"Christian" Terrorism is Everywhere

"If Jesus came back and saw what was being done in his name, he'd never stop throwing up."
-- Woody Allan

Eugene Robinson writes in the Washington Post today:

The arrests of members of a Michigan-based "Christian" militia group should convince doubters that there is good reason to worry about right-wing, anti-government extremism -- and potential violence -- in the Age of Obama.

I put the word Christian in quotes because anyone who plots to assassinate law enforcement officers, as a federal indictment alleges members of the Hutaree militia did, is no follower of Christ.

So why do people call George W. Bush and Barack Obama "Christian" -- without the quote marks -- as they bomb people in Afghanistan. Are they followers of Jesus Christ? It's unchristian to kill law enforcement officials, but is to kill innocent civilians?

Massive terrorism, of the sort that the U.S. government engages in, is the great terrorism threat. Calling the Hutaree militia alleged Christian terrorists should be a step to understanding that.

Banners Nar Wave: The Politics of the Kennedy Center

The Kennedy Center in its "Hall of Nations" does not display the Iranian, Cuban or North Korean flags -- nor the Palestinian ofcourse. I remember it not displaying the Iraqi flag in the 90s. They have a handout saying that the flags are of the "countries with which the US maintains diplomatic relations."
It always seemed rediculous to me that a cultural building would be named for a political leader.

(Addition: This doubly doesn't make sense. The "Hall of Nations" only includes "nations" (including the Vatican) with which the US government has diplomatic releations. So it doesn't include actual nations with non-trivial populations like Iran, Cuba and North Korea. Meanwhile, at the other end of the building, the "Hall of States" includes the flags of such things as Washington, D.C. and Guam -- which are clearly not states.)

My Tweets on Clinton's AIPAC speech

      Clinton at AIPAC - "Netanyahu put Israel on path to peace" - like Bush calling Sharon a man of peace
    
      Clinton at AIPAC keeps referring to the demographic threat - why isn't this racist?
       
      Clinton at AIPAC talking about how bad violence and "incitement" is by Palestinians - nar a word about Israeli and US violence
       
      Clinton - Israel used to be top thing I heard about round the world, now second or third. Yea, because US has done so many other evil things
       
      Clinton talks about Iran allegedly violating the NPT to AIPAC - Israel has nukes and refuses to sign the NPT
       
      Clinton - we attacked Durban conf and Goldstone report. Yup.
       
      Clinton bragging about more money for Israel, joint operations
       
      Clinton at AIPAC - all same myths - Israel is defensive, made desert bloom

The Missed Opportunity Costs of Deferring Real Healthcare Reform

Some people argue with some level of seeming complacency that an expanded Medicare for all or single payer program in the US is inevitable. I'm not sure this is the case -- all kinds of unpredictable things could happen to make things that seem inevitable not happen and for US society to deteriorate even more than it has. But if it were true, it totally ignores (to the extent that it is complacent) the costs involved. There are the obvious costs in terms of the lives lost from lack of proper medical attention until we do get a decent system. There's also the costs of choices people will make in terms of not following their hearts and staying in demoralizing jobs for security of the health insurance. And there's the costs of the work involved in making this an ultimate reality -- activism that could instead be put into stopping war, avoiding environmental disaster and problems that we are not even aware of now -- problems that might make what seems inevitable not so inevitable.

Who can say what the costs are of this dream deferred -- and the costs of the dreams that delay defers.

CodePink apparently put out a fake AIPAC news release in favor of a settlement freeze -- apparently CNN, NPR, Al Jazeera and Jake Tapper got taken in.

This was very clever, though the concern about the humanitarian situation in Gaza should have been a red flag that it wasn't from AIPAC. I have mixed feelings about how much good this does, it creates confusion within AIPAC membership in the short term, and exposes the silliness of the major media, but it also gives millions the false impression that AIPAC is perhaps alittle reasonable. I called up the AIPAC flack, he just said the statement is a fake and refused to even tell me what the AIPAC position on settlements was, just hung up.

(Addition: I heard the disinfo on NPR and it left me scratching my head for much of the morn. I also saw it on C-Span. TPM reported on Al Jazeera and Tapper. CodePink is my source for CNN. People should be demanding very vocal retrations from those outlets and should question what AIPAC's position is.)