Tag Archives: speech

Even in the Year 1076 Muslims Couldn’t Get Along with Their Neighbors

The First Crusade played a very important part in Medieval England. The First Crusade was an attempt to re-capture Jerusalem. After the capture of Jerusalem by the Muslims in 1076, any Christian who wanted to pay a pilgrimage to the city faced a very hard time. Muslim soldiers made life very difficult for the Christians and trying to get to Jerusalem was filled with danger for a Christian. This greatly angered all Christians. One Christian – called Alexius I of Constantinople – feared that his country might also fall to the Muslims as it was very close to the territory captured by the Muslims. Constantinople is in modern day Turkey. Alexius called on the pope – Urban II – to give him help. In 1095, Urban spoke to a great crown at Clermont in France. He called for a war against the Muslims so that Jerusalem was regained for the Christian faith. In his speech he said: “Christians, hasten to help your brothers in the East, for they are being attacked. Arm for the rescue of Jerusalem under your captain Christ. Wear his cross as your badge. If you are killed your sins will be pardoned.” Those who volunteered to go to fight the Muslims cut out red crosses and sewed them on their tunics. The French word “croix” means cross and the word changed to “croisades” or crusades. The fight against the Muslims became a Holy War. Many people did volunteer to fight on the First Crusade. There were true Christians who wanted to reclaim Jerusalem for their belief and get the Muslims out of the city. There were those who knew they had committed sin and that by going on the Crusade they might be forgiven by God. They had also been told by the pope that if they were killed, they would automatically go to heaven as they were fighting for God. There were those who thought that they might get rich by taking the wealth that they thought existed in Jerusalem. Any crusader could claim to be going on a pilgrimage for God – pilgrims did not have to pay tax and they were protected by the Church. http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/cru2.htm added by: congoboy

Five of Six Networks Press Unyielding Gibbs on Crediting Bush; White House Press Secretary Unleashes on Fox & Friends

