U.S. Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor has resigned from the all-women Belizean Grove club — waiting for Friday to try to bury the announcement in the weekend news. Sotomayor did not express any personal concerns or regrets about joining an exclusive club and only stated that she did not want it to be a “distraction” from her record.
In a letter to the Senate Judiciary, Judge Sotomayor explained “I believe the Belizean Grove does not practice invidious discrimination and my membership did not violate the Judicial Code of Ethics, but I do not want questions about this to distract anyone from my qualifications and record.” It is the type of Beltway statement that leaves me cold. Before this nominee, liberals fought any nominee who belonged to an exclusive club confined to men or whites. Here, Sotomayor does not regret joining or oppose the exclusivity of the club — only regrets that it has proven controversial. If she likes discriminatory clubs, I would have much preferred her to regain a member and defend her decision. This announcement would only seem normal in Washington: abandoning the association for the express purpose of avoiding any personal repercussions.
Sotomayor was often suggested as a nominee for George W. Bush and has a fairly conservative voting record in some areas like free speech, police abuse, and student rights.
For the full story, click here
sicilian 1:
Your take on the affinity of Italians and Jews is interesting and something I have also noticed. I think it evolves from cultural similarities such as prioritizing the family; emphasizing education for the young; and a sense of shared community that is worth protecting from the sometimes corrosive affects of the materialist society. Whatever the reason, It seems to work. But did you have to mention Luciano/Lansky?
Mike S,
It always seems like Italians and Jews are always matches made in business heavan. Luciano/Lansky, probably the greatest business pairing in history. LOL.
But I think what gives the Italians and the Jews such commonality is that they both came up as immigrants in the “new” world together. An interesting socio-economic circumstance “trapped” Italians and Jews in the “ghetto” at the same point in American history.
Crime had always been a cyclical thing. The newest immigrants would inhabit the ghetto’s do what they had to do to rise up then leave the ghetto’s for the newest immigrants. The Irish had followed this path from crime to legitimate businesses and politics.
A funny little “quirk” of fate happened as the Italians and Jews were making their ways out of the American ghetto’s. As the newest or most populated inhabitants of American ghetto’s, obviously the Italians and Jews were the 2 ethnicities involved in crime. During prohibition the Italian and Jewish gangsters became rich beyond any of their wildest immaginations to the point where instaed of the political bosses using the gangsters for their bidding the situation was reversed where the gangsters now used the political bosses to do their bidding.
With all the wealth attained from prohibition the Italians and Jews should have been able to segue out of their criminal exploits, leaving the cycle to the next newest ghetto inhabitants. However, a little thing called ‘the great depression’ happened thereby “trapping” the Italians and Jews in the ghetto’s longer than they should have. This “trapping” left many enthusiastic recruits from which the crime bosses could draw from. This is why for so many years it always seemed that organized crime was dominated by Jews and Italians. And because of that similar sociological struggle that was specific to America in that point in history it created a bonding that has survived the generations.
Your prison experience reminds me of a story of my own. When federal inmates are transferred after sentencing they ussually pass through MDC Brooklyn. This is like a federal “county” jail. Any NY’ers awaiting trial and any inmates “in transit” are housed in this facility.
About 40 of us came off the bus. Now they don’t just show you to the cell. Every inmate must be “processed” which includes being given a change of clothes, the bare essentials, seeing a doctor, getting your meds, and filling out paperwork. They process everyone off the same bus and move them to the blocks.
When we arrived they were changing shifts so they piled 40 of us into a holding cell. There was absolutely NO room to sit, all of us were literally squished like sardines, there was so much mass of humanity that condensation was forming on the wall’s, the most you could do was shuffle your feet side-to-side just a few inches. They left us like that for what seemed like several hours. Everyone started out shooting the s— the we all started complaining to one another, finally a few inmates started getting rowdy banging on the door and walls. Do you think that caused the staff to speed up one bit? If anything they slowed down. But never once did the staff yell even when the inmates got rowdy. They would soothingly strum the violin, acting as if they could feel our pain and telling us to hang in there. Do you know how tortuous it is to stand in one spot with bodies crowded all around you stopping you from being able to move an inch? That’s what you call physical and mental torture. The mental torture comes when you are being strung along by those in charge that they’re doing everything in their power to relieve your agony. How can a suppossed civilized human being be so sadistic? How can another human being get joy from torturing and toying with another?
I read were one of Sadaam Hussien’s sons favorite torture techniques for the Iraqui socer team when they lost a match was to jam the whole team into a room like sardines and just have them stand there for hours on end. But the thing with them is that they call it what it is, TORTURE. The federal prison staff excuses themselves and plays innocent by casting it off as “processing” inmates. But to me it’s the same result.
I like to tell that story everytime someone goes on a rant against an inhumane dictator. Sometimes knowing what you’re dealing with is more easy mentally than being tricked. However, that being said, most federal joints where you’re actually doing time are pretty descent. Better than most places I bet. I’ll tell you how loaded the feds are with illegal immigrants doing bids on re-enry beefs b/c they rather do fed time than live in their 3rd world Latin American countries.
