gun, it’s “terrorism.” And you wonder why angry white men are gunning down innocent brown men at bars, in their yards, on the street.

For all your talk about Dreamers, there’s been little action. You don’t seem to give a crap about kids of color who will be kicked out of this country, the only country they know.

What if all those Dreamers were white? I suspect there’d be a very different outcome.

You spend a lot of time and energy wooing white voters, while giving short shrift to voters of colors and assuming we’ll always show up for you.

To be fair, there’s no reason for you to assume otherwise. We always show up for you. Take, for example, the special election in Alabama on Tuesday. Had black people not shown up, an accused child molester would be our newest senator.

What will Doug Jones do for the black folks who put him in the Senate? If history is any indication, very little.

This past year, I held and attended numerous fundraisers for your candidates. I donated money every time I was asked. I marched: for women, for children, for reproductive rights, for science. I traveled across the country for the March for Women in Washington, D.C.

It was there that I got the first hint that you weren’t that into me. The giveaway? The sea of white women in pink hats with brown and black women dotting the waves like debris. I let it slide but I kept my eyes and ears open.

My fellow brown and black sisters started to notice, too — and the chatter began, in whispered hushes at first, then loud and clear. You are a party of white feminists. Of white feminism, the kind of feminism that focuses on the struggles of white women.

It was the first time I’d heard the term, most likely because self-awareness is hard and I was a brown woman trapped in a white feminist’s world.

But then I woke up. I saw you with clear eyes for the first time.

For every Kamala Harris and Pramila Jayapal sticking their brown and black necks out for me, there are dozens of white female Democrats who want me to shut my trap.

Your advocacy for reproductive rights zeros in on wealthy white women. Women of color and other marginalized women get sidelined.

The gender pay gap is worse for black and Latina women than it is for white women. Women of color make up 64 percent of women in U.S. jails. Why isn’t the Democratic Party talking about this and trying to fix it?

My own “liberal” white congresswoman in Colorado has given me a hint as to why.

At the congresswoman’s town hall in February, Neeti Pawar, the brown female founder of the South Asian Bar Association of Colorado, was one of the only people of color in a room of nearly a thousand. She asked about immigration and DACA protections.

The congresswoman scoffed. When Pawar pressed on, she was told to remain silent or she’d be asked to leave. During a follow-up, staffers told Pawar that civil rights weren’t the representative’s “issue.” Brown and black people don’t have the luxury of sidelining civil rights. It’s life and death for us.

And it didn’t stop there.

I was organizing a fundraiser for a U.S. senator earlier this month, and had planned to use the opportunity to highlight women of color by having black women introduce him.

The congresswoman’s staff caught wind of the event and asked if she could introduce the senator. I explained my position but invited her to come as a guest. No response. When pressed on her stance on racial inclusion, her staff didn’t respond to me directly but tattled on me to the white women co-hosting the event.

I know there are some good ones among you. But for every Kamala Harris, Maxine Waters and Pramila Jayapal sticking their brown and black necks out for me, there are dozens of white female Democrats who want me to shut my trap, and say please and thank you. 

I should be grateful for scraps while white women enjoy a proper marriage with you.

I’m done with all that. And if you don’t want to lose more women like me, there are a few basic things you can do.

Pay attention to the reproductive health of women of color and other marginalized women. Do something, anything, to protect Dreamers. Or, if you’re really feeling bold, move forward on some form of reparations for black people.

Finally, mentor young people of color to run for office. Campaign for brown and black folks. Raise money for them. Show up for them. I’d come running back to you with open arms if you did even a few of these things.

In the meantime, I’ll be on the sidelines waiting, watching, hoping, praying. You broke my heart.

.

Hawaii judge halts Trump travel ban

SUBHEAD: Judge says executive order was issued with a purpose to disfavor a particular religion.

By Rui Kanyena on 16 March 2017 for Civil Beat-
(http://www.civilbeat.org/2017/03/hawaii-judge-to-rule-on-challenge-to-travel-ban-before-it-takes-effect/?mc_cid=e810ff9805&mc_eid=28610da3ab)


Image above:  U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson in front of the US Federal Court in Honolulu, Hawaii speaks to media about his ruling on Trump travel ban. From original article.

In a case of legal deja vu, President Donald Trump’s new executive order on immigration suffered a major setback Wednesday, when a federal judge in Honolulu issued a temporary restraining order to keep the travel ban from taking effect nationwide.

n a 43-page opinion, U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson ruled that Hawaii met the “burden of establishing a strong likelihood of success on the merits” of its claims against the travel ban — which suspends refugee resettlements and temporarily halts the issuance of new visas to citizens of six Muslim-majority countries.