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs made the rounds of the six broadcast and cable morning news shows on Tuesday morning to help set the table for the President’s speech marking the end of major combat operations in Iraq. Of the six network anchors Gibbs spoke with, only CBS’s Harry Smith failed to ask whether President Obama would extend credit to President Bush for the successful surge strategy (a strategy then-Senator Obama denigrated as futile). ABC’s George Stephanopoulos recited House GOP Leader John Boehner’s dig at politicians who “fought tooth-and-nail to stop the surge strategy,” and then rejected Gibbs claim that Boehner’s was “made up history.” NBC’s Matt Lauer recited Obama’s own words to Gibbs: “I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq are gonna solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse.” At each stop, Gibbs insisted that no one doubted the surge would improve security, but insisted that the real accomplishment was “an improved political situation.” CNN’s John Roberts followed up, asking whether security improvements credited to the surge were essential to those political improvements, but Gibbs dodged: “John, you asked me the same question I’m likely to give you the same answer.” When Gibbs reached Fox & Friends, co-host Gretchen Carlson was met with condescension and mockery when she asked the same question as the other hosts. “I think you’ve asked me this question twice and I’ve given you an answer,” Gibbs chided, dodging the question. Later: “That’s actually now the fourth time you’ve asked me that question….That’s number five….Gretchen, I don’t know whether this is you actually interviewing me or just a tape of you looping the same question over and over again.” Gibbs never directly stated whether or not the Bush administration deserves any credit for the (so far) positive outcome in Iraq. Only CBS’s Harry Smith — who last year voiced “regret” that he did not abuse his position as a newscaster to “stand up” and say of the Iraq war “this doesn’t make any sense” — refused to ask Gibbs about the surge. Instead, he suggested the seven year military commitment wasn’t worth it: HARRY SMITH: The President goes to Texas today to talk to veterans and soldiers. There are folks who have gone there on deployment after deployment after deployment, and some of them wonder this morning if their sacrifice has been worth it. Gibbs stubborn refusal to share any credit with the Bush administration — even going so far as to belittle a Fox News journalist — is baffling, since President Obama himself declared the surge to be a success in 2008. “I think that the surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated,” Obama told Fox News host Bill O’Reilly. “It’s succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.” ( Video ) Here’s how Gibbs handled the five networks that posed questions about President Bush and the surge (thanks to MRC’s Geoff Dickens and Matthew Balan for help transcribing). They’re organized in roughly the order they took place, starting with the broadcast networks and then the three cable networks: # ABC’s Good Morning America: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: For more on that speech, let’s turn now to Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary. He joins us from the White House this morning. You know, Robert, already, the House Republican leader [John Boehner] has issued, I guess, a ‘pre-buttal’ of the President’s remarks in the speech he’s going to give today. He says this: ‘Some leaders who opposed, criticized, and fought tooth-and-nail to stop the surge strategy, now proudly claim credit for the results. Today, we mark not the defeat those voices anticipated, but progress.’ So he’s basically saying the milestone the President is marking today happened in spite of President Obama, not because of him. Your response? ROBERT GIBBS: Well, look, there’s a lot of made-up history in that statement. I think what Congressman Boehner — I think what the American people would like to know, with Congressman Boehner is, do you support withdrawing the 90,000-plus troops that this commander-in-chief is marking the milestone of today? There’s no doubt that were it not for a timeline for getting our combat troops out of Iraq, we’d still be there. First and foremost- STEPHANOPOULOS, interrupting: You say ‘made-up history,’ Robert, but- wait a second. You say ‘made-up history,’ but the President did oppose the surge. GIBBS The President did oppose the surge, George, but understand this: while the surge did provide some increased security in Iraq, what happened was a political transformation that took a long time after those added troops were put into Iraq. There was a Sunni awakening, where Sunni tribesmen decided they did not want to fight with, but against al Qaeda. STEPHANOPOULOS: But does credit also go to the surge? Does the President now believe that President Bush made the right decision to order that surge in troops in Iraq? GIBBS: Again, George, I think the President has always stated and always believed that our security would be- that adding 30,000 troops into Iraq would improve the security. But obviously, the leaders in Iraq had to make some political accommodation to move that country forward…. # NBC’s Today LAUER: You also mentioned at the White House the President would call President Bush in advance of his speech. Has the call taken place? GIBBS: I believe the call will take place a little bit later this morning, likely when the President is on Air Force One flying to thank our troops at Ft. Bliss right outside of El Paso, Texas. I think probably both commanders in chief share, share certainly one thing in common and that is thanking the men and women in uniform for the tremendous sacrifice that they made over the past seven-and-a-half years- LAUER: Right. GIBBS: -the thousands that aren’t coming back from Iraq, the tens of thousands that have been wounded but those that keep us safe and secure each and every day. LAUER: Let me read you something. In January of 2007 when President Bush announced the surge in Iraq, then Senator Barack Obama had this to say, quote, “I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq are gonna solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse.” So when President Obama speaks to former President Bush today, will he change his mind on that? Will he give President Bush credit for making that decision on the surge and admit that it contributed to the situation of more stability on the ground today? GIBBS: Matt, what is, what is certainly not up for question is that, that President Obama, then candidate Obama, said that adding those 20,000 troops into Iraq would, indeed, improve the security situation, and it did. What was necessary for this moment to happen was a diplomatic surge, a change in the Sunnis, the Sunni awakening, rather than fighting with al Qaeda they fought against al Qaeda. I think a number of things, most importantly our men and women in uniform, brought us to this point. LAUER: Right. GIBBS: I think there’s no doubt that the surge improved the security situation. But as this president said many times, the war in Iraq was not going to be fought or won primarily or just militarily. That we had to see some political accommodation and we had to see sectarian violence reduced because Sunni, Shia and Kurd decided to live together and chart Iraq’s future together, not fighting each other. LAUER: Alright Robert Gibbs at the White House. Robert, thank you so much. I appreciate it. # MSNBC’s Morning Joe MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Obviously the war was controversial, in the first few years, especially. The surge was controversial, for sure, and it generated and garnered a lot of criticism. Will the President be crediting the former president for his work there? ROBERT GIBBS: Well, look, I think the President will talk about the steps that our men and women in uniform took to make this day possible. There’s no doubt about it. I think, Mika, then-candidate Barack Obama said that adding 20,000 men and women into Baghdad and into Iraq was likely to improve the security situation…. # CNN’s American Morning JOHN ROBERTS: I know that the president is going to call former President Bush this morning. Will he tonight during his speech give credit to the president’s surge strategy for helping to better the security situation there so that the political process could proceed? GIBBS: Well, John, I don’t think there is any doubt. And you heard candidate Barack Obama say that adding 20,000 of our brave men and women who, quite frankly, John, I think we all share the belief that they are owed a tremendous amount of gratitude. The president is in awe of their sacrifice. We knew that adding those men and women in there would improve the security situation, but the reason we are where we are today is because of an improved political situation, we know that the Sunni awakening, Sunni tribes in the western part of Iraq began not to fight with but to fight against al Qaeda. And all of those circumstances led to a point in which we’re at today. I will say this, John — I think many people believe that when the President made a commitment to end our combat mission in Iraq by August 31, 2010, I am not sure many people believed that he could pull it off. He’s kept his word. He will talk about the fact that we’ve made a determination that in July 2011, we’ll begin to transition our mission in Afghanistan as well. ROBERTS: Just back on the surge strategy. There’s no question that the surge strategy did improve security. I think most military and political analysts would agree. But you said that it would improve security but it was the political aspect of it that took place that allowed Iraq to come to where it is today. But most military and political analysts would tell you that the improvement in security, because of the surge, set the conditions for the political aspect of it. I’m wondering, again, will the president credit President Bush’s surge strategy for setting the conditions to allow withdrawal? GIBBS: John, you asked me the same question I’m likely to give you the same answer. Again, I don’t think anybody doubted that the 20,000 people were going to improve the security situation in Iraq. It was the political accommodation that had to happen. It was Sunni, Shia and Kurd that had to decide not to fight one another in sectarian violence but to live and work together and chart Iraqis’ future together…. # Now, the most contentious, the Fox & Friends appearance. I’ve loaded the entire transcript, so you can see that Gibbs was inaccurate when he accused Carlson of asking the same question two or three times in a row, which set off his string of sarcastic remarks. GRETCHEN CARLSON: Welcome back, everyone. Well, tonight is the big night. President Obama expected to announce the formal end of U.S. combat operations in Iraq. How will this change our mission there, and is Iraq stable enough to stand alone on its own. Joining me now, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs. Good morning to you, Mr. Gibbs. ROBERT GIBBS: Good morning, how are you? CARLSON: I’m doing just fine. So the big question today is, why now? Why not wait until Iraq is a bit more stable. Why tonight? GIBBS: Well, look, I think Iraq is very stable right now. We have — despite the fact that there is still violence in Iraq, and there certainly will continue to be — as General Ray Odierno told the President in the Situation Room a few weeks ago, it’s among the lowest in measurable violence that we’ve seen in the seven and a half years that American troops have been in Iraq. There’s no doubt that we’re still in the midst of government formation, but the Iraqi security forces provided the security for that election. And I think what’s important today is that as we transition out of our combat role to assisting the Iraqis, the future and the history of Iraq will be written by and be responsible — the Iraqis will be responsible for writing that. CARLSON: Will President Obama recognize the success of the surge put in place by President Bush tonight? GIBBS: Well, look — there’s any doubt that first and foremost that the men and women in our uniform and the sacrifices that I think we are all in awe of and the President will laud today both at Fort Bliss when he stops there as well as in his speech. I don’t