I’m pretty wordy myself.
I want to say thanks to Gyges (I think it was) who recommended reading Joe R. Lansdale. I’ve read 3 of his books now which were hard to put down. His award-winning “The Bottoms” is slated to become a movie and his new book, “Vanilla Ride”, is due out tomorrow. Lansdale says Vachss is one of his favorite authors and so with Lottakatz’s mesmeriztion too, I picked up his “False Allegations” today. My local library does not carry Vachss’ nonfiction unfortunately. I believe both of these authors are members of a child advocacy group, PROTECT.
lottakatz,
I’ve only very dimly heard about A Vachss, but I’ll google him because I know from past comments we share some similar tastes in writers. Guess what, before I finished this I accessed my library’s database to find out there are copies there of 8 different books and they’re all available. Also googled her/him(?), saw a plot synopsis of latest book and I am now dying to read him/her(?). Thank you for the great info.
“I do hold value in experiences (Admittedly maybe too much)What I feel is best is when real life experiences can be used with education.”
sicilian 1,
I may have given you the wrong impression regarding my feelings about experience. I value the experiential part of life, just as highly, if not more so than the educational. To
me experience, properly put in context, is the best educator.
It’s the putting it into context that is difficult. What I was referring to specifically with you was that you drew universal conclusions from your experience with academics for instance. Some academics are total fools, no matter how smart or educated they are. Some use their education in the service of their own prejudices, with no self-awareness of their doing so. I do not consider that type of academic intelligent, or educated in the larger sense, beyond their degrees.
To me real intelligence is synthesizing one’s experiences, with one’s learning (not necessarily book learning), to develop a point of view about your world. But, and a big “but” at that, a person must always be able to revise that worldview based on new evidence that comes in, without being so attached to their own musings that they ignore evidence to the contrary. The last component of real intelligence to me, is self-awareness. Many people avoid the pain of trying to see themselves as they are, because it is at odds with their own mythology of themselves and that hurts. My belief, not by any means my invention, is that a major task of our lives is the search for self-awareness.
“So I see that you got some JEW-SHEENS in your history. LOL. You probably already know but that’s what us Italians call Jewish guys that hang out with Italians.”
I never heard the term before, but my father died almost five decades ago (longer I surmise than you’ve been alive)so
perhaps this is a more recent term. What I heard my parents and their friends mostly talk about was how similar Italian people and Jewish people were, despite the religious differences. I know that I’ve always felt comfortable with the Italo-Americans I’ve known and feel that I’m in sync with them culturally. Then too Italian Americans and Jewish Americans suffered from similar prejudice in America at similar times so there was common rejection and common cause between them. When my father had fights as a youth over being Jewish, it was with Irish Americans, German or Polish Americans who were more firmly established. Jews and Italians had the prejudice and the stereotypes it developed in common.
“What you said about your experiences with African-Americans was right on point.”
What I didn’t mention was that from my earliest memories my parent’s inculcated in me the feeling that prejudice against Afro-Americans (or indeed any group)was wrong, so I grew up relatively free from prejudice in that area. My first ten years of work I worked in what were considered the worst neighborhoods in NYC, of course they were Black neighborhoods and I was out alone on the streets day and night. I’m talking Bed Stuy, Ocean Hill, Brownsville, Red Hook, Harlem and the South Bronx.
I saw many things including for instance walking straight into a “shooting gallery” in the huge basement of a South Bronx apartment building. I never once was threatened with violence, or treated the way blacks are shown to treat straying whites in the movies, except that I was stopped by the NYPD a few times as they suspected I was trying to score dope. Now admittedly I’m a big guy and at the time ran about 235. Then too, I had hair to my shoulders, a full beard and looked tough. But the disconnect between the way the media portrayed blacks and my own experiences was huge. The public was being made to fear them and the propaganda was that even the police wouldn’t venture there alone. I did and never carried any kind of weapon with me other than a pen.
It makes me angry today when I see Afro-American people portrayed in the media as talking a certain way and being a certain way. These are usually awful stereotypes, that the people have to portray to earn a living and that some of the public has to see to make their own prejudice believable. The best actor around today is Denzel Washington and he never panders, nor do men like John Legend and Kanye West.
I appreciate your sharing of your prison experiences because many people in this country don’t really understand how bad they can be and how difficult surviving in them in decent shape is. The only time I’ve been in a cell was in Suffolk County, where in 1973 I was held naked in a Police Station cell for six hours over an overdue traffic ticket. People in Jail there weren’t allowed to wear their clothing “for fear they’d hang themselves” and during much of my hippie years I didn’t wear Jockey shorts. If it didn’t make me so angry, it would have been funny, because my bail was $25 and all I had on me was $15 and an AAA bail card for $5,000 which that County didn’t recognize. The most hilarious part was when they brought in someone who was booked for being drunk and disorderly and he looked at me naked in my cell and asked “What’re in for?” I answered “Failure to follow a right turn arrow.” His eyes widened and he shook his head in confusion.