“A reasonable, objective observer — enlightened by the specific historical context, contemporaneous public statements and specific sequence of events leading to its issuance — would conclude that the executive order was issued with a purpose to disfavor a particular religion, in spite of its stated, religiously neutral purpose,” Watson wrote.

Watson’s ruling was a resounding victory for Hawaii, which mounted the first legal challenge against the new order on grounds that it unconstitutionally targets Muslims and discriminates based on national origin.

Hawaii Attorney General Doug Chin, who first sued the Trump administration in February to challenge the original travel ban, hailed the ruling.

“This is what the checks-and-balances system is all about,” Chin said. “The president might make certain decisions, but the way our government works, we also need to be able to take our own stance to check and balance out that whole process.”

Watson’s ruling was also the second major setback for Trump, who has long argued that the travel ban is necessary for national security.

Trump’s original travel ban, issued January 27th, triggered a flurry of legal challenges across the country and ended in a defeat at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, whose three-judge panel unanimously upheld an injunction issued in Seattle.

Speaking at a rally in Nashville, Tennessee, Trump called Watson’s ruling “an unprecedented judicial overreach” and noted that it came from a judge within the “much-overturned 9th Circuit Court.”

To the cheers of supporters in a campaign-style setting, Trump vowed that “we’re going to fight this terrible ruling” and eventually prevail at the U.S. Supreme Court.

“The danger’s clear; the law is clear,” Trump said, adding, “The best way to stop radical Islamic terrorists … is to stop them from entering the country in the first place.”


Image above: Hawaii Attorney General Doug Chin (center) discusses the decision by U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson to block the travel ban with Gov. David Ige and other local lawmakers. From original article.

Religious Discrimination

In his ruling, Watson directed much of his attention at assessing whether the new order, like the original travel ban, is a “Muslim ban” dressed up in legal garb — in violation of the First Amendment’s establishment clause.

At a hearing Wednesday, acting U.S. Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall argued that Trump was simply exercising his broad authority to address national security concerns.

Wall also told Watson that the travel ban had been revised to address the concerns raised by 9th Circuit Court, noting that it applies only to visa applicants who have yet to travel to the U.S., removes a provision that singled out Syrian refugees for an indefinite ban and no longer gives preferential treatment to the refugee claims of religious minorities.

But Watson was having none of it.

Watson ruled that, despite the revisions, the new order still amounts to religious discrimination — a step toward the “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States” that Trump promised on the campaign trail.

Watson chided the Trump administration, in particular, for suggesting that, since the travel ban doesn’t apply to all Muslim-majority countries, it has no “religious animus.”

“The illogic of the government’s contention is palpable,” Watson wrote. “The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed. The court declines to relegate its establishment clause analysis to a purely mathematical exercise.”

Last-Minute Challenges

Watson’s ruling came on a day in which two other judges held hearings to decide whether to issue an injunction against the travel ban.

Six hours before Watson’s hearing, U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang in Greenbelt, Maryland, heard oral arguments on a lawsuit brought by refugee aid groups but declined to issue a ruling from the bench.

Chuang indicated that his ruling, when it does come, might not be nationwide in scope.

In Seattle, U.S. District Judge James Robart, who blocked the original travel ban, held a hearing to consider the claims of four Washington residents who are concerned that the new order will bar their relatives from entering the U.S. But he has yet to issue a ruling.

Meanwhile, Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson cheered Hawaii’s success.

“A win for Hawaii is a win for all of us,” Ferguson said. “Trump is piling up defeat after defeat after defeat. And we’ll all be here working to make sure his streak continues.”

Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum, who was in Honolulu to attend the meeting of the Conference of Western Attorneys General, said Watson’s ruling reflected Hawaii’s aloha spirit.

“We’re so happy to stand together today with your state with this very, very significant victory for inclusivety and for saying loud and clear against discrimination,” said Rosenblum, who, along with attorneys general from 13 states and the District of Columbia, filed an amicus brief in Hawaii’s lawsuit.

Hakim Ouansafi, president the Muslim Association of Hawaii, said Watson’s ruling will protect “all the families affected by this Muslim ban.”

“They say precious things come in small packages and, in this case, great things for America and the world came from this small state of ours,” Ouansafi said. “Very proud of the great work (Attorney General) Doug Chin and his team did and hope that President Trump can concentrate on truly protecting this country as opposed to concentrating on fulfilling an unconstitutional and un-American campaign pledge.”


.

Media rigged against Bernie

SUBHEAD: Mainstream headlines decry Sanders supporters for disrupting events in outrage.

