Tag Archives: opinion

N!GGER! is it a good word? by the "Burn a Koran Day" Church (dove world outreach)

Dr. Laura is not alone in her fight for the right to say n!gger. After dropping the N-bomb 20 something times a Pastor at the Dove World Outreach Church rants about the racist double standard that prevents white people from using the word as freely as a black man on HBO'S Def Comedy Jam. The Pastor claims no matter how anyone spins it – it is a form of reverse racism to get mad when Whites say n!gger. But then he drops this gem of wisdom – “The standard that the Bible clearly tells us, Black is Black – White is White. What relationship can the Darkness have with Light? we cannot keep coming back and forth, right is right – wrong is wrong. Hold the Stadard” This Pastor's pants must be on the ground . . Cause his head is up his ass. But that's just my opinion, what do you think of this Churches use of the N-word, and does anyone else see a not so subtle message in this Bible quote added by: Stoneyroad

Bombing in Cancun, Mexico

Several gasoline bombs were thrown into a bar in Cancun Mexico, killing eight people. added by: jimhager

Have Linkin Park Changed Too Much On ‘The Catalyst’? Fans Sound Off

Band’s supporters are split over whether new single and video are too much of a departure or a natural evolution. By James Montgomery Linkin Park on the set of “The Catalyst” music video Photo: Warner Bros. With its ominous tone and murky visuals, Linkin Park’s new video for “The Catalyst” is a far cry from the band’s previous, hyperkinetic clips. And, as bassist Dave “Phoenix” Farrell told MTV News earlier this month, that was sort of the point. “The Catalyst” was meant to shake things up and give fans fair warning that LP’s upcoming A Thousand Suns album is going to be a rather dramatic departure from anything they’ve done in the past. Of course, to most, that’s not exactly breaking news. After all, Linkin Park have basically spent the better part of a year touting the “grandiose insanity” of Suns, the album on which they “challenged” themselves to move beyond their n

Glenn Beck Slams ABC’s Story: ‘Something Goebbels Would do’

Good Morning America’s Claire Shipman on Friday launched a pre-emptive one-sided attack on Glenn Beck’s August 28 rally in Washington D.C., including selectively editing clips from the conservative host. The ABC journalist featured a snippet of Beck asserting, “Blacks don’t own Martin Luther King.” [MP3 audio here .] On his radio show, Friday, Beck complained about the “hatchet job.” Shipman clearly distorted the context. He actually said, “Whites don’t own Abraham Lincoln. Blacks don’t own Martin Luther King. Those are American icons, American ideas and we should just talk about character.” (H/T to The Right Scoop and Noel Sheppard.) Playing the segment on the radio, Beck hyperbolically declared, “That’s what Goebbels did. The truth didn’t matter.” Now, while ABC should be criticized for the dishonest editing job, it is over-the-top to play the Nazi card. Shipman featured clips of Al Sharpton, liberal comedian Stephen Colbert and former Democratic Congressman Walter Fauntroy. She asserted that there are angry voices ” comparing the Tea Party to the KKK.” Fauntroy then scolded, “The Klu Klux- I meant to say the Tea Party. You all forgive me. But, you have to use them interchangeably.” Shipman even went to Al Sharpton for a quote. He worried, “…I’m trying to be disciplined and not make this about those that have, in my opinion, hijacked a location, but will never be able to hijack the dream.” Faux conservative Stephen Colbert mocked, “Finally, someone is bringing Martin Luther King’s movement back to its conservative white roots.” Other than Beck himself, ABC had no clips of anyone defending Beck or the conservative rally. A transcript of the segment, which aired at 7:17am EDT on August 27 follows: DAVID MUIR: In the meantime, conservative talk show host Glenn Beck stirring up controversy with a rally now planned for tomorrow at the Lincoln memorial in Washington. Some people are angry the rally is taking place on the anniversary of another famous event there, Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech. And Claire Shipman is at the Lincoln Memorial with much more on this this morning . Claire, good to see you. CLAIRE SHIPMAN: David, there’s a lot of emotion swirling over this issue. Remember, it wasn’t so long ago, that Glenn Beck called President Obama a racist. So, his choice of timing to hold his rally here tomorrow, a surprise, to say the least. MARTIN LUTHER KING: I have a dream. SHIPMAN: Immortal words of unity. But the 47th anniversary of Dr. King’s speech is producing just the opposite. GLENN BECK: Blacks don’t own Martin Luther King. LORETTA ROSS (Sistersong): Glenn Beck is no Martin Luther King. SHIPMAN: Even angry words comparing the Tea Party to the KKK. REVEREND WALTER FAUNTROY (civil rights activist): The Klu Klux- I meant to say the Tea Party. You all forgive me. But, you have to use them interchangeably. SHIPMAN: All this because of an unlikely rally planned by conservative TV and radio host, Glenn beck, for the day of the anniversary on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. BECK: We are doing something absolutely amazing. SHIPMAN: Beck says his rally, which will feature Sarah Palin and many Tea Party supporters, is meant to honor America’s troops. And he insists he picked the day, not realizing it was the anniversary of the “I have a dream” speech. But, not everyone is buying that. STEPHEN COLBERT: Finally, someone is bringing Martin Luther King’s movement back to its conservative white roots. SHIPMAN: Some, like the Reverend Al Sharpton, who is organizing his own march on Washington on Saturday, have more serious concerns. AL SHARPTON: It’s very hard and I’m trying to be disciplined and not make this about those that have, in my opinion, hijacked a location, but will never be able to hijack the dream. SHIPMAN: Beck insists he plans to honor King. BECK: I heard it over and over again in the media that because of this event, on the date of this event, I’m somehow or other Martin Luther King’s speech. I’m not big enough to do that. No one is. SHIPMAN: And Martin Luther King has weighed in on this, saying his father would never limit voices. But that he urges that everybody use the right sort of rhetoric, David. MUIR: A lot of controversy. We’ll be watching it this weekend.