think there’s any doubt as candidate Obama said that adding 20,000 men and women into Iraq would improve the security situation. I think along with — CARLSON: Candidate Obama said that? No, wait, excuse me, back in 2007 he said he was against the surge. GIBBS: No, he said he was against the surge. He said there was no doubt that adding 20,000 men and women would improve the security situation. But as we know, our efforts in Iraq weren’t going to be done simple militarily, Gretchen. There had to be a political accommodation. We had sectarian violence between Sunni, Shia and Kurd and, quite frankly, the Sunni and the Shia and the Kurd had to decide they were going to live and work together for an iraq that met their future needs and not fight each other. I think that’s why we’re at this moment and that’s what the President is going — CARLSON: So that will be the way in which the President will address his flip-flop on the issue tonight? GIBBS: Gretchen, I’m happy to spend a lot of time looking back at decisions four years ago or even seven and a half years ago. I think what’s important, while you guys play political games, is the President to laud our men and women and to mark the end of our combat mission. CARLSON: No political games here. I think a lot of people in the American public are wanting to know what the President will say and how he’ll rectify what he said back in 2007. Let me ask you this- GIBBS: Let’s just be very clear- CARLSON: Word on the street is the President is going to call President Bush today. What will he say when he calls President Bush? GIBBS: Well, I think the President will talk about the situation in Iraq. Thank the President for his service, for his love of country. And I think they’ll have a nice private, quiet conversation about what’s going on in the world. CARLSON: Will the President, will President Obama credit President Bush tonight in his speech for the success in Iraq? GIBBS: Again, Gretchen, I think you’ve asked me this question twice and I’ve given you an answer. CARLSON: No, this is the first time I’ve asked you the question. GIBBS: Okay, maybe I’m having a hard time counting to three CARLSON: Will President Obama thank President Bush tonight during his speech for the success of the surge? GIBBS: No, that’s actually now the fourth time you’ve asked me that question. CARLSON: Well, you haven’t answered it. Will he credit President Bush tonight for the success of the surge? GIBBS: That’s number five. Let me give you the same answer I gave you the first time. CARLSON: In baseball you get three strikes and you’re out. You’ve had five chances to answer the question. Will he credit President Bush tonight? GIBBS: Gretchen, I don’t know whether this is you actually interviewing me or just a tape of you looping the same question over and over again. There is no doubt and the President will mention that adding men and women into Iraq improved the security situation. There’s no doubt about that. But I think we would all recognize, Gretchen, if you’ll take a moment to understand that we wouldn’t be where we are in Iraq without the political accommodation. We wouldn’t be where we are in Iraq today without the Sunni tribes deciding instead of fighting with al Qaeda, they were going to fight against al Qaeda. There were a whole series of factors that went into marking where we are today. I have one question for you, Gretchen, do you support the fact that the President is pulling out more than 90,000 troops today and ending our combat mission there? CARLSON: Well, this is not an interview of Gretchen Carlson. This is an interview with the spokesman of President Obama on one of the most important issues facing the American public today. GIBBS: That’s my one question for you, and I can even ask it five more times. CARLSON: Well, that would be very cute, I guess. Let’s go back to why tonight, because you have Michael O’Hanlon, who’s from the Brookings Institute, saying this is not the right time for a victory lap. If I were him — speaking to the President — I would wait until they have a government and do it with Iraqis together. How would you respond to Mr. O’Hanlon on that? GIBBS: Well, look, Gretchen, I’ve said this before. This is not a victory lap. You’re not going to see any ‘Mission Accomplished’ banners that will be unfurled and you won’t hear the President say the words ‘mission accomplished.’ We understand that violence will still continue. We understand we still have troops there. But it’s important to transition our role out of Iraq and put the Iraqis in control and make sure that the Iraqis are responsible for the decisions that have to govern that country. That’s also a reason why we’re marking this transition today is we put pressure on the Iraqis to come up with decisions and accommodations that they could live with themselves rather than fighting each other because we told them we weren’t going to be there forever and that at a certain point, we were going to transition out. It’s their responsibility. The Vice President is over there now. I don’t think there’s any doubt that we will very soon have a government in place, the last election it took six months to form a government. This election was certified in June, and I think we’re making progress toward that end. CARLSON: And undoubtedly, your boss, the President, will thank the troops tonight during his speech as well. GIBBS: You know, the president will start today, Gretchen, at Fort Bliss which saw some of the heaviest combat fighting at the very beginning of this war and they had troops that were — that have served there continuously. Some have served two, three and four times. You know, Gretchen, whether you agree that we should have gone or not, whether you agree on the certain tactics, I think we can all agree that the men and women of our uniform — the men and women in uniform and those that provide our safety and security and sacrifice and the families that they have that sacrifice so much are a group of people that we are forever indebted to. CARLSON: All right. Very well said. Robert Gibbs, spokesperson to the President. We will all watch tonight, 8pm Eastern time. Thanks for your time this morning. GIBBS: Thank you.