By Claire Bernish on 18 May 2016 for Anti-Media -
(http://theantimedia.org/media-rigged-elections-your-fault/)


Image above: Roberta Lange at the podium running the Nevada Democratic Convention. From (http://www.inquisitr.com/3096404/the-nevada-convention-where-democracy-went-to-die/).

Mainstream headlines constantly decry Bernie Sanders supporters for disrupting events in outrage, as if their protests and demonstrations somehow illustrate the devolution of the elections.

But that focus by the corporate media utterly negates the consistent and continual reports of fraud and disenfranchisement fueling their ire.
And it’s getting ridiculous.

Newsweek, though far from alone, offered a prime example of the obfuscation of the election fraud and questionable campaign tactics by Hillary Clinton in its skewering of Sanders’ supporters.

“Get Control, Senator Sanders, or Get Out,” Newsweek’s Kurt Eichenwald titled his op-ed — which thoroughly blasts the Vermont senator — as if he were somehow responsible for both the electoral chaos and the actions of an irate voting public. Eichenwald writes [with emphasis added]:

“So, Senator Sanders, either get control of what is becoming your increasingly unhinged cult, or get out of the race. Whatever respect sane liberals had for you is rapidly dwindling, and the damage being inflicted on your reputation may be unfixable. If you can’t even manage the vicious thugs who act in your name, you can’t be trusted to run a convenience store, much less the country.”

Really?

Because what Eichenwald obviates most readily in his attack is the inability to understand why those protests might be occurring in the first place. Judging by the timing of his article, it’s likely Eichenwald wrote it after chaos broke out at the Nevada Democratic Convention on Saturday — chaos that transpired after the party took it upon itself to ignore thousands who rightly believed Sanders delegates had been excluded unfairly from the caucus proceedings.

Despite the call for a recount, party officials refused to follow necessary procedure and abruptly adjourned the convention, leaving thousands of voters in the lurch — and hotel security and local law enforcement to deal with the aftermath. When things seem suspicious, apparently Eichenwald feels voters should not only have no recourse, they should be happy about it. He continues:

 “Sanders has increasingly signaled that he is in this race for Sanders and day after day shows himself to be a whining crybaby with little interest in a broader movement.”

It would be nice if Eichenwald’s hit piece were as much a joke as it comes across, but clearly he’s missed the point — and the vast movement supporting not only Sanders, but electoral justice. Worse, he didn’t stop there:

“Signs are emerging that the Sanders campaign is transmogrifying into the type of movement through which tyrants are born.

“The ugly was on display” at the aforementioned Nevada convention, Eichenwald adds, “where Hillary Clinton won more delegates than Sanders.”

No kidding. That would be precisely the issue that “cult” expressed fury about — Clinton managed to put yet another state under her belt under highly questionable circumstances.

In fact, suspect happenings at nearly every primary and caucus so far oddly favor the former secretary of state — and Nevada stood as further testament to why voters are practically up in arms over what appears to be electoral favoritism.

But Eichenwald wasn’t alone in overlooking those concerns — or in blatantly mischaracterizing both that bias and its consequential thwarting of the wishes of a hefty segment of the voting public.

In the New York Times, Alan Rappeport also took the chance to strike at Sanders’ followers by citing Roberta Lange, Nevada State Democratic Party Chairwoman, who adjourned the convention early — earning the wrath of Nevada’s voters.

“‘It’s been vile,’ said Ms. Lange, who riled Sanders supporters by refusing their requests for rule changes at the event in Las Vegas,” Rappeport notes, adding, “The vicious response comes as millions of new voters, many of whom felt excluded by establishment politicians, have flocked to the insurgent campaigns of Mr. Sanders and Mr. Trump.”

Though he at least presented that aspect of the elections fairly, his description of what Lange actually did in Nevada misses the mark — that rules change had originally occurred prior to the convention, and Lange’s hasty and subjective decision on a contentious voice vote to permanently install the change arguably created the eruption of anger.

But a number of Times staff have contributed sizeable amounts to Hillary’s campaign — and a Clinton family organization also donated $100,000 to the Times’ charitable organization the same year it endorsed her. Funny how bias thus peppers its reporting.

.

Xenophobia and religious prejudice

SUBHEAD: It should be obvious by now. The world is descending into xenophobia and religious prejudice.

By Juan Wilson on 19 November 2015 for Island Breath -
(http://islandbreath.blogspot.com/2015/11/xenophobia-and-religious-prejudice.html)


Image above: Photograph by Rav Vadgama of Ralia, 7, and Rahaf, 13, who live on the streets of Beirut. They are from Damascus, Syria, where a grenade killed their mother and brother. Along with their father they have been sleeping rough for a year. They huddle close together on their cardboard boxes. Rahaf says she is scared of “bad boys,” at which Ralia starts crying. From (http://kawaehawaii.blogspot.com/).