Read more:
Glenn Beck Slams ABC’s Story: ‘Something Goebbels Would do’

Halliburton Employee Warned BP That Oil Well Plan Was Risky | Testifies at Today’s Oil Spill Hearings

Halliburton employee warned BP that oil well plan was risky, he testifies at oil spill hearings Published: Tuesday, August 24, 2010, 4:19 PM Updated: Tuesday, August 24, 2010, 5:49 PM David Hammer, The Times-Picayune PART ONE… This is an update from the joint hearings by the Coast Guard and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement investigating the causes of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion on April 20. A Halliburton employee who worked on cementing BP's wild Gulf oil well testified Tuesday that he verbally warned BP officials that their well plan increased the risk of gas leaks and questioned them about their plans by e-mail, but wasn't able to get them to change the process before the well kicked gas and started the largest oil spill in U.S. history. On April 15, five days before the explosions, Jesse Gagliano ran a computer model for BP's engineers, principally Brian Morel, that assumed BP would use 21 devices called centralizers to prevent the cement Halliburton was providing from channeling in the hole, thus weakening its effectiveness in sealing the well. Using modeling for 21 centralizers, Gagliano's report showed a low risk of gas flow. But that same day, Morel sent an e-mail message to Gagliano saying BP was going to use only six centralizers, adding that it was “too late” to send any more of the safety devices. Morel was scheduled to testify in Houston before Gagliano, but Morel's lawyer came instead and said Morel was pleading the Fifth. Three days after the e-mail exchange with Morel, or two days before the accident, Gagliano sent BP officials a new report that included modeling for seven centralizers, Gagliano testified. That report showed a severe risk of gas flowing in the well. Gagliano said he noted the risk on page 18 of the report. In addition, while working in the same office with the BP decision-makers, he said he personally addressed the issue with top BP engineers. “I notified BP of the potential issue we were facing,” Gagliano said before a federal investigative panel. “I printed it out and got up to go show them. I ran into (BP engineering team members) Brett Cocales and Mark Hafle and I said, 'Hey, I think we have a problem here.'” But when asked why he didn't exercise his power to stop the drilling project, which is supposedly given to everyone working on the job, Gagliano said he didn't because “channeling doesn't equal a blowout. It just means increased risk.” Channeling refers to when cement flows unevenly around metal tubes that line the well. When that happens, one side of the cylindrical liners is thicker than the other, leaving a weakness on the thinner side. Later, Gagliano said he sent an e-mail message asking Cocales, Hafle, Morel and another BP official, Greg Walz, if they were going to use the additional centralizers. Gagliano said he never got a response. The issue of centralizers is just one of several in which BP apparently chose less safe designs or processes in the final days before the blowout. The company also decided to use a single, long string of pipe to line the center of the hole, rather than a shorter final liner that could tie back to ones above it and place an additional barrier against gas flowing to the surface. There are BP e-mails in which company officials note that the long string would save time and money. BP also eschewed a cement bond log, a test known