I’ve enjoyed this dialogue also, but I apologize for the fact that I can be a wordy old codger.
I’ve nothing to say on the topic except it’s evolved to a very interesting place and I don’t think she should have resigned unless the Bohemian Grovers have women members now.
Mike S, are you a fan of A Vachss’ writing? I picked up one of his books at a sale and became strangely mesmerized by his writing and personal story; his Burke character is interesting, very moral but possessed of a ‘detached’ (for lack of the clinical term) personality. A child advocate in his own way.
MIKE S,
I agree with what you said about fundamentalism of all stripes, they’re very dangerous to all mankind. But I do feel what you said about having power is important because Islam does have so much power that they fet away with many atrocities.
Your analysis about my experiential circumstances affecting my worl view is a point well taken and something I myself may have to reflect upon.
One thing that insults me about academics is that many of them are so intent on implementing theories at the detriment to human beings as a whole. They think it is ok to use people as lab rats to prove what they’ve been taught or brainwashed into believing. I do hold value in experiences (Admittedly maybe too much)What I feel is best is when real life experiences can be used with education. I feel it is at that point you have the tools to really be effective in your endeavors.
What you said about your experiences with African-Americans was right on point. I believe you are a REAL person and the people you dealt with were REAL and treated you and reacted to you as such because of the “vibe” you resonated. It is those “fakers” that fabricate resentments to excuse their own hatreds that I think are so dangerous. It’s funny because these pseudo-Afro_centric intellectuals always try to intimidate people into “guilt” and when that doesn’t work they pull out the labeling rhetoric. I always call them out, give my “credentials” and challenge them. They ussually give up because they themselves have no REAL experience beyond what they’ve been fed.
So I see that you got some JEW-SHEENS in your history. LOL. You probably already know but that’s what us Italians call Jewish guys that hang out with Italians. It’s a play on the Italian slang, COO-SHEEN for cousin. But like I said I’m sure you know that with your first hand experience.
My good friend at one fed joint was a hardcore JEW-SHEEN. Straight-up NY wiseguy, did his share of fed time. Me and him had some great times together. He liked to wager a little bit, I myself though a sports fanatic was never bit by that betting bug. All week long we’d go over all the available literature so he could make his picks on Sunday. Everyday after chow we’d spend our time untill re-call analyzing to make the best picks. He loved parlays and I could never talk him out of making single bets. But he’d hit a parlay every so often which would make up for and then some for the times he lost. Whenever he’d hit he’d always want to know what I wanted from the commisary, but I always refused, hey, we were freiends and you NEVER do anything for a friend expecting something, especially in prison. But he’d always hit me off with an ice cream. And that was enough for me. When football season ended and it was baseball or basketball, our analyzing session had to be done early to make the daily picks. I worked out everyday, so between my stes and when I was waiting for equipment I’d go into the little day area outside the gym to help him make his selections.
Man, when he went home I was LOST big time. I literally didn’t know what to do with myself.
But that was my good JEW-SHEEN friend. He was cool b/c although he was a JEW-SHEEN he wasn’t a sychophant to the wiseguys. He’d call them out and break them better than anyone.
I’ve really enjoyed our discussions. Your questions and answers have allowed me to flesh out my own thoughts. This has been very enriching. Lets keep it up.
Thanks.
“If Brigham Young had a bigger Army all of us Americans would be Mormons.”
sicilian 1,
You are no doubt correct. However, in truth couldn’t you say that for almost all religious leaders, with the exception perhaps of Jesus, the Buddha and Zoroaster? I include Jesus in that because the real creator of Christianity was Paul and if he had an army I believe he would have been into the same mischief. Looking back at history it is usually the successor to the visionary Prophet, rather than the actual prophet, who turns the cause from the direction of the prophesier. I’ll give you the fact that Mohamed was unusual in this, but I wonder how much he was really the leader of the initial battles to spread the faith, or the captive?
“In reality the Mormons are considered by most rational thinkers to be a radicalized, fringe sect”
The Mormons control Utah, chunks of Colorado and are very active in Nevada and California, as we have recently seen. They are also one of the fastest growing religions in the world, due to enormous wealth and aggressive proselytizing.
They are not fringe and from a marketing perspective they are among the smartest of religions.
“But the rational, reasonable world is forced to legitimize and give credibility to Islam all because of their numbers, fanaticism and the fact that the sit atop so much oil which the world NEEDS more than anything to make your lives go.”
The world treats Islam as legitimate because of its’ numbers and its’ majorities in many country’s. The credibility is quite another thing. It is not politic to criticize most religions, although you and I already agree that within their history and dogma there is much irrationality. As for the oil, the US gets most of its oil from Canada and there is much large oil production in non-Islamic States. ME oil is important because many of the major oil companies have large ME shareholders and because in truth the oil business has its’ scam elements that take a $20 per barrel well head price and sell it as a commodity with at least a 300% markup.