Got an email from Gary Hooser today. Yes he's running again for our Kauai County Council. And yes we will support him. Besides some personal notes and observations he ended his email with this.

... Like most, my work and life is focused primarily on the community in which I live.  However, events of the past few days have made us all keenly aware of the greater world around us that seems to be spinning out of control. The discussion that has erupted around the question of accepting refugees into our State and Country has brought out the worse. I have no answers or solutions but know that collectively we all need to take a deep breath, close our eyes, pause for a moment and think deeply about who we are and the core values that support our humanity. Please read if you have a moment my friend Luke Evslin’s well written and deeply personal blog piece on this topic http://kawaehawaii.blogspot.com/2015/11/thoughts-on-syria.html A woman who was seemingly distraught at the thought of bringing Syrian refugees to Hawaii posted in response a furious rant opposed to allowing refugees to enter Hawaii.  Her point was similar to many others that have been expressed recently “We don’t have the resources to take care of our own problems and have no business trying to help others until we help our own.”. My response to her was: “In this time of fear and angst on many levels and on many issues, both global and local - pushback against the concept of bringing more people into our home is understandable. But if a homeless child from any country or any religion or a family through no fault of their own was fleeing violence and seeking safety were to knock on my door, I would be hard pressed not to find them some small corner of my humble hale where they could lay their heads safely, at least for a little while. Luke Evslin speaks for me on this one.” ...

I commend Gary for speaking out and recommend reading Luke Evslin's blog article. We are putting a permanent link to his site on ours. Here's just the start of his observations that end with some compelling photos of Syrian children who are refugees.

Thoughts on Syria I was robbed on Friday. They took four computers, jewelry, and possibly our two favorite ducks. I have never felt such shame and anger towards my fellow humans. This feeling is new to me. But not because some young punk broke into our house and violated our privacy. Crystal meth is creating a lost generation on Kaua'i who are driven to unconscionable acts. I can understand that. It's our collective response to the worst humanitarian crisis since World War II that makes me want to vomit. It's the venom that is coming out on Social Media that's making me lose faith in humanity. From my friends-- people I know to be smart, good people. That, I can not understand. In case you missed it, Governor Ige said that Hawai'i would welcome Syrian refugees with aloha. And Social Media exploded in vehemence. This xenophobic outburst caused Governor Ige to partially retract his statement yesterday by saying "I suppose in hindsight I should probably be more thoughtful about my statements." Yes-- Governor Ige, you should have known better. While we don't talk about it, we all know that under the thin veneer of the aloha spirit, Hawai'i harbors an intense distrust towards outsiders. But no-- Governor Ige, you shouldn't have to apologize for Hawai'i's lack of humanity. This is one of those rare times where it's important to say "fuck public opinion, I'm doing what's right." My wife was born in a Cambodian refugee camp. My grandparents and great-grant parents were refugees. Most of my grandfather's family were shot or gassed because they could not get political asylum quick enough. Jews were painted as communists, and communists were thought to be dangerous. Nearly 70% of Americans were opposed to accepting Jewish refugees on the eve of World War II. ...

It should be obvious by now. The world is descending into xenophobia and religious prejudice.   Corporations and the military-security structures are taking over the commons and our public resources.

The Republicans are falling over each other trying to prove who's the least tolerant and most afraid of anyone who isn't a white Christian man. 

R. James Woolsey Jr. is an ex Director of the CIA. He is an idiot and a warmonger. The proof? He has been an adviser to John McCain.

Woosley claims the deal to slow Iran's nuclear program is "Worse than Useless" and that Edward Snowden should be executed by hanging because of the recent fatal attacks by terrorists in Paris by revealing the nature of the National Security Administration's universal unconstitutional illegal snooping on Americans (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/260817-ex-cia-director-snowden-should-be-hanged-for-paris).

Where do we go from here? Probably more war.

See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: Federal Court's NSA Smackdown 11/10/15

.

The paper of elitist record

SUBHEAD: New York Times is guilty of 'Aiding the Enemy' with its biased reporting on whistleblowers.

By Mickey Z. on 2 August 2013 for World News Trust -
(http://worldnewstrust.com/new-york-times-guilty-of-aiding-the-enemy-mickey-z)


Image above: Photo of Free Bradley manning demonstration by Mickey Z. From original article.