Read the rest here:
Five of Six Networks Press Unyielding Gibbs on Crediting Bush; White House Press Secretary Unleashes on Fox & Friends

Awesome! Green Cars You will Love to Own!

Who wouldn't love to have a car that runs on electricity and renewable fuels rather than petrol? There have been increasing number of green cars … http://bit.ly/9KFjVm added by: itgrunts

NBC’s Today Show Invites on Two Liberals To Analyze Glenn Beck Rally

NBC’s Matt Lauer, on Monday’s Today show, invited on the not-so balanced panel of the Reverend Al Sharpton and the NAACP’s Ben Jealous to analyze Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally that took place on the 47th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream speech” with Jealous proclaiming that “if Dr. King stood up there” the conservatives in attendance would not have “responded well” to him. Jealous went on to say Dr. King’s “last campaign” was the “poor people’s campaign. To make sure that all people…can find a good job, all kids can go to a great school. And Mr. Beck, that’s not what he talks about. And that’s not, that doesn’t seem to be what he actually wants.” This led Lauer, ignoring the fact that rally attendees also want those things, that they just differ on the methods to get there, to observe: “It seems like you guys are saying, without saying, that you’re looking at what happened and you’re looking at Glenn Beck as somewhat of a wolf in sheep’s clothing.” The following Kelly O’Donnell set-up piece and Lauer interview with Sharpton and Jealous was aired on the August 30 Today show: ANN CURRY: As Brian mentioned, talk show host Glenn Beck drew a big crowd at the National Mall in Washington this weekend including guest speaker Sarah Palin for a controversial rally he called “Restoring Honor.” NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell has a wrap-up now. Kelly, good morning. [On screen headline: “Rallying The Faithful, Glenn Beck ‘Restoring Honor’ Rally Draws Thousands”] KELLY O’DONNELL: Hi, Ann. There is still so much to debate this morning. From the size of the crowd — was it 80,000 or as Brian mentioned, more than 300,000 — to the motives behind calling the rally for this place on a very famous anniversary. Now Glenn Beck did try to set one rumor straight. He says he and Sarah Palin won’t be running for anything. Beck says he has zero political aspirations. GLENN BECK: It has nothing to do with politics! It has everything to do with God! O’DONNELL: Conservative media star Glenn Beck insisted on that “no politics” distinction. Still, the massive rally easily looked like a political event. SARAH PALIN: We must restore America and restore her honor! O’DONNELL: Beck did not criticize President Obama from the stage but has been harsh, even calling Mr. Obama racist last year. BECK: This president, I think, has exposed himself as a guy over and over and over again who has a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture. O’DONNELL: Appearing on Fox News Sunday, Beck said he now regrets that comment. BECK: It shouldn’t have been said. It was poorly said, and it was not accurate. O’DONNELL: Back at the rally, many who came from around the country did criticize the President’s politics. UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: I believe in our Constitution, and this administration doesn’t. UNIDENTIFIED MAN: I, I cannot disagree with our president more. I believe he’s leading this country in the wrong direction. O’DONNELL: Others criticized the time and place, held on the 47th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I have a dream” speech. Beck called that timing a coincidence. He and Palin praised King. PALIN: We feel the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. O’DONNELL: But civil rights activist Reverend Al Sharpton led a smaller, competing rally. REVEREND AL SHARPTON: They want to disgrace this day! And we’re not giving them this day! This is our day, and we ain’t giving it away! O’DONNELL: The context is full of tension. Beck also said his rally would reclaim the civil rights movement. BECK: Meaning people of faith that look at equal justice and look at every man the same. That’s who needs to reclaim it, not the politicians. Not the parties. Not white people or black people. O’DONNELL: And Beck tried to sort of shape some of the imagery here. He had asked some of the followers not to bring signs and often signs at these sort of events, if they have controversial images or words attract a lot of negative attention. And interestingly Beck said he regretted those words calling the President a racist but said he was not retracting them, simply amending them. Matt? LAUER: Kelly O’Donnell, Kelly thanks very much. As you just heard the Reverend Al Sharpton led his own rally this weekend. Ben Jealous is the president of the NAACP. Guys, good morning to both of you. AL SHARPTON: Good morning. BEN JEALOUS: Good morning. LAUER: So much talk leading up to this rally, Reverend Sharpton, and now so much analysis afterward, people worried about the timing, the date, the location, the 47th anniversary of Dr. King’s speech, thinking it was some kind of political rally masquerading as a non-partisan rally for patriotism and responsibility. In the end, wasn’t it fairly uneventful? SHARPTON: Yeah and, and you wonder whether that was designed that way because, just remember now it was Mr. Beck himself that was saying this is gonna be to “reclaim civil rights. I’m gonna do this and that,” attacking the President. And then he comes and does none of that. So I don’t know if it was his promotion or whether we’re seeing the true political strategy. LAUER: But when I, but when I saw you speaking there at your own rally saying “we’re not gonna let him have this day, this is our day,” in the end is it a case of “never mind?” I mean was there no offense? SHARPTON: No, what the offense is to try and cast that as civil rights. Blacks, whites, we had many speakers of all races that are legitimately in civil rights, union leaders, the Secretary of Education, people that are trying to deal with the inequality in this country. We’re not talking about the day didn’t belong to blacks or whites. The day does belong to those that believe in what Dr. King’s dream was about. LAUER: Mr. Jealous there were many people at that rally who said we need to honor the legacy of Dr. King. When you watched and listened to what happened on the Mall there, what was your gut reaction? JEALOUS: My gut reaction was that if Dr. King stood up there, if he came back or somebody read his speech, that, that crowd wouldn’t have responded well to the full text of his speech. You know we are here to finish Dr. King’s last campaign, the poor people’s campaign. To make sure that all people in this country can find a good job, all kids can go to a great school. And Mr. Beck, that’s not what he talks about. And that’s not, that doesn’t seem to be what he actually wants. LAUER: Here’s from an op-ed in the New York Times this morning: “One could also call the day a strange, unlooked for fulfillment of King’s prophecies. Forty-seven years after the “I have a dream” speech here were tens of thousands of white conservatives roaring their approval of its author.” SHARPTON: But not applauding the content, because it was never discussed. Because in the speech Dr. King addressed unemployment and the plight of the poor, police brutality. And when we have an America where we can applaud where everyone is treated the same, that is the fulfillment of Dr. King. LAUER: It seems like you guys are saying, without saying, that you’re looking at what happened and you’re looking at Glenn Beck as somewhat of a wolf in sheep’s clothing. SHARPTON: No I think it’s a political strategy, possibly. I think every time we see the right wing, when we get in an election, they bring out God and country. Jerry Falwell did it one era. We had to deal with it, with same-sex marriage with George Bush. So I think now we see – Barry Goldwater did it in Dr. King’s day. Now I think Mr. Beck has started the, what we’re seeing in the midterm, that they’re going to again, try to use religion rather than really deal with the real issues. I’m a minister, I want us to turn to God- LAUER: Right. SHARPTON: -but I want us to turn to God but I want us to turn to God in a fair and equal way. LAUER: Is perhaps the most disappointing thing, Mr. Jealous, that we have two rallies, same city, same day, and one is predominantly white and the other is predominantly African-American? Would that not disappoint Dr. King? JEALOUS: You know we are, on October 2nd, we’ll have a rally called “One Nation.” It’ll be a large rally. It will be there at the Lincoln and you’ll see people of all faiths coming. We have 3000 buses confirmed right now and you can look at who’s gonna be driving those buses and you will see Dr. King’s dream made manifest. But let’s not forget that, that the rally was in D.C. and our crowd is very much a local crowd. You saw from the speakers there at, you know Gianette Margia, Secretary Duncan, a wide range of people, and those are the folks who are coming together for the “One Nation” rally and will be leading their folks there. SHARPTON: But I think Matt- LAUER: Quickly if you will. SHARPTON: -you’ve got to remember Dr. King was also criticized so criticized in ’63 for having mostly blacks there. We are trying to transform the country to make it one. The difference between Al Roker and an Al Sharpton, he gives the climate. I try to help change the climate. LAUER: You saved up for that one, didn’t you? SHARPTON: I always save one for you. LAUER: Nice. Appreciate it. Guys, good to have you here.