“Some business relationships did evolve into friendships. In federal prison you LIVE with people of all races. You BETTER learn to co-exist or you’ll be in for a tough bid.”
I was wondering about the basis of your Federal Prison experiences and I can now see how you have first hand knowledge. However, since there is an element of sharing here let me share this with you. In my father’s life almost all of his closest friends were Sicilian’s, who were more or less connected. My father himself had been in Federal prison when I was born but I never learned the details of why. I grew up spending much time in their homes and was almost like a nephew.
My father until he died was himself somehow connected, in a minor sense, but that is shrouded in mystery since my family was one that had many secrets. In my young adulthood I hung out with many people who were not legitimate businessmen and they were close friends of mine. Curiously, I never partook in any of their businesses, but again I never judged them. They respected my lack of desire to be involved and so I was never privy to details. My parents raised me to be pretty much a straight arrow and that I’ve been except for the sex, drugs and rock and roll that characterized my life before I met my wife and had kids. Criminality never appealed to me as a growth career and many aspects of it I find reprehensible, though because of those I’ve known, I have some understanding of their motivation.
I too, because of my career knew, was friends with and worked with many Afro-American people. Many of my co-workers were highly educated and middle class. The overwhelming majority of them didn’t behave as if they were trying to get “street cred.” I’ve no doubt that this was your experience, but I am at least as experienced in this and it wasn’t mine.
The point I’m making is that I think you are using your wide and varied personal experience, to draw larger conclusions about the world. While it is very hard not to separate the lives we’ve led, from our worldview, often we must to allow ourselves to see a larger picture.
For instance, I worked for 8 years in the field of child abuse, my skills were such that for 2 of those years I ran a Unit dedicated to dealing with the worse abuse cases. I saw things in that time that would make any normal person’s hair stand on end. I helped send quite a few people to jail and became considered an expert in the investigation of child abuse and neglect. What I saw in that work could literally have given me the most pessimistic outlook on life. What I saw in the other aspects of my long career would reinforce that. However, I made the transition from being immersed in the worst aspects of life, to one who has a larger perspective and who most call an optimist. This is simply because of the understanding that I needed to see beyond my own experiences informing as they may be and to look for greater causation. I have also known many people of radically different political persuasion and/or religious persuasion, than mine and have been able to appreciate who they were as people, if indeed they deserved my appreciation.
Far be it from me to tell you how to perceive the world, but in a spirit of these exchanges we’ve shared, I must say that it seems to me that you are letting the experiential overshadow a broader perspective. In my life I’ve found that when I’m making statements that begin with phrases like: “It was always….,” I am oversimplifying things and drawing universal conclusions, not warranted by my personal experience. I believe that you sometimes fall into that trap.
As far as your experience with Academia, it is always true that those who most claim to be objectively scientific in their views are usually protecting the dogma they’ve learned.
I am particularly interested in Archaeology, for instance. The field is ruled by people who are so jealous of their own work and their career status that they automatically reject anything new that might tend to modify it. This is true in all of the sciences, literature, philosophy and in medicine.
I don’t look to these people for ideas and I view their pronouncements with a healthy grain of salt. So when you write about them as you do, with the claim that most of them
will not criticize Islam, I think that you are generalizing far too much and taking their opinions more seriously than you should.
“Today the greatest threat to the survival of mankind is radical Islam.”
Here is the nub of our disagreement. I do believe that radical Islam is a threat, but to me the greatest threat to the world is Radical Fundamentalism, of all faiths. In their zealotry and fanaticism they are all related to each other and in their repressive methods they all commit horrid excesses. I know Jewish Fundamentalism for instance, well enough to believe if they had real power anywhere equivalent to that of Islam in some countries, they would be just as bad and women would be just as oppressed. You realize for instance that all Ultra-Orthodox women wear wigs, because a woman’s hair shown outside the home is considered sinful.
The evil in the world stems directly from all kinds of fundamentalism, be it religious, or political and radical Islam represents only one part of its’ spectrum. At root to all that evil are sociopathic leaders, interested in power and ego, who convince their followers that they alone own the truth.
Former Federal LEO
1, June 25, 2009 at 6:58 pm
__________________________________
Vince Treacy wrote:
I have always thought that there are two rules at this site.
Rule 1: JT makes the rules.
Rule 2: See Rule 1.
__________________________________
Even I should be able to understand that.
__________
My reply to M.T.B today Sat. June 27, 2009
Vince Treacy got it right last Thursday, June 25, 2009
I possess no authority here, although I have striven to help foster a modicum of decorum. However, and without question, the success or failure of this special, unique blawg rests squarely on the shoulders of one fine gentleman, Professor Jonathan Turley.
I do not see where you have the authority to tell people what they can or cannot say. Just like that Patty C, who does she think she is, to smack down Jill?