as the gold standard for measuring the integrity of a cement job. BP decided to send home a stand-by crew from oil-field services company Schlumberger without having them run the test, another decision that saved time and money. Gagliano testified that in his opinion, BP should have run the cement bond log, but he wasn't asked to weigh in on that. The cement bond log is the best test to detect channeling. If channeling is discovered, there are remedial cement jobs that can be done to sturdy the barriers against any oil or gas that's trying to enter the hole from the side or below. BP also went without a bottoms-up test, in which drilling fluid is circulated through the well to check if gas has entered at the bottom. Gagliano testified that it was Halliburton's best practice to perform a bottoms-up test on each well, but that the contractor played no role in BP's decision not to do it. Except he said Halliburton officially recommended using a bottoms-up test. BP lawyer Richard Godfrey cross-examined Gagliano, noting that Gagliano prepared a design report on April 18 that assumed the use of seven centralizers and that document never explicitly says BP shouldn't use the design. Gagliano responded that he clearly indicated a high risk of gas flow and channeling of the cement in that report. That same day, Gagliano signed a 12-page report that never mentioned the centralizers. In that document, called a job recommendation report, Gagliano asserted that the cementing plan was Halliburton's recommendation. He backpedaled from that under questioning, saying the statement he signed was automatically generated. Again, Godfrey sought to use the document to show that Gagliano and Halliburton weren't really that concerned with BP's well design and were just emphasizing a few pre-accident references after the fact. Godfrey noted that Halliburton markets its ability to control severe gas flow and channeling problems. He also pointed out that Halliburton had poured cement for 21 wells in the Gulf of Mexico that it scored as a severe risk for gas flow, and only two of those were for BP. Gagliano responded that a ratio used to score the risk more precisely was particularly high in this case. After all was said and done, though, Nathaniel Chaisson, a Halliburton engineer on the rig, sent an e-mail to Gagliano stating, “We have completed the job and it went well.” That was 17 hours before the rig blew. Three days later, Gagliano sent a post-job report that said the cement job was good and also never mentions having given any warnings about centralizers, cement channeling or any other deficiency. CONTINUED… added by: EthicalVegan

Telugu Actresses Saira Banu and Jyoti Arrested for Prostitution

Telugu film actresses Saira Banu (also known as Saira Bano), and Jyoti (also known as Jyothi and Jyothy), were arrested for prostitution in Kudan Bagh on Monday. http://www.bittenandbound.com/2010/08/23/telugu-actresses-saira-banu-and-jyoti-a… added by: sumrgurl

China’s Nine-Day Traffic Jam Tops 62 Miles

A traffic jam on the Beijing-Tibet expressway has now entered its ninth day and has grown to over 62 miles in length. This mother-of-all delays has even spawned its own micro-economy of local merchants selling water and food at inflated prices to stranded drivers. Can you imagine how infuriating it must be to see someone leave their blinker on for 9 days? Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j7mCeh43Lk-RIXgcK3jGiDODQt0A added by: Tyrannous

With Friends Like These, Who Needs Glenn Beck? Racism and White Privilege on the Liberal-Left