Read the original post:
NBC’s Today Show Invites on Two Liberals To Analyze Glenn Beck Rally

Glenn Beck Rally Attracts Only 87,000

An estimated 87,000 people attended a rally organized by talk-radio host and Fox News commentator Glenn Beck Saturday in Washington, according to a crowd estimate commissioned by CBS News. The company AirPhotosLive.com based the attendance on aerial pictures it took over the rally, which stretched from in front of the Lincoln Memorial along the Reflecting Pool to the Washington Monument. Beck and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin spoke at the rally. Beck, who predicted that at least 100,000 people would show up, opened his comments with a joke: “I have just gotten word from the media that there is over 1,000 people here today.” AirPhotosLive.com gave its estimate a margin of error of 9,000, meaning between 78,000 and 96,000 people attended the rally. The photos used to make the estimate were taken at noon Saturday, which is when the company estimated was the rally's high point. Rally organizers had a permit for crowd of 300,000. Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s “I Have A Dream” Speech was delivered to over 200,000 people. added by: Future_America

Sharpton To Beck: Come On Fox News and Debate Ground Zero Mosque

Just moments after the conclusion of the Aug. 28 “Restoring Honor” rally in Washington, D.C., an olive branch, albeit a potentially double-edged one, was tossed between an unlikely couple very much on opposite sides of the political aisle.   To the surprise of those in attendance, the Rev. Al Sharpton has challenged Glenn Beck to come on Geraldo Rivera’s Fox News program and support the building of the Ground Zero Mosque. Appearing on “Geraldo At Large” after his own civil rights event in our nation’s capital, Sharpton told the host, ” Why don’t you, you’re here on Fox, invite Mr. Beck on the show to finish the speech? ” “He said we should all come together equal…how do we do that?” Later in the program, Sharpton raised the bet even further saying, “He made a great statement – he said after 9/11 we all came together. All Americans, all races, all religions – therefore Mr. Beck, will you say we should stop fighting the mosque? That’s where the rhetoric will hit the road” (partial transcript follows with commentary):  REV. AL SHARPTON: Let me make a proposition to you. Why don’t you, you’re here on Fox, invite Mr. Beck on the show to finish the speech? He said we should all come together equal. GERALDO RIVERA, HOST: I kind of scare you as an interrogator. SHARPTON: Mr. Beck, how do we do that? When you have unemployment disproportionate, that’s what we raised at the civil rights march, we have education disproportionate. How do we do that? RIVERA: Fair enough. SHARPTON: Every preacher tomorrow morning after church… RIVERA: I’m not going to lose Reverend Al’s point. Invite Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin on my show tomorrow morning. SHARPTON: …every preacher tomorrow morning at 11:00. RIVERA: Tomorrow night. ——————————— SHARPTON: He made a great statement – he said after 9/11 we all came together. All Americans, all races, all religions – therefore Mr. Beck, will you say we should stop fighting the mosque? That’s where the rhetoric will hit the road. DR. ALVEDA KING, PASTORAL ASSOCIATE FOR PRIESTS FOR LIFE, MARTIN LUTHER KING’S NIECE: We’re emphasizing that there’s one human race – not all races getting together, but human race. And we’re saying about rebuilding about rebuilding America and unity – it was just a marvelous time. One human race – doing what my Uncle Martin said – we have to learn to live together as brother and as sisters or perish as fools. So we need to rebuild America and we have to have unity to do that. Assume for a moment Sharpton’s not just trying to set Beck up: wouldn’t it be interesting if as a result of Saturday’s rally, a meeting of the minds could occur between these unlikely personalities that actually improves race relations in this country? And what finer place for it to happen than Fox News where both of the players are clearly at ease? That would surely drive all those in the mainstream media crazy.  Is such an eventuality possible or just a wee bit of post-rally Kumbaya? To quote the late Ed Hart, we will know in the fullness of time. 

