Obama tells us he was black before the election:
This confirms my suspicion that Obama is actually a white liberal in disguise.
Obama tells us he was black before the election:
This confirms my suspicion that Obama is actually a white liberal in disguise.
This will follow shortly after the imminent release of all political prisoners, the ushering in of democracy and the returning of stolen body parts to Falun Gong adherents:
China will increase efforts to improve energy efficiency and curb the rise in CO2 emissions, President Hu Jintao has told a UN climate summit in New York.
Mr Hu gave no details about the measures, which should mean emissions grow less quickly than the economy.
The US, the world’s other major emitter, said China’s proposals were helpful but figures were needed.
Jimmy Carter not only sees apartheid when it isn’t there, he also sees racism:
Former U.S. president Jimmy Carter said a congressman’s outburst directed at President Barack Obama during a speech to Congress last week was an act “based on racism” and rooted in fears of a black president.
“I think it’s based on racism,” Mr. Carter said Tuesday in response to an audience question at a town hall held at his presidential centre in Atlanta. “There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president.”
Carter himself does not hesitate to call George Bush a liar, something he presumably would not have done were Bush black. So who’s the racist?
Jimmy Carter, the former US president, has strongly criticized George Bush and Tony Blair for waging an unnecessary war to oust Saddam Hussein based on “lies or misinterpretations”. The 2002 Nobel peace prize winner said Mr Blair had allowed his better judgment to be swayed by Mr Bush’s desire to finish a war that his father had started.
But will he encourage Muslims to attend church at Easter? Probably not.
Boris Johnson calls for a day of fasting to ‘help understand Muslims’
London Mayor Boris Johnson today encouraged people to undergo a day of fasting to help them gain a better understanding of their ‘Muslim neighbour’.
Speaking during a visit to the East London Mosque and London Muslim Centre he said Muslims in the capital were ‘challenging traditional stereotypes’ to show they wanted to be part of the mainstream.
Mr Johnson’s visit coincided with the holy period of Ramadan in which participating Muslims fast from dawn until sunset.
He said: ‘Whether it’s in theatre, comedy, sports, music or politics, Muslims are challenging the traditional stereotypes and showing that they are, and want to be, a part of the mainstream community.
‘That’s why I urge people, particularly during Ramadan, to find out more about Islam, increase your understanding and learning, even fast for a day with your Muslim neighbour and break your fast at the local mosque.
Observing a religious ceremony for appearance’ sake without actually believing what the ceremony represents would normally be called hypocrisy.
Boris Johnson’s suggestion appears more bizarre in light of some of his earlier remarks about Islam:
..It will take a huge effort of courage and skill to win round the many thousands of British Muslims who are in a similar state of alienation, and to make them see that their faith must be compatible with British values and with loyalty to Britain. That means disposing of the first taboo, and accepting that the problem is Islam. Islam is the problem.
To any non-Muslim reader of the Koran, Islamophobia — fear of Islam — seems a natural reaction, and, indeed, exactly what that text is intended to provoke. Judged purely on its scripture — to say nothing of what is preached in the mosques — it is the most viciously sectarian of all religions in its heartlessness towards unbelievers. […]
The trouble with this disgusting arrogance and condescension [of Theo Van Gogh’s killer] is that it is widely supported in Koranic texts, and we look in vain for the enlightened Islamic teachers and preachers who will begin the process of reform. What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s mediaeval ass?
And I am sure that no-one is surprised to discover that, according to him, it is infested with Israeli occupiers:
Q: Can you describe what it was like to visit Gaza?
A: It was a bit unnerving going through a checkpoint to show your passport and to answer questions as to why you’re there, how long you’re going to be there and where you’re going while you’re there and what time you’re leaving… What’s unnerving about that is that there’s a kind of tenseness in the checkpoint. We’re not accustomed, for instance, to seeing soldiers standing all over the place with machine guns and their hands on the gun at all times…We went in by car and not a lot of vehicles go through Gaza like that. A lot stand in long lines and wait to be processed before they’re given permission to enter and then they walk through the security or checkpoint.
Take a trip to Paris sometime, Fred; there you will see pimply teenagers guarding the Eiffel tower with machine guns:
That is because they want to prevent people from blowing it up; get it, Fred?
The Anglican PWRDF (Primate’s World Relief and Development Fund) never misses an opportunity to whine about any government that is further to the right than Fidel’s Cuba. Thus Canada – and in particular Stephen Harper – are selected for opprobrium for being insufficiently munificent in welcoming refugees – bogus or otherwise.
Laughably, Syria is cited as a model of generosity to which Canada might aspire; the PWRDF neglects to mention that Syria’s human rights record is among the worst in the world; systematic torture, corruption and oppression are rampant – that must be why so many refugees are lining up to get in.
The arguments posed by Minister Jason Kenney are that our asylum system is too easily abused and that there are many “bogus” refugee claims. The Minister’s declarations and actions are misleading. He is trying to convince Canadians that Canada is too generous.
Inaccuracies like, “We accept more refugees per capita than any other country in the world,” as reported in a National Post editorial on August 11, are confusing and encourage an erroneous message from the government. According to Canadian Council for Refugees (CCR) Executive Director Janet Dench, “Jordan has an acceptance ratio of 1:9, Syria 1:11, Lebanon 1:12. Canada? 1:459.” These stats are taken from the World Refugee Survey 2008.