Mind That Bird,
I simply prefer decorum within this blawg. There are endless numbers of other Internet sites where others and I can venture to ‘let our hair down’.
I have no control whatsoever, neither over this blawg nor over anyone posting within.
The CRS Report on Judge Sotomayer’s opinions is now available online:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40649.pdf
MIKE S,
I always like to compare Mohammed to Joseph Smith. They were both visited by an angel who told them they were prophets of God and then instructed them that everything in the Bible had been corrupted and it was their mission to set the record straight.
If Brigham Young had a bigger Army all of us Americans would be Mormons.
In reality the Mormons are considered by most rational thinkers to be a radicalized, fringe sect. They’re for the most part relegated to fringe status.
Islam and Mohammed are really not that much different than the Mormons and their beginings.
But the rational, reasonable world is forced to legitimize and give credibility to Islam all because of their numbers, fanaticism and the fact that the sit atop so much oil which the world NEEDS more than anything to make your lives go.
As far as your analogy to the bogey-man. Yes, I agree with the need for the boogey-man, although I feel trying to outlaw abortion would be political suicide and all poloticians know that. So yes the Repubs like to have the bogey-man and use it to play to their base but when push came to shove I do NOT feel any polotician would REALLY try to outlaw it b/c public opinion would be against him. But thatt is adigression.
I see what you are saying about past Christian resentment. But I do feel that even the Catholic church at the present day in their Catechism has admitted their Jewish roots (pt1 sect1, ch2, art1,para 70,71-72-73) and the “o.T.” roots (pt1, sect1, ch2, art3 para121-128)
Please, I am NOT trying to defend Christianity BUT Islam is too stubborn to admit their Jewish roots even today and they are insistent on high-jacking it and that the Jews and every other faith submit to their revisionist claims.
Now I have told you about real life experiences from the radicals in federal prison to the professors in Academia. And the thing is that I faced the hostility from the intellectd before I ever experienced the radicalism in federal prison.
This is the thing. I can excuse, accept, rationalize the radicalism in prison much more readily and easilly than I can ever stomach the hostility fron academia. Those radicalized from prison can somehow be rationalized through isolation, disenfranchisment, ignorance, lack of exposure to any culture outside their own, brainwashing, etc., I can completely understand all that on an intellectual level. But I swear to you it is my experiences in academia, the outright hostilty to debate or critical examination that continues to baffle me. It is the intelligencia crowd that will not allow real live discussion and the confrontation oftruths. And that is not true of any othjer religion
Now as far as resentments, I do have 1st hand experience with that. My wife is african-American, she had your stereotypical african-american experience. I have had many close personal and business relationships with black people. In my former life as a criminal there is no way you let biases or bigotries if you have any get in the way of making money. Some business relationships did evolve into friendships. In federal prison you LIVE with people of all races. You BETTER learn to co-exist or you’ll be in for a tough bid.
My point is that all the blacks I met in the street or in prison for the most part dealt with people on a one on one basis. They did NOT let past resentments, sometimes some of which they never experienced 1st hand cloud their judgement in dealing with people on one-on-one levels.
It was always the so-called “educated” blacks, the “intellects” who went to college, took a couple of “Afro-Centric” classes and the next thing you know they’re spewing all kinds of “hate” “whitey” rhetoric. Most of these blacks were suburban kids who had an easy life and NEVER experienced the hatred and predjudice they learned about. Yet they transposed those years of hatred onto themselves to then fabricate their own resentments and excuse their own hated.
I do NOT accuse you of this. I respect the Jewish experience. I feel NO other group can even come close to claiming they have experienced the same predjudices as Jews throughout the history of mankind.
But past resentments should be just that. Today the greatest threat to the survival of mankind is radical Islam. And when the mainstream tries to silence respectful critiscism or lets fear silence them from explicating the subject and in the same breadth tries to legitimize their culture, I feel that is a dangerous road to continue down.
“My whole thing is this, Every single religious story my be a fairy tale I will concede it but b/c Islam is the youngest of all the major religions that means it HAS to be a fairy tale. If Judaism is a fairy tale then so is Christianity and so also is Islam. But Islam INSISTS on authorship of the entire fairy tale AND INSISTS that everyone SUBMIT to that claim and if they don’t they will conduct Jihad. And Islam is the ONLY religion that will NOT admit that anything about their narrative COULD POSSIBLY be allegory.
That last paragraph is the essence of my argument and I think difficult to refute.”
sicilian 1
You have only seen the latest of what I’ve written about Islam and my comments on it not only go back a way but have been highly critical. However, when you categorically state:
“And Islam is the ONLY religion that will NOT admit that anything about their narrative COULD POSSIBLY be allegory.”
You are totally wrong. Tell me what Fundamentalist Christians admit about allegory, or the RCC, or Mormons (which is a fast growing religion considerably newer than Islam), or Fundamentalists of any other religion.