His words rang out with an unmistakable certitude. “This is the most racist place I’ve ever lived,” said the man sitting across from me, a black writer and poet whose acquaintance I had only made earlier that day. His expression made it clear that this was no mere hyperbole spat out so as to get a reaction. He meant every word and proceeded in about twenty minutes to lay out the case for why indeed this place where we were talking — San Francisco — was far more racist, in his estimation than any of several places he had lived in the South. Worse than Birmingham. Worse than Jackson, Mississippi. Worse than Dallas. San Francisco. Yes, that San Francisco. From police harassment to profiling to housing discrimination to a persistent invisibility he’d felt since first arriving, there was no doubt that the ostensibly liberal enclave was head and shoulders above the rest. And it wasn’t his opinion alone. I have heard similar feelings expressed about the Bay Area by peoples of color many times since, as well as about Seattle, Portland, and any number of other supposedly progressive paradises where various “alternative” types (of white folks at least) seem to feel at home. Even those who wouldn’t rank a place like San Francisco as the most racist city in which they’d lived, are often quick to insist that its racism is comparable to what they’ve experienced elsewhere, which is to say, no less a problem. When I’ve recounted these discussions with folks of color living in “progressive” cities to my white liberal friends, they have usually recoiled in shock, followed by a kind of white leftie defensiveness that was, sadly, unsurprising. Their responses to the news that black and brown folks don’t find the history of the Haight-Ashbury district, or the Summer of Love all that inspiring — after all, when Jefferson Airplane and the Grateful Dead were entertaining white hippies in the Fillmore, black folks were fighting for their lives across the way in Oakland — often suggest a desire on their part to believe that the people to whom I’d spoken were seeing things. Unfortunately the pattern is all too common. If people of color complain about racism and discrimination in rural Georgia, no one is surprised. In fact, to many the image is comforting as it fulfills every stereotype, regional and political, that so many folks continue to carry around regarding who the bad guys are. But suggest that racism and discrimination are also significant problems in more “progressive spaces,” even among self-proclaimed liberals and leftists themselves — and that it might be unearthed in our political movements — and prepare to be met with icy stares, or worse, a self-righteous vitriol that seeks to separate “real racism” (the right-wing kind) from not-so-real racism (the kind we on the left sometimes foster). And know that before long, someone will admonish you to focus on the “real enemy,” rather than fighting amongst ourselves. “What we need is unity,” these voices say, “and all that talk about racism on the left just divides us further.” But such arguments, in addition to being terribly convenient for the white folks who typically spout them — since it relieves us of having to examine our own practices and rhetoric — are also horribly shortsighted. Only by addressing our own racism (however inadvertent it may be at times) can we grow movements for social justice. By giving short shrift to the subject, internally or in the larger society, we virtually guarantee the defeat of whatever movements for social transformation we claim to support. It’s worth recalling that at the height of the civil rights movement it was not merely conservatives and reactionaries who were the targets of the freedom struggle. Indeed, some of the harshest criticism was reserved for moderates and even liberals, whether the white clergy whom Dr. King was chastising in his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” or Presidents Kennedy and Johnson. In the case of the latter two, neither their relative liberalism (when compared to their political opponents) or party affiliation insulated them from the legitimate ire of peoples of color and their white antiracist allies. Going back further we should recall that it was perhaps the nation’s most progressive president, Franklin Roosevelt, who not only OKd the internment of Japanese Americans, but who was also willing to cut out virtually all African Americans from the key programs of the New Deal so as to placate southern segregationists in his own party (1). Capitulating to racism, and even practicing it, has a sad pedigree on the left of the spectrum as with the right. And it is time we faced this fact honestly. Distinguishing Racism on the Left from Racism on the Right That said, and before detailing what liberal and progressive racism often looks like, let me be clear: racism on the left is not exactly the same as its counterpart on the right. Whereas conservative theory lends itself almost intrinsically to racist conclusions, for reasons I explained in the first essay, liberal theory is generally egalitarian and intuitively antiracist. Liberal and left-leaning folks typically endorse notions of equality in both the political and economic realms. Likewise, most all on the left outwardly reject the attribution of biological or cultural superiority to racial groups. And those on the left are quick to acknowledge and decry the systemic injustices that have been central to the creation of racial disparities in the United States. So too, virtually all the activists in the civil rights struggle, contrary to the revisionism of folks like Glenn Beck, were decidedly to the left. Liberals and left-radicals populated the movement and provided its energy, while leading conservatives like William F. Buckley and his colleagues at The National Review published paeans to white supremacy in which they advised that integration should wait until blacks had progressed enough, in civilizational terms, to be mingled with their betters. Dr. King — even as conservatives like Beck have tried to co-opt his message and his legacy — put forth a consistently progressive and even leftist politics, in terms of his views on race, as well as economics and militarism. But despite the overwhelming role of liberals and leftists in the struggle for racial equity, and despite the antiracist narrative that dovetails with left philosophy, liberal and left individuals and groups in practice have manifested racism in a number of ways. Racism 2.0: White Liberals and the Problem of “Enlightened Exceptionalism” For years, the insistence by whites that “some of (their) best friends” were black was perhaps the most obvious if unintentional way for these whites to expose their broader racial views as anything but enlightened. Whenever we as white folks have felt the need to mention our close personal relationships with African Americans, it has usually been after having just inserted our feet into our mouths by saying something racially intemperate or even racist in the presence of someone of color. Nowadays, the assurance that “some of my best friends are black” as a way to demonstrate one’s open-minded bona fides has been supplanted by a more tangible and ostensibly political statement: namely, that “I voted for Barack Obama.” Thus, imply the persons stating it (often quite liberal in terms of their overall political sensibilities), don’t accuse me of racism. … full article at link added by: animalia_libero