More here:
Sharpton To Beck: Come On Fox News and Debate Ground Zero Mosque

Hayley Williams Channels Viral Video Star Antoine Dodson On ‘Bed Intruder’

Paramore singer collaborates with New Found Glory and Relient K members for ‘punk rock cover’ of the YouTube hit. By James Montgomery Hayley Williams Photo: Christopher Polk/ Getty Images Thanks a rather impassioned speech about an attempted rape in his neighborhood, Huntsville, Alabama resident Antoine Dodson has become an unwitting YouTube sensation over the past month. Footage of Dodson’s tirade, which appeared on a local newscast, has racked up millions of views, inspired a slew of remixes (one of which even cracked the Billboard Hot 100) and earned him a rather fervent fanbase … which, apparently, includes Paramore’s Hayley Williams. On Wednesday (August 25) night, a “punk-rock cover” of Dodson’s speech — featuring Williams on vocals, with assists from New Found Glory’s Jordan Pundik and Relient K’s Ethan Luck — was uploaded to YouTube . The song opens with Williams quoting Dodson’s notorious “rapist in Lincoln Park” line; she also tackles a verse later in the song. She recorded her vocals at Luck’s house in Nashville Wednesday night on a whim (“Over at @EthanLuck’s house, recording something groundbreaking,” she tweeted , later adding, “Just dropped by … to sing a couple lines for it. Too much fun.”). In keeping with that spirit, the entire project is a rather tongue-in-cheek take on both Dodson and punk rock in general, featuring over-the-top fretwork, chugging chords and a whole lot of intertwining gang vocals. Williams did not respond to MTV News’ emails about the song, but Luck described the inspiration for the tune, the recording process and his goals for the song on his official site . “With all this hype of Antoine Dodson around the Internet, a couple friends of mine and I thought it would be fun to do our own version of ‘Bed Intruder,’ ” he wrote. “Everything was recorded at my home studio while New Found Glory had a day off from tour here in Nashville. Hayley came over this evening to add the finishing touches. I hope you all enjoy it as much as we do … It was so much fun! Maybe The Gregory Brothers, who originally [remixed the speech], will get to hear our version! Or better yet, Antoine Dodson himself!” Dare to dream, dude. Related Artists Paramore

Read more:
Hayley Williams Channels Viral Video Star Antoine Dodson On ‘Bed Intruder’

Why Won’t Any Republicans Condemn the "Obama Is a Muslim" Myth?