In the end though that is immaterial to solving the problems we face. Your position, which you doggedly reiterate, seems to be that there will be no progress to peace until Islam admits to its’ flaws. That clearly won’t happen. Religions and religious fanatics don’t do that. Knowing that you are smart enough to know this why does it bother you so much. That is why I refer to you as being angry in your feelings about Islam.
Now back to why in your opinion I am more sympathetic to Islam. Perhaps the reason is that I believe that aside for the last 100 years Islam has treated the Jews better, than has Christianity for 1,700 years. QAs far as the last hundred years go, however, I don’t see the ME problems with Israel as religious ones per se, although their are some aspects of Islam as a religion that can only see infidels in subservient positions. I see the problems as being about power, wealth and oil. I truly believe that while the Saudi’s and Syrians don’t want to see Israel at peace, they don’t want to destroy it either despite their rhetoric. These despots need the Israeli bogey man to continue to exist indefinitely.
An analogy to this is that the Republicans, despite controlling the Presidency, Congress and Supreme Court for six solid years after 2,000, made no real moves to eliminate abortion, though they were seemingly committed to it and their followers called for it. They needed the bogeyman to continue and realized that if you outlawed abortion you were going to be dealing with charging mothers as well as doctors with murder. Call Republicans what you will, but they are not that stupid.
sicilian 1, you are capable of good analysis if you could only let yourself stop being confused by the irrelevant rhetoric.
Someone has stated that FF LEO is a control freak. I don’t know if that is true but who am I to say?
I agree.
Mike S,
I think you’ve misjudged my criticism as anger. I may be stubborn but I am not an idiot (I do not accuse you of labeling me one)and I refuse to compromise my intellectual honesty.
I have been around radical hate/blame America Muslims in federal prison. I have seen these fraudulent converts who have never read a word out of the Koran and the depth of their knowledge of the Islamic faith is that they “don’t eat pork” But I have also been around the academic crowd. I have listened to professor’s critically present the history of EVERY religious faith, point out all the related stories from different civilization, show the connections, show the possibilities of the “lifting” of stories. But then come to Islam and NEVER raise a critical eyebrow about anything that has been preahed by Mohammed and his followers. They will NOT even allow critical questioning in their classrooms. They do NOT want to touch it with a ten foot pole and end up getting very hostile if pressed. I have seen it and experienced it in the classroom. Whenever I had to write a comparative paper I would pick any religions to analyze except Islam because I knew if I criticized Islam NO matter how cautiously or respectfully it would be detrimental to my grade. It is common knowledge by most students to stay away from critical thought with Islam or suffer the consequences. Know I always treated EVERY faith with respect. And any criticisms I raised were accepted and given credence by professor’s. I always recieved A’s on my papers and the most prevelent comment was always that I was thoughtful. But I knew to stay away from Islam because even the most respectful criticism would not be accepted by any professor. That is a fact of my life.
I respect your intelligence, thoughtfulness and insight but I believe that even if you go back and objectively analyze all your answers you will admit that you are most lenient Islam with your criticism.
You are mainly objective in your outlook. You have absolutely NO problem applying a critical lense to your own religion and that is to be commended. But I think if you step back and look at your analysis you will see that you hold back in respects to your critical analysis of Islam. You pull NO punches with any other religion but with Islam even you are more sympathetic in your criticism. And even when you do get critical you first preface your criticism with a critical comment of another religion.
Each religion should stand on their OWN. Good or bad.
My whole thing is this, Every single religious story my be a fairy tale I will concede it but b/c Islam is the youngest of all the major religions that means it HAS to be a fairy tale. If Judaism is a fairy tale then so is Christianity and so also is Islam. But Islam INSISTS on authorship of the entire fairy tale AND INSISTS that everyone SUBMIT to that claim and if they don’t they will conduct Jihad. And Islam is the ONLY religion that will NOT admit that anything about their narrative COULD POSSIBLY be allegory.
That last paragraph is the essence of my argument and I think difficult to refute.
“But I do feel that group has been effectively marginalized. What with all the progressive advances there is no way anyone can claim that the “Bible-thumpers” on the Christian right are in the mainstream.”
sicilian 1,
Their numbers may be few but their influence is still great.
The availability of abortions has markedly decreased. ID is taught in many venues. Their leaders have huge TV access. Even the History Channel plays many shows like The Search for Noah’s Ark. Jewish missionary activities remain well-funded.
All politicians feel the need to pay homage to Christianity, even though it should be a personal, rather than public issue.
You downplay its’ importance far too much. Why do political leaders visit the Pope, for instance, when they don’t visit Islamic, Jewish, Mormon or Hindu religious leaders?
“Many of the academic’s I talk to as I’ve said are quick to assault anything about any other religion EXCEPT Islam.”
Talking to some doesn’t constitute a whole. Academics like
Alan Dershowitz and Daniel Pipes come from your direction.
Blanket, open ended statements, usually are superficial and incorrect. My experience is that while there are many as you describe, there are just as many who take the opposite view and are just as well known.