“There is an odor to any press headquarters that is unmistakable: the unavoidable smell of flesh burning quietly and slowly in the service of a machine.”

- Norman Mailer

If you’ve ever wondered why someone like Bradley Manning gets far less media coverage than, say, a “royal” birth or a mayoral candidate’s penis, well… you can always count on the “newspaper of record” to reveal the method behind the madness.

A July 30, 2013 New York Times article by John M. Broder and Ginger Thompson was deftly entitled, “Loner Sought a Refuge, and Ended Up in War.” The stage was set in a single word -- the first word, in fact -- as we all know what America thinks about “loners.” Those are the ones who turn out to like Oswald or Dahmer or Klebold and Harris.

Any lingering hope for a nuanced discussion on privacy or war crimes was dashed by the opening paragraph:

Feeling outcast and alone in Iraq, Bradley Manning, then a 22-year-old Army private, turned to the Internet for solace in early 2010, wanting to share with the world what he saw as the unconscionable horrors of war, an act that resulted in what military prosecutors called one of the greatest betrayals in the nation’s history.

Not only a loner but an “outcast,” Manning merely exposed “what he saw as the unconscionable horrors of war.” Well played by the Times as loyal readers -- long conditioned by daily propaganda -- are given the comfortable choice of accepting that some weirdo geek with a grudge against god’s country misinterpreted U.S. military behavior. For good measure, Broder and Thompson only tell us how military prosecutors perceive his actions.

For the handful of mainstream folks who might actually continue reading the article beyond this point, the Times offers passing mention of Manning being “confined to a tiny cell 23 hours a day at the Marine base at Quantico, Virginia,” before quickly returning to their more familiar role of stenographer to power.

Those same military prosecutors, we’re told,

“accused Private Manning of being a self-promoting ‘anarchist’ who was nothing like the tortured man of principle portrayed by his lawyers, supporters around the world celebrated him as a martyr for free speech.”

Let’s stop for a second to note that the NY Times not only dragged out the all-purpose smear of “anarchist” but has yet to find it “fit to print” to include any details of the specific “unconscionable horrors of war” Manning exposed. This omission allows Broder and Thompson to claim his supporters are solely focusing on the issue of “free speech.” 

As for the Times’ mocking phrase “tortured man of principle,” it wouldn’t take the reporters (sic) much effort to find Manning’s own thoughts and words on the topic. But, of course, the article’s authors don’t want to complicate matters with such context. Instead, they educate their readers with news that the “heated language on both sides” tends to “overshadow the human story at the center of the case.”

With all due respect to both Manning’s courage and the criminal treatment he’s endured, the story at “the center of the case” is not his personality, upbringing, or political leanings. The story cleverly but predictably obscured by the Times is all about the Home of the Brave™ sanctioning war crimes as policy and throwing the full weight of its legal (sic) might at anyone crazy enough to expose such global criminality.

As Amnesty International recently concluded: “It's hard not to draw the conclusion that Manning's trial was about sending a message: the U.S. government will come after you, no holds barred, if you're thinking of revealing evidence of its unlawful behavior.”

Rather than discuss any of that, of course, journalists (sic) Broder and Thompson treat us to details like Manning being “the child of a severed home” and “a teenager bullied for his conflicted sexuality” who “never fit in.” Even in the Army, he was a “misfit” and just in case you’re not sure why, the Times gleefully clarifies: “In early 2010, he covertly downloaded gun-camera videos, battle logs and tens of thousands of State Department cables onto flash drives while lip-syncing the words to Lady Gaga songs.”

Who ya gonna trust, big strong white men with lots of stripes on their uniforms or a Gaga-loving misfit outcast?

The slander and innuendo goes on -- and on -- but it isn’t until paragraph 12 (when maybe 90 percent of readers have already moved on?) that Broder and Thompson deign to mention Manning as: 

“disturbed by footage shot by an Apache helicopter of an attack on a street in Baghdad in July 2007 that killed two Reuters journalists and several other men.”

Before any of you get the bright idea to ponder a U.S. military helicopter given the name “Apache” or to question our (sic) heroic (sic) men and women in uniform, Broder and Thompson lay it out simply but firmly: 

“While larger questions about government secrecy and the role of the news media in the Internet age swirl around the case, the roots of Private Manning’s behavior may spring as much from his troubled youth as from his political views.”

The remainder of the article provides tidbits about Manning playing video games, being teased by classmates and rejected by his father, living in his car for a while, and 

“his geeky fascination with computers, his liberal political opinions and his sexual orientation.”

To fully illustrate the sheer weirdness of this America-hating gay anarchist loner, Broder and Thompson make sure they tell us that Private Manning wore a dog tag that said “Humanist” and kept a toy fairy wand on his desk.