I would like to know how enthusiastic the PWRDF would be to accept Brandon Huntley’s refugee claim in the face of South Africa’s protests. Not very, I suspect.
Here are two very different views of Scotland’s release of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi. The first is from Anglican bishop and theologian N. T. Wright who believes, among other things, that the British see things differently from the U.S. – N. T. Wright certainly does. Even though the U.K. mood is illogical, one gets the impression that Wright approves of it as he tut-tuts about Abu Graib and U.S. anti-Arab sentiment. And all this is from a bishop whose country is home to the BNP.
Many people in the UK see the reaction in the U.S. as being typical U.S. anti-Arab and particularly anti-Libya reaction. Because we are conditioned to be a bit worried about U.S. knee-jerk pro-Israel attitudes we tend to distance ourselves from that kind of position. Please note, I am NOT saying any of this is particularly significant in terms of the actual decision, just that it is the context within which the debate is going on. Many in the UK have been horrified, too, by the ongoing sagas about Abu Graib, Guantanamo Bay and so on, and in consequence do not like being told by America how to treat prisoners. This may be illogical but it’s the mood at the moment. I know that most Americans do not like being told by Brits how to do things either; that comes with the territory ever since George Washington vs King George III. So be it.
A different perspective from Chuck Colson:
Scotland has made a mockery of justice. Ask the families of the 270 people al-Megrahi murdered.
By any measure, serving only eight years in prison for blowing up an airplane full of people is nothing short of scandalous. Surely there are appropriate ways to show mercy — even to a terminally ill mass murderer: Scotland could have given him palliative medical care, could have allowed family visits, or even arranged for family to stay with al-Megrahi during his last days.
In his essay, “The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment,” Christian writer C. S. Lewis argued that we ought to punish people for no other purpose than just deserts, and in so doing, we recognize that humans are free moral agents, responsible for our actions. That’s why Lewis wrote, “To be punished, however severely, because we have deserved it, because we ‘ought to have known better,’ is to be treated as a human person made in God’s image.”
h/t: Hairy Eyeball
One of the leading characters in Tolstoy’s War and Peace – Pierre Besukhov – spends a considerable amount of energy playing with numbers in the Bible to prove that Napoleon was the antichrist. As is often the case in a Tolstoy novel, his fictional character is pretty close to reality: what obsesses some – I hope it’s fringe, I really do – Christians is just that: identifying the antichrist.
Napoleon may have been disagreeable, but he wasn’t the antichrist; neither is Barack Obama, in spite of a popular youtube video declaring that he is. I disagree politically with Obama and I think the adulation he has attracted is foolish, but I don’t thinks he is about to usher in the Great Tribulation – well, other than the trillion dollar debt.
Nevertheless, there are some who take this sort of thing seriously. This article does an effective debunking job:
More than one Christian friend has suggested to me, in all seriousness, that President Obama is the Antichrist. I haven’t taken such suggestions too seriously, but recently a video has shown up on Youtube that seems to claim that Jesus identified Obama as the Antichrist. Some Christians have been startled by this (and the video is wildly popular) and believe that the evidence is compelling. The video is found here.
Not for this, surely:
An Afghan bill permitting a husband to starve his wife if she refuses to have sex has become law.
The original bill caused international outrage earlier this year, forcing Afghan President Hamid Karzai to withdraw it.
But critics say the amended version of the law, brought into effect on July 27, remains highly repressive.
They accuse Mr Karzai of selling out Afghan women for the sake of conservative Shia support ahead of this week’s presidential election.
Jimmy Carter, Desmond Tutu and Kofi Annan, among others, are Elders apparently and are out to save the world. Having solved the problem of discrimination against women – without mentioning Islam – they are about to focus their gaze on the Middle East; no doubt all strife and dissent with wither before the blinding light of their collective intelligence. In other words, look out Israel, you are in for another bashing.
“The Elders” are coming to the Middle East, ostensibly bringing wise diplomatic counsel, but actually are likely to deliver yet another ultimatum to Israel.
A brainchild of British billionaire and gadfly Richard Branson, “The Elders” are ostensibly a wise junta of “eminent global leaders” bringing “their collective influence and experience to support peace building, help address major causes of human suffering and promote the shared interests of humanity.”
Naturally, Jimmy Carter is an Elder. So too is retired South African Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, former Irish President Mary Robinson, former Brazilian President Fernando Cardoso, former Marxist Mozambican first lady (and later wife to Nelson Mandela) Graca Machel, and former Norwegian Premier Gro Bruntland, along with several other Third World luminaries and global justice advocates, all of whom are left of center.
These Elders generally advocate a flavorless globaloney approach to the world, usually guided by all the usual bromides echoing among the bureaucracies of the United Nations, the European Union, most NGO’s, Ivy League universities, and left-leaning philanthropies like Ford, Rockefeller, and Ted Turner’s United Nations Foundation. The Elders seem to draw their oxygen, stale though it is, from a self-enclosed phalanx of these mutually re-enforcing chattering societies.