“Even moderate Muslims, intelligent people and academics will not axxept any criticism or even intelligent questioning about Islam. Why is that?”
Also not at all true to the extent you describe. Then to remember what happened to Salmon Rushdie, or Van Gogh in Holland. However, how many doctors who have performed abortions have been killed, attacked or had their lives threatened. Oklahoma City was a horrific terrorist act, committed by a Christian fundamentalist/White Supremacist.
Muslims in Mumbai are constantly attacked, with many murders,
by Hindu’s.
“This is a real problem posed by Islam. Everything Mohammed claimed and taught was a revised history. And you can’t even broach that possibility without being drowned out with baseless accusations. That is a problem.”
sicilian 1, you really have to get beyond this mindset, reinforced by your subjective reaction to the world around you. All religions are revised history and in that sense Islam is no better or no worse, than the rest. You know I can prove this, yet you resist the notion in your need to paint Islam as intrinsically evil. If I went on TV and spoke of my theories as to the basis and origins of Christianity, I too would be reviled, threatened and ultimately drowned out by baseless accusations. My only saving grace is that I’m am not Christo-phobic, or Jewish chauvinistic. I feel the same about all religions and what I know of their origins.
“Any other religion allows dialouge and dialouge is accepted and brought up without fear.”
This is patently untrue and moreover you know that in your heart from what you’ve written thus far. See how far any politician gets in the US if she/he would state that Christianity falsifies its’ origins. You know their political career would be destroyed and their personal safety in question.
Please accept the following in sincerity, with my best wishes and not as an attack. I think I’ve earned that from you in my sincerity and honesty in this dialogue.
I believe you are allowing your anger and indignation to overwhelm your reasoning. This is not helpful to you because it undermines the cause that you are committed to and fight for. Emotionally, anger is a superficial emotion that we used to hide frustration and sadness. You are undoubtedly frustrated by what you see (and I agree) is Arab/Islamic intransigence regarding Israel and also radical Islamic rejection, distrust and disgust at Western culture. To be effective towards your goals you need to get beyond this anger, frustration and sadness, so that you can understand that what underlies this is a sad old human story.
The pursuit of and/or desire to maintain power by leaders who are sociopathically inclined. This is coupled by their use of their people as pawns in their game, ready to be sacrificed towards their end. If you cannot get beyond the anger, to perceive reality as it is, then you play the game of those you deem your enemy. To counter the strategies of those you oppose, you must not get entangled in the webs they weave. I honestly feel you have let your anger get you awash in your hatred and due to that you are doing harm to the course you profess to follow. Please ponder these thoughts of mine, remembering that as a Jew, I’ve got far more at stake here and so am sharing them with you as someone who agrees with many parts of your analysis, but is turned off by your letting anger betray your intelligence and ability to provide analysis.
I take into account all the Christian horrors. I take into account continued Christian fundamentalism and the ignorant intolerance on many on the Christian right. But I do feel that group has been effectively marginalized. What with all the progressive advances there is no way anyone can claim that the “Bible-thumpers” on the Christian right are in the mainstream.
I am talking about PRESENT day radical Islam. Radicalism of other stripes is for another day and another topic. And I don’t shy away from it. My current interest is your specific confrontation of the real radicalized Islam.
Many of the academic’s I talk to as I’ve said are quick to assault anything about any other religion EXCEPT Islam. I find it very frustrating when the specific contradiction and inconsistencies in the Koran are shouted down as bigoted diatribes. Or people start playing the tit-for-tat ‘what about them’ game. That is NOT what I want to do.
Once again I am talking about the PRESENT day and Islam in specific. Criticisms about any other faith will be addressed seperately.
My point is that i CAN not SEEM TO HAVE A LEGITIMATE CRITICAL DISCUSSION ABOUT iSLAM IN SPECIFIC WITH SO-CALLED ACADEMICS OR INTELLECTS WITHOUT THE BIGOTED ACCUSATION BEING played. (Sorry I hit the caps lock by accident, I didn’t mean to emphasize that)
Even moderate Muslims, intelligent people and academics will not axxept any criticism or even intelligent questioning about Islam.
Why is that?
I have never as a hole encountered that with other groups. Certainly I’ve faced my intolerants of all stripes but with Islam even those who seemingly have no “skin in the game” will not stand for any critical analysis of Islam.
Why is that?
Even in my encounter’s with atheists, they’ll readily rail against any religion except Islam. That seems to be the religion which they hold the most sympathy towards.
Why is that?
I see you do not seem to care about those admitting their Jewish roots. That seems to be a problem with our discussion. Speaking strictly PERSONALLY, I get very indignant and defensive when a Christian or Muslim won’t accept their Jewish roots. Personally speaking no practing person of those faiths can ever understand their own faith unless they study the Jewish history and come to an acknowledgement of their Jewish roots. After all Jesus Christ was a Jew. The “O.T.” IS the Hebrew Bible. If Christians are going to deny their Jewish roots they might as well rip the “O.T.” out of their Bible. And there are some Christian “Bible-thumpers” who would do this.