Time’s Klein: ‘Nativist Electoral Politics’ Behind Opposition to Ground Zero Mosque

In a Swampland blog post this morning entitled, “Something I Didn’t Know,” Time magazine’s Joe Klein pointed to a New York Times article that noted the existence of two mosques “already within several blocks of the proposed [Islamic] center.” But while other folks might draw the conclusion that building an additional mosque just blocks from Ground Zero is a needless exercise in dividing New Yorkers over a highly sensitive matter, Klein ran in the exact opposite direction, suggesting that logical consistency would compel mosque opponent Newt Gingrich to want to “close those suckers down”? “[T]his is further evidence of the true nature of this squabble: a particularly sleazy form of Nativist electoral politics,” Klein insisted. [click here for a related post by Brent Baker] But the issue has never been any and every mosque on the island of Manhattan, just the Cordoba House/Park 51 project and the imam spearheading the effort to build it, Faisal Abdul Rauf. Klein surely knows this yet simply refuses to acknowledge it because of his desire to play political hack rather than mere opinion journalist. After all, it’s hard to fault folks for opposing Rauf’s project when the imam reportedly said just weeks after 9/11 that the United States was an “accessory” to the attacks . More recently, the imam couldn’t bring himself to agree with the U.S. State Department that Hamas — a group committed to the destruction of U.S. ally Israel — is a terrorist organization. From the June 19 New York Post: Asked if he agreed with the State Department’s assessment, Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf told WABC radio, “Look, I’m not a politician. “The issue of terrorism is a very complex question,” he told interviewer Aaron Klein. “There was an attempt in the ’90s to have the UN define what terrorism is and say who was a terrorist. There was no ability to get agreement on that.” Asked again for his opinion on Hamas, an exasperated Rauf wouldn’t budge. “I am a peace builder. I will not allow anybody to put me in a position where I am seen by any party in the world as an adversary or as an enemy,” Rauf said, insisting that he wants to see peace in Israel between Jews and Arabs.

See the rest here:
Time’s Klein: ‘Nativist Electoral Politics’ Behind Opposition to Ground Zero Mosque

Tila Tequila Viciously Attacked at Juggalos (PHOTOS, VIDEO)

Photos of soon-to-be porn star Tila Tequila’s beaten and bloodied face hit the Internet yesterday. Her injuries were the result of a vicious attack at the Gathering of the Juggalos concert event in Illinois. A lawsuit by the reality star is reportedly already in the works. http://www.bittenandbound.com/2010/08/15/tila-tequila-viciously-attacked-at-jugg… added by: missmissea