With so much traffic on the low road in American politics, you'd imagine a politician or two might take the high road simply to beat the congestion. Sunday on Meet the Press, Mitch McConnell was asked about the Pew poll that showed 31 percent of Republicans believe Obama is a Muslim. He said, “The president says he's a Christian. I take him at his word. I don't think that's in dispute.” If you only paid attention to his first two sentences, as some pundits did, you might think McConnell was trying to keep doubt alive by suggesting the matter was one of debate. If you were patient enough to listen to the last sentence, you heard him say that the matter is not one of debate at all. If McConnell wasn't trying to stir the pot, he also wasn't trying to lower the boil. What you didn't hear McConnell say was that the whole notion that Obama is a Muslim is ridiculous because by any standard we use to evaluate the religious beliefs of our leaders, President Obama is a Christian. Nor did he go on to say that any politician who tries to benefit from this urban legend–by courting either Islamophobes or conspiracy nuts who think Obama is engaged in some kind of systematic deception–should be ashamed of himself. He also did not produce a baby unicorn. That is to say, expecting the events of the previous paragraph would ever happen in real life is a fantasy. We can define our politics by the outrageous things people say. Rep. Joe Wilson yelled, “You lie” during a presidential address to Congress. Newt Gingrich called Sonia Sotomayor a racist, and Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson said, “Republicans want you to die quickly.” But the shamelessness of our politics can also be measured by silence. It's just as embarrassing that in a case like this, no politician will take the high road against their political interest. Fine. If we can't have Boy Scouts in office, let's try it another way. Shouldn't there be someone taking the high road if for no other reason than it is unoccupied? Often in politics, doing the one thing no one else is doing usually gets you air time and exposure. But it's harder to tread the high road in an election year. For Republicans whose constituents dislike the president, there's no advantage in going out of your way to stick up for him. That's why McConnell kept trying to get back to talking about the economy. He was trying to stay on the issue voters care about. Why is the burden on Republicans? They benefit from the misinformation, and the poll shows the myth has taken hold most sharply among their supporters. A soul might want to speak up lest the view get around that the party is willing to let any untruth flower if it helps them. Republicans and conservatives aren't the only ones who don't bother to do the right thing. During the primaries, Hillary Clinton's campaign staffers passed around Obama-is-a-Muslim e-mails. Hillary Clinton gave a McConnell-esque response when asked whether she thought Obama was a Muslim. And Clinton's campaign strategist Mark Penn talked about making Obama's otherness the central pitch of the Clinton campaign. That's part of what the Muslim charge is about–making the president seem like something foreign, mysterious and unfamiliar to Americans. Evangelical Christian leader Franklin Graham bypassed the high road too. Though his father made a career out of sudden conversions to Christ and he has continued that tradition, the younger Graham seemed rather lukewarm about whether Obama's Christian rebirth (described at the end of Dreams From My Father) really took. Saying Obama was “born a Muslim” (in fact, Obama's Muslim-born father and Christian-born mother were both areligious), Graham seemed skeptical of Obama's Christian identity. “That is what he says he has done,” said Graham. “I cannot say that he hasn't. So I just have to believe that the president is what he has said.” Those who doubt Obama's faith practice selective hearing in its highest form. It requires real discipline to hear only Obama's remarks that might identify him in any way with Islam and miss all of the others that refer to his Christian faith. So when the president spoke in Cairo, people heard him say how his father's Kenyan family included generations of Muslims but went la,la,la, la seconds earlier, when Obama declared, “I'm a Christian.” (A Republican national committeewoman, Kim Lehman, who says she believes Obama is a Muslim, seemed almost religious about her refusal to inform herself about this speech,) During his political career, Obama has been quite comfortable talking about his faith and the particularities of his Christian beliefs. Inviting discussion about this aspect of his life has not always benefited Obama. Two years ago he faced a crisis over connections to his Christian pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Earlier, in 2006, Obama gave a high-profile speech about his faith and received a wave of criticism from progressives, many of whom compared him to George Bush. It's hard work to sustain doubt about the president's faith or to believe he doesn't express it enough. At one point, Politico reported that Obama had actually invoked Jesus more than Bush. He often talks in personal terms. “I found myself drawn–not just to work with the church but to be in the church,” Obama said at Notre Dame in May 2009. “It was through this service that I was brought to Christ.” Search for Christ on the White House Web site and the first item you'll find is the president's remarks at an Easter prayer breakfast. He didn't just welcome his “brothers and sisters in Christ,” but also talked at length about why Christ's resurrection and the power of redemption meant so much to him. Previous presidents may have attended church, but Obama was doing something more. He was witnessing. Different churches may have different practices, but the ones I've attended don't usually greet such expressions of faith with scorn. The usual response is to say Amen. added by: TimALoftis

"Top Secret America" Washington Post Investigation

“The top-secret world the government created in response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, has become so large, so unwieldy and so secretive that no one knows how much money it costs, how many people it employs, how many programs exist within it or exactly how many agencies do the same work.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKwCNYkdUNE&feature=related added by: eduardoquezada

Senator Al Franken "Net neutrality is the First Amendment issue of our time." we should stop big corporations like Google and Verizon from taking control of our precious internet.

Sen. Al Franken: We Have a Free Speech Problem By Tim Karr, August 20, 2010 Sen. Al Franken (D.-Minn.) warned a packed house Thursday night in Minneapolis that the corporate takeover of our media, and the government's failure to stop it, is one of the most important issues of our time. Franken said our media system is at risk everywhere we turn — from our free speech online to the growing power of companies who own a massive number of media outlets. Franken was speaking during a hearing featuring Federal Communications Commission Commissioners Mignon Clyburn and Michael Copps. He spoke about recent efforts by Verizon and Google to push a “policy framework” on Washington that transfers control over Internet content from the people who go online into the hands of a few powerful corporations. added by: BRAVATRAVELS