Which brings me back to the title of this article…

The U.S. government charged Bradley Manning with aiding the enemy but, let’s state the obvious: the enemy is the U.S. government… and the multi-national corporations that fund it. The crime isn’t whistle-blowing, the crime is relentless, lawless global war in pursuit and protection of profit. The New York Times and all corporate media outlets, therefore, should be charged with aiding the enemy.

It is the role, the mission, of the corporate-run media to aid the enemy.

Whether you label them liberal or conservative, most major media outlets are large corporations owned by or aligned with even larger corporations, and they share a common strategy: selling a product (an affluent audience) to a given market (advertisers).

Therefore, we shouldn’t find it too shocking that the image of the world being presented by a corporate-owned press very much reflects the biased interests of the elite players involved in this sordid little love triangle.

If you created a blueprint for an apparatus that utterly erased critical thought, you could make none more efficient than the American corporate media -- and please don't fall into the trap of only demonizing Fox News.

A major component of the free press illusion is the notion that some media outlets are more liberal while others are more right-wing -- belief in this myth further limits the already limited parameters of accepted debate.

Reality Check: The media are as liberal or conservative as the corporations that own them.

So, of course the mainstream media distorts and/or ignores the Manning story. That's their job and it's a waste of our time and energy to expect otherwise. The major media corporations been given the keys to the public (sic) airwaves and we don't yet have the means to change that. We do, however, have the means to circumvent this model.

Tracy Chapman once promised that revolution “sounds like a whisper.” Well, we may not be able to yell louder than the professional propagandists of the corporate media but we damn sure can whisper more effectively.
The media can't be "fixed" any more than all the other dying institutions (banking, health care, education, etc.) can be. So, I say: Let the corporate press rot while we utilize our resources and ingenuity to create an entirely new model.

If we build it, they will join us…

It will require both outrage and outreach for us to outlive the corporate pirates (and the politicians they fund) who have hijacked our future. To help make this happen, we need more of the 99% to get aware and active. Thus, we must keep whispering the truth and continue working to model new alternatives.

Let’s not allow Bradley Manning’s efforts and sacrifice to be in vain!

#shifthappens

Video above: From(http://youtu.be/5rXPrfnU3G0).


• Mickey Z. is the author of 11 books, most recently the novel Darker Shade of Green. Until the laws are changed or the power runs out, he can be found on an obscure website called Facebook. Anyone wishing to support his activist efforts can do so by making a donation here. 

911 Aftershock - Islamophobia

SUBHEAD: Murfreesboro, Tennessee, mosque building controversy sparks fear, threats and vandalism. By Janell Ross on 9 Spetmber 2011 for Huffington Post - (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/09/threats-swirl-in-town-sei_n_953997.html) Image above: Mosque burned in Columbia TN in 2010 during fight against Murfreeboro mosque plan. From (http://www.realcourage.org/2010/06/murfreesboro-hate-continues/).

By some accounts, Anthony Mijares is a bit player in the story of Murfreesboro, Tenn., a small city 40 minutes south of Nashville. In Murfreesboro, a growing Muslim community’s plan to build a new mosque has unleashed a public furor, produced threats and counterthreats, and revealed just how far fear of another terrorist attack has spread across the United States.

Since the mosque won local government building approval in May 2010, Murfreesboro's 250 Muslim families have taken an undesirable spot at center stage. Unidentified individuals vandalized a sign that had marked the future worship space site for months and in a separate incident, someone set ablaze a piece of construction equipment. On Labor Day an anonymous caller threatened the group again. A bomb, the caller said, will explode over the September 11 weekend inside the office space where Murfreesboro’s Muslims currently worship. Local law enforcement, the FBI and ATF are investigating the incidents and will not comment on their status.

But Mijares, a retiree and Roman Catholic, is also the lone voice behind a letter-writing campaign to discourage companies from displaying or advertising in a local paper that he believes is helping to fuel the local controversy. For more than a year, the paper has featured stories about the planned mosque, Islam and the alleged threat they pose to Murfreesboro. And this summer, that publication launched its own campaign against Mijares, publishing his home address in an ad that called for readers to "combat" his efforts.

"Yes, I consider that a threat," said Mijares, 54. "What else could it be when every local right-wing nut, some militia member in Idaho or some Aryan (Neo-Nazi) in West Virginia can read the words 'combat' printed next to my address online? The Rutherford Reader knows what it's doing. That wasn't a mistake."