Now we can argue the actual historicracy of the Hebrew Bible. But the radical and in some cases moderate Muslims claim ownership of “Abraham” and Ishmael.” I just can’t come to terms with Muslims who in the PRESENT day still insist that it was the Jews who stole history from the Muslims.
The problem is that unlike the “Bible-thumpers” who’ve been marginalized. The Muslims and everything Islam are gaining credibility. Academics will NOT allow ANY discussion that calls any kind of questoining about Islam. Our president bends over backwards trying to legitimize Islam. And BELIEVE me because I’ve seen it with my own eyes. Federal prison is a recruiting ground eor radical Islam. Most of the converts never even try to learn a word from the Koran. They don’t even concern themselves with it. They’re mostly blacks vulnerable to all the HATE/BlAME “whitey” Hate/BLAME America rhetoric that is drummed into them. (You might want to check out my blog about ‘Fake Muslims”)
This is a real problem posed by Islam. Everything Mohammed claimed and taught was a revised history. And you can’t even broach that possibility without being drowned out with baseless accusations. That is a problem. Any other religion allows dialouge and dialouge is accepted and brought up without fear. That is not true with Islam from the federal prison to the halls of academia.
“I would like to know why you feel it is ok for intellects to criticize every religion from pillar to post but mention one critical word of Islam and you’re a bigot?”
Sicilian 1,
You are asking a question based on a premise that is not true. Many on this site have written voluminously disparaging
Islamic Fundamentalism. However, when you first began to post on this site your posting was viperous in its venom towards Islam. That was when you ran into trouble because of the vociferous nature (I seem to be into V tonight)of your posting. There is a difference between bigotry and criticism. If you remember my original reply to your post it went something like “you and I agree on much, but due the manner with which you defend Israel, I as a Jew think you have gone over the top and would prefer if you didn’t defend it.” That’s a paraphrase but it is in essence what I said. You know from what I’ve written that I hold no brief for the pseudo-Palestinian leadership. However, even as a Jew who supports Israel I recognize that the average person in Gaza and the West Bank is being treated terribly, mostly by their own leaders. In that I feel bad for them, they are after all human beings being misled.
The other part of this has been that Islam was purposely demonized by the Bush Administration to justify the war and to take the heat off the Saud’s the real 9/11 perpetrators.
“Why is it ok to criticixe the words out of the mouth of any religious figure from any religion but question one thing Mohammed said and you’re a bigot?”
This is also not true either on this site or in the media, where plenty of that criticism is to be had.
“Regardless of what Christians say, why are the Muslims so ABSOLUTELY stubborn about admitting their Jewish roots?”
Who cares, not I. The other part of this is that you can’t simply stipulate Christian anti-Jewishness and forget about the Christians. Maimonides, one of the greatest Jewish philosophers was allowed to flourish under Islam, while he had been forcibly evicted from Christian Spain. The Inquisition, Martin Luther’s approved pogroms, the attacks by the Cossacks, the Pale in Poland where Jews were forced to live. the expulsions of Jews from Spain & England came because of Christianity. The Shoah came about because the Christian land of Germany had a long history of anti-Jewish
attacks. Islam had its’ moments but Christianity assaults far outweigh them. I hold no brief for either, because in both cases they were unwarranted, cruel beyond belief and were expressions of bigotry. However, in truth Islam has had the better record over all and your acknowledgment, but quick dismissal of Christian horrors does not want to take that into account. I believe that in this area you are too caught up in your own pre-judgments to look at the issue clearly.
I agree with your last paragraph an have never denied that quotation which I’ve heard many times. In fact one of my friends was quoted that quotation by his federal judge before sentencing. This guy had done his own version of a “ponzi” scheme. But I digress.
My point was to never get into an assault against Christianity. I absolutely acknowledge the sins of Christian bigots and hypocrites and will never excuse the. I acknowledge the corruption of world leaders and how they manipulate the masses. That is all true. We are on the same page there. You should hear me on my rants about corruption, how it’s alright for one and not the other and so on.
Please sir, I respect your insight incredibly, that is why I continue to ask you questions.
That being said about all the hypocricy. None of us can individually change the world. If I could wave my magic wand, I’d by everyone a Coke and we’d all live in perfect harmony. LOL However, we are dealing with a certain reality.
Because I am so sincerely and very interested in your opinion and insight, I please ask you to read my questions I’ve posted on the site today. Please, I am specifically interested in your insight remaining in the strict parameter of the questions.
I would like to know why you feel it is ok for intellects to criticize every religion from pillar to post but mention one critical word of Islam and you’re a bigot?
Why is it ok to criticixe the words out of the mouth of any religious figure from any religion but question one thing Mohammed said and you’re a bigot?
Regardless of what Christians say, why are the Muslims so ABSOLUTELY stubborn about admitting their Jewish roots?