What is happening to Mijares may be the final proof that the crisis in Murfreesboro has been created by nothing more than irrational fear and hate, not legitimate concerns about safety, said Reavis Mitchell, a historian at Fisk University in Nashville who specializes in 20th Century American history.

"There is a long line of people who have been branded an outsider, a troublemaker of some kind, because they won't tolerate injustice silently," said Mitchell.

Historically, community crises like the one in Murfreesboro have been resolved, or at least calmed, after the name-calling, threats, acts of intimidation or actual violence begin national attention turns to the troubled town or ringleader, Mitchell said. During the McCarthy anti-Communist campaign and The Civil Rights Movement, that's the point at which change occurred, he said.

CNN, Time Magazine and international publications have covered the mosque controversy in Murfreesboro. But Mijares and his campaign have remained largely unknown.

In April 2010, just a few weeks before the new mosque won local government approval, Mijares picked up a copy of The Rutherford Reader, a free weekly newspaper, at a Murfreesboro Kroger. Mijares had scanned The Rutherford Reader before, but that day Mejares was appalled. In stories, editorials and hard-to-describe items where opinions and facts were commingled, the paper called for a halt on "Muslim immigration" and described Islam as "dehumanizing" and "defiling."

Mijares decided to contact Kroger. Within weeks, the grocery chain directed its distributor to stop making room for The Rutherford Reader on its free publication racks.

Mijares insists that he isn't a fan of censorship, arguing that The Rutherford Reader can print what it wants and distribute it anyway that it can. But businesses that keep The Rutherford Reader afloat by supplying advertising revenue and access to consumers should think about this carefully, Mijares said, or they risk offending their own customers.

Over the next year, Mijares sent similar letters to the owners of local stores, restaurants and the local Chamber of Commerce. When seven stores, restaurants and chamber locations decided to stop displaying The Rutherford Reader on their free publication racks, Mijares expanded his efforts to advertisers.

"This is hate speech, pure and simple," Mijares said. "I thought advertisers should know that The Rutherford Reader has taken a turn."

Pete Doughtie -- The Rutherford Reader's editor, publisher and owner -- did not respond to multiple requests for comment left at his office and home. But this week, Doughtie's column posed a revealing challenge.

Muslims are not in America to assimilate. They are here to change our system ... Our preachers should go beyond telling us more than 'we must love our enemies.' That is simply passing the buck. They should be getting every Christian ready and armed with the Word of God and an understanding of the Quran and Hadith, to defeat those who are out to destroy Christianity, and our American way of life.

(Hadith is a collection of sayings and ideas attributed to the prophet Muhammed.)

Since the mosque project was approved, Doughtie -a self-described white Christian American - has described Islam in his column as a "political ideology," rather than a religion. He has told readers that Islam compels violence and attempts to implement sharia, a code of Islamic laws. He has described Mijares as a Muslim. And he has described as "terrorists" Mijares and other locals who have objected to The Rutherford Reader's content and the vandalism and arson at the mosque.

"Pete Doughtie is a bully and a bigot," said Mijares. "I may be a 5'4" Italian-American guy with a big nose and olive skin who gets looks around town. And I know that he cannot fathom that there are non-Muslims who do not agree with his ideas. But I am, in fact, not a Muslim. I am not a terrorist. And I am not afraid of Pete Doughtie."

Mijares is a retired international cargo expeditor who spent September 11 directing cargo traffic at the panic-stricken Los Angeles Airport, so he does not scare easily, he said. He moved to Tennessee to care for his ailing mother in 2005.

The Rutherford Reader is a right-of-center publication that represents the community's concerns, said Kevin Fisher, an unpaid Rutherford Reader columnist. Fisher, who is African American, is a corrections officer and also the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit that aims to stop construction of the new mosque.

"I take civil rights seriously and I wouldn't participate in anything that tramples on people's rights. I wouldn't write anything that intentionally offends anyone," said Fisher. "If I have, I am sincerely sorry. But I know Mr. Doughtie and I've always thought he was a really nice guy."

Fisher objects to the lack of detail included in the public meeting notice where the mosque project was approved. The notice -- which included the same information as other planning commission announcements -– allowed the mosque to escape comment from people who oppose it, Fisher said. But that is not his only concern.

"We don't know enough about the motivations here. It's only been 10 years since 9/11," said Fisher, who has sought and lost two bids for public office since 2008. “In the blink of an eye, foreign students went from students to terrorists. And I think that this is why our whole thinking as a nation changed. We have to judge the issue of terror and the potential for Islamic radicalization a little differently. We certainly have to look at that potential in our own community."

Fisher would not comment on the ads featuring Mijares' complete home address. But, Fisher said, Mijares invited the attention when he began his campaign.

When Mijares says that the ads may be dangerous, he is right, said Eric Allen Bell, a documentary filmmaker. In 2010, Bell moved to Murfreesboro planning to take a break. Instead, he wound up making a documentary about the mosque controversy. A full-length version of that film, "Not Welcome," will be released next year, Bell said.

While Bell was making the film, he wrote a series of editorials that criticized the mosques' opponents, including The Rutherford Reader. The weekly's subsequent issue included Bell's picture beneath a headline that read, "The Rutherford Reader's Free Speech is Being Threatened."

Bell began to receive death threats via email, he said. Bell hired a private security to accompany him to certain public events. Then one particularly scary threat arrived over Facebook. When Bell approached local law enforcement, he was reminded that an official complaint would become a matter of public record and would include his home address. A police officer warned him that this might put him in greater danger, Bell said.

"I was advised by people who know that community that you probably need to take this seriously and leave town," said Bell, who returned to California in November 2010.

It is not a coincidence that when the small but vocal group of Murfreesboro residents who oppose the mosque describe their concerns, the sorts of claims made in The Rutherford Reader often come up, said Saleh M. Sbenaty, a board member of Murfreesboro's mosque and a professor at Middle Tennessee State University.

"There are people and publications in this city that specialize in making false accusations," said Sbenaty, who moved to the United States from Syria, 30 years ago around the same time that Muslims in Murfreesboro formed the city's mosque. "They insist that all Muslims are dangerous. And unfortunately, there are a small number of nut jobs who will take that seriously."

Late Wednesday, the mosque's board voted to suspend usual weekend activities at the mosque because of the bomb threat. On Saturdays, the mosque typically holds religious education classes for children. On Sundays, there are sports or community events for kids.

"It is quite unfortunate that our children are bullied in school and now are the subject of a new threat," said Sbenaty, a father of two.

Threats, or what some people consider threats, are becoming common in Murfreesboro.

Back in May, Mijares noticed a Rutherford Reader ad for a Nissan dealership. Mijares contacted the dealer. And since the Japanese car company's North American headquarters are located in nearby Franklin, Tenn., he also called Nissan's community relations staff.

"After he (Mijares) made us aware of the publication where this ad was placed," said Paula Angelo, Nissan's director of corporate communications, "it was clear immediately that its content does not align with Nissan's core values."

Mijares contacted corporate headquarters on May 24. The dealership makes independent decisions about advertising, but there was a conversation between the business and corporate officials, Angelo said. On June 8, Angleo contacted Mijares to advise him that the dealership had purchased Rutherford Reader ad space in May and June but that additional ads would not be placed, he said.

On July 18, The Rutherford Reader began running its series of full-page anti-Mijares ads.

"Murfreesboro, to borrow a phrase, is the ground zero of Muslim bashing in America right now," said Faiz Shakir, vice president of the Center for American Progress and one of the researchers behind "Fear, Inc.," a six-month study released in August by the Washington, D.C.-based think tank that examined the rising tide of anti-Islamic sentiment.

The study found that small groups of individuals have funneled the same pieces of questionable research to activists, commentators and politicians, who have then stirred or led groups such as the one that opposes the Murfreesboro mosque, Shakir said. In August, one of those individuals, Frank Gaffney, testified in the Murfreesboro case hoping to help stop the mosque. Fisher first met Gaffney in the courtroom, he said.

"I am nobody's puppet," Fisher said.

On August 30, a judge ruled that the mosque's construction could move forward. The decision will be appealed, Fisher said.

Inside Murfreesboro, some people suspect that The Rutherford Reader's interest in covering the alleged threats posed by Islam may be driven by profit. In Tennessee, local governments are required to list public notices -– advisories about government meetings and other activities -– in general interest publications. These ads generate revenue for newspapers.

"I think it may be Mr. Doughtie's goal to write just enough about this local controversy to drive up his circulation and meet the definition of a general interest publication," said Ernest G. Burgess, Rutherford County mayor. Murfreesboro is the largest city in Rutherford County and Burgess is the county's chief executive officer.

In late August, the ads with Mijares' home address disappeared. Mijares received a few nasty letters and emails. But, Mijares says, he won't stop his letter-writing campaign.

"I've never been terribly social. In fact, some people may call me a misanthrope," said Mijares. "I don't mind if some people don't like me. I just don't appreciate anyone threatening my family."

If the ads continue, Mijares said he will post Doughtie's home address online with a description of Doughtie's activities and ideas in Arabic.

Video above: GOP Presidential candidate Herman Cain argues right to ban mosques. From (http://youtu.be/3471KA2PlBY). .